« Politico: State Auditor Hector Balderas 95% Committed to Entering 2012 Senate Race | Main | Rep. Martin Heinrich: I Plan to Actively Consider Running for U.S. Senate in NM »
Sunday, February 20, 2011
2/23: Important Debate in Santa Fe: Cut Education and Services or Raise Revenues?
From NM Progressive Action:
New Mexico's state legislators, their families, constituents and communities are invited to a debate on a critical decision facing NM's lawmakers: "Shall we cut education and public services again, or raise revenues?"
The debate will take place:
- Wednesday, February 23, 7-9:00 PM
- Scottish Rite Center (Temple), 463 Paseo de Peralta, Santa Fe
- 7-8:00 PM: Debate
- 8-9:00 PM: Spin Room and Dessert Reception (catered by Cowgirl BBQ), where the audience vote on which team won debate will be announced.
Two teams will debate this question: "To balance the budget, should lawmakers cut education and public services, or raise revenues?"
Team 1: Arguing for raising revenues, and against cutting education & public services.
- Sen. Eric Griego (D-South Valley Albuquerque)
- Rep. Moe Maestas (D-West Side Albuquerque)
- Kelly O'Donnell (Former cabinet secretary, Richardson administration)
- Carter Bundy, AFSCME
Team 2: Arguing against raising revenues, and for cutting education & public services.
- Sen. John Ryan (R-Albuquerque)
- Rep. Conrad James (R-Albuquerque)
- Paul Gessing, Executive Director, Rio Grande Foundation
- Doug Turner, Republican primary candidate for governor
Debate Moderator: Billie Blair, who is currently a visiting lecturer at the UNM School of Public Administration and also:
- Founding member of NM FOG (New Mexico Foundation for Open Government).
- Current board member of NM FOG.
- Former CEO of the Santa Fe Community Foundation.
- Former Associate Publisher of the Santa Fe New Mexican.
- Former publisher of the Taos News.
There is no charge for this debate. Media invited. Special invited guests: Gov. Martinez and Family
For more information, contact NM Progressive Action (co-sponsor of debate) at 505-217-8020, ask for John Ingram, Board of Governors.
February 20, 2011 at 01:19 PM in Economy, Populism, Education, Events, NM Legislature 2011, Progressivism, Right Wing, Taxes | Permalink
Comments
For Team 1, "Carter Bundy, AFSCME". Let's hear it for honesty. After all, cutting education and public services means cutting the pay and benefits of AFSCME members, eliminating the jobs of AFSCME members, or both. He has a vested interest in doing just the opposite, despite the financial condition of the state.
Posted by: Paul Lindsey | Feb 20, 2011 1:45:22 PM
So? Did you bother to look at the members of Team 2? They have a "vested interest", too. Look, Lindsy, we all have a "vested interest" in this. So, what's your gripe? Tell us your "vested interest"!
Posted by: John Adams Ingram | Feb 20, 2011 2:26:15 PM
You don't think Paul Gessing has a vested interest in doing what the extreme right-wing moneybags who fund his "organization," blogs, etc. want him to do? Funny Team 2 can't find a Senator to step up to the plate though
Posted by: Old Dem | Feb 20, 2011 3:30:03 PM
I'm a parent of 2 pre-teen girls who attend public elementary school. They are getting a very good education and lots of help with their reading, especially considering that they have only been in the US for 2.5 years and their native language was Russian. My understanding is the primary reason that HB2 recently passed the House AFC on a party-line vote was that in the opinion of the Republican members, it shorted education and corrections in order to maintain the film industry credit.
I have the same "vested interest" as the majority of New Mexicans not directly employed by state, county or city governments, the various public school systems, or whose livelihood depends on state grant or project money: that the taxes I pay are used efficiently. I am sure that there is "bloat" in the state government and school administration, and money wasted on projects of dubious value (i.e. renewable energy tax credits). Every military and civilian organization has bloat. In the military, you usually find it when you have to do everything you did before with less resources or manpower. In the civilian world, a manager figures out how to be more efficient or he/she finds that they are looking for a new job. Someone disagreed with me in another forum, saying that government is a primary employer in NM, so it must be maintained. Sorry, the primary purpose of taxes is not to maintain the employment in Santa Fe.
If increasing state revenues by raising tax rates would lead to increased business and individual income in NM, I strongly doubt that Paul Gessing would be against it. As it is, raising taxes on NM citizens and businesses in order to maintain or increase the size of state government is just a shell game with our money. Nothing is produced, unless someone intends to heat the Round House with used paper.
Carter Bundy is the political and legislative director for AFSCME in New Mexico. I was being polite when I said that he had a vested interest in enlarging the payroll of state and local governments. Unlike any other person participating in this debate, it's his job to protect the livelihoods of the members of AFSCME in New Mexico. Anything else is contrary to what he's been hired to do.
