Andria Bennett Scotches Budget Vote
In addition to giving away too much too early, Carney and Acting Gov Pete lost Dem Andria Bennett, ostensibly over mortgage interest deductibility:
From the News Journal:
“House Majority Leader Valerie Longhurst, the bill’s sponsor, amended it eliminate tax increases for lower-income folks and hike taxes further on the wealthy. That was apparently a move to shore up support among Democrats, though it abandon any hope of GOP votes.
Yet when the vote came down, Democrats fell one vote short. Andria Bennett, D-Dover, voted no.
Bennett nearly broke down in tears when approached by reporters after the vote. She said her constituents did not like the bill’s reduction of itemized deductions for things like mortgage interest and charitable donations.
“[Democrats] don’t elect me, the people in my district do,” Bennett said. “Is everyone upset with me? Absolutely.”
These are serious times, and they call for serious people, and Andria Viola Bennett is not to be called upon. HB240, the bill that would have created a new tax bracket on the wealthy so that the rich could finally pay their fair share of the shared sacrifice demanded of all of us during this budget crisis, failed the House by a vote of 24-17. Andria Viola Bennett joined with her new Republican caucus in voting down the measure that would have raised new revenues so the state could avoid painful education and nonprofit funding cuts. Any revenue bill requires a 3/5th vote, or 25 votes to pass. Mrs. Bennett’s vote, had she stayed true to Democratic principles, would have been the 25th.
Via Blue Delaware
What a bought and sold person. She has voted against minimum wage increase 2 times since elected also. Hates the working class
This can be viewed as an opportunity. Bennett says that she doesn’t like the cap on mortgage interest deduction, so eliminate that but add another upper bracket.
The Dems have already taken some steps aways from Carney’s idiotic 50/50 spit on Rev vs spending, so take another step away. It SHOULD have been thier starting position, but backing into it works for me.
What were the details on cutting the mortgage interest deduction? I’m not sure we want that camel to get its nose under the tent.
Adding additional upper brackets would no doubt cause multiple Democratic quislings to bail.
Democrats do not elect me. Well run as a independent see if you win !
Deserving of special mention is one John Viola. The House Majority Whip couldn’t get his own daughter to vote for the bill.
When it comes to the Viola legislative family, one mathematical equation says it all:
2 times zero=0
Is there a liberal case for cutting the mortgage interest deduction?
There’s a liberal case for raising enough revenue to forestall draconian budget cuts.
Thanks to Andria Bennett, the bill that would do so isn’t even a bargaining chip in negotiations.
Hey, if Kowalko, Williams, Bentz, Matthews and the rest of the caucus bit the bullet after they were actually able to get some concessions from leadership, then surely this backbencher could have done so as well.
Delaware has the second highest foreclosure rate in the country. Maybe if we turn the screws a little more on homeowners, we can take that top position….I think I like this Andrea Bennett.
The liberal case for it would be that it favors the rich — the bigger your mortgage, the greater the deduction. That’s why most calls for curtailing it have been calls for capping it at a certain level, not eliminating it.
Hmm.
In other words, FBH, you are correct in pointing out that this will increase foreclosures.
The average mortgage balance in Delaware is a little over $155k. That’s an average interest payment of $5700 a year, meaning an average deduction of between 800-900 a year. If you are getting foreclosed on because you can’t live with out that deduction a year you shouldn’t be buying a house
Yeah. that foreclosure argument is bullshit. More likely Bennet’s people don’t want anything that might cool off the real estate market in general.
I am skeptical of this “Bennet has joined the Republicans” narrative. If Andria Bennet has kept our DINOs from giving away the mortgage interest deduction as a bargaining chip, I will nominate her for Progressive MVP. Depending on how it plays out, of course.
Our “leadership” never found a bargaining chip they couldn’t give away.
You can forget a ‘progressive MVP’ nominee for anyone who has helped bury a modest minimum wage increase in committee twice. If the bill was good enough for the D’s who weren’t DINO’s, then I’m not gonna praise someone who has proven herself incapable of independent thought, but capable of parroting Chamber talking points.
Remember, she got a legislative patronage job through her daddy, who is also a nonentity. She hooked up with a married legislator who himself had used his ex-representative father’s name recognition to win the seat. She married him after his marriage fell through b/c of said hookup. She ran for the seat after his second DUI. And she has used her votes in the Business Lapdog Committee to prevent progressive legislation from advancing.
Other than that, she’s a model legislator. To me, she exemplifies everything that’s wrong with the General Assembly.
How quickly we forget that Andria Bennet was one of the “Democratic Six” who earned that title from DL and PDD precisely because they had voted against another Schwarzkopf budget.
http://delawareliberal.net//2015/07/21/pdd-honors-the-democratic-six-in-the-house-and-leading-education-reform-activists-in-summer-tribute/
That person doesn’t blog here any more. Not that he’s taking up the cause on her behalf.
