www.dailycorinthian.com
Opinion
Reece Terry, publisher
Mark Boehler, editor
4 • Saturday, December 6, 2014
Corinth, Miss.
Falling gas prices make key point for stagnant fuel tax STARKVILLE — According to the American Automobile Association (AAA), the highest recorded average price of regular unleaded gasoline in Mississippi was July 16, 2008, at $3.965 per gallon. As of Dec. 2, the average price of regular unleaded gas in Mississippi was $2.519 per gallon. A year ago, that price was $3.133 per gallon. A month ago, the price was $2.756 per gallon. The one constant in that price fluctuation is this: Mississippi’s gasoline tax remains the same 18.4 cents per Sid Salter gallon that it’s been since 1987. Mississippi’s 18.4 cents per Columnist gallon state gas tax (CPG) is a flat tax. When we paid $3.965 a gallon for gas in 2008, the tax was 18.4 CPG. When we pay $2.51 per gallon at the pump this week, the state tax is still 18.4 CPG. The only way the state takes in more revenue in gas taxes is for the volume of gas consumed to increase. According to a report by the American Society of Civil Engineers, Mississippi’s gas tax isn’t keeping pace with the inflation of rising highway construction and maintenance costs and with the modern fuel economy improvements in today’s vehicles. As noted in prior columns on this topic, a 2012 national report found that Mississippi has an estimated $30 billion in highway and bridge needs between 2008 and 2035 but that the state’s current gas tax structure would only generate $15.3 billion to meet those expenses in a “best-case” scenario. That’s concerning. Mississippi has about 4,700 miles of highways in dire need of repair at an estimated current cost of nearly $1 billion, according to Central District Transportation Commissioner Dick Hall. Northern District Transportation Commissioner Mike Tagert and Southern District Commissioner Tom King both have followed Hall’s lead in calling for a sensible increase in the state’s fuel tax before the state’s highway and bridge infrastructure deteriorates to the point that maintenance is no longer feasible — and even costlier new construction is the only remedy. Here’s the rub from a political standpoint — no sane Mississippi legislator or politician is going to look the public in the eye and contend that the state’s highways and bridges aren’t headed toward very serious problem. It’s unlikely any of that group will argue that there’s a sufficient state revenue source to shore up the obvious deficiencies between need and resources in terms of maintaining the state’s highway system. The 2015 legislative session comes in an election year and the talk has already turned to tax cuts and tax breaks on one side of the aisle and spending increases for MAEP and other programs on the other. Republicans face primary entanglements if they deign to raise taxes even for a highly legitimate purpose and Democrats have priorities that push highways construction and maintenance farther down the list. But as the Elaine S. Povich of the Pew Center recently pointed out: “Most states and the federal government tax gas by the gallon. But even under that system, inflation erodes the value of the revenue. For example, the federal motor fuels tax, 18.4 cents per gallon, generates one-third fewer dollars in real purchasing terms than when it was last increased in 1993, according to an estimate by the Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan research organization.” Tax Foundation economist Joseph Henchman told Povich: “At the state and local levels, gas taxes cover less than half of state and local transportation spending.” Henchman said proposals to cut mass transit funding or relax federal salary standards for laborers on public works projects won’t solve the underlying problem, which is that “every year we’re spending a little more and taking in a little less.” Mississippi’s infrastructure faces that depressing legacy – as the three state transportation commissioners have dutifully reported to their constituents. Hall, Tagert and King are telling their constituents the truth – whether their constituents want to hear it or not. (Daily Corinthian columnist Sid Salter is syndicated across the state. Contact him at 601-507-8004 or sidsalter@sidsalter.com.)
Prayer for today My Lord, forgive me if I have allowed bitterness and misery to darken my life, for my soul yearns continually for the light. In thy compassion lead me to the “sunny side of the road where the beautiful flowers grow,” that my path may be made bright and cheerful all the rest of the way. Amen.
