The Tax Cut that won the Cold War

Being a Cold War history freak, I couldn't possibly pass up the opportunity to share this with you. A fellow named Drew McKissick has posted "The Tax Cut that won the Cold War" on the Wizbang Bomb Squad.

A few weeks ago marked the silver anniversary of one of the most pivotal events in American economic and foreign policy history. It was twenty-five years ago on August 13th that Ronald Reagan signed into law the Kemp/Roth tax cuts, also known as the Economic Recovery Act of 1981—legislation which helped set in motion the events which shaped the world in which we live today.

The bill reduced American income tax rates by approximately one-third across the board, and unleashed the pent up power of an economy besieged by double digit inflation, double digit interest rates and double digit unemployment.

The result was an economy that grew at phenomenal rates, created tens of millions of jobs, raised personal incomes and more than doubled overall revenues to the US Treasury, (something liberals and most economists said couldn’t happen). In addition, investment and entrepreneurship blossomed, helping to foster the technology boom that has impacted just about every aspect of our lives.

It's a wonderful article. Something our kids should learn about in their history books.

"If nominated, would you run? If elected, would you serve?"

These are the questions that my fellow brother-in-arms, Alexander Hamilton (a.k.a. The Monarchist) from the American Federalist Blog, asked me in a comment to an earlier post. And in my youth, the instant response would be, "Of course!" Alas, I am a youth no longer, and I have been witness to more than two decades of politics and their affects on people. Still, these are valid questions. I take pot shots at many politicians here on The Light Bulb, so one has every reason to ask whether or not I would expose myself to a similar treatment from the Lefties.

Let's start with the second question: "If elected, would you serve?" This is the easier to answer of the two, to which my response would be an almost unqualified "Yes." I say almost because I would require two things in order to serve: a salary that allowed me to provide well for my family and a budget that provided for a capable staff. These two requirements are not always a given in public service. My own state is a case in point for the former. You might recall an earlier post where I mention the salary for a representative in the Texas legislature: $7,200. Now, mind you, I'm all for the principle of this salary. We in Texas assume that successful people will want to serve in the Legislature. We want that service to be the prize, not a large salary. However, for me personally, I could not support my family on $7,200 per year. Additionally, because I am neither a lawyer nor a public relations expert, I would require a staff consisting of lawyers and public relations experts (among others) to assist me in crafting well-reasoned, durable legislation and spreading the word about why such legislation is needed and why the liberals are wrong. But apart from those two requirements, I would gladly serve. Of course, this is all from the perspective of Mr. Light Bulb. For the fully accurate view we need to hear from . . . Mrs. Light Bulb.

And now for the first question: "If nominated, would you run?" This is a tough one. I understand that running a campaign is necessary to winning an election, unless the Governor appointed me (and, given how much I criticize him on this blog, that's very unlikely). But running a campaign, to me, is one long, debate-filled request for money—begging, if you will. I hate begging. Then there's the lies and innuendo from the liberals and their lapdogs in the drive-by media. I guess, once again, it boils down to money. I would only run for an office if the Republican Party guaranteed me enough money, staff, and support to mount a significant campaign.

Sounds like I need to become a multi-millionaire first, doesn't it?

The Reason for School, Indeed

Last night, my dear friend, PlaywriterGirl, wrote about how it seemed the only reason for school these days is to learn how to raise money. Please go check out her post. Well, I've just returned this evening from my children's school's Curriculum Night, where I presumably was supposed to be told about the content of their expected learnings this year. What's the first thing out of the Art teacher's mouth? Something about (and this was a new one to me) an Art Fundraiser.

Come on.

First, I pay school property taxes. A lot. (See my immediately preceding post for the devious way that I have to pay more and more school taxes each year.) But it seems that my school taxes and all the other school taxes paid to Cy-Fair ISD are just not enough. We have to have an Entertainment Book fundraiser for the school where many/most of the parents are shamed into buying an Entertainment coupon book on the premise that (the third pillar of liberalism) "it's for the children." Fine, I'll buy the silly book, just quit the begging. Then, next month, there's the Sally Foster Fundraiser. (No clue, don't even ask, I have no clue.) So, I pay my property taxes, I buy my Entertainment Book, I do whatever it is that Sally Foster does, and still the Art teacher needs yet more money. Somehow, taxes and two fundraisers cannot yield enough money to buy paint, paint brushes, clay, and whatever else an Art teacher needs.

