Latest MSNBC Lie Debunked

[Susie Chutzpah]

"Despite what you may have heard about Wisconsin’s finances, the state is on track to have a budget surplus this year." -Rachel Maddow

A volley of e-mails, blog posts and inquiries to reporters followed a Madison Capital Times editorial on Feb. 16, 2011, that said no state budget deficit exists for 2010-’11 -- or if it does, it’s the fault of Walker and the Republicans in the Legislature.

Liberal MSNBC talk show host Rachel Maddow joined in Feb. 17, accusing Walker of manipulating the situation for political gain.

"Despite what you may have heard about Wisconsin’s finances, the state is on track to have a budget surplus this year," she said. "I am not kidding."

She added a kicker that is also making the rounds: Walker and fellow Republicans in the Legislature this year gave away $140 million in business tax breaks -- so if there is a deficit projected of $137 million, they created it.

Maddow and others making the claim all cite the same source for their information -- a Jan. 31, 2011 memo prepared by Robert Lang, the director of the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau.

It includes this line: "Our analysis indicates a general fund gross balance of $121.4 million and a net balance of $56.4 million."

We were curious about claims of a surplus based on the fiscal bureau memo.

In writing it when it was released, reporters from the Journal Sentinel and Associated Press had put the shortfall at between $78 million and $340 million. That’s the projection for the end of the fiscal year, June 30, 2011.

Walker himself has settled on $137 million as the deficit figure, a number reporters have adopted as shorthand.

We re-read the fiscal bureau memo, talked to Lang, consulted reporter Jason Stein of the Journal Sentinel’s Madison Bureau, read various news accounts and examined the issue in detail.

Our conclusion: Maddow and the others are wrong.

Here’s the bottom line:

There is fierce debate over the approach Walker took to address the short-term budget deficit. But there should be no debate on whether or not there is a shortfall. While not historically large, the shortfall in the current budget needed to be addressed in some fashion. Walker’s tax cuts will boost the size of the projected deficit in the next budget, but they’re not part of this problem and did not create it.

We rate Maddow’s take False.

http://politifact.com/wisconsin/stat...ve-budget-sur/

[hd79]

Lang's memo and wording definitely leads to confusion as the politifact article itself points out:

So why does Lang write his biennial memo in a way that invites confusion?
Lang, a veteran and respected civil servant working in a nonpartisan job, told us he does not want to presume what legislative or other action will be taken to address the potential shortfalls he lists.
Admittedly, the approach this time created the opportunity for a snappy -- and powerful -- political attack.

But it is an inaccurate one.

Lang's fiscal bureau report also stated this:

The tax cuts will cost the state a projected $140 million in tax revenue -- but not until the next two-year budget, from July 2011 to June 2013. The cuts are not even in effect yet, so they cannot be part of the current problem

This last statement is at the heart of politifacts contention that Maddow and others are inaccurate when attributing the deficit to Walkers own actions.

however, if we look at Lang's memo itself, it states this:

So, in an attempt to get this strait that tax credit passed will have little or No impact till after 2013 right?

But THIS YEAR 2011 LANG himself is adding the 25M to this fund for people to claim THIS YEAR!! but doesn't think that anyone will take advantage of that tax credit.. that is strange how can I put money to an account for people to get and not expect people to get that money?

I would submit that Lang's memo still leads to the credence of the charges of confusion, and this statement in the memo does give credence to the charges of Walker's tax cuts having an affect on the deficits yet for the 2011 budget year!

[Thai Kimchi]

Good find. Rachel may have blown the coverage on this one.

I guess that means Walker isn't using this small budget deficit issue to break the unions after all, eh?

I'm glad he did it....time to put the cards on the table. The people in America need to clearly decide which class is more critical to our economic health - the middle class' or the elite class.

Maybe smoke you water carriers out for the time being.

[cottonbroker1]

It has never ceased to amaze me that so many liberals do not understand that tax breaks for business (in the case of wisconsin $140,000,000) is not a complete loss of revenue. In matters of taxation they do not consider the fact that employees of a business pay taxes on their income and that in some cases if not for the writeoff for business that the job they pay taxes on may not even exist....and that does not even take into account the benefits derived from employment as the monies gained from that employment spill over to other businesses as the employed spend their money....and those businesses also employ people who pay taxes..

[John Galt]

Nice try Minty...you aren't the first to bring that garbage to light.