A verse to share “For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.” — Romans 8:6
David Cameron gets it on immigration There is nothing like a little heat from a third political party to get the attention of career politicians who wish to stay in office. Nigel Farage, leader of the upstart UK Independent Party (UKIP), has been turning up the heat on British Prime Minister David Cameron over the issue of migrants who come to the UK without jobs and immediately sign up for government benefits. The debate in Britain mirrors the one in the United States with one important exception: A treaty with the European Union requires Britain to accept migrants from all EU countries, no matter their employment status or health condition. As in America, this has put pressure on British taxpayers, many of whom think these migrants are taking jobs from British citizens and overburdening schools and the National Health Service. In a recent speech, Cameron proposed denying EU migrants access to certain welfare and other benefits for four years, including denial of a child allowance, unless the immigrant children live with their parents in Britain. “Thus eliminating,” writes the Wall Street
Journal, “an incentive for immigrant families that try to arbitrage Britain’s generCal ous welfare by raisThomas state ing children home Columnist back where costs are lower.” One parent lives in Britain to get the benefit, another stays in their home country with the children, who live on Britain’s pound. No child benefit or tax credits paid for children living outside the UK, Cameron proposes. And he’s right. He hopes such a move, if approved by Parliament, might deter thousands more unemployed immigrants from coming to Britain. Cameron still must win approval from the other EU member nations and that is unlikely. Poland has warned that it will vote against the proposal unless it also applies to British citizens who are unemployed and seeking benefits. German Chancellor Angela Merkel was reported to be “hopping mad” over Cameron’s proposal, so it remains doubtful if Cameron will get more than a short-term bump in his
approval numbers ahead of next spring’s anticipated elections. Some conservatives within Cameron’s Tory Party want Britain out of the EU, a position that goes back to the days of the late British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who was skeptical of the EU from the start and feared the loss of British sovereignty and identity. The Washington Post recently reported “Net migration into (Britain) is now nearly at a post-recession high — and about 50 percent greater as a proportion of population than it is in the United States.” The issue in the UK, as in America, is the character of the country. It isn’t about resurgent “nativism,” the label applied to some people who want to maintain the traditions, honor the history, save the English language and preserve other characteristics that make our countries attractive to residents and immigrants. No nation can long endure with unsecured borders. The Wall Street Journal recently suggested that Cameron might consider slashing the 20 percent value-added tax on consumption, “which disproportionately affects those with lower
incomes.” For that matter the VAT could be slashed altogether to create an economic boom, but that’s a subject for another day. It isn’t xenophobic to suggest that immigrants ought to leave their political and other interests behind when they arrive in a new land. That’s what immigrants to America did in the last century. They left their native countries because they believed America offered them and their children a better life. They intended to embrace all that is America, not hyphenate themselves into competing groups with dual loyalties. Immigrants who wish to become fully British or fully American are the kind of people our countries want. What they don’t want are people who bring their agendas and seek to impose them on citizens who, through military service and sacrifice, built something they wish to sustain for themselves and their posterity. Is that too much to ask? (Cal Thomas’ latest book is “What Works: Common Sense Solutions for a Stronger America” is available in bookstores now. Readers may email Cal Thomas at tcaeditors@tribune.com.)
