|
O'PAKE INTRODUCES
NEW PLAN
TO ELIMINATE HOMEOWNER SCHOOL PROPERTY TAXES
Harrisburg,
November 13, 2007
-- Saying
Pennsylvania can "do better, much better" on the issue of property tax
reform, Senator Michael A. O'Pake (D-Berks) today formally introduced a
three-bill package (SBs
1163,
1164;
1165) to totally abolish the most burdensome of the
property taxes -- the homeowner school property tax -- via a graduated
state income tax on incomes over $100,000.
Backed by more than 75 percent of respondents to a recent 11th
District constituent survey, O'Pake
-- in Senate floor remarks introducing his bills -- said "the beauty of
this plan is that more than 90 percent of of those who pay state income
tax would not pay a dime more in income tax but would have their
homeowner school property tax eliminated." Even "most of those who
would pay more in state income tax," he added, "would still pay less in
total taxes once their homeowner school property tax bill was completely
wiped out."
No one earning less than $100,000 would pay a higher
state income tax. For incomes over $100,000, there would be a gradual ½
percent increase in the state income tax rate per every $50,000 in
additional income with a maximum rate of 6.57% for incomes over
$400,000.
By transforming the state's income tax to finally "lift the burden
of school property taxes from the backs of homeowners," O'Pake noted
that Pennsylvania "would also be joining the vast majority of states in
America that impose a graduated state income tax."
O'Pake's proposal would require a constitutional amendment,
but one of the Senator's bills proposes an "emergency amendment" that --
if approved by a two-thirds majority of the General Assembly -- could
reach the voters for a final decision in short order. He said a
constitutional change was needed, in any event, to forever prohibit
homeowner school property taxes from being re-imposed once they've been
eliminated.
###
The following is
the full text of Senator O'Pake's Senate floor remarks, coinciding with
the introduction of his legislation:
Thank you, Madame
President.
I am convinced we cannot afford to drop this ball. I am convinced we
need to keep this ball on the field, inbounds and in play.
I'm referring, Madame
President, to the long-festering, difficult and elusive struggle to
reform our system of school finance in Pennsylvania generally and, more
specifically, to lift the school property tax burden from the backs of
homeowners.
As we all know, there
have been many efforts -- over many years -- to deal with this issue.
Act 1 was the most recent effort, and the first to set the stage for as
much as $1 billion in relief -- with senior citizen homeowners the first
beneficiaries to the tune of some $200 million in property tax cuts.
And while I'm
encouraged by the fact that many more seniors -- more than 7,000 more in
Berks County alone -- are receiving (or have received) property tax
rebate checks this year than last year via our historic expansion of the
Property Tax and Rent Rebate Program, my Berks constituents have told me
loud and clear (and I suspect the same holds true for many of my
colleagues) that Act 1 did not go nearly far enough.
The fact is, Madame
President, there is rarely a day or week that goes by that my office
isn't flooded with calls, letters or emails -- urging an absolute end to
Pennsylvania's archaic and inequitable property tax system -- and
describing, many times in frustrating and worrisome detail, how the
crushing burden of property taxes is threatening the ability of our
hard-working families and fixed-income seniors to hold onto their
homes.
We have some folks who
are paying their property taxes by racking up huge additional charges on
credit cards. And we have others who have just given up, selling their
homes and moving back into a rental property...or, worse, moving to
another state where they've heard things might be better.
That's why, Madame
President, I am convinced that we need to go further -- much further, I
hope -- in addressing this issue.
And that's why, Madame
President, I am today introducing a new proposal that's aimed at finally
ridding Pennsylvanians of the most burdensome of the property taxes --
the homeowner school property tax -- by shifting the burden to those
with the greatest ability to pay.
Similar to the Stop
Taxing Our Properties proposal introduced by my colleague, Senator Logan
-- which I and others have co-sponsored -- this alternative is aimed at
trying to find common ground -- to at least move forward with a plan, or
a combination of plans, to finally extinguish the homeowner school
property tax once and for all.
The legislation I'm
introducing today is supported by over 75 percent of respondents to a
recent constituent survey in my district.
While the survey was
unscientific, the 1,785 constituents who took the time to respond have
told me -- in no uncertain terms -- that they want us to pick up this
ball again and, this time, attack this problem with finality -- and in a
comprehensive fashion.
