TX GOV 2010

[Porchman]

Will Mayor White run for govenor?

http://blogs.chron.c...ffer_out_b.html

I'm creating a new thread. RBS posted the quote above in the Mayor's race thread. I think there needs to be a thread purely dedicated to next year's gubernatorial race as we are developing mini threads around the topic. I went back a year or more and I cannot find one.

Much happening! White is looking at making a run. Kay is holding to the Senate, but still in the race. We have a great producer of hair products - Shami. We have a great consumer of hair products - Perry.

Yeah, then there's Kinky with his vast resume in public and business administration.

This may be pretty boring until the primaries heat up. So, now we have a new, boring thread. However it's comprehensive and efficient. Oh, wait that's boring, too.

[TJones]

Moderators .....please feel free to merge my Farouk thread into this one.

[BryanS]

Please, God, give us Bill White.

Perry is an embarrassment to this state.

And Kay B... if she tilts her head to the side... that little candy M&M might fall out.

[TheNiche]

Please, God, give us Bill White.

Perry is an embarrassment to this state.

And Kay B... if she tilts her head to the side... that little candy M&M might fall out.

Pick your battles wisely. There's not a great deal of hope for a Democrat in a mid-term election for a statewide race while a Democrat has the White House. If KBH wins the primary, just be thankful that you don't have to put up with Perry again.

Btw, does anybody have the lowdown on the Lt. Governor race?

[JLWM8609]

This should be an interesting race. I think the Dems will go with Bill White and Kinky will have to run as an independent once again.

[RedScare]

This should be an interesting race. I think the Dems will go with Bill White and Kinky will have to run as an independent once again.

Kinky has already stated he intends to run for the Dem nomination. Are you suggesting that if he loses in the primary, he'll pull a Joe Lieberman?

(Note that this is in no way a comment on either Kinky's or Joe's faith.)

[JLWM8609]

Are you suggesting that if he loses in the primary, he'll pull a Joe Lieberman?

If that nomination shouldn't come to pass, I would think he'd run as an independent. I thought that's what he did in the last election, or was he independent all along?

[crunchtastic]

Kinky is pulling out of the gov race, and will instead run for ag commish:

http://blogs.chron.com/texaspolitics/archives/2009/12/friedman_switch_1.html

A good move, it seems. He won't take votes from Bill White, and after all, if a notorious populist like Jim Hightower can make it as ag commissioner, maybe Kinky can, too. I like the idea of being able to vote for an outsider for a major post and still support White for guv.

post above was for the blog, here's the actual peice from the Austin reporter:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6769521.html

[Fringe]

Guess I will have to remove my Kinky for Governor sticker.  Glad to see he's supporting White. 

[AtticaFlinch]

Guess I will have to remove my Kinky for Governor sticker. Glad to see he's supporting White.

I don't know what I'm going to do with this "Kinky for Governor" tattoo.

[RedScare]

Guess I will have to remove my Kinky for Governor sticker.  Glad to see he's supporting White. 

Don't worry. You will soon be able to cover it up with your 'Kinky For Hydro Commissioner' sticker.

[lockmat]

Did anyone watch the debate tonight? I only saw a few minutes but plan to go back and rewatch it. I believe it will be put up on texasdebates.org

The one thing I came away with is that Medina is no pretender.

[crunchtastic]

Did anyone watch the debate tonight? I only saw a few minutes but plan to go back and rewatch it. I believe it will be put up on texasdebates.org

The one thing I came away with is that Medina is no pretender.

We watched pretty much all of it too--she's not a pretender but she's catering to a slice of indy's and tea party republicans. I think she should put her money where her mouth is and not run as a Republican, because she's clearly not. She would appeal to a much broader audience, but then she wouldn't get the $$$$ from the party--so there you go. Party politics as usual.

Rick Perry is more an embarrassment the GW ever was. Good lawd he needs to not talk.

[Marksmu]

We watched pretty much all of it too--she's not a pretender but she's catering to a slice of indy's and tea party republicans. I think she should put her money where her mouth is and not run as a Republican, because she's clearly not. She would appeal to a much broader audience, but then she wouldn't get the $$ from the party--so there you go. Party politics as usual.

Rick Perry is more an embarrassment the GW ever was. Good lawd he needs to not talk.

I liked what I heard of her (only saw some of it). I do not like Perry - and I really think that Hutchinson needs to keep her butt in Senate. The republicans do NOT need to open up another seat that could possibly be filled by a democrat.

The only saving grace, is that Bill White, and the current White House are so incompetent, that it really does not matter who the republicans nominate, because that person will win. If the national polls are correct, and on this issue I believe they probably are - then most of America is sick and tired of democrat politics already. Everything those bimbos in Washington are doing make it easier and easier for a republican to get elected in any up and coming election. Massachusetts is a great example. One of the bluest states is about to elect a republican, because they cant stand the politics of the current administration.

