My analysis of yesterday's elections and some random thoughts

[TDaleBeavers]

Many will point to yesterday's near-sweep for the GOP as a mandate for Governor Barbour and his policies, and in a large measure they are right. However, I believe in legislative races particularly, the voters sent a message in favor of some checks and balances.

In spite fo all of the money and clout that this Governor and his juggernaut spent in this election, the GOP did lose a net of three seats last night, and control of the State Senate. Now the Senate will still have a clear conservative working majority, as several senators like Jack Gordon, Nickey Browning, Nolan Mettetal, Cindy Hyde Smith and some others vote frequently with the GOP, the Senate may not be the rubber stamp for the Govenror it has been for the past four years.

On the House side, I haven't added up all of the numbers yet, but it appears that the GOP gained no more than one or two seats. This probably means that Billy Mccoy will be re-elected Speaker of the House.

I believe this particularly means that the tax swap legislation will become law and that the votes are now there to override a veto from Govenror Barbour, who will not be able to seek a third term. In this past session, the legislation passed by a veto proof margin of 91-27 in the House, but Tommy Roberton killed the bill in his Senate Committee. An effort to bypass his committee fell three votes short (31-20) of the two thirds required to bring directly onto the floor. Robertson was defeated in the primary, and I am convinced the Democratic gains last night will result in this legislation becoming law over any veto -- as it should. My belief has been all along that the vast majority of the public supports the legislation, although it might not have been a decisive factor in their votes.

Thus, I believe the voters, in effect, told the Governor that we generally agree with you and Republican ideals, but we don't want to give you a blank check. And that's pretty close to my opinion.

........

Now, at the risk of engaging in sour grapes, I think a big loser in this year's elections was the Oak Grove area, and here is why: I believe after redistricting the Oak Grove area will be further split between differing legislative districts which will make it all but impossible for Oak Grove to elect a voice from within it to serve in Jackson.

House District 101 is one of the most rapidly growing areas in the state and is growing faster than the rest of the State as a whole. Thus, after the census and redistricting, House 101 will shrink in size. I would bet every hubbuck I could ever earn on here that Harvey Fillingane will seek to keep every single rural vote he can and surrender some of Oak Grove to prevent a strong Oak Grove resident from from threatening him in 2011.

Where will those "surrendered areas" go? In my opinion, they will split between two districts/places. Both House District 102 and 103 has stayed fairly stagnant in populaation, with 103 (Percy Watson) likely losing some. District 103 will have to physically grow in land area, and I'm predicting Percy Watson will pick up some mostly black areas currently in House district 102. On the other hand, newly elected Toby Barker is going to want Republican votes brought into his district and 102 will grow West into parts of Oak Grove to get those votes, and keep him in office, lest he become the next Richard White, who lost last night more than any other reason because of shifting demographics in South Jackson. However, he will not take in so much as to make it an Oak Grove district, and threaten him in a Republican primary.

Thus, I'm predicting another slice of Oak Grove is going to go to House District 100, represented by Ken Morgan. District 100 is still partisanly competitive (Virginia Carlton won by 300 votes in 2003 and O.K Moore got over 40 percent last night), and Morgan would be well served by taking in a little more of Lamar County into Oak Grove to lower his district's BVAP, but again not so much as to make it a Lamar County district.

Thus, by the failure of the voters to elect my good friend Joe Garvin last December, we may have shut the Oak Grove area out of the Legislature for a long time to come. This is just my honest assessment.

[Remington]

Dang! You still sound sore about Harvey Fillingane beating you pretty bad.

[Augustus McRae]

Dang! You still sound sore about Harvey Fillingane beating you pretty bad.


You a good guy, Rem....but I honest to God thought TDBII went to great lengths in his analysis NOT to air that thought. I think he's precisely correct in his thoughts. Although I don't think Harvey will orchestrate the "fixing" of his District. I think little Joey will do that. Despite what some of the folks on here seem to think, it takes balls to put yourself out there and ask folks to vote for you - you hang your personality, your quirks, all that you are out there - you put emotional energy in to it. It ain't for the faint-hearted and it hurts like a mother when you get your behind beat. It's time to get another theme to exchange with TDBII - a decent human being - than lifting his every word and calling it "sore losing" or "sour grapes."

[Baloo]

Thanks for sharing the thoughts and insight TDB!

[CUPCAKE]

Finally, somone acknowledges that TDB is a decent human being. Thanks, Gus. Groan me, stone me, cuss me, but Dale has feelings and I commend him for holding his head up through so much riducule. He is a good guy.

