-
I pledge allegiance to all life
in its interdependent diversity;
and to the Planet upon which it exists;
one World, under the sky, undividable
with harmony and balance for all. ~ Tom King, 2001, for Blue Sky Institute -
-
Me This is my personal website which contains links and information to all aspects about me.
Tag Archives: utah legislature
Poll: What should some of the things be done to balance the budget in the next legislative session i
Food Sales Tax Saga: Continued
(cross-posted to Utah Legislature Watch)
Who benefits from food sales tax breaks? Why, everyone of course. Food is a basic human right, whether you are rich or poor. Everyone must had food and must have it accessible.
But there are legislators who feel that the food sales tax break was too much of a benefit to the wealthy and therefore should be reinstated. The state’s Tax Review Commission announced its support for the restoration of the food sales tax rate an, in an article published in the Salt Lake Tribune, the chair of the commission stated:
But there are legislators who feel that the food sales tax break was too much of a benefit to the wealthy and therefore should be reinstated. The state’s Tax Review Commission announced its support for the restoration of the food sales tax rate an, in an article published in the Salt Lake Tribune, the chair of the commission stated:
Like the other groups endorsing the idea of restoring the full food sales tax, the commission said it sought to create a more stable, sound tax base and was not motivated by the desire to increase revenues to help plug an estimated $850 million budget deficit.
“In my mind, the real issue — in spite of the emotional effects — is efficiency,” said Commission Chairman Keith Prescott. “There’s an efficiency issue that doesn’t reach its target audience. By taking the sales tax off food, it gives too much benefit to the wealthy — an unintended, not well-thought-out result of what we got.”
Huh? Excuse me?
The article continues:
While consumers have enjoyed the reduced sales tax on food, implemented in January of last year, state coffers have missed out on an estimated $160 million in revenues.The commission preferred revenue refunds that would be cost-effective and easy to implement. Several options were discussed, such as tying the benefit to the federal earned income tax credit, adding a few lines on the state’s tax return or increasing the pool of food stamps.
Again: Huh?
This would clearly hurt struggling families and citizens living at the poverty level. Get a credit when they file their taxes? How would that help with daily needs and cash flow? It wouldn’t!
Using the excuse that the sales tax on food must be raised for everyone in order for the wealthy not to be able to “get away” with that benefit is really, really lame. Don’t impose what I consider a sanction on everyone to get revenue from the wealthy. Tax the wealthy on other things such as luxuries. A luxury tax (skiing, recreational vehicles, etc.) would certainly be more in line that with the mindset that the wealthy need to be paying their relative share of taxes in this state.
**Whose** rights are being violated? Legislative session hot spot on GLBT issues
(Cross-posted to Utah Legislature Watch)
Last week Salt Lake City passed an ordinance that protects persons seeking employment and housing from discrimination because of sexual orientation.
Done deal? Not a chance. According to a Deseret News Article last week state legislators are gearing up for what promises to be once again a hot topic for the 2010 legislative session.
Government and civic leaders said Wednesday the fight will be much tougher in the conservative Legislature, though the odds of passing an anti-discrimination law may get a boost from the Mormon church’s endorsement Tuesday of the Salt Lake City Council’s ordinances. Lawmakers could do three things when they come into January’s general session: They could adopt a statewide law similar to the city’s; they could actually repeal the city ordinance and ban all other local governments from doing likewise; or they could do nothing, which would let the city ordinance stand.
Rep. Chris Johnson, D-Salt Lake will be introducing a bill much like the Salt Lake City’s passed ordinance to afford all persons equal protection with regards to housing and employment.
There are, of course, conservative legislators, ironically property owners, outspoken on the issue:
Robbing from the poor to make the poor poorer
The Deseret News reported today that two Utah Senators are pushing for a restoration of the 6+% (from the current 1.75%) sales tax on unprepared food.
Senate budget chairman Lyle Hillyard, R-Logan, and Sen. Howard Stephenson, R-Draper, president of the Utah Taxpayers Association, in separate statements said it was a mistake when Utah legislators bowed to the “influence” of former Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. and cut the food tax.
This tax restoration would place undue burden on poor people. Why should there be a tax on something everyone must have?
One legislator doesn’t think that such a tax would impact poor people:
For more than a year, Rep. Kay McIff, R-Richfield, has been trying to get lawmakers to put the tax back on food and, through other means, give tax cuts to low-income Utahns.
McIff says the food tax cut really didn’t help low-income Utahns that much, but instead went to large Utah families or more well-to-do Utahns who buy a lot of food — people who likely really don’t need that kind of a tax cut.
From what source does McIff get his data? What does he mean “didn’t help low-income Utahns that much“? Where is the evidence to back such a statement?
