In arguing against busting the Texas Constitution’s spending cap, here’s what my senator, Dan Patrick has to say:
On Wednesday, the Senate Finance Committee approved SJR 13, a proposed constitutional amendment that if approved would explode state government spending by more than $15 Billion. To make the constitutional amendment to bust the spending cap more attractive, the resolution was written to add seniors and the disabled to the property tax cut measure of 2006. While senior’s groups, like the AARP, are in favor of a property tax reduction measure that include them, they are opposed to being used as political cover for a bill that busts the spending cap.
According to the Legislative Budget Board, there will be $5 Billion in available revenue this biennium before the constitutional spending cap is triggered. Covering seniors in the property tax cuts would only use $200 - $300 million of the available money.
“In 2006, I was the first one to sound the alarm that seniors and the disabled were left out of the property tax ‘cuts,’” Patrick offered. “However, leaders chose to come back and fix it later rather than fixing it then,” Patrick added. “Now we know they needed the senior’s political cover to complete the tax shift,” Patrick concluded.
“The gig is up, our constituents know the ‘great business and property tax shift of 2006′ did not reflect a reduction in taxes collected or state spending,” Patrick advised. “In fact, the reverse is happening. If SJR 13 and the proposed state budget is approved, the state will be spending 17% more in this budget than the last,” Patrick commented. “The people who voted for me didn’t want me in Austin to spend more of their money, but less. That is why I can’t and won’t vote to bust the constitutional spending cap,” Patrick remarked. “Over the next few days, I will use my voice in the media and on the Senate floor to point out these facts,” Patrick concluded.
Amen, Dan.
Filed Under Uncategorized ·
Comments
11 Responses to “Dan: Don’t use seniors as ‘political human shields’”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...LST Book Club
-
Defending Identity: Its Indispensable Role in Protecting Democracy
by Natan Sharansky -
Fear No Evil
by Natan Sharansky -
The Case For Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror
by Anatoly Shcharansky -
The Jewish State: The Struggle for Israel's Soul
by Yoram Hazony -
Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There
by David Brooks -
Snobbery: The American Version
by Joseph Epstein -
A Conflict of Visions: Idealogical Origins of Political Struggles
by Thomas Sowell
First! Sha-zaam!
Go Dan!
GO DAN - not only should we NOT bust the cap, but we need to IMPEACH PERRY
Dan knows he is fighting an uphill battle with lawyers and politicians who are entrenched in Austin and whose only objective in life is to “tax and spend”. This applies to the Dimwits the most but the Republicans are catching up or think they need to buy votes by spending. A politician is a sneaky person who will gamble with the taxpayer’s money because they know its not theirs and there’s more of it when they need it so why change. The voters of Dan’s district sent him to Austin to start the change, the only question is will any other reps join him in this major undertaking. It may take a few election cycles to achieve change and a taxpayer’s revolt will the the fuel for change.
#3 you are correct about Dan being the start of the change.
however I think the revolt is in full force, and it is going to be only a short time before these snakes are taken to task. Now that there is a radio station in Dallas that Dan can use to expose the frauds up there things will change a lot faster than we seem to think.. Or at least that is how I see it…
Sweet Sha-zaam!
Go Dan!
IMPEACH PERRY
I seem to remember some people saying that Rick Perry was a peach of a man….
so new bumper sticker…
Impeach the peach…..
Don’t blame me - I voted for the Jew!
Perry got my vote but he doesn’t have to worry about spending any of his campaign funds on me again because I won’t be voting for him again. I didn’t know a vote for Perry was a vote for that Dimwit Chris Bell—we ended up with the same results. It would have been easier to criticize Bell because he’s a Dimwit, we expect that of him, but how do you criticize one of your supposed own. I guess you start to realize he’s a RINO.
I would like to suggest that Senator Patrick start making reasonable and realistic suggestions for how the State of Texas can cut spending as he so fervently desires. Should the state lower the requirements for public education accountability so that we do not have to spend more money there? Maybe we can increase class sizes or shorten the school year so we do not have to pay teachers as much. The tourist industry should eat that idea up. I mention education because that is where a great deal of the money goes. Hey maybe we should lease our roads to international corporations so that we can cut taxes. And do we really need any government system to plan for possible emergencies?Maybe Senator Patrick could suggest other items to cut.
If the seniors do not want their tax break then they can vote against the amendment.
Of course it was a tax swap. It had to be. What do you want to cut? Make sure you get your 16 votes. Sorry, I meant 21. Or is it 20? Oh and I guess you will have to convince the House to go along with it too.
Yeah, we all know how efficient government is. There is no place to cut spending. Even education spends every penny wisely.
/barf
#9 brought to you by the education union.
glynne,
No one spends every penny wisely. I am not involved in education but that is where most of the money goes so it is probably a good place to start if you want to find billions of dollars in possible cuts. If you prefer we can cut the budget for law enforcement, prisons, government (why do we need to pay our elected representatives and why do they need staff anyway?), roads or any other department. You and Senator Patrick get to pick.
So take some medication to suppress your urge to throw up and then help Senator Patrick find the $10-$15 billion in wasteful spending so that it can be cut.