Down in the Texas state capitol for the day, enjoying both the buzz of activity that comes with the legislature actually being in session (they only have regular sessions for five month, once every two years) and the good ole boy lobbyists stalking the halls, making deals. Just had an interesting interview with a Republican State Senator in which he raised an interesting point. Basically, he was complaining about how the conservative movement had essentially been reduced to one single, inviolable principle: never raise taxes ever. It's crazy he said. "I'm as much against having my taxes raised as anybody, but the the voters don't send us to the capitol just to make sure taxes don't get raised, they send us here to spend their money wisely. And if there's some program that can benefit the residents of the state, then we should fund it."

But instead, Grover Norquist's infamous no-tax pledge has created an untenable situation across the country, one in which state governments are increasingly resorting to gimmicks, tricks and the outright Russian-style auctioning off of state assets in order to fund government. This despite the fact, that, as this Republican legislator pointed out to me, spending on social programs is quite popular. "The notion that these are programs Democrats want and Republicans abhor may have been true thirty years ago, but I feel like there's been a shift. Now, everybody wants the programs, but one group [the Republicans] is unwilling to pay for them, and the other group [the Democrats] is unable to pay for them."

The only way this is going to change is if there's a) an organized lobbying effort on the part of citizens and interest groups to increase taxes b) some bold legislators vote for tax increases and find out that they won't necessarily get ridden out of town by angry voters. But I was amazed that this Republican legislator was so frank about the problem. And googling around I see that Republican presidential front-runners Rudy Giuliani and John McCain have both yet to sign the no new taxes pledge. It does suggest that the "tax revolt" may indeed be coming to a close.

Comments (45)

1. Toll roads are the new big thing down here in Texas.

   Posted by mtspence05 at 03/08/2007 @ 12:09pm

2. for me the issue is what do you get for your taxes. the militarization of the society and endless war and imperialism? or a just society?

   Posted by johannesrolf at 03/08/2007 @ 12:19pm

3. for me the issue is what do you get for your taxes. the militarization of the society and endless war and imperialism? or a just society?

   Posted by johannesrolf at 03/08/2007 @ 12:20pm

4. Its not that people don't want to pay taxes for the things we need govt to do..its that hidden taxes and fees we are constantly hammer with...its the inability to balance the books or inability to CANCEL programs that don't work or have run their course...our history here is that taxes over all continue to grow as do expenses regardless of the economy or the pressure the people who pay the bills are under..

   If any candidate runs and says, " I will not promise to not raise taxes will lose."..unless he says., "I am going to reveue ALL programs and kill the bad ones..and will attempt to improve the good ones, which might require some help"...now he has a chance....

   There are only.."I'm gonna take those profits from..and give them to.." candiadates or .."we are not gonna tax any more at all", but then they let all new spending programs pop up like flowers in the spring..

   Toll roads in Texas? Good, Thats called user pay..been round since the 1600s...it means they couldn't raise taxes to pay for the roads some one wanted.

   Posted by john maasch at 03/08/2007 @ 2:52pm

5. "The only way this is going to change is if there's a) an organized lobbying effort on the part of citizens and interest groups to increase taxes

   b) some bold legislators vote for tax increases and find out that they won't necessarily get ridden out of town by angry voters."

   So....no "way" in Hell.

   Posted by Mask at 03/08/2007 @ 2:52pm

6. Posted by MTSPENCE05 03/08/2007 @ 12:09pm

   Isn't it ridiculous? And its not just toll roads where the money goes to the state. No, its toll roads where the money goes to a company in Spain.

   Too bad Texas Republicans can't get their head out of their asses and realize if they built high speed trains between the major cities, you could get lots of "four wheelers" off the road and leave the existing roads for the 18 wheelers. Why do we need new roads for the 18 wheelers?

   As for the article, its used to be said that Democrats were "tax and spend liberals." Now its Republicans are "cut tax and spend conservatives." How are we going to pay for the military industrial complex without the taxes?

