Freedomworks: Just another right-wing slime machine

Kari Chisholm FacebookTwitterWebsite

Freedomworks is the right-wing anti-tax group, led by former Congressman Dick Armey (R-TX), that fights for "lower taxes, less government, more freedom". On their website, they boast that their "aggressive, real-time campaigns activate a growing and permanent volunteer grassroots army."

Yeah, too bad their "real-time campaigns" are loaded with such unbelievable slime.

Earlier today, postcards started hitting mailboxes in six legislative districts - those of Reps. Terry Beyer, Chris Edwards, David Edwards, Betty Komp, Mike Schaufler, and Chuck Riley - and looked like this:

Freedomworks

See the rest here. The postcards claim that these legislators have already voted to "raise taxes" by $270 million. That is, of course, not true.

On Tuesday, legislators voted on a one-time suspension of the corporate kicker. One more time: Suspending the kicker is NOT a tax increase. The kicker is merely what happens when the state economists make a bad estimate of future revenues. If their estimate is off, the kicker kicks.

Not only that - but a bunch of Freedomworks-endorsed Republican candidates voted for a $240 million version. So, even if you think the kicker suspension is bad, the Republicans are 89% as "bad" as the Democrats.

And the worst part of this Freedomworks garbage? In order to get these postcards in mailboxes Wednesday - they had to have the design and printing ready to fire as soon as the vote happened on Tuesday. They just had to pull the trigger.

Here's what I want to know: Did Wayne Scott and the Republican leadership know that Freedomworks had this coming? After all, If the Republican leadership knew that Freedomworks was going to pull the trigger on a series of attack ads, well, it's not likely they would have negotiated in good faith. (At least, not until the attack ads hit mailboxes -- which seems to be what happened. Showdown vote, attack ad, compromise. Hmm.)

Freedomworks isn't interested in good government that makes a difference for Oregonians -- they're just part of the right-wing slime machine.

  • THartill (unverified)
    (Show?)

    While I agree that Freedomworks is talking out their a$$ about the Kicker being a tax increase, this approach that they're using will work very well on future votes. Undoubtedly many of the bills that do raise taxes, in committee at the moment, will make it to a vote. And voters will start to notice when these postcards are delivered after each one. Oregon D's better watch out in 2008, or they will be on the losing side of another mandate.

  • Silence Dogood (unverified)
    (Show?)

    In economics class I was taught that corporations don't actually "pay" taxes ... they are tax "collectors." All corporate taxes are paid by individuals in the form of higher prices, because they get built into the price of goods and services. Lower pay and/or lower return on investment may also result from imposed corporate costs if the full cost cannot be added to the price due to competition. Corporate profits are necessary in order to reinvest and assure future profits, employment, etc.

  • John Napolitano (unverified)
    (Show?)

    What I find interesting is that a 4-color printed postcard from Freedomworks arrived in my mailbox (and those of tens of thousands of other Oregon voters) less than 24 hours after the vote on HB 2707. This is not something that can be done in a few hours. Did the minority party vote against creating a rainy day fund just so that this attack mail piece could be mailed? Looking at their 180 degrees turnaround the next day after the vote, it sure looks like it.

  • Patty (unverified)
    (Show?)

    This Freedomworks attack is interesting. While local, mainstream business groups - even conservative ones like Associated Oregon Industries - supported this package, apparently the multi-national corporations did not because don't forget that's who funds Freedomworks. They are funded by the tobacco industry to fight tobacco taxes. They are funded by the oil companies to fight energy taxes. They are funded by the telecom industry to fight cell phone taxes.

    This came out in a 2003 story in the Statesman Journal by Steve Law. Back then, Freedomworks went by Citizens for a Sound Economy. They've changed their name nationally but not their directors. Russ Walker - the vice chair of the Republican Party - continues to be the director.

    Walker must have been delighted to see the Healthy Kids plan - which will insure all Oregon children with an increase in the tobacco tax - because it would mean a new influx of cash.

    Since the Democrats worked with Oregon businesses and business groups to put yesterday's Rainy Day Fund-Corporate Tax Fairness package together, it would be interesting to know which out-of-state companies put in $ to run an astro-turf camapaign against the Rainy Day Fund because they don't want to lose their big windfall.

    Meanwhile, what's Wayne Scott's agenda? Is he for Oregon businesses or out-of-state corporations? He may have been forced into a deal yesterday because the deck was stacked against him, but this mailer shows where his heart lies.

  • Richard P. Burke (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Dear all,

    As someone who supports Freedomworks, I have to say that I'm no fan of attack ads. I hate "gotcha" politics. But I've used them in campaigns I've managed before for the same reason people use them now - they work among an ill-informed electorate.