[Honey]

What's a juggernaut?

[TDaleBeavers]

Fair question...When I refer to Haley's juggernaut, I basically mean his extensive political network of supporters, in particular financial backers, including pro-business and other conservative leaning PACS. The State GOP is also included in my meaning of juggernaut.

[virgo]

Thanks for the analysis, TDB.

[KingMaker]

Finally, somone acknowledges that TDB is a decent human being. Thanks, Gus. Groan me, stone me, cuss me, but Dale has feelings and I commend him for holding his head up through so much riducule. He is a good guy.

I liked T Dale, even when it wasn't cool to do so.

[Honey]

Fair question...When I refer to Haley's juggernaut, I basically mean his extensive political network of supporters, in particular financial backers, including pro-business and other conservative leaning PACS. The State GOP is also included in my meaning of juggernaut.

Like yes men or something like that or just folks with the same ideas. Now I don't know what PACS is. I not trying to be funny. I just am learning so much and I don't want to misunderstand something.

[kevin]

Political action commitee's Honey. I'm just glad it's over!

[Honey]

Thanks Kevin

[TDaleBeavers]

Needless to say, this was the most negative season of political campaigning I recall in statewide races in my lifetime. And, I think the product of that was the low turnout yesterday. Less than 725,000 people voted yesterday, which was the lowest total in at least twenty years. Heck, in 1987, almost that many people voted in the Democratic primary! Four years ago, over 875,000 voted.

Maybe it's just because I've been a candidate myself now, but this year's cycle left a really bad taste in my mouth.

[kevin]

Yeah Dale it was negative and I think some enjoyed the entertainment? I gotta still get Al Hopkins's stickers off my car. I will not miss the "Jim Hood, you're fired" crapola and everything slung. Delbert Hoseman ran a real good campaign and I applaud him for that and as for david hogan he's got some shoe's to fill but I'm sure he'll be up for the job.Well,back to normal? Sorta...

[TDaleBeavers]

As to the AG's race this year and my advice to the State GOP: if you are going to beat Jim Hood, find a good prosecutor to run, please!! Someone like Buddy McDonald or Jon Mark Weathers could have made the same attacks on Hood giving contracts to his trial lawyer donors and cronies, but Hood could not have come back and said that they lacked experience prosecuting criminals. The number one thing the public wants in an Attorney General is someone who is demonstrably tough on crime.

I also thought the "Jim Hood is the greatest at making his friends rich" was one of the worst ads this year, particularly with the depictions of trial lawyers drinking to the background of classical music.

[KingMaker]

I also thought the "Jim Hood is the greatest at making his friends rich" was one of the worst ads this year, particularly with the depictions of trial lawyers drinking to the background of classical music.

You mean that isn't how all you lawyer types make your smoke filled back-room deals?

[mspolitics82]

[quote=TDaleBeavers;379739] This probably means that Billy Mccoy will be re-elected Speaker of the House.

I believe this particularly means that the tax swap legislation will become law and that the votes are now there to override a veto from Govenror Barbour....My belief has been all along that the vast majority of the public supports the legislation, although it might not have been a decisive factor in their votes.


With all due respect, I must disagree with this small portion of TDB's post. Given the growing conservative makeup of the House (Conservative Coalition in mid to high 50's, plus at least 5 Dems BEFORE the election who are conserv. in their vote, but NOT members of the Coalition, and given the fact that rumors are that at least 4 members of the Black Caucus are supporting Smith, is enough info for me to seriously question McCoy's return...I predict a turnover...Smith only needs 62 votes, and I think he will get at least 65.....McCoy has lost Cummings, Miles, Montgomery, and Vince-----all STAUNCH SUPPORTERS OF HIS....their replacements (3 of 4 are GOP) will likely NOT support McCoy......At least one House Dem. could very well switch to GOP fairly soon after first of year....maybe two or three.

Re: tax swap.......I doubt Phil Bryant, as Lt. Gov., will allow that ill-conceived piece of legislation to gain traction.....and I would be surprised that Jeff Smith would do so, either. Rather, what I think we will see is an attempt to have some tax restructuring/reform in this state, which is LONG overdue.

