Letters to the Editor for Jan. 15, 2010

Measures 66, 67 are a bad deal

To the editor:

I detest an underhanded deal. That goes double when it involves pitting state and school employees against business owners and their employees. In Baker County that means friends and family.

As the child of a millworker and a schoolteacher who constantly had their jobs threatened as I grew up in Baker City, I take Measure 66 & 67 personally as the state once again holds the knife to the throats of our frontline workers. It’s always the teachers and police officers that get threatened in hopes of us handing over our wallets.

The state isn’t asking what we think of the $258 million in proposed new taxes already budgeted toward state employee salary increases. And what about the fact that in these hard times, they haven’t bothered to pinch one penny, but increased overall state spending by $4.7 billion. This, in addition to raising taxes and fees by almost $2 billion.

If a business runs $1 million worth of product through their doors on a tight margin and ends up with a very small actual profit after paying for the product, insurance, employee salaries, health benefits, overhead, equipment, fees and more, how will they survive if they are taxed on gross sales, which would be the $1 million? (Even if that business lost money due to a tough year!) To add insult to injury, these new taxes would be retroactive for one year.

Many products are sold multiple times before they reach the consumer, and will be taxed each time they change hands. This will result in higher cost of living during difficult times.

As a community we are in this together. (Read the article on the effects Ash Grove closing may have on the Huntington school system.) Our businesses must thrive and we must have plenty of funding for the education of our most precious resource — our kids. We cannot compromise one or the other.

Please vote no on these absurd and ill-crafted measures and demand that our legislators take the time to come up with a real solution. We can’t afford to throw one another to the wolves. 

Whitney Black

Baker City

We must pass Measures 66, 67

To the editor:

I read the editorial written by the editorial board titled “No on Measures 66 and 67.” On Jan. 5 I heard a program on NPR with business owners and a professor of economics from Portland State University. They convinced me these measures must pass.

In 1931, in order to attract businesses to Oregon in the Depression, a law was made that allowed businesses to pay $10 a year in taxes. It has never been changed. When legislators tried to change it, big business defeated it using the same tactics they use now: fear. The article in the Herald claims that more than half of the taxes raised if these pass will be generated by individuals and families. These two measures are specifically aimed at people who make over $250,000 a year and businesses who are classified as LLC, S-Corp or C-Corp. The article claims that the number of state employees has grown 2 percent and that the retirees still get “generous” benefits, including free health insurance. They also claim state employees worked fewer days in 2009. The article does not mention that the state is honoring contracts it made with workers and that those days “off” were furlough days when the worker did not work and did not get paid either. If the state does not honor those contracts, it faces multiple lawsuits. That would certainly bankrupt the state.

Yesterday I received notice from AARP explaining these measures. According to AARP under Measure 66 those making $250,000 and less per year will see no increase in their income tax. Ninety-seven percent of taxpayers will not see an increase in their taxes. 280,000 Oregonians will get a tax cut. The first $2,400 in 2009 unemployment benefits will be exempt. As for Measure 67, 88 percent of businesses in Oregon will pay only the $150 instead of $10. Oregon would still have the lowest corporate taxes on the West Coast and the fifth-lowest in the United States.

Don’t let big business bamboozle you. I won’t tell anyone how to vote but I think it’s time businesses and families who have enjoyed the tax loopholes you and I don’t enjoy should now pay their fair share.

Iva Mace

Baker City

Defeat tax hikes to save jobs

To the editor:

Thoughtful voters who read the voters’ pamphlet and rely on the ballot titles and explanatory statements about ballots measures 66 and 67 (tax increases) are being duped once again by the tax-and-spend Legislature.

This time the voters’ information pamphlet leaves out important considerations.

1. Corporations and businesses will pay higher taxes, profitable or not profitable.

2. The tax on business is not a tax on profits; it taxes gross receipts — before any expenses are paid, employees are paid or profit is made. It is likely to lead to small business closures and lost jobs.

3. The personal and corporate tax increases are retroactive and permanent. Oregon businesses, corporate or small, will be taxed — even if they lose money.

Many small businesses report business income on personal income tax returns. Small business owners are not the “rich,” but they are employers. The tax burden would be crippling.

Corporations pass tax increases on to their customers, so this becomes a tax that everybody pays indirectly.

I expect the information in the voters’ pamphlet to be clear, impartial and complete — not propaganda for the legislative agenda of tax and spend and spend and spend. . . . A no vote does not mean that education programs will be cut, but jobs that support families and produce tax revenue for vital services like education will definitely be cut if you vote yes.

Carol A. Martin

Baker City

Pass measures to keep services

To the editor:

This is in response to George Wilder’s Jan. 13 letter. First, state employees are not “asking the taxpayers to increase state taxes.” Your elected officials are. “They aren’t willing to make the same cut-backs that most businesses in the state have.” Has he not heard of the 10-14 furlough (that is unpaid time off) days that most state employees have to take? Has he not heard of the pay-step reductions and pay freezes imposed on most state employees?

Don't forget, state employees are taxpayers too.

According to the voters’ pamphlet, Measure 67 would raise the corporate minimum tax (which hasn’t been raised since 1931) from $10 to $150.  It also says that some corporations with over $500,000 in Oregon revenues would pay a minimum tax of approximately 0.1 percent of Oregon revenues. It does not sound like either of those would put many companies out of business to me.

I have a problem with people who compare the private sector with government. No business in the private sector is mandated by law to provide you with a product or service. In the private sector, you can adapt by raising prices, diversifying or cutting product lines and services. The public does not care, they will go someplace else. The government is not allowed to do that  without public outcry or sanctions. They have to maintain these things because you the people have elected representatives and voted for programs that you want the government to run/offer. That means that state employees (which have made concessions in this economy) usually end up with more work and increased caseloads with less help.

I don’t like paying more taxes any more than anyone else. I believe government needs to be held accountable. But you can’t expect everything for nothing. I recommend a yes vote. If you vote no, don’t come to me and complain about having to wait an hour or more because there was only one employee to help you at DMV, or that it took six weeks instead of one or two to get your food stamps or your welfare check.

Doug Evans

Baker City