.jpg)
Gubernatorial candidate Debra Medina
On Monday evening I had the double pleasure of attending my first Log Cabin Republicans meeting (and dispelling a world of biases!) and hearing Texas Gubernatorial candidate Debra Medina speak. One of the major topics that Mrs. Medina spoke on was her stance on personal property rights and gun rights, which drew a strong, supportive applause from the attendees.
However, after asking her a question on the topic, and further discussing with Jerrod Atkinson, a big Ron Paul and Debra Medina supporter, afterwards, I am still not convinced that her position is the right one. First of all, it is a straight-up Libertarian position which holds to the philosophical belief that property taxes equate property ownership to "leasing" property from the government, not truly owning property outright.
Now, I should state for the record that I am somewhat Libertarian-leaning and am mistaken for a Ron Paul Republican all the time. The distinction that I draw, however, lies in the role of the State governments. Basically, within their own borders and for their own purposes and without interference by other States, the States may do pretty much anything they want to. Libertarians, in my opinion, have a hard time distinguishing one level of government from another, preferring as little government as possible, resulting in a borderline-anarchy approach to the role of government.
I differ.
Medina's contention was that we need to do away with property taxes of all kinds in the State and institute a system of sales and consumption taxes instead. My problem with this, first, is the fact that you give up local control over evaluation, appraisal of property and the assessment of taxes and send these to Austin. So my first question was whether this wouldn't be less efficient than our current system?
Medina's first response was basically a restatement of her assertion that we have Constitutional rights to property ownership that are somehow done away with through a property tax system. So I asked again if giving up local control for statewide control wouldn't result in a less efficient system. I decided not to push it and ask a third time or delve into related areas with my questioning.
However, Mr. Atkinson, seated directly next to me at an adjacent table, was quick to leap to Medina's defense. Atkinson is an intelligent, articulate and well-educated individual, so I value his input, and speaking to him on the matter would be pretty much the same as speaking with Medina, so I now shift my conversation to the "number 5" Ron Paul Republican in the State!
Jerrod and I discussed issues such as the apportionment of revenues of certain cities between sales taxes, property taxes and other fees. For example, Mesquite, according to his numbers, only collects 20% of its revenues from sales taxes, where Plano collects around 33%. In this situation, the Plano's would hate a sales tax-only system because they would, in effect, be subsidizing the Mesquite's, who would love this system because they would be receiving more than was being spent within their borders.
Now, could this system be implemented by the State? Sure--heck, it's even on the Republican Party of Texas' Platform! The problem is that we have had property taxes for long enough that many cities have set themselves up for development in a certain way that is not conducive to such a program. For example, Addison and Farmers Branch have small populations but large industrial and commercial tax bases. Under the new system, the "rich" become poor because now they receive a percentage of sales taxes commensurate to their population, not property taxes from the office buildings and warehouses that have made them two of the best-funded cities in the State.
It behooves a city to have a large population with significant retail development. In other words, Frisco becomes the envy of the State! For they have plenty of undeveloped land that can be rezoned residential--even high density residential like multi-family!--and significant retail development to serve the same. Under a property tax system, the Hall Office Complex north of State Highway 121 and on the west side of the tollway doesn't benefit Frisco except to attract businesses who would inevitably spend lunch dollars at local restaurants.
I will discuss more detail surrounding this matter in a subsequent article. That should be enough detail to make some heads spin for now! I'll also wrap up my conversation with Mr. Atkinson later.
But suffice to say, I believe Ms. Medina's proposal to move to sales taxes is a bad proposal. And being my first time to actually hear her speak publicly, in-person, and given her adamant stance on the issue, I would have to say this was a strike one for me personally.
Comments
Why not do away with sales tax as well and have government funded by donation?
Since the English Common Law is the source for much of our property law, the very nature of ownership of property is always subject to the powers of the King's (or in our case, the State's) sovereignty.
Also, a straight sales tax system would be largely retrograde and would affect the poorest strata of our society the hardest.
Perhaps the question you should be asking, is not how best to fund the government, but how to eliminate as much of it as possible?
Property taxes destroy your right to your property.
In AZ so far we are lucky, but a friend of mine in Texas pays over $1200 a month in state property taxes. The first year he bought the home the taxes were only $400 for the year. Oops. Surprise! If you can't afford another $1200 a month for your home, you might know how he feels. He lost his entire down payment, the house, and his credit - all due to exorbitant taxes. (The house only cost $300k)
Thanks to zoning laws in my city, I might lose a substantial portion of the value of my house as the city is considering changing the zoning laws to suit the needs of a developer in my area. Instead of a quiet lovely golf course neighborhood, the course may disappear only to be replaced with condos that it was not zoned for when I bought.
You have no property rights if they can destroy your inv
So by ending the property tax wouldn't you bring in alot more business to the state. Does Frisco need a great City Hall? It is a heady debate, you could say taxing the company you are also taxing the people who also pay the property tax. It seems like her idea "spreads the wealth" however terrible that phrase is.
I will be voting for Debra, for many other reasons.
Your argument is flawed. Debra's system is all but proven to increase annual growth of the economy through maintain private sector spending during a recession instead of siphoning it to the public, read: inefficient, sector. Your argument that it hurts a FEW cities initially ignores the long-term benefits for EVERYONE. You are being penny wise pound foolish.
So the cities that have less revenue might have to cut their budgets? Bad Republican for wanting less spending! Shame on Medina! She should double our debt like Perry did or bailout the banks like Hutchison did! We can't maintain our Republican reputation of hypocrisy with someone like Medina. You better shut her out of the debates or those Tea-partiers might have someone to believe in!
Yoikes - absolutely - that would mean we would get EXACTLY the amount of government we want. It is not a Doer or Provider, it is only supposed to be a Liberator or Mediator - a Referee so that Citizens can get done with what they want by the means they have. Ah, but that is called the Free Market and Liberals do not appreciate that kind of Freedom and Self-Reliance. Unfortunately, they know they must only tame it to a degree because without it, their would be nothing that gets done.
TJ - I am with you Debra Medina is Clearly the only Candidate for Governor with the intelligence and integrity to bring back Community and Commonality to the Great State of Texas.
Yolkes, I have a feeling you are speaking tongue in cheek, but perhaps donations would be best. Many government services used to be taken care of through charity. When citizens are forced to pay for services they do not want or do not approved of such as abortion then taxes are simply "legalized theft" or ultimately tyrannie
Hello David. Great, bold article! However, I completely disagree and think your reasoning is subjective but I love that someone is posting an open rational discussion on this topic. I salute you for that. In short, I see Debra's approach being more efficient statewide as a huge statewide property tax administrative burden is dropped and this is especially helpful at the county level. Second property tax is absolutely unfair because you have to repeat it for the same property! For example my brother spent five years of his life building a house from NOTHING and now the government says it is worth $740K and he can't afford the taxes which REPEAT each year on the house HE MADE WITH HIS OWN HANDS! Third, what the State of Texas does is not tying the hands of the cities to levy any additional tax scheme they want - many segments comprise sales taxes. Finally, I salute Debra for actually walking the talk of what the Republican Party members requested. I love Debra for the refreshing honesty!
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!