    Having said that, let's be fair to Freedomworks - the kicker vote DOES represent a tax increase. Granted, distinctions here are subtle given that we are not talking about a traditional "tax bill." But let's cut the BS: The new corporate kicker deal, over time, will result in government keeping more money out of the private sector. Sounds like a tax increase to me. If this were not so, it wouldn't be worth the Democrats' time to persue it.

    For Libertarians, ideologically, it is a setback. We believe more money should remain in the private sector, not less. But politically, we will do our best to make lemonaide out of these lemons. The new kicker deal represents another GOP collapse against their stated principles of limited government. Our membership and fundraising goes up every time this happens.

    Libertarians didn't ask for this opportunity, and we would have been happier if Republicans had stuck to their stated principles of fiscal conservatism and limited government. But, metaphorically speaking, if one finds a $10 bill on the ground, you'd be stupid not to pick it up.

    I suppose, politically, I should thank the GOP. But all I can do is shake my head in frustration.

    Richard P. Burke, Exec. Dir. Libertarian Party of Oregon

  • (Show?)

    Richard, Ya, good luck with that. I am sure everyone is awaiting the day that there is a libertarian governor. Again, good luck with that one. LOL

  • Phil Jones (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Mr. Burke is quite correct. Voting to keep the kicker is the same as voting to increase taxes on corporations.

    I am due to receive a nice tax refund this year. If Oregon decided to keep my refund, I would consider this a tax increase.

  • (Show?)

    Loathsome and dishonest. Nothing surprising here, regrettably.

  • (Show?)

    Hi Richard! Good to see you joining the conversation at Blue O (and also LoadedO a couple days ago)! And hey, by the way--your comment is total bullshit! :)

    How do I know it's not a tax increase? Let me ask you: during the most recent recession in Oregon, when revenues fell dramatically, did you hail the legislature for engineering a "tax cut?" Because you're calling the converse situation--a simple increase in revenues based on better economic times--a tax hike.

    If you're that upset about your (hypothetical) business paying the 'extra taxes,' can I have the other 91% of that income you earned that went untaxed, and you can keep the 9% you're worried about? Because that's all it is and you know it: OR-taxed companies earned more money than expected, and thus paid the proper tax rate on that additional income. They're simply no longer getting a freebie; the money was never rightfully theirs in the first place.

    But good to hear from you!

  • Galen (unverified)
    (Show?)

    The vote on the corporate kicker represents a tax hike? Yeah sure, and cheetahs have property rights!

  • Anonymous (unverified)
    (Show?)

    "This is not something that can be done in a few hours."

    Ever done direct mail? Yes, it is. If you've got a good printer ready to work with you, it's more than do-able. I can say that with authority.

    "And the worst part of this Freedomworks garbage? In order to get these postcards in mailboxes Wednesday - they had to have the design and printing ready to fire as soon as the vote happened on Tuesday. They just had to pull the trigger."

    That's the best part! The horribly misleading content is the worst part. Oh, That us Dems could operate as such!

  • Anonymous (unverified)
    (Show?)

    (I just wanted to say that I think it's cool that my last line was in iambic pentameter...)

  • (Show?)

    I hope that the FuturePAC kidz are huddling right now to determine the best way to counter this. Freedom Works has showed their hand and their strategy about twenty months ahead of the next election.

    Now that we know some of what they're going to be doing over the course of the next two years, we have no excuse if our PR machine sits dead in the water.

    <hr/>

    As Richard Burke points out:

    I'm no fan of attack ads......they work among an ill-informed electorate.

    So what are we doing about it?

  • bama_barrron (unverified)
    (Show?)

    burke ...

    your posting above, once again, reminds me of my bottom line objection to the libertarian party.

    it still seems to me your party is made up of a few immature people who want something for nothing. you object to paying taxes yet also object to a loss of services. cause you see sooner or later, libertarians always want someone else to pay their fair share ...

    pity that!

  • (Show?)

    The sleazy deception here is that the postcards make it sound as if the legislation raised individual's taxes versus corporate taxes.

    Most people will receive this postcard and take a knee jerk reaction versus actually doing their homework and referencing the bill number (located in small print in the lower left, similar to credit terms in a car dealer ad) and, FW hopes, recipients will automatically assume that they are having their taxes raised.

    Slimy, indefensible political games, either way you look at it. Especially when you have a situation where compromise and negotiation for the best interests of our state were at work.