Don't ask me why I distrust educrats. Don't ask me why I am suspect of my children's teachers. Don't ask me why I vote "NO" on any bond issue that is put before me. Instead, tell me exactly what the Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District did with $329,892,850 of property tax revenue for the 2005-2006 school year budget. Answer that question, and perhaps my children and PlaywriterGirl's children and lots of other children won't have to become fund raisers.

A Texas Property Tax Appraisal Cap Primer

Not everyone lives in Texas. Sad, but true. And, as PlaywriterGirl pointed out to me recently, not everyone knows the complete situation of everything about which I write on my blog. Again, true. (She used different words, though.) Therefore, I, Mr. Light Bulb, being of sound mind and body (hold the crass remarks, please), will now attempt to create a primmer of sorts that will assist those outside the great state of Texas (and those within who are not completely familiar) in understanding the admittedly bone-headed property tax system we have in Texas. Are you ready? Here we go.

Every piece of property is appraised by a county appraisal district. I don't know exactly how this is done, mind you, but I'm certain that some employee of the appraisal district looks at representative homes in an area and enters a dollar amount valuation for each home. In Harris County (where I live) this is done by the Harris County Appraisal District. On this web site, you can find a home's appraised value (or valuation) if you click on "Record Search", then "Real Property", then "Address Search" and enter the address of the home in question.

A local taxing authority sets a tax rate for its services. Where I live, there are three taxing authorities: the Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District, my water district, and Harris County. For instance, a school board can vote to set the tax rate at two cents of tax for every one dollar of appraised value, or a tax rate of .02 . But that's just one taxing authority; the water board and the county get to do the same thing.

Taxes are then calculated and collected by the local taxing authorities. The calculation is the appraised value times the tax rate. For example, if my home were appraised at $100,000 and the school board sets a tax rate of .02, my school tax would be $100,000 x .02 = $2,000.

So far, so good, right? Pretty straight forward. But here's the part that not a lot of people know about.

The appraised value of a home can be increased by as much as ten percent each year. If my home was appraised at $100,000 last year, this year the appraiser can set an apprised value of my home for as much as ten percent more than last year, or $110,000. We call this ten percent limit the Appraisal Cap.

Now, Mr. Light Bulb, don't you want the value of your property to go up, up, up? Isn't that a good thing?

It would be a good thing if I could sell the property for that amount. But I know of no property that generates a guaranteed ten percent increase in value each and every year. What's more, because the valuation can increase each year by ten percent, the tax on that property can increase every year by ten percent. $110,000 x .02 = $2,200. So let's take this to a logical conclusion, say seven years from now.

Year	Valuation	Tax Rate	Tax
Purchase	$100,000	.02	$2,000
1	$110,000	.02	$2,200
2	$121,000	.02	$2,420
3	$133,100	.02	$2,662
4	$146,410	.02	$2,928
5	$161,051	.02	$3,221
6	$177,156	.02	$3,543
7	$194,872	.02	$3,897

Beginning to see the light here? In seven years, your property taxes have the ability to nearly double. For those of you knowledgeable in the financial sector, you'll recognize this as the Rule of 72. According to this rule, something that grows at 10% per year will double in 7.2 years. Just for grins, let's look at year eight.

Year	Valuation	Tax Rate	Tax
8	$214,359	.02	$4,287

Sure enough, there's your greater-than-double tax a mere eight years after purchase of your home. But there's still one more piece of the puzzle to make the picture crystal clear.

As you can see there are two entities who have my property tax destiny in their hands. Well, more than two actually, but two types of entity: the taxing authority and the appraisal district.

Well, Mr. Light Bulb, this IS a democracy. Why don't you vote out the current taxing authority and vote in new ones?

