Politico takes an in depth look at the Republican field in Iowa and concludes Mitt Romney has a commanding lead in the state. They discuss McCain cutting back staff, ask if Rudy is taking Iowa seriously, and they take a look at the darkhorse campaigns of Brownback, Huckabee, and Tommy Thompson.

Politico does point out a possible winning strategy for Giuliani…

For Giuliani, his best caucus hopes may lie in the politics of pluralities. Should Thompson play in Iowa, conservatives may split their vote between the actor/politician and Romney, with some second-tier candidates also picking up support.

Romney has put together a good organization in Iowa, has raised the money, and was the first one airing TV ads in the state. That has obviously helped him gain support. However, one reason Romney looks so strong in Iowa is because the other candidates look so weak. Romney's lead is as much from his work as it is because of the other candidates lack of support.

The second tier candidates haven't been able to spark much enthusiasm. I don't see the excitement on the Republican side in Iowa that I do on the Democratic side. That could be from the quality of candidates, it could be from Bush's sinking poll numbers, or it could just be how each party sets up their campaigns.

In the end, they quote Sioux County chairman, where they say…

There are still a number of conservatives who are looking for somebody that they can rally behind,” Lundberg said. “At some point, you'll make a decision to back somebody and you're going to put time and effort into it — and it's tough to put time and effort in a losing cause.

What I want to know is what Republicans plan on doing if they decided all the candidates are losers?

Originally posted at Century of the Common Iowan. 

I wrote a diary for Daily Kos and MyDD about Joe Biden being someone to watch in Iowa. I think it's a mistake for bloggers to be writing him off as a joke.

I put the whole diary after the jump. Be warned: it's long, and some of it is written for an audience that may not understand how the caucuses work.

Bottom line is that none of the front-runners should be taking anything for granted in Iowa. A lot of voters will thoroughly consider all the options before making up their minds.

I'm interested in your comments, either here or at one of the other sites:

http://www.dailykos….

http://www.mydd.com/…

UPDATE: I get mass e-mails from most of the campaigns, including Biden's. In my most surreal blogging-related experience ever, this evening the latest e-mail from his campaign links to my DKos diary!

I can't wait until the special election set for July 10 is over. I am tired of the glossy mailers, the phone-calls and the radio ads run by the extremely well-funded “Yes to Destiny” campaign.

The direct mail pieces have done more harm than good, with the first one conveniently touting the property tax cut without mentioning the 17 percent increase in the sales tax (from 6 percent to 7 percent).

Then they sent out a piece misquoting some elderly woman in Urbandale who rents and therefore wouldn't even see any benefits from the property tax cut.

I've gotten an e-mail from the Des Moines Art Center containing an absentee ballot request form–the mailing urged me to vote yes on the tax hike.

Today in the car I heard a radio ad for the Blank Park Zoo talking about all the great ways they'll be able to expand the zoo if people vote Yes to Destiny. No mention of the fact that they will be turning half of a county park (currently free and available to the public) into zoo exhibits people will have to pay to see. We've been very regular zoo visitors over the past couple of years, thanks to our toddler/preschooler, but this summer I've been going a lot less because that proposed land grab makes me really angry.

I still think voters are going to soundly reject the Destiny proposal, but the backers are doing GOTV–who knows, maybe they will identify enough supporters and get them to the polls. 

I got a phone call purporting to be a survey, asking me how I would vote on the upcoming special election (without specifying what the election was about). I said I was voting against, and the guy thanked me for my time and ended the call. When I asked who paid for the call, he said Destiny. Presumably, if I had indicated that I was planning to vote for the proposal, I would have been given information about where and when to vote. 

One of the biggest tools in the GOP public relations toolbox is the use of “think tanks” and other non-profits to support conservative pundits financially while they make the rounds on talk radio, newspaper editorial writing, and of course – Fox News.  The conservative establishment is very good about taking care of their own.

Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo found a great new example with a little digging today.

So I inadvertently started a flamewar on Daily Kos and MyDD today by posting a diary about the Clinton campaign being missing in action from July 4 parades in the Des Moines suburbs. The Clintonistas were outraged that (to their mind) my headline implied that the Clinton campaign did not take part in any parades, when we all know that Bill and Hillary marched in the Clear Lake parade.

You can find the DKos version of the flamewar here here or the MyDD version here (the angry Clinton mob was a little less active at MyDD).

