Voters Consistently Reject Tax Increases at the Ballot Box
Consultants often try to convince elected officials that Americans don’t mind tax increases. Such consultants cite questionable opinion polls. But the most accurate polls are elections, and the ballot box results show Americans consistently reject tax increases.
A review by Americans for Tax Reform of the past three election cycles -- 2018, 2016, and 2014 -- shows that voters nationwide have rejected every major tax increase ballot measure:
2018
Arizona voters prevent new tax hikes - Proposition 126, which prohibited the state and local governments from enacting new taxes or increasing tax rates on services performed in Arizona, was passed with 64% voting YES.
Washington state carbon tax defeated - For the second time in a row, blue state Washington voters firmly rejected a carbon tax. Initiative 1631 was defeated by a 56.3% - 43.7% margin.
Missouri voters reject gas tax hike - Proposition D, which would have hiked Missouri's gas tax by more than 58%, raising the rate from 17 to 27 cents per gallon, was rejected by more than 54% of Missouri voters.
Utah voters reject gas tax hike - Utah voters sent a clear message to state lawmakers they do not want them to even think about raising the state gas tax. Non-binding Question 1 asked Utah voters if they wanted to advise the legislature to raise the state gas tax. Utah voters rejected the question with more than 65% voting NO.
Colorado voters reject massive personal and corporate income tax hikes - Amendment 73, which would've imposed personal and corporate income tax hikes, was rejected by voters, with 56% voting NO.
Colorado voters defeat sales tax increase - Proposition 110, which would've raised the state sales tax, was rejected by voters, with 60% voting NO.
Maine voters reject payroll tax hike - Question 1, which would’ve enacted a payroll tax and non-wage income tax to fund a Universal Home Care Program was rejected by voters, with 62% voting NO.
South Dakota voters reject tobacco tax hike - Initiated Measure 25, which would have increased the excise tax on cigarettes, was rejected by voters, with 55% voting NO.
2016
Washington state rejects carbon tax - Initiative 732 got rejected by a 58.5% to 41.5% margin. The initiative would have phased in a $25 per metric ton carbon tax over a period of two years. After reaching $25 it would have continued to increase by 3.5% plus the rate of inflation until the tax reached $100.
Colorado rejects payroll and income tax hike – By a 79.9% to 20.3% margin, Colorado voters rejected Amendment 69, a massive tax increase that would have imposed a 10% payroll tax and a 10% tax on all non-payroll income.
Oklahoma rejects 22 percent sales tax hike - State Question 779 got rejected by a 59.4% to 40.6% margin. State Question 779 would have hiked the sales tax by 22% (from 4.5% to 5.5%).
Oregon rejects business tax increase - By a 59.2% to 40.8% margin, Oregon voters rejected Measure 97 which would have implemented a 2.5% gross receipts tax on all corporate sales exceeding $25 million.
Colorado rejects tobacco tax increase - By a 53.7% to 46.3% margin, Colorado voters rejected Amendment 72, which would have increased the tobacco excise tax by $1.75 per 20-pack. Additionally, all other tobacco products excluding e-cigarettes would have been taxed at 62 percent of the manufacturer's list price.
Missouri rejects 23-cent cigarette tax increase - Missouri voters rejected Proposition A by 55.3% to 44.7% margin, which would have increased the cigarette tax by 23 cents per pack by 2021. Further, all other tobacco products would have been subject to an additional 5% sales tax.
Missouri rejects 60-cent cigarette tax increase - By a 59.2% to 40.8% margin, Missouri voters rejected Constitutional Amendment 3, which would have raised the cigarette tax by 60 cents per 20-pack in 15 cent increments by 2020. Additionally, an 'equity assessment fee' of 67 cents per pack would have been imposed on manufacturers who did not sign the Tobacco Masters Settlement Agreement (TMSA) of 1998.
North Dakota rejects Tobacco Tax Increase - North Dakota voters rejected Initiated Statutory Measure 4 by 61.7% to 38.3%, which would have increased the state tobacco tax from 44 cents to $2.20 per pack. Also, it would have raised the tax on other tobacco products (including liquid nicotine and electronic vapor products) from 28 percent to 56 percent of the wholesale purchase price.