Sure, I could do that. But why? They haven't done anything to raise my taxes. Look at that chart again. Exactly how many times did the taxing authority have to raise the tax rate in order to receive a greater amount of tax each year? Answer: exactly zero. Each year the tax rate remains .02 . When constituents ask them why their taxes are rising, they readily answer "well, I didn't vote to raise your taxes." And they are 100% correct. They didn't vote to raise the tax rate. Rising appraisals did that for them.

Fine then, Mr. Light Bulb. I'll be more specific: why don't you vote out the appraisal district people?

Yes, indeed, we finally get to the rub. Why don't I vote out the appraisal district people? Answer: because they are appointed, not elected. As a voter, I have no say in who gets appointed to the appraisal district. I can protest my appraisal, but I cannot make any direct change to the make up of the appraisal district. So now we have the complete picture. The elected politicians are blameless when it comes to rising taxes because they do not have to increase their tax rate in order to receive a ten percent increase in tax revenues each year. The appraisal district is not elected, so no one can stop them. Plus, their standard answers are "Don't you want a more valuable house?" and "Aren't you happy that your home is worth more this year than last year?" Sure, I'd be happy to have a more valuable house each and every year. Go ahead and fill out that check right now. Make it out to Mr. Light Bulb. Hey, where you going? I thought so.



So perhaps now those of you who might have been a little lost each time I mention "Appraisal Cap" or "Property Taxes" and the name of a certain governor derisively in the same sentence will better understand why I do so. As Governor, Rick Perry had every opportunity to lead on this issue for years. He had every opportunity to get something done about it in the latest special session. But he didn't. Instead he twisted legislative arms in order to pass the largest tax increase in Texas history. And only now, in late August, months before his possible gubernatorial re-election vote in November, does he address the appraisal cap problem—with a Task Force. An appointed, un-elected, responsibility shucking task force. Yet another reason among many that Rick Perry will absolutely not be getting my vote for governor on November 7.

Rick Perry hosts "The Incredibly Late Show"

Well, well, well. Our Governor, Rick Perry, who has a fantastic head of hair, has announced that he is forming the Texas Task Force on Appraisal Reform (TFAR). Instead of evaluating the individual members of the task force, which David Benzion at Lone Star Times has already done exceedingly well, let me tell you exactly what should be said at the one and only meeting of the TFAR.

CHAIRMAN: This one and only meeting of the TFAR is now called to order. All those in favor of a three percent limit on property appraisal increases say "aye."

ALL: Aye.

CHAIRMAN: Those opposed?

Silence.

CHAIRMAN: Three percent it is. This one and only meeting of the TFAR is now adjourned.

Anything more is a complete waste of time.

Of course, Rick Perry wouldn't think of this. He wouldn't think to simply call for a lowering of the appraisal cap. He wouldn't call for a special session of the legislature with the purpose of lowering the cap. He's not a conservative.

Trans-Texas Corridor: the more I learn, the worse it gets

First there's this - Trans-Texas Corridor paved with campaign contributions? - from WolrdNetDaily.

"The politicians in Austin are listening to the highway lobby rather that the citizens who put them in office," [Director of the San Anotonio Toll Party Terri] Hall told WND, adding, "you will not understand the politics of the TTC until you track down Zachry who has a long and distinguished money trail to offices of our state politicians."

The non-partisan Institute on Money in State Politics provides data that support Hall's contention. Analyzing 39 records of campaign contributions made by H.B. Zachry, Jr., the Institute concludes Zachry contributed $112,112 in campaign contributions – 92.2 percent to Republican candidates. The largest of these contributions went to Gov. Perry, two contributions totaling $35,000.

[snip]

Another group opposing TTC construction, Campaigns for People, a 501(c)(3) organization in Austin, argues that between Jan. 1, 2001, and Dec. 31, 2004, the Texas Department of Transportation, or TxDOT, awarded over $14.3 billion in contracts to build and maintain roads in the state. More than 40 percent of this total – over $6 billion – went to the "Top 10" TxDOT contractors, who gave $1.1 million in political contributions.

Then there's this - Trans-Texas Corridor firm hires ex-Perry aide - from the Houston Chronicle.

