Different party same plan

Yesterday I pointed out that President Obama’s Secretary of Education was on capital hill asking for a 68% increase in spending despite our presently catastrophic federal deficits. You can see that article here.

Today it is President Obama’s Secretary of Transportation on capital hill asking for ridiculous sums of money that the American people don’t have. According to this report in The Hill, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood is asking for a 62% increase in spending and wants congress to raise taxes by 435 Billion Dollars so that he can implement a transportation infrastructure bill. Fortunately Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama is unsympathetic to the administration’s plan.

But if mean old Republicans won’t agree to higher taxes how will the federal government ever afford to turn hamlets like Alpharetta into livable centers? What will happen to sustainability and trains if the feds don’t have billions to pump into organizations like the Atlanta Regional Commission? Will people be forced to drive cars and live in those terrible neighborhoods with cul de sacs? The horror!

Of course an attempt to raise taxes during a miserable economy is something one might expect from Washington liberals. Too bad it’s the same thing being proposed by Georgia Republicans.

View from a Political Outsider – Georgia’s Transportation Tax

Jim Galloway’s recent Political Insider column in the Atlanta Journal discusses Georgia’s recently rejected “trauma tax” and how that rejection will impact the state’s proposed sales tax increase in 2012. I respect Mr. Galloway. His Political Insider column provides a great deal of insight into the world of Georgia politics… but being an insider has its price.

In the case of tax increases Mr. Galloway’s insider viewpoint prevent hims from seeing the issue from the perspective of the political outsider (otherwise known as a typical voter). As a political outsider perhaps I can help.

Right now there is a failure to communicate in Georgia. The communication failure stems from the fact that too many elected officials aren’t listening to the voters. Instead of listening to voters politicians spend their time listening to each other along with the bureaucrats and lobbyists that surround them. After talking amongst themselves this political class hammers out a mutually acceptable solution to whatever the perceived problem is and unveils it to the public. Of course the solution always involves confiscating millions of dollars from Georgia’s taxpayers so the taxpayers frequently reject the proposed solution once they find out about it. The whole process is a tremendous waste of time and a big part of the reason government rarely solves anything. If more elected officials juat made a point of talking to people outside of their echo chamber a great deal of time and money could be saved and some progress might actually take place. 

The recent trauma tax debacle is a perfect example of miscommunication between voters and politicians. I have lived in Georgia for 40 years and I have never once had a person tell me they wanted or needed more trauma centers in the state. But despite the fact that average people didn’t think there was a problem, some hospital lobbying group convinced Georgia’s political class that a problem did exist. Once the lobbyists convinced the politicians there was a problem they all got together and hammered out an agreement that was acceptable to them. As usual the solution called for Georgia’s taxpayers to cough up millions of dollars. So once they were satisfied with their solution the political class went to the people of Georgia. The voters weighed the option of paying millions of dollars to solve a problem they had never heard of or faced and said no. The whole process was a complete waste of time and money that could have been spent on one of the real problems facing Georgians.

 A similar process is taking place now in Georgia’s struggle to address transportation infrastructure needs. Both the voters and politicans seem to agree that Georgia needs transportation improvements in this case but the trouble is that the political class and the voters disagree on the solution.

The political class say they could fix the problem if they only had more money. What the political class doesn’t understand is that the voters don’t blame infrastructure needs on a lack of money, the voters place the blame on the political class. Taxes in Georgia are the 16th highest in all of the United States while transportation spending is 49th out 50. See the problem?

But Georgia’s political class won’t accept the fact that they have been the problem. Instead, the politicians and lobbyists  sat down together and once again hammered out an agreement acceptable to the politicans and lobbyists.  And once again their solution is to raise taxes… billions and billions of dollars in taxes. That solution must have sounded awfully good in their echo chamber because a few months ago the political class unveiled this genius idea to great fanfair and they patted themselves on the back so hard that Atlanta’s chiropractors must have made a fortune.

But the people that will pay for this enormous tax increase are not impressed, they are hurting. They face 10% unemployment while the other 90% are still unsure of the future. More than 12,000 Georgia homes were foreclosed in July. IRA accounts and home prices are going down while grocery and gasoline prices are going up. To make matters worse their federal income taxes are going up in a few weeks and they will have even less money to spend. Georgia voters are hurting and they find it offensive that political insiders have decided taxpayers need to pay billions of dollars more to fund transportation improvements. While transportation improvements might bring jobs to Georgia in a decade or so, the state’s taxpayers would have to cough up billions of dollars that could have gone to pay their mortgage or put food on the table in the meantime.

During Georgia’s recent economic boom transportation issues were a top priority for Georgia taxpayers. Voters pleaded for road improvements but the political class ignored their pleas and spent the money elsewhere. Now that the economy has tanked the roads are no longer the highest priority for voters. Money is the top priority now and the politicans find the shoe on the other foot. So as the political insiders plead for money to improve roads in the current environment I fully expect Georgia’s voters will ignore their pleas in return.

 You can read Mr. Galloway’ Political Insider column on ajc.com here: http://bit.ly/gqeLnw

(Added 12/2/10 ) P.S. I forgot to mention that Mr. Galloway conspicuously chose not to allow comments on the column cited above. It is the only recent column which doesn’t permit comments and I don’t ever remember seeing him block comments before. Feel free to draw your own conclusions.

