vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

Political notes from Free Press staff writers Terri Hallenbeck, Sam Hemingway and Nancy Remsen

4.05.2007

We're Number One

The supposedly non-partisan Tax Foundation put out a special report ranking the 50 states in terms of the burden of state and local taxes on taxpayers and guess who's Number One.

Us.

Not Tax-achusetts, Not Taxas. Not Ca-ching-alifornia. Not New (Yikes!) York.

For the second year in a row, the state/local tax burden carried by Vermonters was heavier than any other state -- 14.1 percent of our income went into state and local coffers, nearly 3 percentage points above the 11.0 percent average nationally.

There will be those who say the study fails to recognize that more than $100 million of tax revenue collected in the name of the Act 60 school funding reform law is recycled back to a majority of our taxpayers, this year via a credit against their property taxes.

But then why is it that only since 2002 has the state's ranking been steadily climbing the charts, from 7th in country to 6th, then 3rd, then 2nd and last year, 1st. Curiously this march toward ignominy has occurred entirely on Gov. Jim Douglas' watch. The last three years Howard Dean was governor, the ranking sat in the 7th position and didn't move.

Republicans will argue that the increasing burden took place as Democrats consolidated their control of the House and Senate, but hey, the buck stops with the guv. He's still the guy who has the last word on what becomes law and what doesn't.

What do you think? What's it like to know Vermont leads the country in a category that we are confident won't be featured in the state's promotional literature?

-- Sam Hemingway

posted by vt.Buzz | 2:21 PM |

Comments:

What's non-partisan about it?

It's an organization set up by right-winger Grover Norquest with the express goal of eliminating taxes for him and his rich friends -- and starving money for education, social security, Medicaid, Medicare, head start ...

Ugh.

Get a grip, Sam.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:27 PM, April 05, 2007

Great. Another Washington DC based group wants to judge Vermonters and tell us how to live.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:29 PM, April 05, 2007

The Tax Foundation's methods have been rejected by the Congressional Budget Office, Allen Greenspan, and most legitimate news organizations (do your homework Hemingway!)

For more information:

www.cbpp.org/3-27-07tax.htm

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:35 PM, April 05, 2007

Sam, isn't the comparison a little irrelevant since VT has such a small population, but must provide certain services to all? VT doesn't have the benefit of the economy of scale.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:57 PM, April 05, 2007

The Tax Foundation predates Grover Norquist by many years. According to their web site, they were founded in 1937 as an anti-New Deal organization. One of the Tax Foundation's biggest current funders is the privately-held oil company Koch Industries, a supporter of many ultra-right wing organizations and candidates.

http://www.publicintegrity.org/oil/report.aspx?aid=347

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:04 PM, April 05, 2007

These Right-Wingers will now sit on the sidelines and watch the Deomcrats try to undo all the bad Bush and the GOP Congress have done, all the while forgetting who is actually to blame. Makes me sick. Taxes will have to be raised. Funny how you don't hear these people calling for a repeal of the tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent (Norquist included). I would agree though that before reporters print these studies as fact, they might want to research who funds the study (but that would require some work, as opposed to plucking from AP stories).

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:38 PM, April 05, 2007

Please don't ask Sam to research the things he writes about.

That's just too much to ask of a reporter.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:47 PM, April 05, 2007

Are all of the "anons" really some college freshman that has never had a job in his (her) life? Anyone who has lived in Vermont and WORKED for some time knows that this is right on target. Why do you think the productive youth of Vermont move? (as opposed to the slugs that relish a "career" as social workers or lifetime interns to VNRC) Facts are facts - just like when whistle-blowers like Bill O'Reilly expose the child-molesters and the indifference to putting this scum away and are crucified by the lefties who don't want their dirty linen aired!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:02 PM, April 05, 2007

Symington can't even pull the troops together to sustain a VETO! This is crazy. Bring back Obie!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:10 PM, April 05, 2007

Sorry Bubba -- I've worked hard all my life, lived in Vermont all my life and I love it.

There are tons of opportunities for Vermonters to make money and succeed in life.

I see that you prefer to just whine.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:14 PM, April 05, 2007

I actually would encourage Vermont's youth to get out of the state for a while and experience the rest of the country. I agree with the poster about the lack of a social scene. It's true. Vermont's a beautiful state, but it's not exactly the most exciting atmosphere in the world. Expanding one's horizons is never a bad thing. Frankly, a lot of these sanctimonious Vermonters should move away for a while and quit harping about being a "true Vermonter" (whatever the hell that means).

