There are a lot of groups who have been hurt by the policies passed by Republicans in the legislature. Most are just victims of the Republicans’ budget. A few, though, have been under active attack by the Republican majority. One of those groups is renters.

Renters took a big hit from last year’s cuts to the Renters’ Credit. Now, though, Republicans have decided that wasn’t enough, and they’re proposing even larger cuts::

Here we go again with another proposal to dramatically cut the Renters’ Credit, a property tax refund for about 300,000 low- and moderate-income Minnesota households. It refunds a portion of the property taxes that renters pay through their rents. More than one-quarter of participating households include seniors and/or people with severe disabilities.

On Wednesday night, the House Property and Local Tax Division passed House File 1914, which cuts business property taxes, primarily through phasing out the state property tax paid by businesses and cabins. Unfortunately, it cuts the Renters’ Credit to partially pay for the tax cuts.

I don’t understand what the Republicans’ problem is with renters, but they seem to be a constant target. Republicans seem intent on squeezing money from renters, even as they work hard to enrich the wealthy. It’s a sick reverse-Robin Hood policy that doesn’t represent Minnesotans’ values.

Republicans can never come right out and admit that their policies are all about heaping money on the richest 1 percent. That would obviously be political suicide. Instead, they rely on phony language. For example, they’re not the super-rich, they’re “job creators.” Similarly, Republicans falsely claim that taxes on the rich are actually targeting “small businesses.”

In fact, a large majority of small business owners believe millionaires don’t pay their fair share in taxes, according to a new poll [PDF], and believe their taxes should be increased.

It should be noted that 50 percent of the respondents of the poll identified themselves as Republicans or “independent leaning Republican.” Yes, even Republican business owners believe the rich are getting special treatment. As it turns out, the only people who support continued giveaways to the rich are establishment Republicans and the millionaires and big corporations that fund them. 

Hooray! This is the sort of thing I’m enjoying hearing more of from Barack Obama:

President Barack Obama on Thursday tied his proposal to raise taxes on wealthy Americans to his faith, telling leaders gathered for the National Prayer Breakfast that Jesus’s teachings have shaped that conclusion.

The rich should pay more not only because “I actually think that is going to make economic sense, but for me as a Christian, it also coincides with Jesus’s teaching that ‘for unto whom much is given, much shall be required,’” Obama said…

It’s really important that Democrats stop ceding the moral high ground on issues like taxes. That can mean tackling taxes from a religious perspective, like Obama does here, or simply discussing our moral imperative to provide for the poor and sick.

For years, the right has somehow made giving millions of dollars to the super-rich seem like the height of morality. They’ve tarred progressive taxation as un-American “socialism.” That’s absolutely absurd, but for decades, we have refused to push back.

One of the reasons I voted for Obama in 2008 was that I thought he could make our case effectively. In 2012, he’ll have that chance, and I hope he’ll rise to the occasion.

The MNGOP is upset that some cities and counties have raised their local levies to compensate for the millions of dollars the GOP took away from them. And doggone it, they’re going to do something about it! That’s why Rep. Greg Davids (R-Preston) is sponsoring the Stay Down, Cities! Act of 2012*:

Local units of government could find their ability to raise levies curtailed….

Last year the Legislature re-crafted the market value homestead credit, leaving some communities with less state aid. Davids said while most local governments “acted responsibly” and did not raise their levy, approximately $413 million was raised by others who “went overboard.”…

The bill, which has no Senate companion, would allow a local government’s levy limit to grow by 1.9 percent annually.

Quite a racket they’ve got going, huh? First, they take away millions of dollars from cities and counties. Then, they express their outrage that local governments increased their levies to make up the difference. Finally, they gallantly propose to put a stop to property taxes by legislative fiat.

If the GOP wants to do something about rising property taxes, they should look in the mirror. Stop slashing aid to local governments. Stop taking from the poor and giving to the rich. Stop trying to dismantle our state government and force its responsibilities on our cities and counties. Instead of trying to mandate the impossible, just stop demanding more from local governments while simultaneously cutting their funding.

*No, that’s not currently the official name. Maybe Rep. Davids would like to consider it, though?

This is great news:

[Senator Sheldon Whitehouse] will introduce a bill that would ensure that millionaires paying lower tax rates than middle class taxpayers would henceforth pay a 30 percent tax rate.

…under the proposal, those making more than $1 million a year would be required to calculate their overall tax rate, taking into account all their income and the full sum of what they pay in taxes. If that amount adds up to less than 30 percent, they would be required to make up the difference.

Is this a stunt? Sure, in some respects. Whitehouse is certainly proposing the bill knowing full well that it will be voted down, at least. But it does illustrate a very real difference between the Democrats’ and Republicans’ ideologies. The Democrats truly support the bill, and would happily implement it. Likewise, the Republicans truly oppose it; they’re not being trapped with some sort of gimmick that forces them to take a stance they don’t actually hold.