   Posted by BlueTexan at 03/08/2007 @ 2:55pm

7. I just realized the answer to my question...you pay for the military industrial complex by cutting social programs. How could I forget.

   Posted by BlueTexan at 03/08/2007 @ 2:56pm

8. Bluetx,

   I would love to see a rail system like you describe..Living in the midwest(Omaha area) I would ride a 300mhr train to Denver or St Louis, Chicago..where ever...I asked my reps and even asked some railroad guys..both had the same answer...buying the right of ways and the cost of building per mile would be outrageous..also almost as bad as the railroads themselves..you still have brakeman and fireman on railroad pay roles to keep the unions quiet...to buy the land right of way, with the Enviromental impacts, Native Americans, affirmative actions, ...I mean the special interest groups would tie this up in courts for 200 years...forget state and local and federal regs...the lawyers will bury us....imagine finding a rare cricket in the middle of the right of way...

   Free enterprise can't afford the lawyers to fight all the groups opposed for what ever reasons...would you ride a train built by the govt? Amtrack can't manage itself on the little tracks they now have losing BILLIONs and no one cares because it is easier to pay a few billion in a multitrillion dollar budget..and move on..No balls politically to cut or kill or make the riders pay the true cost...and to try to trim costs the unions and other politians and special intertest groups howl....sometimes projects , no matter how great, die off when they are closely examined.....each state in a corridor looking at this from Chicago to St Louis and Kansas City have had their legislatures looking giving right aways...some politicians vow to kill it unless all jobs are union..others want fair compensation for land taken...and on and on..so we still drive..why? It is still cheaper and more convient to drive.

   Posted by john maasch at 03/08/2007 @ 3:24pm

9. Blue,

   I would like to see a list of all the social programs cut in the last 50 years...our social networks have grown every year and more added...auto matic increases not with standing.

   I look at he growth of entitlement programs from 1950 to today..I think in the 50s the entitlements were around 19% and military around 56%... the rest was discrestionary spending..

   today I think those numbers have fliped..with very little discretionary numbers...I am no pro at this, so maybe someone who works in the field could be more useful...but my point remains entitlements NEVER get cut...only added to..

   Posted by john maasch at 03/08/2007 @ 3:30pm

10. Posted by JOHN MAASCH 03/08/2007 @ 3:24pm

    Why is it that most all industrialized nations on the planet have robust highspeed rail? Are we Americans to dumb?

    You say, "so we still drive..why? It is still cheaper and more convient to drive." It's cheaper now, but not in 20 years. But by then it'll be too late. And we'll all be sitting around in traffic asking, "why didn't someone try to start building a rail system 20 years ago?"

    Posted by BlueTexan at 03/08/2007 @ 3:41pm

11. Posted by JOHN MAASCH 03/08/2007 @ 3:30pm

    Not sure which planet you are living on.

    "but my point remains entitlements NEVER get cut...only added to."

    Okay. I'll name one...CHIPS here in Texas was cut a couple years ago. All those poor kids...to heck with them...they don't need health care!! Let's use the money for...tax cuts!

    Posted by BlueTexan at 03/08/2007 @ 3:55pm

12. Posted by JOHN MAASCH 03/08/2007 @ 3:30pm

    I have a hard time believing the figures associated with any group's explanation of the federal budget. It seems like the percentages depend on who is providing the information. It's hard to know who to believe. Not surprising, financial statistics and accounting - areas where their is a LOT of selective interpretation of the data.

    I think Freiheit may be hip to it.

    Posted by Hman23 at 03/08/2007 @ 4:06pm

13. oops - "there" not "their"

    Posted by Hman23 at 03/08/2007 @ 4:07pm

14. Blue,

    I am not familiar with chips...Has any child been turned away from health care that needs it? or kicked out of the hopital or not treated?

    As far as .. "Why is it that most all industrialized nations on the planet have robust highspeed rail? Are we Americans to dumb? "

    I have ridden on Germanys and I have ridden on and seen Chinas....the European especially the German is great..but they tracel relatively short distances and I do not know how hard it is to get a large project completed through their legal system..Germany is the size of Minnesota and Wisconsin combined, aprox., and it would be too dificult to work in an are that size..but when you cross 7-10 states..I beleieve one ends up with a lot of impedance. Are we dumb...no, just not always pulling in the same direction.