  • DisgustedDemocrat (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Of course FreedomWorks doesn't stand for anything remotely resembling the name. The problem is not what the fact this kind of out-of-state whackjob organization can influence opinions here says about the gullibility of Oregonians. The problem is that a lot of folks who believe they are movers and shakers in Oregon progressive politics are actually so clueless about how politics works that they are incapable of countering such juvenile tactics with much more than impotent indignation. (To his credit, Edwards at least suggested on Hartmann's 03/01/2007 show he will be fighting back.)

    Unlike Burke who opposes attacks ads as, I suppose, somehow being unseemly, I don't think a lot of commonsense folks have a problem with attack ads within certain VERY wide bounds. They are part of the political natural selection process that at times have given us some of our best leaders. I have a problem with those who want to play at being leaders, and their hangers-on, who don't have the decency or the brains to shove back politically at this kind of junior-high political tactics. That failure of character in too many so-called Democrats in the last twenty years or so is the real problem in our country and in the Northwest.

    Our so-called governor had a chance to do just that this on Hartmann's 03/01/2007 show and he once again failed us. If you want to use your editorial privilege to actually move the agenda Kari you'll also start telling our own Democratic leaders to get some backbone or work to find leaders who actually have one.

  • (Show?)

    Silence Dogood In economics class I was taught that corporations don't actually "pay" taxes ... they are tax "collectors." All corporate taxes are paid by individuals in the form of higher prices, because they get built into the price of goods and services.

    Gee, and they say there aren't right wing hacks in academia!

    The instructor who "taught" you that little piece of economic hokum needs to go back to grade school. Businesses profit by exploiting the price differential between two separate markets: raw materials, and finished goods. The specific markets are particular to the business. (For example, a baseball bat company buys on the wood market, and sells on the "bats" market. So long as wood is cheaper than bats, they make a profit; companies also deal with employment markets, but I'll leave out that little compliexity.)

    In general, corporations can't just "pass along" taxes, because if they could, they were underpricing their product in the first place. If a company buying wood at $1 and selling bats at $10 could just raise their price to $11 a bat in a response to a $1 tax increase, they would have done so already. Taxes on corporations are largely taxes on the profits of rent-collectors, a.k.a. "investors", who usually can afford it.

    There are, admittedly, exceptions to this general rule. Go tax crazy that makes it unprofitable to be in businesses - for instance putting a $9 per bat tax - and you will affect the market. You can also distort the market by putting in ill-advised price controls. But these are both situations that are simply unknown in the modern U.S. economy.

  • DisgustedDemocrat (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Silence Dogood obviously failed economics class, but he or she undoubtedly is a intellectually-challenged believer of right-wing talking points.

    In so far as corporations for now are persons under the law, it is just as accurate to say they (should) pay all the taxes and that natural born persons don't (shouldn't). That would easily be accomplished in full by forcing corporations and all business entities to pay taxes on their economic activities, at the cost of reducing the unearned income passed on to "investors" directly as dividends and indirectly as capital gains, and to pay full salaries without income tax deductions to those who earn their income through work.

    No impact on prices there, nor net dollar impact on the economy. A whole lot of impact standing up to the greed morality running this country into the ground of those who increasingly don't feel they should have to pay for what the working people in this country do for them. I'd much rather tax all those corporations and people who sit around pulling in unearned income, rather than those who go out and work every day. It's the American thing to do.

  • (Show?)

    By the way, I'd also like to congradulate Kari on his highly entertaining presentation at the Washington County Democrats meeting last night.

    As a side note, in addition to being hopped up on cold-medicine, I finally was able to figure out why Lupita kept mispronouncing Kari's name: someone had misspelled it as "Keri" on her agenda. She knows the name now.

    Many thanks, Kari. We hope to see you again on the west side. Maybe at our office.

  • nsr (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I got a robo-call from them yesterday. The caller ID was "503-000-0000". Cowards.

  • curt (unverified)
    (Show?)

    "In economics class I was taught that corporations don't actually "pay" taxes ... they are tax "collectors." All corporate taxes are paid by individuals in the form of higher prices, because they get built into the price of goods and services."

    I don't think so.. The price of goods reflects what the seller can get for those goods. Higher taxes on corporate profits are just that -- higher taxes on the profits. The cost can be passed on to customers, assuming the customers are willing to pay those costs. But if they aren't, the company will just have to accept lower profits -- much like they do if the cost of raw material goes up.

    Absent a convincing argument that high corporate profits are the ultimate goal of our tax system, I don't have a problem with a one-time suspension of the corporate kicker. I don't know why someone else would either.

    Curt

  • (Show?)

    nsr--would you mind contacting us at loadedorygun-at-gmail-dot-com? If you can remember how the spiel went, we'd like to hear about it.