The legislative concept
that I'm formally introducing today -- and which over three-quarters of
11th District survey respondents said they favored -- would
totally eliminate the homeowner school property tax by shifting the
burden to a graduated state income tax on those with the greatest
ability to shoulder the burden.
No one earning less
than $100,000 would pay more in state income tax.
And most of those who
would pay more in state income tax would still pay less in total taxes
once their homeowner school property tax bill was completely wiped out.
Combined with the
anticipated $1 billion from slots gaming, we can raise the $5.3 billion
needed to totally lift the school property tax from the backs of
Pennsylvania's homeowners by imposing a gradual ½ percent increase in
the state income tax rate -- per every $50,000 in income OVER
$100,000 -- to a maximum rate of 6.57 percent on income over
$400,000.
By converting to a
graduated state income tax to eliminate the homeowner school property
tax, Pennsylvania would also be joining the vast majority of states in
America that impose a graduated state income tax.
And the maximum 6.57
percent rate on the wealthiest Pennsylvanians suggested in this
legislation would still be below the maximum income tax rates in the
bordering states of New Jersey (8.97%) and New York (6.85%) and not too
far from the maximum rates imposed in Ohio, Delaware, and Maryland.
Of course, the beauty
of this plan is that more than 90 percent of those who pay state income
tax -- more than 5.2 million low-to-moderate-to-higher-middle-income
families (those who earn less than $100,000 a year) -- would not pay a
dime more in income tax but would have their homeowner school property
tax eliminated.
And, as I said before,
the majority of the remaining 10 percent who would pay somewhat more in
state income tax would still pay less in total taxes once the homeowner
property tax from their school district was a thing of the past.
My plan does require a
constitutional amendment. But, one of the bills I'm introducing in the
package today is an "emergency amendment" to our state constitution that
-- if approved by a two-thirds majority of the General Assembly -- could
reach the voters for a final decision in short order...and without the
customary two-session time frame for consideration of a constitutional
change.
The fact remains, in my
view, that people being taxed out of their homes constitutes an
emergency and I hope there are enough of my colleagues who would agree
that this warrants such a determination and our urgent deliberation and
action.
Equally important, the
constitutional change is needed to forever prohibit the reinstitution of
the homeowner school property tax once it's been eliminated.
As I indicated, this
plan received the most support -- 75 percent of survey respondents -- to
my recent newsletter questionnaire. 15% were opposed and 9.5 percent
had no opinion.
I also asked my
constituents what they thought of the still-being-developed,
House-initiated Commonwealth Caucus/Plan for Pennsylvania's Future that
hinges -- in large measure -- on an expansion of the sales tax base.
It's similar to the Senate measure introduced by Senator Piccola and
which I have co-sponsored. That received a favorable response by 48.1%
percent of respondents, with 38.4% opposed and 13.5% with no opinion.
Some 67.4% of
respondents favored Senator Logan's STOP plan, which also calls for a
graduated state income tax but also adds an increase in the sales tax to
eliminate all homeowner property taxes (school, municipal and county).
20.9% were opposed to the STOP plan and 11.7% had no opinion.
In the many
accompanying comments to the response to the survey, Madame President,
my constituents also made very clear that they want all of us to work
together on this issue...to find the bipartisan common ground necessary
to finally get this job done... and, last but not least, to address this
issue in a comprehensive fashion that not only reforms the way we
pay for our schools, but also embraces a concerted effort to control and
reduce school costs wherever possible.
Greater efficiency and
cost control must be a part of this effort, along with adequacy and
equity in school funding -- a subject we're expecting to hear a lot more
about after tomorrow, when the education costing-out study is expected
to be released.
The bottom line, Madame
President, our constitutional obligation is to provide for both a
"thorough" and "efficient" system of public education in Pennsylvania
and, I believe, we can do a much better job on both counts...just as we
MUST find a more equitable way to pay.
As Sen. Rhoades
indicated at a news conference about a month ago when he offered another
solution to this difficult issue, we've "got to keep this dialogue
going."
I agree.
But, we've also got to
stop talking and start doing.
As I said at the
outset, we've got to keep this ball on the field, inbounds and in play.
Our people are
demanding and deserve a more permanent solution.
No more fumbles. No
more fouls.
And -- all sports
analogies aside -- Madame President, this is serious business...and a
serious proposal that I advance today.
For any Senator who has
not yet signed onto my legislation and, who would like to, I'll leave
the bills at the desk.
We can do
better....Madame President. Much better.
Thank you.
###
Back |