The media has done an excellent job of presenting only ONE side of the tax swap bill, so what kind of opinion, other than favorable, would the majority of the public have? However, even the Stennis Institute in its report says this will eventually COST cities money; which means PROPERTY OWNERS/taxpayers will end up (sooner than later) paying through the nose to make up the difference to municipalities. Now, I will save the space, for now, and instead of going into great detail on why this legislation was WRONG>>>>WRONG>>>>>WRONG>>>>>for Miss., I will just say property owners should be VERY grateful that it did not pass.

Some legislators understood, and voted NO, and were willing to take the public heat....while others were sickly afraid that voting no would "take their picture off the wall"; so they yielded to the "popular opinion".

[TDaleBeavers]

Well...not this lawyer anyway...lol.

In any event, I simply thought the ad was ineffective and probably offended a good number of churchgoing voters, in particular, with the depictions of drinking. The classical music came off a bit elitist as well. Good message -- very poorly packaged.

[TDaleBeavers]

Mspolitics...there were other changes as well last night. Yes, Rickey Cummings lost, but so did John Reeves. Carmel Wells Smith is being replaced, apparently, by a Democrat. In the primary at least a couple of conservative Democrats were defeated by more liberal ones, including Joey Hudson.

I want to see McCoy out as speaker as much as anyone, and I would have voted against him had I been given the opportunity. However, my gut feeling from yesterday's returns is that the GOP did not gain enough to defeat McCoy. I hope I am wrong.

You are correct that Phil Bryant will probably appoint a committee chairman who will try to kill the bill the same way Tommy Robertson did. However, by a 2/3 vote the full Senate can bypass the committee and bring it up for a vote. I think the votes are now in place for just that to happen.

[carsalesguy]

i voted for the beav in the primary and the election yesterday for attorney general.

he's not so bad- but he's fun to mess wif-

is it too late to vote?

[noway]

Im still Shocked at the results from the Glendale-Rawls Springa area.. In 2003 Democrats won the Justice Court Judge & Constable Race.. This year republicans Won both races.. I would guess 70-30 Democrat in this District.. The democrats did not get out and vote...

[mspolitics82]

John Reeves was basically a RINO, and was disgusting his fellow Republicans with his allegiance to the Speaker.....while it is true that there are one or two more liberal Dems replacing more conservative ones, I still think the Conservatives will outnumber, and that a few of McCoy's current lieutenants are going to DEFECT.

Yes, the members of the House and the Senate can vote to bypass the Committee process....BUT....they SERIOUSLY ....VERY SERIOUSLY consider how such a vote will affect them personally, as well as their districts, if this is something the Lt. Gov (in the Senate) or the Speaker (in the House) indeed wants. There will probably not be THAT MANY on either side who are willing to do that on the tax swap issue IF there is TAX REFORM LEGISLATION on the table. Remember, the fearless leader of the Senate created the tax swap fiasco, while the NEW FEARLESS LEADER has said during his campaign that tax reform is what lawmakers should address instead. I do not think enough of the Senate will
"buck" the head guy that soon into the game. For sure, the issue will raise its ugly head again IF McCoy is Speaker again, but I personally think it will not make it out of Committee in the Senate.....which brings up the point that the Lt. Gov can put it in ANY committee he wants to......finance, ways and means, or HE CAN EVEN NOT ASSIGN IT AT ALL!

[TDaleBeavers]

As I recall, after the last census Forrest County JC/Constable District 4 was only around 38 percent BVAP. It was newly created as a result of Forrest County's population growth and was designated the "minority influence" district, whereas District 3 (Gambrell) is the minority district, and the other two are heavily white (Bates, Causey). Thus, Myers defeat of Davis in the Justice Court race was somewhat predictable, though I was more surprised by Seal's defeat of Carson.

[mspolitics82]

This info below came from www.smithforspeaker.com (http://www.smithforspeaker.com)


Commitments from a Majority Nov 07, 2007 at 12:02 AM Rep. Jeff Smith announces that after the elections for the Mississippi House of Representatives he has commitments from a majority of the membership of the 2008 House of Representatives. There are still several races that are undecided so the final count is still unknown. Further information will be posted as soon as it is available.

[TDaleBeavers]

This info below came from www.smithforspeaker.com (http://www.smithforspeaker.com)


Commitments from a Majority Nov 07, 2007 at 12:02 AM Rep. Jeff Smith announces that after the elections for the Mississippi House of Representatives he has commitments from a majority of the membership of the 2008 House of Representatives. There are still several races that are undecided so the final count is still unknown. Further information will be posted as soon as it is available.


Like I said, I hope you are right. However, didn't Smith vote for the tax swap legislation in the last session?

