Ohio’s current budget was funded with $8 billion worth of one-time windfalls (see the chart below) — like Federal Stimulus money. Ohio’s new State Assembly — to be elected November 4 — will need to find $8 billion to close this budget gap. This represents 20% of the budget and finding such a huge amount of money will be an enormous challenge for Ohio’s elected representatives.

The Center for Community Solutions, has produced an impressive 50 page white paper analyzing Ohio’s budget challenge. The paper is ominously entitled, “Thinking the Unthinkable,” and, the problem is, “thinking” is not a task easily accommodated in the usual bumper sticker sized allotment of public attention.

Candidates for public office don’t want to deal with reality. It’s not seen as a good election strategy.

Ohio’s $8 billion budget challenge is unprecedented in Ohio’s history, but, the web-sites of the candidates from Montgomery County, seeking election to Ohio’s Assembly, ignore this reality. Balancing the budget will be the biggest task facing the new Assembly, but none of the local incumbents, and none of the challengers, on any of their web-sites, mention a word of this budget tsunami headed our way.

If our democracy had any substance, it seems to me, citizens would demand that candidates to the Assembly present some rational point of view about the looming budget crisis. In a functioning democracy, every candidate seeking election to Ohio’s Assembly would be called upon to demonstrate that he or she has a grasp of the information presented in this Community Solutions report, and would be expected to present a rational and carefully thought out point of view about the matter.

This Community Solution report is dedicated to the memory of Richard Sheridan who passed away at age 72 this past year. Sheridan was long considered the foremost expert on the Ohio budget process and DaytonOS, in its short history, has referenced Sheridan’s work a number of times. (See here, here, and here.)

The Community Solutions report is full of graphs and tables and in future posts I will revisit the information in this report again. As a start, the graph, shown above,  is compelling and one that deserves to be particularly highlighted and discussed. It shows that Ohio’s tax system at present is regressive: those with lower incomes pay higher percentages of their incomes in state and local taxes and those with higher incomes pay lower percentages.  If Ohio seeks to be a progressive state, shouldn’t it have a progressive tax system?

The Center for Community Solutions suggests a three part strategy to solving Ohio’s budget crisis:

• tax increases,
• reductions in tax expenditures, and
• reductions in programmatic expenditures.

Excerpts For the Report:

• While the term ‘tax expenditures’ may be unfamiliar, their existence and significance are quite familiar indeed. More generally, and pejoratively, described as ‘loopholes’ or ‘tax breaks,’ they may be defined as a loss of tax revenue attributable to an exemption, deduction, preference, or other exclusion from tax law.
• In Ohio, the relative burden of state and local taxes paid by businesses has steadily declined since 1975, from 40 percent to 26 percent in 2010. This trend was reinforced by the business, personal income, and sales tax changes adopted five years ago in H.B. 66, and subsequent modifications enacted during 2009 in H.B. 318. (It is worth noting, too, that these tax changes also shifted a significant portion of taxes paid by individuals and families from the progressive income tax to the regressive sales tax.)
• While incomes for most Americans have stagnated for three decades, those of Ohioans have generally stagnated at lower levels, reducing the capacity of the middle class in particular to bear additional tax burdens.
• The wealthiest fifth of taxpayers have enjoyed soaring incomes for over 20 years. While progressive federal taxes have also made them by far the largest contributors to the overall costs of government, the regressive effects of combined state and local taxes in Ohio take a larger share of middle class incomes than the wealthy.
• Business taxes, as a proportion of state tax revenue, have been in steady decline for several decades; the long-range implications in this regard of the 2005 tax overhaul are as yet unclear.
• State personal income and business tax changes during the middle of the last decade (The 2005 Tax Reduction Act) have contributed significantly to the structural deficit.  (About $2 billion per year or $4 billion per per biannual budget).
• Returning to the former upper bracket rate of 7.5 percent for those whose incomes have outpaced the vast majority of Ohioans, would affect just over 2 percent of taxpayers, while raising $448 million annually. (This top rate, and all rates, were reduced 17% by the 2005 Tax Reduction Act, and are still scheduled to be reduced 4.1% more.)
• The imbalance between business and individual taxes also might be addressed in a revenue package. Currently, the rate on the CAT is set too low to reimburse schools and local governments for the full amount of lost tangible property tax revenue. The resulting drain on the General Revenue Fund during the next biennium is estimated to be $322 to $438 million, far short of even beginning to replace lost revenue from the former corpo- rate franchise tax. Each 1/100 of 1 percent increase in the CAT would annually raise approximately $50 million. An increase of 0.08 percent would yield about $400 million annually, enough to cover the estimated cost of GRF subsidies to schools and local governments for loss of tangible personal property tax revenue, and return ap- proximately $200 million per year to the GRF. Table 5 outlines some options for increasing tax revenue.

The proposed Muslim Center will be decorated with geometric, Islamic style patterns.

