exempt?

Maybe it won't be a problem, with all the groaning the techies do over Micron...someday there won't any money left to mow the blue turf!

To hear Mr. Labrador tell it, Democrats were playing politics and thereby acting inconsistently.

Some of the most blatant examples of Republican double-talk:
1) We're for local control (but we support the state taking over all charter schools and we deny local governments and communities the right to tax themselves with the local option tax vehicle).
2) We're for personal freedom (except when it comes to a woman's body, one's sexual preference, what books we read, what God we worship, what language we speak, whether we choose to remain married or not, etc.)
3) We're for smaller government (unless we're in charge, in which case we'll rack up debt and spend like crazy).
4) Government should be run like a business (even though much of Idaho's government is run by Republican political hacks, as in the case of the State Board of Ed, which violated accounting standards and created a huge shortfall, such that they had to curtail testing programs). No heads rolled on account of this--in fact, Karen McGee got a promotion. "Brownie, you're doing a heckuva job."

As for accusing the Democrats of playing politics, I'm glad to hear the Republicans are above that. Surely the gay marriage amendment in 2006 wasn't designed to drive conservative (Republican) voters to the polls. Rather, it was designed to help protect my marriage from the gay conspirators looking to convert my wife and me to their lifestyle.

Oh, and by the way, why don't you talk about the alternative bill that Democrats are proposing: a repeal of the food tax (money saved at the cash register) instead of a tax credit that requires filing paperwork. Why don't you ask your constituents which one they'd prefer.

Finally, Mr. Labrador, when are you going to write about something you actually stand for, rather than complaining about the media, the Democrats, and all your detractors?

He's just trying to score political points by beating on the democrats. Which, in this state, is like thrashing your little brother. Easy to do - but it doesn't mean anything.

Jim Risch raised the sales tax 20%. Idahoans are paying $2.5 million more per month for their food thanks to Jim Risch. That's $40 million more since it was enacted. The Risch tax on groceries was supported by Labrador when a proposal by the Democrats that would not have raised the sales tax 20% was not even allowed to be heard in the '06 special session. It is an issue because working families and seniors are paying more for their groceries with the Risch sales tax increase.

Mr. Labrador does not give any of us here in Idaho much credit if he wants us to believe that the Democrats in Idaho have the power to block anything the republicans desire to do. This mess is all yours, Mr. labrador, all yours.

The State of Washington does not tax food, which is part of why the Cosco store and the new Walmart superstore are in Clarkston rather than Lewiston.

Rep Labrador is comparing last year with this year. So far the Republican grocery credit is the only food tax bill that has been considered by the Revenue and Taxation Committee. Two bills to gradually remove the tax from food are awaiting the chairman's permission to be heard. If the food credit bill passed out of committee, the other bills would never even have a hearing. That is not quite playing fair--the other proposals should have a chance to be evaluated on their merits. Last year, there were four bills addressing food tax or grocery tax credit, heard together.

The bill that was defeated excludes from the credit those individuals who participate in any way in the federal food stamp program, a program that involves no state funds. Even if they receive $5 in monthly assistance, they could not claim the credit. And it still required that the families wait and file for the credit, months after the expense was incurred.

We can do better. Special interests have successfully prevented any review of their tax exemptions again this year. Maybe it is time for the average Idaho citizens to get some consideration.

Rep. John Rusche
Lewiston

I welcome the Democratic Party responses from "thesalsero", Rep. John Rusche and Larry LaRocco. I appreciate your comments and enthusiasm. It makes for a more interesting debate. Just a few responses:

1. I do not see the Republican Party interfering with anyone's right of personal freedom. As far as I can tell, everyone is free to choose their sexual preference, religion, length of marriage, preferred language, etc. without interference from the government. We Republicans like it that way.

The only area where Republicans may try to interfere is when it comes to the issue of abortion and life. I have to admit that when it comes to a choice between a woman’s right to abort and the unborn’s right to live, I will always err on the side of the unborn.

2. It makes me smile that some Democrats are always for local control when the end result is more government and taxation (local option taxes). But when the result is more regulation, more federal mandates and more burdens on the local taxpayer, they love centralized government (education).

3. I was not in the Idaho legislature during the special session, so I was not one of the legislators who voted for the one percent increase in taxes.

4. California does not tax groceries, but has one of the most onerous taxing structures in the Union. That is why, despite its natural beauty and pleasant climate, people leave California in droves.

5. I guess “thesalsero” likes to read my posts without paying attention to the words. He wants me to write about something I actually stand for; I guess he missed that, so far, I have written about my positions on iSTARS, the closed primary issue, and the grocery tax credit.

I was trying to stir up debate on some of the most talked about issues in the local media. Since these topics are too controversial, and require comparing and contrasting positions, maybe I should talk about issues nobody cares about next time.

