Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sort of. The assessment (not the tax rate) is capped at 3% annually. The actual tax could go up faster if say your city council raised the rate.
You sell the house the cap is off and your assessment supposed reflects actual value. Then your assessment is for the future capped at 3% annually. Because of rapid increases in actual value of homes this can result in a tax 2-3-4 times higher.
Martinez's proposal is to end tax lightning for the future, but everyone who bought in the period 2001 to say 2011 will be stuck with the higher tax until they sell their home -- at a discount price because it has higher taxes. For those who have already been hit by tax lightning or who buy in the next year or so -- this is a disaster.
Hmm... that doesn't seem too fair. Especially to those that already own a home! I just googled it and found a Journal article. So you favor Denish's plan to roll it back, then?
Should also add, that a whopping 20% were undecided! Makes for a very interesting race, to say the least. If someone has a subscription and can find the story, that'd be great.
The Rasmussen Poll had Martinez ahead 45-39, with 16% undecided or refusing to answer.
This should be a serious warning for Denish, as she's been in the public eye as LtGov for 8 years and spent much more money than Martinez on TV before this poll. Martinez has done a good job tieing Denish to Richardson (whose last approval rating was 33%), and Denish is hampered by never (maybe, very rarely) speaking out against the way the state has been run until this campaign.
Hmm... that doesn't seem too fair. Especially to those that already own a home! I just googled it and found a Journal article. So you favor Denish's plan to roll it back, then?
Of course. It has the added advantage that it is in accordance with the New Mexico Constitution.
There are some other aspects. Albuquerque is in the process of rolling back the assessments. Denish's proposal would make the state uniform.
Martinez would not rollback but would leave ABQ unchanged. Thus we would have two different systems. Martinez also might give counties the option.
Problems with that for me:
1. Making the constitution county optional rubs me the wrong way.
2. Santa Fe if left to its own devices will never rollback. Tax Lightning was born out of Santa Fe corruption and helps to support it.
3. I would be significantly worse off than I am with the current unfair system.
* Women's Campaign Forum (http://wcfonline.org/sites/wcf/ - broken link)
You've provided a nice long list of meaningless information.
Look at the supporters - unions and pueblos. Have these entities ever supported a Republican? It couldn't be that the unions are looking to get Denish elected so the 5,000-8,000 of their state jobs that should be eliminated won't be. Emily's List has contributed a ton of money to Denish. Have they ever supported a Republican? The answer is no, they only support Democrats.
You've provided a nice long list of meaningless information.
Look at the supporters - unions and pueblos. Have these entities ever supported a Republican? It couldn't be that the unions are looking to get Denish elected so the 5,000-8,000 of their state jobs that should be eliminated won't be. Emily's List has contributed a ton of money to Denish. Have they ever supported a Republican? The answer is no, they only support Democrats.
I'm breathlessly awaiting an endorsement for Denish from Leonard Peltier!
You've provided a nice long list of meaningless information.
Look at the supporters - unions and pueblos. Have these entities ever supported a Republican? It couldn't be that the unions are looking to get Denish elected so the 5,000-8,000 of their state jobs that should be eliminated won't be. Emily's List has contributed a ton of money to Denish. Have they ever supported a Republican? The answer is no, they only support Democrats.
Well, it matters to me that Emily's list supports pro-choice candidates and that Denish is pro-choice. Susana is anti-choice. If I were anti-choice I might move to a country like Iran or Pakistan where abortion is illegal. As Edward Abbey wrote, "Abolition of a woman's right to abortion, when and if she wants it, amounts to compulsory maternity: a form of rape by the State." Not that Martinez could abolish that right, I'm sure she's just playing to her base and "talking the talk." But I can't support someone who's not pro-choice, just as there are those who can't support a pro-choice candidate.
And it matters to me that the Conservation Voters endorse Denish, since I care about the environment. I applaud Richardson for moving to preserve New Mexico lands for future generations by getting additional national parks and preserves established in the state. I would hope Denish would continue in that vein. Susana I'm sure does not care so much about natural lands and would rather "drill, baby, drill."
Now who are Martinez's endorsers, besides the National Republican Governor's Association who just donated $500K to her campaign, no doubt the NRA, and Sara Palin, the governor-who-quit?
Read an interesting article today, the state government has actually *SHRUNK* in Democratic hands, not grown, as Republican Susana Martinez has said. The numbers surprised even me! (I had thought government had grown, not by the percentage Martinez states, but still) Check it out, I thought the way the numbers were broken down was quite interesting.
For the record, I am a pro-choice person. I, too, support a woman's right to choose. But I label this, at least on the state level, as another one of those 'hor$e%hit' issues. That is now, since 1973, in the hands of the federal government. Susanna Martinez can come out against offshore drilling, Denish can speak her mind about her opposition to the war in Afghanistan, etc, but none of these issues really pertain to the current state of the economy in New Mexico. But, I am VERY interested to hear about their respective takes on the state income tax, and if is should be raised, reduced, or maintained at current level. I am also interested in what each candidate might think about reducing funding of state medicaid, WIC, and other freebies that productive New Mexicans have to pay for through taxation. Martinez being against a woman's right to choose has no bearing on my gross versus net on my paystub every 2 weeks.
Read an interesting article today, the state government has actually *SHRUNK* in Democratic hands, not grown, as Republican Susana Martinez has said. The numbers surprised even me! (I had thought government had grown, not by the percentage Martinez states, but still) Check it out, I thought the way the numbers were broken down was quite interesting.
Thanks, JBM, for pointing this out. So if you factor in the consumer price index and population growth in the state, Richardson actually ended with a leaner government than "Governor Veto" Gary Johnson did, who still likes to brag about his budget shrinking. Susana continues to distort the facts.
aries63, mike0421 is spot on with his comments. Abortion is a non-issue in state level elections. It's a matter of settled law and irrelevant. Bully for you, caring for the environment. I can't imagine that the Conservation Voters would ever take a political position. It must be a pure coincidence that every candidate for state wide office that they endorsed is a Democrat.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.