  • (Show?)

    For example, a baseball bat company buys on the wood market, and sells on the "bats" market. So long as wood is cheaper than bats, they make a profit........

    Nice one Steve. Best single sentence on this topic that I've seen so far.

    It's impossible to have informed debate when the parties don't even begin to agree on definitions. As for corporate personhood, that one needs to be part of the drumbeat all of the time.

    It's the single most corrupting factor to have been introduced into US law since the signing of the Bill of Rights.

  • (Show?)

    I like how Richard Burke basicaly admits that the Libertarian party is mostly made up of disgruntled Republicans.

    This means he sees the main source of potential members as being disaffected Republicans, and the primary mission of the Libertarian party as being to put spine back into the Republican party.

    So if and when the Repubican party reinforces its spine in his view, all his members will leave his party and flock back to the Republicans.

    Sounds like a great strategy for building a growing new party with staying power. Not.

  • Dave Lister (unverified)
    (Show?)

    The business community, for the most part, supports keeping the kicker to create a rainy day fund and also supports increasing the corporate minimum. I understand there was general disappointment at the Portland Business Alliance government affairs meeting yesterday morning when it looked like the deal had fallen through.

  • undees (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I buy the argument that the price charged for a good has a lot more to do with the market than it does, for example, with the taxes on raw materials.

    (Perhaps the same argument applies to developers and SDCs as well. The Arbor Homes lobby are always spreading the "home prices will skyrocket" hysteria when localities levy SDCs. Aren't home prices determined by the market?)

    On a related note: since prices are determined by markets and not by taxes, why do some studies count property tax as being paid by renters? The naive objection to this practice would be that rent is determined by the market, not by whatever taxes the landlords pay. Are the standard methods of accounting for rent different than those for purchased goods?

  • (Show?)

    Posted by: Dave Lister | Mar 1, 2007 11:43:23 AM

    Sssssshhhh. You will upset the GOP-bots and fellow travelers of the same, if you point out almost every business association backed the plan to suspend the corporate kicker in order to build a rainy-day fund and the increase of the corporate min.

  • (Show?)

    Richard, if the state economist was a prophetic genius, he'd get the economic forecast right every time -- and there would never be a kicker.

    The kicker kicks because he's wrong, not because we have too much taxes.

    If you want to fight for lower taxes, then fine - do that. We should have a reasonable argument about the appropriate level of taxation.

    But let's not pretend that the kicker is anything other than a bizarre and random rebate - based entirely on the fogginess of the state economists' crystal ball.

    Thanks for coming by.

  • Richard P. Burke (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Dear Zman,

    I think you misunderstood - the Libertarian Party is made up of, I would guess, just about as many ex-Democrats as ex-Republicans. I never admitted that the LP is made up of disgruntled Republicans. Given our stands on issues like gay marriage, medicinal marijuana and death with dignity, nobody who "gets" the LP would simply call us disgruntled Republicans. I invite you to educate yourself.

    Our combined values of fiscal conservatism and broad social tolerance is what will give us staying power, because it is unique among the four largest political parties. Our growth has been and will continue to be facilitated as people tire of choosing between their money and their rights.

    But, in the meantime, if we can occasionally insert a spine into the collective Republican will on fiscal issues, all the better. If we can do the same for Democrats on social issues from time to time, all the better. Our growth and relevance is building from the local level, where we win most of our elections. But as we're building, we naturally try to influence larger forces when we can.

    Richard P. Burke, Exec. Dir. Libertarian Party of Oregon

  • (Show?)

    Mr Burke,

    Ok, good response. I do get the LP.

    I am sympathetic to the Libertarian party's agenda on both social and fiscal issues, but what turns me off is that they take such extreme positions on both sides.

    What we need is a party that is "fiscally conservative" and "socially tolerant" but without going to the extremes on either side.

    We need a moderate Libertarian party, rather than a radical Libertarian party that takes extreme positions outside the mainstream. One that can negotiate, compromise, and actually govern and get things done.

    As it is now, the perception most people have of the Libertarian party is primarily that of a group of Minarchists and Individualist anarchists, and stoners with little common sense.

    I like to call myself a Liberal, in the classic European sense. Which is basically a moderate Libertarian. Or perhaps I'm a Green Libertarian.

    But I usually always vote Democratic since they best represent my views overall, or at least the ones I consider most important.