Posted by: Paul Lindsey | Feb 20, 2011 8:26:58 PM
Lindsey, while I respect your opinions, I strongly believe --- after 3 years of state budget cuts to NM's K-12 public schools, colleges and universities --- there's no more 'bloat' in our public education budgets, no matter how much one hates on APS administration.
However, there is 'bloat' in the 2003 personal state income tax cuts for richest New Mexicans whose annual net income is $250K or more, which our state senators and representatives refuse to restore to pre-2003 rates.
There is also 'bloat' in NM's corporate income tax loophole which allows Walmart, Target, Lowes, Home Depot, and other out-of-state corporations to not pay state corporate income taxes on the profits they earn when you and I buy their cheap, China-made stuff.
If your's and mine state senators and representatives would feel enough pressure from voters who live in their districts, to restore those 2003 personal state income tax rates on the richest, and close that corporate tax loophole, then they would not have to cut education, or public services, for a 4th year in a row.
I'm going to bed. See you tomorrow!
Posted by: John Adams Ingram | Feb 20, 2011 9:54:32 PM
APS ?? I'm in Las Cruces!!
and I agree with you regarding combined reporting.
Posted by: Paul Lindsey | Feb 20, 2011 10:12:19 PM
Okay, so you're in LC. What's holding you up on pressuring your state senator & rep to restore pre-2003 personal state income tax cuts for New Mexicans whose annual NET income is $250K more?
Posted by: John Adams Ingram | Feb 20, 2011 11:02:36 PM
Even though I strongly doubt I will ever have that net income, I do not support the "tax the rich" plan.
Posted by: Paul Lindsey | Feb 21, 2011 8:41:19 AM
Of course you don't Paul. You're one of them not one of the working people who are suffering. You don't believe in government and apparently you think teachers and educators aren't worth a fraction of what private sector white men make for sitting behind desks picking their noses. We see through you.
Posted by: Matanza | Feb 21, 2011 9:27:33 AM
I like the imperial "we" from the IWW member. Or maybe just an anarchist who is only interested in chaos, using a moniker of "Matanza"?
He/she obviously hasn't bothered to read anything except the last post. I wonder why a Democrat-controlled legislature and Democract governor reduced the tax rates on high income earners, and the same people never restored it? Were they all nose-picking white men (and women)? Perhaps because they realized that "tax the rich" is a stupid idea that doesn't work?
Posted by: Paul Lindsey | Feb 21, 2011 11:13:56 AM
It was bad enough to lower the taxes of the rich elite when the economy was booming. That's why people went along with it. But now we have a huge deficit caused by an economy ruined by the elite rich in the country and it's time they got their privileged tax situation fixed. If they don't like it they can move away and live in Mississippi or Texas, home to their fellow greedy elitists. We need good schools and state services a lot more than we need rich elites and more big box stores.
Posted by: Sal | Feb 21, 2011 11:21:07 AM
Paul,
You must think government is nothing but fat. We're cutting muscle these days, to the bone. I do NOT appreciate the reference to the IWW. Just because someone thinks that taxes cuts for wealthy should be reversed doesn't mean that person is a Communist. When there were surpluses, taxes were cut, particularly for the rich. Now that the federal government and states are running deficits, why shouldn't tax cuts be ended and rates restored to previous higher levels? You think it's better to slash worker pay and benefits or just have wholesale layoffs and you are just plain wrong. We've had thirty years of Reaganomics and tax cuts for the rich and for corporations and all it's done is destroy this nation. We, yes WE, can smell that trickle down and IT'S NOT MOUNTAIN DEW!!!
Posted by: Connie | Feb 21, 2011 9:48:29 PM
Attend the Feb. 23 Debate on "Raising Revenues, or cutting education & public services", and hear Demos & Repubs go at it on this issue.
Lindsey is correct re: 2003 NM State Income Tax Cuts for the Rich. The Demos & Gov. RICHardson led the charge, and they wouldn't even discuss/debate restoring the 8% rate for richest New Mexicans.
So what? We are beginning to see that it's not a political party issue, this thing about taking care of the wealthiest New Mexicans and cutting money for school kids. It's a question of class interests, and who's in charge.
Let's face it, the 1-2% of New Mexicans, those with all the money and the tax breaks, are in charge. But, not for long. As Lincoln said, "You can't fool all the people, all the time."
Come to the Feb. 23 Debate in Santa Fe, Scottish Rite Center, 7 pm. Ya Vasta! Bastante!
Posted by: John Adams Ingram | Feb 22, 2011 7:35:21 AM
The Democrats in the legislature are NOT equally to blame for the tax cuts for the rich hanging on like a vampire. There are a couple of fake Democrats in the NM Senate who work with the GOP goons up there to stop progressive measures. Blame them.
Posted by: Al | Feb 22, 2011 9:28:18 AM
How about the fake demos in the House? Like Lujan, Saavedra, Salazar, and all the rest who refuse to allow a debate on raising revenues --- why? Cause they're afraid the new governor will veto them. So, override her veto. Come on, wake-up. Look at how long some of these guys have been in the House and Senate. 30 years! It's time for them to go...
