Home | Advertise Online | Archives | Coupons | Marketplace | Newszap Media Kit | Site Feedback | Subscriptions

 Home
 Search       Members   Calendar   Help   Home 
Search by username
Not logged in - Login | Register 
> Delaware Public Forums > State of Delaware Public Issues Forum > Budget Passes, Signed into law at 4:30 a.m.

Budget Passes, Signed into law at 4:30 a.m.
 
 New Topic   Reply   Print 
AuthorPost
tspong
Member
 

Joined: Fri Aug 24th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 3357
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Mon Jul 13th, 2009 03:24 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Copied below is a letter to the editor submitted to the Delaware State News. You can post your opinions by clicking on "Reply."

 

In passing the Budget on June 30th, the Delaware General Assembly chose the path that leads to immediate gratification at the expense of long-term economic recovery. The clearest indication of this assessment is the burden levied by the massive and multiple tax increases we Delawareans must now bear. To raise taxes in the middle of a recession, in the name of balancing a budget, speaks volumes about the lack of wisdom and vision shared by those at the helm of our Ship of State. At a time when we desperately need people to engage in the marketplace in order to jump start our floundering economy, we have decided to take more of their money in taxes and fees so that we can continue to spend at record setting proportions.


The Joint Finance Committee did make numerous cuts to the budget; in fact, they sliced off nearly $400 million. Unfortunately, they took only the low hanging fruit and left the larger harvest for next year’s budget battle, which will dwarf what we have just faced. You can only sweep the dirt under the rug for so long. Eventually the irresponsible nature by which our state government is dealing with fiscal matters will catch up to us, and when that happens we will all be hit hard. The simplest and most obvious example remains the 2.5% pay cut to state employees. When do they get it back? It will not be next year; how about the year after that? When will there be enough money, without raising taxes even more, to give back the hard-earned money of our loyal state employees.


Raising taxes to fill budgetary gaps only ensures that you will have to continue raising taxes for the same purpose in future years. That is because true economic growth is spurred through the innovation, dedication, risk and sacrifices made by the hardworking people of our great state, not through tax hikes. When the economy screams out for a free flowing exchange of currency, we have decided to increase the state’s portion of the pie instead. This is not a recipe for recovery; rather it serves only to maintain the current size and scope of our state programs.


And the pervasive nature of this school of thought is evident in a number of our state legislators. Some who have been right-thinking in the past have bought into the false claim that we must do everything possible to maintain our current level of state services. One such legislator is John Atkins (D-Millsboro). Representative Atkins was once a conservative; but this year chose to vote for every tax increase that was placed before him. When I asked him why he sided with tax hikes in the middle of a recession, he responded "it was the right thing to do". Clearly, Mr. Atkins has forgotten what it means to be "right".


What we need is a true leader. This state cries out for a bold leader who has the courage of their convictions and is not afraid to go down for what they believe in. It is time to put Delaware first and selfish ambition aside.


Shaun Fink


Small Business Owner


Millsboro


To respond to this letter, go to http://www.newszap.com, go to "" in the State of Delaware Public Forum.

dover-diva
Member
 

Joined: Mon Mar 23rd, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 1973
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Mon Jul 6th, 2009 07:38 pm
 Quote  Reply 
You are exactly right. These politicians who see these "sin" taxes as a good way of making money are eventually going to have NO ONE ELSE to punish. The abuse of alcohol is more prevalent but, the state makes the money on the stop drunk driving campaign. I also see that there was NO, NO, NO, decrease on state spending. All the suggestions that Markell wanted us to send in, fell on deaf ears, and blind eyes. If you have time read the article on waste in gov. by Colin Bonnini.

Habanero
Member


Joined: Wed Sep 28th, 2005
Location: DelMarVA, USA
Posts: 4822
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Mon Jul 6th, 2009 07:22 pm
 Quote  Reply 

The stupidity of those in Dover never ceases to amaze me...............

