Co-Founder of Atlanta Tea Party Fires Across Our Pro-TSPLOST Bow
Decatur Metro | May 31, 2011 | 8:39 amThis comment appeared in our Fayette County post written by someone named “Debbie Dooley”, which just happens to be the name of the co-founder of the Atlanta Tea Party…
You supporters of the TSPLOST just keep being not concerned about the passage of the TSPLOST. Just keep on thinking that it will sail to passage. This is an issue that tea parties throughout the Metro area will be heavily involved with next year. Right now tea party activists are like ducks on a pond regarding the TSPLOST. On the surface, everything is calm. Beneath the surface, we are paddling vigorously preparing to do battle next year.
It will be a big priority next year. We defeated the trauma care tax without spending one dime. We will do the same with TSPLOST.
Debbie Dooley – Georgia Tea Party Patriots State Co-ordinator
This is great. A look inside the mind of the Georgia Tea Party!
Debbie’s note seems to indicate that they believe they’ll do their usual social media magic, hold a few rallies, and take down the transportation sales-tax like they did trauma care. An interesting proposition, but I’m thinking the Georgia Tea Party may finally have met its match on this one.
This ain’t health care, trauma care or big bank bailouts.
This is a concrete list of transportation projects that either get funded or not. It’s not all that hard for the average voter to wrap their head around or foresee the coming impact. (My road is now wider, my town now has transit, etc).
On top of that, the Tea Party faithful will soon come head-to-head with equally passionate transit advocates. Both are true-believers, willing to yell, sweat, and blow raspberries for their cause.
Oh hell yeah. This should be fun to watch.
P.S. I wonder if they’ll encourage fellow Tea Partiers to take MARTA to their protests at the State Capitol like they did back in 2009.
Related Posts:
-
April 28, 2015 DeKalb, PATH and CSX Negotiating to Close Stone Mountain Trail Gap Over I-285 (3)
-
April 27, 2015 Atlanta Ranks 16th Among Travel + Leisure’s “Most Charming Cities” (6)
-
April 16, 2015 Decatur School Board to Ask for $75 Million Bond (1)
Fine. Let them choke on their own clogged roads.
Yep and clogged roads = more accidents. Sure wish we had more Trauma Centers to help with that.
Why does the theme of the 21st century seem to be “Hey, kids, let’s work hard against our own self interest!”?
I think taking credit for the trauma center defeat is stretching a bit. If they spent no money on a campaign, how do they think they had any influence either way? IMO, the measure’s defeat was the result of missteps of state leaders on some other items that resulted in a lack of trust by the voters.
And why is taking credit for defeating a small tax to fund trauma centers a good thing?
What misssteps? By those providing data on the problem and begging for help? Or by those at top levels in state leadership? How so? Or by the legislature?
You may recall that right around the time of the election, it was announced that the tolls were not coming off of GA 400 as previously promised. This produced a current of mistrust in state leadership and folks were reluctant to give them more money for anything, deserving or not.
And TSPLOST is the acronym for….?
“SPLOST stands for Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax. It is a one-cent tax on all consumer goods that must be approved by voters in a referendum.” (from http://www.cobbk12.org/centraloffice/communications/splost) so TSPLOST (I presume stands for a Transportation SPLOST.
” It is a one-cent tax on all consumer goods…”
And thus a regressive tax. There’s lots of reasons to not vote for TSPLOST; that’s one of them. Other reason include, as others have pointed out, the lack of trust voters have for GA government and the problems at GDOT.
I don’t see how the Tea Party figures in to this. Taking credit for the ‘No’ vote on the trauma centers, and taking “pre-credit” on TSPLOST going down, is sort of like crowing at the sunrise. TPers may want to take credit for the outcome, but…
Trust In the Georgia government is at an all time level low (except for the three governors debacle). GA DOT is in disarray as special interests pull their strings to get their friends in charge. The Governor is an unindicted felon.
And you want me to give these yahoos more of my money?
I am no Tea Party supporter but they are right on this one.
I’ll be voting no & encouraging others to do the same. My taxes are already too high & with the pending DeKalb County property tax increase looming; I am in no mood to pay more. Not to mention the Federal government’s insatiable quest for more taxing & more spending.
