The tobacco tax that could

As the 2009 Legislative Session approaches, it looks like we'll have another go at the tobacco tax.

In an AP article today:

Two businessmen are petitioning to let Mississippi voters decide whether to increase the state tobacco tax and designate the revenue for Medicaid.

Clarksdale attorney and restaurateur Bill Luckett and Jackson advertising consultant Rory Reardon filed an initiative Thursday in the secretary of state’s office. They have a year to gather about 90,000 signatures to put the issue on the ballot.

And, somewhat surprising, Barbour is not completely opposed to the idea of raising the tobacco tax. Don't get too excited, though. His proposal is so low, the whole thing will inevitably get bogged down, and the King of Tobacco could still come out looking good to his tobacco buddies after all.

Gov. Haley Barbour said this week that he’ll ask the 2009 Legislature to increase the cigarette excise tax, which is now 18 cents a pack. Barbour proposes adding 24 cents a pack on premium brands and 43 cents on off-brands.

I guess off-brand folks don't hire big-time DC lobbyists.

If we do have a ballot measure, which would be preferrable over whatever plan Barbour devises for his buddies, it will be interesting to see what numbers the legislature comes up with, and how much money will be poured into the state on such a measure.

Haley's wants to tax poor people

A tax study commission appointed by Haley Barbour has made some controversial recommendations regarding our Mississippi tax code.

Barbour, a Republican, appointed about 30 business people, professors, economists and state and local officials to the commission several months ago. The group has met several times to examine tax trends in Mississippi and other states.

Mississippi already has the most regressive tax structure in the United States. In other words we make those who have the most pay the least, and sadly those who have the least pay the most. Haley's "committee" wants to make our tax code more regressive than it already is. The governor is selling this cut in income tax as a trade off for raising the tobacco tax. I saw this coming months ago, see my post from a month ago. Haley the Hatchet

I am glad he is seeing the light on the tobacco tax, but he has other plans in those regards. He is planning on teaming a tobacco tax increase with a state income tax cut, to make our state have an even more regressive tax structure than the current, which ranks 1 out of 50 as being the most regressive. With the incredible fiscal challenges our state is facing such as this current Medicaid crisis, what sense does it make to cut taxes?

We Mississippians have only been able to fully fund MAEP twice in ten years. We are currently fighting over a huge budget shortfall leaving Medicaid exposed. There has even been talks out of the governor's office of reducing the work week from 5 to 4 days for state employees to save money. One wonders, how in the hell does Haley think he can cut taxes without painful cuts in spending. These same "spend now, pay later" policies have played out well in the federal economy. The rich have gotten richer and the poor have gotten poorer. To put is simply, if you handled your finances like George W. Bush or Haley Barbour, you would either be in jail for fraud or bouncing checks.

Haley is rapidly becoming a cartoon in the political world, much like his protege, George W. Bush. Even Republicans know that the USS Barbour is a sinking ship. Phil Bryant would be wise to distance himself from the governor while they both still have any credibility. This medicaid crisis tarnished a lot of the shine on the Barbour-Bryant administration. Billy McCoy ate their lunch with a much more limited position to work from.

Don't fall for the governor's tax reforms. They might as well have been written by the corporations.

Bryant's special session idea not very popular

House Speaker Billy McCoy is saying no thanks to Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant's idea of a special session.

From this DJ article:

"Why call a special session in October?" McCoy asked in a prepared statement. "Simply wait two months and we'll be back in regular session at no additional costs."

It gets better over at the C-L, where McCoy drops this line:

"Seems like (Bryant) is fast moving into the governor's position. ... But he's not governor yet," McCoy, D-Rienzi, said, referring to widespread speculation that Bryant will seek the office in 2011.

Even some of Bryant's top supporters are less than enthusiastic about the idea:

Sen. Terry Brown, R-Columbus, said, "If I'm called, I'll show up. But we've been in enough special sessions already."

Now that it is clear that some sort of tobacco tax is likely, the fight will be centered on what how to use the money:

Bryant told reporters that a debate over what to do with the revenue could be postponed until January. But an argument over how much to tax tobacco also appears likely.

