From the category archives:

Budget

Local communities realize that Gov. Kasich = Higher local taxes.

by ModernEsquire on March 3, 2010 · Comments

From the Granville Sentinel:

A hot button statewide issue could determine whether Granville Township will have turn to local taxpayers to bolster its general fund, township officials say.

The repeal or paring down of the inheritance tax — proposed by a candidate for governor and a state legislator, respectively –coming on the heels of falling state and local revenues, would necessitate a request for a local operating tax levy, said Fred Abraham, chair of the township trustees.

…

The inheritance tax is one of several state and local sources of revenue for the general fund. But in this year’s general fund budget, it is by far the largest local source, projected to supply $140,000. With a bill pending in the Ohio House of Representatives to pare it down and allow for local repeal and with gubernatorial candidate John Kasich’s stand in favor of its repeal, the chances of the tax remaining as a source of Township revenue are fading, Abraham said.

If the inheritance tax is repealed, the township budget will be in a deficit situation in 2012, according to a five-year budget forecast drawn up by Township Fiscal Officer Norm Kennedy. That would necessitate the need for an operating levy, Abraham said.

If the inheritance remains in place, he said, “we will be in somewhat good shape still for some time.”

Kasich’s tax plan will turn this fiscally sound township government and create deficit that will require a massive property tax increase to avoid.

Kasich’s not repealing the tax burden, he’s just going to shift it around with higher local property and sales taxes. 

The only way he can avoid that is to replace the lost revenues to local governments by replacing that lost revenue with appropriations from the general revenue.  Which, itself, is going to be decimated by his plan to repeal the income tax over time.

Anyone who honestly thinks that the State of Ohio will not, on some level, supplement the local governments for the lost revenue caused by an estate tax repeal is DELUSIONAL.  His two tax plans combine create a one-two punch that makes the math impossible to figure out how he’s going to do it “responsibly…”  And how impossible does that make the math?

According to the Columbus Business First newspaper, Kasich defined it as:

“Kasich said he and his team hope to have about 70 percent of their state government reform agenda figured out by November.”

So, John Kasich admits that it’s not that he’s not ready to release details on his plan, IT’S THAT HE AND HIS CAMPAIGN HAVE YET TO FIGURE OUT THEMSELVES!!!

Even, worse, Kasich-Taylor hopes, hopes, HOPES, that they may have it 70% figured out come the general election.

WTF?!?

When I was in school, a 70% answer was a C-.

And Kasich-Taylor are crossing their fingers, with their eyes shut tight in the hopes that the teacher (media) doesn’t call on them to answer any questions yet, so that they can rush home and cram all night and maybe get that C- on the big test tomorrow?!?  That’s what they’re hoping to offer?  (No wonder Kasich has been refusing to do any interviews outside of conservative-friendly media.)

Higher property taxes, massive cuts in law enforcement, colleges, and schools, and a goal to hope to have a C- answer on how you’ll pay for something you’ve been talking about for FOUR YEARS; that’s Kasich’s “New Day” of fiscal irresponsibility?

Maybe Kasich-Taylor’s elections slogan should instead be– “Kasich-Taylor: The Audacity of Nope.”

Leave to John Kasich to reform the Ohio Republican Party to adopt the fine traditions of the old “Know Nothing Party.”

{ 0 comments }

John Boehner doesn’t want to pass health care reform bill, even if most GOPers agree with most of it…

by ModernEsquire on March 2, 2010 · Comments

John Boehner makes it perfectly clear that no matter how many GOP ideas the White House incorporates, the Republicans are interested in seeing it defeated in ANY form, even as he admits that most Republicans agrees with most of the bill (and yet, he didn’t mentioned what these points were as a starting point in the recent health care summit.  I know, Boehner, disingenuous?  I’m stunned, too!)

From the Hamilton Pulse-Journal:

If the American people stay engaged in this fight, I don’t think (current health care reform) is going to happen,” the House Minority Leader and West Chester Twp. Republican told an audience of about 140 residents, business leaders and politicians at a special speaking engagement Monday, March 1, at the Manchester Inn. The Chamber of Commerce Serving Middletown, Monroe and Trenton sponsored the event.

…

While Boehner said there are about eight to 10 points in the current health care legislation most Republicans agree with, he said Congress and the president need to find more common ground and not just “have some Republican crumbs sprinkled on top.”

Boehner claims that the biggest area of disagreement is a mandate to buy insurance and fining businesses who fail to provide health insurance.

Boehner, who once said that the health care bill would “virtually eliminate Medicare Advantage“  (that was, of course, untrue according to the CBO) and publicly decried the cuts in Medicare in the health care bill wants to balance the the budget:

Noting that legislators were able to balance the budget in the latter Clinton years, Boehner said following the event Monday that he believed spending got out of hand after Sept. 11 , when large funds were expended for the Department of Homeland Security and to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan.

However, he said none of these three areas could afford to lose funding and said he would rather see cuts made to three “entitlement programs” — Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

“I think they are important programs, but they aren’t sustainable in the long-term,” he said. “We need to figure out ways to control that spending.”

Boehner specifically cited concerns involving Medicare, which he said would “swell to levels I can’t imagine” as more baby boomers start to retire.

Now John Boehner wants to cut Medicare and Social Security.  Sounds like Boehner is signing up on Paul Ryan’s radical budget.

