Tax Justice Digest stories about New Hampshire
Several weeks ago, we told you of a potentially interesting development in New Hampshire -- an effort by the Granite State Fair Tax Coalition to have voters in nearly a hundred towns call upon their elected officials to forego the so-called “Pledge.” The Pledge is a vow many New Hampshire lawmakers have taken to oppose the creation of a broad-based income or sales tax.
The effort to have voters voice opposition to the Pledge has met considerable success. As the New York Times reported last week, resolutions sponsored by the Fair Tax Coalition passed in close to 70 percent of the towns in which they appeared. This hardly means that
Despite a school funding debate that is now a decade old,
This absence of alternatives to the property tax is perpetuated by the so-called “pledge”, a vow to oppose income and sales taxes to which numerous candidates for public office in the
Conservative critics say that the resolutions are a veiled attempt to impose an income tax, while others maintain that a more direct approach would yield more tangible results. Still, it’s hard to argue against something that simply suggests doing what anyone would do when confronting a major problem – keeping all of one’s options open.
Click here to learn more about the Granite State Fair Tax Coalition.
Late last month,
Policymakers in New England saw several budgetary showdowns this week. On Wednesday, members of the Connecticut General Assembly missed an end-of-session deadline for adopting their state's budget for the next two years. One of the most contentious issues in the debates surrounding the spending measure is, not surprisingly, taxes.
Both chambers of the Assembly recently approved bills that would make Connecticut's personal income tax more progressive and that would yield revenue needed to address structural budget shortfalls and to support new initiatives. While there are differences between the bills backed by the two chambers, conflict is much more likely with Governor Jodi Rell, who has already suggested that she would veto any such tax increase.
Interestingly, just four months ago, Rell herself proposed raising the state's top personal income tax rate. She now argues that anticipated budget surpluses are sufficient to meet the state's needs.
In New Hampshire, some substantial differences will likely have to be hammered out within the legislature. The House of Representatives previously passed a budget that relied on an increase in the state's real estate transfer tax and a 45-cent jump in the cigarette excise. The Senate this week was expected to vote on a version of the budget that abandons the transfer tax increase and that would push the cigarette excise up by just 28 cents.
For advocates seeking equitable funding of K-12 education, state court decisions have been crucial for over a quarter century. From Arkansas to New York, many states have improved their education funding systems, in part, because state supreme courts have told them they have to. (Unlike the US Constitution, virtually every state constitution includes language guaranteeing a basic education to its residents — and many states have failed to comply with this basic guarantee.) In the states, as in Washington DC, this is exactly what courts are supposed to do: rap lawmakers on the knuckles when they pass laws that violate fundamental rights enshrined in the constitution.
But some New Hampshire lawmakers don't see it that way. Senate President Ted Gatsas has introduced a constitutional amendment that would actually prevent state courts from determining whether New Hampshire is living up to its constitutional responsibility to adequately fund schools. In a series of court decisions collectively known as the Claremont cases, New Hampshire courts have ruled that the state does have a constitutional obligation to adequately fund schools — and that the state is not currently doing so. Four Republican ex-governors got together last week to voice their support for "return[ing] control of education policy to the legislature."
The cause of the latest ruckus? A September court decision ruling that the state must take steps to determine what an "adequate" education really means. If the legislature fails to act by next summer, the court has said it may step in. Constitutions are generally thought of as sets of rules that legislators cannot violate, in order to protect citizens, so it's peculiar that the interpretation of these rules would be given to the legislators. No word yet on whether the state legislature would be in charge of safeguarding all other fundamental rights in the Granite State.
In South Dakota, property tax reform became a hot topic this week when schools brought a suit against the state over education funding. In New Hampshire, where the role of property taxes has been debated for a while now, the State Supreme Court is hearing a case to determine and define the cost of adequate education. The districts bringing the suit argue that statewide property tax is geared to give wealthy towns a break compared to poor towns.
Meanwhile, another state looks to passively let its problem slide by. In response to an executive order by Florida Governor Jeb Bush, a 15-member panel will study property tax reform. Some speculate that the panel was formed for purely political reasons and that during an election year a study of this magnitude means that legislators can put off making politically difficult decisions.