State Rep. George Flaggs, a Democrat who has authored several bills to increase tobacco taxes, said he'll push for a $1 hike and split the revenue to pay for Medicaid and services in the general budget. Flaggs' last bill would have hiked the tax by 44 cents.

But Bryant's spokesman said the lieutenant governor disagrees with using a tobacco tax hike as part of a long-term funding solution to Medicaid.

Why would Bryant compromise when he can try to get everything his way?

Another tobacco tax prediction

There's one other prediction I wanted to share with you about the tobacco tax, but I felt it was important enough to warrant a separate post from the one on the lt. gov. urging a special session.

Republicans will try to minimize the increase by speaking in percentages, not raw dollars and cents, when discussing by how much to increase the tobacco tax.

The state's current tobacco tax stands at 18 cents per pack.

Republicans will want to raise that 100 percent or 200 percent. All big numbers. All sounding quite impressive to the voters.

But don't be fooled. At even 200 percent, we're talking just a 36-cent increase. That's a drop in the bucket. It would barely generate enough tax dollars to be beneficial to the state.

Democrats have to talk in cents, never percentages. Never percentages. Listen to me, never percentages. Because 50 cents might be 277 percent, and a dollar might be 555 percent, but it's still just 50 cents or a dollar.

People grasp 50 cents. People grasp a dollar. People are OK with 50 cents and a dollar.

People will get scared at 277 percent -- and really scared at 555 percent -- compared to 100 percent.

Bet that Gov. Barbour is not going to just cave on this tax. He'll try to bog it down in the House because "Democrats are greedy and want a 300 percent increase instead of just a 100 percent increase".

OK. Predictions done. I'm taking off my big red swami hat now.

Will Phil Bryant hijack the tobacco tax?

No one is better than Republicans at "if you can't beat them, join them" politics.

And so, it comes as no suprise that Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant is calling for an October special session to discuss a tobacco tax.

Here's my prediction if we in fact do get a tobacco tax passed in October:

1. The House will have to settle for a much lower increase than will be beneficial to the state, but they'll still be able to claim victory in forcing Barbour to sign one.
2. Barbour will sign the tobacco tax because it is so low that it won't really hurt his buddies at the tobacco companies.
3. The bill will come with no spending ties, and then during the regular session Bryant and the Senate will pass a bill that diverts the tobacco tax increase to pay for rising tuition costs.
4. Bryant will walk away with all the credit because he called the special session and recommended that the increase be passed and he recommended that it go toward tuition, which gives him the education plank for his gubernatorial run.

But here's another scenario, where the Republicans do what they do best, which is confuse the hell out of the general public to the point that the voters think they are trying to accomplish something when in fact they are doing nothing more than playing "gotcha politics".

The scenario:

1. Bryant and the Senate propose a miniscule tobacco tax increase, floating inflated numbers on increased revenue for the state and hypothetical uses for this money, such as offsetting tuition increases.
2. The House refuses to cave because they know the value of this tax increase, and if they pass a 25-cent increase now, they'll never get the modest -- much less ample -- increase that will actually benefit the state.
3. The GOP spin machine will go full force talking about how Democrats are obstructing the path to a cigarette tax that everyone -- including good ol' Bryant -- wants. The GOP will accuse Democrats of being the reason for the state not being able to provide relief for Medicaid or higher tuition.
4. Bryant will have his education plank for his gubernatorial run.

Granted, I may be reading too much into the tution thing. It probably is unrelated to the tobacco tax plan. But little reason exists for Bryant's not wanting to decide how the tax will be spent in October except for they want to spend it in an area that will be more politically beneficial to them.

College tuition instead of health care fits that bill, folks...

Barbour stops at nothing to protect Big Tobacco

Tomorrow, legislators return to Jackson to try once again to fill the $90 million hole in Medicaid.

Governor Barbour wants to tax hospitals to fill the gap, and while hospitals have agreed to pay such a tax, they would rather tobacco be taxed.

