At least one prominent Oregon Republican is going to vote for Measures 66 and 67: former Labor Commissioner Jack Roberts, who gave the tax measures his reluctant endorsement in an op-ed piece in The Oregonian Thursday.
It’s “misleading to label Measures 66 and 67 ‘job-killing tax increases,’” wrote Roberts, who was labor commissioner from 1995 to 2002 and now is executive director of the Lane Metro Partnership, an economic development agency.
Noting that the states, unlike the federal government, don’t have the option of printing more money to balance their budgets, he added: “While President Barack Obama was right when he said that raising federal taxes during a recession is the last thing you want to do, for states, raising taxes is not necessarily worse than cutting spending.
“I’m all for cutting wasteful spending, but unfortunately that isn’t what we’re talking about here. If Measures 66 and 67 are defeated, both state and local governments – including schools – will face a painful round of cuts in basic services. To pretend otherwise is to ignore the reality of the past 20 years.”
Nor will the personal income tax increase of Measure 66 and the corporate tax increase of Measure 67 be as brutal as opponents are making them out to be, Roberts wrote: “[T]ry as I might, I have been unable to construct even a hypothetical example of hardship or unfairness that truly shocks the conscience if these taxes pass.”
The best line in Roberts’s piece, though, was this one: “I’ve never understood the economic reasoning of those who wring their hands when a private business reduces its employment but clap their hands when government lays people off.”
Roberts understands a point that most conservatives just can’t seem to grasp: State employees spend money on things like homes, cars, clothes and food just like employees in the private sector do – and they spend most of it right here in Oregon.
This article appears in Jan 7-13, 2010.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
Waa waa waa. Maybe the budget committee needs to get back to the drawing board and figure out another way to fund the schools; this whole war on the rich thing is really sad. They pay their fair share already. It’s called “job killing” because – SHOCKER – rich people create jobs through owning businesses, hiring employees, doing business with others… How’s that for “common sense”, sir?
One more public figure out to better themselves,I don’t care what party you are with you all want more money.
We the people don’t have the option of voting ourself a raise when things get more expensive we foot the bill for all the politions !! I have not seen ONE political figure offer to take a cut in pay because of the financial position of this country!!
hey bruce, could you do a piece on ( its illegal for the government to use our tax money for private industry ) like car dealership, banks etc.. check it out. that might get some hackles up!!!!! and by the way government always over spends. no on more taxes……..
Now you found 1 republican that agrees with you, WOW. You Larry Liberals never saw a tax you didn,t like!!
Whaddya know- someone who doesn’t let partisanship determine judgment. Thanks, Jack Roberts.
Of course the former Labor Commissioner is going to endorse the Union Measure 66 and 67 that will continue to feed the bloated state government. Look where the Yes and No funds are coming from. YES is Unions. NO is the very businessess and people who have to pay the new taxes.
My problem is: if we keep increasing taxes and finding new ways to tax- with the threat of catastrophic cuts, let’s make everyone in the state a puplic employee- medical,dental,optical,payed days off, pers. there is no reason to go into business in the state of Oregon. WE ARE HURTING!!
So what the author of this article is saying is he likes government subsidized entities that are unprofitable because they are run by GOVERMENT? By admitting this you are un-American and DO NOT believe in the principals that this country was founded on. We should ship you to western Europe so you can pay their taxes and enjoy their regulation. You’d be begging us to let you back in!
Bracing for an invasion of trolls …
what you don’t post what people write????
Jack Roberts will be another name I will remember when it shows up on the next ballot. Don’t be looking for my vote in the future. How can you support a bill that raises our income taxes RETROACTIVE to January 2009? How can you support a bill that taxes businesses on their GROSS income not net income? These are not the bills Oregon needs right now.
come on Bruce, start posting what the trolls are sending about this article?
we all just need to tighten our belts and face that fact the the good days of highball living are gone for now. Its not like this is the first or last recession. People just need to spend wisely and the gross waste and over paid state government employees need to take a pay cut too. We are all in the same boat but seems like the poor get stuck with it all and the higher paid get higher wages.
The reason other people’s comments haven’t been published yet is that all comments (except those of staff, like me) are moderated, and the moderator isn’t working on the weekend. I don’t have the authority to decide which posts get published and which don’t, so if yours doesn’t don’t blame me.