Under the recently passed legislation, the tax on cigarettes will rise by $0.45 per pack. It is expected to bring in $16 million this fiscal year.

What they expect to, and what they actually do, collect are 2 entirely different things.  Taxing a small minority of the population to foot the bill for the majority is never and will never be a proper thing to do.

While smokers and tobacco-store owners were upset by the decision, many health professionals were pleased. They said the increase in price will lead many adolescents away from smoking before they even begin.
The same lie they claim EVERY time they increase the tobacco tax.    The fact that no one calls them on this lie is appalling.  They make the same claim every time they want to raise more funds for their pet projects and as soon as they decide they need more money they claim that teens are buying cigarettes............in other words, the increase tax is NOT a deterrent to teens and they lie by claiming it is.  Or else it is a deterrent, but they lie any way.

Of course smokers and tobacco-store owners are upset, they just got hit with the largest federal tax increase on the products in history. 

I live in Virginia, just over the line from Maryland, less than an hour from the Delaware/Maryland state line, and only 2 hours from Dover.  If anyone in Dover thinks the number of DE tags I see at the tobacco stores on Rte 13 is going to decrease, they need their heads examined. 

More death and destruction is caused to teens from alcohol than from cigarettes, yet they refuse to increase those taxes. 

My suggestion to the airheads in the DE General Assembly is that if it is teens you are targetting with the cig tax, at least give the adults the courtesy of letting them use the products you are overtaxing in private establishments --- IOW repeal the smoker ban.

tspong
Member
 

Joined: Fri Aug 24th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 3357
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Mon Jul 6th, 2009 03:43 pm
 Quote  Reply 
What do you think?

From the Delaware State News:

Tax increases key to passing state budget


Residents, businesses, lottery winners and smokers to share burden


By Leah Burcat


Delaware State News


DOVER — Although there were disagreements along the way and some still are not happy with the results, state lawmakers came together to close an unprecedented budget deficit last week through a series of cuts, taxes and the use of federal stimulus money.


Legislators said that none of the decisions came easy because they knew that each of the choices they made would affect Delawareans. Particularly hard, many said, was the decision to increase a variety of taxes.


"This was a very difficult year. Nobody likes to vote for tax increases, and we had to vote for a lot of them," said Sen. Brian J. Bushweller, D-Dover. "In the end, I believe we reached an unfortunate but fair balance between raising taxes, cutting spending, cutting state employee pay and shrinking the size of government."


Although in total, legislators voted to raise seven taxes, the average citizen is not expected to bear too much of that burden. The taxes are distributed between private citizens, small business, large corporations, lottery winners and smokers.


In regards to the personal income tax — a tax that has fallen from a high of 19.8 percent for the highest bracket three decades ago to 5.95 percent as of last month — lawmakers squabbled as to how to and whether or not to change it.


After much finagling, lawmakers agreed to up the highest bracket of the personal income tax by one percentage point. This means that all individuals earning more than $60,000 a year — only 17 percent of Delawareans — will be taxed at 6.95 percent on those earnings.


The tax is expected to bring in $30 million over the course of this fiscal year.


For small-business owners, it was not the increase in the personal income tax that was of particular concern, but the decision by the General Assembly to hike the gross-receipts tax.


"That’s the one that’s most concerning to us," said A. Richard Heffron, senior vice president of government affairs for the Delaware State Chamber of Commerce. "Because it’s the small businesses that are going to get us out of this recession."


The gross-receipts tax, which is the tax on a seller of goods, was first instated in 1975 as a way to help the state overcome a budget deficit. Even years later when the state was well into the black, the tax was never repealed.


And in recent years as state revenues have decreased, government has relied upon the income generated from this tax to keep moving forward.


Gov. Jack A. Markell initially proposed a 10-percent across-the-board increase in the tax, but after an outcry from small-business owners, the proposal was decreased to 8 percent.


Some lawmakers still had trouble accepting this proposal.


"I believe we’re taxing our small businesses out of business," said Rep. Michael Ramone, R-Wilmington, during a committee meeting on the tax.


