I just saw a Tweet by Assemblyman Scott Hammond (R-13) where he invited me to take a look at his new campaign website. Since Assemblyman Hammond is my assemblyman, I did go to take a look and I found it interesting. Right on the front page is an article titled "Clearing Up The Lies". You see, Assemblyman Hammond was recently on Face-To-Face with John Ralston in a debate with his Senate 18 opponent, Richard McArthur.
Ralston showed a video clip where then candidate Hammond stated, “I want people to look at me and if I tell them I won’t raise your taxes I want them to understand that I won’t. You know, I walk up to my commitments and I keep them. When I tell you face-to-face that I’m not going to raise taxes, I don’t think I have to sign a piece of paper to prove it.” (More info HERE)
In the 2011 session, Assemblyman Hammond did vote to extend the $620 Million in taxes which were set to expire or "sunset". The interesting thing about this is, on his website, Hammond states "The extension of the sunsets did not increase taxes."
Although the extension of these sunset taxes technically did not increase taxes, the point is that thanks to Assemblyman Hammond we are currently paying $620 Million more in taxes today than we are supposed to be paying!
If today we are paying $620 MILLION in taxes that we were promised we would not be paying today, how is that not a tax increase? Are you as tired of the "Doublespeak" as I?
Hammond goes on to say in his website "No one person, business or family is paying more in taxes now than they did before I took office."
Exactly.
We're not paying any MORE but the fact is WE SHOULD BE PAYING LESS!
I don't know about you but if our elected officials promised us a "temporary" tax that would expire in two years, shouldn't they keep their word and let the taxes expire when they were promised?
Assemblyman Hammond is currently running for the State Senate 18 seat against Assemblyman Richard McArthur. Hammond has already stated publicy that he supports making the $620 Million in "temporary" tax PERMANENT.
I think the taxpayers in Nevada would rather see these "temporary" taxes disappear as promised and have their elected officials keep their word, for a change.
I think you can see why you must tell the candidates that "If you don't sign the Tax Pledge, you don't get my vote!"
As a candidate for Assembly 13, I have signed the Tax Pledge and am the only Assembly 13 candidate to do so.
Assemblyman Richard McArthur is running for the Senate 18 seat, has one of the most conservative voting records in the Assembly and has also signed the Tax Pledge. He is also the only candidate for Senate 18 to do so.
The choice is clear, if you don't want your taxes raised and would want the "temporary" taxes to be temporary, tell the candidates, "If you don't sign the Tax Pledge, you don't get my vote!"
It's been all over the news, Facebook, Twitter, blogs today that because the Teachers Union refused to make concessions that the Clark County School District is going to fire 1,015 teachers. Pink slips comming soon.
I find this very interesting as no Administrators will be fired. It seems their Union made concessions so they will stay. This is where I get confused.
You see, there are approximately 18,000 teachers in CCSD. Firing 1,015 of them is a 5.65% cut in the number of teachers.
There are approximately 15,000 Administrators in CCSD. Yes, there is almost one Administrator for every teacher.
Since we will now have 5.65% fewer teachers, shouldn't we also have 5.65% fewer Administrators? Common sense would say yes.
5.65% fewer Administrators would mean firing 848 Administrators. After all, with 1,015 less teachers who are these 848 Adminstrators going to administrate?
Again, common sense would tell us that with 5.65% fewer teachers we could do without 5.65% fewer Administrators.
How much would CCSD save by also eliminating 848 Administrators? Let's do the math. An Administrator makes around $80.000 per year. Multiply that by 848 and you get $67,840.000. Yep, CCDS could save almost $68 MILLION per year by getting rid of 848 Administrators.
CCSD would save even more as Administrators do get a car, gas, cell phone and other perks. Think of how many more MILLIONS the TAXPAYERS could save by eliminating these useless positions.
Again, this is common sense to you and I, the taxpayer, but remember we're talking about CCSD and Unions. Common sense doesn't apply here.
Since the Administrators have their own Union, these 848 now useless positions will continue. CCSD will continue to cry that they don't have enough money and that taxes must be raised.
I say "Hogwash!"
For every teacher let go there MUST be at least one, if not two, Administrators also let go. We don't need them anymore! They no longer have anyone to administrate!
Who are the forgotten ones in this whole mess? The students, of course. In all of this I have not heard of one thing that will improve Nevada's education performance. This has been all about money. Money for the Union Bosses. Money for the top-heavy Administration.
The solution to improve the education is Nevada is simple. Fund the classroom and defund the Administration. Give parents choice in their childs education. This does mean more Charter Schools, more Empowerment Schools and Vouchers.
It's time we cleaned up the education system from the top down, not the bottom up.
