Its surprising how much you can accomplish if you don't care who gets the credit
Just remember this, when Gov. Ducey was running for re-election, he promised not to raise taxes on citizens in Arizona. We know the value of a promise by a politician, President Trump excepted. That's right, those promises are worth a bucket of spit. So do you think this constitutes a tax increase to you?
1. He promised a 20% increase in education funding for teacher raises using the "promises-for-votes" system. He said that would be paid for by increased tax revenue into the state due to a white-hot economy. Now, we know that government has only one source of revenue: our taxes. So even if the economy boom increases money [taxes] into the state and it's used for more education funding instead of, let's say, badly needed infructure funding, crime prevention, etc, would you call that a tax increase for education? We would.
2. He added a $32 fee (aka tax) on everyone who owns and drives a vehicle. Tax increase! [Even the AZ Republic thinks this is jawing words to fit the "promise."] THAT would have been a tax to veto.
3. He vetoed this rational bill SB1143 to keep our taxes from increasing due to non-conforming taxes in the state vs the federal tax. Changes made to the federal tax by Pres. Trump was supposed to help taxpayers lower their taxes but since our illustrous governor refused to bring Arizona tax structure into conformity with those lower taxes, we will be paying a tax increase. "Irresponsible," said Ducey. "Another tax promise broken," shouted his constituents.
This is three (3) tax increases this year and it's only the first week of February. We believe Gov. Ducey, Democrat masquerading as a Repubican, will become known as the "Taxing Governor." After the veto, the Governor and the Democrats enjoyed a group hug! This is what happens when we elect yet another McCain acolyte.
Likewise, he defended his veto of the tax bill.
"For those still needing a civics lesson: You can’t raise taxes through a veto," Ducey tweeted Friday.
The veto and Ducey's sharp words expanded a rift between him and members of his party.
Sen. J.D. Mesnard, R-Chandler, whose bill got vetoed, noted that the state still needs to sort out how to conform since Ducey's veto not only killed the tax-rate reduction in the measure but the conforming action as well.
“He (Ducey) is about the only person around that thinks this would not be a tax increase. He owns this.”Sen. J.D. Mesnard, R-Chandler: "As an addendum to the 'civics lesson,' I will add that you cannot conform to the federal tax code (which is what raises taxes) through a veto," Mesnard tweeted in response to the governor.
Mesnard told The Arizona Republic he'll kill any other measure that comes through the Finance Committee that he chairs because he doesn't want Arizonans paying higher state taxes.
[Let the tit-for-tat political skirmish begin.]
Why do you think he waited until after the elections to do this? This never came up as a serious discussion when Congress and the President made their move. Ducey is a wolf in sheep's clothing. I never liked him nor voted for him.
True colors do seem to come out when there are no immediate future elections with the hope that people will forget should the perp decide to run for something else....Don't forget this wolf .....
Lets see Ducey supported PROP 123, Red 4 Ed, SB 1469 and HB 2184 both stripping the Supt. of Public Instructions authority and so much more, not to mention he's a McCain flunky who has aspirations of more power in the future, just how many more signs do people need to see what he's really like. God Bless You All; Van
Always believe spin is equivalent to spin containing lies. Omission of what you have planned is lying by omission. Silence is often a lie.
Ducey with most likely aspirations for a U.S. Senate run guilty of a lie to win votes. RedforED bill will come due he is trying to cover his backside and I predict that rainy day fund will see dollars going out of the fund to add to payment for RedforED.
Ducey misused and abused Arpaio to promote Prop 123. Jeff DeWit AZ State Treasurer recommended a NO vote on the measure. Ducey scheduled a special election knowing a low turnout would ensure passage. Not a fan.
Ducey the Democrat.
Following A Successful Vote by Arizona Republican lawmakers on a bill that would ensure Arizona taxpayers do not get hit with a tax increase this year, Republican Party of Arizona Chairman Kelli Ward issued the following statement: “Republicans in the House and Senate voted this week to deliver on the promise they made to the people of Arizona to do everything within their power to lower taxes. It’s unfortunate this common-sense bill wasn’t signed into law; nevertheless, I am proud of our Republican legislators for refusing to cave under pressure and for boldly rising to defend Arizona from a tax increase. A vast majority of Arizonans strongly support lower taxes and laws that enable them to keep more of their hard-earned money. I am hopeful we can all work together and get this done before the current session expires,” she said.
Lets see our legislators passed a Bill raising the cost of Plates and call it a Fee, when in fact it's a TAX as we all know and now they vote to keep our taxes low knowing Ducey would Veto it and so was it a real vote or just more Political CYA as usual that's the real question?
Now Campbell supporting a .25 tax on fuel. What the heck are they thinking?
Okay, here is the problem I have with the vehicle license issue. The law they implemented last year says in the first paragraph:
A. At the time of application for and before registration each year of a vehicle, the registering officer shall collect a highway safety fee in an amount to be determined by the director annually for each fiscal year.
Article 9 of the Arizona Constitution says:
Section 1. The power of taxation shall never be surrendered, suspended or contracted away. Except as provided by section 18 of this article, (Article 18 is referring to real estate) all taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of property within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax, and shall be levied and collected for public purposes only. (Did they not surrender the power of taxation over to the director of public safety? Call it what you want, the director through his ability to determine what the fee will be every year has been granted a form of taxing authority. What is it our legislators and Governor don't understand?)
Article 9 AZ Constitution again
3. Annual tax; purposes; amount; tax laws; payment of taxes into state treasury
Section 3. The legislature shall provide by law for an annual tax sufficient, with other sources of revenue, to defray the necessary ordinary expenses of the state for each fiscal year. And for the purpose of paying the state debt, if there be any, the legislature shall provide for levying an annual tax sufficient to pay the annual interest and the principal of such debt within twenty-five years from the final passage of the law creating the debt.
No tax shall be levied except in pursuance of law, and every law imposing a tax shall state distinctly the object of the tax, to which object only it shall be applied.
All taxes levied and collected for state purposes shall be paid into the state treasury in money only. (This tax/fee is being collected and is going directly into the agency's budget avoiding the budgetary process being approved by the legislature and signed by the governor. The director has been given an unconstitutional authority.)
AZ Constitution Article 9
Section 12. The law-making power shall have authority (As stated or shown above, the Arizona legislature is the constitutionally directed law making authority) to provide for the levy and collection of license, franchise, gross revenue, excise, income, collateral and direct inheritance, legacy, and succession taxes, also graduated income taxes, graduated collateral and direct inheritance taxes, graduated legacy and succession taxes, stamp, registration, production, or other specific taxes.
So, in my opinion, our legislature and governor has once again violated our constitution in giving the taxing authority to a department head. No wonder they are now scrambling to fix what they did with a new law to repeal the old one.
Spot on Randy!