Despite the sentiments of Rep. Ramone and others, the bill was passed.


A similar argument was raised when legislators discussed upping the corporate franchise tax.


Under the legislation, the tax cap, which applies to the largest of the businesses incorporated in the state, will increase from $165,000 to $180,000.


Some legislators and business representatives said they believed the tax increase would encourage the big corporations, which are struggling like most other businesses, to relocate in other tax-friendlier states.


One tax increase that did have many supporters —— and, of course, also many opponents — was that of cigarettes.


Under the recently passed legislation, the tax on cigarettes will rise by $0.45 per pack. It is expected to bring in $16 million this fiscal year.


While smokers and tobacco-store owners were upset by the decision, many health professionals were pleased.


They said the increase in price will lead many adolescents away from smoking before they even begin.


In addition to those tax hikes, legislators also voted to increase the public utility tax, to reinstate the estate tax and to tax lottery winnings.


The public utility tax will affect mainly non-residential consumers. Cable customers may see a modest increase in their bills.


The estate tax will only apply to properties worth more than $3.5 million.


A proposed increase in the alcohol tax was not passed. It would have brought in $4.8 million. A similar proposal failed last year in the Senate.


A four-year sunset provision was tacked onto each tax increase, which helped calm the nerves of many.


But even the sunset provisions were not enough for some, who believed tax increases were unnecessary.


"We had a real opportunity to reduce the size and scope of government and we didn’t do it. We instead simply raised taxes," said Sen. Colin R.J. Bonini, R-Camden. "In this economy it was really inexcusable."


Despite the disagreements, the state did manage to cover its deficit and government functions did not cease to function on July 1, the first day of the fiscal year, which is more than some states can say.


"We don’t like taxes; we don’t like tax increases; we don’t think they will help with the economy; but we’re in a bind and we’re all in this together," said Mr. Heffron.


Staff writer Leah Burcat can be reached at 741-8250 or lburcat@newszap.com.

Playing the Game
Member


Joined: Wed Jan 30th, 2008
Location: Delaware USA
Posts: 5408
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sun Jul 5th, 2009 10:12 pm
 Quote  Reply 
You underestimate the creativity of State Employees.

Tired1969 wrote:
First of all most agencies probably won't be able to offer their employees 5 days off because coverage would incur overtime. One stipulation of getting the 5 days off is that it can only happen if it does not result in overtime. So in the end we get 2.5% cut from saleries and the bone of furlough days does not happen so the Governor makes out.

taxpayertoo
Member
 

Joined: Sun Mar 1st, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 159
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sun Jul 5th, 2009 09:38 pm
 Quote  Reply 
The agencies now have a really good incentive to control overtime - which could translate into savings for the state.  In addition, the way overtime is paid has been changed.  An employee must actually work more than 40 hours to receive overtime pay at time and a half.  Sick leave and annual leave taken is not considered as time worked.

Last edited on Sun Jul 5th, 2009 09:52 pm by taxpayertoo

Tired1969
Member
 

Joined: Tue Jun 9th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 29
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sun Jul 5th, 2009 03:07 pm
 Quote  Reply 
First of all most agencies probably won't be able to offer their employees 5 days off because coverage would incur overtime. One stipulation of getting the 5 days off is that it can only happen if it does not result in overtime. So in the end we get 2.5% cut from saleries and the bone of furlough days does not happen so the Governor makes out.

Playing the Game
Member


Joined: Wed Jan 30th, 2008
Location: Delaware USA
Posts: 5408
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 09:47 pm
 Quote  Reply 
The pay was going down 2.5%.  The Legislatire softened the cut by giving employees an additional 5 days off with pay.  In the end it is a wash and a wasted effort.  Politics as usual in Delaware.  Great for us State employees, sucks for the taxpayers.

