Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
04.30.2008 5:25 pm

The lone holdout

  • Email this
  • Print this

After an emotional two-hour debate, House members voted 146-1 to reject a $300 million tax increase intended to put Democrats on the spot on the 2005 Medicaid cuts.

Offered by Rep. Steve Hunter, R-Joplin, the proposal would have increased the income tax rate by half a percent on everyone making more than $50,000 a year.

“I voted for those cuts and I feel bad,” he said. “I think we need to restore them.”

Hunter is critic of the progressive income tax system and favors a consumption tax. Earlier in the debate, he characterized his proposal as, “This is about all of the pages I could tear out of Das Kapital.”

Democrats smelled sarcasm.

“You’re telling me that Mr. Anti-Tax’s conscience is clear in proposing a $300 million tax increase?” said Rep. Jeff Roorda, D-Barnhart.

Hunter, who is term-limited, was the only legislator to vote for the measure.

Rep. Gina Walsh, D- Bellefontaine Neighbors, also said the proposal was disingenuous.

“It is simply an attempt to catch members on both sides of the aisle making a bad vote,” she said. “I’m not going to sit in this chamber and listen to this.”

Republicans said they were giving Democrats a chance to vote for restoring the cuts.

“Everybody that has made those comments (in support of restoring the cuts) has the opportunity to do what they say is the right thing,” said Rep. Shannon Cooper, R-Clinton.

Rep. Jeanette Mott Oxford, D-St. Louis has a bill that would increase taxes on those with higher incomes while lowering taxes for people who make less. In an emotional speech, she said the debate was offensive.

“Rather than having a strong discussion about restoring health care for our friends and neighbors, we are playing a trick,” she said.

Much of the afternoon’s debate was focused on the Medicaid cuts. While House members rejected that amendment, they easily approved a one-time exemption to the state gas tax during the summer months. They also gave initial approval, 104-37, to repeal the state income tax for corporations.

The cost of those two measures is $120 million and $400 million, respectively.

The bill still needs another vote in the House before it would be sent to the Senate. There is just more than two weeks left in the session.

17 comments

Comments are closed.

Oh I see, Democrats only want tax increases to provide healthcare if they propose but restoring healthcare isn’t important enough to vote to restore it if a Republican offers it.

Roorda is right, something does stink and it is the hypocrisy of the democrats. Mott-Oxford is offended, indeed! She is offended because she and her party aren’t getting the “benefit” of being the knights on white horses.

Just goes to show that democrats are all talk and no walk.

— Jackson
10:29 pm April 30th, 2008

Read the article again. Mott Oxford had her own proposal to raise the money to restore the cuts by increasing the tax on the higher incomes and reducing it on the working poor. The republicans, rather than take a look at that real solution, proposed a fictitious one of there own that no one would vote for (read that part again, too. The only one - of either party - to vote for it was that clever little man that proposed it). Ha, Ha, Missour’s poor! You are nothing more than political fodder for republican amusement. The fact that first-round approval was given to REPEAL the corporate income tax on the same day is despicable. You should be ashamed, but of course you’re not.

— Penelope
6:38 am May 1st, 2008

Once again,To grasp the how stupid steve hunter is .just think of Jetho Bodine….But dumber!! Only this fool from Jopin believe that” 50K a year is RICH”!! …His words not mine. If Hunter had his way Corparate america would pay NO taxes..ever!! This fool’s level of respect has hit the bottom even with his own party. He is a senior member of the leg. body …A chairman of a Leg. Committee, and has yet to pass any of his own priority legislation. This clearly shows that he rose to his level of incompotence the day he was elected and now is being used by the majority as nothing more than the village idiot (sorry if I offended any village idiots) preforming legisative parlor tricks while our citizen get put though the ringer

— jacks
7:48 am May 1st, 2008

Jacks, if you had any brain whatsoever, you would already realized that Corporations pay NO taxes, EVER!!!. The consumers that purchase the products or services that the Corporation provides are the ones that pay the taxes, it just funnels through the corporation.

— Amazedbythelunacy
8:31 am May 1st, 2008

My, I’m so shocked! More Republican quackery, more Republican thuggery in the Missouri House! Heavens!

— gaydem
11:13 am May 1st, 2008

Rep. Steve “Hoosier” Hunter should go back to Joplin and stop wasting our time and money playing political games and grandstanding…

Why not propose a $300,000,000 tax on all Missouri seniors over the age of 65 to restore the [Republican] cuts in Medicaid….Let’s see how committed the Democrats really are to our elderly and needy. Makes about as much sense… Right, Joplin Hoosier?