My point was that there was no Clinton campaign presence at the Windsor Heights parade I attended, and according to others I talked to, Clinton's campaign didn't have a vehicle in the Urbandale or West Des Moines parades either.

That surprised me, because Obama, Edwards and Richardson were well represented with campaign workers and/or volunteers. (The organizer of the Windsor Heights parade told me later that Biden's campaign was also in the parade, but I didn't notice them.) 

The Edwards people were able to get quite a few supporter cards signed during these parades. We were watching for people who waved or cheered as the Edwards truck rolled by, and three or four people ran up to those spectators and asked them if they would sign up as Edwards supporters. I didn't catch the number for the WDM parade, but I think they got about 65 cards signed during the Urbandale parade and another 15 to 20 in Windsor Heights.

The team also handed out a lot of Edwards stickers in WDM and Urbandale, but had run out early in the Windsor Heights parade.

Obama and Richardson people were handing out tons of stickers in Windsor Heights. My husband, who was with the kids on the side, was pretty sure he saw an Obama staffer with a clipboard as well, who was probably getting supporter cards signed. He wasn't sure whether anyone with the Richardson group was handing out cards. But yesterday evening at the big Windsor Heights celebration in Colby Park, I saw lots of people still sporting their Obama and Richardson stickers.

The point of my diary was that this was a missed opportunity for the Clinton campaign. Thousands of people watch these parades. I've got to believe there were Clinton supporters and leaners who would have signed up if there had been staffers out there spotting them and asking them. I know staff was probably preoccupied with the Clintons' Iowa tour, but the fact that Obama was in Iowa didn't prevent his campaign from having a strong presence in all of the parades.

A woman I know well in my neighborhood is a Clinton leaner (she says she needs more info about the other candidates before making up her mind). She's a general election voter who rarely votes in primaries. Despite many contacts from me last cycle, she and her husband did not attend our precinct caucus. So she is unlikely to turn up on a list of Ds to target in my precinct. I saw her along the parade route with her kids. If there had been a Clinton presence, I bet she would have taken a sticker or possibly signed up. They could have then targeted her closer to caucus time for GOTV efforts. But how will they find her now?

With Teresa Vilmain running the show and the Vilsacks on board, and plenty of money, I am surprised that the Clinton campaign didn't make sure they had a strong presence in all of the Des Moines-area parades.

What do you think, and which campaigns did you see in your towns? 

Incidentally, the only Republican campaign in the Windsor Heights parade was Brownback's; they were also in Urbandale and West Des Moines. I assume that some of the other Republican candidates were in those larger suburban parades. 

I'm off to march in the Windsor Heights parade with the Edwards group. I don't think I'll be doing any blogging today, but noneedthneed is going to be very busy, so click over to Century of the Common Iowan (link is on the blogroll at the right) for his write-ups.

While you're at it, check out the other Iowa liberal blogs, including John Deeth and Iowa Independent, which have published lots of campaign coverage lately.

I must say, though, that I find it distracting to read those liveblog posts that go backward in time as you're reading from the top down.

Got an e-mail from Tom Harkin announcing that his wife Ruth is endorsing Hillary. Here's an excerpt:

She feels that women who are lucky enough to serve in public office had, and continue to have, a responsibility to opening doors and paving a new way for those seeking other leadership roles. And as Ruth looked closely at who is best suited to do the job of President and to inspire a new generation of leaders, Hillary topped the list.

Thanks a lot, Ruth. If Hillary loses the general to a Republican who puts two or three more Alitos on the Supreme Court, I hope you'll apologize to all women.

Of the many things that bother me about the Hillary Clinton candidacy, one of the biggest is this idea that women are supposed to back her as a pathbreaker (with the corollary that people who don't back her are sexist or can't handle strong women). Hillary would be a weak general election candidate, and I don't even think she would be the best president out of the current field.

The e-mail also mentions that Tom Harkin has no plans to endorse any of the presidential candidates. Smart move, senator. 

Remember how the Republicans always told us Clinton's impeachment wasn't about the sex, it was about the lying? That is, the false affadavit Clinton signed in connection with a civil case.

Scooter Libby committed perjury (lied to a grand jury) and made false statements in connection with a criminal case. Not just any criminal case, an investigation into the leaking of a covert CIA agent's name. Despite his all-star legal team, Libby was convicted on four out of five counts of perjury and making false statements.