By threatening cuts the governor has attempted to force hospital administrators and employees to agree with his position. In fact, when questioned about their stated support for the governor's plan, representatives of the Mississippi Hospital Association testified to a House committee that they preferred the cigarette tax but were told by the governor that the hospital tax was the only option available. (Speaker of the House, Billy McCoy, to the Clarion Ledger.)

The tax will inevitably be passed on to the patients and insurance companies (because premiums aren't already high enough).

The House wants to levy a cigarette tax, not a big surprise since they were pushing this during the regular session as well.

According to numerous studies and sources, including the Partnership For a Healthy Mississippi:

Tobacco-related illnesses claims the lives of 4,700 Mississippians every year.

Tobacco use by pregnant women is a leading cause of low birth-weight infants.

Cigarette smoking doubles the likelihood of a stroke.

Teens who smoke are 3-times more likely as nonsmokers to use alcohol, 8-times more likely to use marijuana, and 22-times more likely to use cocaine.

Cigarette smokers are 2 - 4-times more likely to develop coronary heart disease than nonsmokers.

Exposure to secondhand smoke has been shown to hamper cognitive development
in children.

Tobacco's Impact to Mississippi Taxpayers
Treatment of tobacco-related illness costs the Mississippi Healthcare System $719 million each year.

Treatment of tobacco-related illness costs the state's taxpayer-supported Medicaid program $264 million each year.

For every individual Mississippian who pays taxes, $534 of your money goes to Medicaid pay to treat tobacco related illness in the state.

Tobacco use is linked to $1.41 billion in lost worker productivity annually in the state.

Amazingly, Barbour has turned this in to a Democrat vs. Republican issue. In order to protect tobacco, Barbour has pegged the Partnership as this liberal entity, dedicated to destroying our conservative values.

Obviously, if you want to improve the quality of your life and other Mississippians, and if you want to cut spending in Mississippi, you're a crazy left-wing liberal, or you support the Partnership.

Medicaid bill in Senate committee

Just an FYI- the Medicaid bill (HB1013) that provides the much-needed funding for the poor, elderly, and disabled of our state, is currently in the Senate Public Health & Welfare committee and the Finance committee.

Our ever-so-faithful-to-Barbour Lt. Governor, Phil Bryant, has double-referred this bill, which we know usually means the end for a piece of legislation. However, the Communities for a Clean Bill of Health are asking everyone to call Phil Bryant about this bill, which will fund Medicaid by increasing the cigarette tax by $1.

As Rep. Dirk Dedeaux, author of the bill, said, "This isn't made-up." There is a dire funding crisis for Medicaid this year.

Call your senator (and Phil Bryant) today and tell them to get this bill out of committee and on to the floor!

Click here to see which Senators are on which committee.

The Anti-Cigarette Tax Man Former Senator Tommy Robertson Selected By Barbour?!?

From The Communities for a Clean Bill of Health blog:

Governor Barbour released the names of those appointed to his Tax Study Commission yesterday- Jan 23. The list included the infamous former state Senator Tommy Robertson. Robertson, as Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, blocked legislation that would have increased the cigarette tax up to a $1.00 while cutting the grocery tax by half. In August, Robertson was soundly defeated in the Republican primary largely due to his opposition of that popular piece of legislation.

The Complete List Of Tax Study Commission Members



Michael Watson who defeated him was asked about the legislation in the Mississippi Press:

Q. Sen. Robertson is responsible for the death of the grocery tax/tobacco tax swap legislation that would have lowered the tax on unprepared food items from 7 percent to 3 percent, and increased the tax on tobacco products to as high as $1 per product. Robertson refused to introduce the Senate bill in this year's session and the issue died in committee. Do you think the Senate should have been allowed to vote on the tax swap proposal and do you plan to support similar legislation in 2008?

A. The Senate definitely should have had a chance to vote on the proposal. A senator is there to represent the people who put him in office and that cannot happen if he or she isn't given the chance to vote on the issues. I think the tax swap is a great idea, but I think the numbers still need a little work. Replacing an increasing revenue with a declining revenue just doesn't make good economical sense. There are numbers that will make the swap work. It's our job to find them.