Sarah Palin yesterday joined the debate concerning whether a proposed $100 million, 15 story, Muslim Center should be built two blocks from ground zero in NYC, tweeting, “Peaceful Muslims, pls refudiate.”

Palin later shrugged off her use of the non existent word, “Refudiate,”  by noting, “Shakespeare liked to coin new words too. Got to celebrate it!” Twitter users then began creating their own Palin Shakespearian statements —#ShakesPalin — like: “But soft, what light from yonder window breaks? It is the East, and I can see Russia from my front porch.”

Palin’s comment inspired me to do some googling about the proposed project. I found that the sponsors of the project describe it more like a modern YMCA, than a place of worship just for Muslims.

The Cordoba web-site explains, “Why a Cordoba House?

Cordoba House is a Muslim-led project which will build a world-class facility that promotes tolerance, reflecting the rich diversity of New York City.  The center will be community-driven, serving as a platform for inter-community gatherings and cooperation at all levels, providing a space for all New Yorkers to enjoy.

This proposed project is about promoting integration, tolerance of difference and community cohesion through arts and culture.  Cordoba House will provide a place where individuals, regardless of their backgrounds, will find a center of learning, art and culture; and most importantly, a center guided by Islamic values in their truest form – compassion, generosity, and respect for all.

The site will contain tremendous amounts of resources that otherwise would not exist in Lower Manhattan; a 500-seat auditorium, swimming pool, art exhibition spaces, bookstores, restaurants – all these services would form a cultural nexus for a region of New York City that, as it continues to grow, requires the sort of hub that Cordoba House will provide.

The leader of the Cordoba project, Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf, says, “My colleagues and I are the antiterrorists. We are the people who want to embolden the vast majority of Muslims who hate terrorism to stand up to the radical rhetoric. Our purpose is to interweave America’s Muslim population into the mainstream society.  People who are stake holders in society, who believe they are welcomed as equal partners, do not want to destroy it.”

Imam Faisa says, “What grieves me most is the false reporting that leads some families of 9/11 victims to think this project somehow is designed by Muslims to gloat over the attack.  That could not be further from the truth.”

Palin seems to be wanting to make political hay out of this proposed project — along with other Republicans.  The Republican candidate for New York Governor, Rick Lazio, seems to be trying to gain attention for his candidacy by questioning the funding sources of the proposed project.  It is interesting that the Port Authority Police Benevolent Association, which lost 37 members on 9/11, is condemning such demagoguery.  They put out this statement:  “Rick Lazio should stop exploiting the worst day in New York history for the sake of his campaign.  For any candidate for public office to politicize Ground Zero shows a lack of respect to the families, who will forever live with the terrible memory of that dark day.”

Lots of comments on the web.  This one, I think, deserves to be repeated  (See Portraits of Grief)

Imagine being the family of Salman Hamdani, and being told the Muslims aren’t welcome in lower Manhattan. Hamdami was a part-time ambulance driver, incoming medical student, and devout Muslim. He was also an NYPD cadet. When he disappeared on September 11, law enforcement officials came to his family, seeking him for questioning in relation to the terrorist attacks. They allegedly believed he was somehow involved. His whereabouts were undetermined for over six months, until his remains were finally identified. He was found near the North Tower, with his EMT medical bag beside him, presumably doing everything he could to help those in need. His family could finally rest, knowing that he died the hero they always knew him to be.

It’s people like Hamdami and the dozens of decent hard working Islamic workers from companies like Kantor Fitzgerald, Pitney Bowles, Windows on the World and the other firms at the WTC who themselves were murdered on 9/11 who are disgraced by this pointless debate.

The web-site Oh!pinion reports that in Mason City, Iowa, the North Iowa Tea Party has a billboard showing pictures of Hitler and Lenin, and, in between, a picture of President Obama.  The title on the billboard seems a classic example of projection:  “Radical Leaders Prey On the Fearful and Naive.”

“Projection,” according to Freudian psychology, is “a psychological defense mechanism whereby one ‘projects’ one’s own undesirable thoughts, motivations, desires, and feelings onto someone else.”

Many right wing leaders manipulate the fearful and naive, and the more successful they are in ginning up fear and misinformation, the more money they make and the more political power they gain.

Glen Beck and Sarah Palin are making millions. There is a whole boatload of radical right wingers who seem only interested in their own gain and who have found a way to manipulate the fearful and naive to help their own self promotion. This billboard headline is pretty funny when seen in that light.

The Tea Party, in this ridiculous slam at Obama, projects onto Obama what, in fact, propels and motivates much of the leadership of the right wing and the Tea Party movement, itself. It manages to reveal the truth of what it does so well — “Prey on the fearful and naive.”

Update: According to this source:

“A billboard in Mason City that pictured President Obama flanked by Nazi leader Adolf Hitler and communist leader Vladimir Lenin has been papered over this morning.”