archived: 27 Feb - 5 Mar, 2005 Back Next
ART POPE
Former State Representative, 1989-1992 and
1999-2002.
Junkie: TPJ received several emails from Republicans regarding TPJ’s analysis of Gov. Easley’s tax policy in Consumption Tax last week. TPJ privately responded to one Republican that it was rather hypocritical of Republicans to castigate Gov. Easley for recommending consumption taxation as Republicans nationally advocate consumption taxes. Former Representative Pope responded with this bit of history.
___________
Personal, and I guess historical note on the tax increases.
As a Legislator in 1989-1992, I was a leader in the fight against increasing the sales tax from five cents to six cents, and we won the first two years, but the Dems overcame us in the 1991 tax increases. During 1999-2002, I again fought the one cent sales tax increase, and with the help of dissident Democrats Martin Nesbitt and Toby Fitch, we defeated Gov. Easley and Democrat Speaker Jim Black's proposed sales tax increase the first time on the House floor. Of course the Democrats eventually succeeded in passing both the local option [after stealing the local government reimbursement) half cent, and the state "temporary" half cent sales tax, for a total of one cent.
In other words, the Democrat majority, over Republican opposition, hav! e passed a forty percent increase of the sales tax, from five cents to seven cents, from 1991 to 2001.
Another example, during the 2001-2002 Session, I was a primary co-sponsor of the Telecommunications Tax Simplification bill, with House Democrat co-sponsors, that put a revenue neutral simplified 4.5% tax rate on telephone calls. The House passed it on a bipartisan basis at the 4.5% rate. The Senate Democrats raised it to 6%, and sent it back to the House as part of the big budget/tax bill, where the House Democrats then voted for it, and Republicans voted against it.
Now Easley's 2005 budget proposes raising it to 7%. An increase from the original revenue neutral 4.5% to Easley's 7%, is a 55% increase of that consumption tax in just four years, again by the Democrats.
Now ask your friend Mr. Gheen who is the hypocrite, the Republicans who consistently oppose sales and consumer tax increases, as well as the income tax increases, or the Democrats who criticize regressive or consumption taxes, but then vote to raise the sales tax 40% in ten years, and telephone tax by 55% in four years?
Note, I said Republicans are consistent, that obviously does not include the RINOs who followed the Democrats in voting for the 2003 tax increases.
___________
Junkie: Pope poses a fair question. TPJ believes that it is both hypocritical and irresponsible to believe that a State that has grown at the rate of North Carolina can build the infrastructure and programs necessary to maintain a quality of life that North Carolinians expect and deserve by opposing any tax increases.
TIM LISZEWSKI
“Surprised At TPJ”
I was surprised at how guarded your post on Jerry Meek's election was. While some reluctance is to be expected from someone who backed his opponent, your post bordered on doom and gloom.
The articles you quote were accurate as far as they went, but they didn't delve into who was disaffected with Gov. Easley -- and why. I would submit that, unlike your framing of Mr. Meek as the progressive candidate, a strong coalition of rural, smaller city, and progressive State Executive Committee members brought him the victory.
Many of the members I spoke with were from the western and southern counties and by no definition could be called "progressive." They were from counties that were written off as unwinnable by Barbara Allen and her staff, meaning they did not receive the financial support to help rebuild the party structure there. Those county chairs with whom I spoke talked about a long-range goal of broadening the base so they could win local elections and build from the grassroots -- something you have embraced often in your postings.
They felt that too much emphasis went into reelecting statewide candidates -- thus assuring that larger cities like Charlotte and Raleigh received extra attention and money. It's this sentiment that fed the insider versus outsider dynamic, pitting the Raleigh establishment against the party regulars who got them there. This was the rank and file showing that they will not be ignored. And they came from places like Pitt and Catawba counties, hardly hotbeds of progressive fervor.
Ed Turlington's campaign played into this disaffection. Calls from John Edwards and Bill Bradley tied him to the established party line and served to cement the impression that he was the candidate closer to the status quo. I asked the SEC members as they registered who they were backing. Mr. Turlington gained 25 votes from Mecklenburg County and 30 from Wake County (beyond the elected officials). Consider that another 26 came from elected officials and one can see how the race broke down. This truly was the insiders (those with power and money) against the grassroots.
Let's break down the numbers even further. If the votes from Wake and Mecklenburg counties are subtracted for both candidates, Mr. Meek wins 227 to 161. That's a solid majority (approximately 58 percent) -- far from the divided party your post implied.
You said: "When the dust settles from the contest, the question will be whether the divisions can be bridged. If so, the Democratic Party may thrive. If not, the Party may suffer severely."
Mr. Meek is uniquely situated to bridge the disaffected moderates from the outlying areas with the progressives building solid numbers in Wake, Watauga, Buncombe, Durham, and Orange counties. Both of these groups helped him gain the chairmanship, and have drawn closer to each other in the process. The real division is between the elected officials and the party faithful.
It's up to those elected officials to now show some leadership and help Mr. Meek bridge this divide. They can do this by helping to build strong local parties in the west, south, and east. Instead of concentrating the money toward building only the coalition that helps them get elected, let's be sure to spread it around to rebuild the base in places like District 5. There, job losses and right-wing extremism make organizing a winning proposition in the long term.
It will take years, not just one election cycle, to accomplish this goal. Most politicians -- and some prognosticators -- forget that. They see only the short-term goal of keeping the slim majority the party currently holds. It makes them afraid of doing what they were elected to do -- lead according to our shared values.