People, including legislators, do things. We can respond to what they do. Bennett’s vote guaranteed that the House D’s won’t even have a bargaining chip in budget deliberations. Unless you think that that will make a MORE progressive resolution likely (it won’t), then your verbal gymnastics and your Apologist Tour are worthless (they are).
Not defending Bennet in general. I agree with you about her overall. But in isolation, her vote to preserve the middle-class tax benefit is a Democratic profile in courage.
It all depends how it plays out now. Forcing Schwarzkopf back to the table is a gamble. He may well cut a deal with Republicans instead of Democrats.
You are right – the person who named Bennet as one of the Democratic Six doesn’t blog here anymore.
However, the person who promoted her to the “Progressive Six” and nominated them for Progressive MVP does still blog here;
http://delawareliberal.net//2015/12/22/the-2015-mvp-most-valuable-to-the-progressive-cause-in-delaware-awards/
You can’t take her vote in isolation. We’re either gonna have a bad budget or a very bad budget. Bennett’s vote makes it more likely that we’ll have a very bad budget. Does she really think (sorry, rhetorical question) that her constituents will be better off with a really bad budget, including steep cuts in grants-in-aid to agencies in her district?
Anyone who has watched what passes for her career knows that she is incapable of being a Profile In Courage on her own.
As to what I wrote in 2015, guess it should have been the Progressive 5 plus one hanger-on. My bad.
And she has two fucking t’s in her last name. Spelling errors don’t generally send me around the bend, but failing to correct them does.
The “cap” idea on high end mortgage deductions sounds like a good compromise. I didn’t hear anybody bring it up during the live stream.
The one time Schwarkopf tries to play hardball with Republicans, he blows the layup (to mix sports metaphors). He failed to hold the necessary conversations with his own caucus to secure the do-or-die vote. That’s what happens when you put shit off until the last minute.
I’m sure that Pete figured that Bennett’s own dad, who is the fucking majority whip whose job it is to whip votes, could get his own daughter to vote yes. Whole family is stealing money.
Didn’t Pete stop the whole jt finance committee meetings? I mean they only had 9 months to work on this. It’s kabuki theatre. It’s all for show and it’s as good as reality tv on lifetime network
Arthur: That was both House and Senate leadership who did that. After the public outcries started.
The JFC can only craft a budget based upon the revenues available to them. They can’t generate additional revenue sources on their own. Since, other than the corporate taxes, all the rest of the revenue proposals were in limbo, they were crafting a budget full of deep cuts that nobody, neither the public nor the legislators, could stomach.
Which is why they called a halt until/unless new revenue measures were passed. To date, they haven’t been passed. Which, um, leaves us with this mess.
Did the bill also increase the standard deduction? If the standard deduction goes up, that can offset the loss of other deductions for lower and middle class taxpayers, which makes Andria’s vote even worse. She needs to stop listening to the realtors’ lobbyists. Those lobbyists really did find the weakest link in the House D caucus.
The quality of the Legislative members has declined greatly the last decade. The loss of competent leaders like Karen Peterson, Bob Gilligan, Liane Sorenson, Joe DiPinto and many others is really showing right now. This budget shortfall problem was hanging out there all year and even much earlier, and they end the session this way ?
FBH
One of my amendments, supported by K. Williams and others of my ilk, would have capped the itemized deductions at a $20,000 total thereby trading for some additional revenue from the wealthier but it was defeated by Republicans and some of my Dem. colleagues. In addition both HB 107 and HB 109 (out of committee and wasting away on the “ready” list) have a phase out of itemized deductions starting at the $125,000 individual taxable income level and completed at the $250,000 individual level while allowing current itemized deductions to be used by those lesser income levels if they so choose. Apparently not acceptable to some of my own caucus members, leadership and Governor Carney. Of course we will never know since my (and many other caucus members) numerous pleas and formal requests to place the bills on the agenda for a full House vote have gone unheeded and been rejected multiple times. We have the sufficient 25 vote (3/5 margin required) in our caucus and if either were brought to the floor for what would be a successful vote I guess the naysayers (democrats????) would be forced to choose a clearly defined side. I also implored leadership and the Governor to put the Grant-in Aid bill back into consideration with HB 101 (the LLC license fee increase raising $21.5 million or with the amendment $43 milion) attached to provide the necessary funding required to offset the $37 million in Grant-in-Aid cuts in Rep. Smith’s budget proposal. That idea was also dismissed because of outspoken opposition by a very few (3???) Dem. caucus members whose self-interests seem to obscure our obligations to provide necessary services to the poor, middle-class, disabled and all Delaware residents.
Representative John Kowalko
That certainly supports some things I’ve heard. It seems the fight isn’t between Democrats and Republucans. It is between people who think the rich need government’s help and support (e.g. Republicans, Gov Carney, Acting Gov Pete) and those who think the middle class and poor need support of the government (e.g. Kowalko and his likeminded caucus members).