Madison County Tax Assessor Fran Hamilton wants you to know Madison County Property Tax Facts.

Huntsville pays 27.5 mills school tax (Huntsville City Schools); Madison pays 27 mills school tax and Triana pays 25 mills school tax for their combined school system (Madison City Schools). Rural Madison County, Gurley, OXR, and New Hope pay 16 mills school tax for the Madison County School System

The Madison County Schools are the ones pushing for the sales tax hike.  I don’t doubt that they need more money for County Schools, but if Madison County School Board members need money so badly, they should look to their own property tax rates before raising Huntsville, Madison, and Triana sales taxes. Note that Madison County (5 1/2 %) also pays less in sales tax than Huntsville or Madison or the other municipalities (8%).

Huntsville City Schools don’t appear to need the sales tax money. IIRC about half of the City schools are at 30% - 50% capacity (although Grissom is at 140%).  Huntsville City Schools need to better manage what they’ve got and consolidate / close some underused schools. Note that they’re fixing to think about looking at it.

Madison City Schools may need more money, but they haven’t exhausted other remedies yet. Madison City should get the Legislature to create TIFs to fund their school construction. Plus, they could stop annexing Limestone County land that they can’t support. Planning to build schools in Limestone County with Madison County sales taxes is just wrong.

As expected, The Huntsville Times editorial board supports the county wide half cent sales tax increase for Madison County.  They trotted out the old argument that if you oppose any increased tax for education then you must hate kids and not want them to be educated.

[S]upporters have done little beyond preaching to the choirs of PTAs and those, like local business leaders who understand how vital education is to this area’s continued prosperity, who would support the proposal anyway.

Clearly opponents of the tax hike are trolls who lie in wait under bridges and eat unsuspecting children who pass by.  After all, we don’t “understand how vital education is to this area’s continued prosperity.”  If only we were as enlightened as those who do understand that any time the government school bureaucrats demand money the only response is, “How much?”

The temptation, during a time of high gasoline prices and rumors of recession, is for voters to just say no to another tax. In Alabama, truth be told, that’s an almost unavoidable temptation in boom times.

David Prather - the columnist who penned the endorsement - touched on an interesting point here.  Although Huntsville has been relatively insulated from the broader economic issues facing the country we still remain in an unsteady economy, with prices for many items rising rapidly.  I think it’s worth reading about what is happening in Michigan right now in order to comprehend the consequences of raising taxes in a slow economy.

Prather continues:

The money generated from a sales tax won’t go for additional bureaucrats or swankier offices. It will go, school officials from all three systems promise, for building new buildings and renovating those that need it.

I’m looking into this matter.  When the sales tax was originally proposed that is how it was described.  Various officials drafted resolutions that put the capital improvement requirement in writing.  I remained skeptical because nothing would stop the schools from shifting “other” money away from capital expenses to something else (like salaries) and merely replace it with this money.  The proposal on the ballot does not restrict the revenue to capital projects, however.  I’m not sure if there is a more concrete resolution backing up the ballot wording (I’ve contacted a commissioner for clarification).  But wait!  We have their word; they promised.  Well, that will help me sleep better at night.

I think it is instructive to note, though, that the last county wide half cent sales tax, which was put into effect about 20 years ago, was intended to be for capital projects and now is being used elsewhere.

From the Tax Foundation:

The current high price of gas has led to a lot of crazy proposals from gas tax holidays to creating a tax deduction based upon energy consumption. But Rep. Paul Kanjorski’s (D-PA) may top them all in terms of its stupidity. From the Times Leader, Kanjorski’s plan would do the following:

• H.R. 5800 would tax industries’ windfall profits.
• The bill would set up a Reasonable Profits Board to determine when these companies’ profits are in excess, and then tax them on those windfall profits.
• As oil and gas companies’ windfall profits increase, so would the tax rate for those companies.
• Kanjorski said his legislation will encourage oil companies to lower prices to prevent them from receiving higher tax rates.

While Hillary Clinton may have failed ECON 101 along with John McCain, it appears as if Kanjorski may been enrolled in Marxism 450 at the time. In all honesty, nationalization of the oil industry (i.e. Venezuela) may be better than Kanjorski’s ridiculous proposal.

A “Reasonable Profits Board”?!?!  This is insane.  We should encourage people to make money in this country, not threaten to punish them.  The potential to make money stimulates capital investment.  That yields things like jobs and wealth that the government has absolutely no capacity to create.  Before you reply that the government hires people just think about how they get the money to pay them - from individuals that make and sell things.

