If you’re still looking for the evidence that likely 2014 gubernatorial candidate Gina Raimondo is a progressive Democrat, as she told many a union member during her push for pension reform last year, you won’t find it in local tax policy. Instead of advocating for more revenue, Treasurer Raimondo decided to again side with business interests and the right in calling tax equity measures the enemy of economic growth.
“Given Rhode Island’s current economic condition – with high unemployment and stagnant population growth – I have reservations about adopting policies that could put us at a competitive disadvantage when compared to other states,” she said in a prepared statement. “The best way to increase tax revenue is to grow our state’s overall economy so every Rhode Islander benefits from our success.”
Earlier this month, when I first asked Raimondo about the Miller-Cimini income tax bills, that would repeal the flat income tax and raise back the rates on Rhode Island’s richest residents to the where they were lowered from starting in 2007, she said she hadn’t heard of the effort – even though it had been covered by this news outlet, as well as the Providence Journal, WPRI and RI Public Radio, among others.
In her statement that her deputy chief of staff Joy Fox gave me more recently, Raimondo said: “Representative Cimini and Senator Miller should be commended for reminding all Rhode Islanders about the increasing levels of income inequality across our state, and by extension our country. I look forward to working with Representative Cimini and Senator Miller to actively pursue economic development policies and opportunities that improve our state for everyone.”
When asked about Raimondo’s position on the tax equity bills, George Nee, president of the local AFL-CIO, who has been helping to lead the charge for the bills passage, said, “I don’t know if I’m surprised but I’m certainly disappointed. I still don’t see the connection between jobs and taxes.”
Nee, and other supporters of the tax equity bills, have pointed to the fact that unemployment in Rhode Island has gone up as income tax rates for the affluent have gone down. The AFL-CIO also released poll results last week done by Flemming and Associates that indicates 68 percent of Rhode Islanders support the bills, which would raise the income tax rate on those who make more than $250,000 but subsequently lower it when the unemployment rate drops.
“We will continue to provide her with information to try to change her mind,” Nee said. “I was hoping she would see this as a necessary change in policy on both a state and federal level.”
“I don’t know if I’m surprised but I’m certainly disappointed. I still don’t see the connection between jobs and taxes.”
What??? Then why is he supporting the Cimini bill? Why do you keep quoting George Nee? He doesn’t care about struggling Rhode Islanders. If I’m looking for and educated opinion on taxation should I listen to someone who is in the financial industry and concerned about Rhode Island’s overall well being or the head of a union whose membership is paid with taxpayer dollars?
“The AFL-CIO also released poll results last week done by Flemming and Associates that indicates 68 percent of Rhode Islanders support the bills, which would raise the income tax rate on those who make more than $250,000 but subsequently lower it when the unemployment rate drops.”
Did the AFL-CIO explain that this was a trick question? Did they explain that unemployment would need to drop an entire one percent each year? Did they explain it could drop almost two percent over two years and the tax rate will never drop?
DogDiesel, my reply to you is. Why would someone who would be directly impacted by this legislation, like Treasurer Raimondo, be against it? Answer: maybe because it will raise her taxes. Better answer: Because her wealthy EngageRI supporters and contributors would be the only ones impacted by the raise in tax rates, not the other 98% of RI taxpayers.
What does this all mean? Simply put, Gina Raimondo was all for cutting people’s pensions and in effect limiting what retirees and those close to retirement would be able to spend but she’s against raising revenue by taxing people who are most able to afford it. (We wouldn’t want them not to be able to buy a new yacht, now would we?)
And talk about disingenuous, she didn’t know about the legislation? Give me a break, she wanted to be able to deny it prior to her Wall Street Journal profile running.
I found the ProJo’s report on Gina’s released tax returns “lap-dog” laughable. They accepted her only listing her state salary as her total share of the family income. Was she not a principle in a million (or billion) dollar venture capital firm? If she sold her interest where are the returns on the proceeds? If she put her interest in trust why didn’t she include the tax return of the trust? If her million dollar interest is gone how can we trust her with the state’s billions? Did any of these questions come to the mind of the ProJo “reporter”? So despite the middling income the ProJo says she has, I think she is happily sharing the 40% tax cut for the top bracket, and not feeling any pain from the elimination of medical, or charitable deductions that raised my state taxes this year.
Thom, I don’t buy she’s worried about her own tax bill but lets say I accept that she doesn’t want to tee off her support. That leaves us stuck with two competing approaches neither of which have any concern for the best interest of the majority of Rhode Islanders. Stalemate!
I am SHOCKED, SHOCKED to learn that Raimondo represents the moneyed interests over Rhode Island working families.
Fool us once, shame on you. Fool us again, ………….