[mspolitics82]

I believe you are right about Smith's vote...would have to look it up....even so, he may not necessarily choose to deal with it, especially if Lt. Gov. Bryant can convince him to re-direct attention to tax reform. Just because an issue is very heated for one or two years, does not mean it will be the following year.....voter i.d., for example. I believe Speaker Smith will not be devisive like McCoy has been. Speaker Smith will not do something just to make Barbour, or anyone, look bad......whatever he does, it will most likely be because he strongly believes in it.

[mspolitics82]

HB 247....tax swap bill vote on February 15, 2007....91 YES 27 NO..... No's include Davis, H. Fillingane, and Lott from Forrest/Lamar. Only 3 Dems voted NO....Bobby Shows from Jones County, Mary Ann Stevens from N. Ms. (town of West), and JEFF SMITH from Columbus. (We were BOTH wrong about Smith's vote on this particular bill this year) The nasty bill died , of course, in Senate Finance Committee....

So, I doubt Speaker Smith would deal with this....at least I hope not.

[mspolitics82]

For anyone interested....a list of current members of the Ms. Conservative Coalition in the House can be found at www.msconservative.org (http://www.msconservative.org) . It will be interesting to see how the overall numbers change between now and January, if at all, in this organization that has grown in importance over the last 6-8 years. A newspaper article I read one time, if my memory serves me right, brought out the point that the greatest growth came during Rep. Mike Lott's presidency.....seems that he was extremely effective in that role during Barbour's first two years......without the growth of this organization in 2004 session, Tort Reform would not have happened later that year...business folks,NFIB members like me, know how important that was.

The website is not updated.....I believe that the current president is a conservative Democrat from North Ms. ....I think the article I read said that he is the first Dem. in that position since its start. That same article said that Lott grew the number of Dems from 3 to 14 in 2004, which is how the Conserv. Coalition got tort reform passed in the House......don't you know that made Lott and the Coalition real popular with McCoy?

[politically incorrect]

I have to disagree with you Dale, about the checks and balances. I don't think most Mississippi voters thought about checks and balances when voting on Tuesday. I think they voted for statewide candidates based on one set of criteria - that they are Republicans and that they ran as conservatives - but voted for their local legislators based on local community issues and personalities. I doubt most voters took the time to think how their legislators would act as a check or a balance to Barbour. I think that the conservative balance in the Senate is more important than the party balance, so Bryant should still be able to hold the line against the more liberal House. Barbour may be a lame duck now, but he still has enormous connections that can make or break political careers. He will maintain his loyal supporters - and possibly gain some based on his large majority on Tuesday. Also, Barbour now becomes more attractive as a Republican VP nominee next year, especially if Giuliani or Romney gets the nomination for President.

On a local note, Sen. Tom King is rumored to be in line for President Pro Tempore of the Senate now that Bryant is Lt. Gov. This should mean more clout for South Mississippi in the next session. Also, if Barbour were to become VP or take a Cabinet post in a Republican administration, Bryant would become Governor and King would become an "acting Lt. Governor" in most respects for the remainder of the term.

[daisy]

I have to disagree with you Dale, about the checks and balances. I don't think most Mississippi voters thought about checks and balances when voting on Tuesday. I think they voted for statewide candidates based on one set of criteria - that they are Republicans and that they ran as conservatives - but voted for their local legislators based on local community issues and personalities. I doubt most voters took the time to think how their legislators would act as a check or a balance to Barbour. I think that the conservative balance in the Senate is more important than the party balance, so Bryant should still be able to hold the line against the more liberal House. Barbour may be a lame duck now, but he still has enormous connections that can make or break political careers. He will maintain his loyal supporters - and possibly gain some based on his large majority on Tuesday. Also, Barbour now becomes more attractive as a Republican VP nominee next year, especially if Giuliani or Romney gets the nomination for President.

On a local note, Sen. Tom King is rumored to be in line for President Pro Tempore of the Senate now that Bryant is Lt. Gov. This should mean more clout for South Mississippi in the next session. Also, if Barbour were to become VP or take a Cabinet post in a Republican administration, Bryant would become Governor and King would become an "acting Lt. Governor" in most respects for the remainder of the term.

Ok the bottom part of that answered my ? about if/when haley Barbour accepts a vice-presidential run.

So the lt. governor would step up and the President Pro-tem would be lt. governor.

[TDaleBeavers]

I don't agree with that...the State GOP has made it a priority to gain parity and ultimate control of the State Legislature in recent years. In these elections, keeping control of the Senate and making further gains in the House were of great importance to the GOP.

