We've Moved- Please Come See Us

Check out the new home for New Hampshire Watchdog:

NewHampshireWatchdog.org
Showing posts with label Harold Janeway. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Harold Janeway. Show all posts

Monday, April 13, 2009

Weekend Roundup

Under the State House Dome, Tom Fahey leads with the state budget debate:
IT WAS ALL about taxes last week. The House's $11.5 billion spending plan for the next two years relies on existing taxes, higher taxes and new taxes.

And, Republicans were quick to charge, the good chance of higher property taxes on top of it all.

The House budget, passed by the Democratic majority, leaves a $133 million hole in local aid. That's a lot of money for local government to make up, and it has only one place to look:- property taxes.

Democrats argue the budget also increases aid to education by $123 million. That education money can't be used to plow roads or fix a town-hall roof. But it does offset some of the pressure schools used to put on property taxes.

An additional $37 million or so in local road funding also eases property tax pressures, Democrats say.
Lauren Dorgan gives State Senators a Easter present of not having to talk about controversial social issues by penning a preview of the budget debate in the Senate in her column in the Concord Monitor:
It being a holiday, I decided to give senators a little break from being cornered on social issues and instead checked in with them on the budget. Senate Finance has quite an interesting lineup: Manchester Sen. Lou D'Allesandro, the happy warrior for expanded gambling, chairs the committee, backed up by spry vice chairman Harold Janeway of Webster, a leading anti-gambling voice.

Asked if there are any absolute non-starters for him in the budget, Janeway said, "I don't think so. Because gambling isn't in the budget."

Says D'Allesandro, of all of the taxing measures: I'm not enamored with (the tax on gambling winnings), and I'm not enamored with the legacy tax, the estate tax," he said. "I'm enamored with non-tax revenue because I think that makes a lot of sense."
Where do you find that? "I find that through the expansion of gaming and the offering of the licenses to people," D'Allesandro said.

Neither man said he could predict whether the Senate Finance Committee would get behind gambling as a budget fix. "I'm not an oddsmaker," said D'Allesandro. "I'm a realist."

The one tax that won't have "any trouble," D'Allesandro said, is the 35-cent-a-pack cigarette tax, which he said is "pretty popular."

Both senators say that the first problem for the Senate is $83 million large - the school building aid money that Gov. John Lynch wanted to borrow. House lawmakers disagreed, stripping it from the capital budget - without adding it to the operating budget, saying that they hoped senators could find a way to finance the program.
In the Nashua Telegraph, Kevin Landrigan leads with the social issues, but also includes a history lesson on the 1990 budget debate when Republican Leadership pushed for higher taxes:
Here's what was in that 1990 tax package that went through when Stratham Republican Rep. Doug Scamman was House speaker, former lobbyist Bill Bartlett of Kingston was Senate president and the governor was current U.S. Sen. Gregg.

Cigarette tax: raised 4 cents per pack.

Liquor tax: a new fee of 96 cents per case charged to distillers.

Telecommunications tax: a new tax of 5 percent on telephone calls, replacing a state tax on telephone company real estate.

Beer tax: raised to 35 cents per gallon from 30 cents.

Room and meals tax: raised to 8 percent from 7 percent.

Gas tax: raised to 16 cents from 14 cents per gallon.

Real-estate transfer tax: raised to 6 percent from 4.75 percent, charged to both the seller and buyer.

Wine discount: cut the break for restaurants buying wine from state liquor stores from 20 to 15 percent.

Bingo tax: increased to 7 percent from 5 percent.

State park fees: increased 25 percent.

Corporate franchise fees: a new levy raising $2.3 million.

Monday, January 12, 2009

State Oil Board Backs Gas Tax Increases

(CONCORD) The state Oil Fund Disbursement Board is pushing a pair of gas tax increases to boost flagging funds used to clean up petroleum storage tanks. At its first meeting of 2009, the Board discussed two bills being drafted by Representative Chris Christensen (R-Merrimack), who was re-elected Chairman. The panel oversees several state funds which assist gas station owners, as well as cities and towns, to clean up leaking gas storage tanks and monitor groundwater near contaminated sites.

Christensen's first bill would increase the state's import fee on fuel oil by 25%, from a penny per gallon to 1.25 cents, with the revenues going to the Fuel Oil Discharge Cleanup Fund (FOD). The Department of Environmental Services estimates the increase would generate $680,000 in revenues. The FOD has received $925,000 so far this fiscal year, but has paid out over $1.7 million, and currently has a balance of just $125,000.

The second proposal would increase the import fee on diesel fuel by 17%, from 1.5 cents per gallon to 1.75 cents. Those revenues would flow to the Oil Discharge and Disposal Cleanup Fund (ODD). DES projects this fund to spend up to $2.5 million more than it takes in in Fiscal 2009, drawing the ODD fund down to just over $1.3 million.

The Board also weighed in on a draft proposal being prepared by Representative Candace Bouchard (D-Concord), which would lapse the ODD Fund in 2012, three years earlier than current law. Bouchard would then transfer some of the remaining money towards highway and bridge repair. According to Christensen, Bouchard would like major gas station chains to pay for their own oil tank cleanup projects, and not receive state reimbursement.

The Board spent several minutes discussing the legislation's political prospects, such as its chances of coming out of the House Ways and Means Committee. Senator Harold Janeway (D-Webster) suggested using the projected cost of the bill to kill it, noting that the Fiscal Note prepared by DES could "do the job.". The Board voted unanimously to oppose the bill as proposed. Under Section 146-D, the Oil Fund Disbursement Board lacks any authority to provide legislative recommendations or lobby the Legislature. The Board will meet next on March 2.