Last edited on Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 09:47 pm by Playing the Game

Born Country
Member


Joined: Mon Apr 20th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 82
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 09:10 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Playing the Game wrote: No, everyone gets a 2.5% cut in their paycheck.  Any departments that can give their staff time off without incurring overtime will get 5 additional paid days off this year.
Aren't the 5 days essentially furlough days by another name?  You can opt not to work rather than work for free on those days.   It's a better deal than demanding people work for free... for those who are fortunate enough to have the option.



Forgive me if I'm not following you on this.   Based on your 2009 salary, doesn't 2.5% of your pay amount to about 5 days worth of work?  If so, then in essence, you won't be paid for about five days of work this year that you were paid for last year.  Correct?   That being the case and given the option, wouldn't you choose to stay home for those previously compensated hours you've lost due to the pay cut?   Technically, you get "paid vacation"  those days, but you get paid less for each day than you did last year.   Correct?   So, bottom line, some people will have the option of working less for less pay.  Isn't that kind of like a "back door" furlough option when it comes to your wallet and the option to not work for that lost pay?    

Notably, it has been communicated that you are "worth" less per hour by cutting the pay instead of a straight forward furlough.   That I give you, and I still think it's wrong.

Playing the Game
Member


Joined: Wed Jan 30th, 2008
Location: Delaware USA
Posts: 5408
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 05:45 pm
 Quote  Reply 
No, everyone gets a 2.5% cut in their paycheck.  Any departments that can give their staff time off without incurring overtime will get 5 additional paid days off this year.

Born Country wrote:
Playing the Game wrote: Can someone explain to me how the State budget is saving any money by cutting wages by 2.5% and turning around and giving employees 5 days off with pay.  On top of that they have eliminated 2 State Holidays which means offices will be open 2 more days consuming energy, but employees get 2 floating holidays to make up for it.

That means I get to choose 7 more days off with pay this year, or 47 days in total.  That is 9 and 1/2 weeks off with pay.

Sounds like a pretty good deal.


Aren't the 5 days essentially furlough days by another name?  You can opt not to work rather than work for free on those days.   It's a better deal than demanding people work for free... for those who are fortunate enough to have the option.

 You make a great point re: consuming energy by staying open 2 more days + not having unified furlough days.   I am shocked at the number of seemingly intelligent people who refuse to understand that "the little things" do add up to savings.

Hartlyboy
Member


Joined: Mon Oct 3rd, 2005
Location:  Kenton, Delaware USA
Posts: 3559
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 03:14 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Our Democrat Gov is upset that he only managed to get 16 of the 17 taxes and increases he wanted? Poor baby. The rest of us are disappointed we didn't get any reduction in the size of our bloated state government and we head into FY2011 with the same structural problems intact for another 'crisis'.

Born Country
Member


Joined: Mon Apr 20th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 82
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 03:06 pm
 Quote  Reply 
 lburcat wrote: “We (the Democrats) stepped up to the plate.  We all know the revenue measures are going to be used against us.  At least we were willing to put the state ahead of our political careers,” said Rep. Schwartzkopf.

Even as Gov. Jack A. Markell signed the budget bill into law around 4:30 a.m., he chided Republican lawmakers for not doing their part.

He said he was most upset that two Republicans could not be found to pass the alcohol tax increase.

“The one disappointment I have is that we didn’t have more bipartisan support,” said Gov. Markell.


 This Democrat is very grateful to at least have a 2 party system.  Democrats cannot handle total power any more than Republicans can.   An opposition party challenges unexamined ideas, forces politicians to explain themselves to the people, and keeps the extremists on both sides in check.  I think the Republicans had to compromise a lot to pass this budget on time, and I acknowledge that they did in fact do that.   I do not believe those Democrats who supported pay cuts are "putting the state ahead of our political careers" by cutting teacher salaries and others.     
I'm not satisfied with this budget, but it's with a sigh of relief that I say, "Thank goodness for the Republican caucaus and the Democrats who were willing to stand up to the Markell proposal!   I won't forget. 

