Posted by 2003 gets a re-write, and so does my earlier message that I now believe could benefit from being more to the point. Where is the editor when you need him? [Ed. Note: I don't work weekends. - Doc] If you will indulge me, I will present the succinct version I should have posted originally.
It is a bit disingenuous to call Riley a flip-flopper for asking for an across the board tax cut now compared to his “call for a 1.2 billion dollar tax increase” in 2003. Then and now, Riley expressed his desire to lessen the burden on the working poor in a state that taxes the poor at a rate higher than any other state in the nation. This year’s proposal and the 2003 Amendment One proposal would have lessened the unreasonable tax burden on the working poor. (Yes, I think Riley is playing to his base this year to try to include the state’s wealthiest citizens in the tax cut.)
To dismiss the 2003 Amendment One proposal as a “call for a 1.2 billion dollar tax increase” is to ignore (willfully or not) the whole of the proposal and the context.
- The proposal would have raised the nation’s lowest (and “unconscionable”) income tax threshold from $4600 for a family of four to $16,300 for everyone.
- 70% of income tax filers would have paid the same or less.
- Strong measures of accountability were built in, such as prohibiting the perennially popular “pass-through pork.”
- AEA agreed to a concession to have teachers pay a larger share of health insurance costs.
- Loopholes were to be closed, e.g. one that only the banking industry received that cost the state then $22 million annually.
- The state was believed on both sides of the aisle to be facing a $675 million shortfall. Crisis had recently been averted by spending one time money that was no longer available.
- Riley expressed reluctance to ask for a $675 million tax increase that advanced us not one bit (but only covered a budget hole), so he created a proposal that would advance per-pupil spending from nearly the nation’s lowest.
- Would have fully funded the Alabama Reading Initiative, our program that is creating success stories in other states that are implementing it with sufficient funding.
…and so on. Of course, the measure was handily defeated. The economy turned (Alabama’s state revenue compared to other states is unusually dependent on the economy), the shortfall didn’t materialize that year, and now detractors are making it sound like Riley wanted nothing more than a $1.2 billion spending binge.
Legislative Dispatch
Purple Dot Connection
2010 Big List
2010 Senate Elections
2010 House Elections
Press Releases
Well said, sir.
I recall very well the Amend. One days. And I said from the start Riley’s package was being presented poorly — told them as much by email, with suggestions based on my years of living in AL, along with 10 years marketing/advertising experience.
“Tax cut” wins. “Tax reform” loses. Simple good. Complex bad.
Riley made the point in a speech in Hanceville (paraphrase): “Years ago NC was in a similar situation. Here’s what they did for education, now look at ‘em. WE can do the same things…”
Thank God some people still remember that this was a good idea. I might have actually been in the 30% group at that time, but I still thought it was a great idea.
Jeff, you are right that the plan was complex, and the complexity certainly didn’t help it along any. Simple good.
Poser, “only” 30% still represented 400,000 Alabamians who were ready to change the way the state taxes people. I think that conversation has continued for some (or many?) and that has helped the legislature support the Tax Fairness bill that is now going to the Senate.