Republican Gov. Rick Perry's former liaison to the Legislature is working once again for the Spanish company that won the rights to develop the state's $7 billion Trans-Texas Corridor toll road project.

Lobbyist Dan Shelley worked for the firm as a consultant just before he went to the governor's office, a connection first revealed in 2004.

State officials denied any connection between that circumstance and the decision, three months later, to award Cintra-Zachry the huge highway contract. Now Shelley has left the governor's office, and he and his daughter have large contracts to lobby for the road builder, The Dallas Morning News reported today.

This week, Shelley had planned to take four state lawmakers on a four-day, all-expense-paid trip to Canada. But the trip was abruptly postponed by the state transportation department after the newspaper asked questions about it.

[snip]

Shelley resigned his state job in September and struck a lobbying deal with Cintra worth between $50,000 and $100,000 to work from March through the end of this year. His daughter and lobbying partner, Jennifer Shelley-Rodriguez, will earn between $25,000 and $50,000 from the company over the same period, state records show.

So I decided to do a Google News search on "Trans-Texas Corridor." This caught my eye - In defense of the Indefensible - from the Weatherford Democrat.

The more closely I examine what few facts are actually offered on this massive toll way, the more appalled I become. [...] I would expect a huge, new road system across Texas would be to assist in easing traffic flow within the state due to increased population. I must have fallen off a turnip truck!

Nowhere do you read about this Spanish operated consortium creating a conduit for tax free goods from China and other nations being funneled into the U.S. through Mexico as a result of NAFTA. Why can’t these foreign goods be shipped to U.S. ports instead of Mexican ports? Nowhere do you read about this opening up the border to unrestrained drug trafficking or illegal immigration. Why must all this commerce come through the center of Texas? Why not Arizona or New Mexico where there are wide open spaces?

Perhaps now we see the real reason for not sealing our borders. It isn’t just demand for cheap Mexican labor that creates a porous border. There are several much larger snakes under this rock.

Has Rick Perry EVER done anything conservative in his life? How did this guy get to be in the Republican party? And who let him in?

Sorry, just had to get that out. Here's one last gem - Campaign seizes on 'super-state' highway - again from WorldNetDaily.

Some opponents, including many Texas farmers are concerned about property rights, but many point to the project's foreign control. It's being built and operated by a U.S.-Spanish consortium, Cintra-Zachry. Opponents also point out part of the contract with the firm is secret.

A state attorney general has ruled the Cintra-Zachry contract be made public, but Perry's administration has gone to court to prevent the disclosure of what it says is proprietary information.

I have a bad feeling about this. (And no, I'm not a character in a Star Wars film.) Rest assured, I'll be doing more research in the coming weeks.

Who has the secret hold on S. 2590?

I'm a fiscal conservative, and I assume many of my readers are as well. We want to be able to send as little money as possible to the IRS, and we want that money to be spent wisely and frugally (not that that will ever happen), right? I work hard for my money, and I despise the thought of it wasted away in some useless bureaucratic program. And, if I ever tried a personal version of "deficit spending" I'd be in either irrecoverable debt or jail (probably both).

Imagine then if I were to tell you that a couple of senators have proposed a website that would provide information on nearly all recipients of federal funding. We would call this "a good thing." Well, Senators Coburn and Obama have done just such a thing - S. 2590. But it's being blocked by a SECRET HOLD. (That sounds ridiculous, right? But I'm not making it up. Read the story.) I've already asked mine, so if you're reading this outside of the state of Texas, ask your two senators point blank whether or not they are holding S. 2590.

Big hat tip to Porkbusters.org

100 AUs

A fascinating story from the world of science. The first Voyager probe sped past the 100 AU mark this past Wednesday.

What's an AU?

AU stands for Astronomical Unit, a unit of length equal to the distance between the Earth and the Sun, or about 93 million miles. Isn't that cool? Something that we mere mortals crafted is now flying past the astronomical 9.3 billion mile marker.

Good thing it's not on a toll road.

