Georgia GOP Raising Taxes On Girl Scout Cookies While Cutting Taxes On Foreign Corporations

By Alex Seitz-Wald

Like many states, Georgia is facing a budget shortfall. To address the problem, the legislature is considering a bill that wouldexpand the tax base by doing things like reinstating a sales tax on food and raising the tax on gasoline.

Many Georgians would be adversely affectedby the tax hikes on basic commodities, including the Girl Scouts, who are worried about the “significant financial impact” the bill would have on the revenue they raise through cookie sales, which would now be subject to sales tax. Over the weekend, Marilyn Midyette, the CEO of Girl Scouts of Greater Atlanta, sent an email to supporters warning them that the new tax on their cookies “would take money away from Girl Scout programs“:

This significant financial impact would take money away from Girl Scout programs, camp support, financial aid and proceeds from the sale that support troop activities and community service projects.

…[P]lease contact your State House Representative and State Senator TODAY and express your concern in a courteous, Scout-like manner about our Scouts being taxed. Please reference House Bill 385. Sample letters have been provided on the left to make it easy to copy and paste into your own email. There are sample letters for girls as well as for parents and volunteers.

But while Girl Scouts and anyone who buys groceries and gasoline is forced to sacrifice, domestic and foreign corporations in Geogia are being lavished with a tax break. The same bill that raises taxes on Girl Scouts Cookies lowers tax rates on corporate income, from 6 percent this year to just 4 percent in 2014:

(a)(1)(A) For any taxable year beginning prior to January 1, 2012, every Every 967 domestic corporation and every foreign corporation shall pay annually an income tax 968 equivalent to 6 percent of its Georgia taxable net income. [...]

975 (D) For any taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2014, every domestic 976 corporation and every foreign corporation shall pay annually an income tax equivalent 977 to 4 percent of its Georgia taxable net income

Beyond Girl Scout cookies, taxes on food and gasoline are highly regressivedisproportionately affecting lower and middle class consumers, who spend a larger share of their limited income on necessities like groceries than do people with higher disposable incomes.

Maine Gov. LePage Unveils Budget That Guts Necessities For Main Street To Pay For Tax Cuts For Rich

By Zaid Jilani

Last fall, newly-elected Gov. Paul LePage (R-ME) told the citizens of his state that he pledged to enact “new ideas to get Maine working.” He also promised to defend “the traditional Maine values that have created strong communities and strong families across the state.”

It now appears that LePage is ready to abandon Maine’s strong communities and families with a very old Bush-era idea that has repeatedly failed to get people “working” — gutting necessities for hardworking Main Street Mainers to finance tax cuts for some of the richest in the state. In his budget that was released yesterday, the governor has unveiled a slew of tax cuts, cutbacks in public services, and the gutting of public employee benefits and pensions.

Included in the budget is a provision that would raise the retirement age of public workers from 62 to 65, cut Maine’s prescription drug and health coverage for working parents program, end $400 of property tax relief for more than 75,000 middle-income Maine households, and freeze cost of living adjustments for state employee retirees — which already provides a meager average pension of only $18,500 per year.

Yet at the same time, LePage is pushing through hundreds of millions of dollars of tax cuts. While most Mainers will receive a tax cut under the governor’s plan, the lion’s share of the cuts will go to the wealthiest of state residents. The Maine Center for Economic Policy notes that the average tax cut for most working families in Maine will be a measly $83, while upper income earners will take home an average of $874, and those who earn more than $363,438 — just one percent of the population of the state — will take home a whopping extra $2,770, on average:

And while Millett and business groups gave the tax cuts high marks, the Maine Center for Economic Policy, a liberal think tank, said the cuts give the rich much better benefits than the poor. “Where’s the sacrifice that’s being asked of Maine’s wealthiest residents?” said Garrett Martin, associate director of the center.

The think-tank estimates that the average income tax break for families that earn between $28,139 and $48,050 would be $83 in 2013. That jumps to $874 for those who make more than $199,783 and to $2,770 for those who earn more than $363,438, according to the center.

While unveiling his budget, LePage said that “if you want prosperity, you have got to make sacrifices.” Yet this chart of his proposed tax cuts from the Maine Center for Economic Policy shows that it appears that the richest Mainers aren’t sacrificing at all:

There is reason to believe that Mainers are not going to take such an unfair deal lying down. As a part of a wider Main Street Movement, hundreds of Mainers marched on the State House this past week in support of Wisconsin workers. “The governor proposes largely balancing the state budget on (state workers’) backs,” said Ginette Rivard, vice president of the Maine State Employees Association, who has threatened to lead opposition to LePage’s budget.