  

 

 

 

Born Country
Member


Joined: Mon Apr 20th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 82
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 02:43 pm
 Quote  Reply 
omggetreal wrote: I think it is very sad what is happening to Delaware. I feel every resident in this state needs to go to the state website and really read what was just passed. The State workers are loosing their pay and we are spending $287.5 to go to Temple University (p150 of the budget), not to mention that the Department of Economic Development has in their budget $6.8 to be spent on flags and pins and $200,00.00 for Mother of the Year.Would someone please tell me what our law makers are thinking? We need to pay our teachers, nurses and police not by flags and pins!!!!!!
Agreed.  These decisions could only have been made by people who do not appreciate how far a dollar is stretched in many families.

Born Country
Member


Joined: Mon Apr 20th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 82
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri Jul 3rd, 2009 02:41 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Playing the Game wrote: Can someone explain to me how the State budget is saving any money by cutting wages by 2.5% and turning around and giving employees 5 days off with pay.  On top of that they have eliminated 2 State Holidays which means offices will be open 2 more days consuming energy, but employees get 2 floating holidays to make up for it.

That means I get to choose 7 more days off with pay this year, or 47 days in total.  That is 9 and 1/2 weeks off with pay.

Sounds like a pretty good deal.


Aren't the 5 days essentially furlough days by another name?  You can opt not to work rather than work for free on those days.   It's a better deal than demanding people work for free... for those who are fortunate enough to have the option.

 You make a great point re: consuming energy by staying open 2 more days + not having unified furlough days.   I am shocked at the number of seemingly intelligent people who refuse to understand that "the little things" do add up to savings.

omggetreal
Guest
 

Joined: 
Location:  
Posts: 
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 09:45 pm
 Quote  Reply 
I think it is very sad what is happening to Delaware. I feel every resident in this state needs to go to the state website and really read what was just passed. The State workers are loosing their pay and we are spending $287.5 to go to Temple University (p150 of the budget), not to mention that the Department of Economic Development has in their budget $6.8 to be spent on flags and pins and $200,00.00 for Mother of the Year.Would someone please tell me what our law makers are thinking? We need to pay our teachers, nurses and police not by flags and pins!!!!!!

Two Cents
Member
 

Joined: Mon Oct 1st, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 1464
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 09:34 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Isn't it interesting that the legislature would now vote to end the deposit on plastic bottles which was mandated in the mid-1980's, but not make the repeal effective until September 2010 and not going after all those nickles collected by distributors over the last 20 years??    In other words, allow distributors to continue to collect from Delawareans that 5 cents per bottle for an additiona 14 months, while retaining all the nickles collected.    Who is working in whose interest??

From the News Journal:

The General Assembly has voted to repeal the state’s “bottle bill” enacted in the mid-1980s to encourage recycling.


The law provides a 5 cent-rebate for consumers who return certain beverage bottles, such as soda bottles, to stores that sell them. Rep. John Viola, D-Newark, the bill’s sponsor, said the law has been largely ineffective and repealing it would save residents money because they would pay the actual price for the beverage, minus the 5 cents tacked on at the register. The bill passed 35-3 and awaits a vote in the Senate.


“This is a tax to try to change the behavior of our constituents. It has not been, in my opinion, successful in that regard,” said Rep. Bryon Short, D-Wilmington, who supported the bill.



The House approved the repeal late Tuesday night, while the subsequent Senate vote happened around 2:20 a.m.



The repeal would be effective Sept. 1, 2010.

tspong
Member
 

Joined: Fri Aug 24th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 3357
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Thu Jul 2nd, 2009 04:50 pm
 Quote  Reply 
What do you think?

From the Delaware State News:

Nonprofits suffer with grant cuts


$10 million reduction in funding forces agencies to adjust


By Tom Eldred


Delaware State News


DOVER — Social service agencies and other nonprofit agencies across Delaware are already beginning to feel the pain of greatly reduced grant-in-aid funding in the state budget for fiscal year 2010.


The new spending plan, signed into law early Wednesday by Gov. Jack A. Markell, contains an almost $10 million slash in grants funding for the new year.


