Posted on 05/22/2002 11:17:34 PM PDT by GailA
By Tom Humphrey, News-Sentinel Nashville bureau May 23, 2002
NASHVILLE - Legislators denied any impropriety of private discussions as income tax advocates sought support Wednesday, but questions of honesty were otherwise raised.
"Who was counting votes - Larry, Moe and Curly?" asked state Rep. Gary Odom, D-Nashville, a tax opponent, referring to the late comedians known as the Three Stooges. "Either that, or several people lied."
When the vote came up five votes short on a proposed 4.5 percent state income tax, a surprised House Speaker Jimmy Naifeh refused to have the vote officially recorded for an hour and 50 minutes.
In that time, he and other tax reform supporters confronted a handful of legislators who they had obviously considered as "yes" votes after what Naifeh has characterized as "look-in-the-eye" private meetings. Four of them subsequently switched their votes from "no" to abstaining.
They were Reps. Frank Buck, D-Dowelltown; George Fraley, D-Winchester; John Tidwell, D-New Johnsonville; and John Mark Windle, D-Livingston.
Buck, in a floor speech afterward, added Rep. Chris Newton, R-Cleveland, to the list of those in the private session and deemed as "blatant falsehoods" claims by talk radio hosts that lawmakers were "cutting backroom deals" for personal gain.
Three other legislators who voted "no" were mentioned by several colleagues as prospective "yes" votes, though they denied misleading anyone. They were Reps. Clarence "Pete" Phillips, D-Shelbyville; Mike Turner, D-Nashville; and Mary Pruitt, D-Nashville. Pruitt was the only member of the 14-member Black Caucus to vote no.
Naifeh, echoing Buck's floor comments, later said the discussions involved possible changes to the bill to win extra support.
"Nothing we talked about was for any individual. It was all for the betterment of the state of Tennessee," Naifeh said.
By switching their votes from "no" to "abstain," the four lawmakers avoided the potential of a parliamentary maneuver that could have prevented any further consideration of an income tax during the current legislative session.
If a majority of members vote against a bill, a follow-up "motion of rejection" can be called. If that passes, the content of the bill is considered "rejected," meaning that it cannot be considered again in the same session.
That would have apparently precluded consideration of an income tax again. House Finance Committee Chairman Matt Kisber, D-Jackson, said it could have meant that no taxes of any kind could have been considered.
"By default, you would have been enacting the DOGS budget," Kisber said.
DOGS is the acronym for "Downsizing Ongoing Government Spending," a proposal for cutting spending to balance the state budget without new revenue. Included in the DOGS proposal is about $400 million in cuts to education.
Tom Humphrey may be reached at 615-242-7782 or humphrey@edge.net.
Highlights of Tennessee Tax Reform Plan May 23, 2002
Enact a 4.5 percent flat-rate state income tax effective Jan. 1, 2003, based on adjusted gross income from federal tax return.
The state income tax would have these exemptions: first $15,000 for single filers; first $30,000 for married couples filing jointly; first $22,050 for single heads of household, plus $1,500 per additional dependent.
Repeal 6 percent tax on investment income and treat investment income as regular income subject to 4.5 percent tax, except that 50 percent of capital gains would be excluded from taxation.
Remove sales taxes on grocery food, clothing up to $500 and non-prescription drugs. Prescriptions already exempt.
If tax collections exceed 6 percent of total Tennessee personal income, excess to be rebated to taxpayers or placed in "rainy day fund" if rebate expenses greater than surplus.
Increase cigarette tax by 7 cents per pack, to 20 cents.
Increase liquor, beer and wine taxes by 10 percent.
Increase state sales tax from 6 percent to 7 percent from July 1 to Dec. 31, 2002.
What is next? Wasn't today the last day of the Legislative session?
Thats REALLY funny! State Bureaucrats allowed to CHOOSE whether to KEEP taxpayer overpayments or GIVE THEM BACK...
Hmmmm... tough choice, let's see... THEY WILL ALWAYS KEEP the MONEY!!!