Cant help but cringe when you look at the news and see that yet again, Democrats carve out little party favors for those who give them money and support. (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/unions_get_pecial_treatment_in_health_AB053CwqPIJlIxXAm37DOM)

Washington is for sale, and the democrats are selling it all to the highest bidder.

[LTAWACS]

This thread is going to be a doozy.

[lockmat]

I have a question. In the last debate, Medina mentioned getting rid of property tax and replacing it would be a "broad based sales tax." What does that mean? Doesn't everyone in Texas pay a sales tax when they purchase something?

She starts talking about it at the end of this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iq2eMIZcPy0

[BryanS]

I have a question. In the last debate, Medina mentioned getting rid of property tax and replacing it would be a "broad based sales tax." What does that mean? Doesn't everyone in Texas pay a sales tax when they purchase something?

She starts talking about it at the end of this video:

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=Iq2eMIZcPy0

It means that instead of paying 8.25% sales tax and property tax... how about a 10.5% (or higher?) sales tax and no property tax. The sales tax would have to increase to rate such that it offsets the loss in property tax revenue. That's the only way it could work. In other words, yes everyone pays a sales tax when they buy something. It's about RAISING TAXES on everything you buy and making you pay MORE sales tax...

I could only handle about 45 seconds of that youtube video. Good God Medina fits the typical Texas GOP zombie role of no/less federal government, arming ourselves to the teeth, none/lower taxes (even though it would have to be the same tax in reality), etc, etc.

[lockmat]

It means that instead of paying 8.25% sales tax and property tax... how about a 10.5% (or higher?) sales tax and no property tax. The sales tax would have to increase to rate such that it offsets the loss in property tax revenue. That's the only way it could work. In other words, yes everyone pays a sales tax when they buy something. It's about RAISING TAXES on everything you buy and making you pay MORE sales tax...

I could only handle about 45 seconds of that youtube video. Good God Medina fits the typical Texas GOP zombie role of no/less federal government, arming ourselves to the teeth, none/lower taxes (even though it would have to be the same tax in reality), etc, etc.

everything except food and prescriptions etc

What does a liberal do in a race like this?

[TheNiche]

It means that instead of paying 8.25% sales tax and property tax... how about a 10.5% (or higher?) sales tax and no property tax. The sales tax would have to increase to rate such that it offsets the loss in property tax revenue. That's the only way it could work. In other words, yes everyone pays a sales tax when they buy something. It's about RAISING TAXES on everything you buy and making you pay MORE sales tax...

I could only handle about 45 seconds of that youtube video. Good God Medina fits the typical Texas GOP zombie role of no/less federal government, arming ourselves to the teeth, none/lower taxes (even though it would have to be the same tax in reality), etc, etc.

Getting rid of property taxes is impractical. There are a lot of very small municipalities and bedroom communities that simply do not have a commercial tax base that is large enough to even operate their existing infrastructure. What can be done with minimal hassle is getting rid of the franchise tax and getting rid of property taxes on commercial properties and shifting more of the tax burden directly to consumers on the basis of their consumption. It'd be the ultimate pro-economic-development move, sure to attract corporate relocations and to promote investment in our capital stock.

[AtticaFlinch]

Getting rid of property taxes is impractical. There are a lot of very small municipalities and bedroom communities that simply do not have a commercial tax base that is large enough to even operate their existing infrastructure. What can be done with minimal hassle is getting rid of the franchise tax and getting rid of property taxes on commercial properties and shifting more of the tax burden directly to consumers on the basis of their consumption. It'd be the ultimate pro-economic-development move, sure to attract corporate relocations and to promote investment in our capital stock.

Beyond that, in economies such as the one we're currently in, people tend to hoard rather than spend. If people aren't buying crap, then the government stands a pretty successful chance of going broke. You don't have that issue to such a degree with property taxes included in the mix. I think there may be some trite old saying that involves eggs and baskets that refutes this sales tax idea pretty solidly.

Edit: I think everyone involved with the formulation of this idea must realize how foolish it is, but they're banking on the general public to be full of retards. The Republicans have done such a bang-up job convincing their constituency "taxes be bad an' stuff" that come campaign season, they have to pay some lip-service to the idea of reducing or eliminating taxes, regardless of how untenable or just plain stupid it is.

[N Judah]

Here's what happens when you don't have property tax revenue:

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/01/hoschton-georgia-dissolves-police.html

[TheNiche]

Beyond that, in economies such as the one we're currently in, people tend to hoard rather than spend. If people aren't buying crap, then the government stands a pretty successful chance of going broke. You don't have that issue to such a degree with property taxes included in the mix. I think there may be some trite old saying that involves eggs and baskets that refutes this sales tax idea pretty solidly.

Edit: I think everyone involved with the formulation of this idea must realize how foolish it is, but they're banking on the general public to be full of retards. The Republicans have done such a bang-up job convincing their constituency "taxes be bad an' stuff" that come campaign season, they have to pay some lip-service to the idea of reducing or eliminating taxes, regardless of how untenable or just plain stupid it is.

