The Maryland House of Delegates gave final approval Wednesday to a package of three bills that increases taxes on some state residents, shifts part of teacher pensions to local governments and undoes the so-called "doomsday budget."
The votes Wednesday afternoon capped the three-day special session called by Gov. Martin O'Malley in order to override more than $500 million in cuts made in a budget passed in early April.
The Senate approved the same three bills Tuesday.
As part of the package, legislators approved by a vote of 86-51 what amounts to a 50-50 split of teacher pension costs with local governments. The split will be phased in over the next four years beginning July 1 with the new budget year.
That bill also includes a doubling of fees for death certificates; increasing the tax on the wholesale cost of so-called "little cigars" to 70 percent; and doubles the tax on smokeless tobacco.
Eight Democrats joined all 43 Republicans in the House in voting against the bill that split pension costs.
The House voted 77-60 to approve legislation increasing income taxes on what lawmakers and O'Malley called the top 14 percent of earners in the state. Again, all 43 House Republicans voted against the tax increases and elimination of personal tax exemptions, which are expected to generate $247 million in additional revenues.
Dems and Repubs are currently doing nothing to improve this very sad situation. A REVOLUTION is in order..
1) I'm not female. The only people calling me female are morons who make presumptions based solely on names. 2) I "sound like that type of person" and want "more handouts than [I am] getting now"? You obviously don't know a thing about me since the only handouts I've ever received was 6 months of unemployment out of 18 years of jobs. In previous posts I've railed against Section 8 and supported drug-testing of anyone who wants government assistance. However, as is typical of "your kind", you can't accept reality and constantly try to fit people who disagree with you into your twisted mindset. You know who else does that? People suffering mental disorders. 3) I'm the one who "needs to get an education"? Yet you say to "use google and find the truth"? Seriously, could this be anymore ridiculously ironic. Here I am working on a Master's, posting responses with information from actual texts and studies, while you claim the "truth" is found on Google. What's next, should we look to Wikipedia for the cures to the Nation's woes? B Allen... you are a retard. There's no being polite or intellectual here, I'm sorry. You make fallacious attacks on others, based solely on idiotic presumptions and a lack of reality, and then claim others are wrong. Is there any wonder no one pays heed to the nonsense you spew when you act like that?
Working on a Master's has nothing to do with the Obama administration or earning a job "under" it. You questioned my education, and I provided proof that I am far from uneducated. Yet so far the only proof you have on your education is that you learn everything through Google. Then you try to insinuate that my sources are worse, by arbitrarily suggesting they are MSNBC and PBS? Yes, stories have two sides; Google is not the place to find them. You claim to post real numbers, but so far I have yet to see your sources. Would you mind providing me with direct links to peer-reviewed articles supporting your statements? (By the way, I never watch MSNBC or any "news" station (including CNN or FoxNews). The one news source I recommended was the BBC, seeing as they are not mired in our sociopolitical divides and thus have a better chance of being unbiased. Also, the last I checked most of the programming on PBS included children's shows, educational shows about nature and history, and British comedies and dramas. So, which of those is directly influencing my socio-political stance in such an insidious manner?)
You claim that everything I spew is "wrong", that my views are left wing, liberal, progressive, Democrat, etc. Apparantly there is a miscommunication between myself and my "government masters", seeing as I support the 2nd Amendment, the death penalty, English as a national language, etc. Similarly, I have fought ~against~ legislation that supports illegal immigrants, freeloaders on welfare and housing assistance, etc. Yet, according to you, all of those views are just the stances of a "typical left wing nutjob". I bow to your infinite wisdom and the Almighty Google, which is apparently the only path to a higher education and "the Truth".
That being said, I did not say I solely receive my news about the US from BBC. What I said was that they were recommended and the closest you can get to "unbiased". They still have their agenda and they are still limited, but I would rather watch them over the big Three. I hear most of my news through local stations, after which I then proceed to investigate any stories that interest me. This often involves checking data through a variety of state-run sites, scientific databases, and/or various fact-checking organizations. That is called critical thinking and what I espouse everyone should do. I'm sorry, but your comparison to watching the SuperBowl via a Holland TV source doesn't work. Sports media does not hold the same importance to well-being or education that Political or Scientific media does. The chance of bias (although existent) is also far less than through these other sources. And finally, do you watch the World Cup through European stations or do you instead choose an American broadcast?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703976804575114241782001262.html , but you appear to have fudged some of the numbers in your favor. The year is 2008, *not* 2007. Why is this important? Because from Jan 1 2008 to Dec 31 2008, the stock market dropped just about exactly 30%. Since most people's net worth largely consists of their house value, it's not surprising that there are significantly fewer "millionaires" over the same time period. Property values dropped anywhere from 15-30% over the same time period, depending on where you live. People are always moving to other states. I'll note that the report doesn't say whether it's 1000 people making $100k or 10 people making $100 million. Or whether that's an increase from prior years.
I also admire people like Brook that have the courage to apologize. Live and learn. We all make mistakes and it's good that you establish the boundaries. Play by the rules or get out of the game.
The US Postal Service is, per the regulations enacted by Congress, a self-supporting government entity. Numerous websites confirm this, including their own website which notes, "The Postal Service has been self-supporting since 1982: All income is generated from the sale of stamps and related services. No tax dollars (including from income or sales taxes) is used to pay for the operation of services." Now, there was a report from the USPS Office of Inspector General which noted that the postal service does receive $100 million/year of taxpayer money. This money is directly used to offset costs of free and subsidized mailing privelages, currently limited to free mail for medically blind and official mail to overseas voters. So yes, some of our tax money is funneled into these two Congress-approved exceptions. However, if you think that money should stop, talk to Congress who are the only ones allowed to make changes to how the Postal Service is run.
So, why haven't they drawn from an account that has been overpaid? Because Congress won't let them. To use this account for anything other than what it was declared for requires a Congressional act. Thus, that money just sits there while the US Postal Service slowly dies. Why won't Congress approve withdrawal from the account? Who knows, but the usual concepts of "conspiracy" and "greed" seem likely. It has long been supposed that Congress uses the US Postal Service as its own personal piggy bank. Seeing as they are the only ones who can approve the use of that surplus, they simply sit on the money until ~they~ want it. Then they simply pass an act that allows them to tap it for their own needs, regardless of why it was originally put there. There you have it: This has nothing to do with robbing the taxpayers so much as robbing themselves.
Planned Parenthood? I asked someone to explain what Planned Parenthood has to do with Communism. We all know Planned Parenthood is a special interest group, but what does that have to do with the tenets of Communism? If you're going to try and use an issue to support your stance, then please explain the logic behind that support. Google is ~not~ a good source. The websites it brings up are not guaranteed to be unbiased, fact-checked, or peer-reviewed. They could be reliable websites or they could be opinion-laden blogs. The only guarantee is that they made it to the top of the list either through popularity or by paying Google to be there. I'm done with you, B Allen. You're the one making yourself look uneducated, unintelligent, and closed-minded with every post you make. Every time you post your ignorant vitriol, all it does is hurt any positions you support. Good luck in life.