Well, Bush made a big show of saying he would fire anyone involved in leaking covert CIA agent Valerie Plame's name to the media. But when push came to shove, he didn't do it, and he made sure that convicted felon Scooter Libby didn't see a day in prison for lying to the FBI and to a grand jury.

Today, after a court ruled against Libby's efforts to delay his prison sentence until after he had exhausted his appeals, Bush commuted Libby's sentence to probation and a $250,000 fine. That fine is meaningless–Bush pioneers have been raising millions of dollars for Libby.

TPM Cafe has been keeping track of reaction to the commutation by politicians of both parties. 

I found this nugget at Talking Points Memo particularly interesting. This comes from the Department of Justice manual on commutations, with emphasis added by Josh Marshall:

Section 1-2.113 Standards for Considering Commutation Petitions 

A commutation of sentence reduces the period of incarceration; it does not imply forgiveness of the underlying offense, but simply remits a portion of the punishment. It has no effect upon the underlying conviction and does not necessarily reflect upon the fairness of the sentence originally imposed. Requests for commutation generally are not accepted unless and until a person has begun serving that sentence. Nor are commutation requests generally accepted from persons who are presently challenging their convictions or sentences through appeal or other court proceeding.

Even Bush's commutation didn't follow legal procedures.

But hey, it's ok if you're a Republican. 

Got a card in the mail today announcing that Tom Vilsack is joining the Des Moines office of Dorsey & Whitney LLP. According to the law firm's website, the firm has 18 offices, approximately 650 lawyers, and approximately 850 other support staff.

The card lists 16 other attorneys in the firm's Des Moines office and says Vilsack “will be maintaining a general practice including but not limited to commercial law and litigation and advising clients in the fields of energy conservation, renewable energy and agribusiness development.”

Judging from the envelope, this was a mass mailing. I don't know why I got one–could have been sent to all registered Ds in central Iowa, or just people who have contributed to the Iowa Democratic Party. 

A new poll came out today showing Hillary Clinton and John Edwards way out in front of everyone else in Iowa.

Here are the results from the American Research Group (May's support in parenthesis)…

Clinton 32% (31%)
Edwards 29% (25%)
Obama 13% (11%)
Richardson 5% (8%)
Dodd 2% (2%)
Biden 2% (3%)
Kucinich 1% (4%)
Gravel 1% (1%)
Clark 1% (1%)
Undecided 14% (14%)

At first, I was surprised Hillary was leading with over 30% when other polls show her around 20%. However, if you look at the trends, Hillary has consistently been in the low 30's in this poll, except for May when she had just 23%. In fact Hillary is basically right where she was back in December before her campaign even started (32% to 31%).

Ezra Klein seems to think John Edwards' support is declining, but when you look at the trends in the American Research Group polls, it shows Edwards gaining support. In the past month he increased by 4%. Overall, he has improved from 20% back in December to 29% in June. 9% is the largest increase from any candidate.

If you look at Obama's trends in the American Research Group polls, he peaks at 23% in February right after he announced. He has been on a downward trend since then. I think Obama's support is stronger than the 13% he is polling because the polls is of likely caucus goers. Obama has made a big splash with younger people who would not be included in this poll.

Another interesting thing about this latest poll is looking at the preference by party. Among those who identified themselves as no party, 39% were in favor of Edwards, 31% in favor of Clinton, 11% in favor of Obama, and 3% in favor of Richardson. Edwards' support here only strengthens his campaigns claim that Edwards is in the best position to win independent voters and in red states.

Here's analysis from past ARG polls in May and March .

Originally posted at Century of the Common Iowan. 

I agree 100 percent with a column by David Yepsen. It's about how the “Destiny” tax proposal will lose and deserves to lose.

Here's the link to his piece in the Des Moines Register today. It's hard to know what to excerpt, because he makes a lot of good points. Here's one Chris Woods and I haven't discussed previously on this site:

The supporters' big hope now is that all the groups that will get additional money will vote for it, while those opponents will forget there's an election on July 10. That's what the supporters were trying to do when they scheduled this for a summertime special election – manipulate the outcome.

Which raises another issue for state lawmakers to consider. Why should governments and interest groups be allowed to schedule elections in an effort to affect the results? Got a tax increase or bond issue to get approved? Then schedule the election when people might not be paying attention – like mid-July – so a small handful of voters can push it through.