(Just look at communist Minnesota)
Then, later when there ARE surpluses, liberal groups will clamor for them all the time,
proposing 20 dollars in new liberal spending for every 1 dollar of surplus.
and they will always use the phrase "but the money is ALREADY THERE! -
We don't even have to raise taxes to fund this blah blah blah project!!"
How can the passage of legislation against the will of the vast majority be in the interest of the betterment of the state of Tennessee? This should be easy, Jimmy. If your idea is so hot, just convince the citizens of your cleverness. That you haven't should be taken as an indication you're not the deep thinker you envision yourself to be.
You are SO on target.
I hope if this tax does pass that the TN Supreme Court will sharply rebuke Naifeh. His silver tongue might convince the gullible and state-welfare-dependent, but intelligent legal scholars should see his manuverings as thoroughly contemptible!
I suspect between now and next Wednesday, all of these legislators will be hearing from some acid-tongued constituents. That can only drive down the yes votes next Wednesday.
If you love FReedom and Liberty, and you live in Tennessee, best you be in Nashville next Wednesday!
By Frank Cagle
Vote was failure for leadership
If the General Assembly were a parliamentary form of government House Speaker Jimmy Naifeh would have to resign and call for new elections.
The vote on his state income tax bill on Wednesday was a public humiliation demonstrating a total failure of Democratic control of the House of Representatives and an apparent inability to count to 50.
First, there's the Democratic leadership. Voting against the Naifeh income tax were House Majority Leader Gene Davidson as well as an assistant majority leader and four committee chairs, who owe their positions to the speaker. The most notable of these was Rep. Frank Buck, chair of the Judiciary committee.
But the real shock was about six junior House members that had told the Speaker they would vote for the proposal and they voted instead to embarass him on live television and on the front pages of the state's newspapers. At least two lobbyists told me before the vote that two of the members were going to vote against the proposal, which leads one to wonder how come the Speaker didn't know it.
It was universally remarked among political observers that the speaker's face registered shock and surprise when the vote totals hit the board and his plan failed. It had been widely put about all morning that he "had the votes" or he wouldn't bring the bill. The shock was such that the clerk was not instructed to record the vote for almost two hours while the red and green lights shown there, waiting to see if someone could be convinced to change a red light to a green. Meanwhile, the board was being recorded by live television cameras -- with 45 House members hanging there on the line, on record and putting a bullseye on their backs come the fall elections.
Before the vote Naifeh paraded Speaker Pro Tem Lois DeBerry, Rep. Tommy Head, Rep. Shelby Rhinehart, Rep. Zane Whitson and Rep. Matt Kisber to talk about doing the right thing. They had the air of a group sure in its position, about to ram through a bill, horn honkers be damned.
Voters for the income tax included Republican Leader Steve McDaniel and Assistant Republican Leader Stancil Ford. The rest of the Republicans were Jimmycrats, like Whitson, Rep. Ralph Cole, Rep. Ronnie Davis and Rep. Raymond Walker.
But of serious concern to Democrats is the number of members from conservative rural areas who put their careers on the line to vote as the speaker asked. For nothing. Because he couldn't deliver.
The happiest group of people under the rotunda Wednesday was the state senate, which didn't have to vote to concur with a House income tax bill.
Before the final vote was recorded there were enough votes switched to "not voting" to prevent the measure from being totally eliminated from consideration. It was sent back to the Calendar and Rules Committee where it faces an uncertain future.
If the House were to be in session the following day and the night were spent drawing and quartering the apostate, the bill might have a chance of passage. But the House won't be in session again until next Wednesday. That gives the folks back home time to beat on the pro-income tax voters. It doesn't seem likely that there will be more votes next week than the green lights on the board Wednesday.
The income tax is beaten back for now. But the fallout from Wednesday will be interesting to watch. Will disgusted Democrats and Republicans get together and start wondering whether new leadership might be in order?
Someone that will put the income tax away and try and find another way to deal with the budget crisis?
It isn't likely. It requires a talented, brave and politically savvy leader to emerge. House members with those qualities are, at present, to new to be in leadership positions. If the General Assembly had one of those, we wouldn't have endured the last four years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.