Clinton’s stock declining in futures market Is the market in Hillary Clinton futures collapsing? Quite possibly so. A year ago Clinton seemed likely to become the next president. Presumably she and her husband had not yet started to call themselves, Bush style, 42 and 45. But she had an overwhelming lead in the polls for the Democratic nomination and was getting 50 percent or more in most polls against possible Republican candidates in general election pairings. Ratings of Clinton’s performance as secretary of state were positive. She seemed poised to hold and add onto Barack Obama’s 2008 and 2012 majorities. Things look different now. Obama now gets negative marks on foreign policy, and some of the luster is off Clinton’s record as well. With the Islamic State ravaging much of Iraq and Syria, the decision to withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq looks dubious. With Vladimir Putin’s Russia rampaging through much of Ukraine, Clinton’s reset button looks ludicrous. Most Americans may have been content with a foreign policy of “leading from behind.” But as the world spins out of control, they don’t like the results. And over the course of 2014, Clinton’s favorability ratings have declined. Her memoir of her Cabinet
Reece Terry
Mark Boehler
publisher rterry@dailycorinthian.com
editor editor@dailycorinthian.com
Willie Walker
Roger Delgado
circulation manager circdirector@dailycorinthian.com
press foreman
service had a curiously defensive title – “Hard Choices” – and her book tour was someMichael thing like the Barone opposite of a ringing sucColumnist cess. Sales were slim, and readership probably even slimmer. The prospect of a Clinton presidency may thrill a few aging feminists, but few others seem to find her very interesting. There’s plenty of bad news for Clinton in last month’s Quinnipiac poll, the first national survey conducted since the November election. Clinton runs 1 point behind Mitt Romney, 1 point ahead of Chris Christie, 4 points ahead of Paul Ryan and 5 points ahead of Jeb Bush, Rand Paul and Mike Huckabee. None of this can be blamed on low off-year turnout; the poll is of registered voters. All these Republicans except Romney are significantly less well known than Clinton. When asked whether their feelings are favorable or unfavorable, only 5 percent of poll respondents have no opinion on Clinton and 14 percent on Romney; the numbers for the other Republicans run between 29 and 39 percent. So she’s running even with the best-known can-
didate while the others all have room to grow. Even more significant are Clinton’s percentages against these candidates: 44, 45, 46, 46, 46 and 46. In seriously contested 2014 Senate races, Democratic incumbents tended to run about even with their poll numbers, while their Republican challengers ran well ahead of theirs. If you apply the same rule to Clinton’s Quinnipiac numbers, she ends up with about the same percentage as John McCain in 2008 or Democratic House candidates in 2010 and 2014. Now, things may be different by 2016. Obama’s job approval could rise, and Democrats generally could regain the advantage over Republicans they enjoyed a year ago. Increased economic growth could strengthen the incumbent party – although, as RealClearPolitics. com analyst Sean Trende points out, even significantly greater growth would not point to a Democratic victory under most political scientists’ election prediction formulas. But it’s hard to avoid the conclusion of FiveThirtyEight analyst Harry Enten. Clinton, he wrote last Monday, “no longer looks like such a juggernaut. Not only are her numbers dropping, but she is running on par with a Democratic brand in its weakest shape in a decade.” That’s not what optimis-
World Wide Web: www.dailycorinthian.com To Sound Off: E-mail: email: news@dailycorinthian.com Circulation 287-6111 Classified Adv. 287-6147
tic Democrats were expecting earlier this year. They thought nostalgia for Bill Clinton’s presidency would enable Hillary Clinton to run ahead of party lines. Voters not eager for a third Obama term might welcome a third Clinton term. But those are appeals that look to the past. Voters expect presidential candidates to look to the future. Hillary Clinton has wide leads in polls for the Democratic nomination. But her record is a bad fit for the Democratic primary electorate in which the energy currently comes from the left. Lurching to the left and then tacking toward the center doesn’t project a clear vision of the future. In 1991, candidate Bill Clinton gave three policy speeches to overflow crowds at Georgetown University’s Gaston Hall. When Hillary Clinton spoke there last week, the balcony was almost empty and there were empty seats in the lower level, too. Clinton futures were on the rise 23 years ago. They seem to be in decline 23 years later. (Daily Corinthian columnist Michael Barone is senior political analyst for The Washington Examiner, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a Fox News Channel contributor and a coauthor of The Almanac of American Politics.)
How to reach us -- extensions:
Newsroom.....................317 Circulation....................301 news@dailycorinthian.com advertising@dailycorinthian. Advertising...................339 Classifieds....................302 com Classad@dailycorinthian.com Bookkeeping.................333
Editorials represent the voice of the Daily Corinthian. Editorial columns, letters to the editor and other articles that appear on this page represent the opinions of the writers and the Daily Corinthian may or may not agree.