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:13 PM, April 05, 2007

About Symington and the veto - one of the members she lost was Jon Anderson, the new member from Montpelier. He was appointed by Gov Douglas and sworn in Tuesday, and on Thursday he voted to sustain the veto. The Montpelier Democratic Committee will be furious with Anderson on this one. This sort of thing wouldn't have happened when Obie and Ralph Wright were Speaker.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:03 PM, April 05, 2007

OK - if you don't agree that Vermont has the highest taxes please let us know what state does! Please supply data that can be verified. That surely should be simple enough for you genius lefties.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:08 AM, April 06, 2007

Anderson is a lame duck. Wait until the voters speak. Anderson knows this fact, which explains why he's voting to keep his options open with smarmy Jim.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:04 AM, April 06, 2007

"Frankly, a lot of these sanctimonious Vermonters should move away for a while and quit harping about being a "true Vermonter" (whatever the hell that means)."

If your birth certificate lists any town in Vermont, you may be a true Vermonter.

If your family used to own half the town, and now you live with your parents on two acres in a trailer, you may be a true Vermonter.

If you've ever veered your car toward an animal in the road, you may be a true Vermonter.

If you've ever given a tourist completely wrong directions, you may be a true Vermonter.

If you don't ski and crawl under a rock to hide from winter, you may be a true Vermonter.

If you see snowy weather as opportunity to make money pulling tourists out of ditches, you may be a true Vermonter.

If nothing but real Vermont maple syrup if for you, you may be a true Vermonter.

If you're up to your eyeballs in bills, and you're wondering how you're going to pay your taxes, you may be a true Vermonter.

If you know the start dates of turkey, crow, duck, goose, deer, bear and moose seasons, you might be a true Vermonter.

If your car is rusting out and your still making payments on it, you may be a true Vermonter.

If you slide a rowboat out on last ice in front of you to go ice fishing, you may be a true Vermonter.

If you shoot fish, you may be a true Vermonter.

If you know there are spring and fall mud seasons on the Long Trail, you may be a true Vermonter.

If you make money off of tourists, you may be a true Vermonter.

If you think a trip to the dump is a shopping trip, you may be a true Vermonter.

If you love coming up with things to define true Vermonter, you may be a true Vermonter.

If you ever wonder what it takes to be a true Vermonter, you might just never be a true Vermonter.

Rednalsi

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:12 AM, April 06, 2007

Completely off subject here. Did anyone happen to read Jason Aldous tribute to "the commincators" in today's Times Argus? His kneepads must be worn through. Didn't the House say the Emergency communicator wouldn't be affected? His main point is emergency communications. Oh, and ensuring some some Maple Festival gets ink. He completely misses the point of the House argument. The Douglas people are kicking and screaming about not having their scholarships funded, etc. Well, here is $1 million to help those pet projects. Aldous must not believe that agency heads are able to articulate simple messages very well. Is that an indication of how he feels about the people Douglas has appointed to those positions? Does Aldous think that some of these communicators should spend their days at the Statehouse, essentially lobbying? The money Douglas wants has to come from somewhere. Aldous, like Douglas, had no alternative suggestions to that end. Why doesn't that surprise me?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:28 AM, April 06, 2007

Are the communicators holding classified civil service jobs or exempt positions? If the communicators are really spending their time on political work at the State House, they shouldn't hold classified positions. That way, if a new governor were elected, they could all be fired on the first day of the new governor's term. I realize this sounds like Alberto Gonzales and the US Attorneys, but if the communicators spend most of their time shilling for the governor, they shouldn't have civil service protection.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:20 AM, April 06, 2007

Red, you are about 99% right on as to what constitutes a "true" Vermonter! I might add one more: you would die before voting for a dimocrat or "progressive"!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:26 AM, April 06, 2007

1. I'm a native Vermonter.
2. I'm not poor, but came from a decidedly middle class household. I've had to work for whatever I've gotten.
3. I've chosen to make financial sacrifices to stay in Vermont despite more lucrative options elsewhere. I love it here.
4. But, no matter how folks spin it, "quality of life" doesn't pay the bills, put food on the table, or lessen the tax burden.
5. Under any fair measure, Vermont is near the top respecting per capita tax burdens.
6. Much of this is a function of the fact that we have the highest per capita NON-earned income in the country (translation: trust funds).
7. Remember, to the extent we shift propoerty taxes to income taxes, the two biggest beneficiaries our out-of-state second homeowners whose income we can't tax, and trust fund babies, whose income isn't subject to taxation.

