The Life and Times of the Watters Family

The So-Called “Bush Tax”

A couple weeks back, I was pointed by Dave Winer to this item on Dave Pollard’s blog on increasing traffic to one’s blog. It strikes me that one way to do that may be, in fact, to write about how to increase traffic to one’s blog (which is right out of the Tom Vu/Carlton Sheets handbook if you ask me, but that’s a whole different subject). Having never been to Mr. Pollard’s blog before, I thought I’d have a look around. As I was doing so, I stumbled over this little gem which may rate a post of its own about using graphs of really small sub-sets of very large data sets to misrepresent the truth without actually being technically dishonest. Again, I digress.

Upon seeing the above, I was reminded of the fact that I’ve been wanting to write something seemingly intelligent about the standard liberal tripe about tax cuts mainly benefiting the “rich” (which I still intend to do, though this isn’t it). I thought I might do some initial research into what was being said about the “Bush Tax Cut” and I came across this: The Bush Tax. The basic premise is that states are now being forced to pick up the tab for the programs that were cut to make way for the Bush tax cuts. Because I’m not familiar with what is happening in other states, I thought I’d focus on mine. As I read, I was more and more amazed by the misleading information and in at least one case, factual inaccuracy, they presented as evidence. I’ll take on each of the first three, point by point:

• Property Taxes Soar:
  According to these guys, property taxes increased 9.52%. Hmm…that’s funny. Did you notice they didn’t say “Property tax rates?” That’s because rates haven’t gone up even close to that much. In fact, they nearly admit the misleading nature of their numbert by explaining that it is actually the increase in collected property tax revenues. They never even mention tax rates. What has actually happened is that 1) a ton of new homes have been built, increasing the value of properties for which taxes are collected and 2) in much of the state, home prices increased by as much as 12% in 2003 alone, thus driving up the assessed value for newly constructed homes. For example, my house has appreciated nearly 51% since 1999. Sadly, I’ve only owned it for the past ten months. The assessed value is still at the 1999 amount, but a newly built home that is similar to mine would be assessed at or near the current market price, resulting in higher taxes for effectively the same house.

• College Costs Skyrocket:
  They state that students at state universities have faced tuition increases of around 7%. That’s not surprising considering the UW administration advised four consecutive annual tuition increases of 8% back in 1999! Unfortunately, we didn’t get the tax cut until AFTER the 2000 election, so those recommendations aren’t likely a legitimate part of the “Bush Tax”.

• Health Coverage Slashed:
  According to bushtax.com, the number of persons receiving benefits was cut to 36,000. That’s just not true. Health benefits were reduced, though, whether or not this is a direct result of reductions in federal funding is debatable. However we don’t actually have to resolve that question to correct the facts in this case. It is as simple as taking the time to follow the link they provide. You’ll notice that it says the state reduced the Basic Health enrollment cap “by 36,000″ and not to 36,000. That’s a big difference.

As for the remaining two, I guess I’m confused as to why it has become considered the objective truth that government sponsored medical coverage is the best solution. In this case, we have two taxpayer funded programs that were cut in order to prevent a deficit. That seems reasonable. Frankly, I’d prefer not to have to cut a number of things out of my budget when money is tight, but, unlike governments, I don’t have the luxury of being able to confiscate money from millions of people to support my spending habits. Now, there may have been other expenditures that would’ve been better cut than these, but if so, let’s have that discussion.

SIDE NOTE: I also found it somewhat ironic that, in the same article that laments the cuts to these programs, we find big labor complaining loudly about not receiving a massive $2 per hour wage increase for home healthcare workers. Maybe next year we should just give them the raise. Then we can just raise their taxes so much that the increase is effectively meaningless. Wouldn’t that be a fun exercise in liberal government futility.

---

---