On the Senate side you had three GOP incumbents defeated (White, Doxey and Walley) and a 4th open seat go Democratic (Little). Only one Democratic incumbent (Williamson) was defeated. Numerous Democrats in both houses were handily re-elected in districts that voted for Barbour.

In the House, we broke even. Reps Cummings and Montgomery were defeated on the Democratic side, and Robert Vince's seat (which covers some of south Lamar County) went Republican. On our side, Gale Gregory and John Reeves (another South Jackson casualty) were defeated and Carmel Wells Smith's seat (a heavily Republican district)was filled by a Democrat. In some cases, incumbency was certainly a factor, and in some cases we didn't have strong candidates. But, there were several key cases where we did have strong well-funded candidates and fell well short. Many ran on "I support Haley Barbour" platforms.

Simply put, I expect the Governor to continue to get most of what he wants, particularly in the Senate. But, I do think from time to time, such as on the grocery tax bill, you are going to see some independence.

Finally, I'm tired once again of the red herrings that are being thrown around that local property taxes will go up by the cigarette swap. As I have said numerous times, the sales tax rebate to municipalities would be doubled under the legislation considered, which would make municipalities whole. The only shortfall that could happen is at the state level, and I do not believe that is likely either in the short or long term.

As to rebate, consider my hypothetical

A municipality has $10,000,000 in grocery sales in a given year. That means that $700,000 in sales tax is generated, which under the current law would mean that $129,500 (18.5%) would be rebated to the muncipality.

Now if you cut the grocery tax from 7% to 3.5 percent, only $350,000 in sales tax would be generated, and the rebate would fall to $64,750. However, by doubling that rebate the same amount is collected $129,500. That is assuming that grocery sales remain the same.

However, the Stennis report and common sense tells us that many will simply take the money saved on the grocery tax reducation and go spend it. That spending will simply trigger additional sales taxes, the appropriate portion of which will be rebated to municipalities. Thus, municipalities can only slightly benefit from this bill as written.

And, yes the increase in the tobacco tax will result in some decrease in smoking. That can only reduce the cost of Medicaid and other health related costs due to smoking. Those who don't start or quit will live longer, healthier, and more productive lives, in which they will work longer, and pay more in taxes.

I see this legislation as a win-win for public health, and the tax payers of Mississippi. I am a proud Republican, just as Tom King, Amy Tuck and some others are who supported this bill are. I hope it becomes law in the next legislative session

[mspolitics82]

[quote=TDaleBeavers;380628] Finally, I'm tired once again of the red herrings that are being thrown around that local property taxes will go up by the cigarette swap. As I have said numerous times, the sales tax rebate to municipalities would be doubled under the legislation considered, which would make municipalities whole. The only shortfall that could happen is at the state level, and I do not believe that is likely either in the short or long term.


However, the Stennis report and common sense tells us that many will simply take the money saved on the grocery tax reducation and go spend it. That spending will simply trigger additional sales taxes, the appropriate portion of which will be rebated to municipalities. Thus, municipalities can only slightly benefit from this bill as written.

And, yes the increase in the tobacco tax will result in some decrease in smoking.



Some of your points prove my point of how people do not understand the REAL TRUTH......

First, the Stennis people or anyone else who thinks people in Purvis or Lumberton or Petal or any small municipality are going to spend every last cent, or even 2/3 of it, that they save by not paying grocery tax ALL in their small city....well, they are not being REALISTIC. That is the main problem with the tax swap legislation....IF IT WORKED IDEALLY, then it would work....but it cannot.

1. If I live in Purvis, and buy most of my groceries there, I will not re-spend all of that savings in Purvis....much of it will be spent in Hattiesburg, some out of necessity, some by choice. So, Purvis WILL, I repeat WILL---not might----lose some revenue. If, and ONLY IF, every last penny I save on grocery tax in Purvis is re-spent in Purvis will my city come out even.

2. Sure, there will be a decrease in smoking if the cigarette tax goes up...no problem with that. The Stennis report even speaks to that issue...it is also included in evaluations within the legislation. BUT, what the legislation nor the Stennis Institute people do not factor in are
a. internet sales b. across the state line sales (and mucho people live near state lines) c. Indian Discount Tobacco store sales (plans are ready to go when the tax goes up significantly)
In other words, it will not work as IDEALISTICALLY planned. And, as the sales tax revenue plummets, the premise of the tax swap law is blown to smitherenes and cities' budgets COME UP WAY SHORT...so what will be the answer to that.....do you actually think the STATE will step in and make up the short fall???? NOT !!! If they were willing to do that, then they would craft a piece of legislation to do so from the very start.

