Merdon Tax Cut Passes Council
Posted by David Keelan on Tuesday, October 31, 2006
It is interesting that Larry Carson sought a quote from Grover G. Norquist. He doesn’t like targeted tax cuts, but Grover is a strict conservative and I would not expect him to like this.
Regardless, other taxpayer organizations liked this a lot. Montgomery County is looking at similiar legislation.
Some of the “policy experts” echoed sentiments on the blogs about how it is poor public policy to create targeted tax cuts. It happens all the time folks. Aren’t 501c’s a forum of targeted tax cuts? You know what I mean.
Anyway, these seniors need help. We need them to stay in Howard County.
The council’s majority Democrats – including Ken Ulman, the Democratic nominee for county executive – tabled the bill Oct. 3 and drew up amendments to limit the benefit to lower-income people, but he backed off yesterday for fear amendments might kill the popular bill.
Calvin Ball sent me a copy of his amendments on October 27th. If you are on his Council distribution list then you did too.
- His amendments pegged eligible income to 80% of the median income in Howard County. A difference of only approximated $2,000 per year in income.
- It stepped in the tax cut to a full 100% when a Senior’s income was 20% or less of the median (I didn’t hear the commission on aging comment on that).
- It would institute an income test
The only significant difference was the stepped in tax cut up to a 100% property tax credit.
This bill passed because it is one week before the election and because it is good policy.
Ulman said that if he is elected executive, he would take another look at the measure.
For what purpose? Can he please clarify? If he doesn’t like it in its current form then he should have voted against it. Don’t accuse Merdon of playing election year politics if you don’t have the courage to vote against a bill and only do so in order to avoid Senior backlash at the polls.
Today is Tuesday, October 31st. Have you seen any negative campaigning today?