Looney…you’re finally starting to understand the meaning of a “consumption tax”.
Let’s tax the yacht builders and the Lear Corporation first…. and let the country-club Republicans start paying their fair share whenever they buy another toy.

— Garrison
11:14 am May 1st, 2008

Corps. pay no taxes huh? Well then following your stream of logic Amazed, Corps dont pay anything. They dont pay salarys, pensions, stock dividends, bonouses, after all ,all those costs are ultimately passed down though the Corp. after the consumer buys their service or product. So if the Corp. pays no taxes why the need for tax relief? Then that would also mean that the tax payer pays all of the payroll tax. Then we as a nation should be working to raise wage earners pay instead of whats best for the investment class. woudnt that ultimately be best for everyone? asfor as my brain is concerned,It doesnt spell or ttype very well,but it can reason just fine!!

— jacks
11:35 am May 1st, 2008

Someone needs to get Amazed a mirror so he can see from whence the lunacy cometh.

— Penelope
12:11 pm May 1st, 2008

Hunter wasting time on the taxpayers dime? This is news?
He’s made a career of this kind of stuff.

— Darren01
12:35 pm May 1st, 2008

Without a consumer to purchase a good or service, a company doesn’t exist. No one works there, receives a paycheck, pays any income taxes. Someday you knuckleheads may realize that.

If our intelligent and benevolent government leaders were to impose more taxes on Anheuser Busch, do you think that Auggie the IV, V, or whatever number they are up to will downsize the Gulfstream? Absolutely not. They just raise the price on the beer they produce and everyone that CONSUMES their product pays the tax.

— Amazedbythelunacy
1:03 pm May 1st, 2008

Busch may not choose to absorb the extra cost…but MILLER may, thus the market at work.. And the consumer is free to buy the pruduct that they choose, for what ever reason.To use your example…Pabst is cheaper than bud light….but I prefer the bud light, so ill pay more. In other parts of the country Im sure the opposite is true . The gov. does not compete with them . Once ‘again AMAZED, we’re at the same point…..worrry about the wage earner. they are the CONSUMING CLASS. The buschs’ of the world will get along just fine

— jacks
2:46 pm May 1st, 2008

gaydem<—could never swallow any AB product, therefore does not help underwrite Augie’s corporate ride.

— gaydem
2:47 pm May 1st, 2008

got a question for ya AMAZEd, If the company stops producing, does this force the consumer to stop consuming? I dont think so you silly goose!!!

— jacks
2:53 pm May 1st, 2008

way to swing the hammer jacks!

Amazed, by your theory that “Without a consumer to purchase a good or service, a company doesn’t exist.” Wouldn’t that imply that the more a “consumer” earns the more he/she purchases?

If so why does corporate America continue it’s attack on the wages of workers/consumers of this country by outsourcing our decent paying jobs overseas where the wages are pennies on the dollar?

Henry Ford (Founder of Ford Motor Company) knew that he had to pay his employees enough so they could purchase the products they build. By doing so he became on of the richest people in America and his employees were able to live the American Dream of owning their own cars and a house.

— Bubba Union
7:31 am May 2nd, 2008

PS, I’m not an economist but I would be my next paycheck that my purchasing power is better than the purchasing power of 11 year old Halima who makes six and a half cents per hour working for Hanes. http://youtube.com/results?search_query=child+labor&search_type=

— Bubba Union
7:35 am May 2nd, 2008

Bubba…thanks for the link. Our neo-conservative “free-market” colleauges will undoubtedly tell us the 11 year old girl should have stayed in school and made something of herself…Where in the Constitution does it say American companies like Hanes can’t make a profit?…American workers priced themselves out of the market by asking for more than 6 cents an hour….

Then they’ll ask for your definition of a “decent wage” followed by their assinine statement… “You’re jealous of hedge-fund managers because the make up to $14 billion a year and you’re lazy and don’t want to work hard”.

They believe the same about 11 year old Halima.

— Garrison
12:08 pm May 2nd, 2008

it was my pleasure Garrison.

It saddens me to see children nearly the same ages of my grandchildren working and living in such conditions no matter what part of the world. The question I have is where is the outrage from the religious people? How can any God tolerate a nation that uses children that way?

Yet some of the bloggers on this site jump at a chance to condem organized labor for fighting against those types of abuses. I just wonder what God thinks of them sometimes too.

— Bubba Union
9:16 pm May 2nd, 2008