Posted by: John Adams Ingram | Feb 22, 2011 2:37:20 PM
There aren't enough votes to override a Martinez veto. When you lose 8 seats in the House, it doesn't help. Thanks to the Democratic party for a job not done. No excuse for losing those seats.
Posted by: Old Dem | Feb 22, 2011 3:17:09 PM
More defeatist crap from an 'old Dem'. You are the problem, dude. Your 'can't do' attitude sucks.
There is a movement lifting off in Northern NM, a reasonable 'Red Chili Revolution', if you will. It is Ya Vasta! Bastante!
That's enough, we've had it! Out with the old, in with the new.
The North is flooding 30-year lawmakers like 'Nick' Salazar with demands to raise revenues.
The best 'Nick' can do is respond in letters to hundreds of his Northern constituents which say, and I quote:
"Your concern about the lack of funding for K-12 is no more important to you than it is to me, including Higher Education.
"However the constitution of the State of NM does not permit us to spend more than the revenues the state takes in (my comment: wrong, read the NM State Constitution on this point: it says NM can run a deficit if necessary to put down an insurrection).
"Your two suggestions to raise revenues are good and have been thoroughly discussed in our Democratic Caucus. Everybody agrees with them (my comment - WTF? Then pass the F-ing revenue bills, and override Martinez's vetoes).
"However, Governor Susana Martinez has made it very clear that she will not sign a tax bill throughout her first 4 years in office.
"So may I suggest to you that a similar letter be written to the Governor (my comment - again WTF? Nicky can't get it up, so he says Susana is to blame?).
"Thank you for your interest in funding education.
"Sincerely, Rep. Nick L. Salazar, District 40"
Salazar has been in the House since 1973. 1973!
Now, he has a real problem on his hands: the North is revolting!
Look at these numbers from an online Survey Monkey poll (
Espanola: 82% want Nick to vote to roll back personal state income tax cuts for wealthiest New Mexicans ($250K annual net income) to 2003 rates. Cuba: 68%; Penasco: 60.9%; Gallina: 81.8%; Dulce: 83%. This is no anomaly. In 2009, the number was 49%.
More Survey Monkey poll numbers - Dulce: 100% less likely to vote for my rep & senator if he/she votes to cut education again, instead of raising revenues; Gallina: 100%; Penasco: 82.6%; Espanola: 84.6%; Cuba: 94.7%.
Holy Mother of God!
Take the poll yourself: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/V66JK6Q
Posted by: John Adams Ingram | Feb 22, 2011 9:12:58 PM
I'm stating a fact, that's all. If the Dems want to roll over Martinez, they will have to walk out like they did in Wisconsin. How else would you suggest getting around her veto this year?
Posted by: Old Dem | Feb 22, 2011 9:50:35 PM
Just try one veto override on for size at first. But, we need a bill that's worth the fight.
Where is a bill to raise revenues?
Three Dems in Senate: Phil Griego - San Jose, George Munoz - Gallup, John Sapien - Corrales all voted to kill Peter Wirth's SB 7 in Senate Rules about 2 weeks ago.
SB 7 would close out-of-state corporate tax loophole which allows Walmart, Target, Lowes, Home Depot (and many others) to not pay state corporate income taxes on profits earned in NM.
Sapien, Munoz and P. Griego are protecting out-of-state corporations, and cheating our schools, colleges and universities out of about $90 million in revenues.
Griego, Munoz, and Sapien will pay for their votes to kill SB 7 in the 2012 elections.
Where is the bill to restore personal state income tax cuts for the rich to the 2003 rates?
Lujan, Saavedra, and Salazar are keeping any bills to raise revenues from moving forward, so they don't have to deal with overriding the Gov's veto.
WAKE-UP CALL - these are all DEMS!
Northern NM demands that their lawmakers raise revenues instead of cutting education & public services again.
If our lawmakers continue to ignore their constituents, then they will pay the price by losing their seats in 2012.
NOTE to DFNM editors: could you move your Feb 23 Debate in Santa Fe story to the front of your website, just for today, so we won't have to scroll down so far to see it?
Posted by: John Adams Ingram | Feb 23, 2011 7:20:06 AM
Wow. Exactly. I fashion myself to be somewhat of a fiscal conservative and even fiscal conservatives, the likes of which include David Stockman, have been sounding the alarm bell calling on state level democrats and republicans to wake up - roll back out of control state tax spending on exactly these types of things that DO NOT generate economic activity. #1 The rich don't generate economic activity in a down economy. They save their money. #2 And we're ripping off small businesses AND EDUCATION by making small businesses pay taxes on their profits they earn and pay their share into education while letting Wal-Mart, Lowes and others get a free ride, no taxes? Seriously?
Posted by: gillygogetter | Feb 23, 2011 3:13:53 PM