So, I do not believe the property tax increase at the local level is a red herring......it is more, to me, quite a large possibility that the supporters of the tax swap refuse to admit AND often voluntarily refuse to reveal in their discussions of the issue with the public.

I agree that Medicaid is costly, in large part, because of smoking related diseases. I do not necessarily oppose a cigarette tax increase for that very purpose. But........just raise the taxes on cigarettes.......and use the money to repay Medicaid....how simpler can it get? Re: lowering grocery tax: leave it alone----it is the fairest tax out there, because everybody pays it, even the people in the Pine Belt who are here without following our laws (illegal aliens), even for people who give the illegals jobs that keep them coming here, even for the poorest---because there is no sales tax on food stamp purchases.

I am all for LOWERING taxes...but let's come up with a LOGICAL, SURE-FIRE, NO-DOUBT-IT-WILL-WORK way to do it....REFORM THE TAX SYSTEM IN MS. to help the middle class working person.

If there is even a slight chance----AND THERE IS----that our municipalities are going to take a hit, I say FORGET IT, and re-divert attention to something that WILL work beyond a shadow of a doubt. IF GOVT. is GOING TO ERR, IT SHOULD NOT.... I REPEAT.....< NOT> DO SO AT THE EXPENSE OF PROPERTY OWNERS.

[TDaleBeavers]

Once again...read my above post. I'll accept your hypothetical, for argument's sake, that the $3.50 out of $100 in groceries I would save at Ramey's in Purvis that I'm going to jump in the car and go back to Hattiesburg and spend it, as would everyone else who goes to Rameys in Purvis. In that case, municipalities neither gain nor lose. That's the worst case sceneario...but I don't believe that's what would happen.

By cutting the grocery tax, people are not going to spend less in groceries or decide the go to Hattiesburg to shop instead of Purvis (or Sumrall or wherever). By doubling the sales tax percentage rebate on grocery taxes in conjunction with the cut, municipalities at very worst will be made whole, as I illustrated above.

The sales tax on general sales items is the fairest tax there is, because it is based on consumption and everybody pays something. We are in agreement there. However, the grocery sales tax is regressive, and many who are eligible for food stamps don't participate, perhaps out of something called pride. Mississippi has the highest grocery tax in the nation and is one of only two states that taxes groceries at the same level as other states. With our state having the lowest per capita income, our people spend a larger percentage of their income on food, one of the most basic of life's needs, than other states. Thus, I say this tax is inherently unfair, and to cut the grocery tax would be to only recongize what most other states have already recognized on this point.

Joey Fillingane has even gotten on WDAM and called the grocery tax regressive, but isn't willing to do anything about it.

[Honey]

I have on question about the grocery tax. If grocery tax is deleted places like Jackson and H'burg probably would be okay (don't know for a fact) but what about places like Beaumont or Richtion or New Augusta. Wouldn't those towns suffer greatly because there is not many other places that take in sales tax there. I may have missed someone explaining that point.

[Honey]

And Dale I'm gonna have to add you to my list of MH folks that I need a dictionary to understand. Ha Ha. I get the dictionary out already for Sue and Guru. Honestly, you would think that 4 years of college and I could understand the English language. Please bear with me will I increase my vocabulary.

[TDaleBeavers]

I'm sorry, Ms. Honey. I will try to speak in more simple words. As to the grocery tax and the effect on cities and small towns, I explained how it will at worst be revenue neutral to them. The bill would cut the sales tax on groceries paid by consumers from 7 cents to 3.5 cents, but would double the debate paid back to our cities and towns on thoese sales tax revenues from 18.5 percent to 37 percent. By doing that, the two even out, and the cigarette tax increase would be designated to filling the whole in the state general fund, from the increased diversion to municipalities on the grocery tax and the tax cut itself.

[mspolitics82]

I have on question about the grocery tax. If grocery tax is deleted places like Jackson and H'burg probably would be okay (don't know for a fact) but what about places like Beaumont or Richtion or New Augusta. Wouldn't those towns suffer greatly because there is not many other places that take in sales tax there. I may have missed someone explaining that point.

