Kaine’s budget solution: Raise taxes, raid lottery and free criminals
By Brian Kirwin | Wednesday, December 17th, 2008 | PolicyHere’s how our wonderful Democrats want to steer us through Virginia’s budget shortfall, courtesy of Tim Kaine.
Free felons up to three months early to cut prison costs. (Thieves go free!)
Double taxes on cigarettes (from the guy who wanted a smoking ban), but don’t use it to balance the budget. The tax increase would generate $150 million, but if it passes, Kaine spends it immediately by restoring $150 million of his proposed budget cuts!
That’s literally tax and spend!
Raising taxes is bad enough, raising taxes in this economy is worse enough, but raising taxes to restore your own budget cuts is about the worst idea I’ve heard.
More Kaine ideas? Raid the lottery fund, the rainy day fund, borrow more debt.
Moran? Deeds? McAuliffe? Do you buy into this?
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
The right wants to jeer him. The left wants to censor him. Moderates usually want both. Brian Kirwin is a political consultant and public relations strategist in Virginia Beach with a lightning-rod flair. Brian also serves on the VB Arts & Humanities Commission and frequently appears on Hampton Roads theatrical stages, if only to prove that all actors aren’t liberals. Kirwin’s columns stir up debate and hit the political scene with no punches pulled.
We're 75% there! Thank you to everyone who has so far contributed! Just $2000 to go!
Comments
25 Responses to "Kaine’s budget solution: Raise taxes, raid lottery and free criminals"
Creating an environment where the government’s budget is addicted to cigarettes does nothing to help promote health or cut our long term costs. Thanks, guys!
Sigh.
And raiding the lottery fund? Is he seriously advocating taking money away from education?
The last 10 years has seen Virginia’s budget DOUBLE yet where can we point and say “this is twice as good”?
Sounds less like a budget crisis and more like a spending crisis.
I would not mind having non-violent, simple possession, felony drug offenders being let go 3 months early, anyone else would be pretty out there.
Raising the cigarette tax is fine, but I would have to agree using it to restore spending cuts is counter intuitive (should there be a dash in there?).
I think it would be better to tax percentages of chemicals in cigs, that way companies can choose between formulating purely tobacco cigs (proven to be much healthier) or sticking with the chemical cocktails that are our status quo.
You know whats funny, we teach our kids weed is bad cause its has like 400 chemicals or something, well only about 9 are unique to pot, just about all of the rest are in just about everything we interact with on a daily basis. Scare tactics much?
First off, I am 100% against an increase in the cigarette taxes. I will identify that I am a smoker. But as a smoker I do not think smokers should be unfairly penalized by alone being expected to pay for any increase that every citizen should pay their fair share of. I do not think Virginia Citizens should be trying to eliminate such a large part of their economy. If New York or California shoots us in the foot that is one thing. It is something completely different if we shoot ourselves in the foot.
But I’m wondering just where Brian Kirwin would suggest we decrease spending? If there are not going to be any spending decreases and no tax increases, how are we going to balance the budget?
Everybody wants everything, and nobody wants to pay for it.
I will remind Brian that even Ronald Reagan said there needs to be a societal safety net. So where would our Ronald Reagan advocate suggest we can take steps to balance the budget?
[...] Wow. Brian Kirwin over at Bearing Drift found this stunner in the Virginia-Pilot: Kaine would restore $150 million of the money with [...]
Max,
It’s those 9 chemicals we are afraid of. They build up in the fat tissues and affect the users ability to interact with society (like driving) long after they took the toke.
LD, I wouldn’t have voted to inflate the budget according to Jody Wagner’s incorrect revenue estimates in the first place.
OK, but it is not like Republicans are not partially responsible for this budget inflation, right?
Which budget decreases are they (and you) in favor of now, now that the party is over?