Good news Republicans!  John McCain is absolutely no better.

Aside - I’d never heard of Paul Kanjorski before today and now I’ve written two posts on him in the span of an hour.

Madison City Schools superintendent Dee Fowler offered up one of my favorite selfish arguments that government bureaucrats - typically in education - love to use.

For Fowler, a smaller state education budget justifies a tax base for schools not fueled by sales tax revenue, which drops during economic downturns.

He said property taxes should drive school funding because they are more stable.

“It’s not fair to compile a budget so tied to economic factors,” Fowler said.

And just why isn’t that fair, Dee?  When the economy slows down real people feel the pain.  Real people make less money (or inflation diminishes their purchasing power - same end difference) and they buy less.  How is it fair to them to have their taxes pegged to more static property taxes that would eat up a greater share of their income during tough economic times while you guys don’t share in the pain?  What makes the government run schools so special that they should be immune to widespread suffering during unsteady economic times?

Here’s another shameless plea for more money.

The Huntsville-Madison County Chamber of Commerce on Monday affirmed its support for a half-cent sales tax increase for schools, but the chamber’s board chairman said a property tax hike would make a better choice.

…

Monday’s tax talk comes as Madison County school system leaders consider alternative ways to make room for more students, such as using vacant commercial buildings and extending the school day or having “double shifts,” where half the students attend a school in the morning and early afternoon while others start their day after lunch. 

I guess the earlier talk of year round schooling wasn’t enough to scare parents and homeowners into voting for the tax increase.  Now they’re upping the ante, but they may have overplayed their hand.  Splitting school days into morning and afternoon sessions would wreak havoc on parents and depress property values as people left the area.  Which is exactly why such a plan would NEVER become a reality.  The sheer absurdity of the proposal exposes it as an obvious bluff.

And the winner is… Hillary Clinton.

First of all she rips off John McCain’s gas tax holiday pander.  No points for creativity.  I’m not particularly sanguine about the prospects of such a temporary tax removal having a significant impact on prices at the pump.  The fact is, and people hate to hear it or refuse to believe it, but prices are as high as they are due to tight supply and stubborn demand.  If the tax were removed demand would rise, forcing prices back towards their current levels.  Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for lower taxes, but don’t pitch them using false logic.

But Hillary’s plan is far worse than McCain’s for its sheer presumption of voter stupidity.  She actually plans on making up the lost revenue by hitting oil companies with additional taxes.  Hmmm…  I wonder what would happen.  What are the odds that those companies pass on those costs to consumers just like they do with all other costs?  About 100%.  No relief to motorists whatsoever.  But she would score points with her fiscally ignorant, anti-capitalist base.

Oh, and Hillary is also a Global Warmitarian like McCain and her support of the gas tax holiday demonstrates the frailty of her faith.

From the Madison County Record:

Funding for Madison’s new high school is going to be tricky, said Dr. Dee Fowler, Madison City Schools superintendent.

Fowler recently reported the new school, to be located on the Limestone County side of County Line Road, could take $65 million to build. A new source of revenue will be needed to fund construction of the school, Fowler said-which could possibly come from a new half-cent county sales tax in Madison County, which is being voted on June 3.

Keep dreaming, Dee. That county wide sales tax increase is not going to happen.

The sales tax will be Madison County’s, not Limestone County’s, which is where the tricky part comes in. There will be students from both counties going to the new Madison City School, as 400 Limestone students do already in the Madison City system. Limestone County does not pay anything for the education of these crossover students, Fowler said. School funding comes from both city and county taxes, so as Madison continues to spread into its western neighbor, how to make it fair for a Madison City school located in Limestone County?

“We are trying to hammer out a funding agreement,” Fowler said. “This is the job of prudent people to make the fair decision. All the players have something to win or lose.”

I wonder how long Fowler will wait to announce the grand bargain since the sales tax vote will take place on June 3rd. He’s running out of time to advertise such a plan, should one ever come to fruition. Not to worry, though. I’m sure all the schools are actively indoctrinating their captive subjects with the message for mommy and daddy.

Kudos to Walt and his Small Town Political Gazette.

Part 1

Many times for over a year I’ve decried the foolish headlong government plunge into ethanol. Basically anytime the government anoints a winner in the marketplace the government will be proven wrong for any number of reasons. One of the many predictable outcomes of increased governmental support for ethanol, higher food prices, has become a reality.