Killer Haley Barbour Diary on Kos

Check It Out and if you have a DailyKos account Recommend It!

An excerpt:

Our Democratic candidates for Governor and Lt. Governor are running on trying to cut the regressive grocery tax, the highest in the country. Barbour, a former top tobacco lobbyist, still with financial ties to his former lobbying firm, has repeatedly killed the tax swap legislation that would cut the food tax and offset the revenue loss with a raise of the third lowest tobacco tax in the country. Even the current incumbent Lt. Governor, Republican Amy Tuck has championed the tax swap.

I wonder why?

Barbour had been among the tobacco industry's top lobbyists prior to returning to Mississippi. Between 1998 and 2002, such tobacco companies as Phillip Morris, RJR Nabisco, Brown and Williamson, and U.S. Tobacco paid his firm $3.8 million. The firm has collected more than $2 million in tobacco revenue since Barbour became governor.

Barbour’s grip on power here has even members of his own party scared of him:

To this day, few in the GOP have dared cross Barbour on the matter. Recently, lobbyists from the Mississippi Health Advocacy Program asked several Republicans to pledge to raise the tobacco tax. They encountered near-universal resistance. "A lot of Republicans are saying, Do you know what you're doing? If I sign this thing, then Haley will come and dump more money into my opponent's campaign,'" says Roy Mitchell, the program's director.

And he rewarded his friends with Katrina money for towing the line on the food/tobacco tax swap legislation:

This year, legislators tried again, introducing two more bills that would have halved the state's grocery tax and raised the cigarette tax by $1. Barbour didn't even lift his veto pen this time around--the bills died at the hands of Senate finance committee chairman Tommy Robertson. Oddly, Robertson had been a vocal advocate of previous tax-swap bills. Earlier this year, however, he and two other Republican legislators--who, in their day jobs, are lawyers--had received a $1.2 million contract from the Mississippi Development Authority, which is overseen by the governor, to help homeowners finalize their Katrina grants. The contract raised more than a few eyebrows. (In an interview, Robertson said the contract--which was cleared by the state ethics commission on a party-line vote--had "absolutely nothing" to do with his stance on the tax swap.)

Sure Tommy.

Again go Check It Out and if you have a DailyKos account Recommend It!

John Eaves Responds to the Mississippi Economic Policy Councils Report

John Eaves:

“Mississippi has the highest grocery tax in the nation and our hardworking, God-fearing families deserve a tax cut,” said Eaves. “It is embarrassing and wrong to charge working families the highest tax rate in the country on basic food items, while I see tobacco companies preying upon our children. Barbour vetoed a cut in the grocery tax paid for by increasing our tobacco tax to help the tobacco companies who have paid him millions of dollars as a lobbyist. As governor, I’ll make it one of my top priorities to cut our grocery tax right now and pay for it by increasing the tobacco tax.”

Jamie Franks Responds to the Mississippi Economic Policy Council

Jamie Franks issued a response to the Mississippi Economic Policy Council study saying:

"Their report provides further proof that that our current state tax system penalizes Mississippi's working families. It's appalling that Mississippi, the poorest state in the union is one of only two states that fully tax food without any offsets. Mississippi's working families need tax relief and cutting the regressive food tax is the most direct way to have a positive impact. My opponent sides with Governor Barbour and Big Tobacco and refuses to support the tax swap that will cut the food tax in half, an issue that has overwhelming statewide support."

I agree with Jamie Franks when he says on the stump and in his ad (below) that it is apalling that the poorest state in the union has the highest tax on groceries.

Another Study Shows That Our Tax Structure Penalizes The Poor

Take a look at the nonpartisan study yourself.

John Eaves' New Ad "Ideas"

"I've got so many ideas to move Mississippi forward I've got to talk fast"

- Raise Teacher Pay
- Cut Grocery Tax
- Health Insurance for Children
- (Push Companies to) Pay Claims
- Cut (Reconstruction) Red Tape
- Get Tough With Employers (Who Hire Illegals)
- Create Jobs (By Investing In Mississippi Companies)

Barbour Gets the ThinkProgress Treatment

After noting that Giuliani said that Haley Barbour would be on everyone's list for VP, Think Progress goes into detail on why he might not be the best choice for any ticket offering up these "lowlights":

Family members and lobbyists profited from Katrina tragedy: “Among the beneficiaries are Barbour’s own family and friends, who have earned hundreds of thousands of dollars from hurricane-related business. A nephew, one of two who are lobbyists, saw his fees more than double in the year after his uncle appointed him to a special reconstruction panel.”

