Part two in my series on Terri McCormick’s voting record and governing philosophy delves into McCormick’s record on spending. McCormick, as you probably know, is running for the 8th Congressional District as a libertarian/conservative Republican.
TABOR
The proposed Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) would have codified in the state constitution a requirement that state and local units of government keep spending increases in line with increases in property value (or inflation) within their jurisdiction. Any increase out of that boundary would have to be approved by voters in a referendum.
A very important issue for conservatism, I supported TABOR and wish it would have passed. In fact, had Wisconsin had the foresight to pass and maintain real constitutional spending controls, one could easily argue that we would not be facing the $2.7 billion deficit predicament we’re in today as a state.
TABOR, despite all of the demonization from government interests, unions and Wisconsin’s tax-taking class, would have directly empowered the individual voter to determine the size of their government and the magnitude of their tax increase over the year or biennium ahead.
Such a proposal was considered and received a vote in the State Legislature in 2006. It failed miserably – and Terri McCormick voted against it twice.
Two versions of TABOR (re-branded as the “Taxpayer Protection Amendment” in 2005) were considered by the State Assembly. The first version (failed miserably) would have capped state and local spending, and the second (passed narrowly) would have capped state government spending only.
Most elected officials are not disposed to bravery – I think we know that – and local elected officials become very obnoxious when someone approaches their ox (or fiefdom) with a tight-fitting corset. So I can even understand how a legislator could vote no on the first one.
But why not limit state spending? Why not give voters an opportunity to weigh in on state spending? I wonder what the folks over at the Republican Liberty Caucus would think about this very un-libertarian vote.
Despite all of this, McCormick is casting herself as a spending hawk. I believe that is dishonest.
McCormick Voted for Every Budget
McCormick served in the Assembly for six years. In that time, she managed to vote for all thee of the budgets that were enacted during her term – along with a truly abysmal budget repair bill in 2001. This is hardly the mark of a maverick.
So, what did McCormick vote for in these budget packages?
In 2001, she voted for a 77-cent per pack cigarette tax increase.
She also voted in favor of a $112 million increase in the Stewardship program, one of the most wasteful and profligate programs in Madison’s portfolio. Stewardship uses the government purchase of private property to do a number of great things – like preserving beautiful lands for future generations and then prohibiting those generations from accessing them, taking valuable land off of the tax rolls and depriving local governments of legitimate revenue, and generally expanding the size and reach of the tentacles of government. Making matters worse, every penny of this $112 million was borrowed – making hollow any commitment to reducing long-term debt.
McCormick even favored the much maligned and boldly stupid securitization of Wisconsin’s share of the tobacco settlement.
I just want Terri McCormick to be honest with 8th CD Republican primary voters about her true governing philosophy. She claims to be an anti-establishment conservative, but the votes she took (three budgets, a budget repair bill and anti-TABOR) are all about preserving the status quo. She has no credibility to call herself any sort of maverick or renegade.
And a libertarian she most assuredly is not.
To be fair, she did help lead me to find that Sensenbrenner was campaigning on the tax payers dime in a tax payer funded office, both of which is illegal.
http://cognidissidence.blogspot.com/2010/08/was-sensenbrenner-violating-campaign.html
First of all the Tabor bill was a sham and would not have done a thing to control spending without using standard accounting principles which it did not propose. In this case Terri was right in not supporting a sham bill.
I think an honest analysis of her voting for the budgets would have mentioned that these were Republican leadership budgets, no Dem budgets. Big difference.
I think you may need to take another look at the data you have here.
Also- Where do you mention all of the tax savings and job creating proposals she sponsored.
If you had readers, this may be useful.
Well – you seem to visit often. Thanks for following.
[...] She also voted in favor of a $112 million increase in the Stewardship program, one of the most wasteful and profligate programs in Madison’s portfolio. Stewardship uses the government purchase of private property to do a number of great things – like preserving beautiful lands for future generations and then prohibiting those generations from accessing them, taking valuable land off of the tax rolls and depriving local governments of legitimate revenue, and generally expanding the size and reach of the tentacles of government. Making matters worse, every penny of this $112 million was borrowed – making hollow any commitment to reducing long-term debt. (Source: Wisconsin Truth Project) [...]
Those of us that have been the conservative fight for a long time remember the hour-by-hour caucusing during those votes. It’s fascinating that the Republican Establishment would bring up their own legislative failures as an slander attack on conservative Terri!
To quote Terri on the matter:
“TABOR was to taxpayers protection what the “Patriot Act” is to constitutional protections.
“I voted against TABOR because it was a sham … it was so watered down by John Gard and his dealmakers that it was meaningless to any real spending cuts.