M.C.L Comment: I guess the people in Maine are now discovering hating that Negro President Syndrome has down size i.e.having a governor that's balancing the budget on their backs while giving rich people more breaks.

THE AVENGERS PULL OUT OF MICHIGAN

by SuperHeroHype

It was already known that the majority of Joss Whedon's The Avengers would be shot at Albuquerque Studios in New Mexico, but additional scenes were expected to be filmed in New York and Michigan as well. The Detroit Free Press reports that is no longer the case. Here are several clips from the article:

Anxiety, uncertainty and anger are building in the metro Detroit film community over Snyder's budget plan, which essentially would eliminate the current film tax incentive and instead call for $25 million in each of the next two years for future movie projects. "They were all set to come here," said Chris Baum of Film Detroit, a division of the Detroit Metro Convention & Visitors Bureau. When producers couldn't get confirmation that they would still qualify for the incentives, they decided to pull out of the state, Baum said. Tom Moisides got his call on Saturday morning: His services as a location scout for “The Avengers” would no longer be needed. Moisides, whose credits include the Eminem-Chrysler Super Bowl spot, Hugh Jackman's "Real Steel" andGerard Butler's "Machine Gun Preacher," said that he had been working to finalize contracts for his locations, he had hired an assistant and another location manager was expected to start this week. Moisides added that other members of the production were negotiating with local hotels and looking at office space, warehouse units and construction shops and mills. "I'm mad as hell," Moisides said Sunday. "I feel like I've been punched in the stomach. Something has to happen quickly if we're going to keep the film industry here, like a message from the governor that says, 'We're still open for business.' The reality is, because of the uncertainty, productions are shutting down immediately." Darcy Leutzinger, whose Washington Township-based Shotokan 911 worked on movies such as "Red Dawn" and the upcoming "Transformers" film, said his company had been contacted by "The Avengers" about helping with weapons armor and providing tactical SWAT officers and police officers for the production. He said he got a phone call Saturday saying that the project's Michigan plans were up in the air.

REPORT: How Conservative And Progressive State Governments Are Dealing With Their Budget Crises

By Zaid Jilani One of the major problems facing the nation’s economy is the budget crises being experienced by states all over the country. Ethan Pollack, an analyst at the Economic Policy Institute, estimates that “the combined shortfalls for state and local governments [is] $469 billion over the next three fiscal years.” Additionally, a new report from the Pew Charitable Trusts finds that states are looking at a budget gap of nearly a trillion dollars for state worker pensions and other benefits.

State legislatures faced with these crises have a choice. They can choose the path of the “deficit peacocks,” who demand cutting social spending while ruling out tax increases on those who have benefited immensely from years of conservative policies.

However, at a time when the tax burden between the wealthy and the middle class is “narrower than at any time in modern history” they can instead look for ways to responsibly raise revenues while protecting their states’ spending on vital programs. Conservative and progressive state-led governments are approaching their problems with different policy solutions.

Conservative-led state governments are choosing the deficit peacock path, refusing to responsibly raise revenues and instead slashing their states’ social and infrastructure spending:

VIRGINIA: Virginia faces a $2.2 billion budget shortfall over the next two years. In early January, during his first speech after being sworn in, Gov. Bob McDonnell (R-VA) stressed the need for “compromises” between Virginians of different political beliefs in order to deal with the state’s budget crisis, yet promised to veto any legislation that would raise taxes. As a result, McDonnell’s budget proposal amounts to a full-on assault on the state’s top domestic spending priorities. He has proposed cutting almost $730 million in K-12 education spending, freezing enrollment in the state’s health insurance program for low-income kids and pregnant women, and requiring state workers “to take as many as 10 unpaid days off and contribute more to their pensions.” These cuts would end the school breakfast program, lead to the layoffs of “thousands of teachers,” and close five major state parks.