2014
Massachusetts voters eliminate a vote-less backdoor tax hike on taxpayers - Question 1: In deep blue Massachusetts, voters repealed a law that indexed the state gas tax to inflation by 53% – 47%
Nevada voters defeat a two percent “margin tax” on businesses - Question 3: In Harry Reid’s home state, voters defeated a proposed two percent "margin tax" on businesses by 80% – 20% . The revenue from the new tax was to be granted to the state’s public school districts.
Tennessee voters enshrined a prohibition on state and local income taxes in the state constitution by a vote of 66% – 34%
Georgia voters passed a state constitution cap on the state income tax - Amendment A: Voters enshrined in the state constitution a cap on the state income tax at the effective rate on January 1, 2015 by a vote of 74% – 26% . Therefore the state legislature is now constitutionally prohibited from increasing the state income tax rate any higher.
Photo Credit: Joe the Goat Farmer
ATR Opposes Congressional Effort to Keep Adults Smoking Cigarettes
Earlier today, Americans for Tax Reform sent a letter to the United States Senate in opposition to the Resources to Prevent Youth Vaping Act, legislation that takes aim at e-cigarette manufacturers and the lifesaving products they produce. Should the proposal be enacted, vape manufacturers would be required to pay user fees to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that would be used to increase awareness of the “danger” of e-cigarettes, even though vaping has been conclusively shown to be 95% less harmful than traditional cigarettes.
While it is obvious that underage persons should not be consuming e-cigarettes, this bill would lead to an increase cigarette consumption, harming the health of American youths more than e-cigarettes ever could.
Tim Andrews, ATR’s Director of Consumer Issues, wrote: “It would be incredibly cruel to force e-cigarette manufacturers to fund FDA misinformation. The products that these businesses creating are saving lives every day. Further, e-cigarettes have the potential to decrease socioeconomic disparities in healthcare by aiding disadvantaged populations with smoking cessation.”
“Cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States and is responsible for roughly 480,000 deaths every year. Public policy, particularly when related to public health, must take into account all available data and evidence. This proposal fails to consider the lifesaving benefits of e-cigarettes. It will keep adults smoking, and dying from, traditional cigarettes.”
Andrews concluded: “E-cigarettes are not tobacco products. There is no reason for Congress to impose rules and regulations that treat them as such. Vaping products are the most effective method of helping smokers quit the deadly habit of cigarettes and there is zero evidence demonstrating e-cigarettes are a pathway to cigarette smoking. Rather, more than 60 public health organizations agree that e-cigarettes are a pathway away from smoking. In the interests of public health, we call upon you to accept the science and vote against the Resources to Prevent Youth Vaping Act. Millions of lives quite literally depend upon it.”
The full letter can be read here.
Photo Credit: David Maiolo
More from Americans for Tax Reform
Members of Congress Promote Cigarette Smoking with Push to Vilify Vape Businesses
On July 23, 2021, a group of eight bipartisan legislators in the United States Senate and House of Representatives introduced the Resources to Prevent Youth Vaping Act, legislation that would force e-cigarette manufacturers to fund an anti-vaping misinformation campaign with fees paid to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
A press release that accompanied the introduction of the bill contained numerous myths, misconceptions, and downright lies about e-cigarettes and the vaping industry. It is highly disappointing that the six U.S. Senators and two Representatives sponsoring the legislation have chosen to engage in fear-based deception, rather than accepting the science on e-cigarettes.
However, the problem is larger than just a few misguided lawmakers. More than half of adult cigarette smokers, the people for who vaping was invented, believe that e-cigarettes are at least as harmful, or more harmful, than traditional cigarettes. This could not be farther from the truth, as vaping has been scientifically shown to be 95% safer than cigarettes.
Legislation like the Resources to Prevent Youth Vaping Act exacerbates this problem and will keep more adults smoking, and dying from, traditional cigarettes. As such, it is crucial to communicate the truth about vaping. Let’s examine some of the allegations from the press release.
