Jon Stewart details all the ways New York has tried to get Rush Limbaugh to leave the city and the state, though he still hasn't left. So Rush, is this an empty threat or will you take that hate-filled, bigoted energy elsewhere?
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | M - Th 11p / 10c | |||
| Rush Limbaugh Leaves New York | ||||
| ||||
The budget is officially out and the clock is ticking until the state legislature can approve it. It comes with plenty of criticism, plenty of perks and the made with the usual amount of shrouds, cloaks and general darkness. The Gotham Gazette wonders if people will care as long as the budget gets done. Of course, it wasn't done with the blessings of good government groups and probably meant that way so that the budget could be more easily made even bigger than it was supposed to be.
For the sake of New York, this turns out to be a deal:
The agreement attempts to close the state's estimated $17.7 billion budget deficit through roughly $6.2 billion in federal stimulus spending, $5.2 billion in cuts to an array of programs, and $6.3 billion in new revenue — including an increase in the personal income tax on affluent New Yorkers.The personal income tax hike would create two new tax brackets — 7.85 percent for single or married-filing-separately taxpayers making more than $200,000, head-of-household filers making more than $250,000 and married couples with incomes greater than $300,000.
For all taxpayers making more than $500,000 — regardless of filing status — the rate would rise to 8.97 percent.
Currently, New York's highest tax rate is 6.85 percent, a rate that kicks in for single or married-filing-separately filers making more than $20,000, head-of-household filers making more than $30,000, and couples and joint filers making more than $40,000.
So the system is still broken, but the people did not lose out completely. Making the state income tax more progressive is a victory for those of us outside the elite class. It took a tremendous effort to put that Fair Share plan on the board but it should show New Yorkers one thing, if we put enough pressure on our leaders, they will act in our favor. Whether that takes displays of social protest or booting politicians from office, change can happen. Like in this instance, change is generally slow in coming, but persistence can transform society if we make it so. Sometimes though, we do need instrumental change, but it has to be brought about with a sustained push so that the powerful give way to the rest of us. The scenario that I present is something that has been done several times in our history as a state, that is, call a Constitutional Convention. When that happens, the sky is the limit on how open we want Albany to be.
Dysfunction in Albany is at an all-time high, with dissension growing in the ranks along with a weak-kneed governor coupled with the capitol's byzantine system of keeping citizens in the dark about what is going on. The budget is far from getting done and April 1st is approaching fast. So that is why we are pushing so hard to get a fair share tax on the books that makes the state income tax based on a progressive pay scale and not just a simple 6.85% for those that make more than $25,000.
Now Bloomberg, as the richest New Yorker out there, has taken it upon himself to defend his wealthy class. However, he is only one of an elite class in this state that is made up of tens of thousands, and many of them have a different idea about taxation than Mayor Bloomberg.
From The Times-Union:
ALBANY — Although "please tax me more" is a sentiment that's rarely heard — especially in this state — more than 80 well-to-do New Yorkers are asking political leaders to boost the state income tax on the wealthy.[...]The letter was organized by a consortium of groups, including Responsible Wealth, New Yorkers for Fiscal Fairness and the Fiscal Policy Institute.
The signatories include New York residents as well as those who live outside New York but pay in-state income tax.
Bloomberg would ask these people, why do you not love yourself? Well, it seems at least for these eighty signatories, they see life through a less myopic lens:
Released as the Legislature is weighing a range of proposals to do just that, a new open letter to Gov. David Paterson and legislators asks that any budget cuts to programs affecting education, health care and the poor be ameliorated by "an increase in income taxes on those who can afford it — which means us."[...]
"I've been pretty lucky, and I've always felt that a disproportionate share of the tax burden falls on lower-income people," said Chet Opalka of Averill Park, who put his name on the letter.
The well-known philanthropist and founder of Albany Molecular Research said that government tends to "cut in all the wrong places" — from the arts to education — and that he's equally committed to tightening up government spending.
So Governor Paterson, Majority Leader Smith, stop listening to Michael Bloomberg and similarily-sounding lobbyists that circle the capitol and realize there is more to budgeting than sparing the rich. If these wealthy signatories can see the problem in not encouraging the growth of the bottom 95% of society, then so should you.
Could it be that a massive union demonstration around City Hall two weeks ago paid off? The protesters were looking for the state government to have the wealthy to pay their fair share of NY's massive budget deficit. Majority Leader Smith on the other hand, wanted to focus on spending cuts alone. Yet now after considerable pressure, he looks like he's ready to budge at least somewhat.
From The NY Times:
Now that's good news, but how serious are they about it?
ALBANY — Democratic leaders in the State Senate will seek income tax increases on at least some affluent New Yorkers and a sales tax increase of a quarter of 1 percent to help balance the state budget, a Senate official with knowledge of the plans said in an interview over the weekend.
And that is the key, the framework that is set when Paterson, Smith and Silver come to the table...in that room. If Smith and Silver are already willing and able to raise taxes on the wealthy, it'll be extremely difficult for Paterson, as unpopular as he is already, to resist the groundswell for this effort.“The Senate is signaling that it needs to balance the budget in a balanced way, meaning smart cuts and fair taxes,” Mr. Cantor said.
The Senate official also said that the Democratic majority, led by Malcolm A. Smith, would resist some other key parts of Mr. Paterson’s executive budget, including a proposal to raise the state tax on income earned by hospitals, known as the gross receipts tax, and a plan to merge the New York State Foundation for Science, Technology and Innovation into the Empire State Development Corporation, the state’s main economic development agency.
The Senate’s forthcoming proposal will serve as a framework for negotiations among Mr. Paterson, Mr. Silver and Mr. Smith.
Last month when Speaker Quinn gave her State of the City address, many were surprised by her sudden willingness to take on the Mayor. I for one was thrilled to see her think about average New Yorkers and help pay for our deficits by taxing the rich instead of always taking from the poor (as Bloomberg has...or more appropriately, driving them out of the city). Of course, she had no problem going around the voters' will last year and extending term limits so that Bloomberg and herself could run for another term, so my trust in her leadership abilities was beyond shattered. So when she hedged on her idea to increase taxes on the rich yesterday, it wasn't too suprising.
From PolitickerNY:
Asked about the prospective of a perfect storm of taxation on upper-income New Yorkers, Ms. Quinn seemed at least willing to entertain the possibility of altering her plan.
“We are going to follow after the state to see what the state does,” she said. “I think that, although I very clearly believe that those who make more have to help out at times like this, we still have to be mindful of a piling-on effect, and even for a multimillionaire, there is some point at which, with A, B, C tax increase, tax increase D will be too many.”
So is she backing off her plan already, should the state adopt a new tax increase?
No, she said. “We just have to see what happens.”
That means she's still on the right side of the issue, but her slight waver is troublesome from a politician such as herself. After slush-fund scandals and the term limits fiasco, her credibility is shot. I certainly hope she comes through on this small city tax hike for the wealthiest among us, but it isn't set in stone.
