Kansas Governor Sam Brownback [R]—who started the whole mess—knows it. The Republican dominated Kansas legislature—who gleefully made it happen—knows it, too. The radical, right-wing economic experiment in tax reduction that they imposed on Kansas citizens has failed—miserably, ignominiously, publicly—to do what its theoreticians promised it would do: magically stimulate the Kansas economy through that good-old, theoretical mantra known as “trickle-down” economics.

But for liberal/progressives who saw the trickle-down philosophy for what it really was—utter bullshit designed to kill the government programs that “fetter” capitalism—there is no real joy in its failure, because the effects Brownback’s policies have hurt people—actual people, not corporations—so badly.

We could, I suppose, take some satisfaction from the desperation now rampant among Kansas’ Republican “leadership,” and their decision to, with tails between their legs, do precisely what they said they would never have to do: raise taxes. We could say that, with Kansas raising taxes, pigs are flying and hell has frozen over.

But, in fact, there is little satisfaction to be taken, because, true to form—form being protection of the rich and punishment of the poor—they are “raising taxes” in the worst possible way.

The taxes they are raising are those that hit lower-income people the most. According to the Kansas City Star, a bill passed [June 2, 2015] in the Kansas Senate would increase sales taxes from 6.15 percent to 6.55 percent beginning July 1 and drop the sales tax on food to 4.95 percent in July 2016. It would eliminate most itemized deductions and raise the cigarette tax by 50 cents a pack to $1.29.

At the same time, they are steadfastly sticking to their low state-income-tax policy. According to BankRate.com,

Kansas revised its individual income tax system in 2013, going from three tax brackets to two and reducing the rates for both. At that time, the rates became 2.7 percent on the first $15,000 of taxable income, and 4.8 percent on taxable income of $15,001 and more.

By comparison, Iowa has nine income-tax brackets, with the highest being 8.98 percent [on taxable income over $68,176]

But even Kansas’ very low tax rate is not low enough for Gov. Brownback. When he was first elected, he vowed to repeal the state income tax entirely, claiming that reducing income taxes and raising sales taxes is a more efficient way to raise revenue and to attract businesses to the state. He is now seeing the disastrous results of that idea–a reported $400 million budget shortfall.

Kansas’ move to bump up sales taxes is shameful. Sales taxes are regressive, raising everyday costs disproportionately for those with less disposable income. Couple increased sales taxes with the state’s very low income-tax rate [or, worse yet, the absence of a state income tax—Brownback’s dream], and you have a situation in which lower-income people are, in effect, subsidizing their wealthier counterparts.

It’s obvious that a better solution would be to do the logical, responsible and fair thing: Institute a more realistic income-tax rate—in a progressive structure that would ask more of those who have more. Or, at the very least, institute a luxury tax on high-cost items. But apparently, even as its schools fall apart, its infrastructure goes unrepaired, its safety-net services fail, and its police, fire and EMS services go underfunded, Kansas’ state government is not interested in doing its job.

Kansas’ political leaders [and I use that term very loosely] have been using an economic argument that they know to be false, as cover for their penchant for helping their wealthy buddies and campaign donors. Their new revenue-producing, “corrective” policies cynically protect the rich and judgmentally punish the poor, rather than being anything remotely resembling the right thing.

The post Kansas raises taxes…reluctantly and nastily appeared first on Occasional Planet.

Republican Secretaries of State in Kansas and Arizona are devising a whole new way to make voting harder. Thwarted by the U.S. Supreme Court in their attempt to require proof of citizenship for voter registration, they are working on a plan to create an unprecedented system of two classes of voters: those who qualify—under new rules—to vote in federal elections only, and those who qualify to vote in state elections as well as federal elections.

Some background, from Talking Points Memo:

In both states, the preparations underway are reactions to the Supreme Court’s June ruling in Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council, the legal battle over Arizona’s 2004 voter identification law, known as Proposition 200. While the headlines in June painted the ruling as a blow to Proposition 200, officials in both Arizona and Kansas have chosen to focus on the leeway the Supreme Court left them. Kansas State Election Director Brad Bryant laid out the argument in an email he sent to county election officers at the end of July.

“As the Supreme Court made clear, its decision applies only to ‘federal registration forms’ and covers only federal elections,” Bryant wrote, according to a copy of the email provided to TPM. “States remain free to require proof of citizenship from voters who seek to also vote in state elections.”

Here’s how it works: When potential voters register using the standard federal voter registration form, they are asked only to indicate, by their signature, that they are citizens of the U.S. and therefore qualified to vote. But in addition to the standardized voter registration provided to all states by the federal government, there’s also a form, in almost all states, that is customized to that state. Kansas’ Secretary of State is now saying there’s a loophole in the Supreme Court decision that leaves a window of opportunity to require proof of citizenship on the state registration form.

So, Kansas is going to add that stipulation to its voter registration form. By this logic, that means that there will be two classes of voters: Tier 1 will be who have registered via the federal form—with no documentary proof of citizenship. In Kansas, those voters will be allowed to vote only on federal offices, not on state and local elections. Tier 2 voters, who have registered via the state form—providing the required proof of citizenship—will be allowed to vote in both state and federal elections.

Of course, it’s an “end-around” play, designed to circumvent the Supreme Court’s ruling and to suppress the votes of people who they’d like to keep from voting—effectively people who don’t have the necessary documents [or the time/money to go and get them], which generally means minorities, poor people and older people—who tend to vote for Democrats.

This ploy is also another sorry, scary and democracy-killing example of states asserting their rights versus the federal government—not for reasons of fairness or opportunity, but as a cynical and nihilistic way of manipulating elections. Sadly, it’s part of a trend: We’ve also seen state legislatures attempting to nullify federal gun laws, and make implementation of the Affordable Care Act [Obamacare] illegal in their states.

Creating separate and unequal “tiers” of voting is a sickening idea that has the potential to become a terrible trend. At long last, have they no decency?

The post Voting rights watch: KS and AZ have scary plans for “two-tier” voting appeared first on Occasional Planet.