Let's
start the discussion by asking: How many
readers have heard of the Code of Virginia
58.1-3536(A)? Only a handful, basically those who
work for state government. The law was inserted
into Gov. Jim Gilmore's car tax program at
the insistence of Democrats, Republican Senator
John Chichester and John Bennett, the Secretary of
Finance who then was working for the Senate
Finance Committee.
All
responsible finance experts knew that Gilmore had
misled Virginians - whether purposeful or
innocently is a matter of debate -- on the true car
tax budget expenditure projections, understating
the amount of the line item by a factor two or
more.
The
handful of legislators still trying to pretend
they were fiscally responsible in 1998 insisted
that "Deficit" Jim Gilmore accept
58.1-3536 (A) which
The
Governor shall not submit any budget bill ... or
any amendments ... that propose the
appropriation of an amount that exceeds a
total of eight and one-half percent of the
amount of total general fund revenues
available for appropriation for payments in any
fiscal year to treasurers pursuant to 58.1-3526.
(Emphasis added).
This
clause, in plain English, put brakes on what
legislators knew would be the runaway budget
buster it has become by 2003. As predicted, the
line item has constantly grown and grown by
hundreds of millions of dollars over original
projections. Thanks to this law, the car tax
expenditure can never exceed 8.5 percent of
general fund revenues. But if Mark Warner has his
way, it will eventually mushroom an additional
$800 million more and counting for a full budget
cycle.
Think
of it: The Dems bashed "Deficit" Jim
Gilmore for being reckless with his car tax
promises, for taking money from education and
other priorities, etc. But now, for reasons
discussed below, Gov. Warner has decided to do the
Full Gilmore Monte on the car tax; with a special
twist as I will show.
What
The Guv Wants
Warner
wants to move from the current 70 percent
phase-out to the full 100 phase-out, fulfilling
his campaign promise to finish the job that
Gilmore started. There's
just one stumbling block. At the expected growth
in state revenues of five percent to seven percent
annually, even phasing out the car tax slowly over
four years at the rate of 7.5 percent annually,
the reimbursement bumps into the 8.5-percent
budget cap. Indeed, as long as the cap stays in
place, based on his economic assumptions, Warner
won't be able to phase out any more than 80
percent of the car tax.
That's
right, hidden in Warner's plan, not disclosed to
Democrats or anyone, is his decision to eliminate
the 8.5-percent cap, a key part of his tax plan that
was described this way in yesterday's Washington
Post:
Tax
Plan Won't Help Va.'s Poor, Elderly
By
Michael D. Shear
Washington Post Staff Writer
RICHMOND
-- More than a half-million poor and elderly
Virginians would receive no benefit from Gov.
Mark R. Warner's proposed changes to the state's
income tax, leaving them especially vulnerable
to the governor's one-cent increase in the
state's sales tax.
Why
does the governor, a sensible guy, expect
Democrats to swallow this plan in silence? I guess
because General Assembly Dems have been signing
on, as they are afraid of being called
"disloyal," even when they are backing a
plan that they would strongly oppose had it been
submitted by a Republican.
Why
is it that we commentators have had to raise these
issues, comparing the governor's promises to the
ugly reality? Why not the Democratic legislators
elected to protect the poor, the elderly, the most
vulnerable and least powerful in our society?
I
ask you: What has happened to the soul of the
Virginia Democratic Party in the past few years?
I
want to thank Jim Bacon, editor of this
website, for getting Warner's chief Three Card
Monte dealer on the record about their intentions
regarding the 8.5-percent cap. In preparation of
his own column, Jim took the initiative to put the
tough questions directly to Secretary of Finance
Bennett on Friday. He shared some of the answers
with me yesterday when editing this column.
The
Political Calculus
Here's
how I reconstruct the thinking inside the Warner
camp: The governor told his kitchen cabinet
and government aides to come up with a plan to
allow him to claim that 65 percent of Virginians
would pay less taxes. This 65-percent claim is his
self-styled "wow" factor. But after
his political guys took a look at the numbers, it
appears they could not give the governor the thing
he wanted -- the 65 percent sound bite which his
polling said was powerful -- unless he could
figure out how to take credit for enacting the
last 30 percent of Gilmore's car tax phase-out,
irrespective of the cost.
Without
the car tax phase-out, Warner's plan would
raise the state taxes of a majority of Virginia
taxpayers. So they came up with this plan: If
they eliminated the 8.5 percent budget cap on
car-tax expenditures, put into place by Dems and
others in the General Assembly out of fear that it
would consume the budget, then Warner can lay
claim to credit for getting the phase-out to 100
percent.
Net,
net: GUV Warner, under pressure from his aides,
Sabato, et. al, and the editorial boards to raise
taxes and get a "legacy" -- what a silly
debate this has been on the "legacy"
thing, so amateurish -- thus has become obsessed
with the 65 percent number.
The
governor is approaching the tax issue as a sound-
bite, poll-driven political strategy. Otherwise,
he could never justify his Car Tax Cap Buster, something
no Democrat has ever proposed.
Unfortunately, the political game the governor is
playing is fiscally dangerous -- and every honest
Dem leader, every editorial board, every objective
individual who follows state finances knows it.
