Showing posts with label Ballot Initiatives. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ballot Initiatives. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 01, 2008

Finally, a good initiative for 2008

The Arizona Republic has this story about a "homeowners bill of rights" initiative being put on the ballot by the Sheet Metal Workers' International Association.

I think even conservatives and Republicans will find this largely non-controversial. It gives homeowners a 10 year warranty on a new home, allows the homeowner to choose who does repair work, the ability to sue the home builder without paying attorney's fees and requiring model homes to (gasp) reflect the houses being sold.

As far as I am concerned this is overdue... Kudos to the Sheet Metal Workers.

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Why I haven't posted anything recently.

I was supposed to have started writing for this blog regularly six weeks ago or so, but haven't done much else except comment on the presidential primary. So naturally, here is a list of reasons I haven't been writing anything:

1. Working, volunteering, or meaning to do either for for the Arizona League of Conservation Voters and the Fair Districts campaign.

2. Watching with fascination the Tempe City Council races, and trying to decide how to cast three votes for four people-- Mark Mitchell, Corey Woods, Joel Navarro, and Rhett Wilson.

3. Studying. Sorry, nothing to link to.

4. Anticipating the next round of discussion on Wactivist about the Shadegg/McCain/etc saga.

5. Wondering how the creator of A Democrat's Lament gets the time to write posts that are worth reading. Also, who he is.

I'm looking at hitting the blog alot harder soon though, the development plans for Jackson and the immigration debate in Phoenix haven't been talked about enough.

Thursday, January 24, 2008

Government egregiously seizes private property

Once again the government is using its coercive power to steal from hard working individuals everywhere. Here is the article from the Arizona Republic. Clearly there are Socialists in our midst. After all taking 1 cent for every $10 spent to build parks is just theft. Why not privatize all of the parks and let the market take care of this? I was planning on using my .001 to buy a weeks worth of starbucks this year or pay my dues to the Minute Men.

If this Ahwatukee woman wants more little league fields then she needs to figure out how to make little league profitable. Look at professional baseball, they would never ask tax payers to pay for a stadium.

Ok, seriously. These ballot elections are important and no one votes in them except me. The thoughts above are from the brain of an anti-tax zealot (or at least what I imagine an anti-tax zealot might think) right before they vote to kill this park funding. They see tax on the ballot and they reflexively vote against it. The election will be on May 20th. Please mark it on your calendar and vote. Do not let this slip by and be defeated. After all, parks are nice and improve our quality of life.

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Dumb people should not be allowed to make tax plans

Why is it that only dumb and short-sighted people seem to float initiatives about taxes? The East Valley Tribune has this article about eliminating the income tax in Arizona. The myopia that pervades the right-wing anti-tax crowd is staggering.

I get it guys, you don't like taxes. I don't like taxes either. I also do not like going to the dentist or painting my house when the paint is peeling or fixing my roof when it is leaking. I would like all of those things to magically fix themselves for free.

Government has to do things. It needs to provide law enforcement, roads, parks, sewage, water, schools, courts etc. All of these things cost money. The government needs sufficient and stable funding to operate. I for one do not trust right-wing ideologues to determine whether a sales tax will provide enough funding to do what needs to be done.

The unintended consequences of these sorts of policies can be pretty harsh. I am being self-interested here (I pay property taxes, income taxes, car taxes, sales taxes etc). Anyone who has lived in a state without an income tax have seen how the state insures its funding. In California they passed Prop 13 for property taxes, now they have a very uneven system of property taxation. If you are a new home owner, you get stuck with much higher property taxes (and all manner of fees) to make up for the others with low taxes. It is similar to rent control. You also pay higher prices for car tags and almost everything else. In Florida, property taxes are sky-high because they don't have Prop 13 or income taxes. In fact, there are fees everywhere when you deal with the government.

What I almost never see is an analysis of the consequences of something like prop 13. What is the affect on the housing market when a new house pays double the taxes as the house next door? Does it affect the fungibility of property? Does it keep newer home owners out of the market? Does it drive higher foreclosure rates? Will a sales tax only system provide sufficient revenue? Will people seek loopholes out of self-interest with property and sales taxes?