The Nevada Constitution is clear, it is unconstitutional to have a State income tax. Yet, we do have an income tax in Nevada. It's called a payroll tax. This is a tax that a business must pay based on the money, or income, they pay their employees. The more employees a business has, the more they have to pay. As this tax is based on the income of employees, it is an income tax. As Nevada continues to go through tough economic times, we need to be talking about ways for businesses to expand and hire employees. Eliminating the payroll tax is a huge step in the right direction. We need to reward businesses for creating jobs. Many of our current Assemblymen and State Senators are not only in favor of NOT eliminating this anti-hiring payroll tax, the want to increase it. This is why I am running for Nevada Assembly in District 13. It's time to bring some common-sense back to Nevada. It's time to eliminate job killing taxes, rules and regulations which do nothing except suck the money from hardworking small busines owners and prevents jobs from being created. Support me and my campaign. Support and vote for Leonard Foster Nevada Assembly District 13!
Back in the 2009 Session, our Legislature raised taxes by $620 Million. These taxes were "temporary" and set to expire, or sunset, in 2011. However, in the 2011 Session, our elected representatives voted to extend these "temporary" taxes for another two years, again promising they would disappear in two years. Just last week, Governor Sandoval publicly stated that the new budget for the 2013 session would include keeping the full $620 Million. I guess this is how "temporary" taxes become permanent. The reasoning for not allowing the $620 Million to sunset , Jeff Mohlenkamp, the governor’s budget czar, stated that demand for “safety net (welfare) services” has supposedly “increased dramatically and continued high demand is expected.” So, according to Mr. Mohlenkamp, the $620 million is to go to essential services. Or is it? Mr. Mohlenkamp goes on to say, “All executive branch agencies must limit their agency request budget submissions to amounts listed in the attached General Fund target sheet. … These General Fund targets are…adjusted for pay-related reductions that sunset effective July 1, 2013. These reductions that have been added back include furloughs, pay rate reductions, suspension of merit salary increases, and suspension of longevity pay.” Did you get that? The $620 Million isn't going to go to "essential services", it's going straight into the pockets of public employees in the form of pay raises. As has been well reported, State and local government employees are already paid up to 30% more than the equivalent private sector worker. Here in Nevada State employees average $50,125 per year, local government employees $52,088 while the same job in the private sector average only $40,899. So, the reason for not allowing the $620 million to sunset as promised is so we can give the higher paid government employees a raise. I'm sorry, but I believe it's time for our elected officials to do what they say. We were promised the $620 Million would end in two years, we've had them for four. Now our Governor and State Senate "leaders" tell us they want to make them permanent. As your Assemblyman, I will vote against any attempt to increase taxes and will vote against any attempt to extend the $620 Million we were promised would already be gone. You can read more on this topic HERE.
Support and elect Leonard Foster for Nevada Assembly District 13!
We have heard many times that we need to raise taxes in order to fund "essential services". As if businesses in Nevada aren't paying enough. As if there is no waste in Nevada government to cut.
If you believe we’re just not taxing businesses enough to pay for our state’s “vital” and essential services and need to “broaden” our tax base, here’s a listing I compiled of the taxes and fees we’re already burdening our business community with:
Business License Fee, Modified Business Tax, Modified Business Tax for Financial Institutions, Bank Branch Excise Tax, Incorporation Fees, Business Trusts, Limited Liability Company Fees, Limited Partnership Fees & LLLP Fees, Limited Liability Partnership Fees, Trademarks & Trade Names Fees, Uniform Commercial Code Fees, Video Service Provider Fees, Unemployment Insurance Tax, Drug Taxes, Controlled Substance Tax, Special Drug Manufacturing Tax, Excise Taxes, Cigarette & Other Tobacco Products Excise Tax, Intoxicating Liquor License & Tax, Fuel Taxes, State Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax and Aviation Fuel Tax.
Hold on…we’re just getting warmed up. There’s also the…
County Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax, County RTC Motor Vehicle Tax, Special Fuel Tax, Jet Fuel Tax, Gaming and Entertainment Taxes & Fees, City-County Gaming Tax, County Gaming Fees, Gross Gaming Revenue Fee, Pari-Mutual Wagering Tax, Race Wire License Fee, Slot License Fee – Non-Restricted, Slot License Fee – Restricted, Slot Machine Excise Tax, Slot Route Operator & Distributor Fees, State Gaming License – Annual Fees, State Games License – Quarterly Fees, Internet Gaming Tax, Insurance Tax, Insurance Premium Tax, Lodging Tax, State Transient Lodging Tax, Local Transient Lodging Tax, Mining Tax and Miscellaneous Mine Fees, Net Proceeds of Minerals & Patented Mines Tax.
