It never fails to amaze me how Democrats and Republicans can often times look at something and come to completely different conclusions.
Take the deficit problems in NH right now, Democrats look and say it's a revenue problem where as Republicans see it as a spending problem.
The quote is in regards to Marjorie Smith (D)'s room and meals tax option which would allow towns to create local room and meals taxes on top of the room and meals taxes already collected by the state. Karen's response was:
By opening the flood gates to allow towns to assess their own Rooms and Meals taxes they are breaking New Hampshire into hundreds of small taxing governments. This scheme isn't going to work.
Before reading on reread that quote and really understand what is being said.
Of course Blue Hampshire sees this and they equate the power to tax with local control. These are NOT one in the same because the state and federal government place requirements on towns stripping them of local control, they then toss a bone of allowing towns new creative ways to add new taxes and say look now you have local control. In reality though that's not the case.
Blue Hampshire's follow up quote is:
But the ghosts of Meldrim Thomson and William Loeb cast long shadows, so we don't really have a choice on the predominant revenue structure in the Granite State, do we?
Budget cutting is not even considered an option to them. It's as if they just don't realize government isn't always necessary as the be all end all solution to everything.
Steve MacDonald already reported on this shift in taxation calling it a trap. I have to agree with his assessment but not necessarily for the same reasons he points to. I've pointed out before and I do so here again that the key tool Democrats use in taxation is creating more and more new taxes so they can mask how much you really pay. Creating a new local tax allows the spending to continue to rise at local levels while masking how much is actually being collected. It also allows the state to push more spending down onto the local level to give the impression Lynch is trying to build for himself as being fiscally responsible because after all the state budget will appear to balance and it wont be state property taxes going up.
It's smoke and mirrors.
So Blue Hampshire, I do want local control but that doesn't mean more taxes. Give me one single tax bill and the local authority to say what I do or do not want included in that tax bill. Why is that so hard to understand?