An e mail from
In previous editions of the Nygren's Notes, I outlined new taxes on your phone bill, on your garbage, and on your internet downloads to name a few. These taxes were part of the $4.5 billion in tax and fee increases that are feeding the 6.2 percent increase in government spending contained in the budgets passed this year. Sadly, there is another one that is now hitting your electric bill.
.
In the budget was a public benefits fee placed on utility bills that will pay for the salaries and benefits of district attorneys. This appears on bills as a line item along with other fees such as the low income assistance fee. The fee will total $18.2 million over the next two years and is intended to sunset at that time.
.
I would not be surprised if the fee is continued after two years. Government and in particular our current leadership has a problem with eliminating any revenue generator that funds excess government spending. A current example is the E911 phone fee that was supposed to sunset and have any surplus be reimbursed to rate payers. Instead of that taking place, the $20 million surplus was raided by the Democrat majorities to pay for unrelated government programs and the E911 fee transformed into a new $107 million phone tax.
.
The new $18.2 million public benefits fee is being used to replace general purpose revenue (GPR) that would have been used to pay for district attorneys. This accounting trick saves GPR which can be used elsewhere in the budget. It is nothing more than a shell game to cover up frivolous government spending and puts off hard decisions into the future. Actions like this have put Wisconsin's state finances on a house of cards that will get more and more rocky if hard decisions continue to be pushed into the future.
.
District attorneys should not shoulder the blame for this $18.2 million fee. The blame rests at the feet of the Democrat majorities and Governor Doyle who created this fee and are using it to plug spending holes created by unsustainable government programs.
.
Something also to remember is that $36.7 million in earmarks were included in the budget. As well, in the Nygren's Notes last week I outlined $22 million of estimated fraud in the Wisconsin Shares program. These are just two examples in many that if cut from the budget would have been more than enough to keep the public benefits fee from ever being created.
.
When in Doubt, Blame the Economy
Democrats Grabbing at Straws over Auto Premium Increases
.
I have often written about the automobile insurance changes that were included in the budget. I did so as recently as two weeks ago in an edition of the Nygren's Notes. This week, it has come to my attention that the Democrat majority has been spreading misleading information surrounding what happened in the budget and how their actions will affect your automobile insurance premiums.
.
In a letter from Assembly Majority Leader Tom Nelson (D-Kaukauna) to one of his constituents, he blames the economy and insurance providers for any premium increases. He states, "Quite simply, any premium increases are due to the business decisions of insurance providers rather than any action taken by the Legislature." Read the full letter here.
.
These assertions by the Majority Leader of the Assembly are 'quite simply' false and 'misleading' to be kind. In the budget, Democrats raised mandatory automobile insurance coverage minimums to the highest levels in the nation and increased the ability of trial lawyers to cash in on frivolous automobile accident lawsuits.
.
More money can be handed out during lawsuits which increases the potential financial liability of insurance providers. The money an insurance provider has comes directly from individual's and family's auto insurance premiums. Consequently, the question for Representative Nelson is not, did their budget actions cause premium rates to increase, but how could they not?
.
The Democrats and specifically the Majority Leader are grabbing at straws by blaming these premium increases on anything but the changes that they passed in the 2009-11 budget. For added proof, read pages 7 and 8 of this non-partisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau memo. It states, "OCI (the Wisconsin Office of the Commissioner of Insurance) expects that the provisions of [the budget] would increase motor vehicle liability insurance premiums, reflecting the increase in coverage that would be provided by these policies."
.
As well, in the same memo it states UW-Madison and St. John's University of New York researchers were consulted regarding the Wisconsin Insurance Alliance (WIA) auto premium estimates. Both universities' researchers said that WIA's 33 to 43 percent estimate increase in auto insurance premiums, due to the budget changes, was reasonable.
.
This memo also warns that these changes would potentially increase the number of uninsured drivers on the roads because of the large increases in automobile insurance cost. All of this information was available to the Governor and legislators long before the final vote on the budget.
"John NygrenNew Utility Tax Pays for District Attorneys?
