News -> INDReporter MON, JUN 13 9:41AM by Walter Pierce

Tax renewal veto expected this week

Gov. Bobby Jindal is expected early this week to follow through on his threat to veto a bill that renews a 4-cent state sales tax on cigarettes. Jindal told state lawmakers at the start of the session he considers the renewal to be a new tax. Consequently, a veto, if not overridden by the Legislature, would actually lower the price of cigarettes.

The bill enjoyed overwhelming support in both chambers of the Legislature, passing the House with 70 votes and garnering 29 votes in the Senate. That’s enough support to override Jindal’s veto.

However, in an effort to head off the embarrassment of becoming only the third governor in modern history — Buddy Roemer and Edwin Edwards had vetos overridden — to be slapped with a veto override, the Jindal administration has been heavily lobbying Republican lawmakers, urging them to toe the party line. The effort will likely pay off as at least a few solons in each chamber have signalled they’ll stick with Jindal even after having voted for the renewal. Seventy is the minimum number of votes needed in the House to override, so if even one state rep who voted for the renewal votes with the governor, the override will fail. On the Senate side, 26 votes are need to override a veto, meaning Jindal need only peel four senators away from their earlier votes.

State Sen. Dan Claitor, R-Baton Rouge, told The Advocate he believes some lawmakers, especially in rural districts where the governor’s support is vital for securing precious few state-funded public-works projects, are afraid to stick with their votes renewing the tax for fear of risking retribution from Jindal.

“Politics is still a contact sport,” Claitor told the Baton Rouge daily.

Read more here.


Walter Pierce
About the author:


Comments (7)add
...
written by ragin_cajun , June 13, 2011 - 03:22 pm
"afraid to stick with their votes renewing the tax for fear of risking retribution from Jindal"

So what? I think that Jindal was crystal clear when he ran for Governor that he would not be raising taxes. He was crystal clear before the Legislature voted on this that he considered the "renewal" a "tax increase".

Now he's going to use every reasonable means at his disposal as Governor to stop a tax increases.

He was clear, he is now doing what he said he would do when he ran. Isn't that what everybody says they want from their elected officials? I wish Jindal were this committed to everything ELSE he said he'd do when he ran.
...
written by The Holy Goofus , June 13, 2011 - 06:55 pm
Jindal: "The pro-smoking governor".
...
written by Morrow , June 13, 2011 - 08:23 pm
Just so you know, 99 % of us out here HAVE NO PROBLEM RENEWING THE 4cent TAX. DON'T BE WIMPS, DO THE RIGHT THING.
When his ugly little back was to the wall when some idiot wanted to give you raises, his footing sure was slippery as he back peddled cause the constituency was up in arms. Show some testicular fortitude and don't be afraid to do the right thing. We voters will back him into a wall again if we have to.
...
written by ragin_cajun , June 13, 2011 - 10:43 pm
The right thing is doing what you say you're going to do. That's what Jindal is finally doing for a change. However much that 4 cent tax was gonna raise, they can cut that spending somewhere. Anywhere. The State wastes so much money it's staggering.
...
written by Gene Broussard , June 15, 2011 - 10:18 am
ragin cajun, I've got to hand it to you. You are a one issue man and stick with it. No matter that a tax would help the state and is a tax on a poison. Just put your head in concrete and live that way. Why are you so afraid to reveal who you really are? Why hide behind a pseudonym?
...
written by James Melancon , June 15, 2011 - 06:57 pm
Excise taxes, like the tobacco tax, are ways the government controls, or tries to control behavior. A question, do we need government to control our private lives?
...
written by ragin_cajun , June 16, 2011 - 01:24 pm
" a tax would help the state " So....I, as an individual, should subordinate my beliefs about limited government, and ownership of the money I have earned by working, to the "the state" because "the state" needs it?

So...you believe that when individual rights collide with the will/whim/rights of "the state", as expressed by the vote of some meddlesome busy body legislator in Baton Rouge, that "the state" should win out.

"tax on a poison"...you could also say a tax on a perfectly legal product. But where does "the state", or "the majority", derive the right to regulate, through tax policy, the personal health choices of an individual? Is it because "the state" pays the individual's medical bills?


You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in using your Facebook account or register if you do not have an account yet.

busy 
LA LA Land
Advertisement
Most Read
Advertisement
Advertisement
in case you missed it