RSS FEEDS
Recent Research
AUGUST 27, 2010 | Commentary by NATHAN BENEFIELD
Gov. Rendell's Gamesmanship
While table games have been in Pennsylvania casinos for more than a month, I don't know if Gov. Rendell has tried his luck. But it would be a safe wager that he's a fantastic poker player. Why? For eight years, he's been able to bluff, bully, and stare down anyone who opposes his tax-borrow-and-spend agenda.
JULY 29, 2010 | Testimony by NATHAN BENEFIELD
Lancaster Co. Human Relations Commission
Testimony of Nathan A. Benefield to the Lancaster County Board of Commissioners: July 29, 2010
I hope the Commissioners will seriously consider both the costs and the benefits of the LCHRC. They may find that there is reason to continue this work, but I hope not to pay lip service to "promoting diversity," but for the actual results and performance of the LCHRC's work.
JULY 27, 2010 | Commentary by MATTHEW BROUILLETTE
Can Tom Corbett Keep His "No Tax" Pledge?
Attorney General Tom Corbett has taken significant criticism for his pledge to not raise taxes if elected governor. That was to be expected from his Democrat rival, Allegheny County executive Dan Onorato, who hasn't ruled out raising taxes to fill a budget gap expected to be as high as $5 billion next year. But it's the friendly
Recent Blog Posts
SEPTEMBER 2, 2010
A Slap in the Face to Pennsylvania Taxpayers
The Tribune Review revisits the Rendell Administration's leasing tens of thousands of acres of state forest lands via no-bid contracts.
State records the Tribune-Review obtained show that, in one noncompetitive agreement Jan. 7 with Texas gas company Anadarko, the state received $1,000 an acre for 2,300 acres in Sproul State Forest, in Centre and Clinton counties.
Two weeks later on Jan. 19, a public auction of 31,976 acres in Cameron, Clearfield, Potter, Clinton and Tioga counties generated $128 million, or about $4,000 an acre, for taxpayers.
A similar situation occurred in May, when another no-bid contract with Anadarko resulted in a lease of 33,000 acres at an average $3,650 an acre. Greg Wrightstone, a petroleum geologists notes private landholders were getting $5,000 to $6,000 acres at the same time.
Both of these private, no-bid lease schemes ... were consummated at less than market-bonus rates, Wrightstone said, calling the deals "a slap in the face to Pennsylvania taxpayers."
As we've blogged in the past, Gov. Rendell's no-bid deals -- in light of a budget crisis, pension crisis, and transportation crisis -- smack of corruption. And yet he wonders why lawmakers don't support his push for higher taxes.
posted by ELIZABETH STELLE | 04:05 PM | 0 comment
AUGUST 26, 2010
Why Lawmakers Don't (And Shouldn't) Raise Taxes
Terry Madonna and Michael Young have a new column asking why Pennsylvania lawmakers are so loath to raise taxes:
This response differs dramatically from past practice. Throughout most of the 20th century, despite partisan differences, governors and legislatures raised taxes to balance state budgets during recessions. In just the last 25 years, for example, state leaders raised the income tax three times - 1983, 1991, and 2003 - to meet budget shortfalls. Indeed, the pattern of raising taxes to combat recessionary deficits was almost Pavlovian in its predictability.
But not this year! Despite perhaps the worst revenue shortfall in Pennsylvania's history, a tax increase is simply not in the cards.
The obvious question: What is different now?
Let me offer some quick answers to this question.
For starters, Pennsylvania's state and local tax burden is significantly higher today than it was in prior years. And while the 1983 income tax raise resulted in a lower rate a few years later, the 1991 and 2003 tax hikes have resulted in a PIT rate that is 46% higher than in 1990.
| Pennsylvania Tax Rates and Burdens Before Tax Hikes | |||
| Year | PIT Rate | State and Local Tax Burden | Tax Burden Rank |
| 1982 | 2.20% | 9.5% | 16 |
| 1990 | 2.10% | 9.8% | 24 |
| 2002 | 2.80% | 9.6% | 16 |
| 2009 | 3.07% | 10.2% | 11 |
| Sources: Tax Foundation, PA Department of Revenue | |||
Maybe lawmakers realize you can't just keep raising taxes indefinitely.
A second hypothesis is that lawmakers have seen the effect of these higher taxes. That is, Pennsylvania's growing tax burden resulted in stagnant economic growth. From 1991 to 2009, Pennsylvania ranks 42nd in job growth, 48th in personal income growth, and 47th in population growth among the 50 states.
A final possibility is that lawmakers recognize that our budget deficit is caused not by taxing too little, but by overspending. As Matt Mitchell of the Mercatus Center points out in a recent policy report, spending restraint by states is an untested policy. In fact, nearly every state with a budget deficit would have a surplus if they had merely grown spending to the rate of inflation plus population growth.
This is true in Pennsylvania -- even going back just to the start of the Rendell Administration. By growing the General Fund Budget from $20 billion to $28 billion, Gov. Rendell produced a 40% increase in spending, almost double the rate of inflation.
posted by NATHAN BENEFIELD | 10:18 AM | 0 comment
AUGUST 23, 2010
Speech Pathologist Goes On Taxpayer-Funded Spending Spree
The Daily Review reports that Towanda Speech Pathologist Peter Ferrulli admitted to submitting false Medicaid claims totaling more than $365,000. Ferrulli routinely double-billed the program, and used the extra income to purchase jewelry, cars, snowmobiles, and vacations.
When investigators with the Attorney General's Office asked Ferrulli how much money he fraudulently obtained through the Medical Assistance program, he replied "probably over a million," according to the criminal complaint.
This is just another example of how PA's Medicaid system is wrought with fraud and mismanagement. The State Auditor General found a Medicaid eligibility error rate of 14%, costing taxpayers upwards of $1 billion.
As I testified this spring, giving individuals more control over their health care dollars reduces costs, as participants use medical services more discriminately. This in turn would reduce the massive bureaucracy in which the potential for fraud is increased. Reducing fraud will save taxpayers, focusing Medicaid spending on those who truly need, and are eligible for, the aid.
posted by ELIZABETH STELLE | 02:10 PM | 0 comment
