Kansas Gov Parkinson’s Tax Increase Confronted by Opponents

Members of the House Taxation Committee were encouraged to look deeper at trimming the budget before tapping taxpayers for more, with opponents noting that unemployment in Kansas remains high at 6.3 percent. “Much of the current situation that we have with the revenue shortfall is because of our excessive spending,” said Derrick Sontag, state director of the anti-tax, small-government group Americans for Prosperity. “We’re starting to hear from folks, ‘How much is enough?’”

More than a half-dozen opponents shared their views on the proposal by Gov. Mark Parkinson, who wants to raise the sales tax from 5.3 percent to 6.3 percent to help close a projected $400 million hole in the next state budget. Parkinson argues that there is little left to trim, and that without new revenue more cuts would be needed in education, corrections and social services. The state expects to spend $651 million less in general tax revenues in its current budget than in it did two years ago, a drop of nearly 11 percent.

House Taxation Chairman Richard Carlson, a St. Marys Republican, said the committee would take more questions on the proposal Wednesday and could take a vote on whether it merits debate by the full House. Art Hall, an economist at the University of Kansas, said one economic model suggests that Parkinson’s plan would blunt any recovery over the next five years. He estimated that the effect could be as many as 26,000 private sector jobs that otherwise would have been created.

But, “this is a simulation, not a forecasting tool,” Hall cautioned. “We’re creating computer simulations, not a crystal ball.” Rep. Julie Menghini, a Pittsburg Democrat, defended the proposal, saying preserving government jobs would mean maintaining services that Kansas residents expect and noting that state employees pay taxes just like those in private sector jobs.

Parkinson maintains that more cuts would only inflict deeper pain on state agencies and the residents they serve. He told social workers on Monday that he was open to suggestions for solving the budget crisis, but the key element is new revenue sources. The Senate is expected to debate legislation this week that would enact spending cuts Parkinson proposed in November. Lawmakers must approve the reductions, which trimmed funds from schools, highways and social services.

Appropriations Committee Chairman Kevin Yoder, a Republican from Overland Park, said legislators would like to see how January’s revenue collections look before they act. He said it makes little sense to pass the bill to transfer money to shore up this fiscal year, only to have to turn around later and make deeper cuts or to be forced to delay payments to state agencies until the next budget year. “Unless you are trying to build support for a tax increase,” Yoder said.

Build support for a tax increase by the Democrats? Thats what they seem to live for.

Kansas Governor Parkinson Proposes Tax Increase(s) –plural

Gov. Mark Parkinson pitched a state budget proposal to the Kansas Legislature on that would raise funding for public education and social services through a set of tax increases. Parkinson reminded lawmakers of the strong university system that has boosted the Sunflower State’s economic prospects. He called on lawmakers to continue investing in all levels of education, proposing a 1 cent on the dollar sales tax hike and a 55-cent per pack cigarette tax increase.

Parkinson noted that other important state services would gain a needed boost from the new tax money. Parolees would again be supervised more closely, he said, and funding cuts to Medicaid, a health program for the poorest Kansans, could be restored. Nothing like a little fear propaganda to boost interest in paying more taxes.

Marysville public schools Superintendent Khris Thexton said, “I am still skeptical that legislators will follow and comply with his suggestions. I am hoping for a positive outcome during this year’s legislative session, but only time will tell how serious our government is in correcting the situation they created.” Marysville schools have faced two rounds of cuts this past year, forcing a freeze in the teacher pay scale and reductions in other services. More reductions will follow if the Legislature opts to cut more to make up for an estimated $400 million budget shortfall.

Other area districts are dealing with less funding as well. The Valley Heights school board voted to join other school districts around Kansas in a Schools For Fair Funding lawsuit. The court case alleges the Legislature has failed in its constitutional obligation to fund public education. It revisits the 1999 case that led to a state Supreme Court ordering the Legislature to put more money into public schools.

After the governor’s speech Monday night, Sen. Mark Taddiken, R-Clifton, said he was impressed. “It was good to hear,” he said. “He at least put something on the table to start with.” Taddiken agrees that schools should not face further cuts. But he was non-committal on whether the tax package is acceptable. It should be clear if Taddiken was on top of things, or not feeling out public opinion through an amibguous noncomittment.

Rep. Sharon Schwartz, R-Washington, was a bit more on top of it, and said Kansans can’t handle a tax increase at this time. A sales tax hike, Schwartz said, could encourage consumers to shop on the Internet rather than from local small businesses. On the cigarette tax hike, Schwartz said she reviewed past constituent surveys and found majority support for that. However, she said the increase might lead people to cross state lines to buy cigarettes rather than pay more tax here.

Baldwin Newspaper Applauds tax Hike and Spreading the Debt

The Baldwin City Signal editor wrote, “We saw democracy in action Tuesday and we liked what we saw. A majority of Baldwin City voters said yes to a pair of sales tax questions. Both questions passed by wide enough margins to say without a doubt that the city has spoken. The first question, on renewing a half-cent sales tax that’s been in place since 1991, passed 66-33 percent. The second question, on a new quarter-cent sales tax to be used for “quality of life” projects was closer, but still 55 percent said yes, while 44 percent said no.”