I’m willing to bet that poor people spend most of their income on food while rich people spend a fraction of their income on food.
Taxing food is preposterous. Don’t hurt families this way.
Hard economic times and cost of tuition making college education further from reality for some
Higher education was not exempt from the figurative slash of the knife in its budget this year by the Utah legislature.
Lawmakers cut 9% from higher education’s funding, resulting inemployee furloughs and layoffs and higher tuition for students pursuing their education at Utah colleges. It is anticipated that future years will see even more cuts to higher education budgets.
While some students are grateful that the tuition hikes did not go any higher than they did (ranging anywhere from 4% to 9.5% in Utah’s colleges), there are many students who are working their way through college and barely making it with current tuition costs. These hikes will make it even more difficult for these students to attain their goals during this time of economic hardships when their employment situations will not see relative pay increases to match their now rising cost of attending post secondary institutions.
Utah needs to examine tuition-free programs for students, particularly those with low incomes, like other states do, such as Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, and West Virginia.
(cross-posted to Utah Legislature Watch)
Language of lobbyist bill in question
HB345, a bill that was passed in the 2009 Utah Legislative session, prevents former Utah Lawmakers from returning t othe Legislator as paid lobbyists for one year.
Well, sort of.
Turns out that the Utah Lt. Governor’s office has interpreted the language of the bill in such a way that allows former lawmakers to still be able to return on behalf of him/herselfor a business with which he/she is associated, unless the “primary activity” of the business is lobbying or governmental relations.
This loophhole has bill sponors and advocates up in arms.
“I hope that this sends a signal to those legislators who are lobbying in 2009 and sat on this floor last year,” Rep. Christine Johnson (D-SLC) told fellow House members in February, “that they understand that it’s the will of the Legislature and the will of the people to have a cooling off period.” The bill’s primary sponsor, Rep. Brad Dee, R-Washington Terrace, doesn’t believe the bill is fatally flawed. He’s surprised at how the Lt. Governor’s Office interpreted the bill and said he plans to discuss it with Herbert.
“If I need to tighten the language, I’ll do it. I’m passionate about it,” Dee said. “It wasn’t a feel-good bill — it had some teeth in it and got it done.”
Sen. Greg Bell, R-Fruit Heights, sponsored HB345 on its rough ride through the Senate.”I tried to make it crystal clear that what was prohibited was the garden variety contract lobbyist,” Bell said, “those guys in the hall who are there for three different businesses.”
Quotes from Salt Lake Tribune article
Amazingly, 71 or 75 Utah House members signed on HB345, which leaves me wondering if this loophole glared out at some who chose to keep silent while the bill got passed.
I anticipate this issue taking on a legal challenge.
(Cross-posted to Utah Legislature Watch)
Utah’s Liquor Legislation
Liquor Legislation is getting a lot of attention this session. Utah is known all over for its draconian liquor laws and there has been a lot of activity this session over changes. to these laws.
Utah has a law that anyone wishing to patronize a bar must become a member since bars are required to be “private clubs for members only”. This is one reason why many people, including tourists, do not regularly visit these establishments in Utah.
Tightening up the laws to include more touch penalties for infractions of Utah’s liquor laws is on the agenda this year, but legislators are also examining legislation (HB151) that would do away with the private club membership issue and would replace it instead with scanners to verify the validity of a patron’s identification.
Data would be stored on-site for a week and there would be no centralized law enforcement database.New templates would be designed for bars in restaurants to keep the mixing of drinks out of the view of children. Existing restaurants would be grandfathered in, but might qualify for assistance if they chose to renovate to conceal the mixing of drinks.
I personally adovocate e the elimination of the private club membership requirement and am cautiously optimistic about its replacement (as long as there is no “big brother” component to it over the long term), however am not in favor of the restaurant bar legislation. I feel this is an unnecessary crossing of the line of the rights and freedoms of individual business owners. If parents do not wish their children to be exposed to any type of liquor culture, they should refrain from taking them to any establishment that serves liquor, period.
Non-Partisan agrees with me on this:
Proponents of the “10-foot wall” argue that the mixing of drinks in view of children in some way glamourizes alcohol and encourages children to drink. This falls back into that responsibility argument that I’ve made about 500 times on this blog. Be a parent, explain to your children the dangers of alcohol and over-consumption. If you’re that paranoid about them seeing a drink being mixed, don’t go to places that serve. Realistically, it’s not like they’re not going to see the drinks being served after they’re mixed behind the wall.
HB151 has cleared the house and unanimously passed the Senate. It is now in the hands of the Governor. Continue reading
Buttars Poll
Please take a minute to participate in the poll over on Utah Legislature Watch about Senator Chris Buttars resigning.
Deanna Dee-Dee Taylor 