You were promised a school 1/3 property tax cut. Where did that tax cut go and why open your pocketbooks even wider in the November election?
November's statewide ballot initiatives total almost $10 billion in state spending. School districts are asking for almost $7 billion more in taxes, and local governments are seeking $9 billion in bonds. Texans will be asked to consider shouldering considerable additional public debt with numerous measures on November 6. Currently, the state's outstanding general-obligation bond debt is $7.5 billion. If passed, the state initiatives could more than double that.
Local governments -- including the 106 school districts seeking tax hikes, 52 school districts, 12 cities, seven counties and three colleges asking for bond approvals -- will hit taxpayers’ pocketbooks even harder.
Where did your tax cut go? We anticipated that property tax savings would evaporate as local governments either increased rates or continued to bring in more property tax revenue as appraisals increased. That is why we championed taxpayer protections which included both revenue cap triggers (which would have provided for voter approval of revenue increases above the growth in population and inflation) and lowering appraisal caps.
Having provided the property tax cut “swap” while not putting taxpayer protections in place, the Legislature’s action was irresponsible. It will result in a tax increase for most taxpayers in only a few years.Texans paid the second highest property taxes as a percentage of home values in the country. With our home values are on the rise, property tax creep is an important issue
Here in Travis County we are hit particularly hard:
30th in property taxes as % of home value
51st in the country in the property taxes you paid; and
53rd in relation to taxes as percentage of income. Williamson County fared as badly – with:
16th in taxes as a % of home value;
49th in property taxes paid
And 60th in the country in taxes as percentage of income.
These figures are not just in relation to the 254 counties in Texas but in all counties across the country. There are 3,143 Counties, Parishes or Independent Cities in the USA Local governments have increased their spending at an unsustainable rate – in 25 years, increasing an astonishing 158% when per-person income increased by 39%. Local government debt has also grown at an alarming rate – increasing 270% in 25 years, more than 5 times the rate of income growth.
Local governments have accumulated $132 BILLION in debt – more than $5,700 for every man, woman and child in Texas. Actually, the interest payments on local government debt in Texas total more than what local governments spend on police and fire protection combined.
Texans need taxpayer protections that put taxpayers in control over how much government we want and are willing to pay for -- and we should not call a school tax increase a "rollback" election. We should also end taxpayer-funded lobbying and stop government spending our money to advertise (you got it, to take mroe of our money).
Monday, October 29, 2007
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Proposition 2 Shows the Problems with Higher Education Finance
Proposition 2 Shows the Problems with Higher Education Finance
In 2003, the State Legislature passed the tuition deregulation plan which gave university systems the ability to raise their own tuition rates. Previously, the tuition rates for state universities were controlled by the State Legislature. We were assured by university presidents and regents that the power to raise tuition with limited legislative oversight would not be misused, but that there were legitimate budget for universities that would not be funded by the legislature.
Let’s fast forward to 2007.
Over the past four years under the “unlimited tuition plan,” universities have increased tuition as much as 35 percent per school in some cases. This increase in tuition has priced many students out of higher education and put many families in financial hardship, bankrupted the original Texas Tomorrow Fund, and reduced the amount of students receiving legitimate student aid. The Legislature and the university presidents both understand the financial hardships they have put on students and their families, but in true bureaucratic style, instead of working on the root of spending problem, they have instead allowed Proposition 2 to come before the voters.
Proposition 2 allows the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) to sell bonds to give an additional $500 million in student aid for college students. What is wrong with this? One government bureaucracy (THECB) is increasing its own bureaucracy by taking out 30-year loans at taxpayer expense to give money to another bureaucracy (state university) which is spending money without control. These universities are allowed to raise their own tuition while at the same time are having their legislative appropriations increased. It is the best of both worlds for university bureaucracies. We now have the uncontrolled spending policies of one bureaucracy being offset by additional spending by another bureaucracy. And, the worst part, the students that are receiving this aid will be paying back the bonds, with interest, for the next 30 years.
The intent of Proposition 2 is to benefit college students, but in fact, all it benefits is the public university systems in Texas. Texas truly needs a competitive university funding system to drive the cost of higher education down while driving the quality of the education up. We currently have the exact opposite situation happening in Texas, costs are increasing while quality is decreasing, and now current taxpayers and future taxpayers will be required to pay for even more of it.
In 2003, the State Legislature passed the tuition deregulation plan which gave university systems the ability to raise their own tuition rates. Previously, the tuition rates for state universities were controlled by the State Legislature. We were assured by university presidents and regents that the power to raise tuition with limited legislative oversight would not be misused, but that there were legitimate budget for universities that would not be funded by the legislature.
Let’s fast forward to 2007.
Over the past four years under the “unlimited tuition plan,” universities have increased tuition as much as 35 percent per school in some cases. This increase in tuition has priced many students out of higher education and put many families in financial hardship, bankrupted the original Texas Tomorrow Fund, and reduced the amount of students receiving legitimate student aid. The Legislature and the university presidents both understand the financial hardships they have put on students and their families, but in true bureaucratic style, instead of working on the root of spending problem, they have instead allowed Proposition 2 to come before the voters.
Proposition 2 allows the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) to sell bonds to give an additional $500 million in student aid for college students. What is wrong with this? One government bureaucracy (THECB) is increasing its own bureaucracy by taking out 30-year loans at taxpayer expense to give money to another bureaucracy (state university) which is spending money without control. These universities are allowed to raise their own tuition while at the same time are having their legislative appropriations increased. It is the best of both worlds for university bureaucracies. We now have the uncontrolled spending policies of one bureaucracy being offset by additional spending by another bureaucracy. And, the worst part, the students that are receiving this aid will be paying back the bonds, with interest, for the next 30 years.
