Wasn’t there supposed to be a big announcement from Paula Hawks that didn’t happen a few weeks back? Today, State Representative Paula Hawks is admitting to the Associated Press that yes, she’s looking at taking on Congresswoman Kristi Noem:
State Rep. Paula Hawks appears to be the first Democrat publicly weighing a challenge to Republican U.S. Rep. Kristi Noem, who will be seeking re-election in 2016.
Hawks, a representative from Hartford, said Tuesday she will likely make a decision before July.
and…
Noem had more than $1 million in the bank when she wrapped up the fundraising quarter that ended in March.
The biggest problem Hawks faces in a run against Noem? Before she can think about raising money against Noem’s $1 Million in the bank, she’s got to try to explain away her dismal record on the State income tax (View this video starting about 17-18 minutes in):
Questioner: are you in favor of an income tax? Hawks: “Um, yeah. If done properly… I think an income tax is fairly based.”
Questioner: Do you see a downside to an income tax? Hawks: “It’s extremely unpopular. The unfortunate part of that is it’s unpopular because of a lack of understanding how that would affect people differently than taxes now.”
View and read for yourself here at ArgusLeader.com.
Hmm… Kristi Noem who is on the Ways and Means Committee fighting to reduce taxes? Or Paula Hawks who thinks we need new taxes at the state level and people don’t want new income taxes because they somehow don’t understand they need to pay more to government? Is Hawks running for Congress because she thinks there are more tax-and-spend Democrats in Washington than there are in Pierre?
If Paula Hawks is for a state income tax in South Dakota, what will she do to our taxes at the federal level?
That’s the biggest question that voters should keep in mind.
She says education funding, expanding medical coverage (Medicaid), and economic development are her biggest issues. So why is she looking to get whooped up on by Noem in a race for a seat that has little direct impact over those issues?
Hawks is another Progressive who thinks that we are all too stupid to understand what is in our best interest, which in this particular instance is the establishment of an income. That is hubris at its extreme.
Apparently, listening to Representative Hawks has made me stupid. I accidentally omitted the word tax at the end of that first sentence.
Be careful, Daugaard is ramping up for a second round of tax increases that will make the gas, property, excise, wheel and license taxes of this past session the second largest tax increase in South Dakota’s history. We’ve got a new number one largest tax increase in South Dakota’s history coming.
Kniep may have wanted an income tax, but Daugaard will get sales, gas, wheel, property, excise and license tax increases passed. Kniep was a liberal piker compared to Daugaard. Go get ’em, Denny!
Great! More regressive taxes! The way we are taxed here in SD is so out of balance. We need a state income tax and look hard at tax exemptions that are given out.
people don’t fear the state income tax because they don’t understand it, its because they don’t trust that the property and sales taxes and user “fees” will be commensurately brought down in a balanced trade off in order to establish the position of an income tax in the revenue stream at its existing size. they just (rightly) see the argument made for “income taxes” that only add to the already unbalanced burden. really set up a doable path to an income tax. clearly pulling down other taxes to balance it out, and it might get done. i personally don’t expect anyone to give ground on the state’s goofy property tax calculation system so i don’t expect an income tax to come about.
Your party is the party of taxes gas tax right. Lets not forget wheel tax al you so called conservatives.As far as I know Hawks doesnt get a farm subsidy but I am conservative at least its not mine.
Don’t worry. Leftist Paula Hawks will understand things for us. We just need to keep voting for her.
Young Ms. Hawks seems like a good bet for this. I hear tell she is very nice, if not a bit of an Amazon.
I have a real problem with the gas tax increase. Yes roads need to be funded but it is also a regressive tax on those who are the poorest and need transportation to get to work.
I haven’t seen any huge proposals from Noem to make me excited about her positions on taxes. Yes I probably agree with her on most tax issues but she isn’t really bringing forth tax reductions that make my life a lot better. She is not calling for ending the IRS, speaking about a fair tax or flat tax. She’s calling for a repeal of the death tax which doesn’t impact me. She’s very narrow on this issue.
In SD we have real issues with putting too much of the tax burden on one group. Property owners and farmers.
How about we look at revamping our states tax code also. Just because we have it does not mean it is the best option.
I disagree with Hawks but I’m in favor of having discussions on how to best raise revenue for the state through various tax options. Though I would not be in favor of adding one without removing another and I would never support an income tax for SD.
It’s hard for me to look at Kristi Noem and see anti tax champion. The whole tax code is a mess and I don’t see any real proposals from her to fix it – just a little piece here or there.
Would it be possible for our state legislature to discuss going to a sales tax with an exemption on food and essential items?
Anytime we are going to have a discussion on taxes I say good because we need to start talking about a new way to fund government in this country.
Noem is on the committee in Congress that has jurisdiction over all tax issues. If we see tax reform in the next few years than Noem will have her fingerprints on it. The only way we’re going to see any big change in our tax code on the federal level is through a massive overhaul, not piecemeal.
Anonymous 6:54:
A case can be made the gas tax is one of the fairest taxes we have in that it is a user tax, in some ways not unlike paying rent or buying a house. If one lives in an apartment or drive on the roads, one pays for what they use.
“Regressive” is an easy argument to make because it compares itself against income. But the reality is the lower class (and middle class) pays a greater percentage of their income for groceries, housing, owning a car, insurance of all kinds, cable TV/phone, and just about every other “necessity” than the rich.
Additionally, when you compute the percentage of what a lot of transportation intensive businesses pay in gas tax against their profit, some pay a higher percentage of gas tax than they pay in income taxes. Just ask an independent trucker what his profit is after taking the salary he’d get if he wasn’t independent and paying for his truck. Yes, it is a cost of doing business but again a case can be made it is the gas tax that is regressive.