More Tax Shifting

Looks like another attempt by the House Democrats to shift my taxes around in ways I don’t like:

The committee approved House Bill 1600, by Rep. David Levdansky, D-Forward. He proposes raising about $2.5 billion by doing three things. He would raise the state sales tax by 0.5 percent (making it 6.5 percent in most counties but 7.5 percent in Allegheny and Philadelphia counties.)

He would also raise the personal income tax rate by .22 percent, to a total of 3.29 percent. Those two moves would take effect July 1. Together they would generate an additional $1.5 billion, to which he would add the expected $1 billion from slots revenue once all 14 casinos are up and running. The resulting $2.5 billion would be used to lower property taxes.

Mr. Levdansky expects such tax shifting will slice several hundred dollars from the average homeowner’s property tax bills. The full House is expected to debate the bill in November.

Several hundred dollars?  That’s it?  The tax increase will cost me a more than that.   Is the concept of cutting spending and using that to cut my property taxes so hard to do?  Maybe if we didn’t have a governor wasting money on things like building soccer stadiums in Chester, we might be able to pull it off.

Ed’s C.R.A.P.

According to Wyatt our Governor thinks people in Chester share the European love of Soccer, and thinks they are deserving of considerable “Capital-Redevelopment Assistance Program” (read tax dollars) to build a stadium.  I grew up 3 miles outside of Chester, and I’m pretty sure that no one in Delaware County likes soccer enough to make a trip to Chester.

Let me just give you an idea of how bad Chester is.  When I was growing up, it was well known not to enter the city at night, or really during the day either.  Carjackings were not unheard of, and a few folks were dragged out of their cars and beaten for being at the wrong stoplight at the wrong time.

Thanks to PennDOT’s I-95 construction fiasco, I have been forced to drive through Chester on my way back from seeing Bitter on a few occasions.  Normally I just lock the Glock in the case for the whole ride, thanks to the Great State of Maryland, which is most of the transit miles between here in DC.  But when I have to drive through Chester, I make sure to stop at Delaware’s “Lock & Load” (also known as Service) Plaza and crack Mr. Glock out of his case, load it up, and get ready to do the Route 13 bypass at 1:00 in the morning.

Chester actually seems to look a little better these days than I remember it, but it’ll take a lot more than a soccer stadium to turn that city around.  I’d say our governor is smoking crack on this, but it looks to me like a way to pay off his political supporters, rather than something he really expects will make a difference.   A pity we’ll all have to pay for it.

Bad Ideas

There’s a move afoot to make Pennsylvania an initiative and referendum state, much like California.   No thanks.  I share our founding father’s skepticism of direct democracy.  Most people just don’t have enough information to make informed decisions about government, which is why we have republican government, where we elect people to represent our interests for us.

I don’t exempt myself from this ignorance.  I’ve more than a few times thought something sounded good, until I heard more information about through a legislator.  I much prefer to leave the ugly details to a delegate, than undertake them myself.

Let’s not take Pennsylvania down this road.  I have no desire to live under a state government that allows two wolves and a sheep to decide what’s for lunch.

Taxes in The Keystone State

I’ve said that Ed Rendell has never met a tax he wouldn’t like to raise.  Job killing corporate taxes for Pennsylvania are already among the highest in the nation.   Rendell is proposing a 3% tax on businesses as part of his health care initiative, which would make Pennsylvania and even less attractive place to do business than it already is.

Oh well, at least I don’t live in Michigan.

Pittsburgh Needs To Aim Higher

I was really surprised by this article in the New York Sun on Pittsburgh’s woes as a city.  Particularly this bit:

Pittsburgh is a cautionary tale for many American cities. It can either go the way of Detroit or become a comeback city like Philadelphia and Baltimore. Its future, as defined by either Mr. Ravenstahl or Mr. DeSantis, could provide a roadmap for how economically depressed cities can recover.

Philadelphia?  Baltimore?  Comeback cities?  Are you kidding?  Pittsburgh folks need to have higher ambitions than this.   The rust belt is a truly depressing place.

I was listening a bit to Cam & Company last night, to see how the NRA National Police Shooting Championships are going.  People in Albuquerque are very proud of their town, and what it’s achieved, and are optimistic about their future, which is the complete opposite of rust belt cities.  They remain proud and forward looking despite the fact that most people in the US have no idea how to spell Albuquerque.  I sure didn’t.   Thank god for spell checkers.

Working to Undermine the PA Constitution

Looks like anti-gun activists and the media are looking to guilt companies into helping them pass more gun laws in the Commonwealth.   I’m sorry to see they appear to have the support of former Governor Mark Schweiker, who is currently running the Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce.  Schweiker had this to say:

Let me mention that the business community has been a steadfast participant in efforts to reduce violence. Our political efforts range from the Chamber’s 1999 testimony in Harrisburg in favor of one-gun-per-month sales legislation to our recent testimony in July in support of Philadelphia’s efforts to pass gun laws more restrictive than the state’s. Financial efforts and backing include the record-setting workplace donations to United Way of Southeastern Pennsylvania in 2006 as well as the millions of dollars which individual corporations donate directly to social service agencies.