{ 2 comments }

Dispatch (R-Columbus): Kasich long on rhetoric, short on results

by ModernEsquire on February 15, 2010 · Comments

Joe Hallett, registered Republican, tries to help John Kasich’s “dirty little secret” by writing about it and declaring it no big deal.

However, Hallett and Riskind engage in a game of distraction in declaring Kasich a “success.”

The article begins with this question:

“How much of a role did Kasich actually play in balancing the federal budget in the late 1990s?”

Here’s Governor Strickland’s answer:

“It was the economy that brought us to a balanced budget, it was not the work of any individual,” Strickland said.

…

But Strickland also correctly points out that the task was made easier then by tax increases championed in 1990 by Republican President George H.W. Bush and in 1993 by Clinton, coupled with a booming dot-com economy that produced record revenue for the federal government.

And for an objective, academic prospective?

“For the most part, Republicans and Democrats joined together to take credit for what was happening, due mostly to a bubble-fed surge in federal revenues,” said Allen Schick, a federal budget expert and public policy professor at the University of Maryland.

Kasich’s response?

Kasich disagreed, contending that Clinton’s budgets in 1994 and 1995 projected “$200 billion deficits as far as the eye could see.”

Well, not really, and Hallett and Riskind failed to point out an obvious counterpoint to Kasich’s soundbite:  Kasich’s budgets at the time also predicted budget deficits until this century.  None of Kasich’s budgets, which were NEVER enacted, ever predicted a budget surplus in the 1990s.  At best, they predicted a “balanced” budget by the early 2000s. 

The reason Kasich’s projections were off?  Yeah, that bubble economy Prof. Schick and even the CATO Institute acknowledges was responsible for balancing the budget and creating federal “surpluses,” not John Kasich (or Bill Clinton.)

To Kasich’s defense rides Newt Gingrich and Pete Dominici, who spend the rest of the article discussion how important Kasich’s role was in budget negotiations, even though he was excluded from negotiations with the White House, which the article mentions.

But this is a subterfuge, because this issue isn’t whether John Kasich was involved in the federal budget debate in the 1990s.  He was the House Budget Chairman, of course, he was involved.  The issue was, I thought, was did Kasich actually do anything that allows him to claim credit for those surpluses.

The fact that the Clinton White House is viewed as winning each budget battle and none of the draconian cuts Kasich advocated ever made it into law, coupled with the fact that Kasich’s own budgets didn’t predict they’d be balanced in nearly a decade, all suggests that his claim to fame is undeserved.

And you’d think that there’d be some mention of how Kasich’s current tax plan, with no plan to pay for them, is a stark contrast to the image Kasich presents from his congressional days.

You’d think in a story that was about whether Kasich did anything to deserve credit for the budget surplus, you’d see, you know, SOMETHING that actually discussed these issues.

But not in an article written by Joe Hallett for the Columbus Dispatch.  Not when the the truth doesn’t support Kasich’s narrative.

{ 0 comments }

John Kasich endorses Ted Strickland for Governor

by ModernEsquire on February 4, 2010 · Comments

John Kasich has been on a tear lately…. a tear of endorsing Governor Strickland’s plan to Turnaround Ohio:

Starting at the 6:18 mark:

Kasich: “Now, Larry, at the same time, we talk about: how do you transition? In manufacturing, go up the value chain, you know, make parts for alternative energy, go into avontics and make parts for advanced aircraft.  You know, there’s still a chance to make cars, but you just can’t rely on auto parts.  You think about technology, our workers out here are good people, they’re smart people, we’ve got a great university system, we can get people from Silicon Valley to come here, but we have to improve the atmosphere in our State….”

I’ll agree with Keeling on this, the plan Kasich just described is a “homerun.”  Only problem is that it’s Governor Strickland’s Turnaround Ohio plan.

You know who’s done a lot on promoting the manufacturing of alternative energy technologies in Ohio, John?  Ted Strickland. 

You know whose Administration created that great University System in Ohio?  Ted Strickland (and Chancellor Eric Fingerhut).

You know whose Administration already has done regulatory reform and got rid of thousands of overly burdensome and unproductive government regulations?  Yep, Ted Strickland.

Ted Strickland has enacted job-creation tax credits, he’s ushered in a reform of our corporate tax rates, cut our personal income tax rates by double-digits and now about of expensive makeup and hair and private jet tours through Ohio is going to help John Kasich avoid that reality.

(BTW, at no time did John Kasich mention once his tax repeals… in an interview billed as “Kasich on Taxes.”  He falsely said our budgets haven’t been balanced, when they are REQUIRED to be balanced.  He claims Governor Strickland raised taxes… when he’s lowered them.  So, not only is John Kasich running to the national media claiming a plan that is actually the Governor’s record, he’s then lying about the record.)

And I admit, I misjudged the extent John Kasich would try to co-opt Governor Strickland’s record as his own.  I should have realized that when I didn’t see Jon Keeling writing post after post, Tweet after Tweet, condemning the Third Frontier, it meant that Kasich was going to sign onto it.

After all, John Kasich has wowed the Tea Party crowds throughout Ohio with his conservative populist message as being against “corporate welfare,” so much he claimed that he was a Tea Bagger First, a Republican second.