Grants made by the state to nonprofits will drop from $45,232,021 in fiscal 2009 to $35,398,511 for 2010.


"After I dried my tears, it began to sink in," said Lakema Hammond, executive director of Shepherd Place, a short-term emergency shelter for the homeless on South Governors Avenue in Dover.


"I don’t know what they expect us to do. Even though our regular supporters are still coming in faithfully, donations are down because of the economy. In my opinion, I think they could have found many more ways to cut the budget — turn off the lights, turn down the (air conditioning) so you don’t have to wear a sweater in those state offices."


Annual grant-in-aid figures, accessible online on the state of Delaware Web site, show virtually across-the-board funding cuts to hundreds of nonprofits — large and small — that traditionally depend on the state’s monetary assistance for help during the year in providing services to the public.


Even volunteer fire departments and veterans’ organizations did not escape the cutting board this year.


One segment of applicants, grouped as "arts, historical, cultural/tourism" in the grant-in-aid bill, were cut well over the 30 percent, from $1,761,800 in 2009 to $963,410 for the coming year.


First Night Dover, the capital city’s annual New Year’s Eve celebration, saw its grant drop from $12,400 in 2009 to $7,000 in 2010.


Shelly Cecchett, executive director of the event, said the "show will go on" despite the funding cut.


"We have actually tried to protect ourselves for a rainy day in case something like this happened," she said Wednesday. "This will probably wipe that out now. We’re hoping the community will do what they can to continue to support the event."


Nonprofits generally depend almost entirely on contributions, grants and fund-raisers for survival.


Ms. Cecchett said First Night Dover’s modest entrance fee would stay in place.


"We’re hoping to not have to cut back the event," she said. "And the buttons will still be $9 before Christmas.


"We are definitely feeling the pinch but we want it to remain a great, affordable and wholesome event for the community on New Year’s Eve. We’re waiting to see what comes in before making any major decisions. The plan is that the show will go on."


Another Dover attraction — the Delaware Agricultural Museum on U.S. 13 — will likewise see a substantial funding cut from $48,300 down to $33,800.


"Obviously it hurts but it is not mortal," said Delaware Secretary of Agriculture Ed Kee, a former director and board president of the early Delaware farming showplace.


"The good news is, because of the (budgetary) moves we made last year, the museum ended this year with a $9,000 surplus for the first time in 10 years. The museum is solvent. There’s a team now in place that makes sure it stays in existence. I understand what the state had to do to balance the budget. We feel grateful to get what we got."


Be that as it may, it’s a sure bet there will be rounds of serious belt-tightening as nonprofits statewide gear down to survive the slumping economy.


"It’s definitely going to be harder to provide our services," Ms. Hammond concluded. "We’ve already cut back. Where the heck are we going to cut now?"


Senior News Editor Tom Eldred can be reached at 741-8212 or at teldred@newszap.com.


Grant-in-aid funding


Major grant-in-aid funding categories in Delaware’s fiscal 2010 state budget dropped almost $10 million or approximately 30 percent when the new spending plan took effect Tuesday. Below is a comparison of funding amounts for fiscal 2009 and fiscal 2010.


                                                         Fiscal 2009     Fiscal 2010


Government units and senior centers    $23,980,688    $20,250,879


One-time and community agencies       $14,327,994    $10,710,693


Fire companies                                     $6,629,939      $4,205,139


Veterans’ organizations                            $293,400          $231,800


Total                                                   $45,232,021     $35,398,511

tspong
Member
 

Joined: Fri Aug 24th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 3357
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Wed Jul 1st, 2009 05:36 pm
 Quote  Reply 
What do you think?

From the Delaware State News:

Session winds down with final votes on tax, fee bills


By Leah Burcat


Delaware State News


DOVER — It was a busy day at Legislative Hall on Tuesday as lawmakers tried to tie up all the loose ends, which included passing a balanced budget.