Claim: “Electronic nicotine devices should be subject to the same user fees that the FDA assesses on the manufacturers and importers of cigarettes and other forms of tobacco” - Senator Mitt Romney (R-Utah)
Truth: E-cigarettes and traditional cigarettes share very few characteristics. E-cigarettes heat a nicotine-containing liquid to create a vapor. Cigarettes have a combustion process which creates tar and other harmful chemicals that cause cancer, heart disease, and other serious illnesses. Vaping does not have a combustion process, allowing users to consume nicotine while decreasing the harm they are subjected to. Nicotine is not a carcinogen. Rather, it is a highly addictive but relatively benign substance, much like caffeine, that does not cause short or long-term harm when separated from the dangerous chemicals in cigarettes.
Claim: “We know the numbers – more and more teens and high school students are using vapor products.” - Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Truth: Clearly, Senator Murkowski does not know the numbers. According to data from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, the number of underage persons who had vaped nicotine in the past 30 days decreased by 27.2% between 2019 and 2020. National Youth Tobacco Survey Data, the most recent data available, shows that past-30-day youth vaping rates are lower today than they were in 2015.
Claim: “Big Vape has hooked nearly four million kids on e-cigarettes, creating a vaping epidemic that is threatening our next generation with a lifetime of nicotine addiction and disease.” - Senator Richard Durbin (D-Ill.)
Truth: Senator Durbin’s attempt to demonize vaping manufacturers by branding them “Big Vape” is unequivocally false. The Small Business Administration, a government agency that provides support to American entrepreneurs, has correctly noted that “small businesses created the (vaping) industry and have been drivers of the industry’s major innovations”.
More Truth: There are not four million kids “hooked” on e-cigarettes. Senator Durbin would like you to believe that a teenager who vapes once or twice a month is addicted to vaping but that, of course, is not true. Approximately 3% of teenagers are daily users of vape products and 67% of daily users previously smoked cigarettes. Obviously, no teenagers should be using vaping products but teenage cigarette smokers who switch to vaping are reducing the harm they are exposed to. Senator Durbin would prefer they smoke.
Even More Truth: There is zero evidence that vaping causes disease. Shockingly, Senator Durbin is wrong once again.
The bill was introduced by U.S. Senators Mitt Romney (R-Utah), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), and U.S. Representatives Cheri Bustos (IL-17), and Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-01).
Shortly after the bill was introduced, Americans for Tax Reform sent a letter to members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, urging them to oppose this disastrous proposal. That letter can be read here.
Photo Credit: Piqsels
More from Americans for Tax Reform
Senate GOP Unified Against Biden’s Second Death Tax
Recently, all 50 Senate Republicans sent a letter urging President Biden not to repeal stepped-up in basis, raising taxes on family-owned businesses. If step-up in basis is repealed, family-owned businesses would suffer much higher tax liabilities, hurting the businesses themselves and those they employ.
The letter was signed by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.Dak.), Senator Finance Committee Ranking Member Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) and Senators John Boozman (R-Ariz.), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Steve Daines (R-Mont.). Biden proposed removing the stepped-up in basis provision in his budget along with trillions of dollars of other tax increases.
Stepped-up in basis is a provision that allows decedents to pass down their family businesses by protecting it against double taxation. This is done by “stepping up” the purchase price of the asset to the current market value. Repealing stepped-up in basis means that the unrealized gains passed down to the heirs of a family business would be taxed. This tax would be separate from, and in addition to, the existing 40 percent death tax.
Not only would this be a tax increase, but it would also increase tax complexity. If a taxpayer is unable to determine how much they bought the asset for, they may need to pay the 43.4 percent capital gains tax on the entire value of that asset, many of which could have been bought decades ago.
The letter outlines the many problems with President Biden’s proposal to remove stepped-up in basis, including job-loss and increased tax liability.
A study by E&Y that found by removing stepped-up in basis, the federal government would eliminate 80,000 jobs each year over the next decade.