# Posted by:

BarreBoy | 9:30 AM, April 06, 2007

I agree - bring back Obie - Symington does not have what it takes.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:49 AM, April 06, 2007

"highest per capita NON-earned income in the country (translation: trust funds)."

Non-earned income items include: unemployment benefits; child support; Social Security benefits; pensions; alimony; welfare benefits; food stamps; job training benefits; nontaxable employee pay and interest.

its not trust funds. It's retirees and welfare folks.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:46 AM, April 06, 2007

It's no surprise that Vermont has a lot of "non-earned" income being paid to retirees and people receiving public assistance. Vermont's tax and permit policies do not encourage businesses to expand and create jobs in Vermont. In this morning's Free Press, there is an article that Target is considering opening a store in Plattsburgh, not in Vermont. Is it any suprise that they don't want to put a store in Vermont? What with the Act 250 permit process, assessments for Catamount Health, etc., it doesn't pay for businesses to come to Vermont. The trust fund recipients can afford to do their shopping online, or to go to high-end stores out of state, but working Vermonters are the ones who suffer from the state's tax and permit policies.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:55 AM, April 06, 2007

We really suffer from not shopping at Target.

Without Target, we Vermonters are little Jesuses on the cross.

Oh the humanity !!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:05 AM, April 06, 2007

Is it any surprise that ANY retiree has a lot of "non-earned" income???

Actually, shopping online is cheaper for just about everything irregardless of whether you live in Vermont or any other place.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:06 AM, April 06, 2007

I'm not sure why folks assume that people with trust funds are fabulously weathy or have a significantly higher standard of living.

I know of two people with trusts. Only one is in VT. Both have to and do work regular jobs and don't live at a different standard of living than anybody else in VT,

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:13 AM, April 06, 2007

hey barreboy what tribe did you say you were with?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:24 AM, April 06, 2007

Hey that list of "true" Vermonters came from http://rednalsivermont.blogspot.com

# Posted by:

REDNALSI | 12:42 PM, April 06, 2007

Sorry, rednalsiofvermont.blogspot.com

# Posted by:

REDNALSI | 12:43 PM, April 06, 2007

I realize that most of the "anons" only shop in the elitist boutiques in Burlington for their Birkenstocks and brie, BUT for the poor working stiffs that have no trust funds or Volvos, Targets and WalMarts are life-savers. In fact, there are non-partisan studies out that show that WalMart ALONE has created much of the prosperity and low inflation over the past 8 years or so, in turn keeping interest rates low for everyone. I realize that the hydrophobic Wal Mart haters in academia and the union bosses that just can't tolerate the rights of workers to reject unions will dispute this, but hey, facts are facts!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:47 PM, April 06, 2007

Anybody who doesn't shop where bubba shops is elitist and evil.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:09 PM, April 06, 2007

Bubba would be the first person to stick up for the Vermont mom and pops and the first person to stick up for Wal-mart, which will destroy the mom and pops. Typical GOP BS. Just tout what sounds good without thinking through the ramifications. But then again, maybe Bubba and Redboreme and the others just want to see Vermont paved over. It's good for shareholders. Right Bubs?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:48 PM, April 06, 2007

Just think of all of the awesome minimum wage jobs that Wal-Mart brings to Vermont!!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:49 PM, April 06, 2007

Regarding Sam Hemingway’s little partisan blog entry published on the print edition of the Opinion page: What a twit! Everyone knows the tax burden in Vermont is growing automatically every year because of Act 60, a democrat-Dean scheme.

Governor Douglas tried to slow down property tax growth with Act 68, which lowers the property tax rate when the ed fund is flush. That led to an education spending frenzy to use up the money before the tax rate dropped - the latest effort in this direction is free government preschool for all. So the governor proposed to put a cap on spending increases. Symington and the democrats rejected that proposal out-of-hand. Instead, they made it so the average spending school can "only" jack up spending by 23% per year now. Whoopee do!