As of 11 p.m., the House, where revenue bills must begin, had accomplished much of its tasks, having passed 12 of 13 tax and fee bills, as well as the budget.


Passing the budget bill took much of the stress away from members of the House, who had been under pressure for much of the last month.


"I feel like a kid waking up on Christmas," said Rep. Dennis P. Williams, D-Wilmington, who served as co-chairman of the Joint Finance Committee. "I’m happy. It’s been a grueling process."


In addition to passing the budget bill, the chamber passed the corporate franchise tax. The House had already approved 11 of the tax and fee measures on Monday.


Late Tuesday night, leaders in the House were trying to lock down the votes necessary to pass the tax increase on alcoholic beverages.


The bill failed on Monday evening for the second time in two weeks, when Rep. John A. Kowalko, D-Newark, in a surprise move, voted against the measure.


He said he tried to tack on an amendment to increase, to a greater degree, the corporate franchise tax, in order to reduce the need for the alcohol tax. The amendment failed.


The Senate began its work around 6 p.m. and passed a multitude of non-revenue-related bills before recessing for caucus. Around 10 p.m., the chamber reconvened to begin work on the legislation that had been sent over from the House.


Within the first hour of their work, the chamber had passed 11 of the 12 tax and fee measures that the House had already passed.


There was little debate on any of the legislation.


Much of the discussion had come over the past few weeks as the bills were brought up in the House.


House Republicans, who, unlike Senate Republicans, have enough members to block the passage of revenue bills, held out on their votes in order to ensure their voices were heard on other measures.


In order to have at least one Republican vote on each of the measures, Democrats agreed to reduce the proposed increases to the personal income tax, the limited liability company tax and the gross receipts tax. To make up for the funds, they consented to a plan to shrink the size of government by about 525 positions next year through attrition.


In the Senate, President Pro Tempore Anthony J. DeLuca, D-Newark, called for a roll call almost immediately on each bill.


Neither chamber had worked on the Grant-In-Aid bill or the bond bill as of late Tuesday night.


Included in the bond bill is the money used to complete capital infrastructure and transportation projects.


The Grant-In-Aid bill, which was drafted by the Joint Finance Committee, includes specifics on pass-through funding and the quasi-furlough plan for state employees. Typically, it is the last appropriations bill to pass through the General Assembly at the end of a fiscal year.


Staff writer Leah Burcat can be reached at 741-8250 or lburcat@newszap.com.

rocket350
Member
 

Joined: Wed May 13th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 6
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Wed Jul 1st, 2009 04:23 pm
 Quote  Reply 
lburcat wrote: “We (the Democrats) stepped up to the plate.  We all know the revenue measures are going to be used against us.  At least we were willing to put the state ahead of our political careers,” said Rep. Schwartzkopf.

Even as Gov. Jack A. Markell signed the budget bill into law around 4:30 a.m., he chided Republican lawmakers for not doing their part.

He said he was most upset that two Republicans could not be found to pass the alcohol tax increase.

“The one disappointment I have is that we didn’t have more bipartisan support,” said Gov. Markell.


 

  Someone should tell Markell that "the Republican lawmakers not doing their part" does not mean they must do everything the Democrats say.I realize thats what Obama says "bipartisan support" is but my kid in the 3rd grade who barely knows what a dictionary is can tell you its like the exact opposite.And Pete Schwartzkopf,well we already know he has problems with simple concepts like "no special privileges for a group that chooses a non--mainstream,some would say perverted lifestyle".When I see a quote from him in the paper,I take that as a good sign to skip to the next paragraph.

  I dont think this thug politics that Markell and the Dems have embraced will work too long,with its wonderful Pelosi tricks and gambits.It worked this time,to an extent.We shall see.

 

 

 

Playing the Game
Member


Joined: Wed Jan 30th, 2008
Location: Delaware USA
Posts: 5408
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Wed Jul 1st, 2009 12:23 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Can someone explain to me how the State budget is saving any money by cutting wages by 2.5% and turning around and giving employees 5 days off with pay.  On top of that they have eliminated 2 State Holidays which means offices will be open 2 more days consuming energy, but employees get 2 floating holidays to make up for it.

