Montana Gov Smacks Down Rightwing on Property Taxes
Folks may be missing the rightwing movement across the states to generate another "tax revolt", this one around the so-called "Taxpayer Bill of Rights" (TABOR) restrictions on government spending.
Well, Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer just hit them hard with his own tax proposal which is something of a triple whammy-- it's progressive, it's politically messed up the GOP leadership, and severely undercut the TABOR ballot initiative slotted for the Montana ballot this fall.Read more about it at the Progressive States blog and this week's Stateside Dispatch, but the summary is this:
Instead of an open-ended tax cut that would give more to the wealthy, Schweitzer is proposing a $400 per homeowner tax cut, where commercial landowners get zippo.
And here's the kicker in undercutting the tax revolt:
In a move that has already drawn praise for its political acumen, Schweitzer has already started using his property tax rebate as a tool to fight Montana's proposed TABOR amendment. Like in other states across the country, Montana is facing a TABOR ballot initiative this fall -- a proposal to strictly limit spending increases and require that the state refund most of the money not spent to taxpayers. But as Schweitzer's Administration has pointed out, the TABOR amendment narrowly outlines how the money can be rebated. And progressive, flat rebates like the Schweitzer plan would be illegal in most cases if the TABOR amendment passes.
Realizing they had already been outflanked on the property tax debate, rightwing leaders howled with rage upon realizing that the Governor had also found a useful tool for defeating their disastrous spending plan. And by giving voters a concrete example of how the TABOR will actually hurt their own pocketbooks, Schweitzer promises to significantly change the tone of the debate over the spending cap this fall.
This is what makes the Montana maneuver so interesting-- with a growing budget surplus, Schweitzer beat the tax revolters to the punch and not only handed some of the surplus out in a progressive way, but did it in a way that undercuts political support for the TABOR-style tax limitation initiative.
My only bveef with this proposal; (which is far superiopr to the GOP's I agree) is that it should be limited to home-owners only. Renters pay taxes too and they should get their share of any rebate as well.
July 10, 2006 3:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I understand how you feel because I am a renter, too––we're a senior citizen couple on a fixed income. However, our very fair landlord continues to abide by our lease which includes electricity, heat, and hot water, plus an efficient snow-removal service and low-tech storage in a barn. I wouldn't like to have him be so pressed that he'd have to increase our payments.
July 10, 2006 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
the financing of education. a very provocative topic.
here in texas, it is financed by property taxes. and the valuations of property are generally unfair, inequitable. in fact, i think that my research would indicate that employees of montgomery county appraisal district must be on the take.
now, i am a bachelor. i have no children. have never used the public education system while a homeowner.
still, my property is taxed as if i am as much a user of the public education as my neighbor[5 children, k-12].
so, as you might contemplate, i am opposed to the current property tax system.
once upon a time, i supported the idea that since all citizens benefited from the public education system, all should finance it. but as i age, i am modifying that pov.
why? it has something to do with suburbanization.
i used to live in the country. in a quasi-rural area where its educational assets had been constructed in the 1950's, 1960's, 1970's.
within the last decade, this rural area has been experiencing a population "swelling" that is mandating the construction of new educational facilities. and the design and construction requirements of these new facilities are not geared to cost-effectiveness. in fact, my investigation reveals that these are so monumental that they can only be likened to the pyramids.
the politics of how these edifices become designed and constructed with the taxpayers' ignorant nickels would be a great book. anyone who would do it could be another bob caro[as in the powerbroker].
texas is an odd state. purportedly the state of mind of independence. and perhaps it was once. long before my arrival[1971].
texians mock california. concerning its subservience to state-sanctioned robbery via taxation schemes.
yet, i think that howard jarvis with his prop 13[?] did the property owners of california the kind of good deed that you would expect from the republican[nee fascist]pols of texas.
don't i have it correctly? after the jarvis pelbiscite weren't property valuations for taxation purposes based on last transaction valuations? thus avoiding a taxing district appraisal that annually made valuations for tax collection purposes?
yet, texan pols refuse energetically to moderate state property tax - education-financing - stipulations. of even greater importance, they refrain from investigating, improving the state's public education system.
my industrial property is also subjected to property taxes.
and i hire young men and women. and i don't think i am getting my tax moneys' worth these days.
it is like so many aspects of our society. i must have become a curmedgeon decades ago.
but so many of my supervisors are becoming curmudgeons.
we all see educational, knowledge retrogrades as our workforce becomes younger.
read john mcphee's new book. concentrate on the chapter concerning ups.
is this story the revelation that industry has recognized that the publix educational "system" is a failure?
July 10, 2006 10:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
In insteresting tirade against public education, especially as rife as it is with spelling mistakes not easily explained away by typos. :)
In all seriousness, you seem to think that you shouldn't have to pay for education because you don't have kids (or plan on having any, I suppose?), consider new schools monsters since they're not "cost effective" enough, and since kids these days are so darn dumb, why even bother?
That, sir, is a myopic and selfish viewpoint. I hope you are not as egocentric as your post suggests, or you shall soon be bitter and alone.
No, really, I am curious as to how you expect your community to survive without a properly financed education system, how you as an employer plan on compensating for the defecits in training your future employees will have should the system be scrapped, or even how you expect your community to attract affluent new members without a proper infrastructure.
I suspect however that you couldn't care less about your neighbourhood. As long as you personally are comfortable, then everybody else in your town, your county can take a flying leap. Please prove me wrong, as I would hate to be right about your heartlessness.
July 11, 2006 4:14 AM | Reply | Permalink