Your federal tax rate went up last year, Mic?
It stayed about the same from yr to yr. But, with the Federal deficit at an all-time high & the current government hell bent on spending; do you believe our federal tax rates will decline over time?
Not an all-time high. Lower, as a % of GDP, than during WWI or WWII. Interest payments on the debt are lower, as a % of GDP, than in the late 80’s and early 90’s.
Of course, maybe a return to the federal income tax rates of the 50’s and 60’s, with the top bracket exceeding 70%, is inevitable. I wouldn’t mind returning to the economic climate of those decades, personally. I’ve got an idea – why don’t we middle-class folks agitate for higher taxes for the rich? There are more of us than there are of them, right? Can’t we get our elected officials to support that platform?
You may be right, but I don’t think over-taxing the people who create jobs is a good thing. What about the 49-50% of the population that end up paying zero Federal income tax? The top 10-15% of income earnings already pay over 50% of the Federal income tax.
yes, but what percentage of income do those top 10% make? 50% in 2007. If they are getting 50% of the income in this country, shouldn’t they pay 50% of the taxes? (not even taking into account if you believe in progressive taxes.)
And after tax breaks, the richest 400 people in this country pay an average tax rate of 18%–doesn’t sound that bad (and not at all progressive). Of the “50% paying no taxes” (which is sketchy as someone linked to below), 18,000 of them make >$500,000 a year.
So really it’s people of all economic levels who abuse our current system, and those with money pay people well to do it better. The “job creators” are getting their tax breaks just fine, and we’re toward the bottom on job creation stats as DM pointed out… hmmm…. maybe if we cut taxes even more it’ll suddenly start acting differently!
The reason for the 18% average tax rate is that folks that rich don’t get paid much in salary. Their incomes are largely drawn from dividends and capital gains. It is entirely appropriate to tax those at a lower rate. Dividends are already the end result of double taxation — a company’s profits are taxed, then whatever is left over can be paid out in dividends, then that money is taxed again. Also, to get dividend income requires taking risk. At any given time, a dividend paying investment may be substantially underwater. If I buy XYZ Corp at 50, and it drops to 30, is the $2 dividend I receive really income that we should be taxing at more than 20%?
I’ve never understood this argument about taxes and job creation. Business expenses – including hiring new employees – are tax deductible. Wouldn’t increasing upper-bracket tax rates make it more attractive for those who do create jobs (which is not all rich people, mind you) to invest in their enterprises rather than take their profits, retire and buy champagne?
It’s not working:
http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2011/05/31/new-business-not-creating-jobs-and-hasnt-for-a-long-time/
So the current deficit is lower as a share of GDP than it was when the entire world was at war? How encouraging. In any case, I’m pretty sure the current deficit doesn’t account for some pretty major off-balance sheet liabilities like, oh, a $37 trillion unfunded Medicare liability. Now that’s the kind of thing a CFO would go to jail for if a public company did it.
Oh, and as to interest payments: easy to keep them low when the fed is “buying” about 85% of new T-bills at the auctions. I know that when I lend money to myself, I give myself a dynamite interest rate.
Fits with the unfunded wars.
At to the unfunded $37T of Medicare, links please.
Here’s one:
http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/14/taxes-social-security-opinions-columnists-medicare.html
It links to the actual government reports. There are about 1,000 other sources for this same info if you want it.
The state of Georgia 49th out of 50 in per capita infrastructure spending, and it shows.
+1 to AMB. Plus, anyone who believes this is truly a 1 cent increase in the sales tax is, shall we say, a bit gullible. Because if there’s one thing we know, it is that government cost estimates for construction projects are always dead accurate, right?
Here’s how this would proceed if passed:
Year 1 — tax rate goes up
Year 2 — project costs start to exceed budget
Years 3 and on — repeat year 2, but add that “oh noes, the penny tax increase is producing less revenue than expected!!!”
Year 4 or 5 — calls for a new tax in light of cost overages and revenue “shortfalls”
Lather, rinse, repeat.
Great, but what’s the alternative? Stay put with the current available options?