Owned controlling interest in 2002 New Hampshire phone jamming company: For nearly two hours on election day 2002, subcontractors for the telemarketing firm GOP Marketplace tied-up Democratic and union phone banks with repeated hang up calls. Multiple GOP officials eventually either pled guilty to or were convicted of criminally violating federal communications law. Barbour’s investment group, Helm Partners, was not only a major investor in GOP Marketplace, but it also held a controlling interest in the firm.

As a lobbyist, he represented firm indicted in Tom DeLay’s money laundering scandal: As a lobbyist for Barbour Griffith & Rogers, Barbour represented The Alliance for Quality Nursing Home Care Inc., “a corporate coalition of 14 of the country’s largest for-profit nursing home companies.” The Alliance wrote a check for $100,000 “ended up illegally funding Republican candidates for the Texas statehouse” in 2002. The check was eventually used as evidence in the case that led to indictments for money laundering against former Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX).

A former tobacco lobbyist, he killed Mississippi’s successful anti-smoking program: From 1998 to 2002, Barbour’s lobbying firm “was paid a total of $3.8 million by the tobacco companies.” As governor of Mississippi, he led an effort to defund and ultimately kill the state’s anti-smoking program, considered to be “the nation’s most successful anti-smoking programs.”

Directed large amounts of reconstruction funds to wealthy homeowners: Barbour and Mississippi’s two Republican Senators steered an “unprecedented” $23.5 billion in federal reconstruction aid, but by waiving a HUD requirement that “70 percent of the funds are supposed to be allocated to low- and moderate-income people.” Barbour “badly skewed” the funds towards “wealthy homeowners,” with only 25 percent reaching “the poorer segments of the population.”

Most of the quotes are hyperlinked on their site to supporting documents or articles and you can check that out at ThinkProgress.org

Bill Minor's Take on Bloomberg and Blind Trusts

Bill Minor:

As expected, Gov. Haley Barbour shrugged off as "election-year politics" the detailed expose' by Bloomberg News Service on how his relatives and his campaign have profited off Katrina recovery money...What puts a highly sensitive stamp on this money is that it was generated by the nation's worst natural disaster, and was intended to help its victims.
Thus it is purely cynical for Barbour to equate as election-year politics the story showing how two of his nephews, his old lobby firm, and his own campaign war chest (to the tune of $45,000) benefited from Katrina money...

A bill to disclose sources of income paid to a blind trust passed the Mississippi House in February, but was killed by Barbour forces in the Senate.


This column and others have questioned whether his so-called blind trust includes a stake in his old lobby firm, Barbour, Griffith & Rogers, from which he said in 2003 he severed connections... Since one of BG&R's clients is tobacco giant P. Lorillard, it could be seen that Barbour, in vetoing the bill to raise Mississippi's pitifully low cigarette tax, was shielding the tobacco industry. Burger points out two of Barbour's ex-partners in BG&R have kicked in $30,000 for his campaign.

Read the rest at The Clarion Ledger

John Goodman offers a CPA's Perspective on the Tax Swap

John Goodman, who writes at PearlMississippiCPA, offers up his perspective on the tax swap and why it makes sense to cut taxes on food first before looking at the income tax as Bryant supposedly wants to do. In his analysis he draws from solid numbers and facts which make it an interesting and informative read.

First he tackles the math of the sales tax cut:

The median household income in Mississippi is $31330 and for a single person $15853 (This is based on a WASHINGTON POST article covering the Mississippi elections for 2006.). The average family of four spends $150 a week on groceries. A single person spends approximately $40 a week on groceries. Note this does not include head of households, which could range to two individuals in the family to four or five.