Except the Dayton Daily News reported this morning that the Kasich campaing has endorsed the compromise on Third Frontier worked out between Governor Strickland, the House Democrats, and the Senate Republican leaderships.

So, imagine the gall of Kasich when despite all this, he tries to pivot before the general election and claim that Governor Strickland has no plan to Turnaround Ohio.

Excuse me a minute, I’m sorry Mary Taylor has something she wants to say in response to concerns that Kasich-Taylor have no plans:

“[T]hey’re talking about a plan that doesn’t currently exist,” Taylor said.

Mary Taylor is right.  It’s hard to criticize someone if they don’t have anything original to say…

{ 0 comments }

John Kasich reminds everyone that he created the housing and IT bubbles of the 1990s

by ModernEsquire on January 26, 2010 · Comments

Who’s bright idea was THIS? 

Hey, John, to compete with the Governor appearing at the well of the People’s house to bipartisan applause, we’re going to film you in an empty room.  But we’ll make it all white like the loading room in “The Matrix.”  The kids will love it even if we never make any guns appear and you never kick ass.  Yeah, we’ll keep it as blank as your plan to fix Ohio’s economy.  Look into the camera like your talking to your dog after it just took a dump on your exotic, persian carpet in your study…. Great, just like that.

Oh, and could you talk about all the new ideas you got from the Voinovich, Taft, and Blackwell campaigns?  Yeah, the voters totally believe that lawsuits cost them their jobs and not your support for free trade deals that killed Ohio’s manufacturing sector or the repeal of Glass-Steagal that helped your old buddies from Lehman Brothers. 

By the way, could you remind people how you enacted policies that created the housing and IT bubble that created this recession?  Grrrreat…. Shooting in 3, 2, 1….

Seriously, Kasich talking about “honest” balanced budgets while he runs around the state promising to repeal both the estate and income tax, with no announced plan on how to pay for them, is just comical. 

The fact of the matter is that with Kasich’s campaign now swearing off even a ten-year timetable to repeal Ohio’s income tax, (See where Kasich’s campaign spokesman throws State Rep. Adams under the bus.) Kasich’s campaign cannot even claim to have a plan to fix Ohio’s economy IN THIS DECADE.  No plan.  It’s as blank as his background.  Ted Strickland ushered in the biggest tax cut in modern Ohio history.  It hasn’t worked.  More of the same isn’t the answer, John, and yet, that’s exactly what you’re calling for.  Instead of offering the same failed policies of past Republican Administrations, Governor Strickland, unlike Kasich, is proposing a new way to build Ohio’s economy in this decade.

BTW, no mention of Mary Taylor, not even in the end credit?  But I though she was so super awesome?!?

{ 1 comment }

Like a neglected crack in glass, major fault lines in Kasich’s campaign messaging starting to emerge

by ModernEsquire on January 16, 2010 · Comments

If you thought that this week’s coverage over Kasich’s tax plan which overshadowed what should have been nothing more than puff, positive stories about the Kasich-Taylor rollout wouldn’t continue, well, guess again.

Here are some major fault lines that this week’s event demonstrated that will grow like an untreated crack in a car windshield until election day.

