Heartland Values
It's an election year, and the state and local campaigns have an importance that is at least equivalent to that of the campaigns for Congress. Candidates for governor of a state are stumping on issues which more directly affect the voters: roads and infrastructure, schools, public safety. Ironically, how to pay for those items is rarely directly addressed beyond promises to eliminate the waste in state government. Even with the reduction of federal funds to states for many local programs, most sensible candidates shy away from even mentioning taxes.
Minnesota is apparently no different than other states in this regard, yet there are some citizens of that state who are not so shy. This column by Lori Sturdevant appeared June 24, 2006 in the Minneapolis Star Tribune:
End of story? I thought so, until I saw the ad in this fine newspaper's Thursday edition, headlined, "We can afford to pay more state taxes."
It listed more than 200 prominent Minnesotans. All have incomes that reach into the top tax bracket. All are begging the next Legislature and governor: Please, tax us more.
You don't see paid ads with that message every day, or every year. But if plans hold, you'll see it with some frequency this fall.
The signatures were rounded up by Growth & Justice, the progressive think tank that was founded a few years back by former Star Tribune publisher Joel Kramer.
..."Yes, I'm a Republican," McFarland said, though he confessed a fondness for Hutchinson's candidacy. "I really get passionate about this state. My whole life has been in Minnesota. Almost all of my investments are in Minnesota companies. Why wouldn't I want to invest more here?"
He likes the strategy that Growth & Justice is promoting: Raise state income and sales taxes a total of $2 billion per year. Do it in a progressive way, so that people in McFarland's bracket would pay an extra 2 cents on every dollar they earn, while those with household incomes below $45,000 would pay next to nothing.
Use that money for investments in human capital and infrastructure. Some possibilities:
• Give every 3- and 4-year-old access to center-based preschool education. Cost: $200 million per year.
• Provide health insurance for every child whose family income is less than $60,000 per year. Cost: $300 million per year.
• Build a complete metro light-rail network over 10 years. Cost: $250 million per year.
McFarland scoffs at the suggestion that Minnesotans can't afford those things. Under the G & J tax plan, he figures, he'd pay $13,000 more per year to the state. His annual state and federal tax bill has dropped by an amount several times that since 2001. The Bush tax cuts have reduced his federal income tax bill by more than 40 percent.
"The fact is, I'm not paying my fair share," he said.
Minnesotans became more affluent in the last three decades. As they did, a growing number warmed to politicians who preach that a progressive state income tax unduly burdens success, and that government spending is a crutch for the undeserving poor.
But fresh evidence suggests that's not the majority view in this state. A Rasmussen Reports poll in April found that only 48 percent of Minnesotans -- fewer than in most other states -- buy the idea that tax cuts help the economy and tax increases hurt it.
That leaves 52 percent open to the Growth & Justice notion that tax money spent wisely on education, transportation, health and the environment makes the economy stronger, not weaker. [Emphasis added]
Right now, this country is split into two ideological camps on the issue of taxes, and I am not talking about Liberal/Conservative or Democratic/Republican. These camps are labeled "communitarian" and "individualist."
The communitarian view recognizes that the social fabric, the relationships among citizens, is key to the well-being of society. It is not enough that one child has a good education and adequate health care. All children must have access to both if the entire society is to continue and thrive while doing so.
The individualist view believes that by dint of hard work an individual can succeed and prosper and thereby contribute to society. Government has, at best, a minimal role in this view. The less governmental interference in the individual's life the better.
At least in Minnesota, the communitarian view seems to have the edge right now. I am thrilled beyond belief by that fact.
Minnesota is apparently no different than other states in this regard, yet there are some citizens of that state who are not so shy. This column by Lori Sturdevant appeared June 24, 2006 in the Minneapolis Star Tribune:
End of story? I thought so, until I saw the ad in this fine newspaper's Thursday edition, headlined, "We can afford to pay more state taxes."
It listed more than 200 prominent Minnesotans. All have incomes that reach into the top tax bracket. All are begging the next Legislature and governor: Please, tax us more.