The intent of Proposition 2 is to benefit college students, but in fact, all it benefits is the public university systems in Texas. Texas truly needs a competitive university funding system to drive the cost of higher education down while driving the quality of the education up. We currently have the exact opposite situation happening in Texas, costs are increasing while quality is decreasing, and now current taxpayers and future taxpayers will be required to pay for even more of it.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Take Back the Debate on SCHIP
Take Back the Debate on SCHIP
By Randy A. Samuelson
In watching the recent debates on the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), I quickly realized that liberals are dominating the debate on the issue. Republican Presidential candidates are agreeing in principle that it is a proper role of government to provide health care for children. I have to wonder why conservatives are not changing the debate to fit our principles and goals instead of changing our goals and principles to fit the debate.
At the core of the conservative argument and debate should be that we are looking out for the best interest of families and children in America and we have the same common desires as the liberals. Our goals are the same, but our method is what is different. The liberals, who are controlling the debate, wish to create and expand taxes to provide government mandated health care for children, and eventually, everybody. Conservatives wish to utilize businesses and the expansion of the economy to provide for the needed insurance. Only by expanding our national economy through incentives for business can we have the necessary prosperity to ensure that all children are insured. Only businesses produce high-paying jobs and wealth. Government seizes wealth through taxes which takes away business incentives to create wealth and therefore creates a demand for additional government services and solutions.
The health care provided by SCHIP will eventually drive up the cost of insurance for all of us because the children who are given the insurance are high risk applicants for non-payment, diseases due to their living situations, and other such issues. For insurance companies to continue to provide this coverage to the recipients of SCHIP will require the rest of us to pay higher costs for our own health insurance, higher costs for actual health care so our doctors can make money, and higher taxes so the government can reimburse the insurance companies. How does this benefit the children? In reality, our children are given a loan by the federal government to spend on health care, but the interest rate on that loan in indiscernibly large through higher taxes and higher insurance premiums later in life.
Once again, the intentions of the liberals are offset by their plan of action to achieve such results. This is a prime opportunity for conservatives to take over the debate on this issue and push for personal Health Savings Accounts and the expansion of the economy so that individuals can afford to pay for their own health insurance instead of looking to the government. Conservatives, take back the debate! Stop agreeing with the liberals on the need for SCHIP and instead push for the economic policies that ensure that all Americans can afford affordable insurance!
By Randy A. Samuelson
In watching the recent debates on the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), I quickly realized that liberals are dominating the debate on the issue. Republican Presidential candidates are agreeing in principle that it is a proper role of government to provide health care for children. I have to wonder why conservatives are not changing the debate to fit our principles and goals instead of changing our goals and principles to fit the debate.
At the core of the conservative argument and debate should be that we are looking out for the best interest of families and children in America and we have the same common desires as the liberals. Our goals are the same, but our method is what is different. The liberals, who are controlling the debate, wish to create and expand taxes to provide government mandated health care for children, and eventually, everybody. Conservatives wish to utilize businesses and the expansion of the economy to provide for the needed insurance. Only by expanding our national economy through incentives for business can we have the necessary prosperity to ensure that all children are insured. Only businesses produce high-paying jobs and wealth. Government seizes wealth through taxes which takes away business incentives to create wealth and therefore creates a demand for additional government services and solutions.
The health care provided by SCHIP will eventually drive up the cost of insurance for all of us because the children who are given the insurance are high risk applicants for non-payment, diseases due to their living situations, and other such issues. For insurance companies to continue to provide this coverage to the recipients of SCHIP will require the rest of us to pay higher costs for our own health insurance, higher costs for actual health care so our doctors can make money, and higher taxes so the government can reimburse the insurance companies. How does this benefit the children? In reality, our children are given a loan by the federal government to spend on health care, but the interest rate on that loan in indiscernibly large through higher taxes and higher insurance premiums later in life.
Once again, the intentions of the liberals are offset by their plan of action to achieve such results. This is a prime opportunity for conservatives to take over the debate on this issue and push for personal Health Savings Accounts and the expansion of the economy so that individuals can afford to pay for their own health insurance instead of looking to the government. Conservatives, take back the debate! Stop agreeing with the liberals on the need for SCHIP and instead push for the economic policies that ensure that all Americans can afford affordable insurance!
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
Taxpayer Pledges
It's almost that time again. As primary season approaches, several organizations, including Americans for Prosperity and Americans for Tax Reform, will be encouraging candidates to sign Taxpayer Pledges.
If you're interested to see who in Texas has signed on in the past, check out Americans for Prosperity's list here: http://www.americansforprosperity.org/index.php?id=1562
Ask your elected officials and candidates for elective offices - what will you do today to lower my taxes?
If you're interested to see who in Texas has signed on in the past, check out Americans for Prosperity's list here: http://www.americansforprosperity.org/index.php?id=1562
Ask your elected officials and candidates for elective offices - what will you do today to lower my taxes?
Monday, October 1, 2007
Happy New Year! a.k.a. Hold on to your wallets.
The motto for federal employees today is “10-1!” What does this mean? Today is the beginning of the 2008 federal fiscal year and, you guessed it, bureaucrats are eager to spend your tax money! After having one month of limited spending due to the closing out of the books for the 2007 fiscal year, the shackles of fiscal responsibility are removed! Bureaucrats are on parole from spending restraints!
The amount of spending by bureaucrats in the 2008 fiscal year will determine how much money is appropriated to each agency in 2009. So, when you come across a federal employee today, wish them happy New Year and ask him “What are you doing to lower my taxes today?”
The amount of spending by bureaucrats in the 2008 fiscal year will determine how much money is appropriated to each agency in 2009. So, when you come across a federal employee today, wish them happy New Year and ask him “What are you doing to lower my taxes today?”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)