6. Rep. Rusche is right that no other bills have been heard in the Revenue and Taxation Committee. I even agree with him that the optimal solution would be to repeal the grocery tax. The problem, as I indicated in the initial post, is that the economy has slowed down. Some legislators believe we cannot afford a complete repeal of the grocery tax, which would cost an additional $55 million. Others fear that the Governor would veto such a plan.

I believe the Republican plan is the only one that would pass both Houses of the Legislature and, I believe, would be signed by the Governor. So, in the spirit of actually giving something back to the taxpayers, I favor the Republican grocery tax plan.

Rep. Labrador

In response to Mr. Labrador:

1. I think we are all together on this one, all of us want and stand for personal freedom.

2. I don't know where you personally stand on the war in Iraq, I can only assume as a republican you support the preemptive action of invading Iraq. I can only assume you support killing innocent people if it supports our special interests, in this case oil. Does supporting life have limits? I don't agree with abortion, but taking a stand against abortion at the exclusion of everything else is taking us down the wrong path.

3. The rest of the state does not want to pay for our roads in this valley and they need a lot of work. So what is the answer? You need to come up with a solution. Most of us who drive I84 would be willing to pay a little more for a least a little progress.

4. Tax credits are really very simple. Repeal the food sales tax and find the money elsewhere. The fact that the economy is starting a downward spiral is all the more reason to give effected people some relief. Listen to all proposals, come up with a good fair plan...nobody said your job was easy figure out a way to do it, that is why you are there. The best solutions are always the most difficult...stand for something don't settle.

So if the Gov would veto any bill that would get rid of the credit, what does that leave us with?

I do get a kick out of those that want to get rid of taxes, but want better infrastructure and services at the same time. "Just find the money from somewhere else"

Let's see, out of the highway funds, maybe medicare, how about education or the funds for our public safety officers? When you take money out of the revenue bucket, it's gone. Less money in the bucket (if you want to repeal the grocery tax for instance) means less money available for infrastructure and public needs. Get rid of the tax, but then what service do you want to give up?

Come on, let's hear some ideas! Find a $55 million dollar program that you want to cut from the state budget, what would you do? $55 million is a chunk of change that's not easy to replace for those that have become dependant on it.

Instead of pointing fingers, playing Dems against Republicans, why not be a bit constructive and throw out some ideas?

Any? Any at all? It's always easier to complain I guess.

The voting figure I looked at showed 10 against -- 5 Democrats and 5 Republicans.

I think it's wonderful that you're acknowledging how much power Democrats now have in the Legislature, though.

Mr. Labrador:

As to your comment: I was trying to stir up debate on some of the most talked about issues in the local media. Since these topics are too controversial, and require comparing and contrasting positions, maybe I should talk about issues nobody cares about next time.

That is ridiculous comment to make when you brought this up as a campaign issue not an issue just regarding grocery's? You were belittling the Democrats plain and simple. If you really cared about the people you represent you would write about how you are working on helping this pass...not picking on opposition - how does that help? Every time you post that is exactly what you do. Your first post was an OLD editorial you wrote a year ago about the caucus. Why do you hate Democrats? Can't you work together with them or are you just like Bill Sali? An extremist right winger....when you have 70% of the House it's pretty easy to pick on Democrats isn't it?

As to this comment: 6. Rep. Rusche is right that no other bills have been heard in the Revenue and Taxation Committee. I even agree with him that the optimal solution would be to repeal the grocery tax. The problem, as I indicated in the initial post, is that the economy has slowed down. Some legislators believe we cannot afford a complete repeal of the grocery tax, which would cost an additional $55 million. Others fear that the Governor would veto such a plan.

Now you are backtracking here....you "agree" with Rep Rusche and you are trying to speak as if you were pragmatic when your original post is trying to blame Democrats and accuse them of just campaigning. These are honest hard working people, it's disrespectful. Have you actually spoken to a Democratic Legislator and asked them to their face if they are "campaigning" on food tax or do you just like to accuse first, and then back peddle?

As to your random abortion comment, I would suggest your next post be about that. Then the next post after that could be about gay marriage (opps you guys did that last year...that shouldn't stop you from writing about it), then perhaps you could write about guns? All the real important wedge issues...

"...the optimal solution would be to repeal the grocery tax."

So do it! When you can get a Democrat and a Republican agreeing that cutting taxes is a good thing, do the right thing and cut the food tax. GOP legislators should not shy away from a good idea because it originated with a Democrat. Since it will require a Republican majority to pass the legislation, both parties will be able to take credit for the tax cut and spin it to serve their election needs. If the gov vetoes the bill, stand firm as if your life depended on it.

Tax credits are typically a Democrat ploy to give themselves credit for looking after some demographic constituency, and to the extent Republicans copy this cowardly approach to governing, they are a disappointment to those who elected them. Cut taxes or raise taxes but don't play games with us that pit one constituency against another.

