Janet Cowell

Not to me anyway.

Let them expire and then reinstitute them, or better yet, increase the income tax on high income households.

I tend to agree about the sales tax, but Cowell's talking like they're joined at the hip. They're two completely different things that are only related in terms of timing.

The bigger issue is simply that the Senate isn't stepping up to invest in all the areas that need attention. Not even close. The COPS scheme is an end-around doing the right thing.

Dome: How important is repealing the temporary taxes to you in the final budget? 

Cowell: I think there's multiple issues there. Certainly, there's keeping your promise to voters, and if you say you're going to roll off a tax, there's an integrity issue of actually rolling it off. What I'm watching for is to make sure that if we cut the high-income tax and cut the sales tax as we've done, we don't come back in with another plan to up the sales tax, for example, as part of a Medicaid swap with counties. I would have a very, very hard time putting a sales tax back on, which would make the whole tax code more regressive. 

n/t

In a portion of the interview that I didn't include, Cowell also said she supports the repeal of the temporary taxes.

— RTB

other than a novel argument for the COP funding scheme. And if that argument (lock in low prices now for construction) is to be taken seriously, why not COP the entire Land for Tomorrow agenda?

Despite the Senator's impressive record on many fronts, if she does indeed "support" the proposed budget, she has either (1) resigned herself to its passage and played along to make nice, or (2) had her brain stolen by the anti-tax zealots.

This budget stinks, pure and simple. It may be "realistic" and it may be the best the Senate could cobble together, but it ain't good enough. Not by a long shot.