I live in the Pinebelt and work for a business group that has been very interested in this piece of legislation. I have followed it very closely. Most legislators have been afraid to vote against it for fear of making their consituents mad. Those who have voted against it are sometimes bad-mouthed by others; but, I for one, asked my legislators NOT to vote for it. Most mayors do not like it, either, because of its LARGE UNCERTAINTIES. I for one, truly and STRONGLY believe that the media has done a very good job of NOT TELLING THE WHOLE TRUTH about the tax swap. I have a very good explanation for this "ill-conceived" piece of legislation (I borrowed that description from a legislator), but it will take up way too much space on this forum, so if you ---or anyone else----would like to email me, please do so, and I can email you the details....my email is mississippipolitics82@yahoo.com .

[TDaleBeavers]

I, too, had initial problems with the tax swap legislation proposed by Lt.Governor Tuck in early 2006. In the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Katrina I thought it was poorly timed, for starters. Secondly, there were real problems with the legislation itself. The initial bill wanted to raise cigarette taxes by $1.00 per pack and over time eliminate the sales tax on groceries. It gave no adjustment to the sales tax rebated paid back to our cities and towns. Obviously, that was not workable, and would have created shortfalls for both the state and municipalities.

The revised version of the bill, however, I believe is workable. By doubling the sales tax rebate on groceries back to municipalities, they are made whole. The only way this could change is if the Legislature later on went back and readjusted the sales tax rebate on groceries paid back. Right now, unless you believe that lowering the grocery tax will result in people buying fewer groceries, there is no way our towns will be hurt. If there were, I wouldn't support this. My understanding is also that the Muncipal association withdrew their opposition to the bill after this happened. I cannot speak for certain individual mayors.

What this bill would do is raise the tax on a clearly unneeded and irresponsible behavior (smoking) and give take relief for an activity which is absolutely necessary for day to day living (eating). Now over two years after Katrina, I believe it is time to make this legislation a reality.

Since Haley began his political career in 1982 running against John Stennis, and the way you seem to reiterate his talking points, I'd almost believe you were GHB himself....lol.

[chaz]

At what rate would millage increase for most towns? I agree that the property tax increase would be negligible.

If a family spends $3,000 on groceries (per annum), they pay $210 in tax. If property taxes were only to increase $210, the "taxation" would remain the same.

Wal-Mart and Ramey's also pay property tax.

[TDaleBeavers]

I'm not saying local propertry will never go up...but they will not go up as a result of this bill as it in written. Cut the grocery tax by one half + double the sales tax rebate on groceries paid back to cities = revenue neutrality as it relates to those rebates. As many will simply spend their grocery sales tax savings on more groceries or other items, cities will slightly benefit.

I have yet heard anyone to explain to me how I am wrong in this analysis -- other than code words such as "risky" and "Haley says so". As great a Governor as Haley overall is, that's just not good enough for me.

[Guru]

It took me forever to find the total state wide election results.
And, this wasn't through the Hattiesburg American or the Clarion Ledger.
Thanks for this thread TDB, very good discussion.

[BlueDogDemocrat]

Isn't the vote for speaker a private vote?

[TDaleBeavers]

I know the vote for speaker of the U.S. House Speaker is not a private vote. I know in the past, when the Dems were in the minority, Gene Taylor was ripped by some for voting "present" on Nancy Pelosi (even though the minority party knows they are going to lose, they nominate a candidate for speaker and there is a vote). The last time there was a real fight for House Speaker in Mississippi was in 1992 when Ed Perry of Oxford tried for the second time to knock of Tim Ford of Baldwin (and failed). It seem like I remember at least a vote tally being reported, but of course, can't remember if names were reported.

[mspolitics82]

I know the vote for speaker of the U.S. House Speaker is not a private vote. I know in the past, when the Dems were in the minority, Gene Taylor was ripped by some for voting "present" on Nancy Pelosi (even though the minority party knows they are going to lose, they nominate a candidate for speaker and there is a vote). The last time there was a real fight for House Speaker in Mississippi was in 1992 when Ed Perry of Oxford tried for the second time to knock of Tim Ford of Baldwin (and failed). It seem like I remember at least a vote tally being reported, but of course, can't remember if names were reported.


The vote for Mississippi's Speaker of the House is a ROLL CALL vote, starting with District 1, all the way through District 122......NOT ALPHABETICALLY! To clarify what I heard on a radio show this morning, the current SPEAKER, or any SPEAKER CANDIDATE, is NOT the first one to cast a vote, unless the Speaker Candidate is from District 1.

