Dizzy Douglas

So, the Governor's people are saying that state employees that make $30,000/year can afford to cough up $1,500 each (that's a pretty big "tax" increase on them), but he won't even consider slightly higher taxes across the board for Vermonters akin to the Snelling Surcharge proposed by Rep. Michael Fisher?

The logic here is dizzyingly inconsistent. First of all, if according to the Governor, Vermonters who make $30,000 or more is the threshhold for giving back, then why not apply that to all Vermonters? Second, under the Snelling Surcharge, it would only kick in when you make about $45,000 AGI (so it gives lower income folks a break). Finally, a person making $45,000 would only pay about an extra $66. A couple making $70,000 would pay an extra $92. That's a far cry from asking someone making $30,000 to give up $1,500 of their income.

Jim is Digging Himself into a Very Deep Hole

It appears that the Governor and his allies by suggesting that non-profit employees at $60,000 income, and state employees at $30,000 can all afford to give up 5% of their respective incomes are actually supporting income-based determinations of who can afford to pay (and how much). So, essentially what the Governor is doing is advocating raising taxes (albeit by taking it off the top up front rather than after it has already been paid out) on select groups saying they can afford to give more. Meanwhile, he turns around and says we have no more taxing capacity. So, which is it Governor?

And, if this "taxation by obfuscation" is what we can expect from this Administration, how long until the Governor simply enacts a 5% paycut provision on every group in the state until he's filled all the budget holes?

"Presto-Change-o! No new taxes!"

Regardless of whether or not there actually is a nefarious plot to enact "hidden taxes" by making us all give up 5% of our salaries, rather than spread the wealth according to people's ability to pay and raise lots more money at much less cost, there is no doubt the Governor's logic simply doesn't add up.

Here's something else that doesn't add up: the amount that would actually go to helping us out of this budget mess. The savings from making these paycuts effective would only be about $11 million. An income tax surcharge would raise $40 million or more.

Is the Governor up for the disingenuousity of the year award? Why not just come clean and support an income tax surcharge like the one proposed by Rep. Fisher and/or other income tax proposals? Oh, but that would be "divorced from reality."