Sunlight Seeker
Look up national or state donors or check where your Congresspeople are getting their money.
| December 2004 |
| Sun |
Mon |
Tue |
Wed |
Thu |
Fri |
Sat |
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
Liz Eisen - Sat 11 Oct 2008 10:12 AM CDT
Tojo8817 - Fri 03 Oct 2008 08:35 PM CDT
Marilyn Walker - Fri 03 Oct 2008 12:51 PM CDT
Brent - Mon 29 Sep 2008 02:55 PM CDT
audiored - Sat 27 Sep 2008 10:34 PM CDT
|
Thursday, December 9
Iowa Public Radio - A Possible Merger
by
Chad Thompson
on Thu 09 Dec 2004 12:52 PM CST
 Iowa Public Radio - A Possible Merger
If you're like me (an admitted public radio addict, and donor to WOI) - you've probably heard about this story:
Iowa's
three university-based public radio stations would get less money from
the state, would merge as a network called Iowa Public Radio, and would
extend service into western Iowa, under a consultant's recommendations
released Tuesday by the Board of Regents.
You might ask "how much money will the state save"? According to the report:
Authorizing
universities to gradually decrease money for public radio stations by
$300,000 over the next five years, reducing universities' share of
public radio's budget from 35 percent to 29 percent. The money would be
replaced with improved private fund-raising.
$300,000?
Considering that many individual public high schools in the state are
dealing with budget problems much larger than this, going through the
motions of the "saving money" argument here just doesn't ring
true.
(For example, it was estimated that the Des Moines school district needed to cut $4 millon from its budget for this fiscal year.)
A few thoughts on a possible merger - minus the seemingly bogus financial argument:
Pro:
There would likely be an opportunity to see music offerings enhanced
and expanded.
On my wish list: a good jazz station in
Central Iowa with daytime programming. A
combined offering would also allow stations to combine
resources to produce and broadcast concerts and events from state and
private colleges in Iowa.
Con:
Combining news reporting functions into a statewide network seems
likely to greatly reduce (or eliminate) the last reliable source of
good local radio news in the state. I listen to WOI Radio, and
appreciate the mix of national, state and local (Ames/Des Moines) news
and weather reporting - it's something that commercial radio just doesn't do well anymore.
There
are some good things going on that could potentially be combined into a
joint news production group - the joint WOI/WSUI program "Talk of Iowa"
is a good example of such a production. However, the two
different broadcast groups allow for a good mix of discussion topics
centered around both Iowa State and the University of Iowa.
What I don't see happening: the merging of functions creating a resource like the neighbors to our north have in Minnesota Public Radio. MPR originates a lot of original programming, even spinning off American Public Media
to produce original content. An Iowa network would be able to
create a few local programs, but not on the level of MPR without
significant investment.
There
are some benefits to merging functions, but it should be done with the
idea of improving services, not just to cut state funding by a few
token percentage points.
(By the way - did anyone ask how much the consultant billed to research and write this report?)
Iowa Tax Reform in 2005?
by
Chad Thompson
on Thu 09 Dec 2004 09:31 AM CST
 Iowa Tax Reform in 2005?
I caught
a few reports on Tom Vilsack speaking to the "Iowa Taxpayers
Association" yesterday on WOI Radio with proposals to reform the Iowa Tax Code, and today David Yepsen writes a column with some of the highlights.
I point you to the column to read Yepsen's comments on the details of the proposal, but here are the points Vilsack addressed:
Eliminate federal deductibility.
This
proposal has been on the table for some time. Iowa is one of the
few states that allows you to deduct federal taxes from your state
return - but in order to make up for the smaller taxable income, tax
rates are kept higher than they would be without the federal deduction.
It is a
little disappointing that we treat this as an urgent proposal.
Truthfully, I imagine that this subject is better talk-radio fodder
than substantive input for corporate accounting departments.
Eliminate the state income tax on all pension and Social Security income.
The reason that Yepsen atrributes to Vilsack for this strikes me as fairly odd:
In
the past, he rejected this idea, arguing that since the state already
exempts some of this income, exempting all of it would benefit only
well-to-do Iowans.
When I
think of friends and relatives that rely on Social Security and
pensions to provide retirement income the term "well-to-do" is not the
first term that comes to mind.
Considering
that increases in property taxes and health care costs have hit seniors
on fixed incomes particularly hard, providing whatever relief we can
with the state tax code seems to be a good idea.
The trick here, however, is to keep such a reduction
revenue-neutral. (Of course, this also depends on what is meant
by the phrase "some of this income" - does anyone know what the limits
are?)
Expand the base of the sales tax.
The examples used by Vilsack seem to make sense:
He wants the sales tax to apply to more services, such as engineering and accounting fees.
As the
legislation-writing unfolds, we should keep an eye on "which services"
are taxed. (Yepsen accuses Vilsack of pandering to his interests
by exempting legal services from taxes. There are arguments to be
made, but I do know that a wage earner is far more likely to use the
services of a lawyer than the services of an engineer.)
Allow Iowans to vote on any proposal to increase sales- or income-tax rates.
Yepsen calls this a "compromise" position - but it seems to be a horrible idea.
Why?
When we're in a situation (as we are now) where all reserve funds for
state government are tapped, the legislature will need some flexibility
in raising funds without going through an electoral process to approve
small increases in service and sales taxes.
Do we
really think we could do without some vital services (such as last
year's cutbacks in State Patrol hours and patrolled territories) while
we wait six to nine months for an election to be held?
I would
feel better about this proposal if state funding was on firm footing -
but it's not. Last year's budget was balanced by using "one time"
sources of funding: tough decisions will have to be made this
year regardless of the political situation.
Besides - if our we don't want our legislators to make decisions on
fiscal and economic policy, why elect them in the first place?
For the "social issue showboating" that last year's GOP leadership
highlighted?
Create a higher state earned income tax credit for lower-income Iowans and make it refundable.
This is agreeable, however I am bothered by the notion that changes to
tax policy are the only way working families can see an increased
standard of living.
I would
like to see this proposal go hand-in-hand with some form of increase in
the minimum wage and a strengthening of labor laws.
I'm obviously not a tax-law policy wonk, but those are my first
reactions to what is likely to be the first topic introduced in
Vilsack's "State of the State" address.
What are your thoughts?
|
|