The three most common ways for a state or municipality to generate revenue are property taxes, sales taxes, and income taxes. All three of these sources will tend to contract in an economy such as the one we're currently in. And I'd suspect that since people with less income tend to spend a greater proportion of their earnings on consumption items, that a sales tax would be more stable than an income tax; and income taxes on corporations are notoriously volatile, if that's what you thought might save the day. And in certain parts of the country, a sales tax would almost certainly be more stable than property tax receipts.

So yeah, I'm not really buying this concept that moving to a consumption tax is overly-risky due to short-term considerations. The fact is that sound financial planning during good times can allow states and municipalities to continue operating at normal levels through most downturns. There certainly are examples of cities that are downsizing...but that doesn't reflect so much on the particular source of a city's revenue so much as it does on how they've managed that revenue.

[AtticaFlinch]

The three most common ways for a state or municipality to generate revenue are property taxes, sales taxes, and income taxes. All three of these sources will tend to contract in an economy such as the one we're currently in. And I'd suspect that since people with less income tend to spend a greater proportion of their earnings on consumption items, that a sales tax would be more stable than an income tax; and income taxes on corporations are notoriously volatile, if that's what you thought might save the day. And in certain parts of the country, a sales tax would almost certainly be more stable than property tax receipts.

So yeah, I'm not really buying this concept that moving to a consumption tax is overly-risky due to short-term considerations. The fact is that sound financial planning during good times can allow states and municipalities to continue operating at normal levels through most downturns. There certainly are examples of cities that are downsizing...but that doesn't reflect so much on the particular source of a city's revenue so much as it does on how they've managed that revenue.

You may be right, but my larger point beyond that was simply that collecting sales tax exclusively is foolish. Property tax revenue will drop the year following an economic decline, a year after property taxes drop (unless I'm misunderstanding the nature of property tax collection). Sales tax revenue will drop immediately, and that drop is more difficult to prepare for.

[TheNiche]

You may be right, but my larger point beyond that was simply that collecting sales tax exclusively is foolish. Property tax revenue will drop the year following an economic decline, a year after property taxes drop (unless I'm misunderstanding the nature of property tax collection). Sales tax revenue will drop immediately, and that drop is more difficult to prepare for.

No, not really. The preponderance of the State of Texas' budget is based on a 6.25% sales tax. There are some auxiliary revenue streams, such as royalties from oil & gas production, but those are mostly correlated to and are often even more volatile than sales taxes. Yet, even under craptastic state leadership and even given a legislature that meets only once every two years--precluding emergency measures on their part--our budget isn't anything like the game of federal/state brinksmanship that is played out by the likes of California, New York, or other states with a more diverse portfolio of revenue sources.

[musicman]

Yet, even under craptastic state leadership and even given a legislature that meets only once every two years--precluding emergency measures on their part--our budget isn't anything like the game of federal/state brinksmanship that is played out by the likes of California, New York, or other states with a more diverse portfolio of revenue sources.

some states' budgets are forced to be balanced and others aren't.

[TheNiche]

some states' budgets are forced to be balanced and others aren't.

But that's not possible with a consumption tax because consumption taxes are too unpredictable. Attica said so.

[musicman]

Attica said so.

he Flinched

[N Judah]

My understanding is that to get rid of the property tax she'd have to amend the Texas constitution with the assistance of the legislature. And even if she did, the state budget would still be balanced because as has been noted most of it comes from sales taxes. However, local municipalities (authorized by the constitution to collect sales taxes for their own uses) would then be unable to pay for a lot of things. By "broad based sales tax" she could mean increasing the state sales tax and then divvying up the money to the local municipalities as the state government might deem fit to replace revenue lost from the absence of property taxes. I guess local municipalities would still be able to increase their own area's sales tax but that wouldn't really be "broad based".

[TheNiche]

My understanding is that to get rid of the property tax she'd have to amend the Texas constitution with the assistance of the legislature. And even if she did, the state budget would still be balanced because as has been noted most of it comes from sales taxes. However, local municipalities (authorized by the constitution to collect sales taxes for their own uses) would then be unable to pay for a lot of things. By "broad based sales tax" she could mean increasing the state sales tax and then divvying up the money to the local municipalities as the state government might deem fit to replace revenue lost from the absence of property taxes. I guess local municipalities would still be able to increase their own area's sales tax but that wouldn't really be "broad based".

You're completely correct in your analysis. Getting rid of property taxes or even just capping the rate would entail enormous changes in the way that municipalities raise funds. There are ways to legislate this policy in such a way as would be effective and equitable, and I do believe that this is a political discussion that needs to be had, however I do not believe that Medina is a capable leader in that respect.

[RedScare]

some states' budgets are forced to be balanced and others aren't.

Every state except Vermont has a balanced budget law.