  1. Something about Mary.  Yeah, we all know there’s still the unresolved issue of who, if anyone, will the GOP be able to recruit to challenge Hamilton County Commissioner David Pepper for State Auditor.  ORP Chairman Kevin DeWine can call Pepper a “dud” all he wants, but neither he, Kasich, nor Taylor did anything to challenge the media narrative that it was Pepper’s impressive fundraising that pushed the only elected nonjudicial GOP officeholder from seeking re-election.  But besides that, what happens to the money Taylor raised for the Auditor’s race?  I’m sure there’s more than just a few donors who will want their money back because they thought they were helping Taylor stay in the Auditior’s race and thus helping the GOP with a majority on the Apportionment Board.  Will she refund her campaign chest back to the donors?  Will she just turn it all over to the Kasich campaign?  Or will she transfer it to whomever the GOP finds at the last minute to run for her vacating office?  Depending on the answer, there could be some real fireworks in store over the fight over Taylor’s $$$.  I think this will be the next story you’ll see about the wake of the launch of the SS Kasich-Taylor.
  2. Kasich’s unnoticed double-standard on the economy.  Kasich’s entire rationale for his campaign seems to be:  “Because Ted Strickland couldn’t turn around the economy in two years, you should vote for me because I’ll fix it sometime after 2020.”  Seriously.  Even Kasich’s most loyal conservatives in the General Assembly do not believe its possible to repeal Ohio’s income tax before 2020, a timeline former Ohio Taxpayers Association President Scott Pullins even calls naive.  When will the media point out that Kasich’s own insistence that his plan to allegedly fix Ohio’s economy won’t take place, at the earliest, until THREE GUBERNATORIAL and TWO PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS from now is evidence that Strickland couldn’t possibly be blamed for the economy not turning around when Kasich’s strongest supporters say his plan (let alone the hoped for results of that plan) can’t happen any sooner than ten years from now? John Kasich has been attacking Governor Strickland over something that not even John Kasich claims he could do.
  3. Kasich=Blackwell.  John Kasich was asked, point blank, how he was different from Ken Blackwell.  He didn’t even argue with the premise of the question.  Instead, he wished to be thought of as like Ronald Reagan.  You know who else wanted people to think of him as Ohio’s Ronald Reagan?  Ken Blackwell.
  4. John Kasich throws the rest of the GOP under the bus, including Mary Taylor.  It was, by far, my favorite moment of the Kasich-Taylor press conference.  After ORP Chairman Kevin DeWine called Mary Taylor’s “leadership” in crafting the tax reforms in 2005 in the General Assembly as her biggest policy achievement, John Kasich, to Taylor’s face, called them a failure.  It actually stunned the media who gave Kasich a chance to talk it back.  He didn’t.  Kasich had already alienated himself with the ORP folks in Columbus by upending what everyone thought (myself included) was as strong of a slate as they could find.  Now, the ORP is scrambling to the very real risk that they might lose the majority on the Apportionment Board that everyone, myself included, thought they’d get even if Kasich lost.  With this single comment, John Kasich just threw the entire GOP legislative caucuses and his running mate under the bus and said their failed leadership is to blame for the current economic conditions.  When, not if, when John Kasich’s numbers soften and it looks like he’s headed for defeat, his comment is going to give the Republicans in the General Assembly all the excuse they need to jump ship. . . just like they did with Ken Blackwell in ‘06.
  5. John Kasich’s unnoticed double standard on delaying tax relief.  At one point during his news conference, a defensive, and somewhat testy Kasich interrupted Mary Taylor to tell the media that the reason he doesn’t have an announced timetable for his income tax repeal is because he’s going to have to ease this through in a “responsible way.”  This is exactly why Governor Strickland delayed the anticipated personal income tax cut this year that Kasich has criticized so much.  So far, nobody in the media has pointed out that double-standard.
  6. Mary Taylor’s double-standard on fiscal conservatism. Where was Mary Taylor, the crusader against structural deficits during the Taft years?  AWOL.  These “structural deficits” didn’t just occur when Governor Strickland came into office.  And he’s tried as much as he can get the Senate GOPers to work with him to address it.  But despite the best efforts of ODP Chairman Chris Redfern, very few, if any, in the media pointed out that Taylor was the only statewide office holder who DIDN’T refuse a pay raise or cut salaries in her office.   While every other Democratic official did both.   Meanwhile, there’s still the issue of all the tens of thousands of dollars in self-promotional swag Taylor spent taxpayer dollars in buying to promote herself.  Given her brief history in office, Taylor is a curious person to waive the banner of fiscal conservatism about.

Now I must say, the media did not sit back and play stenographer to the Kasich campaign as I’ve felt they’ve done in the past.  They clearly see the impact of the LSC study has on the ticket and realize that Kasich has no real excuse for being so ill-equipped to defend what is after all his plan.

Every one of these observations are things that escaped me this week until just now.  You’re not likely going to see these narratives in Sunday’s paper.  It may be months, heck, until November even, before you see signs of these fault lines being noted in the media.  But they are there, and it’s just a matter of time before they erupt and cause some serious damage to this ticket.

{ 1 comment }

As the conservative blogsphere ignores disastrous Kasich-Taylor rollout, legislative hearings on Kasich’s tax plan are scheduled

by ModernEsquire on January 14, 2010 · Comments

I feel I must point out that not a single conservative blogger, Jon Keeling included, wrote about the Kasich-Taylor press conference today.  Not one person wrote, in excitement, how they’ll remember where they were when Kasich tweeted them.  After four days of public teeth gnashing over the disaster Kasich-Taylor leaves in its wake for the GOP, the entire conservative blogsphere decided to find something else to talk about instead.  That’s hardly evidence of the “unbeatable” powerhouse ticket GOP Chairman Kevin DeWine tried to declare while choking back the urge to uncontrollably sob.

The entire GOP ticket, from the top to bottom of the state legislative races, has signed onto a plan to repeal Ohio’s income tax.  Almost the entire House Republican caucus has signed on as cosponsors of legislation already pending.  I believe there is a sizeable number of Senate Republicans have endorsed a Senate version of the same bill.

One house is controlled by the Republicans.  The other is controlled by the Democrats.  Guess which one the Columbus Dispatch has reported will begin hearings on Kasich’s tax plan?

Rep. John Adams, R-Sidney, will provide sponsor testimony on House Bill 400 on Tuesday before the House Ways and Means Committee. The committee chairman, Rep. Tom Letson, D-Warren, all but guaranteed it will not be the only hearing.

“I believe this discussion needs to be had and this is the time to have it,” Letson said of the bill, which would phase out Ohio’s income tax over 10 years. “This is an idea that can only be called dangerous. I think it is basically a fiscal disaster.”

An analysis completed this week by the nonpartisan Legislative Service Commission said the bill would reduce general revenue fund totals by $814 million in fiscal year 2011, rising to a cut of more than $12 billion by 2020. It also would mean the loss of $79 million in 2011 for local governments and libraries, a figure that also would rise each year.

…

The bill is co-sponsored by 30 House Republicans, including Rep. Josh Mandel of Lyndhurst, the likely GOP candidate for state treasurer, and Rep. Seth Morgan of Huber Heights, who has announced he is running for state auditor.

“If this is one of the cornerstones of the punitive (GOP) gubernatorial platform, this is something the public and legislature need to understand, so we’re going to give it the hearings,” Letson said. “Let’s give it an airing. If it is as irresponsible as I think it is, then the Republicans may have to revise some of there thinking about this sort of thing.”

The Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee is calling Kasich’s tax plan out.  He’s going to do that which Kasich and his supporters have actively sought to avoid doing.  He’s going to tell the people of Ohio what a Kasich-Taylor Administration would mean: what cuts it would involve,what it would do to tuition, education, and other societal priorities, and yes, how it would lead to higher taxes elsewhere.

And who’s there to defend Kasich’s signature issue?  State Rep. John Adams, a guy who didn’t even complete a two-year degree from a California community college that doesn’t even offer a degree in economics. 

John Kasich can try to walk away from his tax platform.  But we won’t let him.  He formed a PAC on this issue.  He’s campaigned for over a year on this issue.  He WILL own this issue.  And it will be his campaign’s entire undoing.

{ 0 comments }

With Taylor announcement out of the way, the only thing Kasich-Taylor is going to be asked about is today’s non-partisan LSC report on Kasich’s signature issue

by ModernEsquire on January 14, 2010 · Comments

Here’s the Plain Dealer’s coverage over the “Tweet predicted around the world” today:

But an independent analysis released Wednesday of a bill introduced by a Republican lawmaker proposing to phase that tax out over 10 years concluded Ohio would lose $768 million next year alone and more in years after that.

Local governments and libraries would also lose money under a plan to eliminate the income tax, according to the Legislative Service Commission analysis.

Kasich has refused, to this point, to say how he would make the plan work or what revenue he might use to replace the income tax funds. Those details will come later in the campaign, he has said.

(Eric already covered the Legislative Service Commission’s report today here.)

Kasich, the former House Budget Chairman, and “One-term Taylor” the soon-to-be-former Auditor of Ohio, is a ticket billed for its mastery of all things budget.

With the Taylor pick out of the bag, now even officially, there’s no way Kasich and Taylor are going to hold a press conference and get away with not answering any questions about the LSC report on the centerpiece issue for their campaign.

(On a side note, I’d like to thank State Representative John Adams (R) for submitting the tax repeal bill so that an LSC fiscal analysis would be released on the day of the Kasich-Taylor ticket launch.  Thanks!)

That press conference in half and hour should be a doozy.  Time to go pop the popcorn.

{ 0 comments }

Tax Foundation attempts to refute Plunderbund analysis by disclaiming that Tax Foundation’s study on Ohio’s taxes was fundamentally flawed

by ModernEsquire on January 13, 2010 · Comments

fail-owned-pwned-pictures

So the Tax Foundation’s blogger tried to do some damage control yesterday for the Kasich-Taylor campaign after I pointed out that their election-year study on John Kasich’s signature issue really didn’t help his campaign any.  Please note that the Tax Foundation’s blog post was not written by the actual author of the report, but instead someone who is far less qualified than the original study’s author.  First, read my initial post, and then read the Tax Foundation’s reply.

I know, they raised more strawmen than an Iowa cornfield!

But, just so you can follow this reply, I’m going to respond to each point in the order used in the headers on the Tax Foundation’s blog.

1) The Tax Foundation admits that its own data suggests no correlation between state/local tax rates in Ohio and migration from the state.

Remember this graph? Remember how I pointed out that the Tax Foundation’s own data shows that migration out of the State actually accelerated when Ohio began phase out corporate inventory taxes and making massive cuts to the personal income tax?  And remember how I specifically said that I’m not suggesting there’s actually a negative correlation, but I’m pointing out there’s no correlation at all?  Well, the Tax Foundation’s blogger apparently didn’t:

Just because two things happened in 2005 doesn’t mean one caused the other.

He thinks he’s refuting my point, but he actually made it: the Tax Foundation’s blogger just pointed out the major fallacy of its President’s report on Ohio taxes in which he claimed there was a correlation between state/local taxes and migration out of the State.  I only pointed out that the data doesn’t support that conclusion.  The Tax Foundation’s  blogger pointed out it would be a fallacy to suggest a causative  link between the two in the first place.  This, of course, did not stop him from repeating the fallacy as fact at the end of his post.  Irony.

Way to refute the President of your organization’s major thesis of his report on Ohio!

2.  Not even the Tax Foundation believes Kasich will run on a platform of repealing Ohio’s income tax.

The Tax Foundation essentially says it isn’t aware that Kasich is running to repeal Ohio’s income and estate tax, only that he ”mentions” he might.   This is the second time this week alone an organization sympathetic or someone tied to Kasich has suggested that Kasich will not, in fact, campaign on repealing Ohio’s income tax.  That, in and of itself, is newsworthy.

Second, the report at issue was explicitly billed as the most “sensible” way Ohio could reform its taxes to encourage economic growth.  Is their blogger now suggesting otherwise?  I’d note that the study doesn’t suggest these changes should be made because it will improve Ohio’s ranking with the organization’s biased and completely ridiculed “business environment” rankings.  No, the report said that the recommendations would actually make the actual conditions of our economy better.  Their omission of anything approaching Kasich’s platform is an indictment that Kasich’s plan is not sensible, according to them.  Again, the report itself does not even conclude that Ohio’s personal income tax, or its estate tax are the “most anti-growth” taxes in the State, instead it cites other taxes for that distinction.