Another study from Texas A&M Agricultural and Food Policy Center found that 98 percent of the farms in its 30-state database would be impacted with a median increase in tax liabilities of $726,104 per farm.
Many asset-rich, cash-poor businesses would have to liquidate their assets or lose their entire business if the Biden Administration imposes this second death tax. In a Ways and Means Committee Hearing, multiple American business owners explained how removing stepped-up in basis would harm their businesses and force their heirs to pay a tax that would force them to liquidate their assets.
Senate Republicans should be applauded for standing up for family-owned business and standing against the massive tax increases that Biden is proposing.
Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore
ATR Leads Coalition in Support of Rep. Ronny Jackson's Amendment to Prohibit IRS Political Targeting
ATR today led a coalition of conservative organizations in support of Congressman Ronny Jackson’s (R-Texas) amendment to prohibit the IRS from targeting individuals or organizations based on their political affiliation. This amendment has been ruled in order for Division D of H.R. 4502, the appropriations minibus which includes additional funding for the IRS.
The Internal Revenue Service has a long history of political discrimination. Oftentimes, those responsible are not punished nor held accountable. At the very least, this spending package should implement important safeguards to protect the American people from the IRS’s abuse.
Click here to view the letter or read below.
July 29, 2021
Dear Member of Congress:
We write in support of Congressman Ronny Jackson’s amendment to prohibit the IRS from targeting individuals or organizations based on their political affiliation. This amendment has been ruled in order for Division D of H.R. 4502, the appropriations minibus being considered by the House this week.
The IRS has a history of targeting conservative organizations and individuals. Most notably, under the Obama administration, the IRS targeted conservative groups applying for nonprofit status ahead of the 2012 election. Under the lead of IRS Exempt Organizations Director Lois Lerner, the agency screened the applications of conservative organizations based on their names and policy positions, subjecting those applications to heightened scrutiny and inordinate delays, and demanding information that was unnecessary for the determination of their tax-exempt statuses.
A 2017 Senate Finance Committee report found that just one conservative nonprofit organization received tax-exempt status over a three-year period between 2009 and 2012. No IRS employee was disciplined for this scandal. The Obama Department of Justice closed its investigation with no charges, and Lerner was allowed to retire with a pension and a bonus.
Rep. Jackson’s amendment would prohibit future targeting of individuals or organizations based on their political affiliation. We urge all members of Congress to support and vote for this important, commonsense proposal.
Sincerely,
Americans for Tax Reform
American Commitment
Institute for Liberty
Club for Growth
Center for a Free Economy
Less Government
Center for Freedom and Prosperity
Council for Citizens Against Government Waste
National Taxpayers Union
Texas Public Policy Foundation
60 Plus Association
Frontiers of Freedom
Photo Credit: U.S. House of Representatives
ATR Joins Coalition Letter Opposing Restrictive Price Controls
Today, ATR joined a coalition of conservative organizations in opposition to the implementation of a federally mandated cap on interest rates. The letter was addressed to the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs to express the negative consequences this unnecessary government regulation will have on consumer loan products.
Senate Democrats are expected to announce the reintroduction of the misguided Veterans and Consumers Fair Credit Act. This bill, if enacted, will make it harder for Americans to access short-term loans. The interest rate cap in the bill would restrict access to lending because lenders will not be able to properly account for risk. This bad policy would also potentially hamper credit card rewards programs.
Congress should work to enact legislation that will enable greater consumer access to credit, not limit consumer credit options.
The full letter can be found here.
Photo Credit: kuhnmi
ATR Leads Coalition Letter Opposed to Short Sale Transparency and Market Fairness Act
ATR today led a coalition of conservative organizations in opposition to H.R. 4618, the Short Sale Transparency and Market Fairness Act. This legislation will impose unprecedented and unnecessary government overreach in financial markets that would harm retirees and the broader U.S. economy.
If enacted into law, H.R. 4618 would expand reporting mandates under Section 13(f) of the Securities Exchange Act to require monthly reporting of investments held by investors and asset managers, including derivatives, security-based swaps, and other financial instruments that provide immense value to millions of Americans, including through public pensions and charities. The bill would sharply increase the frequency of filings from quarterly to monthly, while reducing the time to prepare filings from 45 days after the end of a quarter to 10 days after the end of the month.
