Robey Threatens Tax Cut Veto
Larry Carson of the Baltimore Sun reports in this story further on Robey's veto threat. I think he will do it.
Don't let the effective dates and first year savings on these competing tax cuts fool you.
Feaga calls it a very small decrease. In the first year it is... Run the math on a $400,000 home and use the current property tax rates. The savings snowball over time. That 1% decrease in the cap is not insignificant - it is huge. I like that. It doesn't cut County revenue it limits the revenue.
Compared to Robey's tax rate cut proposal, which I like too, Feaga saves tax payers a lot more money over three years than Robey's plan. Take the math out 7 years and the savings are twice what Robey's plan proposes.
That is what this arguement is about. That is why we have all the name calling.
The Democrat scare tactic on this is hollow. If it becomes law today they can make a new law tomorrow.
What I want Robey to elaborate on is this comment from the article:
First, he must know we are talking about more than just $4.00 a month or he would not have threatened the veto (same goes for The Me Too Kid and Guzzone). Tell me about this $3M!
You have a $20M surplus this year. (The County has to spend it this year and it won't go into next year's operating budget - it is the law.) Is he saying that he spent next years $20M surplus already?
Lets see:
$20M - $9M for tax cuts - $6M for the rainy day fund (assuming he does the same next year) = $5M. Throw in Feaga's tax cut and now we have a $1.2M surplus next year. Where is Robey short $3M? Before or after Feaga's tax cut. It sounds like before.
What! You spent it all! Didn't you promise to give that money back if the County ran surpluses after you raised income taxes 30%? You might not meant all of it - but I did. MR. ROBEY, HOWARD COUNTY DOES NOT NEED ANOTHER HELICOPTER. (That is a joke - as far as I know their are no hidden helicopter appropriations in this years budget, unlike last years).
The whole arguement for tax increases was to maintain our standard of living in a time when tax revenues were declining. Well, we aren't there anymore. You generated surpluses and you want to give less than half back to the tax payers.
Here is the Conservative view on this. Government should not raise more money than it needs to operates because when they do they will spend it. The cycle of tax increases will continue with that kind of mentality, Government will grow as a result of the continued infusion of new revenues, and eventually exhaust the citizen's ability to pay for bloated Government. Put County Government on a diet now before it grows too obese for us to control.
So, Mr. Ulman can stand shoulder to shoulder with Mr. Robey on this. Both of you are confirming, for fiscal conservatives, your tax and spend credentials.
I encourage everyone reading this post to take a hard look at the 2005, 2006, and 2007 budgets and find out where our money is going.
I challenge every candidate for COUNTY COUNCIL to weigh in on this issue because it will come up again.
Don't let the effective dates and first year savings on these competing tax cuts fool you.
Feaga calls it a very small decrease. In the first year it is... Run the math on a $400,000 home and use the current property tax rates. The savings snowball over time. That 1% decrease in the cap is not insignificant - it is huge. I like that. It doesn't cut County revenue it limits the revenue.
Compared to Robey's tax rate cut proposal, which I like too, Feaga saves tax payers a lot more money over three years than Robey's plan. Take the math out 7 years and the savings are twice what Robey's plan proposes.
That is what this arguement is about. That is why we have all the name calling.
The Democrat scare tactic on this is hollow. If it becomes law today they can make a new law tomorrow.
What I want Robey to elaborate on is this comment from the article:
"I wanted the world to know, and the three sponsors of the bill to know, I'm not playing politics with the future of the county for $4 a month. I'm still $3 million short of balancing the operating budget [for next year]," Robey said.
First, he must know we are talking about more than just $4.00 a month or he would not have threatened the veto (same goes for The Me Too Kid and Guzzone). Tell me about this $3M!
You have a $20M surplus this year. (The County has to spend it this year and it won't go into next year's operating budget - it is the law.) Is he saying that he spent next years $20M surplus already?
Lets see:
$20M - $9M for tax cuts - $6M for the rainy day fund (assuming he does the same next year) = $5M. Throw in Feaga's tax cut and now we have a $1.2M surplus next year. Where is Robey short $3M? Before or after Feaga's tax cut. It sounds like before.
What! You spent it all! Didn't you promise to give that money back if the County ran surpluses after you raised income taxes 30%? You might not meant all of it - but I did. MR. ROBEY, HOWARD COUNTY DOES NOT NEED ANOTHER HELICOPTER. (That is a joke - as far as I know their are no hidden helicopter appropriations in this years budget, unlike last years).
The whole arguement for tax increases was to maintain our standard of living in a time when tax revenues were declining. Well, we aren't there anymore. You generated surpluses and you want to give less than half back to the tax payers.
Here is the Conservative view on this. Government should not raise more money than it needs to operates because when they do they will spend it. The cycle of tax increases will continue with that kind of mentality, Government will grow as a result of the continued infusion of new revenues, and eventually exhaust the citizen's ability to pay for bloated Government. Put County Government on a diet now before it grows too obese for us to control.
So, Mr. Ulman can stand shoulder to shoulder with Mr. Robey on this. Both of you are confirming, for fiscal conservatives, your tax and spend credentials.
I encourage everyone reading this post to take a hard look at the 2005, 2006, and 2007 budgets and find out where our money is going.
I challenge every candidate for COUNTY COUNCIL to weigh in on this issue because it will come up again.
posted by hocoblog at 6:29 AM
2 comments
2 Comments:
"So, Mr. Ulman can stand shoulder to shoulder with Mr. Robey on this. Both of you are confirming, for fiscal conservatives, your tax and spend credentials".
- Yup!
When we were told that the 30% tax increase was to cover services, I thought that included future school construction.I think that Robey and the Me Too Kid should remember that citizens of Howard County are not going to forget what they said in the past. If they can't manage a budget when we have a surplus what are they going to do as County Executive and in the Maryland Senate break promises and raise taxes.
Post a Comment
<< Home