Carter appointee tries to hobble America

Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, who campaigned for and was appointed by Jimmy Carter, our nation's worst president, ruled today that the Terrorist Surveillance Program is unconstitutional. Fortunately, Judge Taylor is only one member of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Power Line brainiacs say that the ruling should be overturned on appeal to the full circuit court. There's lots that can be said about this. "Here go the Lefties again, trying to run the country via the Judicial branch." Or "what they can't get through the ballot box, they'll go shop a judge for." (Check out Red State: "Like A Parody of Bad Judging. But With Potentially Tragic Consequences.")

If Republicans have merely half a brain, they'll remind America that it was this program that helped foil the plane-bombing operation just a few days ago. Hope springs eternal.

En arche

In the third century before Christ, Emperor Ptolemy asked that the Old Testament (then known simply as the Jewish scriptures) be translated into the most accessible and wide-spread language of the day: Greek, or Koine. To accomplish this task, tradition holds that 72 Jewish scholars were appointed as translators and met in Alexandria between 300 and 200 B.C. Their product became known as the Septuagint, after the Latin septuaginta interpretum versio.

Translated into Koine, Genesis, the first book of the Law, the book of beginnings, began:

En arche epoiesen ho Theos ton ouranon kai ton gen.
In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth.

En arche, "in the beginning," would have served as a title of sorts. (Books, as you may know, were not present during this time. What we would consider a book today would have been a scroll then. And the first line of the scroll would most commonly be used for its title.) The Septuagint provided a previously unavailable window into Judaism for the Koine-speaking world, which at that time was much of civilization surrounding the Mediterranean. Additionally, the Jews of the period were losing their Hebrew knowledge. The Septuagint would allow them to learn their scriptures in the language of their environment—"Hebrew as a second language" classes would no longer be needed.

Fast forward to the first century ano domini. Sometime between 65 and 90, John, the Disciple whom Jesus loved, sought to relate the story of Jesus to his culture in more than simple historical events. He would be the maverick among his fellow disciples in sharing the Gospel. John also sought to engage the philosophers of the day who themselves sought the Divine Word, ho logos, that something that was unknown and unnamed yet was behind and ordered everything. The philosophers knew there had to be something more to their existence. They believed it was ho logos.

And so, written in elegant Koine, John's gospel began:

En arche en ho logos, kai ho logos en pros ton Theon, kai Theos en ho logos.
In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and God was the word.

En arche. The first two words of the book of John, and the first two words of Genesis in the Septuagint. This is not an accident.

A first century philosopher might have thought, "En arche, I've read that, haven't I?" If they were learned in the philosophies of their age, the Greeks would have known of the Jewish book of beginnings, En arche, and of how the Jewish God had made everything. From John, they would learn that the God who made everything had come to earth as one of them. They would learn of his great love for them (3:16) and the sacrifice to which that love would lead. And they would learn that He was the Divine Word, the one behind everything, ho logos.

En arche. In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth. En arche. In the beginning was the word.... This is not an accident.



More learnings from my genius Sunday School teacher. More to come.

Here's what they're thinking in Connecticut

Last Thursday, I pondered what the Nutmeggers might be thinking after voting to oust three-term Senator Joe Lieberman (from the Democratic ticket) and beginning to empty liquids from their carry-on luggage. A bit of an answer appears today in the results of a Rasmussen Poll: Two Days after Primary, Lieberman Ahead by 5.

Seriously, sometimes these posts just write themselves.

FASB: "Perry signed an Income Tax into law"

From the Waco Tribune:

An influential national accounting organization has ruled the new Texas business tax is an income tax for accounting practices.

The Financial Accounting Standards Board decided last week that the new levy on at least 70 percent of a company’s revenue is an income tax “because it is based on a measure of their income,” unintentionally entering the brouhaha over school finance in Texas.

The group believes that accountants, auditors and regulators would all come to the same conclusion. The board decided it was so clear that it was an income tax they did not need to study the issue further. [Emphasis mine]

Well, well, well. A group of accountants (generally, not a very free-form group) has determined that the "Franchise Tax" passed during our state's last special session and signed into law by Governor Rick Perry (who has a fantastic head of hair) is, in fact, an Income Tax. What political party does he say he represents? But more importantly, where's my $2,000 tax savings?