By cutting the sales tax in half on groceries, the average household will save $273 a year. If it is eliminated, the savings goes to $546 a year. A single person will save $72.80 and $145.60 respectively.

Then he covers how a similar cut in the income tax would have to be engineered to reap the same benefit:

Since Bryant hasn't spelled out his income tax proposals, let us assume we raise the standard deduction from $2300 to $3500 for singles, $4600 to $7000 for marrieds and the brackets remain the same. Let us also assume the married couple has two children and the parents work. Let us also assume the single and the married couple take only the standard deduction. With the new increase in deductions, the single person will save $48 a year and the average married household will save $89.30 a year. For the break even point to occur on income tax savings to match half the tax cut on groceries, the single standard deduction would have to go from $2300 to $4120. To match the entire tax cut on groceries, the single standard deduction would have to go from $2300 to $6302. For the break even point to occur on income tax savings to match half the tax cut on groceries, the married standard deduction would have to go from $4600 to $13123. Of course, the entire tax cut on groceries would be greater than eliminating their entire tax liability.

Goodman then details another reason why the grocery tax cut is needed:

Also, the grocery tax cut would help mitigate the increase in food prices. Maybe it doesn't hurt the rich, but the poor and the working class are feeling it. Milk has climbed to four dollars a gallon! Bread and cereal have shot up. Beef prices have gone up (Thanks to that idiotic ethanol boondoggle, which has greatly increased the price of corn.). This tax cut would give a little relief to the hard-working people of Mississippi.

The tax swap is needed to bring needed dollars to the pockets of all Mississippians and to help stop a new generation of people from getting addicted to the poison that is cigarettes. The plan is fair, sound, and popular and Barbour Republicans like Phil Bryant only oppose it because they didn't think of it first. This partisan skullduggery is unnecessary and as we wait more youth are developing what will be for many a lifelong addiction to cigarettes and many families are having trouble finding the money to feed their families. Jamie Franks will act to help all of Mississippi. Can the same be said for Phil Bryant?

Franks: Cut Taxes For Everyone VS. Bryant: Look Quickly, Brown People!

Franks may be gaining traction. Even Barbour lovers like Sid Salter recognize that Jamie Franks is the real deal and has a clear chance at becoming our next Lt. Governor.

Recently Franks invited reporters and the public to join him at the grocery store to demonstrate how under his plan the average family would save $273 dollars. He then broke down how that money could go to feeding a family which you can find HERE.

Bryant quickly responded by saying "the burden would be shifted to the wage-earners and property owners." That doesn't make a lick of sense since "the burden" is shifted to cigarettes which people don't need to live.

After coming up nearly empty when asked to differentiate between himself and Franks, Bryant plans to go on the offensive next week with a press conference on illegal immigration. Forced to act on a campaign quickly losing momentum Bryant will chose the politics of fear over the politics of progress and possibility.

I'd like to know how a candidate for Lt. Governor can make any real progress on the national issue of immigration when the leaders of both parties tried to find a solution and were unable. Does Phil have any new ideas or is he just recycling the same old, same old for votes?

Franks: Cut Taxes For Everyone VS. Bryant: Hell No

Democratic candidate for Lt. Governor Jamie Franks recently took a reporter to a grocery store to demonstrate how much folks would save if we cut the grocery tax. Here is some of the resulting article and my comment:

"A major cornerstone of my campaign is helping working people have tax relief," Franks said. "We need to cut Mississippi's sales tax on groceries, the highest in the nation."

An average family spends about $150 a week on groceries and pays $546 a year in grocery taxes, he said. His proposal to cut the tax in half would save abut $273 for a family during a year.

Yep. That's true. What family couldn't use a couple hundred dollars to make ends meet? I know of a lot of students who could use that money.

When municipal officials voiced concerns they could lose sales taxes, "we doubled the diversion in tax money going back to cities," he said. That plan had support from Democrats and Republicans.

This was the only valid complaint I saw and it was addressed before the final bill; a bill that Barbour Republicans blocked.

"I'm all about cutting taxes but believe that the numbers will not support the revenue shift," Bryant said after Franks' Tupelo event Wednesday. "The burden would be shifted to the wage-earners and property owners."