It amounts to governments playing games with their people. No wonder folks get cynical. Legislators should put a stop to it by adopting an idea Secretary of State Mike Mauro and Gov. Chet Culver have suggested: Governments should be required to hold bond elections and special ballot elections on just a handful of pre-determined dates. For example, once every six months, the state could specify a date on which all bond referendums, ballot initiatives or elections to fill vacancies must be held.

Also in the Sunday Register, you'll find a write-up of this opinion poll, which found that people in the three counties that will be voting oppose the Destiny proposal 2 to 1.

The question is, will these people turn out to vote? The groups that will benefit from the spending are working to get supporters to vote–as a member of the Des Moines Art Center, I got an e-mail recently containing an absentee ballot request form as an attachment.

I think the “Destiny” proposal will go down in flames. It probably wouldn't have passed even if the promoters hadn't sent out misleading direct-mail pieces supporting it (the first one didn't mention the sales-tax hike, and another one included a quote from an elderly woman who later said she never made the comment attributed to her in the mailer). But those mistakes certainly hurt their cause too.

without hitting a presidential candidate during the next week in Iowa.

Noneed4thneed's got a comprehensive list of who'll be where over at Century of the Common Iowan. Click through for info on impending visits by Biden, Dodd, Obama, Clinton, Romney, Huckabee and Tancredo.

Got an e-mail from the Biden campaign:

July 3rd: Enjoy a day at the State Capitol. Stop by the Yankee Doodle Pops and then come see Senator Biden's 2:30pm press conference on the steps. Several major State Legislators will be endorsing Biden and you can join in the festivities.

July 4th: March with Senator Biden in the Urbandale Parade. Line up is at 9:30am on 70th St between Palm Dr. and Roseland Dr. The parade starts at 10am. Wave to the crowds and share the excitement of Independence Day as you and Senator Biden< make your way through Urbandale. July 4th: Come to Senator Biden's backyard Barbecue hosted at the home of Nate and Meg Boulton. Guests are welcome at 1:30pm. This is a great chance to experience the Senator and Presidential Candidate one on one, ask questions, and enjoy a beautiful day. For details or to RSVP please contact Raena, Raena@JoeBiden.com or 515-440-2008.

Anyone know who's planning to endorse Biden?

Anyone keeping track of the statehouse endorsements so far? The only one I know of for sure is Staci Appel, who's on the Hillary bandwagon. 

I've been somewhat critical of the Culver administration when it comes to environmental issues, but I'm proud of Chet Culver upon reading this release that came to me on the Sierra Club e-mail list:

OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
Governor Chet Culver « Lt. Governor Patty Judge
 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 29, 2007

Contact: Brad Anderson
 (515) 281-0173

 

GOVERNOR CULVER APPOINTS NEW EPC BOARD MEMBER

 

PAUL JOHNSON NAMED TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION COMMISSION

(Des Moines)  Today, Governor Chet Culver appointed Paul Johnson of Decorah to the Environmental Protection Commission.  The EPC is a panel of nine citizens who provide policy oversight of Iowa's environmental protection efforts. EPC members are appointed by the Governor and confirmed by vote of the Senate for four year terms.

“Paul is a family farmer who will bring valuable experience to this important Board,” said Governor Culver.  As Governor, I am committed to improving water quality and protecting the land, lakes, rivers and streams we all love.  I am confident Paul will make a valuable contribution to the EPC’s efforts to protect Iowa’s environment.”

PAUL JOHNSON – Paul Johnson holds a BS (1966) and MS (1969) in Forestry from the University of Michigan and an honorary doctorate from Luther College in Decorah, Iowa. His international experience spans Peace Corps service in Ghana, West Africa (1962-4), forestry teaching in Ghana (1967-68), doctoral research in tropical forest ecology in Costa Rica (1969, 1970, 1971), co-directorship of the Luther College Nottingham Year (1980-81) in Nottingham, England and numerous educational and research visits to countries such as Sweden and the former Soviet Union.

Since 1974, Paul and his family have owned and operated Oneota Slopes Farm near Decorah, Iowa. Their farm has included dairy, corn, soybeans, hay, beef cattle, sheep and Christmas trees.
 
Paul's distinguished public service career includes three terms in the Iowa State Legislature (1984-1990) during which he co-authored the 1987 Groundwater Protection Act, the 1989 Resource Enhancement and Protection Act (REAP) and the 1990 Iowa Energy Act. In addition, Paul served as Chief of the Soil Conservation Service (now the Natural Resources Conservation Service) at the United States Department of Agriculture from 1993-1997 and as Director of the Iowa Department of Natural Resources from 1999-2000.
Additional service includes two terms on the National Research Council's Board on Agriculture (1988-1993) and participation on numerous foundation boards including the Aldo Leopold Foundation. He has been the recipient of many awards over his years of public service, among them the prestigious Hugh Hammond Bennett Conservation Award from the Soil and Water Conservation Society of America.