  • Phil Jones (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Sure, go ahead and allow the state to keep the kickers. The next thing that'll happen is the state economist will pad the economic forecast every time to ensure a nice, cushy "rainy day fund". This slush fund will be used for everything other than the public good, i.e. legislative trips to Hawaii, new luxury SUV's for state employees and huge increases in state employee salary and benefits. There will be no incentive for the state to budget carefully and all our taxes will skyrocket.

    Caveat Emptor

  • Scott in Damascus (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Sssssshhhh. You will upset the GOP-bots and fellow travelers of the same, if you point out almost every business association backed the plan to suspend the corporate kicker in order to build a rainy-day fund and the increase of the corporate min.

    Even the hand-picked republican party economist agreed that the corporate kicker did nothing to promote Oregon businesses.

    And correct me if I'm wrong, but can anyone name one single Oregon company that decreased prices or offered rebates to their clients after they received their kicker checks? Nike .... no. Intel .... no. Columbia Sportswear ... that would be NOT.

    Yeah, I didn't think so.

  • Scott (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Undees asks: On a related note: since prices are determined by markets and not by taxes, why do some studies count property tax as being paid by renters? The naive objection to this practice would be that rent is determined by the market, not by whatever taxes the landlords pay. Are the standard methods of accounting for rent different than those for purchased goods?

    Good question. A corporation's ability to pass on taxes, or get stuck with them, depends in part on the consumer's ability to find a substitute for the taxed good or service. In the case of rental housing, there is no substitute (except for the streets), so landlords can effectively pass on the entire tax. In the short run, rents may go up at slower or faster rates, depending on supply and demand. But over time, renters eat the tax.

  • Anthony (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Phil--

    We all like a good slippery slop argument from time to time but, as most of us know, they don't work. They lack logic and are simple fear tactics.

    On the kicker note, it's nice that the State Legislature is actually behaving like it did in a bygone era: bypartisanship without violent rhetoric--except from the special interest groups who will always behave like political gorillas--uncouth, rabid and irrational.

  • Silence Dogood (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I am not arguing that corporations should bear no mandated costs. This is about the annual $250 million increment that the new Oregon tax increase represents.

    I met somebody who had started his own business and it had become successful after a decade or so of struggling to stay solvent, above water.

    I got to talk to him at length and one thing I asked was how he priced his product to his customers. While for sure, he would charge as much as he could, the reality was that if he was not limited by what his customers could afford, he was always limited by what competitors would charge.

    And as a competitor himself, the most valuable customers to get were established buyers, who already bought from someone else (because 9 out of 10 start-ups fail and you cannot grow your business with new business accounts.) So he had to have at least a better price plus some other benefit(s) or advantage(s) to win over an account, making cost control very important.

    What about when a cost went up without delivering marginal value, like inflation pushing up the prices of what he needed to buy? Or higher taxes? To him, whatever cost went up was one and the same. To resolve the economic effect required a balance between a) passing along as much of the price increase as possible to customers, b) cutting some other costs or jobs or improving labor efficiency, and c) accepting lower profits and being able to afford less reinvestment and growth.

    Mind you, this was a successful business person who ended up investing quite a sum (and getting a fair return) and creating hundreds of jobs. And of course he worked very hard and - most importantly, he says, he was lucky, to boot.

    So the upshot - if you are a consumer or worker, neither a), b), nor c) is a really good outcome and that's why mandated cost increases to corporations undermine outcomes for both capital and labor interests.

    Besides, most "labor interest" is accompanied by a "capital interest", insofar as individual home ownership and savings for retirement is now quite widespread.

  • youaretheslimes (unverified)
    (Show?)

    THe real slimebuckets are the so called "progressives" AKA liberals who want to cram the concept of communism down our throats, take away all our freedom and let the government run everything. What exactly, I might ask, is "progressive" about that? Definitely NOT definition #3

    Main Entry: 1pro·gres·sive
    Pronunciation: \prə-ˈgre-siv\ Function: adjective Date: circa 1612 1 a: of, relating to, or characterized by progress b: making use of or interested in new ideas, findings, or opportunities c: of, relating to, or constituting an educational theory marked by emphasis on the individual child, informality of classroom procedure, and encouragement of self-expression 2: of, relating to, or characterized by progression 3: moving forward or onward : advancing 4 a: increasing in extent or severity b: increasing in rate as the base increases 5often capitalized : of or relating to political Progressives 6: of, relating to, or constituting a verb form that expresses action or state in progress at the time of speaking or a time spoken of — pro·gres·sive·ly adverb — pro·gres·sive·ness noun

  • Anthony (unverified)
    (Show?)

    youaretheslime--

    Lol! Wow, that was pretty funny! That was satire, right?

