I wanted to share with you the email I received from Majority Leader Paul Weissmann. But first I want to point you his Facebook page where Rep. Weissmann calls for a discussion of corporate welfare. Corporate welfare? Hmm, not from my perspective as a solopreneur who earns a small income from links to affiliate programs.
Here’s his email to me:
Thank you for your thoughts on the series of the bills the legislature is debating to help balance the budget. I apologize in advance for this “form letter” response. The volume of emails on the topic, both supporting the actions of Governor Ritter and opposing them, has been too much for individual responses.
The Legislature needs to close a budget gap of $1.5 Billion. This doesn’t sound like a lot in Washington, DC money, but it is huge here in Colorado. Part of the way the Governor and Legislature is looking to close this budget shortfall is to eliminate some of the tax credits and exemptions. Colorado has well over 100 of these.
The 12 that were debated Friday and will continue to be debated will raise less than 10% of what is needed to balance our budget – about $135 million. These range from the tax credit on bull semen to eliminating the tax exemption on junk mail. There has been over 24 total hours of public hearings so far on these bills and there will be more in the Senate.
Here are some of the other balanced budget measures the legislature is taking: We just took back $110 million from k – 12 education with the passage of Senate Bill 65. We anticipate cutting that budget an additional $260 million. Last year, and again this year, seniors will be losing their “homestead exemption,” adding to about $200 million over 2 years. The Governor released some prisoners 6 months early this summer, and that brought a huge firestorm. We are cutting higher education back to 2005 funding levels.
It is not easy to make these cuts, as most of the state budget is “caseload” driven. That is, most of our expenses depend on who shows up: the number of students in k-12 and higher education, the number of people on Medicaid, the number of prisoners, etc… Those numbers we have very little control of, although we are also working on some criminal sentencing reform, to decrease the number of people in our prisons.
I certainly would have chosen a different mix of tax credits and exemptions to eliminate. I hate the candy and pop one! But this money is critical if we want a state to provide services necessary. The environmental community understands this, and is not opposing the cuts we are making to the hybrid tax credit and the conservation easement tax credit – 2 of the 12. They know that any tax credit that is not pulled back, further cuts will have to be made in education, the biggest economic driver in the state.
Most of these tax credits were put in place when the economies of Colorado and the nation were more robust. Most of the 100 plus tax credits were put in by high priced, special interest lobbyists. When we give a tax credit to one person or interest we increase the tax burden, as a percentage, on everyone else.
While it is not popular to eliminate these tax exemptions and credits, I believe it is what we must do. I know there are other cuts the legislature can make and I’ll continue to pursue and vote for many of those cuts. Cutting programs is not popular either.
Paul Weissmann
State Representative
The soda and candy tax
Just for the record, as a healthy lifestyle blogger, I do like the “sin tax” on candy and soda. I’m willing to pay taxes on my Coke Zero and Lindt chocolate. To me that’s not food. Instead, they’re luxury items and special treats. Will it cause me to buy less soda and candy? No, I’m a self-admitted Coke Zero and chocolate addict. I’ll have to get my fix no matter what type of taxes are put on my favorite indulgences. I believe others are the same – they need their Pepsi or Red Vines and will buy them even if they a bit more expensive.
Even so, we may see people cutting back a little, similar to what java junkies did at Starbucks when the economy went south. Instead of having their coffee (or in this case soda or candy) every day, they may have their special treat once a week. You have to wonder if the tax will do more harm than good financially. Then again, we could use a bit less soda and candy in our lives. It’s better for our health, which means less trips to the doctor and possibly a lowering of medical costs. We’ll see.