Little David, what you say is true in some cases, but when we lie to our kids and they try drugs and see we lied they are more apt not to believe us again. I learned cocaine will kill you weed will make you retarded, after seeing hundreds of people who have done both I can say weed will not make you retarded and cocaine will not kill you the first time. When we exaggerate to kids and they find out it ruins our credibility.
I would cut enforcement for simple possession. It is a huge waste of money and accomplishes absolutely nothing. We need to focus ONLY on large drug dealers, people selling nickel and dime bags should be left alone, were never going to get anywhere arresting those people. Catching them because of their own stupidity is one thing, but seeking out low level dealers and users is just pointless.
I would also rework how school textbooks are bought, we are paying far too much for books which clearly do not work. It would be much cheaper for us to forgo buying new textbooks and instead focus on making sure our teachers can teach what was in the old ones. I dare anyone to give an example where the best teacher(s) they ever had taught out of the book. The best ones I ever had only used the book to point out a mistake or something really stupid…
How about starting with what Del. David Poisson proposed a few months back regarding privitizing the Lottery to begin with so that it can be run or at the very least leased from the State to be run more effectively and cost efficiently. Effective management would also be able to expand the lottery throughout new areas as well instead of allowing the State to continue to run it requiring State resources being required to run the operation. The Lottery is but one area where the State could jettison alot of overhead and expense to private industry and still come away with greater benefit without the huge financial committment. Other States have been considering the same measure and Virginia should be looking at doing it as well as a good start and decreasing the size of government.
Maybe we should also as Max addresses look at the expenses like textbooks in the same light as many colleges are moving where instrcutors post syllabus online as well as text material without requiring a “textbook”. Obviously in college these books are purchased of course by students, but in public education as we move to more technological means would it not be easier to put alot of the social sciences, english, etc in the form of online learning or at least reference over buying large scale purchases of textbooks that rarely get opened anyway.
55% of Fedral prisoners are in for drug related crimes.
25% of state prisoners the same.
A grand total of 500,000 of the 2 million plus prisoners in the US are in for drugs.
It cost an average $180 a day to house a prisoner, a grand total of $9M a day is spent. That’s over $3 Billion a year just to house them. This does not include courts costs, police drug task forces and misc expenses, but I do know DEA cost the tax payer $2.3 Billion in 2007.
And before you go there, only 5% of homicides are drug related.
No commentary, just the facts.
Frenchy,
I guess those drug related prisoners didn’t learn the lesson. Don’t do the crime and you won’t do the time.
Max Shapiro,
Weed won’t make you retarded? Are you on weed?
Cut enforcement? Is not that the problem we have with illegal immigration? Just asking. Be careful what you wish for Max. Maybe your ideas are what can save Starbucks….what is this Amersterdam?
What is the point in enforcing laws against possession? If we stop charging people with that crap we can focus all of the money for drug enforcement on the people bringing the drugs into the country and the big distributors. Cut the supply and prices will rise lowering demand and the profit motive for drug kingpins. This is how you fix the drug problem, not by arresting users, but by destroying supply chains. We do not have the resources to take out the supply chains because we waste so much money on simple users. Its simple econ 101.
We teach our kids drugs are so horribly bad and yet we all know they have positive side effects. The negatives surely outweigh the positives, but that in now way means those positives do not exist. If people did not enjoy drugs they would not use them, we need to educate our kids as to the good and the bad so we can preserve our credibility. If that does not make sense then something is seriously wrong with your logical faculties.
Brian,
Count your blessings. It could be worse. Look at what Patterson wants to do in New York. I think the number is 88 new taxes/increase in taxes. Everything from cigars to beverages with sugar in them.
He has also decided to raise welfare checks by 10 percent in 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012. Ten percent each year! Not 10 percent over 4 years.
And his solution for less gov’t. spending? Don’t investigate reported cases of welfare fraud.
Max no issue regarding incarceration rates regarding drugs but enforcement should be undertaken with stiff fines and penalties…oopps the far left will not go for that one just like the abuser fees. The costs of jail time is certainly an issue but maybe if we treated weed crimes more like DUI’s I could get possibly get on board. Gee think of the revenue reward of fines and the like versus covering the costs of putting these guys in jail.