MINNESOTA: Minnesota currently has to deal with a $1.2 billion budget deficit. Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R-MN) has unveiled a massive series of cuts that will gut the state’s social services. The governor “proposes cutting $347 million from health care and human services programs. Most significantly, he wants to limit the enrollment of single adults in MinnesotaCare to people earning less than 75 percent of the federal poverty level,” which would leave an additional 20,000 Minnesotans without health care coverage. He also has proposed cutting $250 million in aid to municipalities and $50 million in higher education aid. Yet at the same time, he has failed to propose ways to raise more revenue and has even called for a 20 percent cut in the corporate tax rate, effectively rewarding the most prosperous Minnesotans while punishing some of the poorest. Unfortunately, Pawlenty’s Democratic opposition has not shown much creativity in responding to his plans; Senate Majority Leader Larry Pogemiller (D-Minneapolis) has indicated that his party plans to “propose cutting at least as much as the governor from higher education and health care.”

CALIFORNIA: California is enduring the most extreme budget crisis in the nation, with a $20 billion budget shortfall in the current year. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA), who has ruled out any sort of tax increases, has submitted $8.5 billion in budget cuts for 2010, which even he admits are “draconian.” Under just one of the cuts, taking aim at the state’s health care budget, more than 200,000 children would lose their eligibility for state health insurance. The governor has also proposed “permanently [lowering] state workforce salaries by 5% without returning to the bargaining table with public-sector unions.” These cuts come on top of $7.4 billion in cuts last year, which caused double-digit tuition increases at public universities and laid off thousands of teachers, increased class sizes, and slashed academic programs.” Due to Proposition 13, “which requires that a two-thirds majority of the state legislature approve any tax increase,” conservative legislators have repeatedly been able to block tax increases on the wealthiest Californians.

Meanwhile, progressive-led state governments are asking their states’ most prosperous citizens to sacrifice a little so that spending on the most vital programs can be protected:

NEW YORK: New York was expecting a $16.2 billion deficit for 2009. Despite hesitancy from Gov. David Paterson (D-NY), progressive legislators chose to raise taxes on its wealthiest citizens rather than simply punish its poorest. It boosted the state income tax rate from 6.85 percent to 8.97 percent for households with over $500,000 of taxable income, and raised the rate one percent for “those with taxable income below $500,000 but above $200,000 for single individuals, $250,000 for heads of households, and $300,000 for married couples filing joint returns,” raising more than $5 billion and staving off the need for deeper cuts in social services.

WISCONSIN: After approaching the “largest budget shortfall” in the state’s history, Wisconsin legislators under the leadership of Gov. Jim Doyle (D-WI) raised taxes on wealthy Wisconsonians to help blunt the need for budget cuts. The state “enacted a new 7.75 percent income tax bracket on all income over $300,000 for married couples and $225,000 for individuals and heads of households. And the exclusion for capital gains income was lowered to 30 percent from 60 percent.” Altogether, these measures generated an extra $280 million for fiscal year 2010. Thanks to these progressive steps, Wisconsin was able to limit cuts on public school funding to 2.5% (rather than the 6.1% without the tax increases) and actually increase funding for Wisconsin’s technical colleges and children’s health insurance programs.

OREGON: With a $2.5 billion projected budget shortfall between 2009 and 2011, Oregon was on the verge of having to make deep cuts to education spending, freeze public employee salaries, and end forest protection rules. Alongside support from Gov. Ted Kulongoski (D-OR), Oregon progressives organized and triumphed over a corporate-backed propaganda campaign to successfully convince voters to “handily” pass ballot measures that increased taxes on the wealthiest Oregonians and increased the corporate minimum tax rate from a paltry $10 a year while not raising taxes on 97.5% of taxpayers and 93% of businesses — protecting $1 billion in services.

Budget cuts that states are facing “could lead to a loss of 900,000 jobs, according to Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Economy.com.” Although it’s important for state legislators to balance their budgets in progressive ways, the federal government has a role to play as well. The Senate’s version of its jobs bill has chosen to not include aid state governments. The House’s version includes billions in support for cash-strapped states. The New York Times has noted that including aid to states in the Senate bill is essential because it is “among the surest ways to preserve and create jobs because the money is pushed through quickly to employees, contractors and beneficiaries. The alternative is recovery-killing spending cuts…on the state level.”

M.C.L comments: Ah how does it feel middle class or working poor Republican voters in Virgina and Minnesota your governors say save the richer citizens of your state and the hell with you? Hopefully people in Michigan are smart enough to make sure the only way that Mike Cox, the so called tough nerd and Mike Bouchard step foot in the governor mansion is by visiting.