Doesn’t seem to cut it since we’re something like 46th in job creation in the last 10 years. Even with our attractive lower tax rates.
Yes, the best option is to stand pat. The state’s finances are a mess, the federal government’s are worse, and now is not the time to embark on a $8 billion project. As for the job creation issue, I think it is a stretch, to say the least, that building even more roads will set the stage for real, lasting job creation in this state.
I must be missing something.
First, I haven’t seen a definitive list of projects TSPLOST. Does one exist?
Second, why is this painted as a battle of tea partiers v. “transit” advocates, by which I understand you to mean public mass transit as opposed to roads? Last I read, the vast majority of proposed TSPLOST projects were roads, not rail. Do you want to spend more on roads or are you willing to support any project list and tax, no matter how bloated, so long as it includes a rail project?
I believe I only call out transit advocates in the last paragraph because I’m comparing the most passionate advocates on both sides of the issue. Otherwise I call them transportation advocates, no?
The list is currently being generated and should be produced some time this fall, a year before any vote.
I thought it said transit, which I took to mean rail. If wrong, my bad.
“transit” in the broad sense means any public mass transportation – MARTA (heavy) rail, light rail (streetcars), commuter rail (regular, traditional trains) and buses (express or otherwise).
Is it just me, or is Sir DM gettin’ feisty lately? Between this post and the eye on the street stroller picture, I do believe he’s getting bored with the pedestrian nature of his subjects.
Once you’ve walked in the man’s shoes…..
You get blisters and toe nail fungus?
“I do believe he’s getting bored with the pedestrian nature of his subjects.”
I love how this reads two ways. Endure us, DM your lordship!
Thanks, Scott! Took me a while to come up with that one.
And thanks to DM for his patience with such silliness.
Mic, that’s always struck me as such a ridiculous argument. All that reveals is the inequality in this country, not that half the population is getting a free ride at the expense of the hard working job creators. Give me a break. How much do you propose we tax those making minimum wage? Assuming a 40hr work week year round, that’s roughly $15,000 per year. What do believe is a fair federal tax amount for those folks? I really want to hear your answer.
+1
I don’t think Mic has that answer.
JJ,
I don’t know the answer. I’ll throw it back to you, what is the “fair” amount of tax for those earning over $250K, $300K (pick the number)? 50%, 70%, 100%?
If you care about this issue, then spend some time on the tax foundation website. I think it is taxfoundation.org. There you will find our from an income tax perspective who is paying what. A few quick hits, I can provide links later on when I have more time:
— In 2008, last year data was available, the bottom 50% earned about 12.5% of all AGI and paid about 2.5% of all federal income taxes. The line that divides the bottom 50% is about $33,000. That’s AGI, not gross income. So a teacher in Peoria earning $45,000 and contributing $12,000 to a 401(k) is in this group. hardly destitiute. Hardly minimum wage. On average, those folks are paying little to nothing in federal income taxes. All in all, this accounts for 70 million federal tax returns — a huge number of people.
— The top 1%, with incomes over $380,000, earned something like 20% of all AGI. They paid 38% of all federal income taxes. So all of you equality types can take note: the poor pay a siproportionately low share of income taxes. The rich pay a disproportionately high share.
— My $.02 is that everyone needs to pay some income taxes. I am not a huge fan of progressivity but can live with it. So if you are truly minimum wage, we’re talking a low percentage. Maybe it’s 5%. But you have to pay something. Because otherwise, you end up where we are, with a massive percentage of the population paying next to nothing, very insulated from the cost of government. This not only makes a perpetual “spend more” constituency but makes income taxe receipts more volatile because of the narrow base. Rich people have incomes that go up and down by large margins, which is a real problem for creating a stable government revenue stream.
Looking only at federal income tax skews things. Sales taxes are regressive, and FICA withholdings hit middle-class people the hardest. Poor people and middle-class people pay taxes too, and once you include those local and state taxes too, our taxation system is hardly progressive at all. Here’s a link.
