Category: Public Policy

No comments

Here Is What We Know About the COVID-19 Stimulus Bill

  By COVID-19, Economic Development, PBPC Blog posts, Politics

Originally published by KRC-PBPC here. Here is what we think we know about the bipartisan COVID-19 stimulus / relief bill that we expect the Senate to pass today. Let me be clear that lawmakers reached a deal—but the legislative text is not yet complete. Legislative staff members are working to fill in all the blanks on the agreements in order to have a full bill to move to the floor today. Some of these details may change in the final version. We will be updating this blog post throughout the day as we receive more details. Cash payments: The bill provides a one-time stipend of about $1,200 per individual making up to $75,000, $2,400 for couples making $150,000 or less, and $500 per child. The payment will be reduced gradually as incomes rise. Individuals who make up to $99,000 and couples making up to $198,000 would receive less. Though still unsure, we believe… Continue reading

No comments

Calm Before the Storm: An Analysis of Governor Wolf’s Proposed Budget for 2020-21

  By Budget analysis, Diana Polson, PA Budget and Policy Center, Pennsylvania Budget, Stephen Herzenberg

Originally published by KRC-PBPC here, By Diana Polson, Marc Stier, and Stephen Herzenberg We were in the last two weeks of work on this analysis of the governor’s proposed budget for the fiscal year beginning on July 1, 2020, when the political and economic world in which we’d been living tilted on its axis. The coronavirus that is responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic was creating havoc in China, both to the health of the population and to the economy of the country. It is now clear that the United States is heading into a recession. We should expect that our economy, and indeed the whole world, will suffer for some time. A recession will have a severe impact on the budget of Pennsylvania with regard to both revenues and expenditure. Revenues will certainly decline. And expenditures for human services—especially for Medical Assistance (Pennsylvania’s Medicaid program), Unemployment Compensation, SNAP (formerly called… Continue reading

No comments

M4A and the Future of American Politics

  By Health Care, Inequality, Politics, Public Policy, US

Elizabeth Warren’s campaign may be over soon. But before she disappears, let’s learn from what may have doomed her campaign, her stance on health care. Some of my friends who know that I’m a latecomer to Medicare for All might be surprised I’m enthusiastic about it now. And those who believe some of the silly stuff Sanders’s supporters said about Warren’s version of M4A, will be outraged that I think Warren has something to offer on this subject. Going really bold and then pulling it back was not smart politics by any means. Warren pulled off a political self-hat trick. First, she offered a bold M4A plan that scared the centrists. Then she offered an interim health care plan that the left felt was a betrayal. And, ultimately, she made everyone wonder if she knew what she was doing. But for reasons I’m going to explain, both her ultimate goal… Continue reading

No comments

Only Wealthy Immigrants Need Apply: The Chilling Effects of “Public Charge”

  By Immigration, Pennsylvania

By David Dyssegaard Kallick, Cyierra Roldan and Marc Stier Originally published at by the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center of the Keystone Research Center. The day the new public charge rule goes into effect, the Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center and the New York Fiscal Policy Institute are releasing a report demonstrating the harm it will create for Pennsylvania families, the Pennsylvania economy and state revenues. The “public charge” inadmissability test has been part of federal immigration law for more than one hundred years. Federal law allows the government to deny permanent residence (a “green card”) to a person “likely at any time to become a public charge.” The Trump administration’s new regulations significantly stiffen this forward-looking test. The public charge rule will make it much more difficult for low- and moderate-income families to make their lives in the United States if they are considered likely to use public benefits… Continue reading

No comments

Lawmakers Should Take a Mulligan When Governor Wolf Vetoes Tax Credit for More Petro Plants

  By Economic Development, Environment, Marcellus Shale, PA Budget and Policy Center, PBPC Blog posts

HARRISBURG – Keystone Research Center economist Stephen Herzenberg and Pennsylvania Budget and Policy Center director Marc Stier issued the following statement in the wake of the Pennsylvania General Assembly’s approval yesterday of a multimillion-dollar tax credit for future petrochemical and fertilizer plants that use Pennsylvania natural gas as a feedstock. “We strongly urge Governor Wolf to veto HB 1100, an  inadequately considered subsidy for petrochemical companies and then urge lawmakers of both parties to reconsider their support so that the governor’s veto is sustained. Doubling down on subsidies for petrochemical and plastics companies at this moment of history is like buying more deck chairs for the Titanic.” “The minimum due diligence the Pennsylvania General Assembly should demand of itself is to ask the Independent Fiscal Office to evaluate the advisability of this subsidy, considering: the consequences of expanding petrochemical production in western Pennsylvania for carbon emissions and other pollutants, and… Continue reading

