Posted on 09/06/2011 9:49:54 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
To hear him tell it on the presidential campaign trail, Gov. Rick Perry has never met a tax increase he liked.
But at home, over a political career that reaches back to the oil price shocks of the 1980s, Perry has embraced billions of dollars worth of them — including a $528 million tax hike approved in 1990, after he defected to the Republican Party.
The biggest tax increases came early in his career, before anyone used the phrase “Tea Party” to describe a potent political movement. But a few weeks ago, Perry also signed into law an online sales tax measure the state says will raise $60 million over the next five years. Grover Norquist’s influential organization, Americans for Tax Reform, calls the measure a dreaded “new tax.”
(Excerpt) Read more at texastribune.org ...
Mayhap why Palin is waiting ... let all the rest kill their own campaigns?
I think this website:
http://www.cafepress.com/dd/56623339
has awesome stuff for every Rick Perry defender out there.
Well with Obama’s numbers in the tank and the nation sinking deeper. Bachman, Santorum and Cain are much better viable choices. Because let’s face it by 2012 Obama is going to lose against a papar sack.
Let's not follow the democrat's 1999 mistake.
Assume the worst and fight for the win
You know this Soros backed Tex Trib isn’t the best “conservative” source to be dragging around, if you expect to impress anyone? But we both know you don’t care much about facts just have to say something ronpaulish cause you just can’t help yourself.
Further, Perry vetoed the online sales tax measure in Texas: Perry vetoes online sales tax bill, but measure may not be dead yet
During the session, Perry had a better solution: "During the session, it also dangled a carrot, offering to invest $300 million in five or six warehouse and distribution centers in the state, employing 6,000 people, if lawmakers would let the company operate for four and a half years without collecting sales taxes from customers. Gov. Rick Perry liked the idea. The Legislature never bought it."
After the veto, the legislators added it to the fiscal bill during the special session. For Perry to stop the online tax, he would have had to veto the entire measure, which was the budget measure funding the state for the next two years.
It is rediculous to blame Perry for that measure, or to claim he "raised taxes" by signing that budget bill, since the measure included NO taxes that are not already legally due.
Calling that a tax increase would be like calling money spent to prosecute tax cheaters to a "tax increase".
I’m not a Perry expert, but I do know he supported Gore in 1988. That was after 8 yrs of Reagan and when Perry wasn’t a kid anymore. What opened his eyes? Election chances? Heck, in 1980 when I was 18, I knew right from wrong. Sounds like just another politician to me.
Isn’t Rick Perry funded by Bilderberg?
See how that works.
Correct the facts if they are wrong but don’t just blame the messenger.
The other "republican" one was the increase in 1990. From the article:
Two years later, Perry became a Republican and voted against a half-cent increase in the sales tax during one of four special sessions called to reform the state’s shaky school finance system. Then-Gov. Bill Clements, a Republican, later vetoed that bill, but he signed on to a compromise quarter-cent increase in the sales tax — and Perry fell in line behind him.So he voted against a .5 cent tax increase, but when the leader of the republican party later compromised with the democratic legislature, Perry went along with the compromise, with the bill passing by a wide majority.
The article, attempting to find anything else to criticize, mentions Perry's tax cuts in 2006, noting that while it cut taxes overall, it did raise some taxes while it cut others, and for some people , the result was higher tax bills and hardship, while others saw lower tax bills.
If I decide to vote for Perry, it won't be the first time I voted for a President who did things I opposed over 20 years earlier, or even 15 years earlier. I'm interested in how he applies his conservative principles today, not what happened in the 1980s.
Yes, it’s always something, like those pesky texas laws that don’t allow the Governor to pick and choose veto items from a special session.
I’m sure if he had vetoed it, we’d be reading attacks from people who dislike him about every good thing that was in the bill — the bill was a good bill, and it had one thing Perry opposed in it. And that thing wasn’t a new tax.
So yes, as usual, there is always a reason as to why Perry did something.
Just like there was a reason Sarah Palin resigned from the Governorship — and I’m sure you get pissed when people say it was “an excuse”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.