That graph is deceptively appealing. But it’s badly flawed. Progressivity is not proportionality between share of income earned and share of taxes paid; it is the notion that marginal rates increase with income. To show you why his analysis is flawed, imagine a world of 2 payers. Payer 1 earns $50, or 5% of all income, and pays $9 in taxes, which is 3% of all taxes. His rate is 18%. Payer 2 earns $950, or 95% of all income, pays $291 in taxes, which is 97% of all taxes. Those numbers would fit the blogger’s graph; the poor’s share of taxes is just slightly less than their his share of income, the rich’s is slightly more. You might say it’s not very progressive. But it is. Payer 1’s rate is 18% but Payer 2 is paying a 30.6% tax rate.
Plus I disagree that you can or should count FICA as part of this analysis, for reasons stated in a post below. I can see both sides of that, but I disagree with yours.
“My $.02 is that everyone needs to pay some income taxes.”
I agree with this. But I also think everyone should be paying more income taxes, even the demographic third rail: the middle class.
I’m still steaming about the tea party/republican lie that half the population doesn’t pay taxes (at the expense of the hard working wealthy job creators, of course)
Here’s a great article debunking that misconception:
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3505
Same old reply. The claim is that about 50% pay no INCOME taxes. The response that those people pay PAYROLL taxes is not really a response. They’re different. Social security, for example, is not supposed to be a tax; it is a required contribution to a government-run pension. That’s why is is treated separately. And Medicare is not the same but is similar. Thee idea is you pay in and get later. Income taxes,on the other hand, fund defense, transportation, etc. That’s the idea.
There are efforts being made to move the tsplost vote to the general election ballot. In my view, that is the only way it has a chance of passing.
I wonder that you all seem to miss the issue that the government is scamming us. Roads have always been paid for from our taxes. Some ‘smart’ politician got the idea that the could create a commission to ‘give the people’ more voice and make them think it was a good idea for them to raise more taxes on themselves. Don’t be fools!
We pay enough taxes! The roads can be built if government will start prioritizing and stop funding less important items.
We all want better transportation but this method is a scam. And you do have to admit that Atlanta is positioned to get others to pay for their problems. There is very good reason to OPPOSE this TSPLOST!
Gosh, with such a clear explanation of the scam, how COULD we be such fools?
More Burkian Bells, please!
Traffic congestion experts have long warned that pollution caused by idling vehicles on crowded roads was harming Americans’ health.
Motor vehicle emissions have a public health cost, according to research.
Now, for the first time, researchers at Harvard University have quantified the damage: They say that congestion in the USA’s 83 largest urban areas last year led to more than 2,200 premature deaths and a related public health cost of at least $18 billion.
“Our estimates of the total public health cost of traffic congestion in the U.S. are likely conservative, in that they consider only the impacts in 83 urban areas and only the cost of related mortality and not the costs that could be associated with related morbidity — health care, insurance, accidents and other factors,” the researchers at the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis at the Harvard School of Public Health report.
Researchers focused on motor vehicle emissions, using several models “to predict how much of what people are breathing in each urban area is attributable to emissions from traffic congestion.”
The issue is far beyond transportation. It would really be the beginning of the metro region working together to attack its most critical problem, congestion.
And, if the tax fails, expect it to be very bad for business. It’s like calling attention to your No. 1 problem and then saying we refuse to address it. Charlotte will love that.
On job creation, the projects would address that by changing how we live — more urban density, less sprawl. If it succeeds, you will see the beginning of a government policy change to direct resources inward rather than to continue to expand to greenfields.
The tax would pay for regional transportation projects, both rail and pavement. The list will be ready in August.
I get the idea that most Georgians living outside the Atlanta area really don’t WANT Georgia to be competitive in the growth area. They pretend it’s not a problem that will sink us all. They want more isolation and stagnation, not less.
That attitude has not changed in the 40 years I’ve known Georgia.
Too bad we can’t privatize light rail (as they all were in the 19th and 20th cent)…it would be up to the owner to pull a profit, our tax dollars would not be used (for good or bad depending on your bend) and when its up to the operator to pull a profit they wont create stupid “proof of concept” lines from Olympic park to MLK.