Instead of meddling in the markets with unprecedented, unnecessary, and harmful mandates, Congress should work to reduce regulatory burdens on investors, retirees, and pensioners.
The full letter can be found here.
Report: U.S. Energy Sector Supports Millions of Jobs That Would Be Threatened By Dem Tax Hikes
The oil and gas industry is a driver of every other sector in the U.S. economy and supports millions of high-paying American jobs, according to a new study prepared by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). This study shows why Americans should be alarmed at efforts by President Biden and Congressional Democrats to raise taxes on oil and gas businesses through the repeal of various tax provisions, including the deduction for intangible drilling costs (IDCs).
IDCs allow independent producers to immediately deduct business expenses related to drilling such as labor, site preparation, repairs, and survey work. The deduction for IDCs is consistent with immediate expensing offered to all business investments.
If this provision is repealed, it could have significant, negative economic impacts in several states. As the study notes, the onshore upstream oil and gas sector, which relies on the deduction for IDCs, contributes 3.2 million jobs across the economy, including 690,500 direct jobs.
In certain states, the economy depends heavily on these onshore projects, including in West Virginia, Texas, and Oklahoma:
- In West Virginia, there are 39,000 onshore supported jobs, accounting for 4.5% of the state’s total employment.
- In Louisiana, there are 153,000 onshore supported jobs, accounting for 7.0% of the state’s total employment.
- In New Mexico, there are 72,000 onshore supported jobs, accounting for 6.5% of the state’s total employment.
- In North Dakota, there are 58,000 onshore supported jobs, accounting for 10.0% of the state’s total employment.
- In Oklahoma, there are 257,000 onshore supported jobs, accounting for 11.0% of the state’s total employment.
- In Texas, there are 1,549,000 onshore supported jobs, accounting for 8.6% of the state’s total employment.
Investing in these drilling projects is risky. After all, drilling a well does not guarantee that oil and gas will be found. IDCs enable American producers to continue exploring even after unsuccessful endeavors. As Energy Tax Facts explains, “Removing this 100-year-old tax provision from the code would not only strip away roughly 25 percent of the capital available for independent producers to continue looking for new oil and natural gas, but also diminish the many economic benefits created by those activities.”
If the IDC deduction is eliminated, as President Biden has proposed, many of the jobs the PwC study highlights could be eliminated. As noted in a 2014 study by Wood Mackenzie consulting, repealing the immediate deduction for IDCs would cost 265,000 jobs in the long-term.
More broadly, the PwC study notes that the oil and gas industry supports 11.3 million total American jobs across all 50 states and accounts for nearly 8 percent of GDP.
These jobs are high paying. In 2017, these jobs paid an average salary of $102,000, 85 percent higher than the average private sector salary.
Democrat members of Congress whose districts rely on this industry should stand with their workers and reject efforts to raise taxes on American manufacturing. For example, Democratic members of Congress from Texas represent numerous districts where the oil and gas industry employs thousands of Americans:
- Texas District 7: Rep. Lizzie Fletcher -
- 43,760 Direct Jobs, 152,080 Total Jobs, 19.8% of Jobs in District
- 33.3% of District’s Total Labor Income
- Texas District 15: Rep. Vicente Gonzalez –
- 11,840 Direct Jobs, 47,860 Total Jobs, 11.6% of Jobs in District
- 14.9% of District’s Total Labor Income
- Texas District 28: Rep. Henry Cuellar -
- 15,020 Direct Jobs, 48,660 Total Jobs, 13.8% of Jobs in District
- 20.0% of District’s Total Labor Income
- Texas District 29: Rep. Sylvia Garcia -
- 11,320 Direct Jobs, 53,760 Total Jobs, 15.3% of Jobs in District
- 24.6% of District’s Total Labor Income
- Texas District 32: Rep. Colin Allred –
- 19,620 Direct Jobs, 99,110 Total Jobs, 14.1% of Jobs in District
- 24.7% of District’s Total Labor Income
- Texas District 33: Rep. Marc Veasey –
- 7,000 Direct Jobs, 44,720 Total Jobs, 8.3% of Jobs in District
- 10.1% of District’s Total Labor Income
For decades, progressive Democrats and activist groups have undertaken a coordinated attack on reliable sources of energy produced in the United States, including oil and natural gas, through schemes like cap-and-trade, bans on hydraulic fracturing, the Green New Deal, and tax hikes all aimed at “keeping it in the ground.” These kinds of schemes are a direct threat to millions of high-paying manufacturing jobs, which the Left has claimed to be a champion of.