Given the errors that the organization has admitted in this post later, I even question if Ohio would rank as the Foundation’s blogger “projected” it would.   There’s no question that any State without an income tax automatically gets a #1 from the Tax Foundation on income tax issues, but the rest of their rankings depends on what the organization estimated, if at all, how such a repeal would affect other tax rates as governments struggled to mitigate the loss of revenues caused by a repeal.  I bet $5 the simulated ranking failed to account for increases in local income and property taxes that even proponents of the repeal concede are likely to occur.

3.  The Tax Foundation admits that its data in the report was fundamentally flawed, and then correct it with praise for Strickland.

Don’t believe me?:

The numbers [regarding per capita spending adjusted for population changes and inflation from 1993 to the present] we used in our original report were wrong and we have now corrected them.

How flawed was the Foundation’s data in its initial report?  Well, instead of show flat growth in per capita spending when adjusted for inflation, they NOW claim it shows nearly a 40% increase on average.  Given that this was a major focus of the study, an error that profound is amazing.  It basically calls into question the validity of the rest of its “data” and the analysis thereof.

But those years were all Republican years except from 2007 till now.  What did they say specifically about state spending under Governor Strickland?  Well after observing that State expenditures in 2008 were $67.788 billion, it notes that:

Governor Strickland has proposed a 2010 total expenditure level of $63.9 billion and a 2011 level of $65.3 billion. (Executive Budget, page C-5.)

In other words, after blasting Ohio’s Republican Governors for exploding state spending, the Tax Foundation has to note that Governor Strickland has actually CUT overall State spending.  Without Governor Strickland’s first term, Ohio’s increase in per capita spending (if the Tax Foundation’s second try is more accurate) average would be worse.

And it’s not like this is the first conservative organization that has had to admit that historically Ohio Democratic governors have been better to keep state spending in check compared to Republican ones.  In fact, after Strickland’s first budget passed, the Buckeye Institute’s President said that Republicans should be “embarassed” that a Democratic Governor would pass a more fiscally conservative budget than ones the last two Republican governors passed.

Like everything the Tax Foundation does, it’s long on ideological rhetoric, but embarassingly lacking in actual facts.  Actually, as I already pointed out, even the data as they present them actually refutes their own assertions.

After first conceding that their own data does not prove their own theory: that there’s a direct correlation between state/local taxes rates and migration, they then “correct” their story by pointing out that state spending had, in fact, exploded since 1993… until Ted Strickland became Governor.

Can’t wait to read their third bite at the apple.

{ 1 comment }

Not even the conservative Tax Foundation will say that Kasich’s tax plans will help Ohio’s economy.

by ModernEsquire on January 11, 2010 · Comments

Last week, several conservative bloggers, including Virginia-based/unofficial Kasich campaign blogger Jon Keeling (a.k.a. I.T. 1040sauce) wrote about a recent “study” by the Tax Foundation regarding Ohio’s tax climate.

Billed as a non-partisan organization, the Tax Foundation is nonetheless a conservative ideological one whose studies and methodology has been criticized widely by economists. 

Among its board members is Gingrich-era House Ways and Means Chairman Bill Archer.  It’s President, who authored the “study” on Ohio, is Scott Hodge. According to the Tax Foundation’s website, Hodge was behind the Gingrich and then Bush Administration’s effort to cut the federal capital gains taxes.  “Before joining the Tax Foundation, Scott was Director of Tax and Budget Policy at Citizens for a Sound Economy. He also spent ten years at The Heritage Foundation, including eight years as Heritage’s Grover Hermann Fellow in Federal Budgetary Affairs.”  Citizens for a Sound Economy was the predecessor organization of Dick Armey’s FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity.

So, when you see someone like Hodge from a conservative organization on tax issues suddenly decide to issue a report on Ohio’s taxes at the beginning of an election year in which the Republican candidate has made taxes his entire platform, I guess you can guess what that report would say, right?

Well, no. 

1.  Ohio has actually lost more population after massively cutting the income tax.

The Tax Foundation’s own data rebuts Kasich’s main argument that tax cuts stem out-of-state migration. 

2005 was the first year of massive income tax cuts.  The result was that population loss actually accelerated.  Does this suggest a negative correlation?  No, but it does establish that there is no correlation between cutting taxes and population lost.  Remember, in conservative blogs, the use of a chart ends all debate.

2.  According to the conservative Tax Foundation, state spending in Ohio per capita has been relatively flat when you factor for inflation.

Second, has Ohio seen exploding state government spending?  Not according to Hodge:

During the same period, however, Ohio’s state spending grew from $38 billion in 1993 to over $60 billion today, roughly keeping equal after adjusting for population and inflation changes. (emphasis added).

Basically when you adjust for changes in population and factor in inflation, Ohio is spending the same amount per capita as it was back in 1993.  That seems to refute any notion by Kasich that Ohio has out-of-control government spending, especially when you consider the source.

Don’t get me wrong, the study talks negatively about Ohio’s tax environment (it is, after all, a study by the Tax Foundation), but the study when taken as a whole, does not do what you’d expect an election-year study by the Tax Foundation would say–  It does NOTHING to support Kasich’s case for repealing Ohio’s personal income or estate taxes.  Instead, quite the opposite.  It provides a conservative argument why Kasich’s platform is unlikely to improve Ohio’s economy. 

3.  The Tax Foundation’s own study concludes less expensive, more modest reforms other than what Kasich is promoting would be more effective.

