Add our friend Bob Griendling over at Commonwealth Commonsense to the list of those unhinged by the Republican car tax proposal. Bob's anger extends to Professor Larry Sabato for seeing some political merit in the "No Car Tax" revival.
I'm with Larry. With Fairfax County probably leaning Democratic, this is one issue that might pull some "leaners" back.
Wednesday, January 26, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Gilmore's Ghost
This proposal is so lame, I'm surprised Howell, Callahan, and company all didn't show up on crutches.
Doesn't anyone remember how the car tax issue pretty much ended Jim Gilmore's political career?
Good luck getting the Senate to go along!
Scoff if you like. You may be proven correct. I'm just not discounting the possibility that the combination of car tax, revenue surplus, and massive increase in local property assessments in Fairfax County could be used by skillful political operatives as a powerful issue.
Stop talking "politics" and discuss the merits and the long term impact of taxs on citizens, the economy and the environment not on those obsessed with maintaining the Two Party Dictatorship. Bacon is right, citizens need a tax system that promots heath safety and general welfare not political gamesmanship.
Sorry, E. M.
I'm not a theorist or visionary on transportation and land use issues.
I do what I know. Or think I know.
Recall, if you will, that Fairfax County went Democratic AFTER the budget debate in Richmond and AFTER a third straight year of skyrocketing real estate taxes. The GOP stubbornness in Richmond did nothing to help the party in Novemeber, even though by then there were reports of the state's budget surplus circulating. Differnet elections, I realize, but if your logic holds, Will, don't you think Fairfax would have gone for someone like Bush, who holds tax cuts as his mantra? His tax cuts did him no good in Fairfax, perhaps because folks here -- and throughout Virginia -- are smart enough to realize there's no free lunch.
Will: I do not mean to be harsh, but... I have been in the Washington Baltimore New Urban Region for over 30 years and have seen the quality of transport, the bellwether of quality contemporary life, deteriorate becaise issues like mobility, access and congestion are treated as "political." Back in August, Barnie Day did a column suggesting that transport was too important to be a political football in the upcoming Commonwealth elections. I responded that it was a good idea to take transport off the political agenda and why not health, safety and public welfare including secrity and prosperity?
Politics is broken. A Two Party Dictatorship is imcapable of representing citizens in a democracy. That is why we advocate not just Fundamental Change in human settlement pattern but also Fundamental Change in governance structure (See "The Shape of Richmonds Future" at www.baconsrebellion.com) and, as you will see in our next column, in the education system.
You may make your living as a political pundit but you are also a citizen. All citizens must come to understand how to make the real world better. If the do not, they will all lose faith that democracy is better than some alternative. Polls show a number those who did not vote in the last election already beleive that.
Professor Freemans column "Rain Dance" in the last Bacons Rebellion outlines some ideas to move us forward but we all have to help. Even politicians.
Keep up the good work. Abandon the rest, no one can do it all.
EMR
I'm really growing weary of others suggesting we're not paying enough in taxes. Real estate revenue in Arlington County is up about 46% over the past few years. Meanwhile, personal income has increased less than 7%. In addition, we just saw a jump in the state sales tax. Just where is this money going? If I can get my car tax nixed, I say all the better. That's one less bill to worry about. Then I can concentrate on where the rest of my tax dollars are going....
I believe the car tax phase-out is an excellent political tool for shaping a legislature that won't tend to be so imprudent with its tax revenue.
"...an excellent political tool for shaping a legislature that won't tend to be so imprudent with its tax revenue."
That would be you voting in the people you think would do a better job. That’s a totally separate issue from how much you spend in taxes. If you aren’t happy -- I’m going out on a limb here and guess you’re not -- then simply giving them less to spend doesn’t really fix your problem, does it? Just maybe, we’re both right. But until something better comes along, I’d like to get the problems fixed. More money won’t necessarily do that, of course. But if I wait til I get lawmakers I’d trust with my daughters, they’ll be paving over my grave. I agree that part of the problem is imprudence. So will you sympathize with me if I don’t pay my federal taxes because of the war. Will you bail me out?
Government spending and selecting the right candidate for the job aren’t “totally separate” issues. For many--although obviously not all--spending restraint just might be a top criterion for the job! I’m betting on a majority of voters showing their displeasure for uniformly unpopular levies like the personal property tax--particularly in the wake of the Commonwealth’s recent budget surplus. Political aspirants with a low-tax philosophy clearly can leverage support for their candidacies this election cycle by adopting positions complementary to a car tax phase-out. It’s worked well in the past.
If the church collected taxes the way the government does you would pay the greeter, the usher, the organist, choirmaster, the acolytes, and the deacon. They would each take a piece and give the remainder to the minister. He would take most of it and give the remainders to the ushers who would pass it up and down the aisle. After consulting forty pages of paperwork you would decide how much you had overpaid and take some back for yourself.
Then you would pray that there was enough left to live on.
The government has to stop having multiple layers of government beating up on the individual and using every asset as if it was a revenue stream. The reason the car tax was so unpopular was that it was grossly unfair. Assessments were based on the NADA book values, but dealers usually only see the best cars - the ones worth trading in. People like myself who drive until the wheels fall off, overhaul the vehicle and drive it some more were always overcharged.
For years I had vehicles that I would have sold in a heartbeat if I thought I could get half of what the state claimed it was worth. There was no reasonable or cost effective way to protest your assessment.
I once had a motorcycle that was worth $150. The state somehow got it in its head that it was worth $15,000. The paperwork flew for months, to no avail. Finally a state man came to repossess the vehicle for non-payment. When I handed him a box full of parts he tore up the bill.
I once got a mistaken bill for a boat that I had never owned. The county wanted me to fill out a form that included a description of the non-existent boat, how long I had owned it etc. They were upset when I sent it back with every space on a four page document marked DNA. This went on for several years until the county was threatening to take me to court. They insisted that this was my problem and I had to pay. I insisted it was their problem and they needed to fix it. They finally went away.
This kind of nonsense is why the car tax was so hated. I am highly skilled and frugal. Over the years I have manufactured, repaired, restored, rebuilt, and constructed my way into a situation in which through my own sweat I own more stuff than I can afford to keep.
They tax my income, my house, my car, my business, my purchases, my sales, and my death - each of them. There is only one source of revenue, which is my pocket. As far as I'm concerned you can tax it on the way in or on the way out as long as you leave me in peace with the rest.
Post a Comment