2010-11 General Fund Condition Statement


Based upon the November/December reports, the administration's general fund condition
statement for 2010-11 reflects a gross ending balance (June 30, 2011) of $67.4 million and a net
balance (after consideration of the $65.0 million required statutory balance) of $2.4 million.
Our analysis indicates a general fund gross balance of $121.4 million and a net balance of
$56.4 million. This is $54.0 million above that of the administration's reports. The 2010-11
general fund condition statement is shown in Table 1

http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lfb/Misc/...os&Darling.pdf


Curiously absent from your flawed claim, is this nugget:

To the extent that there is an imbalance -- Walker claims there is a $137 million deficit -- it is not because of a drop in revenues or increases in the cost of state employee contracts, benefits or pensions. It is because Walker and his allies pushed through $140 million in new spending for special-interest groups in January. If the Legislature were simply to rescind Walker’s new spending schemes -- or delay their implementation until they are offset by fresh revenues -- the “crisis” would not exist

.



The giveaway....

Wall Street Bond Holders Win; Wisconsin's Long-Term Debt Rises



Madison-- Republican Gov. Scott Walker plans to pay for $140 million in new special interest spending signed into law in January by extending the state's long term debt in a "scoop and toss" refinancing scheme that will cost untold tens of millions of dollars in additional debt for Wisconsin.

"Scott Walker railed non-stop against budget gimmicks as a candidate and now as governor he's put together a scheme that would make a pay-day lender blush," said Scot Ross, One Wisconsin Now Executive Director. "Gov. Walker created this problem by handing out $140 million in special interest spending to his corporate pals and he's going to make our children pay for it by taking loans the state was ready to pay off and borrow more money on them."

Walker is refusing to provide full accounting of how much in additional costs his "scoop and toss" scheme would cost taxpayers down the road. Since his inauguration in early January, Walker has approved $140 million in new special interest spending that includes

◦$25 million for an economic development fund for job creation that still has $73 million due to a lack of job creation. Walker is creating a $25 million hole which will not create or retain jobs. [Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau, 1/7/11]
◦$48 million for private health savings accounts, which primarily benefit the wealthy. A study from the federal Governmental Accountability Office showed the average adjusted gross income of HSA participants was $139,000 and nearly half of HSA participants reported withdrawing nothing from their HSA, evidence that it is serving as a tax shelter for wealthy participants. [Government Accountability Office, 4/1/08; Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau, 1/11/11]
◦$67 million for a tax shift plan, so ill-conceived that at-best the benefit provided to job creators would be less than a dollar a day per new job, and may be as little as 30 cents a day.



http://www.onewisconsinnow.org/press...-spending.html

[Thai Kimchi]

It has never ceased to amaze me that so many liberals do not understand that tax breaks for business (in the case of wisconsin $140,000,000) is not a complete loss of revenue. In matters of taxation they do not consider the fact that employees of a business pay taxes on their income and that in some cases if not for the writeoff for business that the job they pay taxes on may not even exist....and that does not even take into account the benefits derived from employment as the monies gained from that employment spill over to other businesses as the employed spend their money....and those businesses also employ people who pay taxes..

We've heard that rationale for decades, pilgrim.

1. Taxes need to be increased on the top 2%, not the bottom 98%.

2. It's never been proven, even remotely, lower taxes on the elite class spurs economic growth and/or jobs.

Fixed News has rendered you a total moron.

[cottonbroker1]

We've heard that rationale for decades, pilgrim.

1. Taxes need to be increased on the top 2%, not the bottom 98%.

2. It's never been proven, even remotely, lower taxes on the elite class spurs economic growth and/or jobs.

Fixed News has rendered you a total moron.

oh yea...thats right..what was I thinking??? its the poor who create jobs...idiot...

[hd79]

Yeah, we've been hearing for 10 years now that giving tax cuts to the rich and wealthy will create jobs. What the rich failed to disclose to anyone is that the jobs were created in China and overseas, while they kept getting ever richer off the tax cuts funded by the sweat and toil of the working and middle class in the USA!

It should be simple enough to prove, as we've been trying it your way for over 10 years now!!!

WHERE ARE THE JOBS??????

[cottonbroker1]

Yeah, we've been hearing for 10 years now that giving tax cuts to the rich and wealthy will create jobs. What the rich failed to disclose to anyone is that the jobs were created in China and overseas, while they kept getting ever richer off the tax cuts funded by the sweat and toil of the working and middle class in the USA!

It should be simple enough to prove, as we've been trying it your way for over 10 years now!!!

WHERE ARE THE JOBS??????

and you are waiting on some politician to give or get you a job?? surely you jest.... what the hell is the matter with this country??? do people not believe in cutting your own path in the world anymore?? has this nation under Obama became that passive about their own futures??

[hd79]

It was the RW Camp with the mantra of "tax cuts", "tax cuts", "tax cuts" will produce jobs for over 10 years, and it was the Republicans that ran on campaign promises of focusing on the economy and JOBS prior to last November!

So as Deflection is all you have remaining, are you now admitting THEY LIED????