The Property Tax Amendment

So there's still plenty to say about insurance, but I think we've hit a calm spot until next week when State Farm has to testify on its plan to drop 50,000 policies. There's other insurance news - like that PIP won't be on the agenda for the special session, and on KidCare and S-CHIP. But I want to instead take the time machine back to the last special session, on property taxes, and speculate a bit on what happened.

The last special session was scheduled to last up to ten days. That's ten days that could have been spent discussing ideas, building support for various ideas, forging compromises and settling the little issues. Instead, the leadership crammed a prefabricated plan through in just three days. And it wasn't like plan had been on the table and open for discussion before the special session began; no, instead, broad information about the plan was presented to legislators on the Friday before the session, and the actual language of the bill was finally provided on the Tuesday of the first week of the special session. The initial House Policy and Budget Council which was supposed to meet on that Tuesday was pushed back to Wednesday so that legislators could actually see the bill before they started debating it.

Starting that Tuesday, Rubio attacked Democrats for not immediately supporting his plan, and upped the rhetoric during a press conference on Wednesday. The plan passed on Thursday, but not untouched. There were a number of amendments, check out the list yourself. Notice anything strange? All of the successful amendments (including the one that allowed Floridians to choose between Save Our Homes and the super exemption) were proposed by Dean Cannon, who was one of the negotiators for the original plan. Check out who proposed failed amendments: Grant, Kravitz, Reagan, Robaina, Frishe, Allen... all Republicans. Toward the end of the list you see some Democrats also proposed failed amendments. Bottom line: only the leadership got to touch the bill.

Now, lets look at some of the rhetoric spewed out by Rubio and his lackeys:
From the St. Pete Times article mentioned previously: "[Rubio] said complaints that the plan is confusing amount to "code speak for 'let's do nothing.'" He later calls those against the bill "opponents of property tax relief."
From the Buzz: Adam Hasner (majority leader) said "despite the efforts of some politicians to obstruct property tax relief..." and "It is disappointing that so many Democrats chose to ignore the voices of the taxpayers..."
Dean Cannon said "Any vote against either of the bills presented today was a vote against property tax relief, plain and simple,"

The pattern here is that A) opponents of the tax plan were against all tax cuts and B) the tax plan was exactly what the people wanted. The point of part B is simple - it's just presenting their plan as the best possible plan It's what you'd expect from politicians. Part A, however, is more than just slamming Democrats - it's also intended to scare Republicans. Many Republicans were not happy with the plan when they got it, just as they weren't happy with it in the aftermath (take a look at my previous post on this). It appears that Rubio and co. did everything they could to prevent Republicans from challenging the plan - including shutting down questions from Republican Carl Domino. If you don't believe me that Republicans were ambivelent at best about the plan, check out this article in the Sarasota Herald Tribune written in the midst of the special session.

So if they had a bad plan on their hands, why did the leadership push it through? They had ten days to tinker with it. They didn't even have to listen to Democrats - that amendment list proves that plenty of Republicans had their own ideas.

I bet Rubio knows full well that the amendment is going to crash. It has to get 60 percent approval, and the first poll on the issue found only 57 percent supporting it. That number is going to go down - it always does on constitutional amendments. We all know what Rubio really wants: Sales Taxes. It'd be all to easy for him to, after the January 29th election, to blame its failure on Democrats, Teachers Unions, etc. and then turn around and offer an even more radical proposal - abolishing or severely cutting property taxes and upping the sales tax. In fact, he doesn't even have to. He can turn to his buddies on the Taxation and Budget Reform Commission. Since the commission has the power to place amendments directly on the ballot of the November 2008 election, Rubio can campaign for an amendment supporting his dream of increased sales taxes and abolished property taxes without ever having to get anything through the legislature.

Still, I don't see how he could get 60% support for a sales tax amendment if he can't get it for a property tax one. So I expect him to be working on it during the regular session in March and April.