As far as taxes go…how do people feel about the fair tax? Taxed on what you consume instead of what you make…
Unfortunately, from the transportation engineers I worked with a few years ago (project for the state on passenger rail transit in Georgia), there isn’t a transit system in the entire nation that is not subsidized. They can’t run a profit because they can’t compete with the perceived relative total benefit of driving (convenience, commute time, and cost) and the cost per passenger mile for transit is too high. And for all the “government is bad” crowd out there, have you ever considered that government is not synonymous with elected officials and special interests? At least my experience in Decaatur has been that it is the way citizens come together to make things better and of course that means people will disagree. And sometimes that means you will not get your way and it will cost more. So deal with it.
“there isn’t a transit system in the entire nation that is not subsidized”
Nor is there a highway that is not “subsidized” either – general taxes pay for at least one-third of construction and maintenance cost. Airlines also – they don’t build the airports or pay the controllers.
That’s right. Public transportation is a financial loser. It is considered a public good that virtually everyone uses, though the cost-benefit is debatable for many programs. And this isn’t government control either as the TP might want you to believe. Guess who is paid to do the work? Private contractors.
At some point, RScott, it must be profitable in order to be worthwhile. I assume that you mean that public transit is not profitable in terms of cash flow from operations but that you feel that it is profitable in terms of economic return. This is the point that must be proven. We cannot go blindly toward a hope. We know where it works and where it doesn’t based on density and demographics and we need to legislate the building side before the transportation side – or at least do them together. It makes more sense to increase the density of Atlanta or some chosen hubs outside and support them with mass transit than it does to just expand ‘hopefully’.
in the end it must be a profitable investment and not a feel good one. Otherwise all you have is debt and the promise of bigger government to help get us out of the problem they create.
Apply your logic to roads. They’re not profitable.
“how do people feel about the fair tax? ”
I feel it is misnamed.
Call it what you like, why is it unfair/fair in your opinion?
Because those who make less have to spend a bigger percentage of what they make. It is a regressive tax. As for the name, why not call it what it would be, a national sales tax? I think it’s kind of funny that one of the biggest local proponents of it, Neil Boortz, mocks people who talk about “fairness” in other aspects of life (particularly when it’s the “Fairness Doctrine” being discussed), but he has no problem with the word being used for deceptive marketing purposes in this case.
Have you read the book(s)?
+1
Because those who make less have to spend a bigger percentage of what they make. It is a regressive tax.
___________________________________
You have no idea what you are talking about. You clearly know nothing about the FairTax.
It is fair mostly because you have a choice every time you buy something if you want to pay tax. True, it can be regressive depending on how it is implemented but they are talking about a system to protect the poor (who do, by the way, get the majority of the services). I doubt it has a chance if it doesn’t cover this point. Finally, it encourages saving which is something we are in dire need of so that we have people entering retirement with some of their own money and don’t plan on relying on the rest of us to care for them. The term National Sales Tax is just as good.
The best point is that you eliminate the IRS and a load of corporate bureaucracy, tax planners and tax preparers – some of which are the brightest minds among us who could then be deployed to make something useful. Sounds fair to me.
She’s proud of defeating the trauma tax, but Fayette isn’t exactly in the middle of nowhere, and would be less affected by the “golden hour” after an accident. I guess the mentality is, “Yeah, we’ll sure those rural people they better not get involved in a life threatening car accident, we’ll teach them a lesson!”
Take issue all day long with social programs if that’s your deal, but everyone relies on roads, transportation, and infrastructure.
There are legitimate gripes with the system of collection, and I completely understand their perspective on taxes, but their attitude is so completely self-centered and belligerent it’s impossible to get past.
Though I’m skeptical about its chances of passage (especially if the vote isn’t moved to the general election day), I do think there is going to be a tremendous push by the business community to garner support for it.
Unless the legislature changes it in the next session, the law that established this whole convoluted process requires the vote to be coincident with the primary.
And you are correct, there will be a major push by the business community, headed by the Metro Atlanta Chamber. They have hired a consultant and committed multi-million $$ to the effort.
Here’s an AJC story about GDOT’s release of the “unconstrained” list. If a project is not on this list, it won’t make the cut to the final list that the roundtable comes up with. In the whole metro area, there are about $29B worth of projects that will have to be culled to about $8B.
http://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-politics-elections/state-adds-to-cuts-963995.html