The Washington Post had a good column recently aptly titled “Ethanol’s Failed Promise” that outlined the many flaws with biofuels. I was particularly amused by the line, “Food-to-fuel mandates were created for the right reasons.” Ohhhh, the liberal’s lament. It’s always about good intentions with them, not sound, well reasoned policy. Any degree of government interference is justifiable if your heart is pure.

Seriously, who thought it was a good idea to use precious arable land for fuel production instead of food production while there are still people starving in the world?

Part 2

On a related topic, I recently wrote that John McCain’s proposal to eliminate the federal fuel tax for the summer revealed his lack of adherence to the global warming creed. Eliminating the tax would encourage more consumption of fuel, which is exactly the opposite of what a devout global warmitarian would want. Now the Wall Street Journal has come to the same conclusion. They state that proposals such as McCain’s make “a hash out of the climate-change policies that the candidate purports to favor.”

If such politicians were honestly concerned with the survival of our species their recourse would be simple and easy to make: artificially force up fuel prices. Tax it. Regulate it. Bludgeon it to death. Instead what we get are politicians who seem to be eager to just gain more power and control since their contradictory cocktail of policies belie their tenuous belief in the man-made global warming faith.

Update: More on McCain’s hypocrisy from Newsweek:

[A]ttorney and former GM exec Frank Dunne finds the climate-change hawk’s call for a gas-tax holiday “intellectually dishonest.”

[Tom Kloza, energy analyst with the Oil Price Information Service] goes a bit further, calling a gas-tax holiday “caca.” “It represents pandering. You’re not leveling with the American public,” says Kloza.

Good news from the AP:

Alabama’s reputation as a low tax state is supported by a new national study that shows Alabama’s business tax rate is tied for 14th lowest among the states.

The study done by Ernst & Young reported that Alabama businesses paid $6.2 billion in state, county and city taxes in fiscal 2007, which represented 4.6 percent of the gross state product.

Among neighboring states, Alabama’s percentage was lower than Mississippi’s 6.3 percent and Florida’s 4.9 percent. Alabama tied Tennessee and was higher than Georgia’s 4.2 percent.

Not so fast, though. It is true that Alabama has pretty low corporate taxes - relative to the other states. But, as I mentioned recently, there are only two countries in the entire world (Japan and Germany) with higher combined national and regional taxes on business than here in Alabama.

John McCain has proposed a federal gas tax holiday in which the federal tax on gas and diesel would be repealed from Memorial Day to Labor Day. The gas tax is just under 20 cents a gallon and the diesel tax is about a quarter per gallon. While the proposal has one possible redeeming quality, it is poorly thought out and revealing.

First of all it a bit dubious to suggest that the government can control prices in the manner McCain is suggesting. Gas costs as much as it does because of demand. If the government removes the tax and the price decreases then demand will increase correspondingly and push the price back up. It probably wouldn’t be a zero sum game, but it certainly wouldn’t be as great as what McCain is claiming.

What I find most interesting, though, is the fact that McCain, a well known global warmitarian, would pursue a tax policy that would increase use of one of the products that his ilk loudly proclaim is bringing about the end of the world. I don’t know about you, but if I really believed that internal combustion engines were going to cause major cities to by underwater in a few decades I sure as sin wouldn’t be encouraging the use of gas. Every single warmitarian liberal who whines about gas prices or - better yet - advocates lowering them is either confused or dishonest about their real adherence to the warmitarian sect. If they were strong in their convictions they would be pushing for higher gas taxes to discourage consumption and stimulate a private sector generated alternative.

I think policy proposals like this one lay naked the true intent of the warmitarians. They don’t really want to save the world. If they really felt the world was in mortal danger they would be willing to make tough choices. If you knew that an asteroid was going to hit the planet next year and wipe out all life I doubt you would be calling for taxes that fund NASA to be cut. No, their pursuit is one of control. They are engaged in a long term campaign to encourage people to voluntarily cede their freedom and give increased control to politicians and bureaucrats.

McCain’s proposal would have one possible silver lining in the unlikely event that it became a reality. Fast forward to Labor Day. Just imagine the VERY loud cries from Americans when the “tax holiday” expires and the price per gallon increases 20 cents instantly. There might actually be a little pressure for the repeal to be made permanent.