Repealing tax cuts makes a moral budget possible for North Carolina
Published June 21, 2014
by Rev. William Barber, president NC NAACP, published in News and Observer, June 20, 2014.
A budget is a moral document. Through it, we can measure a state’s values and its vision for the common good. In North Carolina, we toast ourselves as a place “where the weak grow strong and the strong grow great.” But there is no greatness in our current budget proposals.
The draft budgets pushed by Speaker Thom Tillis, Senate Leader Phil Berger and their allies deepen the flood of extremist policies that they unleashed into law last summer. I am no lonely voice crying in the wilderness here. Only 18 percent of North Carolinians approve of the work our state legislators are carrying out this June.
This short session, the Forward Together Moral Movement called upon our legislators to repeal huge tax cuts for the wealthy that hurt the most vulnerable among us. Those harmed by these policies – the sick without Medicaid, working families without the Earned Income Tax Credit – spoke for themselves. But the extremists look away. They veil their immoral choices behind the rhetoric of economic necessity. There simply isn’t enough to go around, they say.
But the General Assembly created this year’s so-called budget crisis by passing hefty tax breaks for the wealthiest and the corporations last year. If our lawmakers found the courage to repeal the unfair tax policies, we would gain up to $1.2 billion in additional revenue.
The choices that extremist budget proposals put before us – to pay for teacher raises by firing teaching assistants or preying on poor people for lottery sales – are false. We need not rob Peter to pay Paul.
There is another way forward.
Berger tried to deflect a serious discussion by claiming it would cost the state $7 billion to implement the Forward Together Movement’s Moral Agenda. But when the nonpartisan N.C. Budget & Tax Center ran the numbers on a budget that repealed the tax cuts and aligned with the movement’s platform, it discovered that North Carolina would have an extra $100 million in its coffers in 2014.
With these revenues, we could give teachers an average raise of 5 percent with no strings attached. And extending Medicaid would further increase revenue by stimulating the economy.
Not only are such policies economically feasible, but more North Carolinians agree with the movement’s budget priorities than with the extreme proposals from Tillis or Berger. According to Public Policy Polling, more than half of the state’s residents are in favor of raising taxes on those earning more than $250,000 to give our teachers a pay increase – a measure that the extremists say is off the table. Compare that with the 19 percent and 12 percent, respectively, who approve of the House and Senate budgets’ methods for raising teacher salaries.
Close to 60 percent of people support expanding Medicaid, which would provide 500,000 people with health care and pump $2 billion a year into our economy. Last summer, only 29 percent supported the extremists’ decision to cut federal unemployment benefits from 70,000 North Carolinians struggling to get back on their feet. Fewer than a third stood behind the fracking bill that will endanger our drinking water. Fewer than 10 percent want everyday people to pay for the coal ash clean-up on the Dan River.
A more fair-minded budget would give North Carolina more than a billion dollars of additional revenue to invest in the communities who need it most. That could include, among other priorities, restoring the EITC, broadening access to quality pre-kindergarten and higher education, lifting teacher salaries and boosting economic development and health access among the poor.
In this moment of reactionary politics, I am reminded of words from the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. on the moral imperatives that anchor public policy: “True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar; it is not haphazard and superficial. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring.” Dr. King and other civil rights activists knew that systemic racial injustice did not end at a desegregated lunch counter but must be traced back to federal and state policies that consolidate inequities.
In North Carolina today, it is time to reconsider our budget priorities and open, not close, the doors of the People’s House, if this is to be a state where the weak can once again grow strong and the strong grow great.
http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/06/20/3952362/repealing-tax-cuts-makes-a-moral.html?sp=/99/108/
June 22, 2014 at 12:08 pm
Norm Kelly says:
Does Mr. Barber have a right to free speech? Yes. Am I required to receive his free speech. Thank God NO! Mr. Barber has an agenda that supports a minority of people at the expense of the majority of people. People helping people is a good thing. Forced altruism through government action is not true altruism. It is theft, plain & simple. Theft is immoral. Telling me that there's a group of people that incapable of doing a specific activity because of their skin color is not only a lie, it's also immoral. Can every one of Mr. Barber's arguments be countered with truth & logic & facts? Yes. Mr. Barber's history shows he is a lib first, a black man second, and anything else is a distant third. So facts & logic are not something that comes easily to Mr. Barber. Libs don't like facts.
Why would only 18% of people polled support the direction of our state legislature? I'm guessing it has a lot to with the fact that Mr. Barber is extremely vocal in his opposition to EVERYTHING this legislature does. There are major news outlets, such as the N&D, WRAL, and many others including national outlets, that are doing nothing but criticizing our legislature. Even the NY newspapers are writing disparaging stories about our voting changes, even though our modified laws are still much much much more liberal than NY's are. Pot & kettle comes to mind when it comes to things like NY paper stories. This is why liberal rags tend to be called rags: cuz you rarely get news from them instead getting nothing more than lib/demon/socialist talking points. Much like Mr. Barber spews. The majority of low-information/democrat voters are called low-information because they only occasionally check out the news in their busy reality-tv day. And when they choose to get news from places like the N&D and stories about Mr. Barber and his words, these low-information voters have no idea what the truth of the story really is. So if it's low-information and demon voters who have a low opinion of our state legislature, then who really cares?!