No comments

Cutting Corporate Taxes Hasn’t Worked: Why PA Is Still Short on Necessary Funding

  By PA Budget and Policy Center, Pennsylvania State Taxes, Taxation, Testimony

Originally published by KRC-PBPC here. Continue reading

No comments

Corporate Tax Cuts Since 2002 Now Cost PA $4.2 Billion Yearly: Pennsylvania Should Pass Worldwide Combined Reporting

  By PA Budget and Policy Center, Pennsylvania State Taxes, Policy reports, Taxation

Originally published at KRC-PBPC here. By Stephen Herzenberg, Diana Polson, and Marc Stier This paper focuses on the details of one part of this story: the cuts in corporate taxes in Pennsylvania since 2002 that have reduced revenues by what is now $4.2 billion per year and have created a tax system that is among the most unfair in the country.   Pennsylvania’s tax-cutting, shaped by the corporate-sponsored narrative, has taken a variety of forms. Under both Republican and Democratic governors, we have entirely eliminated one of our two major taxes on corporations, the Capital Stock and Franchise Tax (CSFT). We have also allowed businesses to lower their reported profits subject to the largest remaining corporate tax—the Corporate Net Income (CNI) tax. And we have continued to give multi-state corporations free rein to cook their books and exploit corporate tax loopholes to their reported income subject to the CNI. The result is that 73% of corporations that do business in Pennsylvania pay no corporate income tax at all.1  This policy brief updates estimates of the cost each year to the Pennsylvania budget from corporate… Continue reading

No comments

Corporate Tax Cuts Since 2002 Cost PA $4.2B Annually

  By Corporate Taxes, Diana Polson, Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Budget, Pennsylvania State Taxes, Stephen Herzenberg, Taxation

By Stephen Herzenberg, Diana Polson, and Marc Stier Closing Delaware loophole, instituting worldwide combined reporting would level the playing field for small businesses and generate over $700 million a year to invest in PA communities This paper focuses on the details of one part of this story: the cuts in corporate taxes in Pennsylvania since 2002 that have reduced revenues by what is now $4.2 billion per year and have created a tax system that is among the most unfair in the country.   Pennsylvania’s tax–cutting, shaped by the corporate-sponsored narrative, has taken a variety of forms. Under both Republican and Democratic governors, we have entirely eliminated one of our two major taxes on corporations, the Capital Stock and Franchise Tax (CSFT). We have also allowed businesses to lower their reported profits subject to the largest remaining corporate tax—the Corporate Net Income (CNI) tax. And we have continued to give multi-state corporations free rein to cook their books and exploit corporate tax loopholes to their reported income subject to the CNI. The result is that 73% of corporations that do business in Pennsylvania… Continue reading

No comments

On Today’s Ruling on the Affordable Care Act Individual Health Insurance Mandate

  By Health Care, PA Budget and Policy Center, PBPC Blog posts

Originally published at KRC-PBPC here. Today’s 2-1 decision by a federal appeals court rules the ACA’s requirement that people have health insurance is unconstitutional because Congress has repealed the tax penalty for those who don’t have health insurance. But it steps back from the conclusion reached a year ago by Federal Judge Reed O’Connor that the entire ACA is unconstitutional. Both parts of the decision were expected by reasonable legal scholars. The individual mandate was upheld by the Court in NFIB v. Sibelius in 2012 on the grounds that it was an exercise of Congress’s power to tax individuals. The repeal of the tax undermined this rationale for the individual mandate put forward by Chief Justice Roberts in that case. Judge O’Connor went much further and argued that without the individual mandate, the entire ACA is unconstitutional, even though there was no explicit indication in the law that said the… Continue reading

No comments

Judicial Gerrymandering is Back

  By Constitutional Law and Civil Liberties, Courts, Judicial Gerrymandering, PA Constitutional Law

Originally published by KRC-PBPC here. Republicans who control the Pennsylvania House of Representatives couldn’t find time to raise the minimum wage this week. But they did find time to take revenge on Pennsylvania judges for protecting our rights to vote and to have Congressional districts that are not gerrymandered in their favor. They did this by passing a proposed amendment to the Pennsylvania Constitution that will change how we elect judges and justices to our appellate courts, including our Supreme Court. Instead of electing them statewide, if this amendment becomes part of our Constitution, we will elect them from districts that, of course, would be drawn by members of the General Assembly. As we explained in detail in this blog post, this proposed amendment will, in two ways, give the General Assembly far more influence over the courts than is appropriate in a government that respects the separation of powers. By… Continue reading