    You couldn't be serious, right? Especially since many of the founders of the US were 'liberals' by today's standards. 'Liberals' helped defeat Communism just as much as Conservatives did.

    I'd explain what it is that liberals expect of capitalism, but it'd probably be lost on you.

  • (Show?)

    The next thing that'll happen is the state economist will pad the economic forecast every time to ensure a nice, cushy "rainy day fund".

    Actually, you've got that backwards. If the state economist was an unethical person, he'd simply post the official estimate at "Fourteen Trilllllllion Dollars!" and whisper the real number in the each of the budgetmakers -- and there would be no kicker. Ever. (In fact, I may have suggested just such a thing. :)

    But as an ethical person whose reputation and livelihood relies on getting the numbers right -- or at least, having a real basis for the numbers -- the state economist gives us his best guesstimate.

    But of course, he/she can't possibly know if Intel is going to delay a new chip release or if Nike is going to land LeBron James or not or any number of things that whipsaw corporate taxation two years out.

  • dddave (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Kary says: "But let's not pretend that the kicker is anything other than a bizarre and random rebate - based entirely on the fogginess of the state economists' crystal ball.

    Thanks for coming by."

    What is bizarre is that you think the state budget is totally dependent on 9% of a total, or whatever the state is capable of collecting? The state budgets for its needs. If it collects more than said budget, then we get it back. If the economy goes up, then taxes go full steam ahead, funny tho, if the economy goes down, we cant possibly cut the budget, think of the children. The concept of a percentage is idiotic. Budget what you want/need and fight for it. Taking another $4 billion a year, PLUS overcollected taxes in the kickers is pure BS. Kari, why isn't a projected FOUR BILLION A YEAR INCREASE good enough for you? Talk about appalling greed. How about sending in more of YOUR MONEY?? The state is going to go find a way to spend FOUR BILLION more dollars a year, regardless of the need!!!! How you folks sleep at night is beyond me.

  • (Show?)

    What is bizarre is that you think the state budget is totally dependent on 9% of a total, or whatever the state is capable of collecting?

    Strawman alret. Kari nor nobody else claims such a thing.

    If the corporate kicker is such a pittance, then why are you up in arms over this plan, which almost all business associations and the corporations themselves support?

  • (Show?)

    Silence Dogood reports that “In economics class I was taught that corporations don't actually "pay" taxes ... they are tax "collectors." All corporate taxes are paid by individuals in the form of higher prices, because they get built into the price of goods and services. Lower pay and/or lower return on investment may also result from imposed corporate costs if the full cost cannot be added to the price due to competition.” If it were my economics class, Silence would get an A. Individuals pay taxes, all taxes. There is some disagreement among economists about which individuals pay corporate income taxes. The majority answer is Silence’s – the corporate income tax is a consumption tax: anything that raises the cost of doing business across the board, like corporate income taxes or property taxes, will ultimately be shifted forward to consumers. The minority answer is that these are primarily wealth taxes, paid by shareholders, landlords, etc. Economists tend to see this second position as the more conservative perspective. The empirical evidence can be interpreted either way. My view is that who pays largely depends on how the tax base is defined, how the tax is assessed and administered, etc.

  • (Show?)

    If Dick Armey thinks he's going to make political hay out of David Edwards working to eliminate the corporate kicker, then Armey still hasn't grasped why the GOP lost in 2006.

    Edwards won because Oregonians understand that the tax burden has been falling heavier on working people and small businesses in this state, and that 70 percent of the corporate kicker was going to multi-state and out of state corporations of the kind that Armey and Freedomworks front for.

  • Ben (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Tax increase, not an increase. Tax not a tax. All that aside. How much should state pending rise every year or biennium? Is that in perpetual flux? There seems to be only one circumstance prevalent throughout every economic cycle. Every economy needs tax increases. Tax increases were deemed vital during the early 90s recession, deemed vital during the boom of the 90's, imperative in the 2000 recession and a must during the current boom. Exactly what economy has to arrive where Democrats will not claim tax increases are a must? I contend no such economy exists.

