Third and State This Week: Pa. Job Numbers, Drilling Tax Plans & Getting Cheeky with Tax Data

This week at Third and State, we had a podcast on Pennsylvania's April job numbers, a three-part series on dishonest claims about taxes, an overview of several natural gas drilling tax plans, and a quick visit to Ohio.

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:

  • On jobs and the economy, Mark Price has a podcast explaining Pennsylvania's April job numbers, what it means for the recovery and why a bill in the state House aiming to cut unemployment benefits could set things backs.
  • On state and federal taxes, Mark also wrote a three-part series playfully titled "Getting Cheeky with Tax Data." In it Mark sheds some light on misleading claims about the impact of state and federal taxes on businesses and how many of them avoid paying taxes. Read Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3.
  • On the Marcellus Shale, Michael Wood takes stock of several natural gas drilling tax plans now before the Legislature.
  • Finally, on income inequality, Stephen Herzenberg shares an Ohio colleague's article voicing the outrage of many people there, as new Governor John Kasich takes a state and a middle class that are down and gives them a good hard kick.

More blog posts next week. Keep us bookmarked and join the conversation!

Podcast: The Takeaway from Pennsylvania's April Jobs Report

Before you head to your weekend, watch my four-minute podcast explaining the April job numbers report for Pennsylvania, what it means for the economic recovery, and why a bill in the state House aiming to cut unemployment benefits could set things backs.

Getting Cheeky with Tax Data, Part 3

This is the final part of three-part series running this week on Third and State.

On Wednesday, we highlighted the flaws in a Wall Street Journal editorial that was caught being, shall we say, less than truthful in its presentation of data on taxes.

Then, yesterday we wrote about conservatives here in Harrisburg, like the Commonwealth Foundation’s Nathan Benefield and Jonathan Humma, who want to make the case that Pennsylvania's business climate is bad because of taxes, ergo we should cut corporate taxes and shift more of the tax burden away from the wealthy and onto the rest of us.

Richard Florida has a piece at the Atlantic reviewing the relationship between "business tax competitiveness" and various measures of state level economic performance where he concludes:

The bottom line is this: Lower state investment tax burdens aren't associated with stronger state economies, and higher investment tax burdens aren't associated with worse ones. Tax cuts may be an effective political strategy and lowering business and investment taxes may appeal to corporate interests and attract campaign contributions, but they have little relation to state economies.

And don't forget that in Pennsylvania, middle-income taxpayers already pay more of their income in state and local taxes than the wealthy do.

This all reminds me of a great Upton Sinclair quote:

It's difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!

Getting Cheeky with Tax Data, Part 2

This is the second of a three-part series running this week on Third and State.

As we noted in Part 1 yesterday, getting cheeky with tax data is not a phenomenon limited to New York City and Washington D.C. Just a few steps south of our worldwide headquarters here at Third and State you can find Pennsylvania's own Commonwealth Foundation working hard not to be outdone by their national peers.

Getting Cheeky With Tax Data, Part 1

This is the first of a three-part series running this week on Third and State.

Last week, the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal got caught being, shall we say, less than truthful in its presentation of data on taxes.

Taking Stock of Drilling Tax Plans

As The Delaware County Daily Times reports this morning, state lawmakers believe a Marcellus Shale gas drilling tax will happen one way or another. The big question is just what it will look like.

Right now, there are four prominent plans being kicked around Harrisburg to assess a drilling tax or fee on shale gas. The plans, introduced by Rep. Greg Vitali, Sens. John Yudichak and Ted Erickson, Rep. Kate Harper, and Senate President Pro Tempore Joe Scarnati, have bipartisan backing.

We took up the task of wading through each plan to make sense of them and to see how they stack up against each other. Here's what we found.

Ohio's Governor Kasich Makes Clear Which Side He Is On

Our friend at the dynamic Policy Matters Ohio think tank, Amy Hanauer, has a powerful article in the most recent issue of The Nation, voicing the outrage of many in that state, as Governor John Kasich takes a state and a middle class that are down and gives them a good hard kick.

One example: The Governor recently explained his efforts to cut public-sector compensation by saying, “When I go to Bob Evans and I see a woman ... who doesn’t have any pension, and I don’t even know if she has healthcare benefits — and if she does, they’re shabby, at best — to think we’re asking public workers to do a little bit more ... it’s fairness.”

Yet what is the Governor actually doing for workers at Bob Evans? Looking to cut the state's Medicaid program that insures more than 4,700 of the chain’s employees.

Governor Kasich is also preserving a large state tax cut for the likes of Bob Evans CEO Steven Davis (with his $3.9 million annual salary). To top this off, Ohio just provided $7.7 million in incentives to keep Bob Evans headquartered in Cleveland — but did nothing to require the company to raise wages, provide even "shabby" health care, or any pension benefits.

Certainly sounds fair to me.

Third and State This Week: The State Budget, Voter ID and CEO Pay

This week, the state budget dominated with the introduction of the House Republican budget. We also weighed in on the cost of a voter ID law and the rules for CEO pay.

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:

  • On the state budget, Chris Lilienthal shared a Patriot-News feature that asked the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center what a good budget would look like. Chris also wrote an initial take on the House Republican budget plan unveiled on Tuesday and later in the week highlighted the center's full analysis of that plan.
  • Sharon Ward blogged about another recent Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center report on what it would cost to implement a voter ID law in Pennsylvania.
  • Finally, on income inequality, Mark Price wrote about a change in the rules of measuring CEO pay at Wal-Mart that ensures CEO compensation keeps growing.

More blog posts next week. Keep us bookmarked and join the conversation!

A Detailed Look at the House GOP Budget Plan

As promised earlier this week, we have a full analysis of the Pennsylvania House Republicans' 2011-12 budget proposal now available at the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center's web site.

The budget plan, which was introduced on Tuesday, sets spending at $27.3 billion, the initial spend number proposed by Governor Tom Corbett, and leaves untouched a $506 million accumulated revenue surplus.

Voter ID Law Costly to Taxpayers

The Pennsylvania House of Representatives is considering legislation that would require every citizen to present photo identification as a condition for voting in primary and general elections.

Many recently enacted voter ID laws have been subject to legal challenges, and states considering such laws are being proactive about including safeguards that eliminate impediments to a citizen's constitutional right to vote. But it doesn't come without cost.

In a recent policy brief, the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center applied the experiences of other states with voter ID laws to estimate the cost of implementing such a law in the Commonwealth. In order to meet the requirements set forth in the legislation and avoid potential litigation, PBPC estimates the first-year costs for a voter identification program of approximately $11 million.

Syndicate content