He can’t see the difference between State workers and private industry workers? Maybe he should resign for being so ignornat. State workers are paid by th the taxes of private workers and companies. Many times there are 3 people doing the job of what one person should be able to do. The more state workers that are hired the more our “trustworthy politicians” want to raise taxes to keep them all employed. A Fat and sassy state worker is a sure thing vote for the POS politician who works to increase taxes to keep these union thugs employed. Maybe now he understands why we all get giddy when the something for nothing payroll goes down.
Nothing says, ‘I’m a bleeding heart liberal’ quite like a titling your article ‘Shocker common sense from a Republican’. It is a shame you guys accept articles from someone so biased and intolerant. Bruce try being a little more objective in your pretenses, of course it did get me to read your piece of work. Then again I guess being straight forward and honest, objective, or using logic have ever been what people of your caliber are known for. I understand something you don’t. If I give someone $1,000 and they give me $250 back, is that really beneficial to me? Why don’t we all have government jobs? Because government has to be supported by private enterprise. I got news for you; GOVERNMENT CANNOT SUPPORT ITSELF.
SHOCKER: The source is pro taxes and pro liberal agenda.
“We should ship you to western Europe so you can pay their taxes and enjoy their regulation.”
And also enjoy their excellent public education systems, their excellent transportation systems and their excellent health care systems? Works for me. When can I go?
Europeans pay higher taxes than Americans but we don’t hear them bitching about taxes nearly as much. Why? Because they GET SOMETHING for their taxes. Americans get nothing for their taxes but endless wars.
An American said…
“So what the author of this article is saying is he likes government subsidized entities that are unprofitable because they are run by GOVERMENT? By admitting this you are un-American and DO NOT believe in the principals that this country was founded on.”
Do you even think before you write drivel like this?
The vast majority of government-run agencies, departments and programs (entities) are not profitable. Think about it…how about the military? The U.S. Army is a government-subsidized entity…should it be making a profit? How, exactly? By looting and pillaging the foreign countries it invades?
Or how about local public schools…they are government-funded, nonprofit entities…because they are nonprofit, should they be abandoned?
Think, people.
Bruce you are so predictable. The problem facing this state is not inadequate tax revenues, it is plain and simply excessive spending. The elephant in the room is PERS, and the public employee unions which have driven Oregon, and a raft of others states to the point of bankruptcy.
America gets nothing for its taxes?? Wrong we get a bloated and corrupted public employee union sector.
Fact : In the second quarter of 2009 the average cost of total compensation for all private employment was $27.42 per hour compared to $39.66 for state and local government employees. Public sector employees make 44.6% more than private sector employees.
Fact : Oregon’s Legislatively Adopted Budgets have grown 64.2 percent between the 2001-03 and 2009-11 biennia, while the state’s population has grown only 10.8 percent between 2001 and 2008. When adjusted for the rate of inflation spending in the state has increased 64.2%, while population + inflation has increased 35%. State spending has double the rate of population growth + inflation.
You cannot tax your way out of this. This tax increase will just kick the can down the road a couple of years, and then we will have a far worse problem on our hands.
“Fact : In the second quarter of 2009 the average cost of total compensation for all private employment was $27.42 per hour compared to $39.66 for state and local government employees. Public sector employees make 44.6% more than private sector employees.”
Sorry, but this is just another “fun with statistics” thing. The “average cost of total compensation for all private employment” includes more low-wage service jobs than the state and local government figures. Lots and lots more, in fact. All those entry-level, minimum wage McDonalds workers, Wal-Mart greeters, convenience store clerks, video store clerks, etc…of which there are TONS…their low wages skew that “average cost for private employment” down quite a bit. Meanwhile, state and local government agencies typically higher people with more education, experience and talent for a much greater percentage of jobs…after all, there just ain’t too many state burger-flipping jobs out there.
In sum, your whole conclusion (“Public sector employees make 44.6% more than private sector employees”) is false.
Good post, Slacker. If we’re going to talk about averages, why not compare the average Oregon state employee with the average Wall Street employee? Makes just as much sense.