  • RonB (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Good job of exposing the Republican slime machine, Kari.
    This is fresh and original reporting.
    What I worry about is that the legislature becomes merely an extension of similar slime-like partisan infighting in the elections. How do we stop this in a state as closely divided as Oregon? 1) The Democrats, when they win, don't play these awful Republican games that tear down the democracy -- see above. They refuse to get down in the dirt with the Rs.
    2) The Ds try to open up the process and challenge the Rs to do the same. Didn't happen this session. Closed caucuses in both the House and the Senate. 3) The Democrats try to develop an agenda that causes meaningful change in education, health care and the other issues that independents and moderates of both parties can recognize has their best interest at heart. The Democrats do this indpendent of the special interest groups who finance their campaigns. That is, they look to the public interest, not their own re-elections. 4) The Democrats solicit their Republican counterparts across the aisle to vote with them in the public interest. They do this openly and not in a partisan, game-playing fashion. What is important the Ds should be saying with humility and without a touch of self righteousness, is not continuation of partisan voting control, but the public interest. In this regard, action speaks louder than words.
    5) The Democrats give voice to minority ideas within their own caucus. Some of them are worthy of considering, and voting upon. They set an example of not managing the caucus tightly, and they call attention to this when it happens. Not as a partisan tactic, but as a matter of principle. This is hard to do with a closed caucus. When our democracy works best is when electoral politics focuses on substance, when the press focuses on substance not conflict, and when the legislature sets aside partisan differences and tries to work in the public interest and let the political chips fall where they may. This is not the way the special interest lobbies want us to act. This is not the way our current unbridled system of campaign finance encourages.
    I would like to see Blue Oregon and Oregon progressives more focused on how to get to the kind of politics we want, not simply punishing the wrongdoers, but making things work.

  • Steve (unverified)
    (Show?)

    "the money was never rightfully theirs in the first place."

    Truer words were never spoken by a government employee who has enough time during his work day to give out these little gems of wisdom. Why doesnt the govt just take all money back since they print it then?

    Again, Teddy got a 20% increase in revenues as a gift. Why can't he take and put any of this in a rainy-day fund? Sorry, if you pay a higher tax rate than you would have last year by keeping the kicker (which if the legislature would follw the constitution is rightfully corporation's) - it is a tax increase.

  • Ross Williams (unverified)
    (Show?)

    " All corporate taxes are paid by individuals in the form of higher prices,

    That's clearly not true. Prices are set by the market. Just because taxes are raised doesn't mean a business can raise its prices. And cutting taxes won't reduce prices unless the market forces them to be reduced.

    Of course, in the end, the cost of everything is paid by someone. The question is who.

  • Silence Dogood (unverified)
    (Show?)

    In economics class we were required to read Das Kapital as a matter of "opposition research" so we could understand capitalism and free-trade among individuals as a natural self-organizing system ... bionomics, if you will ... compared to the obvious failure of a system imposed on ordinary people by vicious authoritarians.

    I find it mildly surprising that so many commenters here seem to regard Das Kapital as gospel, and lack a basic understanding of human economic behavior. However, this does explain - a little - why Oregon tends toward collectivist. More-than-adequate proof notwithstanding, many people still do not view Marxism as a straight-line path to human misery. As Kurt Vonnegut wrote, "So it goes."

  • (Show?)

    In economics class we were required to read Das Kapital as a matter of "opposition research" so we could understand capitalism and free-trade among individuals as a natural self-organizing system ... bionomics, if you will ... compared to the obvious failure of a system imposed on ordinary people by vicious authoritarians.

    I really have to wonder where this economics class took place because it sounds like one of those academic worlds where there is a distinct agenda -- something usually blamed on the Left.

    Capitalism as a natural system. No agenda there.

    Was this at Ayn Rand U?

  • (Show?)

    "Sorry, if you pay a higher tax rate than you would have last year by keeping the kicker (which if the legislature would follw the constitution is rightfully corporation's) - it is a tax increase."

    And since you don't pay a higher tax rate, in fact, it is NOT a tax increase. I'm glad we could clear that up. It took a machete to whack through the ad hominem, but we got it straight now.

  • charlie (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Curious, if I had been a GOP strategist I would have sent those out to a slightly different list. Does this mean that Galizio is no longer a top target for the GOP?

  • (Show?)

    Jeff Frane I really have to wonder where [Silence DoGood's] economics class took place because it sounds like one of those academic worlds where there is a distinct agenda

    I'm pretty certain at this point that the class, was not actually real, but instead took place in Silence's colon, from whence he pulls random self-created facts from time to time.

    The irony is that, having spent my youth being branded a revanchist corporate-worshipping conservative in the schoolyard politics of Bezerkley California, I find that "Silence DoGood" and most of the modern GOP resemble nothing so much as Communist ranters of that day. They both subscribe to what I call "the bad people theory of economics". This theory posits that everything would be virtually free if the "bad people" weren't taking it all away. (And of course - the "bad people" fully control all aspects of all governments everywhere.) They also both think that you can make the fundimental economic cost of something (apples/steel in the case of communists, teachers/roads/bridges in the case of Republicans) go away if you simply VOTE to make it "free"!