Even though the stated purpose of the study is to suggest improvements to Ohio’s tax environment to make it “attractive” to businesses and job growth (the stated rationale for Kasich’s platform), it doesn’t even discuss either of Kasich’s proposals as something that would significantly improve Ohio’s economic climate.

The Tax Foundation does not even call Ohio’s progressive income tax or its estate tax one of Ohio’s most “anti-growth taxes.”  Again,the Tax Foundation’s study seems to suggest that Kasich’s plan is an ineffective way of improving Ohio’s economy.  Let me say that again, one of the most conservative tax organizations in the nation cannot bring themselves to say that Kasich’s platform would help. Instead of repealing Ohio’s personal income tax, the Tax Foundation instead suggests, predictably, that Ohio move to a flatter income tax.  I will say that Ohio’s nine income brackets does seem excessive. 

The taxes the Tax Foundation suggests should be repealed is the Commercial Activities Tax and the state’s capital gains tax.  Ironically, the Tax Foundation singles out the CAT tax as the most anti-growth tax in Ohio.  Ironic because it was instituted by Republicans in the General Assembly because the Tax Foundation called Ohio’s inventory tax… the most anti-growth tax in Ohio. 

However, nowhere in this study does the Tax Foundation recommend any component of John Kasich’s platform.

In fact, the massive reductions in spending caused by a repeal of the personal income tax would make the changes the Tax Foundation recommends fiscally impossible.

4.  Ohio’s personal income tax rates don’t put Ohio at an unique disadvantage to other States.

According to the Tax Foundation: “Ohio’s top income tax rate of 5.925% is about average regionally and nationally.”  What the Tax Foundation says makes Ohio rank so poorly in its business environment ranking (which has been widely criticized by economist for ideological bias) is local municipalities and school districts income taxes.

When not even the Tax Foundation can sign onto your signature issue, you know you have problems.  While Keeling and other conservative bloggers liked the Tax Foundation’s press release for the study for its catchy headline, they apparently didn’t read the study.  Because the actual study is a damning indictment as how silly repealing Ohio’s income tax would be.

{ 2 comments }

Conservative blogger finally admits it: John Kasich will raise taxes

by ModernEsquire on December 7, 2009 · Comments

Kyle Sisk is the first conservative blogger to admit that the entire candidacy of John Kasich for Governor is about hiding one fact: that for all his promises to repeal taxes, not only will John Kasich not do that, but he’ll raise taxes instead.

Given Sisk’s recent history of scrubbing his website when he realizes the import of his post is counterproductive, here’s the screenshot:

image

Meanwhile, it’s Strickland’s public construction contract and sentencing reforms that are the structural reforms that the Senate GOP has adopted as their own (both were originally introduced in the Governor’s budget.)

It’s nice to finally see a conservative honestly admit that the entire platform of the Kasich for Governor campaign is a sham solely designed to dupe conservatives to believe that a vote for Kasich is a vote to repeal, not raise, taxes.  You’re right, Kyle, I understand exactly why the Kasich campaign would want to keep that quiet.

{ 2 comments }

Ohio Senate GOP: “Drill, Baby, Drill”

by ModernEsquire on November 18, 2009 · Comments

So, the Columbus Dispatch, has more details on exactly how the Senate GOP would fill the gap with less than a full freeze of the final income tax cut:

  • Raids $30 million from the Housing Trust Fund
  • Removing the requirement that schools provide all-day kindergarten starting next school year, and the requirement that they meet class size restrictions.
  • Restoring $25 million this year and $35 million next year to private, chartered schools, most of which are Catholic. The schools were hit with significant cuts in the two-year budget.
  • Creating a commission to study state functions that could be privatized.
  • Requiring the departments of Education, Natural Resources and Transportation to undergo performance audits.
  • Creating a study to look at allowing private insurance entities to compete with the state Bureau of Workers’ Compensation.
  • Studying the potential cost savings of a four-day work week (I’m assuming for just government workers, not the rest of us.)
  • The plan also counts on $10 million from allowing oil and gas drilling at Salt Fork State Park, $50 million in savings from a variety of changes to prison sentencing, $30 million in liquor profits transfers, $7.5 million in “cash management,” and the transfer of $30 million in liquor profits.

So in anticipation of Sarah Palin’s booksigning, the Ohio Senate GOP has given us “Drill, Baby, Drill” in its’ Ohio form.  Where suddenly, without explanation, the Salt Fork State Park has turned into the Ohio version of ANWR.  No debate, no legislative findings, no real basis to believe that we could get that much money (or shouldn’t go more.)  But more importantly, a complete ignorance of why Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican President, created the National Park System which inspired Ohio’s park system:  to preserve nature, not a government land grab in the hopes that there’s liquid gold in them thar hills when the state’s budget needs balancing.

The GOP plan actually calls for MORE government spending, but, of course, it’s for PRIVATE interests.  Yes, nothing will help Ohio’s economy better if we took a step back and didn’t push for all-day kindergarten or do anything regarding class sizes.

Basically, this is a bad deal.  All the Senate GOP is doing is putting every ideological rider they can on this bill because they know they couldn’t pass these things on their own.  I do have to ask the obvious question: if these things were so great for Ohio, why didn’t the GOP do these things when they controlled both houses of the General Assembly and the Governor’s office?