You don't see paid ads with that message every day, or every year. But if plans hold, you'll see it with some frequency this fall.
The signatures were rounded up by Growth & Justice, the progressive think tank that was founded a few years back by former Star Tribune publisher Joel Kramer.
..."Yes, I'm a Republican," McFarland said, though he confessed a fondness for Hutchinson's candidacy. "I really get passionate about this state. My whole life has been in Minnesota. Almost all of my investments are in Minnesota companies. Why wouldn't I want to invest more here?"
He likes the strategy that Growth & Justice is promoting: Raise state income and sales taxes a total of $2 billion per year. Do it in a progressive way, so that people in McFarland's bracket would pay an extra 2 cents on every dollar they earn, while those with household incomes below $45,000 would pay next to nothing.
Use that money for investments in human capital and infrastructure. Some possibilities:
• Give every 3- and 4-year-old access to center-based preschool education. Cost: $200 million per year.
• Provide health insurance for every child whose family income is less than $60,000 per year. Cost: $300 million per year.
• Build a complete metro light-rail network over 10 years. Cost: $250 million per year.
McFarland scoffs at the suggestion that Minnesotans can't afford those things. Under the G & J tax plan, he figures, he'd pay $13,000 more per year to the state. His annual state and federal tax bill has dropped by an amount several times that since 2001. The Bush tax cuts have reduced his federal income tax bill by more than 40 percent.
"The fact is, I'm not paying my fair share," he said.
Minnesotans became more affluent in the last three decades. As they did, a growing number warmed to politicians who preach that a progressive state income tax unduly burdens success, and that government spending is a crutch for the undeserving poor.
But fresh evidence suggests that's not the majority view in this state. A Rasmussen Reports poll in April found that only 48 percent of Minnesotans -- fewer than in most other states -- buy the idea that tax cuts help the economy and tax increases hurt it.
That leaves 52 percent open to the Growth & Justice notion that tax money spent wisely on education, transportation, health and the environment makes the economy stronger, not weaker. [Emphasis added]
Right now, this country is split into two ideological camps on the issue of taxes, and I am not talking about Liberal/Conservative or Democratic/Republican. These camps are labeled "communitarian" and "individualist."
The communitarian view recognizes that the social fabric, the relationships among citizens, is key to the well-being of society. It is not enough that one child has a good education and adequate health care. All children must have access to both if the entire society is to continue and thrive while doing so.
The individualist view believes that by dint of hard work an individual can succeed and prosper and thereby contribute to society. Government has, at best, a minimal role in this view. The less governmental interference in the individual's life the better.
At least in Minnesota, the communitarian view seems to have the edge right now. I am thrilled beyond belief by that fact.
posted by Diane at 4:27 AM
1 Comments:
Someone needs to bring this movement to New Jersey, where, under a very high debt, new Gov. John Corzine, whom I voted for, wants to increase the sales tax from 6% to 7%, but have no increase in taxes on high earners.
According to one program I listened to, he fears NJ will lose high tech and other growth businesses if they feel their potential employees will be taxed higher than neighboring states--meaning PA primarily, I think, since NY has a pretty heft tax rate, no sure about DE.
Well, now Corzine has begun closing down state services since the legislature did not come up with a budget and a means of raising revenue he can live with.
NJ has had a long run of "interesting" financing for state services, prior to and after Jim Florio's increase in the income tax--which would have kept NJ solvent, but also lead to Christie Whitman becoming governor with a big Repug majority. She passed a financing "scheme," which really fits her plan. It was to borrow from Wall Street, go into even more debt on the basis that increased earnings would mean cheap easy way to pay off the debt--sometime in her great grandchildren's adulthood--or something like that. It would not have been permitted on the open market, but passed in the political market.
So, Corzine is refusing to "kick the can down the road," and he will probably pay a price. The Dems in the Assembly are terrified of being tax and pay off the debt Democrats.
We need this group...NOW, ASAP!
Must run, so no proofing--may be a disaster!
jawbone
Post a Comment
<< Home