The difference between the two parties on soaring inequality — and the preferential treatment the rich receive — will be a key deciding point in this election. I’m very glad the Democrats are taking steps to ensure that the public understands where the parties stand.

Barack Obama has clearly warmed to the fight over taxes and income inequality, which is wonderful to see. At a campaign event yesterday, he responded with derision to Romney’s accusations that his policies were based on envy of the rich. He archly suggested that Warren Buffett and Bill Gates aren’t motivated by class envy. Mockingly, he reassured Americans that he, Buffett, and Gates would survive if their taxes went up.

Romney’s argument is so simplistic, and reeks so strongly of a wealthy plutocrat lording it over those he sees as his inferiors, that it’s worthy of Obama’s scorn. But Obama also made some serious points. He’s 

This has nothing to do with envy. It has everything to do with math. We’ve got to make choices. Americans understand — if I get a tax break I don’t need, and a tax break the country can’t afford, then one of two things are gonna happen: either it’s going to add to our deficit, or somebody else is going to have to make up the difference…. [Emphasis added]

As Greg Sargent points out, Obama has also embraced the argument that the rich should pay higher taxes to ensure the continued functioning of the system that led to their own success:

Each of us is only here because somebody, somewhere, felt a responsibility to each other and to our country and helped to create all this incredible opportunity that we call the United States of America. Now it’s our turn to be responsible. And it’s our turn to leave an America built to last for the next generation.

I’m so glad that Democrats are finally embracing this message. Plenty of liberals, myself included, have been saying this for years, of course. But we owe an enormous debt of gratitude to Elizabeth Warren for bringing it into the mainstream.

Obama has a legitimate argument for why soaring inequality is harmful to our nation, and why we should increase taxes on the rich. Mitt Romney has name calling, and adamant demands that nobody ever discuss income inequality except in “quiet rooms.” His “arguments,” such as they are, deserve every bit of scorn Obama heaped on them.

The UpTake has some great video of Mark Dayton speaking at the Blue State Ball on Saturday. Dayton skewered the GOP for their one sole priority during the last legislative session:

…an absolute unwavering devotion to their mantra that there will be no tax increases on the richest Minnesotans. And everything else — everything else sacrificed at that altar. Property taxes increased, school funding withheld, borrowing from our future with tobacco bonds… everything and anything so as not to make the wealthiest 2 percent of Minnesotans pay their fair share of taxes.

I couldn’t agree more. I noted back in July that the GOP’s lone victory was protecting multi-millionaires. And I’m glad Dayton is willing to bring this to the forefront of the debate.

In fact, Dayton went on to urge DFLers to take a strong stand on raising taxes on the very rich, calling it good policy and good politics. He’s absolutely right — after all, he took back the Governor’s mansion with those politics. I hope DFL legislative candidates will heed his advice.

Watch the whole speech below:

While they fought tooth and nail to protect millionaires from paying their fair share, the Republican legislature had no such qualms about hurting the middle class. Their cuts to local government aid and changes to the property tax system mean real pain for Minnesota families.

But you don’t have to take my word for it. Here’s what a nonpartisan House Research study concluded:

Statewide, property taxes would increase by $413 million, or 5.2%, if all local taxing jurisdictions were to adopt their proposed levies…. Increases on the largest property types are 4.9% on residential non-homestead property, 8% on regular apartments, 4.2% on commercial industrial property, 11.4% on agricultural property, 11% on low-income apartments, and 4.8% on seasonal-recreational property.

When you dig into the details, things looks even worse — especially in Greater Minnesota. Here are some details I received in a press release from Reps. Paul Marquart and Ann Lenczewski:

• The total average increase for the Duluth area is 10.3%
• The small business average increase for East Central Minnesota cities is 11.7%
• The residential home average increase for South Central Minnesota towns is 10% with an increase of 23.6% for higher-valued businesses (over $150,000)
• The higher-valued business (over $150,000) average increase for Southeast Minnesota towns is a jaw-dropping 25.7%

And I have to keep saying it over and over. Why is this happening? Because the only thing the Republicans stand for is coddling the super-rich. It’s their number one priority, and they don’t care if it means soaking the poor and the middle class to accomplish it.

On Monday, I wrote that the MNGOP has had a lot of success pitting residents against their city and county elected officials:

Our cities and counties aren’t to blame for the property tax increases, but that’s difficult to see. For most people, it looks like their local governments are to blame. And that’s exactly what the MNGOP wanted.

Ramsey County is a perfect example of what I’m talking about: 

Ramsey County commissioners voted Wednesday on a 2012 budget that’s 2.7 percent lower than this year; but the math is never simple and it turns out that taxpayers will still pay more in property taxes next year.

The overall levy is going up 1.7 percent, because state and federal aid has decreased, commissioners said.

So Ramsey County commissioners are likely to get an earful from their constituents for raising taxes. Voters will fume, why can’t they be fiscally responsible? Once again, that’s exactly what the MNGOP wanted.