Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Cathleen Allison / nevada appeal
Gov. Jim Gibbons answers questions Thursday in Carson City. Gibbons repeated his threat to veto any budget submitted to him by the Legislature that contains tax increases, and he criticized lawmakers for adding back $72 million in budget cuts he had proposed.
Friday, May 1, 2009 | 2 a.m.
Sun Archives
Sun Coverage
Sun Coverage
Gov. Jim Gibbons’ news conference Thursday provided a nice summation of his first two years in office. He was forcefully anti-tax. He attacked the Legislature. He had the backing of five junior, conservative Republican assemblymen.
Mostly, though, it served as a forum for the governor to repeat his stance on taxes.
• “The budget I submitted was balanced ... without raising taxes.”
• “We’ll submit a budget amendment to balance the budget ... without raising taxes.”
• “I welcome the opportunity to sit down with all legislators on how to provide those core needs, but without raising taxes.”
He said all that in the first minute.
During the remaining three minutes he spoke Thursday, Gibbons repeated his no-new-tax mantra another five times.
Gibbons rode that stance to the Governor’s Mansion in 2006. Thursday showed he is hitching his reelection hopes to the same wagon.
Forget for a moment that he included in his budget one of the largest tax hikes in state history. The $200-plus million increase in the hotel room tax — approved in a referendum on an advisory question by voters in Clark and Washoe counties and passed by the Legislature — became law without his signature.
He attacked Democratic and Republican lawmakers for adding back some of his proposed budget cuts — about $72 million so far, out of a $6.1 billion budget.
“When you’re in a hole, you have to stop digging,” he said.
Assembly Speaker Barbara Buckley defended those spending decisions as things “legislators couldn’t sleep at night if we let happen. The safety net would be so affected, people would die.”
It’s things like maintaining treatment for autistic children, providing mentally ill people with medication and keeping open some rural mental health clinics, she said.
The Economic Forum, made up of five business leaders, will meet today and set revenue projections for the next two years. Legislative staff estimates that the state will have to cut another $255 million, based on their projections. The estimate of the governor’s budget director, Andrew Clinger, is $516 million.
Gibbons said he will propose more pay cuts for state workers, teachers and higher education employees to make up for the shortfall.
“We want to stimulate the economy, not kill it,” he said. “We do not need to raise taxes to balance this budget.
“Now is not the time to raise taxes. Now is not the time to kill recovery of the state of Nevada by changing tax formulas. Now is not time to raise taxes on sales. Now is not the time to kill jobs in the state of Nevada by raising business taxes.”
Gibbons was asked if there was any point at which he would raise taxes — if the hole in the budget grew to $900 million, for example.
“It’s foolish to think that raising taxes is going to bring more revenue into the state during an economic recession,” he said. “It’s been proven time and time again.”
He then threw out the possibility of a tax cut. “If we want to stimulate the economy, we should think about a tax holiday — stop collecting taxes,” he said.
There was time for one more question: Would he veto a budget with a tax increase?
“If they send me a budget that includes tax increases, I will veto the budget,” he said. “Thank you very much. Thank you.”
I just read in the RJ that our "leader" wants to increase the proposed salary cuts to state workers. It's interesting that no one - NO ONE - seems to be advocating an increase in taxes on the mining industry. This sacred cow scares everyone with bluffs. Think this through, people. First, they pay - what? - .2% tax? Casinos pay more than that. A lot more. Second, if you increase the mining tax, the industry is not going to up and leave. All the stuff they want is here, under the ground. And even if they did leave, there will be plenty of others who will happily take it over, even at a higher tax rate. Third, they will not chop their work force. You need people to go under the ground and get the stuff. If you reduce the workforce, you have fewer people to do this. You'd slow production. So it's a bluff. The bottom line is that the industry has the governor and legislators in its back pocket, and it has apparently effectively trained all Nevadans to conveniently ignore this potential additional tax revenue source. Instead, everyone picks on state workers and other easy prey. Way to go, Nevada.