Earlier this year Culver appointed four new commissioners to the EPC: Dale Cochran, Ralph Klemme, Charlotte Hubbell and Susan Heathcote. I heard later that one of men would be unable to serve because it turned out that he was not currently farming (at least one, possibly two of the four commissioner positions is reserved for a farmer). I don't know if that was Cochran or Klemme.

In any case, Paul Johnson is an outstanding environmentalist and a good Democrat too (he ran against Latham in the 4th District a few years back). 

After winning the 1st and 2nd Districts in 2006, Iowa Democrats have their sights set on Tom Latham's seat in Iowa's 4th District.

Dr. Selden Spencer is committed to running again in the 4th district, a district Gov. Culver won with 59% of the vote. In 2006, Dr. Spencer had a winning message, but he entered the race late and was fighting an uphill battle. He is starting early this time around and has been busy raising money. 

This week Dr. Spencer sent this email out to supporters …

“This may be the most important date of this election for taking back the 4th District for the people of Iowa. June 30, 2007 is the second quarter filing deadline for the Federal Election Commission. On this day, all federal campaign committees must report their donations. Together, we can elevate this race to the national level. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and other national groups, will be looking at this quarter to find the candidates and campaigns to target to win in 2008…and they want to help our race here in Iowa. We need to show support in the district now. I am fully committed to winning in 2008, but my commitment is not enough. It takes more than one person to create change. I am asking you to match your previous donation of $ or send $25, $50, or $100 to show Washington we are serious about 2008. It may seem early, and like I mentioned before, this is a big quarter to show support. Your contribution now means more support from the national committees who will elevate this race to the most competitive level in 2008.

Every dollar you can send will show the DC bigwigs that Dr. Spencer is the real deal. Every dollar you can send has the chance of turning into more money for the Spencer campaign down the road. Please help out Selden Spencer's campaign by donating whatever you can before Saturday's deadline.

The way last night's exchange was set up, it was hard to declare an actual winner or loser in terms of substance and reference to the issues (especially since they all seemed to finish each other's sentences and agree for the most part, save for Gravel and Kucinich).  Without trying to sound racist, Obama seemed poised to make a huge splash with the audience–he is, after all, an African-American man speaking to a largely African-American audience.  However, that didn't happen.  And maybe that's a good thing.

Overall, it seemed that a lot of candidates stood out.  Clearly, Clinton stood out with her response that garnered her the only standing ovation.  Biden stood out for the ridiculous things he said and the look he put on Al Sharpton's face (it must prove that the pundits and media elite really are his biggest constituency).  Richardson again demonstrated that while he may be an excellent person-to-person on the ground campaigner, he still has a way to go in the debates.  And Chris Dodd seemed to sound like the most invigorated, presidential-esque candidate up on the stage.

Did anyone do exceptionally poorly?  Of course not.  But it is clear that there wasn't really a favorite last night, someone who swept the field and dominated.

MSNBC's First Read documents a lot of the different responses from media outlets and the pundits last night on who stood out, who 'won,' and who bombed (though I don't understand how they thought Biden stood out, as they said so here).  Clearly, the media elite seem to think that Clinton and Obama continued to stand out.  But that's because the Clinton-Obama race is the horserace for them to follow and cover.  The tit-for-tat between the two campaigns is what they're looking for.

So, I'm putting the question to you, registered Bleeding Heartland users: Who  do you think stood out the most or performed the best (in essence: won) last night's forum? And don't just limit your answers to submitting your response in the poll; leave a comment explaining your vote, too.  This is your community site.  Make it worth your while.

As usual, I'm taping the debate to watch later, after the kids are in bed.

If you watched, let us know what you thought. Who won? Who missed a great opportunity? Who had the best line? 

As I talk to voters in my precinct who caucused in 2004, I am finding that very few of them have watched the first two debates. I think people will tune in more in the fall. 

There have been some claims that Hillary Clinton is “push-polling” against her main rivals, Barack Obama and John Edwards in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Her campaign appears to have commissioned some detailed message testing in both states. That is different from a sleazy push-poll (such as what Bush did to McCain in South Carolina in 2000, having people call up voters asking if it would change their opinion if they knew that McCain had an illegitimate black child).