Photo Credit: Lorie Shaull
Seven-Bill Spending Package Packed Full of Wasteful Spending
The House of Representatives will this week vote on the “bloatedbus” appropriations bills, H.R. 4502, which provides appropriations for 7 of the 12 agencies covered by the annual appropriation acts: Labor/HHS/Education, Agriculture, Energy/Water, Financial Services, Interior/Environment, Military Construction/VA, and Transportation/HUD.
This bill is packed full of wasteful spending and should be rejected by members of Congress.
The bill promises “thousands” of new jobs through lavish spending on “clean energy,” provides funding to the corrupt and dysfunctional IRS, creates a Civilian Climate Corp, expands federal involvement in housing, and includes millions of dollars’ worth of earmarks.
Ideally, each appropriation for an agency would be a separate bill, allowing for more scrutiny and helping ensure lawmakers’ ability to know exactly what they’re voting on. Instead, funding for agencies is often grouped together, creating “must-pass” legislation with unexplored, wasteful spending.
Within this high-price bill are pieces of the leftist agenda that, perhaps, are too unpopular to pass through higher profile legislation.
Below are just a few wasteful, harmful parts of this appropriations package.
This bill would spend exorbitantly on projects to combat climate change, with a false promise of “thousands of jobs.”
H.R. 4502 would spend billions of dollars on “creating good-paying American jobs through investments in renewable energy.”
Investments and subsidies for “clean energy” are not new. In fact, for over 30 years the government has been holding these industries afloat, shielding them from the reality of the marketplace. This, ultimately, could actually be a reason why the alternative energy industry still has not been able to be competitive with fossil fuels. This industry is dependent on the government, and therefore is comfortable with slow, costly “progress.” Meanwhile, taxpayers foot the bill.
Further, the promise of American jobs through renewable energy has also fallen flat. Many of the “clean energy” job number estimates are inflated to include “jobs tied to energy efficiency,” like “positions in the heating, ventilation and air conditioning industry, as well as fields like advanced building materials and efficient lighting.” This ridiculous category makes up 77 percent of “clean energy jobs” in the “Clean Energy Trust and Environmental Entrepreneurs” estimate.
In general, Americans should be skeptical of any claim that the government can create jobs.
If President Biden were really concerned with high-paying manufacturing jobs, he’d be less bent on destroying jobs in the oil and gas industry, which employs millions of Americans and pays a salary 85 percent higher than the average private sector salary.
This bill would increase funding for the IRS.
The IRS has a long history of dysfunction, corruption, and lackluster privacy protection. Before funneling money into a broke agency, Congress should reform the IRS.
Specifically, the bill includes $13.6 billion for the IRS, an increase of $1.7 billion above the FY 2021 enacted level. About $5.8 billion of this funding will go towards enforcement, ultimately fueling the IRS to unleash its wrath on the American people.
Contrary to Democrats’ claims, new IRS enforcement will fall on American families and small businesses, not the “rich.” The wealthy and large corporations already have armies of lawyers and accountants that ensure they legally take advantage of the plethora of credits and deductions offered by the tax code. In this way, the IRS will revert back to collecting money from easier targets: small businesses and middle-class families.
The bill creates a Civilian Climate Corps.
The creation of a uniformed Civilian Climate Corps is a make-work program for progressive climate activists who will be tasked with the vague mission of “advancing environmental justice."