“I wrote an amendment – several of them as a matter of fact – on that vote because it was such a sham. The main Amendment I created was to create Zero Based Budgeting so the spending that TABOR did not restrain would actually be restrained. My leadership including Frank Lasee who carried water on the bill voted against my Amendment.”
(BTW, I’m still waiting for the answer from Ribble on his carpet-bagging into the 8th district and how directly that reflects his support for Ted Kennedy’s Amnesty bill. )
Re TABOR, In Terri McCormick’s own words:
“TABOR was to taxpayers protection what the “Patriot Act” is to constitutional protections. I voted against TABOR because it was a sham. It was so watered down by the Republican leadership and the dealmakers that it was meaningless to any real spending cuts.”
”I wrote an amendment — several of them as a matter of fact — on that vote because it was such a sham. The main Amendment I created was to create Zero Based Budgeting so the spending that TABOR did not restrain would actually be restrained.”
These comments were originally posted at http://wi.rlc.org/2010/08/terri-mccormick/
Ok, I see. McCormick voted against Assembly Substitute Amendment 3 b/c it wasn’t conservative enough, although it was supported nearly universally by the Assembly’s conservatives, including the bill’s authors. Not a single known conservative voted against it. She must have known something they did not.
If she thought an imperfect TABOR limit was worse than no limit at all, Terri McCormick would be completely useless in Congress, where every bill has some sort of impurity.
Keep in mind, too, that her TABOR vote was issued at a time when she was posturing against John Gard for the 8th. Don’t tell me there were no politics involved with her amendments and votes to make darn sure she was sideways with Gard and could make an argument either way against him.
Flav: “She must have known something they did not.”
You hit the nail on the head. (Myopic squirrel meets acorn.)
The more you read Terri McCormick’s positions, the more you see that indeed, she understands things that the Business-As-Usual Republican do not.
She sees through their nonsense. Their unconstitutional actions. Their “go along to get along.” Their manipulations of the people to preserve their power.
Flav: “Terri would be useless in Congress.”
Yeah, all her “no” votes on bullsh*t spending would be REALLY useless.
Brian – Don’t be naive – McCormick was a doctrinaire establishmentarian before she decided to run for Congress. Our discussion here has focused on TABOR, but let’s not forget that she was a reliable “yes” vote on every single budget – even the Chvala/Jensen one that securitized the tobacco settlement. She doesn’t have a leg to stand on to contend that she opposed wasteful spending. It is misleading to suggest otherwise. Just look at those budgets!
Lol… You must be referring to the 2003 budget (SB 44) where she voted along with all the other Republicans.
Oh, no wait, maybe you’re thinking it’s the 2005 budget (AB 100.) Whooops. No, she voted along with the other Republicans too. .. .
Darn. Maybe it’s the Wisconsin budgets in a fantasy world, where smears and innuendo are substituted for rational thought.
Now, can we get back to the adult conversation of why Ribble supports amnesty for illegals with the backing of his industry donors?
Or maybe Roth believing, “The Constitution is just a piece of paper.” (Yeah, that inspires confidence about his willingness to say ‘no’ in Washington.) Let’s explore Roth’s protectionist legislation at the specific request of the bankers wanting legislative ‘help’ from out of state competition. The WCBA *BRAGS* about Roth’s “responsiveness.”
So now it’s GOOD that McCormick voted with all the Republicans? But – I thought “…she understands things that the Business-As-Usual Republican do not.” Those were your words, Brian. Think it through and get back to me. I’ll give you a mulligan on this one.
You’re so kind and generous, oh great Flav.
Let me get this straight….
If Terri is accused of being a closet Democrat (like Ribble’s support of Kennedy’s Amnesty bill??) but, …
then when shown she voted with Republicans on the GOP budgets,
Terri is *instead* accused of being TOO Republican (GOP leaders rejecting her zero-base-budget amendment to close the their loopholes in TABOR doesn’t garner her respect in some GOP-zombie circles), well,…
I think it’s fair to conclude there’s less of an intent for fair discourse of ideas and more intent to just fling accusations like a diarrheaic monkey.
Elections being the advance auction of stolen goods, there’s a lot at stake for the Establishment to misrepresent Terri.
After all, legislators who introduce zero-based-budget amendments are **OBVIOUSLY** “no friend of the taxpayer.” That’s how logic works in Madison.
Sorry if this comes across as rude. I don’t mean to imply, Flavo, that you’re a monkey. Poop-flinger, yes, but monkey, no. You have human dignity. But poo-flinging-monkey is a fun meme and fitting analogy.