Schweiker’s name comes up when people talk about who’s going to run on the GOP ticket when Rendell’s term is up in 2010.  I thought Pennsylvania gun owners should be aware of what he’s been up to in the mean time, in the event he does still have political ambitions.

A Bit on Section 302 of MHPA

I notice Larry Pratt keeps bringing up a Pennsylvania case where a man was committed involuntarily for observation under Section 302 of Pennsylvania’s Mental Health Procedures Act. This provision is described as follows:

Section 302 is the part of the Act relating to treatment without consent for observed behavior constituting a clear and present danger to the individual and/or others. The behavior must have occurred in the past 30 days. Under Section 302(a) any responsible party can petition for an involuntary evaluation by stating that an individual may be severely mentally disabled.

Now, it should be noted that for purposes of a federal firearms disability, this section is insufficient. The regulations specifically exempt persons held for observation.

Committed to a mental institution. A formal commitment of a person to a mental institution by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority. The term includes a commitment to a mental institution involuntarily. The term includes commitment for mental defectiveness or mental illness. It also includes commitments for other reasons, such as for drug use. The term does not include a person in a mental institution for observation or a voluntary admission to a mental institution.

But that’s federal. The PA Uniform Firearms Act is also a controlling law:

A person who has been adjudicated as an incompetent or who has been involuntarily committed to a mental institution for inpatient care and treatment under section 302, 303 or 304 of the provisions of the act of July 9, 1976 (P.L.817, No.143), known as the Mental Health Procedures Act. This paragraph shall not apply to any proceeding under section 302 of the Mental Health Procedures Act unless the examining physician has issued a certification that inpatient care was necessary or that the person was committable.

So unless the person actually ends up being involuntarily committed to a mental health institution, there’s no prohibition under federal or state law that prevents him from owning a firearm in the future, unless he’s committed.  It should be noted that Pennsylvania already has a mechanism in place for restoration of rights for commitments and adjudications.  In the editorial I mentioned last, a PA district attorney was quoted as saying:

“I contacted the sheriff and had his license to carry a firearm revoked. And I asked police to commit him under Section 302 of the mental health procedures act and that was done. He is now ineligible to possess firearms [for life] because he was committed involuntarily,” the district attorney reported.

I think that particular DA needs to read the law, because he’s wrong.

Penndot Woes

Bitter and I have come to hate Penndot lately, because of adding about an hour delay on the trip between here and DC.  Now she finds that they are probably ruined a potential Turnpike lease deal by not informing the state police there might be foreign men in the area taking pictures.

You know, it’s funny, but since when is taking pictures probable cause for an arrest?  Though, I suspect that stopping for a non-emergency along the Turnpike is a traffic infraction, and our Supreme Court has said you can be arrested for those at the whim of the officer.

More Pennsylvania Proposals

Some bills that are up for consideration in Harrisburg, courtesey, again, of Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs:

HB 1744 Caltagirone – (PN 2323) Amends Title 18 (Crimes and Offenses) providing for a notice of limits on lending or transferring a handgun. Each purchaser of a firearm would receive a copy of a notice, to be promulgated by the Pennsylvania State Police, containing the information regarding limits on lending or transferring a handgun. The bill also states that the Joint State Government Commission would conduct a continuing study for the purpose of evaluating the extent to which multiple purchases of firearms by any individual during the period of the study are a contributing factor to the use of firearms in criminal activity. The bill adds that the Attorney General would have the authority to investigate and to institute criminal proceedings for any violation of this chapter. The Attorney General would be able to inspect or examine the inventory and records of a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer or licensed dealer without reasonable cause or warrant in certain cases.

This seems to me to be a worthless law.  Any law that is not obvious enough that it requires notification probably should not be a law.

HB 41 Thomas – (PN 66) The Illegal Firearms Trafficking Act establishes the Bureau of Illegal Firearms Trafficking in the Office of the Attorney General. Duties of the bureau would include investigating potential violations of 18 Pa.C.S. (relating to crimes and offenses) relating to illegal firearms trafficking; and bringing prosecutions relating to illegal firearms trafficking. The Attorney General would receive complaints from individuals concerning illegal firearms trafficking and investigate and assist in county prosecutions relating to illegal firearms trafficking and, as necessary, coordinate with Federal, State and local law enforcement agencies in the investigation of similar crimes. Additionally, the Attorney General would annually report to the General Assembly detailing the activities engaged in by the bureau.

This is the one Philadelphia DA Lynn Abraham is wary of.  You know how we talk about going after criminals?  This proposal is mostly about that, but Philadelphia’s political leadership is opposed to it because it invades in on their territory.  Better to go after gun owners than have the state AG threatening your turf eh?

HB 21 James – (PN 46) Amends Title 42 (Judiciary) further providing for bail by stating that the amount of bail fixed for any person charged with an offense committed while the person used or displayed a firearm would not be less than $50,000 unless special circumstances are presented.

Displaying or brandishing?  There’s a difference.  A lot of these bills I might be willing to talk about, but what is “displayed” and what is “offense”.  If I have a pistol in my center console, and I get pulled over, am I subject to 50,000 bail if the officer, as the Supreme Court of the United States has permitted him to do, decides to arrest me formally?