“There are lies, damned lies and statistics.” — Benjamin Disraeli
“Think, people.”
You’re asking too much from most of them, Slacker.
“Sorry, but this is just another “fun with statistics” thing. The “average cost of total compensation for all private employment” includes more low-wage service jobs than the state and local government figures. Lots and lots more, in fact. All those entry-level, minimum wage McDonalds workers, Wal-Mart greeters, convenience store clerks, video store clerks, etc…of which there are TONS…their low wages skew that “average cost for private employment” down quite a bit. Meanwhile, state and local government agencies typically higher people with more education, experience and talent for a much greater percentage of jobs…after all, there just ain’t too many state burger-flipping jobs out there.
In sum, your whole conclusion (“Public sector employees make 44.6% more than private sector employees”) is false.”
That statistic likely also includes the millionaires and billionaires in the private sector. The only person having “fun with statistics” is you Slacker.
Plus, not every government job requires high skills and education. I’m sure there are some janitorial positions that are paid better than wal-mart’s janitorial staff. So your point is?
Come on Bruce, be less predictable.
“If we’re going to talk about averages, why not compare the average Oregon state employee with the average Wall Street employee? Makes just as much sense.”
You inadvertently exposed the fatal flaw in Slackers whole argument. He wants to focus on only the low wage earners, while ignoring high wage earners. It makes perfect sense for slacker to focus only on low wage earners in the private sector to compare against all public sector employees, but it is bogus to compare averages to averages????
The reality is still the same. Average public sector compensation is still 44.6% higher than private sector compensation. Average public sector compensation for a 40 hour a week position is still $83,000. Public sector spending has still increased at twice the rate of inflation and population growth over the last decade. Increasing taxes will not solve our underlying problem, which is spending that is growing at an unsustainable rate, and the vast majority of the increase in spending is driven by public sector employee compensation.
So feel free to call those who disagree with you names. You, as always, are afraid to address the real issue.
“You inadvertently exposed the fatal flaw in Slackers whole argument. He wants to focus on only the low wage earners, while ignoring high wage earners.”
He didn’t “ignore” them; he just said there are a hell of lot of minimum- or near-minimum-wage workers in the private sector, which pulls the average down. And that’s just a fact.
I could never understand why, instead of bitching that public employees have it too good, those doing the bitching don’t join a union and win better pay and benefits for themselves. But the same people who are anti-public employees are typically the people who are most vehemently against unions in general.
It’s just crazy. Such “thinking” is guided by resentment instead of reason. “I’m getting screwed so I want everybody else to get screwed too” sums it up.
unions should be abolished, didn’t prices start going up when the unions started, because of high wages and the pers, they wanted, and are getting now!!!!!!!
“unions should be abolished”
Yes, and then we can go back to those wonderful days of child labor and working 70 hours a week for $5. I can’t wait.
OOOO get real Bruce! the unions and there wages drove up every price on the self. just look at the auto workers, for one example.
and don’t give me that stuff!!!! i know to many people that worked in public service, say they are disabled, drawing benefits, but yet doing a full time job on there own!!!!!!!! its alll crap!!!!!!
The only people I know that support this bill are government employees, school teachers and the author of this article. This taxes small business, not Nike,… to keep afloat the same wages of government employees they have had during good times.
the hot topic got dropped, bummer. but please do check this out and report, if you have the cahownaa’s.
( its illegal for the government to use our tax money for private industry )
“the unions and there wages drove up every price on the self”
As this comment shows, the right-wing propaganda machine has done a hell of a job of convincing working Americans that their friends are their enemies and their enemies are their friends. It would be funny if it wasn’t so sad.
“its illegal for the government to use our tax money for private industry”
I don’t know what you’re talking about. The government buys stuff from private industry all the time — everything from school textbooks to nuclear submarines.
http://www.qualityinfo.org/olmisj/ArticleReader?itemid=00006781 for the source of this information.
“In Oregon in 2006, more than four in 10 government workers were in a professional or related occupation, compared to about one in 10 private-sector workers. The private sector also had a fairly diversified occupation mix, while public employees were more concentrated in a few occupation groups.