According to an Appropriations Committee report on the environmental funding sections of the bill, “The Departments of Interior and Agriculture are directed to provide a written plan, within 90 days of enactment of this Act, for how CCC funding will be used, along with a breakdown of funding and a list of existing programs or partners.”
Though the minibus is scant on details, progressive proposals for the CCC offer a glimpse of the waste that is likely to occur. The 21st Century Civilian Conservation Corps Act introduced by House Democrats calls for at least 80 percent of CCC funding to be used for employment, leaving less than 20 percent to be used for actual conservation and climate-related efforts. Additionally, Democrats want CCC employees to receive taxpayer-funding housing, clothing, food, and transportation—all in addition to their actual salaries.
This bill significantly expands the federal government’s involvement in affordable and public housing.
Instead of deregulating and empowering the housing market to drive down costs, this bill seeks to distort housing markets through more spending on “affordable” and public housing.
Specifically, this bill includes funding for more than 125,000 new housing vouchers and the creation of 4,000 new housing units. The bill would also fund public housing by $8.64 billion.
This “Housing First” approach by Democrats fundamentally ignores many of the causes of high housing prices and could contribute to the problem itself. In fact, regulations, zoning policy, and market distortions are some of the driving factors in higher rent prices.
This bill contains hundreds of millions of dollars in earmarks.
Earmarks are provisions inserted by members of Congress into large spending bills directing funds to be spent on specific projects or programs. Before their ban, funds would often be directed towards specific congressional districts, pressuring members into voting for legislation they wouldn't normally vote for. Congressional Democrats recently brought earmarks back, restoring this currency of corruption.
This practice facilitates the passage of unpopular, costly legislation filled with giveaways to lawmakers. It pushes members of Congress to vote not on the merits of the legislation, but because a small portion of the legislation would benefit their home district, a donor of theirs, or even themselves.
This spending package contains a lot of these earmarks, especially for colleges and universities. Specifically, $272 million in funding would go towards pet projects at 228 colleges and universities.
Lawmakers should reject this “bloatedbus” and instead demand responsible and reasonable federal spending.
Photo Credit: John Brighenti
Fighting Governor Wolf’s Unilateral Cap-and-Trade Tax on Pennsylvania Families
Boasting 20% of the country’s total natural gas production, gas drives Pennsylvania’s economy. It has also driven the state’s emissions down as much as states in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).
But thanks to unilateral action by Governor Tom Wolf to join the destructive cap and trade program, the state will risk losing its competitive advantage in natural gas production while imposing a $3.5 billion carbon tax on its residents.
The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) requires power plants to pay a fee to the state for each ton of carbon dioxide they emit, thereby purchasing a carbon “allowance” from the state. Fuels like coal will suffer disproportionately under the program with their above-average carbon emissions. Over the years, the number of allowances will shrink, leading to an increase in prices for the allowances that Governor Wolf hopes will motivate companies to close fossil fuel plants and eventually transition to wind and solar.
With these stringent new levies on fuel production, electric consumers and workers in Pennsylvania will bear the brunt of the costs. According to the Power PA Jobs Alliance, as more than two-thirds of the state’s power generation is made less competitive or uncompetitive by the program, Pennsylvania will lose more than 8,000 jobs and $2.87 billion in total economic impact. That includes a loss of $539 million in employee compensation and, with resultant lower wages and a weaker economy, a loss of $34.2 million in state and local taxes.
Electric bills will inevitably rise for Pennsylvania families as companies try to recoup billions in new taxes. Since 2009, the average monthly electric bill in Pennsylvania has increased by more than 17%, from around $98 to $115 in 2019. But with an estimated $3.5 billion in carbon tax collection over the next 9 years, a Penn State analysis expects the average household electric bill to rise by $43 every year. That is a burden which many low-income Pennsylvania residents will struggle to afford.
The Republican-controlled legislature is strongly against participation in RGGI, with several Democrats joining them in their opposition. By signing off on the program without the consent of the legislature, Governor Wolf ignores a critical component of the Pennsylvania constitution: that only the Pennsylvania General Assembly may levy new taxes. In fact, every other state that joined RGGI did so with the approval of their respective state legislatures.