    Posted by john maasch at 03/08/2007 @ 4:13pm

15. Sorry about the spelling these days...

    Blue,

    If Texas wanted and could prove the viability of high speed, which I am sure they can, then Texas should help get the road blocks out of the way and make it happen...tell the unions, Enviromental nut groups, All the special interestes that they are now mute,...use the eminent domain power, as this is an example of how it should be used in the publics interest.... and open up the construction for bids...

    Posted by john maasch at 03/08/2007 @ 4:18pm

16. Posted by JOHN MAASCH 03/08/2007 @ 4:18pm | ignore this person

    Coulda shoulda woulda.....but kinda hard when you've got to sell the naming rights to what was previously called "The Lonestar State" now to be called the "Coca Cola State", just to make March payroll!!!!

    Posted by freedomplease at 03/08/2007 @ 4:21pm

17. Your right Christopher. Its an 8 letter word: STEALING

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 03/08/2007 @ 4:22pm

18. Mash,

    Penny wise / pound foolish (British currency expression) is the whole point of the blog..........realizing you don't get it (again).

    Posted by freedomplease at 03/08/2007 @ 4:23pm

19. Posted by JOHN MAASCH 03/08/2007 @ 4:18pm | ignore this person

    I imagine this is how they did it in France and Japan where high speed rail is a fact not a subject.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/08/2007 @ 4:38pm

20. Are we dumb...no, just not always pulling in the same direction.

    Posted by JOHN MAASCH 03/08/2007 @ 4:13pm | ignore this person

    bullbleep, those trains go all over europe.

    that would be a yes. the news reported an uninsured child dying of a brain infection caused by an untreated tooth problem. also there was the story of the homeless man dumped in downtown La. with his colostomy bag in his filthy hospital gown.

    you live in a world of myths, and consequently are clueless how the other half lives. it is obviously half a lifetime, since you have stared want in the face.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/08/2007 @ 4:44pm

21. Interesting the turn this thread has taken ...for...

    I think "high speed rail" is MUCH more likely than "a large group of Americans demanding a tax hike" or "politicians willing to call for one and expect no negative reaction from the voters"!

    Posted by Mask at 03/08/2007 @ 4:46pm

22. I would love to see a rail system like you describe..Living in the midwest(Omaha area) I would ride a 300mhr train to Denver or St Louis, Chicago..where ever...I asked my reps and even asked some railroad guys..both had the same answer...buying the right of ways and the cost of building per mile would be outrageous.

    this WOULD be true if these places never had rail service in the past. they did and so it defies credulity.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/08/2007 @ 4:47pm

23. this is ALL false. Japan and europe have unions, and they have environmental regs, far more stringent than here. no, my midwestern friend what is lacking is good sense and a vision.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/08/2007 @ 4:51pm

24. Posted by JOHN MAASCH 03/08/2007 @ 4:13pm

    "but when you cross 7-10 states..I beleieve one ends up with a lot of impedance."

    I don't advocate having one rail system covering the entire country. Doesn't make sense. Not going to happen.

    I think there should be regional rail lines that connect major cities in a given area. For instance, there should be a rail line connecting Dallas, Houston, San Antonio and Austin. No other cities big enough or close enough to connect for now.

    "tell the unions, Enviromental nut groups, All the special interestes that they are now mute"

    Lucky for you (not for most folks though) we don't have many of those anyway. What we do have are lazy leaders and a govenor that is single-handedly trying to build his own tollway/pipeline/rail/whatever else line through the state for products coming from Mexico. Of course, he has a reason for doing this...$$$$, but no other logical reason. It would just be cheaper and show a much longer term vision to build rails between the cities and get people going to visit granny off the road and in a rail car.