The first problem that I think of with a sales tax only system besides its regressive nature for food and other necessities, are online sales. If you increase sales taxes you will incentivize buying online to avoid taxes. For instance when I bought my wife's engagement ring, I purchased it online. Not only were the prices lower and the quality better, but I got a 6% discount because of no sales tax being charged. If you significantly raise sales tax the incentive to buy online goes up significantly.

My only point here is that when it comes to taxes, I wish that the right could have an adult conversation about providing necessary services and the unintended consequences of changes. You anti-tax folks must realize that just because something sounds good does not mean that it is good.

Thursday, July 26, 2007

The Starve the Government Crowd Strikes Again

I wrote about this ballot initiative last week. Here is what really bugs me about trying to freeze property taxes (beyond the mess it has made in California), Arizona is a pretty nice place to live. I have lived in many other states and cities and Arizona despite all of the complaints is pretty well run and efficient. I know it is hard to believe... Sure, Arizona has its problems, but we have ok government services in the cities and we have relatively low taxes. The problem here is the anti-tax crowd really wants no taxes and seems to be rather delusional about the affect. I rather naively prefer an honest debate. Here is the problem, perhaps one of the bigger problems with our system, taxes are divorced from services.

It is a problem when someone proposes a tax cut for property taxes and many voters do not know where the money goes? All they know, is that they are financially squeezed and need some relief. I think a lot more people would be ok with their tax bill (state and local, not federal) or at least make more informed decisions, if they actually had a better idea of what their money buys. I leave out Federal because frankly the Federal Government is a financial mess. I blame both parties for that and hope that some of that will change under a Democratic President and Congress.

Should all ballot initiatives proposing tax cuts be require to have more information about their impact? If a tax is earmarked for certain activities, should that earmark be listed, so voters can more easily make an informed decision? In the end, I think most voters will vote for more services and lower taxes at the same time because the cost of services and taxes required to pay for them are not connected...

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid...

The local (probably helped by National) anti-tax groups in Arizona have filed this initiative to limit property taxes. So, what is the problem? After all, nobody likes paying property taxes. There are a couple of problems: 1. It did not help California keep property taxes under control. Instead of costs being evenly distributed, they are now heaped on new home owners. When my wife sold her house in California she was paying $1100 a quarter. I am not kidding... Her taxes were outrageous. The fact is that newly developed areas are limited in their property taxing authority, so they add other assessments and fees to make up for it. The net result is that when you buy a new house you get lots of fees that older home owners avoid. It is like rent control, great if your rent is controlled, but really sucky if it is not. 2. The California educational system was severely hurt by their property tax changes. 3. This is why we have elections. Why should someone tell me or my community the level of services that can be provided. Our system is already self-regulating. If taxes get out of control, we can defeat the people responsible and roll back assessments. Some municipalities want more services than others. They will have higher taxes than other communities.

Also, Arizona has really low property taxes. I have relatives in Florida that were amazed and jealous when I told them what I pay in property taxes. Furthermore, if you read the article above, we already have several laws or constitutional amendments dealing with this issue. The fact is that this a solution seeking a problem, not the other way around.

I wish I knew what was being done to defeat this... What a bad idea.

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Maybe there should be a law?

I found this amusing (I am clearly easily amused..) So, Jan Brewer's son was fooled into signing a petition for a ballot initiative under false pretenses. If the SoS's son cannot be educated about these things, maybe, just maybe there is a bigger problem or flaw in our system. Note to Jan, I know you are not the most adept public official, but this is what legislation (pronounced legis-lay-shun) was designed for... I know it is hard to believe but there are a group of people who can make these special rules that make it so people are punished when fraudulently collecting signatures.

Jan, we know you are trying your best over at that big office... Hang in there your term is almost over and you won't be elected Governor, so the confusion will soon end.

Just kidding...I kid the our Secretary of State, I am sure she is a fine woman (and not litigious).