Wash. Dems cheer Ore. tax vote; preview of what's next here?

[HuckleB]

http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/archives/192462.asp

"Democrats in Washington state and groups seeking to avoid deep cuts to education and human services were buoyed by the results of an Oregon election Tuesday in which voters approved tax hikes on the wealthy and businesses.

Gov. Chris Gregoire and majority Democrats in the Legislature are considering raising taxes as one way to deal with a $2.6 billion operating budget deficit.

"Oregon voters met the challenge of these difficult times and clearly said that schools, healthcare, public safety and other essential services cannot be forsaken. It is gratifying to see that the public understands the importance of preserving services to the most needy and providing education to the next generation--especially now when those efforts are most needed," Gregoire said in a statement.

Rep. Jeff Morris, D-Mount Vernon, the House Speaker pro tem, said the Oregon results "show that taxpayers recognize filling these deficits by just cutting safety nets will have long-term negative impacts on people individually having a good job and putting food on the table."

..."

-------------------------------

Good luck to our northern neighbors!

:hi:

[ParkieDem]

1. Good-- they'll need to.

I'm not sure about the tax rates or structure in Washington, but my biggest fear when Oregon raised these taxes was that high-earners (who are much more mobile than lower-wage workers) would move across the river to Washington, depriving Oregon of a skilled wage base. That's what happened in California in the 1990s and early 2000s, as they could easily move to low-tax Nevada or Arizona. The same thing also happened in Maryland.

[HuckleB]

3. In reality, they would have to move quite far to save much.

They might end up paying more if they moved to WA or CA, for example.

Oregon actually does not have restrictive taxes. That is a perception that does not match reality.

In the '90s, I worked for a business publication company, and I had to read most of the nation's business magazines. For several years, Oregon's businesses rated it as being very business friendly, especially for small businesses, and Portland was singled out as being a great for a small business. Then the PBA decided they wanted an even better deal, and they began pushing propaganda about how Portland was not business friendly. Despite no tax increases and no policy changes, suddenly those magazines were no longer rating Portland and Oregon as business friendly, largely because the businesses had motive to change perception. Propaganda is successful, but, at least in this case, it's BS.

Some actual data can be found here where Oregon is rated as the 14th "best" state for business tax climate:... See More

http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/topic/52.html

This five-year-old study also shows Oregon's business tax burden as being very low:

http://www.ocpp.org/cgi-bin/display.cgi?page=issue040123

And another piece on the matter:

http://www.blueoregon.com/2009/03/oregon-business-taxes-were-number-2-lowest.html

And one more:

http://blog.oregonlive.com/mapesonpolitics/2008/08/oregon_state_and_local_tax_bur.html

I say it's time to drop the propaganda of the campaign, and look at the reality of the situation. The following pieces do a mildly fair job of doing just that.

http://www.registerguard.com/csp/cms/sites/web/news/cityregion/24367821-41/oregon-business-tax-state-measures.csp

and

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2010/01/measures_66_and_67_weighing_th.html

[marginlized]

2. Good, somebody gets it.

but then Oregon is so lucky to be looking at just a 2.6 billion deficit.

[HuckleB]

5. We're not exactly a very big state, population wise, though.

[LakeSamish706]

4. It needs to be done federally to really do the job. Since the rich can just move, how

do you hold them accountable at a State level?

[HuckleB]

6. See post 3 above.

We're not talking huge amounts on an individual basis. The wealthy would have to go quite far away to save any on taxes.

But, yes, we need to do it at the Federal level. No disagreement there.

[alstephenson]

7. Thanks, Oregon Dems!!!