Nevertheless, this kind of survey rubs some voters the wrong way. This Daily Kos diarist described it as “push-ish” polling.

I don't have a problem with message testing–I was a respondent on a lengthy message-testing survey commissioned by Chet Culver before last year's gubernatorial primary. I do think it's sleazy for Democrats to attack each other using right-wing talking points, but I don't blame campaigns for wanting to know which messages are going to be effective for and against them.

That said, I would really like to know which candidates are doing these surveys, and what kinds of messages they are testing. If you get a call like this, please try to remember the questions (taking notes if needed), and put up a diary afterwards. Or, if you prefer, you could share your info with me by e-mail (desmoinesdem AT yahoo.com). I will not reveal your identity.

I’ve blogged about it before over at Political Forecast, but I’m not too enthusiastic with the way that Senate Democrats have responded to Jim Nussle’s nomination to be Director of the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB).  Maybe it is all of the work I did during the gubernatorial race talking about Nussle’s failed leadership on the House Budget Committee as it’s chair–leading us into horrible deficits, uncontrollable spending, and ridiculous tax cuts for the richest Americans.

Or maybe it is just that we know he’s a confrontational hack who shouldn’t be charged with leading such a complex and tough office, one that requires someone with some kind of expertise is actual management and appropriate budgeting techniques.  The reality, however, is the that OMB is largely a political office and it made sense for Bush to pick someone who was willing to give up the next two years to fight with Congressional Democratic leadership about the Republican President’s budget.

Still, the least the Democrats could do is raise objections to Nussle’s past experience–deficits and debt–and instead call for someone more inclined to have positive budget experience, yet be known for compromise and hard work, not hackery.

I guess that’s why I’m slightly surprised at today’s Register story where Jane Norman reports that Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND), the chair of the Senate Budget Committee, is not all that enthusiastic about Nussle’s nomination and has some reservations.  Maybe that’s just political cover for the left flank by telling grumpy activists like me that they’re not planning for anything great coming from, but are going to confirm him anyway.

Or maybe it is some serious action that would make Conrad more inclined to grill him during confirmation hearings.  Conrad is no liberal in the way that people consider Iowa’s Tom Harkin (who has indicated he’ll likely vote to confirm Nussle), but Conrad has a strong populist streak on trade and labor issues.  Nussle’s record on those issues, particularly with the budget, is not good at all.  Kudos to Conrad for stepping up, and I hope he takes it to another level.

Desmoinesdem has previously written about Project Destiny–a tricounty joint venture between Polk, Dallas, and Warren Counties to increase the sales tax in the three communities by one cent–and urged you to vote against the plan.  And now the South Central Iowa Federation of Labor AFL-CIO, will announce on Thursday that they plan to oppose the sales tax increase as well.

From an advisory put out today:

“Union leadwers say voters should consider that “basic needs” are not being met in the three-county area. A regressive tax to finance so-called “quality of life” efforts such as bicycle trails, they say, should not take precedence over citizens’ fundamental needs.”

With strong labor opposition, who knows how the effort will fare on election day, July 10th.

Discussing and talking about the proposal is no easy subject.  Almost two weeks ago, CityView’s cover story was dedicated to the debate over Project Destiny.  The story offered more insight on the project, its supporters and opponents than the Register or any other local news stations have offered.  I recommend reading the full story to truly understand the debate behind Project Destiny.

The biggest opposition to the tax comes from taxpayers groups and citizens who feel that the sales tax increase is a regressive move that hits the poorest residents in these three counties the hardest.  And they’re right.  The fact is, the fundamentals for citizens in these areas aren’t even being provided and that is something that local government leaders should focus on first and foremost.

While I’m all about lowering property taxes in the area–because we could certainly use the decrease–the problem is that current tax revenue isn’t being spent wisely.  Not to mention that we’re already giving out large property tax breaks to the corporations who would receive the most benefit from the proposal were it to pass and they were to have their property taxes reduced further.  Inherently, the system is complex and difficult, but the focus should be on infrastructure priorities and essentials.

I want more trails, culture, and focus on the arts in the region.  But I can’t write off a disproportionate tax increase on the low-income and poorest people of the community to make our region better.  I just can’t.

For more information on the proposal, check out the supporters’ website and the opponents’ website.