That means I get to choose 7 more days off with pay this year, or 47 days in total.  That is 9 and 1/2 weeks off with pay.

Sounds like a pretty good deal.

lburcat
Member
 

Joined: Thu Feb 19th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 3
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Wed Jul 1st, 2009 10:44 am
 Quote  Reply 
By: Leah Burcat

Delaware State News

DOVER - The state’s $3.09 billion operating budget and $284.5 million bond bill cleared the General Assembly Tuesday morning, but not without the scurrying back and forth of legislators to meetings of the Bond Bill Committee and the finagling of funds after a tax bill failed to clear the House.

In a near repeat of last year, lawmakers went back and wrangled another $4.8 million from the bond bill after it appeared the 25 votes in the House could not be found for the alcohol tax increase.

“Some people are just sticklers on that bill,” said Rep. Dennis P. Williams, D-Wilmington.

But unlike last year, public education construction was not kept off the chopping block when legislators looked to slice from capital infrastructure projects.

Members of the committee voted to cut more than $3 million from a renovation project at Colwyck Elementary School in the Colonial School District, about $600,000 from the renovation project at W.B. Simpson Elementary School in the Caesar Rodney School District, more than $700,000 from the elementary school construction project in the Milford School District, $200,000 to renovate Cedar Lane Elementary School in the Appoquinimink School District and nearly $200,000 from Clayton Intermediate School project in the Smyrna School District.

“It’s disturbing.  It’s all for 2 cents a can?  And now we’re taking money away from schools,” said House Majority Leader Rep. Peter C. Schwartzkopf, D-Rehoboth Beach.

Although it was not resolved until the wee hours of the morning on July 1, the defeat of the revenue bill was not a complete surprise.  The legislation had failed in the House twice over the course of the past two weeks.

Other aspects of the revenue package, which had originally been blocked by the House Republicans, passed early on in the night.

House Republicans gave up on the impasse after they reached a compromise with the Markell administration on Monday. 

In order to ascertain at least one Republican vote on each of the measures, Democrats agreed to reduce the proposed increases to the personal income tax, the limited liability company tax and the gross receipts tax.  To make up for the funds, they consented to a plan to shrink the size of government by about 525 positions next year through attrition.

In addition, the Markell administration agreed to look into a plan to substitute the pay cuts for state employees with a furlough option.

After passing most of the revenue enhancing measures, the budget bill passed in the House around 9:30 p.m.  In the Senate, the balanced budget did see a vote until nearly 3:30 a.m.

Votes on the Grant-In-Aid bill and the bond bill did not occur in either chamber until nearly 4 a.m.

Although Republicans felt as though they were doing their part by having one or two of their members attach their name to each of the tax and fee increases, Democrats said they did not receive the support they had expected from the other party.

“We (the Democrats) stepped up to the plate.  We all know the revenue measures are going to be used against us.  At least we were willing to put the state ahead of our political careers,” said Rep. Schwartzkopf.

Even as Gov. Jack A. Markell signed the budget bill into law around 4:30 a.m., he chided Republican lawmakers for not doing their part.

He said he was most upset that two Republicans could not be found to pass the alcohol tax increase.

“The one disappointment I have is that we didn’t have more bipartisan support,” said Gov. Markell.

Despite the disappointment he expressed, he also mentioned how pleased he was that so many other important bills were able to be passed in spite of the historic budget deficit, citing in specific, education and energy reform legislation.

Staff writer Leah Burcat can be reached at 741-8250 or lburcat@newszap.com.

 


 Current time is 07:01 am



Click here to read our Policies & Disclaimers.
Click here to go to the Newszap.com home page

Powered by WowBB 1.7 - Copyright © 2003-2006 Aycan Gulez
Page processed in 0.3216 seconds (33% database + 67% PHP). 27 queries executed.