Seriously — they are actually PAYING money for their bullshit. And the new bullshit is today’s amateurish hand-wringing about Delaware’s debt situation and how apparently this is supposed to be a sword of Damocles for state Democrats by the CRI’s resident economist. An economist who apparently aspires to be the local version of the Laffer curve guy.
It is hard to know where to start, but let’s start with the obvious. There is not one single claim here that has been sourced to anything you can trace or check. Not a single number cited or claim made gets a reference to where you may be able to find that statistic in its original context. (There’s nothing with better references on their website, either) As most of the readers of this blog already know — this is a typical wingnut tactic. Just throw numbers and claims out there and try to make them the CW. It isn’t too hard to do — especially since any media outlet who may be inclined to explore this further will do so from the frame of this article (when will this bring down Democrats) vs whether this data is as dire as it is made out to be and what would that mean to the rest of us. Horserace vs information you can really use. If you pay attention to the local media, listen for this. If you hear them having on about Delaware’s debt being a problem for Democrats, you will have seen first hand how wingnuts get their media frames into circulation.
But let’s look at this:
First, Delaware residents are not paying the real bill for the runaway state and local government spending that has occurred over the past decade. Delaware exports 44 percent of its state and local tax burden, ranking fifth among all the states in being able to successfully shift the state and local tax burden out of state.
This isn’t even especially deft — scare people about not paying the bills for government, then tell them that the state does a pretty damn fine job of getting non-residents to pay alot of money into the system. *boggle* I have no idea where he got the ranking from, but I’m guessing that the tax shift data came from here.
Or how about this:
In addition, the state of Delaware has held taxes down by running up debt. Over the last decade, Delaware has gone from the middle of the pack on debt per capita to the fifth-highest among all states. State debt has doubled over the past seven years.
Did you catch the trick here? Comparison of a decade of debt-per-capita data to *seven years* of state debt increases. Bullshit and no references to where this data comes from again. Not to mention this glosses over what may have happened to state bonding activity over the years of the recession. There are states who reached their legal limits, some states pulled back significantly on bond activity for awhile, and part of ARRA is a subsidized Build America Bond that states can issue (and Delaware did). Plus (and I’m not completely certain of this), Delaware seems pretty disciplined about using bond revenues for capital expenditures (or in refinancing capital) rather than operational ones.
Or this:
Not to mention the fact that local property taxes are kept low because public education is funded primarily at the state level. Delaware has the third-lowest property taxes as a percentage of median home value among all the states.
So it is a *problem* that local property taxes are kept low? Or maybe he meant to say that the property taxes are artificially low, since there may not have been a reassessment in living memory. (Hyperbole) But also think about the housing bubble bust that we continue to feel the effects of and you have to wonder how much of a reassement could we have managed that wouldn’t have damaged governments more than they already were.
But, wait, there’s more!
Counter to that, the voter participation rate for government employees is typically high. AFSCME and the teachers union have been very involved in this election cycle in Delaware.
The voter participation rate for the teabaggers was very high this year too. As were the likely Chamber of Commerce types (add your repub-leaning group here). So the fact that people who belong to a union are exercising their franchise is supposed to be scary while belligerent teabaggers and their funders are not is meant to be scary to the folks who still think that ACORN stole elections.
He goes on to predict that taxes will go up because some of the tax advantages will dry up and because the stimulus goes away. He is right that the stimulus goes away and some of the advantages may dry up — but certainly not all of them — but it also means that there are likely some opportunities here too. Stapleford wants you to know that the Dodd-Frank banking regulation will also mean decreased revenues for Delaware, without ever citing *how* that might happen. Just the standard issue wingnut talk radio declaration that it will happen. What Stapleford does NOT do, however, is predict that the prices of everything will increase some and nor does he point to the magic talisman that will protect the State from having to pay any of those increased costs. Especially health care costs.
And while he is waiting for the tax burden to increase here, he certainly does not recommend any additional exercises the state can do to reduce costs even further. If someone was listening to me, I would spend more time taking a look at the work the state does that ought to be done by counties or municipalities — or in the places where that work overlaps. I mean, why does DelDOT have to do (or fund) so much of the snow plowing on non-DelDOT maintained roads? School systems do collect some portion of property taxes — telling them that the state contribution to budgets is holding at 2008 levels and they have to get the rest otherwise seems reasonable to me. There are local governments thinking about downsizing — how about helping them get there?
Which isn’t to say that this year’s budget isn’t another minefield, because it is. And Democrats should be On Notice here to navigate this minefield carefully. This is the year to make the tough decisions, because we all know all bets are off in 2012.
But of course, Stapleford’s piece isn’t about policy or even providing voters with any data that you can use to make decisions about your government. It is about trying to set up a Dems In Trouble storyline in the media, while pretending that none of these problems would even be in existence in the repubs were in control of state government. Nobody here will fall this this bullshit, but be on the lookout for the usual media suspects who *will*.
ps. I’m sure I spent way more time on this post — just looking for data! — than Stapleford did writing his BS. I, however, just gave up part of my Sunday afternoon for this with no possibility of participation in the Wingnut Welfare League. Amazing how much money conservatives have thrown out there to make sure that people are well and thoroughly lied to.