Comments for independentarkansas.com

Comment on CNBC ranks Arkansas 33rd overall in business survey by Steve Brawner

Steve Brawner — Fri, 08 Jul 2011 01:06:32 +0000

Hi, Linton. I have a feeling we’re going to be hearing a lot about it regardless. I expect Perry will be the nominee.

Comment on CNBC ranks Arkansas 33rd overall in business survey by Linton

Linton — Thu, 07 Jul 2011 22:51:18 +0000

The Rick Perry caucus and all other Texas worshipers need to realize that every state can’t be Texas (and when it comes to some things, thank God for that). I would argue that luck more than politics made Texas what it is. It’s size, the large amount of energy resources, and its bordering the gulf all add up to a state that is the perfect blend to succeed. And some of our country’s rabid anti-immigrant citizens may not want to hear this, but a copious amount of cheap, and illegal at times, Hispanic labor probably didn’t hurt either.

You could put almost anybody in the governor’s seat and it would probably hum right along. I mean, from 2000-2008 all Americans got to witness what Texas had previously dealt with in the executive chair. And somehow the state still turned out alright.

Comment on Column: An oath and a pledge by Steve Brawner

Steve Brawner — Wed, 11 May 2011 18:49:09 +0000

Thanks for reading, young Skywalker. I agree – I wish conservatives would be more flexible on raising taxes. especially to keep the country from going ever farther into debt. If we don’t pay for our government, then our children will. And I wish liberals would be more open to spending cuts.

Rigid ideology is making it impossible for the two parties to work together to address the country’s long-term problems. Will they ever be willing to work on a case-by-case basis?

Comment on Column: An oath and a pledge by Skywalker

Skywalker — Wed, 11 May 2011 16:16:41 +0000

You are on the money, Steve. Politicians should never paint themselves into a corner like that. Bush 41 got burned when he campaigned one way on taxes and then realized he had to govern another way.

The problem is that a large section of the political right in America seems to view taxes as evil. That’s not a sensible or responsible way to look at things. Some taxes may be harmful, and others may be beneficial. Rather than making a sweeping ideological pledge against ever, EVER, voting to raise taxes, why not evaluate taxes and tax increases on a case-by-case basis?

Comment on Column: Don’t put too much faith in Revenue Stabilization by Steve Brawner

Steve Brawner — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:15:42 +0000

Well, there is a bill by Rep. Jeremy Hutchinson that would pay it out over 12 years. In other words, later, as always.

Comment on Column: Don’t put too much faith in Revenue Stabilization by Skywalker

Skywalker — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:13:37 +0000

Great take. Glad to see more of your thoughts on this topic, and I think I agree. The unemployment trust fund is certainly the elephant in the room for this year’s legislature, and it’s looking like they’re not going to address it at all.

Comment on To cut spending, you cut spending by Steve Brawner

Steve Brawner — Sat, 05 Mar 2011 23:17:54 +0000

Thanks again for posting, Mark. I agree with everything you just wrote. I just have this concern that legislators – well, frankly, the Republicans – are going to employ the same “starve the government” strategy in Little Rock that they have at the national level. It made sense, but it didn’t work. Democrats agreed with Republicans on the tax-cutting side. Republicans agreed with Democrats on the increasing spending side. And the combination led to the national debt rising to these levels. And now we have a state debt.

Comment on To cut spending, you cut spending by Mark White

Mark White — Sat, 05 Mar 2011 04:10:20 +0000

That’s a fair point. I don’t mean you should trust the state’s future to that; I’m only making a point about what I think is the wisest course of action in a tactical sense, and I think that was Sen. Baker’s intent as well.

One thing I don’t understood is the Republican legislators who vote down a couple of measly agency budgets to save a few thousand dollars yet have no problem voting for general improvement bills appropriating literally millions of dollars for local pork. That just signals a huge disconnect to me.

Comment on To cut spending, you cut spending by Steve Brawner

Steve Brawner — Fri, 04 Mar 2011 23:38:24 +0000

Hi, Mark.

Thanks for reading and for writing. I saw you in Panda Garden the other day and should have said hi, but I was too busy stuffing my face with very cheap and pretty good Chinese food.

I know that what you say theoretically is true, but I don’t have complete faith in the Revenue Stabilization Act. It didn’t stop the state from going in debt $330 million to the feds for unemployment benefits. If Arkansas is legally required to have a balanced budget every year, then it’s been breaking the law.

“Will and must result in spending cuts”? I’m not willing to trust my state’s future in that.

Steve

Comment on To cut spending, you cut spending by Mark

Mark — Fri, 04 Mar 2011 23:06:40 +0000

Actually, Steve, I think Sen. Baker is right and you’re comparing apples and oranges. At the federal level, you’re right, you have to cut spending first. But in Arkansas, thanks to the Revenue Stabilization Act, every dollar of tax cuts approved by the Legislature will and must result in a dollar of spending cuts, because the overall level of spending is determined by projected revenue. His point, I think, is that defeating this or that appropriation doesn’t accomplish diddly squat, because the money will just flow to some other appropriation. Literally the only way to cut overall spending in Arkansas government is to reduce projected revenue with a tax cut. You cut a tax, and you’ve guaranteed a spending cut.