[statecom-discuss] Draft 2008 Public Policy Question Campaign

[Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com]

Nat    :-)    !

Ah, this is getting interesting.   If we did a legislative level campaign - 
we could essentially put an educational alternative to the proposed statewide 
initiative - that would be great, because it would engage local people in 
direct education but offer a real alternative - it could also cover how cuts that 
don't shift the tax burden will continue to damage our schools, our basic 
services, our environment, etc. 

In terms of specifics, I want to point out, though that major moves towards 
more regressive taxation in the past few years have been because of the 
increase in property taxes and more burden on sales taxes because of the decreased 
burden carried by businesses and higher income folks.

So I really think we should go with the initiatives moving towards fairer 
taxation already on the table - like expanding the property tax circuit-breaker 
that gives you a tax deduction for your property taxes -(renters and property 
owners equally pay these texts since they are passed directly onto renters).   
We have to shift the fundamental misunderstanding that income taxes are bad - 
they are the only thing that reaches hte richer echelons of society   - so 
they are the relative friend of most of us (even if they are flat they are more 
progressive) than any other kind of tax we have now.   Sales taxes since they 
don't tax upper-end services fall more on you the lower income you are!

If our basic thrust is not that other tax cuts are more progressive and that 
cutting the overallincome of the state really screws regular people mroe then 
I think we are not talking at a fundamental enough level.

This will certainly separate us from the libertarians and could connect us 
(if we have a real commitment, as I said to talking to the voters usually 
ignored) with both lower income/more people of color voters and the unions - which 
are already the driving force behind the opposition to the initiative to 
eliminate income tax.

Grace
In a message dated 12/16/07 5:00:48 PM, nat.fortune at comcast.net writes:


> 
> > On Dec 16, 2007, at 4:06 PM, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote:
> >
> > Equally important is that there may well be a ballot question 
> > attempting to
> > eliminate income tax - moving us ever more regressively on 
> > taxation, crippling
> > what is left of our state economy, and hurting those the most (both 
> > in terms
> > of shifted tax burden and cuts in services) who can least afford it.
> >
> > If we are going to mount a statewide ballot campaign, what about 
> > actually
> > doing organizing and voter registration with a broad-based message 
> > that really
> > empowers people around taxes and voting (using their initiative as 
> > the target)?
> >  And reaches the people no one else is willing to take the time to 
> > reach?
> 
> 
> Grace is right: paying attention to the questions already on the 
> ballot and posing an alternative that focuses on what the state 
> legislature could do is a very good idea. It would show how the GRP 
> would govern differently and could do it in a way that would have 
> direct appeal to voters already confronted with questions about taxes.
> 
> Here's one possibility but there are many others (for example a 
> carbon tax)
> 
> Let's start with the assumption that our goal is an honest sharing of 
> burdens and benefits, so that everyone can afford to live in 
> communities worth living in. Instead, we have a tax system that 
> steals from the poor to give to the rich. What we ultimately need is 
> a progressive tax system, but that requires a constitutional 
> amendment that wouldn't be on the ballot this time, and the average 
> voter seems to mistakenly believe that they would pay more taxes 
> under such a system.
> 
> So how about an advisory question that makes the existing system more 
> progressive, spells out how the average voter would benefit in a way 
> that is easier to understand, and builds the base needed to actually 
> pass a progressive tax system amendment (which has been repeatedly 
> defeated).
> 
> Here's my idea, but it needs work to make it easier to follow.
> 
> (1) Exempt anyone earning less than a living wage from paying any 
> state income taxes. Give the same size exemption to every additional 
> member of a family.
> 
> Example: if living wage is $10/hour (just to pick a round number) and 
> you work full time 50 weeks a year with two weeks off, then you earn 
> $10/hour x 40 hours/week x 50 weeks/year = $20,000 year. So if you 
> are single, the first $20,000 is exempt. If you are a couple, the 
> first $40,000 is exempt. If you have two kids as well, the first 
> $80,000 is exempt.  Likewise, f the living wage is $12/hour, then the 
> first $24,000 is exempt, etc. etc.
> 
> 
> (2) change  the tax rate on what you earn over and above a living 
> wage so that  If you earn twice the living wage , then you pay the 
> same as you did before (or less)  in taxes and if you earn less than 
> double the living wage then you pay less than you do now. If you earn 
> more than that, then the poor have been paying your way for a very 
> long time and you can afford to start pulling your weight!
> 
> Example: Assume a living wage of $10/hour like before. So if you are 
> a couple with two kids earning $160,000/year, then you pay the same 
> as before.
> 
> 
> 
> The official living wage for Brookline MA was $10.30 as of July 
> 2006   and for Boston was $11.95 as of June 2006.
> <http://www.livingwagecampaign.org/index.php?id=1958 >
> 
> Nat
> 
> _______________________________________________
> statecom-discuss mailing list
> statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
> 
> 




**************************************
See AOL's top rated recipes 
(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)