    Posted by BlueTexan at 03/08/2007 @ 4:51pm

25. Posted by FREIHEIT 03/08/2007 @ 3:04pm | ignore this person

    are you STILL flogging that dead horse, you one trick pony?

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/08/2007 @ 4:52pm

26. Posted by FREIHEIT 03/08/2007 @ 3:04pm | ignore this person

    are you STILL flogging that dead horse, you one trick pony?

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/08/2007 @ 4:52pm

27. Maybe high speed rail could be the next "industrial complex" (as in military).

    People in America would benefit for obvious reasons and people all over the globe would rejoice as we would not be invading and torturing/killing them.

    Posted by BlueTexan at 03/08/2007 @ 4:53pm

28. contrary to common wisdom, there are actually THREE things for certain. death, taxes, and Tories whining about taxes.

    seriously, I understand your frustration, you have been swindled by the congressional military industrial complex, which has stolen your tax money at the expense of a civilized just society, so long, that you no longer know which end is up. america has been mostly guns, and very, very little butter.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/08/2007 @ 4:56pm

29. Frei, pretty good mixing of metaphors, don't you think?

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/08/2007 @ 4:57pm

30. Your right Christopher. Its an 8 letter word: STEALING

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON 03/08/2007 @ 4:22pm | ignore this person

    this is a brain dead post. you are just taking up space.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/08/2007 @ 4:59pm

31. JR,

    Posted by JOHANNESROLF 03/08/2007 @ 4:44pm |

    2? Two examples of what? A hospital Staffer hauls a guy out and dumps him in the street?

    Out of how many 10s millions treated..without billing or cash?

    As to Eirorail...All I am saying is there will be obsticales to over come that Europe perhaps handles diffrently that we do...

    You really think it could happen here without the unions screaming or holding up the whole project, or ol'Jesse, or one of the myriad of enviro groups, some nuts and some not, impact statements..appraisals, hearings ....and then all the anti profit, Peta, anti captalist, ...think about it...look at the last post from Freedom...he is more worried thsat Texas would be called the Coca Cola State...please..

    The project is DOA..or the govt does it themselves, we get the bill, and the public gets the Ted Williams Tunnel....complete with leaks and inability to fire anyone...

    Posted by john maasch at 03/08/2007 @ 5:20pm

32. Out of how many 10s millions treated..without billing or cash?

    none are so blind than those who do not see.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/08/2007 @ 5:26pm

33. It has to be a partnership..and that is unlikely..too mamny interests groups..

    Blue,

    I agree on the regioanal aspect of the rail( iused it in Denver when I lived there), but imagine if you will, cross country trains like the ones in S Africa.....full bedroom cars with restaurants and smooth ride....Washington to LA or SF with stops in between..

    Jr, All the citys I mentioned had rail at one time...but those road beds, lines if right of way and actually parts are gone...

    Posted by john maasch at 03/08/2007 @ 5:26pm

34. Posted by JOHN MAASCH 03/08/2007 @ 5:26pm | ignore this person

    the rights of way are gone? I don't believe.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/08/2007 @ 5:31pm

35. Posted by PLAIN BRUCE 03/08/2007 @ 8:29pm

    Stop with the facts, BRUCE...they hurt people's feelings!

    Social Security and Medicare eat up most of the Federal budget, defense the rest, some discretionary (space program, Amtrak, grants, and pork).

    The only retort to that is the money we're spending in Iraq...but if the war ended tomorrow, we'd still be spending 2/3rds on entitlements than on defense...and with the up-coming "hole" in Medicare....gut the Pentagon and you won't fill it.

    And what's one of the most popular answers to "universal health care"?....yep, "put everybody in the wonderfully run MEDICARE Program"!