Whew! But we’re not finished yet. There’s also the…
Oil & Gas Administrative Fee, Miscellaneous Taxes & Fees, Unarmed Combat Fees, Car Rental Government Services Tax, Livestock Tax, Live Entertainment Tax, Local Franchise Fee, Tax on Estates, Tire Tax, Nevada Transportation Authority Fees, Water Transfer Tax, Motor Vehicle Taxes, Motor Vehicle Registration Tax, Governmental Services Tax – Basic, Governmental Services Tax – Supplemental, Property Taxes, Real Property Tax (Ad Valorem), Personal Property Tax, Real Property Transfer Tax, Public Utility Taxes, Public Utility Assessment Fee, Universal Energy Charge and Sales and Use Taxes.
Take a breath. We’re almost there…
Combined Sales and Use Tax/State Sales and Use Tax (S.S.T.), Combined Sales and Use Tax/Local School Support Tax (LSST), Combined Sales and Use Tax/Basic City-County Relief Tax (BCCRT), Combined Sales and Use Tax/Supplemental City-County Relief Tax (SCCRT), and County Optional Sales Tax.
That’s more than 80 ways the government is sucking money out of our business community and our citizens. I am running for Assembly 13 as Nevada businesses need someone who will fight and represent them.
I have signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge. I will fight against any and all tax increases.
Support me and my campaign and vote for Leonard Foster for Assembly 13.
( Ron Knecht) – A recent Brookings Institute study on economic growth in Nevada concluded that we must innovate and diversify – which we already knew. I hope its proposals to “unleash” growth produce more than those from previous studies, but only time will tell. However, the study was marred by a high-profile false claim it made that provided red meat for the statists who dominate academe and the mainstream media. Smash-mouth left-wing pundit Jon Ralston trumpeted gleefully Brookings’ claim that Nevada not only underfunds higher education, but is last among comparable states by a significant margin. The claim is a classic Big Lie. Nevada’s higher education funding is in the mainstream and even high by some measures. Brookings’ first major error is to assume that the fraction of its economy a state spends on college varies with its population. So, Brookings compares five states with populations of 2- to 3-million to Nevada (2.7-million), even though that range yields four states slightly larger than Nevada and one state much smaller. But there is no correlation of states’ economic fractions with their populations, which is why no one else uses this practice. Standard practice compares state college funding regionally (such as western states) or on a national basis. Brookings’ method cherry-picked states ranked 1, 2, 6, 16 and 19 out of 50 as its standard for Nevada. Second, Brookings’ use of the economic fraction as a comparative-funding metric is also one that, for good reason, no one else uses. This fraction is useful for comparing broader aggregates such as total public spending, and it can have limited use for education funding in a given state over time. However, it is misleading in comparing states, due to large differences in the portions of states’ populations that attend college. If one state’s college-going rate is twice that of another, it’s ridiculous to suggest that college spending should be the same fraction of their economies. A well-known major Nevada problem is that too few of our people attend college (especially in high-value majors). Brookings’ metric obscures that problem to reach the conclusion Brookings and Ralston always seek – namely, that more public spending, higher taxes and further government intervention are needed. The proper education funding measure, used almost universally, is state spending per student. Using the per-student measure, Nevada’s taxpayer support for higher education is 29th among the 50 states, merely two percent below the national average. Using the western states, as most studies do, Nevada’s funding is almost nine percent above average. How misleading are Brookings and Ralston? Consider faculty pay. Using their five states as the standard, Nevada faculty pay is 25 percent above market, even though it is 0.65 percent below the western average. Nationally, Nevada faculty pay is 10th among the 50 states, seven percent above the national average. In short, Nevada tax funding of education and faculty pay are mainstream to somewhat higher. So, Brookings and Ralston’s biased and shoddy claim is completely misleading. Nevada higher education regents, administrators and faculty are working to improve academic quality, do strategic planning and management in a new competitive environment, and meet numerous other challenges of a Great Recession caused mainly by public-sector excesses that Brookings, Ralston and other statists promote. Our efforts are hindered, not helped, by the Chicken Little squawks of ideologues and special interests. ( Regent Ron Knecht of Carson City is an economist with background also in law, mathematics, science, engineering, liberal arts and public policy. Additional information at www.RonKnecht.com.)
Steve Gunn of the Education Action Group embraced today a collective bargaining reform I feel is desperately needed now: If collective bargaining sessions aren’t open to the public to witness and monitor, then taxpayers “should have veto power” by requiring a public vote before any such agreement can take effect.
I couldn’t agree more.
|
RSS Feed