I question whether these provisions are even constitutional.  Unlike the federal constitution, the Ohio constitution requires that a bill in a legislature essentially deals with the same subject.   The intent of the provision is to prevent the very kind of riders the Senate GOP is attempted to do.  I have a feeling that their Plan B is to pass a bill with these riders and probably gut education.  I’m surprised the Senate GOP didn’t get in something about abortion and “teh gays” while they were at it.

Make them do this.  The Senate GOP’s proposal is a bad plan.  Maybe that’s why they’ve had to announce that any vote on it won’t take place until next week.

{ 8 comments }

[UPDATE:] Ohio Senate Republicans decide to go with the five, instead of seventeen.

by ModernEsquire on November 18, 2009 · Comments

Despite their best efforts, the Senate GOP Caucus could not unite behind an alternative plan to Governor Strickland’s proposal to freeze the implementation of the final phase of the state income tax cuts begun in 2005.  Therefore, they have resigned themselves to giving the Democrats the five votes necessary to pass their modified version of the House’s plan.

According to the Cleveland Plain Dealer, the Senate GOP plan delay implementation of a majority of the tax cut with the remaining hole filled by other sources, such as the casino licensing fees being paid now that Issue 3 has passed.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman John Carey is briefing the Governor on the Senate GOP’s this morning with a vote in his committee roughly this hour and an expected floor vote by the full Senate this afternoon.

The Senate GOP will provide just enough support, with the full backing of the Democratic Senate caucus, to get it passed.  Regardless, this fact is not enough to change the fact that the Senate Republicans, regardless of how they vote, now have equal ownership in the solution because their leadership could not find an alternative that could pass with their sizeable majority support alone.

[UPDATE:]  The Columbus Dispatch is reporting that the Ohio Democratic caucus has not yet signled that it will support the Senate GOP’s plan.  Former Senator Minority Leader Ray Miller has stated he won’t, and Minority Leader Capri Cafaro was noncommital while entering into the Caucus Room for the Senate Democrats to deliberate.  Senate President Bill Harris claims that the Senate Republicans have a “Plan B” that they believe it can pass with little or no Democratic support.  I’m doubtful.  If they had such a plan and the votes, why wouldn’t be their Plan A?

{ 0 comments }

Ohio Senate Democrats make a power play in the budget impasse: 5 v. 17.

by ModernEsquire on November 17, 2009 · Comments

Look, I’ve been really hard on the Ohio Senate Democratic Caucus, its leaders, and particularly Ohio Senate Minority Leader Capri Cafaro.

It’s hard when you are so outnumbered by the Senate Republicans to be politically relevant, or to convince Democratic donors to donate to your caucus in your campaign to chip away and eventually take over a legislative body most of us have always known to be controlled by the Republicans.

But I think Senate Minority Leader Cafaro has listened to that criticism and is responding, and therefore, she should be applauded.

Watching the Senate Republican majority trying to find a way not to delay tax cuts and thereby give House Democrats and Governor Strickland political cover, Cafaro has seen a political opportunity for her caucus to make a power play and be a political relevant minority:  she’s told Senate President Harris that if he’ll go along with the Governor and the House’s plan to suspend the final installment of the income tax cuts, her caucus will support it, but anything else and the Senate Republicans better be ready to go alone.

The practical result is that Harris is only five GOP votes away from getting the Strickland plan passed, but any GOP alternative is going to need the support of 17 GOP Senators.   And his caucus has yet to unite behind an alternative plan that will get the 17 votes.  And it’s not looking good for them that they’re going to be able to by their promised deadline of tomorrow.

It’s pretty clear that the Senate GOP is trying to reach for the 17 instead of the 5.  Why else would they jettison the House’s provision calling for a 5% cut in legislative salaries unless they were planning to vote down the House bill, but want to do so without the political baggage of voting on the record against a legislative pay cut to help balance the budget?

The problem then is that if the Senate goes a different route, it’s not likely going to have much of a shelf life because the House is not likely to concur to the Senate’s changes thus throwing the entire thing into a conference committee to work out.

Harris has to either get 17 out of 21 of his members to unite around a plan that will then be subject to further negotiations with the House majority leadership or they can give the Democrats 5 votes and move on.

And none of their alternatives is really any politically more palatable than what Strickland proposed, either.

Tick-tock.

{ 2 comments }

Kevin Coughlin Still Trying to Give Our Tax Dollars to His Rich Friends

by Joseph on June 24, 2007 · Comments

kevin.jpgState Senator Kevin Coughlin (R-Cuyahoga Falls) doesn’t give up.

He’s always trying to privatize something i.e. give away OUR tax dollars to HIS big campaign contributors.

This time he’s using Special Education students as pawns in his plan to give away much-needed public school funds to his private-school-operating pals.

As we’ve mentioned here before, Kevin has received TENS OF THOUSANDS of dollars in campaign contributions from the owners of private school companies.

And he is doing his best to return the favor with his most recent attempt to expand the voucher program.

Coughlin introduced a similar bill last session- which failed. But, like I said, this guy doesn’t give up. Not when the campaign contributions keep rolling in.

Kevin Coughlin wants you to believe he is concerned about Ohio’s Children. But that, my friend, is Bullshit!

{ 1 comment }

← Previous Entries