Bryant's grasp of the facts here is questionable. How swapping the tax from bread and milk to cigarettes moves "the burden ... to the wage-earners and property owners" is beyond me. Perhaps one of the many Phil Bryant apologists would like to explain that one.

The truth is that Barbour Republicans like Bryant are incapable of being independent and will bend to his will without regard to the facts. Any other explanation of his response is welcome below in the comments.

The Daily Journal Article

Where in the World Are Barbour's Coattails?

Due to polling I'd been told about several weeks ago, I knew that Robertson was in trouble, but then Barbour made his choice clear. He recorded a radio ad endorsing Robertson and I doubt many of the folks who voted for Michael Watson didn't know who the Governor favored.

Going against the will of their "popular" incumbent Governor, Jackson County Republicans overwelmingly chose newcomer Michael Watson over one of Barbour's closest allies.

Ignore what the prognasticators are telling you. I think it is clear that Mississippi voters don't share the love for Barbour that Sid Salter and many editorial boards do. The people see the truth and they want change.

The Democratic Party sent out this release:

When a powerful state Senate ally of Republican Gov. Haley Barbour lost a bid for re-election, it became more clear than ever that the governor’s political coattails aren’t as long as he thought.

Barbour endorsed state Sen. Tommy Robertson of Moss Point – the Senate Finance Committee chairman who single handedly killed a proposal in the Legislature this year to cut the state sales tax on groceries. Barbour even recorded a radio ad for Robertson.

“But Haley’s staunch support did nothing,” said Wayne Dowdy, chairman of the Mississippi Democratic Party. “Voters chose someone completely different. Haley couldn’t even help an incumbent state senator win another term.”

On Tuesday, Democrats made their choice for governor overwhelmingly clear by nominating John Eaves for the job.

Unofficial and incomplete returns show that Eaves received 286,557 votes, or 70 percent, in the Democratic Party primary. Eaves, in fact, received 115,635 more votes than the 170,922 Barbour received in winning the GOP nomination.

Eaves’ strong performance in the Tuesday primary shows that momentum has shifted to him and the Mississippi Democratic Party. It also sets up a distinct contrast of styles between Eaves and Barbour.

Over the next three months, voters will learn more about Eaves’ support for such issues as better health care and consistent education funding every year.

“It’s clear Haley’s coattails are worn, ragged and frayed,” Dowdy said. “It’s a new day in Mississippi. And with John Eaves, we have a candidate for governor who will offer this state the kind of dynamic leadership we have been sorely lacking.”

Remember it was Robertson who blocked the grocery tax cut so that the Governor wouldn't have to go through with his veto threat. That veto would have shown the public where the Governor stood; a place clearly out of the mainstream. If "Holy Haley" Barbour can't save a close and important ally, what does that say for where he stands with the voters?

Republicans Ross and Bryant on Taxes

Charlie Ross and Phil Bryant both recently spoke to the Daily Journal. Here's what they had to say on taxes:

"I have always favored decreasing the grocery tax," Ross said. "I have introduced it (legislation to reduce the tax) several times. I think it is a good measure."

Oh really, is that why you voted against such measures these last two years when they actually had a chance at passing. Did you you change your mind because you didn't want to anger Big Daddy Barbour?

Byrant said he was not keen on reducing the grocery tax.

"Absolutely - I would rather see a cut in the income tax," Bryant said. "...Everybody will pay the grocery tax. Not everybody will pay the income tax."

Bryant predicted that reducing the grocery tax would lead to a "tax transfer" where other taxes would be hiked to make up for the tax cut. He did not say why a reduction in the income tax would not lead to a similar tax transfer.

I fail to see the logic here. He wants to cut our income tax which is already low instead of opting to cut the highest sales tax in the country. That defies common sense. The Journal writer makes a good point when he points out the inconsistency in Bryant's postion.

While the Republicans tie themselves up in knots trying to defend their move to block a direct cut in the price of basic necessities, Democrats like Jamie Franks continue to lead the efforts to make our tax structure more fair.