Conference Committee Outlook

[Gary Gilbert]

The Vermont House of Representatives had its finest moment Friday after the economists released additional bad news about further revenue shortfalls. The House stayed after adjournment while the Speaker outlined the process that would occur in the next two weeks, as conference committees would begin the task of selecting the best alternative to several interrelated bills. The discussion in the well of the House was unique. Individual legislators had the opportunity to raise their concerns and to learn how each of them could be involved in this decision making process. No one was in charge of this discussion, no group advocated for a course of action. It was simply your legislators trying to clearly understand how and to what degree it would be possible for each of them to have input into the work of the committees.

The Conference committees are composed of three members of the House and three members of the Senate who will be looking at the capital bill, the transportation bill, the budget bill, and the tax bill. The committee members are the most respected and 
knowledgeable legislators, whose task is to make a recommendation to the whole House and Senate as to the best course of action given our financial situation and the increasing need for public services. But they will not work alone. There are really four players: House and Senate leadership, the Governor, the Committees, and individual legislators Speaker Smith encouraged all individual House members to follow events closely and to provide information and insight to the conference committee members. The conferees will work closely with other committees. The Administration will be a major player at the table. Any proposal will seek approval from the administration and the House and Senate. The final recommendation will be the one that fully utilizes federal stimulus funds, is in the best longterm interests of the state and can rally the most support. The final decision will be made by the legislature, not just the conference committee members.

I cannot stress too strongly how these different bills are intertwined. There will be something in each to love and something to hate. The economists told us that a recession is not the time to raise taxes or to cut spending unless basic services are at risk. We are now at that point. We must do both. The easy political choices will be to cut people and reduce programs or to reduce funding to towns and cities letting them shoulder more of the burden. This is like throwing the weakest out of the lifeboat .It requires the least thought. The tougher choice would be to cut a state program that is popular in your town. The easy choice is to fight to retain a popular program. The tough choice would be to raise revenue to pay for it. A tax increase is the most difficult choice and the one least likely to be made unless there are no reasonable alternatives. This might be the case with our roads and bridges. No one likes to pay more taxes. No legislator wants to take a political risk by raising taxes, which hits every single voter equally. Fees are politically safer. They will raise revenue, but hit only some of the voters, can be avoided by others, and are not remembered on election day. Not everyone has to register a vehicle, or use the parks, or have their barber's license renewed. That is why a tax on gas is unpopular but a charge on the wholesale transfer of gas to distributors, is more attractive to law makers, even though it will be the consumer that will ultimately pay.

Representative Gary Gilbert
Fairfax/Georgia

[special ED]

alright we need to raise taxes!!!!! ,maybe the sales tax to 9 % that would bring in alot of money to the state coffers,we need some toll roads we dont have any and feel left out from the rest of the country,gas and cig. taxes are already done ,we need a new and inovative tax that no one has thought of before,how about a wood burning tax or better yet a wood pellet tax?wait I know a tax on junk in your yard tax or call it progressive green up tax,you could sell stamps to put on your junk or garbage bags to let the collectors know that you paid in full.how about a tax on landlords per unit ,above the property tax for the privlage of owning rental property .we need to get emmissions started on cars and trucks now theres a money making scheme ,you can sell extra stickers for that ,make it twice a year .we need to protect the children from breathing all that smog,I know what how about a bicycle road use tax ,make the bicycles owners get an inspection sticker ,that one would go over well!!! they have been getting a free ride for too long now. snow machine riders ,4 wheeler riders ,motor cycle riders all have to pay that stuff why not bicycle riders?you could sell some kind of burn permit for people wanting to burn grass or brush,or you could start a lisencing program and have professionals go around to homes and hire these people to burn the piles of stuff.that would bring in some jobs to the area ,maybe the fire fighters could do it for a business and if anything got out of control they would already be there.let me think on it some more I can come up with more maybe I should run for some office cause this is the age of tax and spend

[special ED]

how about a lawn mower yard use tax there are alot of lawn mowers out there?

[edakrupp]

What we really need is how to figure out a way Vermont as a state can generate more jobs, industry and revenue. We need to get the fire started and become more valuable so the Feds can begin to match our funds and we can get our hands on some of that money Obama has. As it stands VT is too poor to recieve money from the Feds

[Gary Gilbert]

I’d like to address the issue of property tax increase v. other increases .

Those that believe that lower income Vermonters are protected somewhat from a property tax increase by the income sensitivity and will pay their education property taxes based on income are correct. That is exactly what the sensitivity program is designed to do. It helps protect those with low, fixed, or falling incomes. But I see any increase on the property tax as poor policy for several reasons. Increasing the tax on property is like taxing a person savings account as their home was purchased with dollars that they already paid taxes on. It is taxing what they have saved not what they are capable of earning.
A second reason is that the property tax has been adjusted over time to raise the amount of dollars necessary to provide the State’s share of the education budgets that were passed in local school budgets. The tax rate went up when property values went down and down when values were increasing. (There is some lag as a 3 yr. average is used to prevent sharper ups and downs.) The only reason the ed. Fund appears to be stable is because it was adjusted to meet costs and has raised more than twice the state income tax revenue and four times the sales tax. The failure of the legislator to adjust these other sources of income and the shift now proposed tells the local school voters who reduced their projected budgets , as the Fairfax Board did, that they are now rewarded by having an additional 19 million dollars placed on their shoulders. Remember that the property tax is still regressive in that wealthy pay a lower percentage of their income for property taxes than moderate Vermonters pay. Whether it is the governor’s 63 m shift or the legislatures 19 m shift, both are tax increases. We need revenues that increase the income tax on those making over 200,000 a year not just on homeowners.   I will continue to work for revenues other than the property tax until it becomes necessary to accept the best of the worse alternatives.

[special ED]

you need to protect the retired and elderly people they should not have to pay school tax at all local yes but not school ,it is heart wrenching to see a person who worked all their lives ,paid bills ,paid the house off and then turn around and lose it all because of the STUPID school kids that dont need half of the junk that they are being taught .let the parents pay for all the extra stuff and I guarantee you the costs would come under control