Some of the difference in compensation is also likely explained by differences in age. Older workers tend to have more work experience and are therefore able to command a higher wage from employers. In comparing the age distribution of private and public sector workers, we see that public employees tend to be somewhat older. In fact, more than half (55.2%) of Oregon’s government employees were age 45 or older in 2008, compared to 40 percent of private-sector workers. On the other end of the wage spectrum, individuals age 14 to 24 accounted for only 5 percent of government workers, but nearly 16 percent of private-sector workers.”
The article also contains interesting information on wage growth and job growth.
If I remember my collegiate statistics courses, the best way to get an accurate feel for ‘average’ wages in this case would be to use a median average–not a mean average. Some method for normalizing part time wages in the private sector would be required. Most job statistics are provided by governmental agencies–and therefore immediately suspect as self-serving by the anti-gov crowd that always ‘knows what it knows’ crowd that emphasizes common sense and minimalizes knowledge.
That great socialist, Henry Ford, raised wages and cut the work day for his workers. Rather than charge ‘whatever the market would bear’ he adopted the ‘low price’ model of doing business. He knew that unless the workers had a living wage, there was a limited market for his product. He got rich doing it. Our current batch of lassez faire advocates are willing to promote wealth accumulation while ignoring any and all consequences to others.
…and mister, it’s cajones, not cahownaa’s. Please be satisfied with displaying ignorance in a single language and not demonstrating it in two.
its illegal for the government to use our tax money for private industry. I should have added, (bailouts)
“and mister, it’s cajones, not cahownaa’s”
LOL! Yeah, I was wondering, “What the hell are ‘cahownaas”? Is that a Polynesian word?”
(In fact, though, Mexicans don’t use the word “cajones” — they say “huevos.”)
Read this and tell me that our public sector unions are not corrupted and rotting at the core, and that our elected representatives have sold us out to get reelected. It is disgusting and pathetic.
http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/12/class-war
Another example of why California is in the condition it is in and why Californians are fleeing the ‘golden’ (small d now) state. The Democrats in the Cal state legislature have given away the farm, lock stock and barrel. Prison officer’s union, teacher’s union, service worker’s union–you name it, they got the golden egg in return for their votes. It would be nice to think that it was strictly a Democrat problem, but the unions make sure that the incumbents get their support–unless they are rabidly anti-union. Most of the loyal ‘opposition’ know better in Cal. They always take the safe vote and the soft money. Sixty percent of the state reps are Democrats and that percentage just keeps increasing..as the problems the state is experiencing do the same.
Now watch the rats desert the burning ship.
HBM says on 1/11: “I could never understand why, instead of bitching that public employees have it too good, those doing the bitching don’t join a union and win better pay and benefits for themselves.”
Tell me now, HBM which unions are thriving today? Only the public sector unions like SEIU which is corrupt to its very core. Public sector union employees don’t have to worry about their “company” making a profit. Their “company” can raise its prices (taxes) almost whenever it pleases or if on the federal level just print more money.
Look at the dwindling membership of private sector unions such as the UAW, Teeamsters, AFL-CIO, etc. They killed their golden goose because in the end, their paymaster had to actually compete for business. If Card Check legislation passes, these thugs can come to your door and force you to pay dues to advance their corruption.
Governments don’t compete….they are just there for us to pay the freight. And don’t tell me about police, firemen, or public safety, and DOT people. They are worth every penny. It’s the other 90% of the payroll that needs drastic reduction.
HBM, sooner or later you run out of someone else’s money to spend. Just look at California.
Someone please justify this? Someone please tell me that our governments are not rotting at their core to pay off their union backers. The state of Oregon is being destroyed by Public Employee Unions. The health care plan is now being used to bribe unions for their continued support. This entire situation smells like rotting fish.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MTcxYzhlZDE3NzNkZjQzN2YzZTJiMzlmYTQ4YTM2NTg=
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Unions to be Exempted from Cadillac Tax? [Daniel Foster]
Congress Daily is reporting that union lobbyists on Capitol Hill today scored a tentative deal that would exempt “collectively bargained healthcare plans” from the so-called Cadillac Tax on high-cost policies.
As The American Spectator’s Philip Klein notes, this means that two Americans receiving identical health-care benefits could be taxed differently if one happened to be a member of a union and the other not.