Nice try Heminway. You must have thought you were really clever. Too bad your not.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:10 PM, April 06, 2007

you might want to compare the economic climate of St. Johnsbury, which rejected a Wal Mart several years ago to Littleton, NH which wanted one.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:24 PM, April 06, 2007

Notice that St. Johnsbury is the most right wing backwards-Republican area of Vermont.

Compare Republican St. Johnsbury's ecconomy with the ecconomy of liberal Burlington, Montpelier or Brattleboro.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:59 PM, April 06, 2007

St. Johnsbury sends left-wing Senator Jane Kitchell (dean's ex-welfare queen) to Montpelier. Some Republican area! Act 60 was mandated by a left-wing Supreme Court packed by Kunin and Dean, and the whole issue was forced on them by far-left dimocrat lawyer Robert Gensburg. The state has been suffering ever since.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:27 AM, April 07, 2007

We're Number One.........

Or 50th state for ability to make government run efficiently without raising taxes. Kind of depends on how you look at it?

Realizing fully we are a small state and economy of scale does come into play. Are we not ready to start thinking outside the box?

Obviously whatever we have been thinking, hasn't been working.

# Posted by:

REDNALSI | 2:48 PM, April 07, 2007

Apparently the majority of Vermonters like it just the way it is or they wouldn't keep sending back these morons to Montpelier (with the exception of the NEK which still actually has some native, conservative, common-sense reps). Face it, the young people that want a future, raise kids, and are willing to work hard are leaving the state; what we are now getting is the slugs and parasites that DEMAND this and DEMAND that as if they were supposed to be cradled in a nanny state their entire lives! Oh, I can't live on my trust fund! Boo hoo! Get a job, hippies!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:17 PM, April 07, 2007

For the past 20 years, 95% of St.Johnsbury's Montpelier Delegation has been Republican.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:10 PM, April 07, 2007

You are right, but the reason Wal Mart went to Littleton is that a handful of loud leftists from St. Johnsbury, Barnet, Peacham, etc. made such a stink about them that they said "OK, we are not wanted here, we'll go across the river!". Last time I went to Littleton the town was thriving with a mix of WalMart and all kinds of local businesses, a sight you rarely see in Vermont. Also, a prominant businessman financed a lot of the local opposition because he wanted to protect his "mall". I think if anyone had it to do over, they would have fought harder for Wal Mart.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:43 PM, April 07, 2007

Gee I wonder why the NH side of the Connecticut River has all the business and Vermont downtowns are dead? From Colebrook to Keene, NH thrives economically while we grow trees - duh! No wonder we're number one. CLF, VNRC, VCE etc work hard to keep Vermont at a stand still with economic development

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:59 PM, April 07, 2007

You seem to like NH. You should move there.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:02 PM, April 07, 2007

Remember there is a reason Jim Douglas gets re-elected - it is not because the republicans are so great!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:10 AM, April 08, 2007

And what reason would that be?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:53 PM, April 08, 2007

It's because he's politically bulletproof.

He makes the shit fly and miraculously none of it lands on him.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:40 PM, April 08, 2007

I don't know about bullet proof. The price tag on this new state hospital is like $100 million. Smells like the political contributor and contractor money talking here. We've got enough congestion in this neighborhood. There has to be another place to stick this thing. I must think it would be cheaper then putting it here too. I think this is going to be a strike against Douglas.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:09 AM, April 09, 2007

But that would mean the democrats
would have to use the strike - they
don't seem armed with any artillery.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:07 PM, April 09, 2007

Don't tax you,
Don't tax me,
Tax that guy behind the tree.
...dimocrat national anthem.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:10 PM, April 09, 2007

"...more than $100 million of tax revenue collected in the name of the Act 60 school funding reform law is recycled back to a majority of our taxpayers..."

The property tax that is collected is the property tax that is owed. The money that is refunded is welfare. The fact that it is paid out to 90% of the state's population doesn't change that.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:26 PM, April 15, 2007

"the buck stops with the guv. He's still the guy who has the last word on what becomes law and what doesn't."

Unfortunately, the current "guv" wasn't in office when Act 60 was enacted. It was the exact impact that its critics predicted, which obviously didn't kick in until after Dean was gone, that has driven tax rates through the roof.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:31 PM, April 15, 2007