Income tax would be more fair than governor's payroll tax
The governor's choice of a payroll tax is curious — the only reason for such a tax is that he doesn't want anything labeled an "income tax." However, it is a tax on income nonetheless. Unfortunately, it is regressive. The tax is 1.5 percent on wages, self-employment and partnership up to a maximum of $150,000. A low-wage earner making $5,000 will pay 1.5 percent of his income in the form of tax, where someone earning $300,000 will pay .075 percent of her income in taxes. That is regressive — taking relatively higher taxes from lower-income people. The impact on the well-being of lower-income taxpayers is much more detrimental than for higher-income taxpayers. The proposed payroll tax fails the "fairness" test.
There will need to be a whole new bureaucracy set up to handle such a specialized tax. An income tax would be much easier to facilitate, as people already have their federal tax. The state tax could merely be a small percentage of the federal tax. This would be much more easily administered.
Moreover, much income enjoyed by people in the upper income brackets escapes a "wage tax." There will be lots of gaming the system, as people figure out how to not report wages. All retirement income (state retirement packages — PERS and TRS) will not be taxed, as well as liquidated deferred payment programs (IRA). Also, income from non-wage sources increases more than proportionately as income rises. Much of the income for people in the $500K and higher is non-wage income, further exacerbating the regressivity problem.
Alaska can do better — hopefully better heads will prevail in this time of revenue shortfalls. We can do better than a regressive wage tax that hurts low-income people more.
— P.J. Hill
Anchorage
How would Jenkins trim budget?
Paul Jenkins (and others) opine that reducing the size of government is the best way to solve Anchorage's budget woes.
I hope in an upcoming op-ed Mr Jenkins would be much more specific. What items and or personnel would he "shrink?" And how much savings would each suggestion provide? Only with these details can one intelligently decide whether more tax revenue is needed.
— Steve Tucker
Anchorage
Alaska needs pragmatism
Please come back, Jimmy Stewart, he of that most wonderful film "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington." We are in such deep need of that kind of pragmatism!
— Steven Williams
Anchorage
Time has come for Legislature to rescind '80th Percentile Rule'
I want to control the cost of medical care in Alaska. Therefore, I request the Alaska state Legislature rescind the portion of the October 2004 supplement of the Alaska Administrative Code known as "The 80th Percentile Rule."
Let me explain. In 2004, the division adopted the 80th percentile rule. It requires insurance companies to pay 80 percent of the reasonable market rate for a health care service. On an insurance statement, you may have seen this called a UCR for "usual, customary and reasonable rate." Insurers calculate that rate twice a year after surveying the market.
The following is an excellent explanation I found in an article by Annie Feldt of the Alaska Energy Desk that appeared in the ADN:
"In Alaska, that market is small. Even in the state's largest city, Anchorage, most specialties have only one or two provider groups.
"Jeff Ranf is an employee benefits consultant with the company USI in Anchorage. And because the market is so small, he says the 80th percentile rule essentially allows specialists to name a price that insurers are then required to pay.
" 'Every year that providers continue to raise their rates, all they're doing is bumping up that 80th percentile. There's nothing holding them back, in other words,' he says.
"A 2011 report by the actuarial firm Milliman pointed to the 80th percentile rule as a factor driving up health care costs in the state. The report said Alaska is the only state in the country with this type of regulation."
You may have noticed that many specialists are NOT preferred providers with your insurance plan. Thus no one has any control over the exorbitant prices these doctors charge for their surgeries. Compare for yourself the cost of surgery in Alaska versus the Lower 48. The difference is nauseating.
I'm not a politician. I work at the Community Health Center where I struggle on a daily basis to get the care for my patients that they deserve.
I've never started a petition. Maybe the time has come …
— Dr. Sharon Smith
Anchorage
Letter-writer makes good point on our assault on history
Don Neal has stated a great reason to stop this assault on the history of the past (Letters, Oct. 20). Good or bad, it should remain. Remember, many radical groups around the would in this century have destroyed remnants of our past to fit their own view of the world. Well, the USA has its own way of doing the same thing. Eliminate all references to slavery now, then years from now it just didn't exist.
— Liz Forsman
Anchorage
Alaska senators add to debt
In spite of the fact that the federal debt would rise by $1.5-trillion, both Alaska senators voted in favor of the Trump budget!
This budget sets the stage for smoother passage of Trump's tax plan, estimated to increase the deficit $7.2 trillion over the first decade.
Total vote was 51-49.
Many joined the Senate with the rise of the tea party movement, which railed against rising national debt.
— Mary L. Turner
Anchorage
Opposed to drilling in ANWR, and here's a list of reasons why
As a lifelong Alaskan, I am opposed to drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Why, you ask? Because of flowers blooming on our deck on Oct. 8. Because Alaska villages, no longer protected by sea ice, are eroding into the ocean. Because the Gwich'in people rely on the caribou that birth in ANWR.
Because Hurricane Harvey dumped 51.88 inches of rain on Texas in a day, a record. Because a family on the 2017 Fairbanks Solar Tour cut their electricity bill in half using solar panels. Because the fires in California are record-breaking deadly. Because the minus-60 degrees Fahrenheit Fairbanks winters of my youth are gone. Because an Antarctica iceberg the size of Delaware calved in July. Because polar bears are drowning as the ice melts. Because the Greenland ice sheet has lost 3,600 billion tons of ice since 2002. Because acidification of the ocean harms the zooplankton in the food chain, which feeds salmon. Because Farmer's Loop Road is becoming a washboard as permafrost melts. Because the Chinese and Europeans are ahead of us in renewable energy. Because my children are 19 and 21. And because ANWR is one of the last great wilderness places on earth and oil is of the past and renewable energy is the future.
We humans are not particularly good at long-term planning. We don't like to do things that are hard or uncomfortable or even think about those things. We don't like to change our diets or our spending or our oil consumption. But now we are faced with global weirding — a massive disruption of climate as we have known it. If we don't "leave it in the ground" regarding fossil fuels, we will exacerbate the climate crisis.
In Alaska, we have an opportunity to move away from oil, diversify our economy, reduce our contribution to global pollution and protect what is unique and dear to Alaskans. All of this is why I am opposed to drilling in ANWR.
— Diane Preston
Fairbanks
Like the changes in newspaper
Since the new management team has taken over the Alaska Dispatch News, it has become so "user friendly." I actually now look forward now to read the paper in the morning. The new format is just great. What is important to us in our state is given to us first. … we don't have to go to through "filler" to get to the meat. Thank you for finally getting the paper "ship-shape."
— Roy Mendenhall
Chugiak
It's ATF's job to know when weapon has crossed the line
To bump stock or not to bump stock? Why does a tragedy always mean we have to ban a gun or component? An insane person bent on hurting others will always find a way to kill, as evidenced by the 2017 attacks in Europe. The real question is why the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives allowed the sale of the bump stock without classifying it and any weapon it was installed on as a Class 3 firearm, which requires a special license and background check.
To do this, ATF needs to specify at what speed a weapon can spit out bullets regardless of whether the trigger is pulled once or more than once. There are many modifications to weapons that can make them spit out more bullets than originally designed. It's ATF's job to know when a weapon/modification has crossed the line and set regulations to protect us.
— Gerry Guay
Anchorage
The views expressed here are the writers' own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a letter under 200 words for consideration, email letters@alaskadispatch.com, or click here to submit via any web browser. Submitting a letter to the editor constitutes granting permission for it to be edited for clarity, accuracy and brevity. Send longer works of opinion to commentary@alaskadispatch.com.