[Vision2020] report from the legislature

[Donovan Arnold]

"Impose a 6% fee on daily rental of motor vehicles.
  
                
Increase the state tax on motor fuel – 2 cents per year for five 
years.
  
                
Increase registration fees on cars and trucks.
  
                
Eliminate the ethanol exemption."
Why are we raising taxes during a recession? Why are raising taxes using regressive taxation?Why not beat poor people over their head with a baseball bat and take the last few dimes they got?
I am sick of taxes being raised when you cannot afford even the basics of things. When your car breaks down, you got to pay for the fixin, and now we got to pay an additional 6% sales tax everyday while our car is broken? People with cars that break down are usually ones that don't have a lot of money. Otherwise they would be buyin a better set of wheels  

Here is an idea, how about a tax on big profit companies that pay minimum wages to their employees? A big tax on corporations that use illegal labor? A big tax on larger employers that don't offer health care to their employees? A big tax on rich people? A big tax on the companies that ship jobs overseas? 

Just because it is easier to steal from the poor to pay for the rich, doesn't mean you should. 

Best Regards,
Donovan


--- On Wed, 2/11/09, Shirley Ringo <ringoshirl at moscow.com> wrote:
From: Shirley Ringo <ringoshirl at moscow.com>
Subject: [Vision2020] report from the legislature
To: vision2020 at moscow.com
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2009, 4:25 PM



 
 

Dear Friends:
February 11, 2009

Legislative Report
 
I often kid my fellow Democrats who go to fundraising auctions 
looking for bargains.  They don’t 
seem to understand the notion of fundraising.  Now, the final details of the federal 
stimulus package are nearly hammered out.   As I hear some of my legislative 
colleagues discuss the conditions under which they might be willing to accept 
such funds, it occurs to me they fail to understand the basic notion.  Stimulus funds – they can be used to 
slow job loss, help develop a trained workforce, build roads, bridges, school 
buildings support K-12 and higher education.  They can also be used to help support 
struggling families and help folks get timely heath care.  Under normal conditions, Idaho can 
provide a reasonable degree of support to state agencies that provide these 
services, and balance the budget.  
Not now.  Of course there are 
no guarantees this package will get us back on track, but there is plenty of 
evidence that extraordinary measures are necessary.  We need to get money in the hands of 
people who will use it and get moving.

  
I serve on the Transportation and Defense Committee.  It has become clear to me that Idaho 
does not have a revenue structure to support adequate maintenance of roads and 
bridges.  Yesterday, during the 
Transportation committee meeting, Governor Otter’s plan for raising more funds 
was unveiled.  The Governor proposed 
the following:
                                

                
Remove support for the State Patrol from the Highway Distribution 
Account.
  
                
Impose a 6% fee on daily rental of motor vehicles.
  
                
Increase the state tax on motor fuel – 2 cents per year for five 
years.
  
                
Increase registration fees on cars and trucks.
  
                
Eliminate the ethanol exemption.
  
A good system of transportation is important, and work on roads and 
bridges provides jobs.  However, 
it’s a hard time to think of raising people’s taxes and fees.  It appears the federal stimulus package 
proposes to send over $200 million to Idaho for construction and repair of roads 
and bridges.
  
Does anybody want to adopt a wolf?  There are many who are eager for wolf 
delisting – they are eager for Idaho to manage the wolf population.  The question is currently in the hands 
of the federal government.  I would 
suggest that we need to give evidence that we will be responsible in our 
approach.  Last year, the majority 
of legislators passed a bill allowing ranchers to shoot wolves if they are being 
“annoying.”  I think that language 
lacks specificity – many of us would be in trouble if being annoying were 
sufficient cause to make us a target.   In addition, I have not heard a 
proposal from anyone concerning a very important funding issue.  When wolves are delisted, federal funds 
for management will not continue to flow.  
They may be available 
for an additional three years.  If 
Idaho plans state management of wolves, funding the program will not be 
insignificant.  An official from the 
Office of Endangered Species told me he thinks the feds should continue to 
shoulder the responsibility.  They 
probably won’t do that.  Any Idaho 
management plan won’t succeed without financial support. 
=======================================================
 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
               http://www.fsr.net                       
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20090211/614175bd/attachment.html