That thought leads me to ask what TPJ means when he talks of a "realistic Party Platform." Does this refer to the general, make-no-waves platform short-circuited at the last convention? Or does it mean we should have a concise, distilled declaration of who we are and what we will do when elected? No voter will read nor care about a 42-page list of what we want. Most of the state convention delegates didn't even read it.
It IS time for all Democrats to build a stronger party. Here's hoping TPJ will continue to contribute to that process, instead of prolonging the rebuilding of the party.
__________
At lunch with several friends this past week, one made comment on a recent TPJ article. Another lunch companion commented that what he liked best about TPJ is that TPJ played a role in fostering much needed discussion. Therein is the genesis of TPJ. Liszewski’s letter to TPJ is published in the spirit of that genesis.
Rather than bordering on “gloom and doom,” TPJ is deeply concerned for the future of the Democratic Party in North Carolina. Every Democrat in the State should be.
Several critical events on both sides of the Meek/Turlington race did not happen. First, those leaders who supported Turlington have not publicly demonstrated a unification of support for Meek. For example, there has been no letter from Gov. Easley, Gov. Hunt or any other elected official publicly endorsing Turlington or a call by those who supported Turlington to support the Party financially and otherwise. This lack of unification is in direct contrast to what happened in the race for DNC Chairman. The Clintons, Sen. Kerry, Sen. Kennedy and a host of others called on Democrats to close ranks with Gov. Dean as our new Chairman. In fact, Sen. Kerry transferred One Million Dollars to the DNC and wrote his supporters asking them to give money to the DNC.
Second, Meek missed, either intentionally or unintentionally, an opportunity to extend an “olive branch” to those Liszewski describes as the “insiders.” The press, quick to seize an opportunity to test Meek’s commitment that he would challenge elected Democrats on Party issues “up to and including the Governor,” asked Meek his opinion on Gov. Easley’s budget. This is what Meek did say:
The new chairman of the state Democratic Party is being, well, meek about Democratic Gov. Mike Easley's budget proposal.
Jerry Meek, who won the party chairmanship this month, said through a spokesman that he didn't yet have comments on Easley's plan to raise taxes on cigarettes, candy, movie tickets, phone bills and more to settle the state budget, while also offering an income tax break for the wealthiest in the state.
"He hasn't had time to study it," spokesman Schorr Johnson said. "And he wants to study it instead of saying something off the cuff." – News & Observer
The headline for the article read, “Meek is mum on Easley’s tax proposals.” What message did that send to not only Gov. Easley, but to the Democrats across the State and those 241 on the State Executive Committee who voted for Turlington.
Meek could have issued many statements that would have been more meaningful. For example, Meek could have chosen to issue a statement that he had not studied Easley’s tax proposals but credited Gov. Easley is attempting to deal with a State budget shortfall to find the necessary money to improve public education in North Carolina while radical Republicans in the general assembly would cut funds for public education, kick North Carolinians who need basic health care out of Medicaid and who would cut any government program possible in order to cut taxes. Meek could have closed that the Democratic Party looked forward to working with the Governor and all elected Democrats to find the best way to keep North Carolina strong and responsible.
Instead, Democrats across the State were left reading their State Chairman was “mum.” Both sides are missing opportunities for unity here.
Third, another non-event is troubling. There is no scheduled meeting between Gov. Easley and Meek:
Meek has not met with Easley, who backed Raleigh lawyer Ed Turlington for the position, since Meek was elected party chairman. There do not appear to be plans for a meeting yet.
Easley political adviser Mac McCorkle said he is not sure when the two might meet. Meek's spokesman said there is hope for a meeting in the "near future." – News & Observer
The report does not bode well.
Third, Democrats do not have “years” to rebuild the Party. The elections for 2006 have already started. Democrats regained control of the State House by very narrow margins. Holding both the State House and State Senate will require Democrats to start voter registration, candidate recruitment and fund rasing now. Certainly, the Party should lay out plans for the long term, but retaining control of both houses of the General Assembly is critical. For example, a Republican controlled State Supreme Court has just invalidated thousands of ballots cast by legal voters that had been counted for years. Democrats in the State Senate have been unified in adopting legislation to address the issue. Just imagine what the constitutional right to vote would mean if Republicans controlled either house.
Fourth, Liszewski contends that Meeks support was actually greater than it was if one ignores the votes of Mecklenburg and Wake County. Of course, if one ignores the votes from Durham, Orange, etc., Turlington would have won. The fact remains that a vote of 271 to 242 denotes a Party divided.
There is no question that Democrat Party leaders and rank and file Democrats generally have felt that the Party has not had an effective role. Years of neglect justifiably produced the backlash to Turlington.
Fifth, Liszewski asks whether TPJ is advocating another milquetoast Party Platform. Perhaps it is fair to ask if progressive Democrats are going to advance commercial hemp as a plank in the platform? In all candor, progressives at the last NCDSC selected commercial hemp to advance as an issue compared to a plethora of other issues that could have come from the progressive community.
Sixth, Liszewski concludes that, “It IS time for all Democrats to build a stronger party. Here's hoping TPJ will continue to contribute to that process, instead of prolonging the rebuilding of the party.” TPJ leaves the judgment of its contributions, or perceived lack thereof, to each TPJ subscriber and reader. Personally, Junkie lives in an unorganized precinct in Durham County and is busy working to correct that omission.
Last Update: 03/23/2006