On July 6, I participated in the Tax Modernization Project, the only delegate from the House 44th District who attended. That daylong "tax forum," in Charleston, included breakout sessions and presentations. On July 23, I also attended a second "tax seminar" held in the chamber of the House of Delegates. Additionally, it is public record that I have introduced numerous tax relief and tax reform bills. Those bills are easily accessible to Tax Task Force members on the state Legislature's web site. So I have indeed offered input into the process.
I take my job of looking out for the best interests of my constituents seriously. That is why I participated in both the tax forum and the tax seminar in July regarding tax reform issues. My participation at those two tax meetings prompted me to write the letter, which has triggered Musgrave's negative response, which wrongfully asserted that I had not yet interacted with his Tax Task Force.
Musgrave misrepresented my opinion, but did not deny the facts I provided in my July 27 letter to the editor. This justifies my concern that my constituent's property taxes may be increased and appears to confirm that the vote on this issue will occur after the Nov. 7 election, but before newly elected legislators are sworn into office.
My concern was that voters' wishes will be circumvented if the governor calls a lame duck special session on taxes before any newly elected members are sworn into office. This is a far cry from what Musgrave accused me of saying. He wrote, "Delegate Frich has suggested that the Task Force is nothing more than a ruse for political gain by the governor". I made no such statement. Perhaps his statement is a Freudian slip revealing what I hope is not the truth.
My suggestion that legislators might be denied input in the tax legislation was based on past factual experience serving with this administration.
In September 2005, West Virginia was thrown into a constitutional crisis when, as a result of undue influence by the governor upon the Democratic Party's legislative leadership, the Legislature set precedent by voting to limit its own powers and not allow amendments to the governor's bill lowering the food tax by only 1 percent.
Then in November 2005, the governor completely ignored the state Constitution and bypassed the Legislature by making his own tax policy through an executive order.
In the 2006 regular legislative session, I asked the House Finance Committee chair to place any one of several tax bills I introduced on the agenda. The response I received was that the governor would deal with tax reform later during a special session.
In the June special session, I asked the governor if legislators could have an outline of the tax plan by Labor Day so we could share it with voters and have a public debate in the normal political process of an election year. He did not agree with my request.
Musgrave claims they are seeking input from the public and looking at every aspect of the tax system. However, most "tax summit" participants were lobbyists. Some group facilitators were discouraging discussion of the elimination of the food tax. Nor would discussion be allowed on where spending might be cut. And finally, on the six-question online survey on taxes, why would the Tax Task Force include:
2B. What suggestions would you make under the requirement that any tax reduction(s) be offset by equal revenue enhancement(s)?
That sounds like tax shifting rather than tax relief.
Delegate Cindy Frich
R-Monongalia