How will the lost revenues from the food tax be replaced? Where there's a will to do the right thing, a way will be found. For one thing, don't overestimate the lost revenues. Money not spent on a food tax is just as likely to be spent on taxable items as it is on larger quantities of nourishing food, which is why we should retain the sale tax on junk food. Secondly, raising the sales tax one or two percentage points is not a bad idea, in which case you might want to consider removing the sales tax on thrift store purchases where many low income families buy their clothing, furniture, and appliances.

Last but not least, our legislators need to get serious about expanding our tax base through economic development strategies instead of adhering to policies that overburden our small population, people who are rich in spirit but poor in the pocketbook. Many good ideas have been floated in this regard, and it's time for the cowboys to fund them, so that we don't have to have this same discussion year after year.

Ok, let me get this straight:

1> Gov will veto a full out gettin' rid of the tax bill

2> Reps in the House want to have some sort of credit that the Gov might pass.

3> Most of the people commenting here don't get the fact that no matter how bad the House wants to get rid of the tax, it ain't gonna happen (and the Dems know that, they are just posturing knowing the Gov will veto their bill just like he did last year).

4> So the comprimise is stuck because the Dems that want only to posture and the Reps that want to consider yet another bill on the table (thus the 5 Reps that voted no on the phased in credit bill).

5> It takes 3 to Tango, the House, Senate and the Gov. No matter what, someone has to give a bit. Full out gettin' rid of the tax was tried last year that the Gov veto'd it (Dems know this) and the House overroad that veto but the Senate couldn't find the balls to do the same thing and give us our money back.

Sounds to me like a comprimise bill is the only thing that will get us grocery money back... why is that so confusing to so many of you?

You ain't gonna get rid of the tax, the Gov doesn't want to. Next best thing is a phased in credit of some kind.

(All while the Dems play their games to do nothing more than to make the Reps look bad by saying "this year" we want a full out ban on the tax). What a bunch of crap, when we gonna go to work and quit playing politics with my money?

If you all at once get rid of the tax, what programs do you cut to offset that $55 million that you ain't got coming in anymore?

I have not seen anyone answer that question.

Dems say they want to cut the tax, but where are those cuts to be applied, which programs?

Oh, for some reason that part of the tax cut ain't been figured out yet. Likely 'cause they know it will never happen. All they want to do is posture and try to make the Reps look bad. Remember for every day they posture, you and I are paying taxes on our grits!

If they have a plan, lets hear it!

Like Daddy used to say, "poop or get off the pot"

worthless whores. The only interest they have is to protect
farmers and ranchers. TAKE BACK THE POWER.

Farmers and ranchers have a sweet deal to pay taxes on the
"production value" of their land. They can cook the books
to always show very small profit, after they buy the new motorhome
to get out and protect the range, and the three new pick-ups for the
kids. Wake up and smell the cow crap. We are paying for the
welfare for farmers and ranchers.

Ask any farmer/rancher you know if they would sell
you their land for 50% above what the tax value is on it?
YOU WILL FIND NO TAKERS. Ask them if they will sell for
double the value they are paying taxes on. You will find no takers.

What planet are you from, and did you eat greyghost?

Eliminate the Grocery Tax and you will raise the spending power of everyone in Idaho. Even the poor will spend more.
Have all Idaho lawmakers give back all, but 3 to 5% of their last raises.

That $5.00 per 100.

That meant a lot in 1998 when whole milk was 2 something and watermelon 8 cents a pound not to mention cheap bacon 1.59 or the largest box of cheery oats well under 3 dollars amd 5 pounds of potatoes .69 to .99...

Now:

nearly $4/gallon in places
more per pound than bananas
3.29 to ridiculous
.50-up

This is nice but it doesn't slay the dragon!

Progresso at Winco - 1st 4 cans $.98 per can then $1.28

Prgresso at Albertsons $2.89 per can

Now there's some useful information you can sink your teeth into

But the last time I looked the GOFP controlled both houses and all the committees of the Idaho Legislature. Yet some how the democrats are forcing the legislature to waste time passing non-binding resolutions on immigration and internet porn instead of the fixing the roads and repealing the Risch low income/middle income tax increase. Gosh where can I learn those Jedi mind tricks?

Sir, since you are posturing for the next campaign, perhaps it is time to take a look at getting rid of the grocery tax altogether. I'm confident that more people would vote you back in if you helped do away with such an illogical source of state revenue.

That's the solution. You wanna make a difference for Idaho families, do that. The idea of a $50 rebate is laughable, that's enough to cover anywhere from 1/4 to 1/2 of the cost of one bi-weekly shopping trip for a family of four. Maybe if you gave the people a $50 rebate every week, you could do some good. I dunno, the legislature's tax priorities are so screwey, they keep giving corporate breaks to companies like Albertsons which has been gobbled up and is probably moving to Minneapolis anyways.

$360 credit for a family of four isn't bad, but eliminating sales taxes on groceries is the best solution.