Pledge Zombie Apocalypse - Granite Grok

Pledge Zombie Apocalypse

Taxes and Democrats The pledge politics lie and broad based taxesDemocrat Candidate Jackie Cilley is trying to rally the extreme left of the already extreme left in the New Hampshire Democrat party by pretending to be a moderating voice for tax policy.  Her distinction without a difference (other than that she is being direct about her desire for a broad based tax) is that the idea of taking a pledge to veto (or vote against) any sales or income tax is unfair.  That every option should be on the table.

As pointed out here, this is extremely disingenuous because this is the only policy in which she or any of her supporters (or any Democrat) wants to “have a conversation.”  But it is worse than even that.  The facts behind the pledge zombie antics on the lefts left are, as in most cases when dealing with Democrats, lying by omission.

Back in 2007, on the cusp of what their experts claim was the beginning of the great recession, New Hampshire Democrats had a majority control of every part of state government, with Democrat John Lynch as Governor,…and the first thing the grow-government-first Democrats did was to spend your money like drunken sailors.

The second thing they did was to estimate revenue projections (equivalent to playing make-believe) that would appear to produce enough money to cover all that new spending.  They then proceeded to add taxes and fees, lots of them.

To review.  Democrats took over, spent your money, then looked for legal ways to separate you from it.

The end results were rather embarrassing and the beginning of what would be four years of a near constant fiscal budgetary crisis.

But having hidden their malfeasance well enough from the voters and taxpayers (with help from the media), and riding in on the coat-tails of the clean articulate black man from Chicago, they managed to cling to their hold on power in 2008, on the way into the heart of the great recession.

The first thing they did when they got back to Concord, was to spend even more of your money, over-estimate revenues, raise even more taxes, and begin again the cycle of constant budgetary crisis.  Were it not for one time bail out money from the federal government, the difference between what Democrats spent and what they claimed we’d generate in state revenue, on a budget they had grown by close to 25% in just a few short years, was 800,000,000.00 (million) dollars or about (roughly) 7% of the entire state budget.  An 800 Million dollar deficit they all knew about all because of new spending we could never afford to begin with.

Now this point is critical.  They spent the money believing that they would find a way to make you pay for it.  We know this because they added around 100 new taxes and fees, including a few whoppers that the citizens fought them on.  None of that was designed to create property tax relief, it was all legislated to make and then keep the State government $800 million dollars larger, and almost $2,000,000,000.00 (Billion) dollars bigger than when they came into power just a few years earlier; to create a new budget plateau from which to pile on even more spending.

So back to the pledge zombie meme; the idea that these Democrats want to have a discussion about changing New Hampshire’s tax structure.  That the idea of promising to vote against any broad based tax (sales or income) is bad for New Hampshire.

Yes, Democrats want to change it.  But they are not the least bit interested in you, working families, the elderly, the poor, the unemployed, or the most vulnerable, whoever they might be.  They want to change it so that is is easier for them to make the government larger, so they can people it with more dues paying public union employees, who will then finance their political ambition to…make the government even bigger, requiring more taxes.

You don’t have to believe me.  Look at Massachusetts, California, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Illinois.   All bastions of Democrat power, rife with corruption, incredibly high taxes, burdensome and inefficient bureaucracies, an a lot of taxes.  They all have higher poverty rates, higher rates of unemployment, higher rates of Welfare, lower standards of living, higher crime, and higher overall tax burdens….And in every one of those states, at one point or another, there was a Jackie Cilley or a Mark Fernald, trying to sell their citizens on the lie that there is some long term benefit to a broad based tax.

So instead of attacking the thing that probably kept New Hampshire better (the anti-tax pledge), why don’t we start the “conversation” with these unpleasant facts.

Those other states had a conversation about taxes, someone made the case that it would help (insert name here) but the end result was just higher taxes, bigger less efficient government, and let’s be honest, more misery.  There is not one example of a state with the kinds of taxes New Hampshire Democrats want, with lower unemployment, lower poverty, better health outcomes, healthier children, a better standard of living, and less crime, than New Hampshire.  None.  And make no mistake–they are related.

The conversation Jackie Cilley wants to have is bad for New Hampshire and worse for the people she wants you to believe will benefit.  You know who will benefit.  Jackie Cilley.

The only  long term benefit of broad based taxes is an expensive and expansive left wing bureaucracy that finances a dominant tax and spend Democrat party, and the long gradual decline into mediocrity, constant budgetary crisis, and more and higher taxes, for bigger and increasingly less efficient union controlled state government.

They all want it.  Every Democrat in New Hampshire would back a sales and income tax tomorrow if they could get one.  Jackie Cilley wants it and Maggie Hassan wants it and their voting history proves it.  And the only reason they want to talk about talking about it is because they still can’t just come out and say it.  “We are Democrats.  We believe in Big expensive State Government.  Government can’t run without taxes and big government needs big taxes.  We want more of your money for bigger government.”

That would be honest.  But they can’t say that.  Who would vote for them?

And, or course,  at the very heart of all of this, we must acknowledge, is the upcoming constitutional amendment that would prevent New Hampshire Democrats from having an income tax, which to Democrats is akin to denying the devil access to your mortal soul.

If you want to protect your income from tax and spend, grow government first Democrats (and a few score progressive Republicans), you’d better vote to pass the constitutional amendment.

In the mean time, if you want to have a discussion about tax policy,  start by asking Democrats to show us where their ideas made other states better, happier, and more prosperous places than New Hampshire is now or has been without those taxes?  It will be a very short discussion because there are none, which is why New Hampshire Democrats have to attack the anti-tax pledge and the people willing to take it, even the hoard of lying snakes on the left who only sign on because they hope it will get them into elected office.

I do commend Jackie Cilley and her supporters for almost being honest about their goals.  They want a broad based tax.  But they are still lying by omission.  Your own New Hampshire Democrat Party history tell us that you would have to be a fool to even allow a Democrat into office to begin with.  You’d have to be damn fool to allow them back into office with a board based tax at their disposal.

Democrats simply cannot be trusted with other peoples money.  It is therefore an imperative that we do everything in our power to keep them from it because they will spend it, and then spend more of it; and not a one of them can begin to tell you when they will have spent enough.

 

 

>