And they end with “We’re pleased with what the voters decided, too. ………..It’s not spreading the wealth, it’s spreading the debt. Good choice.”

Uhhh, there is really not much difference. The only way any government creates any wealth is by collecting a debt from someone else. Baldwin City residents were duped into voting away some of the contents of their own wallet. That is not unusual when in most cases the organization that proposes the increase will not only benefit, but has the most money to campaign for it. It also leads to the old question of “how much tax money was spent in order to get more tax money?”

The town of Baldwin is off the hook now, since they baited the residents and they of their own free will bit the hook. Happy taxing!

Kansas City: Repeal Earnings Tax and KC will become “unlivable” wasteland…

The Missouri Auditor’s office has gathered comments from interested groups related to a vote and/or eventual repeal of Kansas City’s 1% earnings tax (St. Louis has a similar levy.)

“It is not hyperbole to state that elimination of the earnings tax without replacement revenue could render the City of Kansas City unlivable,” Kansas City told the auditor’s office. “The City has already cut over $80 million from its budget for the current year, and may need to reduce another $60 million next year – even though the earnings tax exists. The fiscal impact of the adoption of this petition and the resultant election if the earnings tax was eliminated, or the adoption of Petition 09-68 with its statutory revocation of the earnings tax is currently $200 million with a domino effect for the city that would render the losses devastating.”

I will suggest they are not cutting from the right places. They seem to think it is less offensive if they cut money from the taxpayers income as opposed to cutting any of their own programs.

Kansas Gov Mark Parkinson to propose tobacco tax increase in 2010

According to Associated Press, Gov. Mark Parkinson will propose increasing Kansas’ tobacco taxes next year. Parkinson spokeswoman Beth Martino said the governor hasn’t settled on how much of an increase he’ll propose. But she hinted that he’s considering asking legislators to bring Kansas’ cigarette tax up to the national average.

Kansas’ cigarette tax is 79 cents a pack. The national average for states and the District of Columbia is $1.34 a pack, according to the Washington-based group Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. “He is going to pursue a tobacco tax of some sort,” Martino said. “He is still looking at the options.” Martino said Parkinson has not decided whether to ask legislators to dedicate the new revenues to health programs, or use it to help the state balance its budget for fiscal year 2011, which begins July 1.

Legislative researchers estimate that increasing the cigarette tax by 55 cents, to $1.34 a pack, would raise about $88 million during the next fiscal year. The state also imposes a 10 percent tax on other tobacco products, but doubling it would raise only $5 million during the next fiscal year.

Senate President Steve Morris, a Hugoton Republican, said a cigarette tax increase would have the best chance of any proposal to raise tax rates. “I would support it,” Morris said. “I think it’s probably the only tax increase that would have the possibility of getting through the Legislature.”

Merchants also worry about losing business to other states. While Colorado and Oklahoma have higher cigarette taxes, Nebraska’s is lower, and Missouri’s, at 17 cents a pack, is second-lowest in the nation, behind only South Carolina. Public health advocates have long argued that Kansans will support higher tobacco taxes if the money is used for health care programs.

But in 2002, when legislators boosted the cigarette tax from 24 cents, they did it to help close a budget shortfall. When then-Gov. Kathleen Sebelius outlined a plan in 2004 to raise tobacco taxes for health care, legislators ignored the proposal for several years.

Beware Kansas Taxpayers: Kansas schools vote to take budget cuts to court

Dozens of Kansas school districts have decided to ask the Kansas Supreme Court to weigh in on school funding. Members of a coalition of more than 70 school districts voted unanimously on a resolution to ask the Supreme Court to reopen a lawsuit that was filed in 1999. It led to Kansas Supreme Court orders in 2005 and 2006 that forced dramatic increases in aid to public schools.

The group, called Schools for Fair Funding, represents 168,000 students in kindergarten through 12th grade. It wants the court to decide whether the funding formula that legislators created in response to the suit and this year’s state education budget cuts are constitutional, said John Robb, lead attorney for the coalition. Lawmakers have grumbled about the litigation talk, saying the state is doing the best it can with shrinking revenues. But Robb has said tax cuts have contributed to the education shortfall.

Money is tight. There is a recession going on. There has never been anything to suggest absolutely that more money means better education. So less money will not take away either. It is the schools who need to learn to budget.

Baldwin City Voters Vote to INCREASE Taxes with ONLY 20% Voter Turnout

The first question, on renewing a half-cent sales tax that’s been in place since 1991, passed 66-33 percent. The second question, on a new quarter-cent sales tax to be used for “quality of life” projects was closer, but still 55 percent said yes, while 44 percent said no.

With 20 percent of the registered voters casting ballots, those 533 voters were more than the 381 who voted in the city’s last special election regarding Sunday sales of liquor in 2005.

I, personally, do not share the optimism that any mandate was reached in such low voter turnout. But its not unsual in these special elections. What city governments need to remember, though, is that they can pat themselves on the back for selling their increases to voters, but many of those “I dont care enough to vote” residents will show how much they care when they decide its too expensive to live there and move away.