Mr. Barber & his group want our legislature to 'repeal huge tax cuts for the wealthy'. This is a LIB idea. Mr. Barber is asking the legislature to forget that they were elected by THE MAJORITY of NC legal voters (i hope!) to change the direction of the libs that controlled the state for a century. If the legislature does what the minority led by Mr. Barber then we're back to the policies of the libs who were kicked out of office. How does this help anyone? Wouldn't this mean that the majority vote was ignored and the minority opinion, based strictly on questionnaires and not voting, would take over? Is this the way it's supposed to be? Should we ignore the will of the majority simply because the person asking is a black man? Or is it because he's a part-time preacher? When the majority of taxes are paid by 'the wealthy', then it's logical that when a tax cut is implemented the majority of the cut is going to 'the wealthy'. And who spends more in the state, 'the wealthy' or 'the poor'? By far, 'the wealthy' pay more in sales taxes than 'the poor' do! And every other tax is paid more by 'the wealthy' than 'the poor'. Except perhaps the sales tax. Between the sales tax and the lottery, the poor are actually hit the hardest. Who implemented the lottery tax on the poor? The libs! Where was Mr. Barber when the libs decided on a party-line vote to tax his constituents? Was he this vocal then? How about every time that the libs implemented a sales tax increase? And the times when the libs converted a temporary sales tax increase into a permanent sales tax increase? A sales tax hurts 'the poor' much more than it hurts 'the wealthy'. Did Mr. Barber hold rallies on the lawn when the libs were hurting his constituents so much? Or was Mr. Barber silent? Since I refuse to follow Mr. Barber's 'career' as an activist, I have no idea of his activism during those times. But I'm guessing, as much as the N&D and WRAL support him now, if he had been as outspoken we would know about it!
When stealing money earned by 'the wealthy' Mr. Barber and almost every lib believe it's an OK thing to do, that it is moral to steal even more from 'the wealthy'. But when a tax cut is implemented and 'the wealthy' are the beneficiaries, libs go nuts proclaiming it's immoral to allow 'the wealthy' to keep the money they earned. Why is it that libs feel the need to pit one group of Americans against another group of Americans? What happened to the lib mantra of 'can't we all just get along'? How about everyone pay the same RATE of income taxes and sales taxes, and every other tax & fee the government comes up with? Then everyone will be treated the same and NO ONE, even non-thinking libs, would be able to claim that any one group is getting special treatment. Wouldn't this actually BE FAIR? Another oft repeated mantra of the left! But the lib goal is NOT to be fair. Because being fair allows 'the wealthy' to keep some of the money they earn and does not penalize them for being successful. In the lib feelings book success demands penalizing!
Let's see what Mr. Barber says in his post: 'We need not rob Peter to pay Paul'. What exactly is Mr. Barber's plan? Before I read beyond this point he has already told us his plan. Raise taxes on the wealthy. Provide more benefits to his constituents, 'the poor'. But since it is stealing money/resources from the hated 'wealthy', it's not robbing Peter to pay Paul. It's leveling the playing field, another oft repeated mantra from lefties. It makes no sense, but this is also typical of libs. Why is stealing money from 'the wealthy' not considered robbing Peter? Because it's fair!
How do we know Mr. Barber's fiscal plan is bogus? By his own words: 'And extending Medicaid would further increase revenue'. There is one thing that is an absolute fact: taking money from one group of citizens to spend it through government programs does NOT INCREASE REVENUE! The medicaid system is ripe with fraud and abuse. The medicaid system wastes money in majestic style. Spending even more money on a fraud-ridden program DOES NOT INCREASE REVENUE! A government spending spree is NOT a way to generate revenue. Never has been, never will be, but libs love it so they always propose/endorse it.
Public Policy polling doesn't hold much weight. It's voting by legal residents that counts. Just because some people have been convinced by libs that expanding government spending programs will BOOST THE ECONOMY does not mean it is true. In order to pump $2billion into our economy by government spending means that those $2billion had to be taken out of the economy somewhere else in order to inject it in through government spending. Government spending IS NOT a zero sum game. Nothing financial is a zero sum game. But libs DO NOT UNDERSTAND this FACT! Probably because it's a fact, which they prove they are incapable of recognizing. Add to this the FACT that socialized medicine has it's own failure built in and you have a system designed to fail. It will cost us a whole bunch of money in the meantime, but it will fail in monumental style. Using medicaid to pay doctors and hospitals less than it costs them to provide the services actually does NOT boost our economy. It kills private businesses, like your local doctor's office.
I've read enough of Mr. Barber's post to know that there is nothing useful up to this point and there will be nothing useful after this point. Libs are NOT good financial planners. Libs are NOT fiscally responsible or the least bit interested in 'fairness'. They talk a good line but they are confused and want to foist their confusion on the rest of us. Taking money from one group of hated people to buy the votes of another group of people is not moral. Just because the bought people are the ones you love doesn't mean you are right. Your love may be misdirected. And your plan for improving the lives of those you love is probably misdirected as well. A hand UP is ALWAYS more useful than a hand OUT. A fact that libs don't recognize. And something that financially illiterates can't grasp.