State Representative
89th Assembly District" State Representative John Nygren
In previous editions of the Nygren's Notes, I outlined new taxes on your phone bill, on your garbage, and on your internet downloads to name a few. These taxes were part of the $4.5 billion in tax and fee increases that are feeding the 6.2 percent increase in government spending contained in the budgets passed this year. Sadly, there is another one that is now hitting your electric bill.
.
In the budget was a public benefits fee placed on utility bills that will pay for the salaries and benefits of district attorneys. This appears on bills as a line item along with other fees such as the low income assistance fee. The fee will total $18.2 million over the next two years and is intended to sunset at that time.
.
I would not be surprised if the fee is continued after two years. Government and in particular our current leadership has a problem with eliminating any revenue generator that funds excess government spending. A current example is the E911 phone fee that was supposed to sunset and have any surplus be reimbursed to rate payers. Instead of that taking place, the $20 million surplus was raided by the Democrat majorities to pay for unrelated government programs and the E911 fee transformed into a new $107 million phone tax.
.
The new $18.2 million public benefits fee is being used to replace general purpose revenue (GPR) that would have been used to pay for district attorneys. This accounting trick saves GPR which can be used elsewhere in the budget. It is nothing more than a shell game to cover up frivolous government spending and puts off hard decisions into the future. Actions like this have put Wisconsin's state finances on a house of cards that will get more and more rocky if hard decisions continue to be pushed into the future.
.
District attorneys should not shoulder the blame for this $18.2 million fee. The blame rests at the feet of the Democrat majorities and Governor Doyle who created this fee and are using it to plug spending holes created by unsustainable government programs.
.
Something also to remember is that $36.7 million in earmarks were included in the budget. As well, in the Nygren's Notes last week I outlined $22 million of estimated fraud in the Wisconsin Shares program. These are just two examples in many that if cut from the budget would have been more than enough to keep the public benefits fee from ever being created.
.
When in Doubt, Blame the Economy
Democrats Grabbing at Straws over Auto Premium Increases
.
I have often written about the automobile insurance changes that were included in the budget. I did so as recently as two weeks ago in an edition of the Nygren's Notes. This week, it has come to my attention that the Democrat majority has been spreading misleading information surrounding what happened in the budget and how their actions will affect your automobile insurance premiums.
.
In a letter from Assembly Majority Leader Tom Nelson (D-Kaukauna) to one of his constituents, he blames the economy and insurance providers for any premium increases. He states, "Quite simply, any premium increases are due to the business decisions of insurance providers rather than any action taken by the Legislature." Read the full letter here.
.
These assertions by the Majority Leader of the Assembly are 'quite simply' false and 'misleading' to be kind. In the budget, Democrats raised mandatory automobile insurance coverage minimums to the highest levels in the nation and increased the ability of trial lawyers to cash in on frivolous automobile accident lawsuits.
.
More money can be handed out during lawsuits which increases the potential financial liability of insurance providers. The money an insurance provider has comes directly from individual's and family's auto insurance premiums. Consequently, the question for Representative Nelson is not, did their budget actions cause premium rates to increase, but how could they not?
.
The Democrats and specifically the Majority Leader are grabbing at straws by blaming these premium increases on anything but the changes that they passed in the 2009-11 budget. For added proof, read pages 7 and 8 of this non-partisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau memo. It states, "OCI (the Wisconsin Office of the Commissioner of Insurance) expects that the provisions of [the budget] would increase motor vehicle liability insurance premiums, reflecting the increase in coverage that would be provided by these policies."
.
As well, in the same memo it states UW-Madison and St. John's University of New York researchers were consulted regarding the Wisconsin Insurance Alliance (WIA) auto premium estimates. Both universities' researchers said that WIA's 33 to 43 percent estimate increase in auto insurance premiums, due to the budget changes, was reasonable.
.
This memo also warns that these changes would potentially increase the number of uninsured drivers on the roads because of the large increases in automobile insurance cost. All of this information was available to the Governor and legislators long before the final vote on the budget.
No comments:
Post a Comment