    Da, da, comrade! By cutting taxes to nothing so we can drown government in the bathtub, policemen will be so happy they will go into business writing people tickets for free! Then we will be all living in Commu-- -sorry- Republican utopia!

  • DSaretheREALslimebuckets (unverified)
    (Show?)

    These idiot democrats are the real slimebuckets. They want to feed the bloated government bureaucracy to justify their own existence. I hear Portland has more government per capita than anywhere else in the U.S. Is this a reputation you're proud of? Government paper pushers who are trying to drive out all the business and at the same time cram this stupid "livability" joke down our throats. Oh forgot to mention that you can ride a pretty and costly tram overlooking the sewage filled river. Or that you can make lots of nice conversation with many bums since there are so many of them here. This city is an utter joke and an embarassment for the entire state of Oregon.

  • DSaretheREALslimebuckets (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Oh, and I love how the bureaucrat-loving sky is falling alarmists always point to police and vital government services and even cut those VITAL services when they lose funding so as to con the general public into feeling sorry for them. It's forcedc charitability, ala progressive style!

  • DavidEdwardsConstiuent (unverified)
    (Show?)

    So what are we doing about it?

    I just checked my voice mail and found a "voter alert" robocall from Our Oregon thanking David Edwards for his leadership. Glad to see some sort of a response to these slime ball mailings. I got one of those postcards as well.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    These idiot democrats are the real slimebuckets. They want to feed the bloated government bureaucracy to justify their own existence.

    I was just talking to a local school board candidate about the need to examine the high salaries paid some central office administrators. If that is what is meant by bloated bureaucracy, fine. But if what you really mean is management should be paid what the market will bear but unionized employees are paid too much, forget my support.

    It is true in both public and private sector (ever dealt with large corporate bureaucracy?) that the front line workers don't get the pay or respect upper management gets.

  • GT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    The entire government is wasteful and horribly inefficient and provides LOUSY service, at best. Take for instance our wonderful "transit" system. Tri-Met is so bad they won't even post reliability reports on their website. I love how they tout it "America's Best Transit System". I'm sorry but this is a bold faced lie. I have been to many other cities and their transit systems blew ours out of the water. I also like it how these "livability experts" say how Portland is the "most European city in America". B.S. I've been to Europe and those places are nothing like Portland! How many times have you witnessed a broken fare collection machine along the max or in the Streetcar? I got into it with a bus driver a few weeks ago because she said I didn't have fare. Well the fare machine was broken - what was I supposed to do? All I had was my credit card and it would have taken me extra time to go to the ATM, get change, etc... I politely asked her for an envelope to mail payment and she angrily quipped back at me that it wasn't "HER PROBLEM" that I don't have the means to pay my way. So the concept of "customer service" doesn't apply to the government, so it seems. But the lowlife and bum slimebags ride the MAX all the time for free and you rarely see the fare police. I witnessed a fist fight on the MAX while crossing the bridge tonight and the operator opened the door and told them to quit "disturbing the peace". I can't believe she was so passive and incompetant to just let it continue. What should have happened is she should have stopped the MAX and waited until the Police came and let them handle it. But the police were probably busy hobnobbing at the local 7-11 store like they always are. So, Tri-Met can't even fix their revenue collection methods but seem to have the money to build a completely unnecessary "transit mall" costing over $1 BILLION! Now I hear that the busses are actually MORE reliable off the mall, on 3rd and 4th avenues but local businesses are upset because the lowlife scumbags are huddling near their entrances, smoking cigarettes and drinking beer. So there you have it, the transit system that we all subsidize for the benefit for the lowlives of Portland who don't give a damn to better themselves. Then there's the tram - 10x over budget. Tonight I actually (in yet ANOTHER attempt to be "progressive" and "open minded) decided I was going to take the Amtrak down to Salem to go visit my parents. Well, for the 10th time in a row that I've ridden it, it was LATE... I don't mean a little late, but WAAAAAY late (45 minutes to be exact). Another example of a government "service". And who subsidizes this substandard garbage? We all do..... And they think we should fork over even more for their bumbling incompetance? How about we truly be progressive and reform the government and make it accountable to it's customers? No, that is heretical. They would rather give free rides to illegals and pander to them than those of us who actually contribute to their incomes. Nevermind. Any organization that operated in such a way would go out of business. Government is the only entity that can get away with abysmal service and still extract more from its customers, against their will.

  • Snider (unverified)
    (Show?)

    That's it. I'm voting Republican next time - damn freaking commie pic liberals!

    Terrorists!

    <h2>Terrorists!</h2>

connect with blueoregon