Moreover, Pennsylvania law requires physical, public hearings in regions impacted by new regulations like RGGI. Yet just 10 hearings, all of them virtual, were hurriedly scheduled over a five-day period in December. Not one was held in one of the many communities that will suffer from the impending power plant closures as a result of joining RGGI.
Natural gas and fossil fuel production more broadly have been an economic boon to Pennsylvania. But carbon emissions in the state have also dropped dramatically as union workers built more than a dozen major natural gas extraction plants. Over the last 10 years, more than $14 billion has been invested in new production facilities. Increased rates of extraction of natural gas – by far the cleanest fossil fuel – has led to a 30% reduction in carbon emissions in Pennsylvania, in addition to making the state the number 2 natural gas producer in the country. It’s no surprise that more than a dozen labor unions, including the Pennsylvania AFL-CIO, oppose joining the RGGI.
By unilaterally joining the RGGI, Governor Wolf is overstepping his authority and imposing a repressive new tax burden on Pennsylvania families. Instead of having any significant impact on climate change, this move will simply encourage electricity generation, jobs, and capital investment to shift to unregulated, neighboring states like West Virginia and Ohio. In the meantime, Pennsylvanians will struggle with increasingly higher bills and lower growth.
Photo Credit: ReAl
More from Americans for Tax Reform
An Open Internet is Critical for the Cuban People
The communist regime of Cuba is using their control of the internet to stifle dissent and contain protests. The United States has the technology and resources to circumvent this censorship. The Biden Administration says it will sanction Cuba. A condition of lifting any sanctions must include an open internet for the Cuban People.
The internet in Cuba is provided by ETECSA, a state-owned enterprise. They have limited access during these recent protests. Encrypted messaging services like WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram were being blocked from citizens accessing it. At one point there was a total blackout of internet and telephone service.
This an insidious pattern of internet control is right out of Chinese playbook, where their far-reaching “Great Firewall” has restricted the information that the Chinese people can see for decades. In fact, it might be likely that China is directly supporting Cuba’s censorship effort.
Cuban internet is built on equipment sold by Huawei, ZTE, and TP-Link. This is equipment that has since been banned in the United States. It has also been observed that ETECSA’s login portal was written by Chinese developers as well as utilizing Chinese written web filtering software.
This command and control of the internet is antithetical to the American principles of collaboration and the free exchange of ideas that built the internet. Last week Florida governor Ron DeSantis, Senator Marco Rubio and FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr all called on President Biden to greenlight American efforts to ensure internet connectivity in Cuba.
Helping Cubans access the internet isn’s some abstract principle. There are simple solutions to be done here. Right now 1.4 million Cubans are using a U.S. created software called “Psiphon” that uses virtual private networks (VPNs) and HTTP proxy technology to circumvent government censorship measures.
The U.S. can also get the internet to Cuba using balloons (yes, balloons) to send mobile cell sites up into the atmosphere. These solar-powered sites can serve thousands of users and last up to 5 months at a time. Internet could also be provided to Cubans via satellite as Senator Marco Rubio points out in his open letter to President Biden.
This is an issue the administration cannot faulter on. Protestors and journalists have been arrested or attacked. “This isn’t about politics is about saving lives” musician Pitbull said. Allowing this censorship and preventing these acts from being shown to the world deprives the Cuban people the ability to present evidence of the abuse they face from their government.
American enterprises are quite capable of delivering internet to Cuba, the lukewarm response the Whitehouse has given so far needs to turn into an action. “This is a moment in history we cannot let pass. Increasingly, dictators around the world are shutting down internet connections when people are yearning for freedom” said FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr.
As we work in our own country to give everyone access to the internet, this is an opportunity to show how much we value connectivity and demonstrate to the world that the internet will not be a tool of control to be used by authoritarian governments around the world.
Photo Credit: Yerson Olivares
More from Americans for Tax Reform
State news
Top Stories