So, it is a public vote, and should be posted on the Legislature's website at some point, probably within 24 hours of the vote. Of course, anyone can call in at any time to see how their Representative voted, AFTER the votes have been cast and the voting record has been sent to the clerk's office.

[mspolitics82]

[quote=TDaleBeavers;382177] I know in the past, when the Dems were in the minority, Gene Taylor was ripped by some for voting "present" on Nancy Pelosi (even though the minority party knows they are going to lose, they nominate a candidate for speaker and there is a vote). [quote]

Taylor NEVER voted for Pelosi, until THIS YEAR!!!!! His reasons were that she was TOO LIBERAL ! I agree with that description of her; but my question: Was she any LESS LIBERAL this year than in years gone by? I think we all know the answer to that question. Obviously, Taylor will say, when challenged, he HAD TO VOTE FOR her this time, if he wanted a leadership role........HE STILL DOES NOT HAVE A COMMITTEE CHAIRMANSHIP, other than sub-committee----and he has been there about 2 decades. It will be interesting to see if Republicans will target this seat, since they are behind in the numbers this year. To win it, they are going to have to field a candidate who can bring in the bucks and who can compete with Taylor on the Gulf Coast. AND REPUBLICANS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO VOTE FOR THEIR OWN THIS TIME!!!!! I am sick and tired of hearing Republicans talk about Taylor's uselessness, but none of them will make a strong effort to get him out. Aside from the post Katrina years, he has been a "do-nothing" Congressman, for the most part.......call him conservative, if you want, and then go look at the ratings of the American Conservative Union.....his scores are in the 60's...70's one time, I think. When I was in school 70 was BARELY PASSING, and 60's was a FAILING GRADE! Compare that to the 90's for Pickering, Wicker, Lott, and Cochran, most of the time. Sure, Taylor is the most conservative Democrat---so what? Check his record...only voted for tax cuts 1 or 2 times in 20 years (that was recently---hhmmm, could he be thinking about the upcoming election?)....and when you vote against tax cuts, you are voting to keep taxes higher. He is still a Democrat that is representing a HEAVY, HEAVY Republican district. Saying that Taylor is a Democrat, but a more conservative Dem. is like comparing the ferociousness of two tigers.....they are both still tigers and still dangerous to humans.

[TDaleBeavers]

[quote=TDaleBeavers;382177] I know in the past, when the Dems were in the minority, Gene Taylor was ripped by some for voting "present" on Nancy Pelosi (even though the minority party knows they are going to lose, they nominate a candidate for speaker and there is a vote). [quote]

Taylor NEVER voted for Pelosi, until THIS YEAR!!!!! His reasons were that she was TOO LIBERAL ! I agree with that description of her; but my question: Was she any LESS LIBERAL this year than in years gone by? I think we all know the answer to that question. Obviously, Taylor will say, when challenged, he HAD TO VOTE FOR her this time, if he wanted a leadership role........HE STILL DOES NOT HAVE A COMMITTEE CHAIRMANSHIP, other than sub-committee----and he has been there about 2 decades. It will be interesting to see if Republicans will target this seat, since they are behind in the numbers this year. To win it, they are going to have to field a candidate who can bring in the bucks and who can compete with Taylor on the Gulf Coast. AND REPUBLICANS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO VOTE FOR THEIR OWN THIS TIME!!!!! I am sick and tired of hearing Republicans talk about Taylor's uselessness, but none of them will make a strong effort to get him out. Aside from the post Katrina years, he has been a "do-nothing" Congressman, for the most part.......call him conservative, if you want, and then go look at the ratings of the American Conservative Union.....his scores are in the 60's...70's one time, I think. When I was in school 70 was BARELY PASSING, and 60's was a FAILING GRADE! Compare that to the 90's for Pickering, Wicker, Lott, and Cochran, most of the time. Sure, Taylor is the most conservative Democrat---so what? Check his record...only voted for tax cuts 1 or 2 times in 20 years (that was recently---hhmmm, could he be thinking about the upcoming election?)....and when you vote against tax cuts, you are voting to keep taxes higher. He is still a Democrat that is representing a HEAVY, HEAVY Republican district. Saying that Taylor is a Democrat, but a more conservative Dem. is like comparing the ferociousness of two tigers.....they are both still tigers and still dangerous to humans.


I've called Gene Taylor an "irrelevant backbencher" for years for the reasons you've described. Taylor could serve another twenty years and not be chairman of the Armed Services Committee.