Skip to main content

Soaked Rich Swim to Safety in Maryland, Picasso's Budget

Maryland tried to soak the rich, but they swam off.

Trying to settle what liberals here in Connecticut call “a revenue problem,” a cash shortage in their budget, Maryland legislators enacted a higher tax bracket for “millionaires.” Here in the land of steady bad habits, Democrats are seeking to plunder “millionaires” who earn more than $750,000; call them mini-millionaires.

Democrats hope to raise $1.5 billion in increased income taxes and $125 million in new fee increases to pay for their improvident spending. The Democrat plan, almost certain to face a gubernatorial veto, would raise the state income tax on couples earning more than &170,000 by 7.5%, a 50 percent rate increase.

Maryland boosted its top bracket to 6.25 percent.

Result?

One third of Maryland’s “millionaires” disappeared from the tax roles and took up residence in Virginia, Delaware and Florida, all less tax punishing states.

And now, even though Maryland is colleting more money from its vanishing “millionaires,” it is hauling in $100 million less a year from the mobile rich.

National Review, an oasis of good sense in a nation of thoughtless liberals, reasons: “Capital is mobile. So are capitalists.”

The more Connecticut's governor talks about state finances, the more she begins to sound like Thomas Paine – or Margaret Thatcher, giving the evil eye to political wastrels.

Connecticut does not have a revenue problem; it has a spending problem. And its spending problem has been caused by Democrat legislatures and Republican governors that together have been folding billion dollar surpluses into the state budget ever since former Gov. Lowell Weicker, who some disgruntled Republicans consider a menace, muscled the legislature into passing an income tax. All that excess money was spent and it bloated future budgets. Now we have a $37 billion fat-boy budget on our hands, and Democrats still insist the state has no spending problem. It has, the Democrat caucus iterates in unison, a revenue problem – which means this: “The proposed two year [Democrat] budget,” the Harford Courant reported, “calls for 2.5 billion in tax increases and about $1 billion in spending cuts…”

As my old Aunt Lena once said, looking somewhat abstractedly at Picasso’s “Portrait De Femme” – “As a portrait of a lady, it’s a failure because the proportions are wrong; as a painting, it’s a failure, because it lacks beauty.”



The recently proposed Democrat budget – these guys had months to bring forth this improvident mouse – is both unlovely and an insult to the laws of economics, one of which is: When you find yourself in an economic hole, stop digging.

"The Democrats' budget,” Rell said according to a story in the Republican American, “goes in precisely the wrong direction at precisely the wrong time. It is neither balanced nor remotely realistic ... It contains so many holes — together with unachievable spending cuts — that new and higher taxes would be needed each and every year for years to come,"

Taking the long view, Rell is most interested in positioning her state so that, when good times return, Connecticut will not be, shall we say, another Maryland.

Republicans have been somewhat shocked at Rell’s steely resolve. Other Republican governors, including Rell herself, have taken bows in the direction of fiscal responsibility, only to surrender later in budget negotiations to importunate Democrat leaders. You say “no, no” with your lips, but your eyes say “yes, yes.” It is all part of the budget mating game.

In past times, when Connecticut was flush with surpluses, no one much cared that the state was even then digging itself into a hole. But now, waist deep in red ink, some politicians are seriously engaged in political reform, and wouldn’t it be refreshing to count Rell among their number when the saints come marching in?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton, a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Dave Walker, Turning Around The Misery Index

Dave Walker, who is running for Lieutenant Governor on the Republican Party ticket, is recognized by most credible political observers as perhaps the most over qualified candidate for Lieutenant Governor in state history.
He is a member of the Accounting Hall of Fame and for ten years was the Comptroller General of the United States. When Mr. Walker talks about budgets, financing and pension viability, people listen.
Mr. Walker is also attuned to fine nuances in political campaigning. He is not running for governor, he says, because he had moved to Connecticut only four years ago and wishes to respect the political pecking order. Very few people in the state think that, were he governor, Mr. Walker would know less about the finance side of government than his budget chief.

Murphy Stumbles

U.S. Senator Chris Murphy has been roughly cuffed by some news outlets, but not by Vox, which published on April 16 a worshipful article on Connecticut’s Junior Senator, “The Senator of State: How Connecticut’s Chris Murphy, a rising Democratic star, would run the world.”
On April 15, The Federalist mentioned Murphy in an article entitled “Sen. Chris Murphy: China And The World Health Organization Did Nothing Wrong. The lede was a blow to Murphy’s solar plexus: “Democratic Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy exonerated China of any wrongdoing over the global pandemic stemming from the novel Wuhan coronavirus on Tuesday.
“’The reason that we’re in the crisis that we are today is not because of anything that China did, is not because of anything the WHO [World Health Organization] did,’ said Murphy during a prime-time interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper.”