Remember, low taxes + low spending = growth

Georgia is one of eight states projected to gain congressional seats after the 2010 census numbers are tallied. Recently, Barbara Hollingsworth of the Washington Examiner wrote an editorial analyzing the tax policies of those eight states compared to the states which are projected to lose representation and guess what? Barbara discovered that people are fleeing states with high taxes and high spending. Surprise, surprise!

The article points out, “The state and local tax burden is nearly a third lower in states with growing populations… As a result, per capita government spending is also lower: $4,008 for states gaining congressional seats, $5,117 for states losing them.” In addition to tax policies Barbara Hollingsworth also points out that many of the states also have right to work laws that entice businesses to relocate from less friendly states. The article isn’t very long and you can read it here: bit.ly/9C6cRd

So we see that relatively low taxes and government spending have a direct correlation to Georgia’s tremendous growth over the past few decades. The majority of voters in Georgia understand this instinctively but I’m not sure the state’s current power structure quite gets it.

In which I respond to the towering genius of rude commenter Paul, part III

This post is a response to a commenter on my earlier post, Public transportation, solution or problem? You can see the original post and the comment in its entirety here: https://gajim.wordpress.com/2010/02/18/public-transportation-solution-or-problem/

Commenter: “As far as tax payer subsidies, who do you think pays for the roads you drive on? Billions and billions of dollars are spent on road infrastructure, and you’re not complaining about that. The 14th st bridge project alone cost over $100,000,000… just for the fixing of one bridge over the highway.”

Response: Thank you for raising this point. Proponents of MARTA often try to equate the cost of public transportation with the cost of building roads but let me be clear, the two things are completely different and to compare them shows a lack of objectivity.

We all pay for roads because they are a basic component required for our society to function. Every human in the United States depends on a roadway system. A woman can walk to the grocery store but the food gets there on a truck.  A man may not have a job but his unemployment check was delivered on a road. A person might take MARTA to Starbucks but there wouldn’t be any coffee without roads. Comparing roads to MARTA is like comparing water to arugula.

I agree with your assertion that road construction is often too costly but that simply illustrates the point I made earlier. Governments and their dependent agencies are inefficient delivery systems and should be tasked with the fewest responsibilities possible.

Commenter: “In addition, study after study by the CDC and Universites have shown the benefits of public transit. Atlanta has a high obesity rate and one of the highest asthma rates in the country, all of which are are tied to the automobile lifestyle. In fact, we have previously lost Federal highway funding because our air quality was so bad that it violated EPA standards.”

Response: It is easy for a person to claim validity by citing “study after study” but it is impossible to determine the veracity of the claim or the study without a specific attribution. I would like to point out that the CDC and the EPA are not independent, objective organizations. Both the CDC and EPA depend on federal funding for their livelihood and as such are political instruments.

That concludes my response to commenter Paul. I am glad that he took the time to comment because this is an important issue to the future our state. In the next few years Georgia is going to face increasingly difficult budgetary decisions and we will all have to make some tough choices. If you have anything to add to what Paul and I have written please feel free to leave a comment but play nice or it may not see the light of day.

In which I respond to the towering genius of rude commenter Paul, Part II

This post is a response to a commenter on my earlier post, Public transportation, solution or problem? You can see the original post and the comment in its entirety here: https://gajim.wordpress.com/2010/02/18/public-transportation-solution-or-problem/

Commenter: “MARTA’s hands are tied by the state.”

Response: Thank you for helping to make my point. Governments and their dependent agencies are inefficient delivery systems. It is unreasonable for a person to expect a governmental agency to provide any service as effectively as a private sector business. Public sector inefficiency is one reason our founding fathers tried to limit the federal government to a few, clearly defined responsiblities such as the building of roads which is clearly stated in Article 1 of the United States Constitution.

Commenter: “I personally do not own a car, and use MARTA to get to work.”

Response: I respect your choice to use MARTA. I just don’t like taking money from my family to subsidize your choice. I choose to own my own car and could not sell real estate without that car. Should you be required to pay an additional 1% sales tax to subsidize my car payment?

Commenter: “If MARTA did not exist, I would not be able to continue working, and would lose my job.”

Response: If MARTA doesn’t exist you would just quit going to work and get fired? You would not consider moving closer to work or taking a cab? You would stop working to support yourself (and your family if you have one)? Are you really trying to say that a resident of the greatest nation in the history of the world would be incapable of supporting themself without a taxpayer subsidized mode of transportation? That is just sad. And it is the mindset that is destroying our nation.

Comment: “Many many people depend on it, from people like me who chose not to own a car, to people who can’t afford a car, to the disabled and elderly, and those who just want to get to the airport or a sporting event without dealing with traffic.”

Response: Many people depend on MARTA precisely because a government subsidized pseudo-monopoly distorts the market. Private sector companies would gladly step in to fill Atlanta’s transportation needs but they can’t compete with an organization that receives $350,000,000 in tax subsidies every year.

Alas, beautiful sunshine and fresh air are calling me away from this computer screen so I will stop again for now. The forecast for tomorrow predicts possible rain so maybe I can finish this discussion then.