Texas Congressional District 22

I'm a Texan and a Houstonian, but I've not blogged about Tom Delay, until now. One reason, of course, is that the professional blogosphere has covered the subject so well.

Still, I do have one point to emphasize. It's been made many times, but I think it bears repeating over and over and over until people who don't normally understand such things understand this point. Once again we see the Left accomplishing through the courts what they cannot accomplish through the demonstrated will of the people. A couple of examples:

• Abortion - the people have constantly voted to affirm the right to life, but the Left used the courts and the Roe vs. Wade decision (which contains exactly zero legal reasoning) to reverse the demonstrated will of the people.
• Proposition 187 in California - the people of the state of California voted to deny illegal aliens social services, health care, and public education 59% to 41%. Three days later, a judge issued a restraining order against it, thwarting the demonstrated will of the people. It was eventually declared unconstitutional.

Conservatives present ideas to voters. (Are you writing this down, Liberals?) We craft logical arguments in support of those ideas and then seek the votes to implement them. The Left can't do that. If they ever crafted an argument in support of their ideas, they'd loose at the ballot box. Ned Lamont never crafted an argument to get votes. All he did was whine and complain and tell people that he was against the war. We'll see what happens to him in November.

Fauxtography: it's the new black

What would we do without a blogosphere? We'd get lied to a whole lot more, that's what! After Rathergate, you'd think these people would learn a lesson. You'd think. A brief round-up:

• Were the Qana bodies staged?
• The Passion of the Toys - this one's funny
• Photo Op
• As usual, Michelle Malkin is all over it
• Extreme Makeover - Beirut Edition
• More Extreme Makeover Beirut Edition
• And the folks who started all this, Reuters Doctoring Photos from Beirut? at Little Green Footballs

Nagging thought that keeps me awake at night (seriously): how many times pre-blogosphere did they get away with this?

What are they thinking in Connecticut TODAY?

Yesterday, we saw these headlines:

• Lieberman pays a price for Iraq stance
• Lieberman loss signals anti-war mood
• Lieberman Pays for Flawed Bipartisan Embrace
• Lieberman loss reverberates
• Being an anti-Bush Democrat not enough to cut it at ballot box

Well, I wonder what the Cut-and-Run Nutmeggers are thinking about today? I bet I know one thing that's reverberating around the uptight county that calls itself a state: "did I remove all my liquids and gels from my carry-on bag?" One thing is certain, Joe Lieberman's chances of remaining in the Senate look a lot better today than they did yesterday.

I have a day job

Well, as you can see, I didn't do a great job in covering the two races I had my eye on last night. What can I say besides, "I have a day job, two kids, and one wife, in reverse order." Hopefully better content tomorrow.

Remember, you get what you pay for.

This should be fun

Today's the day we find out whether or not the Democratic Party still has either a conscience or a Loon. Stay tuned. I'll update after 7:00 p.m.

UPDATE
8:30 p.m. CDT - 11% reporting in CT - Lamont 56%, Lieberman 44%
8:30 p.m. CDT - 13% reporting in GA 4 - Johnson 73.8%, McKinney 26.2%

UPDATE 2
9:05 p.m. CDT - 35% reporting of GA 4 - Johnson 61.5%, McKinney 38.5%

Texas Sales Tax Holiday

...is this weeekend, August 4-6. Retailers are gettin' ready. Are you?

Where is the Greatest Generation?

That's the question asked by Max Conservative on his self-named blog.

On December 8, 1941, one lone voice voted against the war with Japan. Today, a whole political party is opposed to the war against terror.

What happened to the political opposition? Why didn't the Republicans use every set back during the war to gain political points? Everyone tried to remember Pearl Harbor, and the sneak attack. Remember Pearl Harbor was the cry through the war. No one screamed that Germans had nothing to do with Pearl Harbor, we were determined to destroy all enemies, no matter if they personally participated in the attack or not. We didn't limit our vengeance on the Japanese Navy, nor the Japanesee Air Forces. Why are we told that the images of 9-11 are harmful?

I recommend a visit.