If
you study Warner's own numbers, you will find that
the massive increase in car tax expenditures,
fueled by his proposal to drop the Cap, forces
him to raise taxes elsewhere.
(1) But
for the car tax proposal, the governor could have
raised the money he wants for the budget he will
submit Wednesday with a 1/2-percent sales tax
increase.
(2) But
for his need to raise the sales tax by a record 1
percent, Warner would not have had to promise
powerful special interests to eliminate the
Estate Tax on all but a handful of families,
giving a few hundred of the wealthiest Virginians
windfalls of $100,000 to $1 million while
giving no net tax relief to many of the state's
poorest 600,000 families.
(3)
But for the car tax, he would not have to ask for such
a big increase in the state tobacco tax -- a cost
borne disproportionately by the poor and
inner-city residents.
(4)
But for the car tax, Warner would not have needed
to eliminate an important tax deduction that goes
to low- and middle-income seniors between 62-64.
(5)
Due to his need to keep the 65-pecent figure,
Warner now will have to veto any gas tax
increase even though he said transportation needs
were key to jobs in 2002.
(6)
But for his fiscally reckless car tax promise, the
governor could have come up with a plan to give
real relief to the poor and elderly.
Truth
is, this is a Nixon Goes To China thing. Warner
figures the editorial boards, key Dems,
education groups and the big-business
community are so desperate for a tax increase that
they would buy a tax plan that they would have
opposed if Gilmore's name had been on it -- even
if it does punish the poor.
Governor
Warner's plan violates the central principles of
Virginia Democrats: It guarantees a bigger
structural deficit crisis during the next downturn
-- Warner's six year plan conveniently assumes no
economic downturns all the way through -- and it
is based not on sound fiscal principles, but
polling data and sound-bite politics.
Warner
won the job, so he can do what he wants. But any
honest observer has to state that the governor is
now doing precisely what he campaigned against: He
is emulating Gilmorenomics, putting the state's
fiscal situation at unnecessary risk and failing
to meet the standards of fairness and candor that
he criticizes Republicans and others for not
practicing.
If
you go to the out years of his proposal, you see
that he has front-loaded the taxes and back-loaded
the expenditures -- allowing him to extract
maximum political benefit and saddling his
successor with big problems.
Moreover,
if you move the chess board around a few pieces,
you can see that Warner has given away so much
that he has almost no room to maneuver.
Political
Reality Bites
Let's
analyze what will happen to the governor's plan
after it gets run through the sausage grinder in
the General Assembly.
First
of all, logic suggests the General Assembly
will give no more than half -- if that much
-- of his proposed state tobacco tax
increase. I may be wrong but logic tells me that
in the end, he will have to back out $70
million revenue out of his plan. Second, he will
need to change his plan to give tax relief to the
60,000 poor and elderly families discussed in the Washington
Post story. At a minimum of $50
dollars a family average -- hardly a lot -- this
would require backing out another $30 million.
House
Speaker William Howell says a one-percent increase
in the sales tax is too much. Let's say they
compromise and Warner gets 3/4 of a percent. That
reduces his plan's net revenue by another $200
million.
Warner
claims his plan will produce $450 million net
revenue a few years out. I have my doubts. But
assuming the $450 million for analysis purposes, we
have just shown how the three issues above would
force Warner to back out $300 million per year in
new revenue from his plan, leaving him now down
to $150 million -- and that assumes that GOP gives
him everything else he wants, like a new
6.25-percent income tax bracket and tax increases
for seniors. It also assumes, in the face of past
experience, that the true out-year cost of the car
tax won't actually be $100 million higher than
Warner is projecting in order to make his plan
appear to add up.
Then
there's the gas tax. Some Republicans have been
talking up the gas tax as a way to raise money for
transportation. Plus, the GOP might push this to
offset the new upper-income tax bracket, a major
downer for the party base. A two-cent increase on
the gas tax would raise $100 million. Trouble is,
if Warner accepts a gas tax -- which hits all tax
brackets -- he'll never achieve his 65-percent
figure.
Finally,
consider that the Warner plan underestimates the
huge cost of his estate tax windfalls. Once you
get to 2011, when the federal law reverts to the
way it was, repeal of Virginia's estate tax will
cost the state many hundreds of millions of
dollars.
Bottom
line: Mark Warner is a smart guy. But spooked by
"legacy" foolishness, he drafted a plan
in secret, wanting to show that he was in full
control. Those who had access to the drafting
clearly didn't represent the poor, or even the
Democratic party.
He
can still come out a big winner next year. But for
this to happen, he is going to have admit serious
flaws in his plan, speak candidly to Virginians,
and perhaps even take the risk of asking the
General Assembly to put his tax ideas to a vote of
the people.
True,
on Tuesday, he will present his budget, and as I
wrote in Goshfather
1, he feels his spending plan -- an
unprecedented use of nonexistent funds from his
proposed taxes -- will change the nature of the
debate.
But
all these things can not change what reporters and
analysts are finding: Warner has taken a Nixon
Goes To China approach, which seems to fly in the
face of his image.
--
December 15, 2003
|