Basically we should just make simple possession and use civil offenses that are at the bottom of the police department’s priorities. If you are dumb enough to be caught using the drug or with it or caught doing a crime with it on you in small amounts then you get fined a set amount, incrementally higher for the amount (up to a point, high enough and its criminal possesion) and severity of the drug, and you get no criminal record. This would only apply the first 3 times you get caught, then its a criminal offense. Fines would be pre-payable. Take all the money from the fines and split it towards social programs that keep at risk people occupied with meaningful activities and the police department/agency responsible for tracking down large producers/distributors.
Max Shapiro,
Your proposal to decriminalize use and come down heavy only on the distributors makes no sense.
Increasing demand while decreasing supply would only inflate the price providing even more motivation and profits for the suppliers that managed to break through the enforcement.
Third world drug supplying countries have righteously claimed that the way to stop the supply is end the demand. That when we stop demanding the product, their citizens will stop supplying it.
Personally I do not see any solution better then what we already do. It is a two pronged approach that attempts to kill the two headed snake by concentrating on both aspects at the same time. Look at the problem in its whole without saying one head of the snake is more evil then the other.
Supply is a problem. Demand is a problem. Take the steps necessary to diminish both at the same time.
Your argument would be true only if demand increased while supply decreased. Done correctly demand would drop or stay the same as supply levels fall. People use drugs out of boredom and depression. If we make drugs more expensive and put more money into programs that keep people occupied or happy then it will go a long way towards fixing our drug problem. I am not saying the government should run these social programs, only that they should facilitate them. IE take some of this money and funnel it to an organization that runs sporting events for kids or that provides work to the homeless. There is so much red tape in those areas, government should be the force doing the paperwork, not creating it.
According to the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta, there are 105,000 alcohol related deaths annually due to drunken drivers and alcohol related injuries and diseases.
Alcohol related accidents are the leading cause of deaths among young people.
Drunk drivers are responsible for 1/2 of highway fatal injuries.
In 1988, 25,000 Americans were killed in auto accidents involving alcohol. Over one half million were injured.
Of all murders, alcohol was involved in at least 34% of cases.
Rape – More than 1/2 of rapists had been drinking.
Child abuse – mothers convicted are 3 times more likely to be alcoholics – fathers 10 times more likely.
Heavy drinking is involved in 60% of violent crimes, 30% of suicides, and 80% of fire and drowning accidents.
The economic cost of alcohol abuse is projected to be $150 billion in 1995. Alcohol & Health – U.S. dept. of H.H.S. 1/90
Prohibition doesn’t work. People will consume drugs and alcohol whether they’re legal or not.
Why not legalize all drugs and then throw the people in jail who commit crimes while under the influence of drugs just like we do alcohol?
^ That would work just fine by me, my earlier solution was adjusted to be possible politically. Yours would be fine except I am not sure of many non-invasive on the spot ways to tell if someone is stoned or on cocaine.
I’m pretty sure that if there was a market for portable drug testing kit, that could determine the amount of chemicals in the system, some company would develop it and sell it by the thousands to law enforcement agencies. (Just think of the jobs that would create, not to mention all “mom and pop” pot growers that would florish under leagilazation
Good point, as long as they do not legalize spinal taps…
Better than the GOP’s zombie-like solution: borrow money… borrow money… cut taxes… borrow money…
Nice to see a little fiscal responsibility – brought to you – as is more often than not the case – by a Democrat.
Fine, just as long as the drug test is something like plucking a hair off your head and revoking your license if you had used marijuana within the past thirty days. For those that shave their heads we can go for the pubic hairs.
Science proves that the psychoactive chemicals of pot build up in your fat tissues and you can remain under the effect for days and even weeks after you smoked the joint. From personal experience I can state that this claim is not hysteria but grounded in facts.
Leave your response