Capitol Watch
I’m down at the Statehouse today for Organization Day. This the day we get a real feel for where people stand on the big issues that are coming. Not that they are any big secret, but here’s what I’ll be paying attention to.
- How will the sagging economy and job losses impact the state budget?
- Will constitutional property tax caps go forward or stall?
- Will local government reform get derailed by the forces who oppose change?
- Will there be more a movement toward school choice now that the state funds the operating costs of school districts?
- What irrelevant wedge issue will pop up (immigration, gay marriage, abortion)?
Let me grab my binoculars and enjoy the view.
November 18th, 2008 at 8:08 am
Abdul: you forgot the ever important wedge issue, prayer to a Christian God.
November 18th, 2008 at 8:57 am
“Irrelevant” relative to larger issues that need attention (property tax caps, Kernan-Shepard)- point conceded. But, even those of us who disagree on specifics would acknowledge immigration needs reform.
November 18th, 2008 at 9:58 am
Why does immigration need reform? Don’t we already have strict immigration laws?
.
We don’t need immigration reform. We need representation reform. Remove the people who refuse to do the job we hired them to do, and find someone better who will actually enforce the law.
November 18th, 2008 at 10:11 am
Shorebreak is right. Besides, immigration is a federal responsibility.
November 18th, 2008 at 10:15 am
With regards to the economy and the budget, I can tell you right now how the budget will be impacted: If you work for a state aid agency, head for high ground. You’re gonna get flooded in ’09.
.
Hopefully there will be some common sense and the people won’t seek to make property taxation a Constitutional mandate. Capped at 1%? 1% of what? The most recent assessment? Will the amendment be tied to a fixed assessment standard? Market value? It’s a rabbit hole, folks. The best advice is to fill the hole and forget about it.
.
Derailed by those who oppose change? Newsflash, Abdul: If someone opposes a specific issue, they aren’t “opposers of change”. They’re opposers of a specific issue. Blanket statements are for the weak-minded who don’t understand dynamic processes. I hope you don’t consider us to be weak minded. Some change is great. Other change, not so great.
November 18th, 2008 at 10:42 am
FYI – Congressman Issa (R-CA) lets the cat out of the bag – half of the $700B bailout went to foreign countries and institutions. Bailout of foreign assets was never on the table in public hearings. This is one of the objectives agreed upon behind closed doors.
.
Tar and feathers, folks. Start at 1:18:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOuYssGYOEo&feature=related
November 18th, 2008 at 11:21 am
Property tax caps are faux real; a cynically contrived gimmick to convince taxpayers that faulty controls will “protect” them from runaway assessments- history anyone? How about an answer; how do you “cap” (read control) a VARIABLE (i.e. annually trending assessments)? Within the past 24 hours, members of the legislature have taken to the airwaves to express concerns about the Constitutionality (???) of the very caps THEY PROPOSE; concerns about the state’s legal vulnerability in complying with existing Constitutional requirements that taxes (this would include the oxymoronic “market value” assessment system) be uniform and equal (I believe it’s Article 10, sct. 1). What does that say about the legislature, when law makers are considering the removal of “uniform” & “equal” (what is constitutional purpose if not uniform & equal?); changing the rules to give the state cover, from previous & current violations of the Constitution?!? Who, are folks in the legislature “protecting,” the people, or government & the self interests of a political class?
November 18th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Thank you for correction in posts 3 & 4. I would welcome ‘Federal representation reform’ if it would come to pass and be based on fiscal reality.
November 18th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
TA: Saying immigration is a federal responsibility and leaving it at that is a joke. Look at states like Arizona that have made huge strides in immigration enforcement, all on their own. States can’t just standby and wait for the feds to do nothing – which is what we’ll get with Obama (or with McCain)
November 18th, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Please kick Delph out of the party if he pushes immigration reform at the state level again this year.
November 18th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
Arizona has made “huge strides” in immigration reform? Surely you jest. No border state has properly confronted this complex issue.
Passports, visas, and work permits are the purview of the INS. Period. No state. Ever. Thank God.
We almost built a huge wall all along the border. Thankfully, some common sense prevailed.
November 18th, 2008 at 2:06 pm
This is something everyone should be worried about. Billions of taxpayers money going into a black hole.
A tiny Indiana bank and the bailout
http://newstalk.ibj.com/blogshell.asp?p=244
November 18th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
I agree with Shorebreak on immigration. I also interrupt what Jerry was posting regarding Arizona was that their success was in enforcing the laws that are on the books. While the laws need to be driven by the Feds, support needs to come from local law enforcement. Not to have this would suggest that the Feds need to flood each community with a redundant police force just to deal with immigration. I think (without facts) that if Arizona is successful, it is because they have chosen this partnership. I doubt that the “walls” have had much to do with it.
On a second point to Shorebreak. I think your second point in post three is in part about outing those who oppose change for the sake of their sacred turf, not about honest debate, as you point out in post five, and supported in post six. Just my two cents.
November 18th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
oops, meant to say interpret, not interrupt.
November 18th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
Greg, I’m not clear on your second point to me. To clarify and to expand for you, my entire point in most of my posts is that we’re surrounded by a media and a leadership – particularly at the national level – who are complicit in lies of omission and commission that allow the public to concede control to corporate greed. Our system has been so tightly structured around that fact that when pinpoints of light are revealed, the light is determined by the average person to be an anomally rather than a glimpes at reality.
.
I could tell people that the Pentagon announced in a press release that it lost $2 Trillion and has refused to explain how. Most would either dismiss it as false because they aren’t aware of it, or they’d simply let it go in one ear and out the other because the nature, complexity, and impact of the crime simply doesn’t register.
.
The loss of the money with no excuse is a fact, admiitted by the Pentagon and the Secretary of Defense, yet most people are unaware or they don’t give a $h!t. Why? We’re living in a conditioned environment.
.
I give you the Pentagon theft as an example of ommission and of complicity that’s the result of the corporate overthrow of our government.
.
I’m not a capitalist. I’m not a communist. I’m not an independent. And I’m not an anarchist. I’m a republican (lower case “r”) who places his faith in the individual liberty, free market, and sovereign rule of law established by the US Constitution.
.
From a political perspective, when I post on this board that is my point. We don’t have a corrupt leadership. We have a usurped leadership. I give you the Pentagon as another example.
November 18th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
Shorebreak. Thanks for coming back on my post. I won’t try to confuse my point further. Instead, I will confirm 100% alignment to your last post. Well said. Thanks. Greg
November 18th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
As I’ve said before; I am against a Constitutional cap on property taxes.
-
Government has lied to us before. Take the last time they muddled with Article 10 as an example back in ’04.
-
I want property taxes, and the confiscation of peoples homes, abolished.
November 18th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
For those of you now concerned about the property tax “cap” as proposed, I suggest you read “April Fool,” posted on 3/20/08 on http://www.indytaxdollars.typepad.com.
November 19th, 2008 at 8:37 am
I am also in favor of property tax repeal and am very suspicious of the property tax caps for three primary reasons:
(1) creates a false sense that the property tax issue is resolved yet people can still lose their homes.
(2) assessments can still be highly subjective and/or not based on market realities.
(3) potentially legitimizes the property tax system constitutionally and it could take another 10 or 20 years to get serious attention back on the issue
November 19th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Don’t worry Dave, Teresa Lubbers will protect us!
November 19th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
I agree with the comments that the tax caps are a bad idea. We really don’t want them fiddling with the constitution. We need property tax completely abolished. I’m curious just how much additional money this most recent property tax debacle with its reassessments, referendum, collections, and appeals has cost the taxpayers.