Why increase taxes, there is already a $5.1 billion budget proposed...http://www.lvrj.com/news/44123207.html
What happens when in 5-6 months revenues are down yet again? Does this guy purpose more cuts to state workers?? How far down is this necompoop going to take the state?? Why isn't there a recall effort in full force? Oh - opps it's because the replacement lietuent gov is under indictment!!
in my opinion, you are very short sighted. other states have state income tax (ie, 10% in California and 6% in other states). people in those other states are also being furloughed. so if Gibbons imposes a temporary pay cut, SAY THANK YOU MR GIBBONS! You are still coming out ahead compared to people in other states and no one is losing their jobs. Maybe you'd rather not take a pay cut and hope that others lose their jobs since there is a lack of money to go around. In that case, I'm glad that Gibbons is not short sighted to think that way.
Nevada is not a very self responsible state. It believes that sucking at the wallets of tourists will save its axx. So much for conservatives who pull up their bootstraps. Fake rules! Or wait, I think I mean HYPOCRISY RULES IN NEVADA!
Time to impeach this axxhat sock puppet.
WHAT IS A TAX? IT IS TAKING MONEY FROM SOMEONE AND PUTTING IT IN THE GOVERNMENT'S COFFERS. SO, GIBBONS is IN FAVOR OF TAXES-- BUT ONLY ON THE STATE'S 18,000 EMPLOYEES. His stand is about getting re-elected, not about doing the right thing.
Since I'm a state worker, anything I say about this would seem to have something to do with my pocketbook. So be it--I know how I felt about these issues before I went to work for the state. I don't think it involves ego for me to say that if Governor Assaulter did his job 1/1,000,000th as well as I do mine, Nevada would be a lot better off. But the point is moot, since he defines his job as helping drunken women to their cars, text-messaging during meetings, and accusing major newspapers of being paid off by Democrats to report on what an embarrassment he is. And if that really is his job, he's great at it. As for being governor, he's making some of his less competent predecessors look like the second coming of Abraham Lincoln.
WHAT IS A TAX? IT IS TAKING MONEY FROM SOMEONE AND PUTTING IT IN THE GOVERNMENT'S COFFERS. SO, GIBBONS is IN FAVOR OF TAXES-- BUT ONLY ON THE STATE'S 18,000 EMPLOYEES. His stand is about getting re-elected, not about doing the right thing.
No! You are way off, he doesn't just want to tax the 18,000 state employees, he wants to tax college students as well. He is quoted as they can raise revenue, by raising tuition. Hmmmm, raising revenue, isn't that what a tax is? He is without a doubt the worst leader in the country. I actually voted for him, I apologize dearly to all of you.
Taxation is theft; those mandating taxation are thieves, thieves are criminals.
A free society is one not shackled by criminals imposing mandates of theft.
I applaud Governor Gibbons for his stance for the people of Nevada and our economy. He is standing up against the power of the Government employee Unions and their Democrat puppets in the Nevada Assembly and Senate in a manner similar to David vs. Goliath. Government employees have wages and benefits that probably 90% of private sector employees only dream of and they can afford to have pay cuts to help defend their lifer jobs. He believes that Nevadans deserve a government that works for them, not for the government or against them. When he runs again, I will vote for a second term for Governor Gibbons because of his budget stance.
Keep fighting the good fight Governor Gibbons.
Apples,
States with income taxes faced bigger shortfalls and were more likely to face a shortfall than states without an income tax.
Yes, we are lucky to not have an income tax. That's why I can't complain about a 6% salary cut. I appreciate my fat pay check, but I am happy to take the cut so that less people lose their jobs. There are younger people that I work with that I love having around and if my pay cut helps them to keep their jobs, great. Plus, a 6% pay cut is about the raise that I got in January. I can forgo that raise and it's no biggie.
A good place to cut - kick out the governor and leutenant criminal and let some of the part time legislators run the state. There now, that doesn't hurt me!
The reason is simply that the broad taxes leads to more revenue, as you reasoned. But more revenue with no spending limits leads to a rapidly expanding government. When the economic trouble comes (and corporate taxes are the most volatile tax) states that spent far too much find themselves in a shortfall. Essentially they have committed themselves to programs than cannot be funded any longer.
Think of the government as a teenage kid and a broad-based-tax as a credit card with no spending limit. The bill always comes, and when it does did you spend wisely or spend wildly?