Showing posts with label taxes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label taxes. Show all posts

Friday, September 5, 2008

Contempt for Taxpayers

The City Council of Concord has joined their counterparts in Manchester is showing contempt for taxpayers:
Concord city councilors voted last night not to place a proposed tax cap on the November ballot. Instead, councilors decided to postpone action on the matter until officials in the attorney general's office, the secretary of state's office and the Department of Revenue Administration decide whether the language in the proposed tax cap conforms with state law.

The council's decision means that, if those state officials deem the language valid, the city would have to hold a special election on the proposed tax cap.

Putting the Tax Cap on the November ballot would give the largest and fairest representation of voter opinion, and would hold City Councilors accountable to the will of those voters. Apparently, Councilors in both Concord and Manchester would rather be subject to such restrictions. They know better than us, after all.

Postponing the Tax Cap referendum is a naked attempt to undermine its chances, pushing such a vital question to a low-turnout special election where city employees can be counted on to vote for higher spending, while taxpayers are at work.

Tuesday, April 29, 2008

Taxpayer Protection Pledge

Taking the Taxpayer Protection Pledge:



We need to acknowledge that taxes and spending are the same issue, and any candidate unwilling to address the out-of-control spending in Washington is ultimately unwilling to do anything to lower overall federal taxes.

Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Video Diary: Tax Day

Taking the Taxpayer Protection Pledge on Tax Day in Concord:

Tuesday, April 15, 2008

Tax Day at the State House

UPDATED AND BUMPED
Well, four hours later, it looks like this hearing is winding down. After the bill sponsor and a school administrator testified in favor of the bill, every single person, for four hours, testified in opposition. I think the House Education Committee received a fairly strong message today, and I was happy to add my voice. Thanks to everyone who stayed through a long hearing to speak, and to the members of the Committee, who listened to us.

By the way, with many home school parents brining their children this morning, I'd say that more students learned more about the legislative process this morning at the State House than in the rest of our schools this morning.
____

I was pleased to take the Taxpayer Protection Pledge this morning, alongside Ed Naile from the Coalition of New Hampshire Taxpayers, which asks candidates to take the state pledge.

I also had the opportunity to testify in opposition to SB 312-FN, which would mandate insurance coverage for bariatric surgery and obesity treatments:
Members of the House Commerce Committee,

Senate Bill 312 is compassionate. It is well-meaning. It is a tremendously bad idea.

We can not regulate our way to lower health care costs, at least not without significantly decreasing health care delivery. We can not mandate our way to lower health care costs. Trying to do so will result in reduced choice and higher insurance rates. New Hampshire has tried this approach before and failed.

Health care costs are rising because we are using both more health care overall, and more advanced health care techniques. Diagnostic health care costs are rising at double the rate of overall costs. Advanced imaging techniques such as MRI’s, CT scans, and nuclear imaging were unheard of a generation ago, and exotic a decade ago. They are now routine. They are also, often, unnecessary. Because our current health care system has decoupled health care decisions from health care payments, we get more of these expensive tests than if doctors and patients bore the costs of ordering them.

Supporters of this bill argue that bariatric surgery and preventative treatments save money by preventing chronic health problems. Two of the three insurance companies left in our state seem to agree, as they cover such treatments. One doesn’t. And if the supporters of this bill are correct, that company is losing money by limiting its coverage. Such decisions should be left to the marketplace.

Similarly, consumers should have greater choice in their health insurance coverage, rather than being stuck with the health insurance provider chosen by their employer. Consumers should also have the choice to pay more of their routine and anticipated health care expenses out of pocket, rather than sending every bill for every dollar of health care they consume to their insurance company. A basic plan could cover catastrophic care and prescription drugs, and charge premiums affordable to working families.

I’m neither a doctor nor an insurance specialist. I do not claim any expertise on the health care decisions you and your doctor should make. Please do not presume to make such decisions for me, or the other 1.3 million people in New Hampshire. Please reject SB 312-FN, and work to increase choice and competition in New Hampshire’s health insurance marketplace.

Thank you,
Grant Bosse


I also hope to testify in person against SB 337, the anti-home schooling bill under consideration by the House Education Committee. I had a chance to submit written testimony against the bill, but since so many people showed up in opposition, the Committee extended the hearing until today. There are close to 400 people in Representatives Hall right now, largely in opposition to this bill.

Sunday, March 23, 2008

No Laffing Matter

Dan Mitchell at the Center for Freedom and Prosperity wraps up his video series on the Laffer Curve:


I've worked with Dan during my time in the Senate. He's a good guy, and a great ambassador for lower taxes and smaller government. The video takes a while to load, but Dan makes macroeconomics about as interesting as it can get.

Friday, March 14, 2008

Hodes Sets Record; Votes for Largest Tax Increase in History

UPDATED with audio.

(Washington, DC) Congressman Paul Hodes set a record this week by voting for the largest tax increase in American history. Republican challenger Grant Bosse says the tax hike is a direct result of Hodes support for runaway federal spending.

"Paul Hodes has shown no respect for taxpayer dollars. The budget he approved will increase taxes by $683 billion next year," Bosse said. "That's going to cost New Hampshire taxpayers $3200 apiece."


The Pelosi Budget that Hodes supported will increase current taxes on families and senior citizens, reduce child tax credits, and reinstate the Death Tax, which alone will cost American taxpayers over $180 billion. The Pelosi Budget also contains over 11,000 earmarks, costing
$16 billion next year.

"This Congress has lost control of the federal budget. Now they want to raise taxes on children, seniors, and working families to pay for this spending spree," Bosse added. "Paul Hodes said he was going to change Washington. He didn't tell us that it would be by raising taxes more
than anyone in history."


Friday, February 29, 2008

Grant on NH Taxpayer Radio

Grant says that Paul Hodes was wrong to oppose the Surge, and he's wrong now.

NHTR Clip 1

Grant explains why the next Congress will be the most important for Second Amendment rights in a generation.

NHTR Clip 2

Grant argues that the strength of the American economy comes from people, bot government.

NHTR Clip 3


Grant says that bipartisanship is overrated, unless it's backed up by sound principles.

NHTR Clip 4


Grant quotes Mel Thompson to make a point about taxes and spending.

NHTR Clip 5