    Posted by Mask at 03/08/2007 @ 8:48pm

36. a 40% INCREASE in military spending since 2000. you have been so thoroughly swindled you can't even see it, Bruce. I will NEVER stop railing against our money being stolen for death and more death.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/08/2007 @ 11:08pm

37. BTW, recent article by Robert Samuelson pointed out that 59% of federal spending is for welfare programs--medicare, social security, etc. Only 19% is spent on defense.

    this is really phony. social security for one thing has been paying for itself, and then some. remember the lock box? the politicians, of both parties, have highjacked the social security surplus, so as not to have to raise taxes, for decades. bad enough then, but a disaster now, when the baby boomers are about to retire. talk to your grandparents and parents about THEIR medicare, I'm sure they're great advocates of cutting their benefits, and the great conservative just added the drug benefit. all the while cutting taxes. who pays? your children and their children. you Bruce are the biggest phony of all, you know what I mean. haha indeed.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/08/2007 @ 11:32pm

38. another thing that goes unmentioned, is the huge interest payments on the gargantuan debt. where is that in this equation?

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/08/2007 @ 11:34pm

39. another thing that goes unmentioned, is the huge interest payments on the gargantuan debt. where is that in this equation? Posted by JOHANNESROLF 03/08/2007 @ 11:34pm

    Well put, JR.

    This president has never in his life had to stretch to make a payment. He comes from a life of wealth and privilege and I bet that it's been years since he's reached into his pocket to pull out his wallet to actually pay for something.

    It's with that same mindset that he runs the country. Just spend like a drunken sailor (my apologizes to the sailors out there) orders the finest steaks and wine, then just gets up and let someone else pay. It will be our kids and our grandkids that will be paying for the damage done by this spoiled preppy rich kid.

    "Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it." ~ Mark Twain

    Posted by COProgressive at 03/09/2007 @ 12:36am

40. Co, I bet it's the latter. good quote and good points.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/09/2007 @ 08:00am

41. Frei, I'm simply disappointed at the well-meaning people here who believe that tax money better used for social causes is being rerouted to fund the war in Iraq. That is intolerable ignorance of how our system works. An ignorance welcomed by power, by the way.

    are you suggesting that the huge cost of the Iraq war was money well spent?

    I can certainly suggest a few ways it could have been better spent. we could have restored the social security money, that was diverted, so as not to say stolen, to pay for the huge expenses associated with the aging boomers. as it is now, that expense too will be borne by our children.

    your fed reserve rants have always been short on facts and large on conspiracy theories.you see I can live with, actually without as they are on permanent ignore, the nutcase conspiracy guys. but when an intelligent and well educated person such as your self fogs up the discussion in your manner, that's when I despair.

    "Until Americans get a clear understanding"

    hey why not give it a shot and splain us ignorant sots. seriously. you know that I have on occasion taken much time and space to summarize my views. I have seen no such effort on your part.

    as for the one trick pony part, I have seen little comment from you on the very pressing issues of our day, like war and corruption in high places, the loss of rights, torture, secret prisons etc. but when the subject of taxes comes up you're right there.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/09/2007 @ 10:14am

42. Frei, I guess I will have to look up that Mandrake thingy.

    your assertions are as often, unsupported. I guess I should take your word for it, huh? like this one for instance:

    "War and corruption in high places, the loss of rights, torture, secret prisons etc. are only symptoms of that reality."

    I guess yours is a version of the unified field theory that Einstein was searching for, in vain incidentally.

    I remain skeptical, it wasn't the fed who hyped the casus belli and sent the army on a fools errand. remember when you used to lecture me that the Iraqis deserved the same as our way of life, and that it should be our task to see that they get it? ah the old days.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/09/2007 @ 10:55am

43. sorry Frei, impenetrable drivel. completely irrelevant to any discussion we've had here.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/09/2007 @ 6:16pm

44. Frei, one man's drivel is another man's wisdom. it is not my intention to disparage you. I confess I don't know much about the fed, but it's clear to me that this source is not one that I would choose to inform myself, the sound of an ax grinding was deafening.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/10/2007 @ 10:50am

45. I believe to truly understand why the United States invaded Iraq one must fully understand the Federal Reserve.

    you're going to have to flesh this out a bit. don't be so coy.

    you are also aware that it was Nixon that took our currency of the specie standard. so what was the problem with the fed before that?

    Posted by johannesrolf at 03/10/2007 @ 1:46pm