What you fail to mention is that CAFE requirements are going to double by 2025, thereby cutting the fuel tax collections in half. Electric cars would pay nothing. You would hgave to more than DOUBLE the tax to make up for that. Who would pay for that?? We would.

Go back to yearly inspections, or at least require motorists to "check in" annually. We would "gain" revenue from out of staters fueling up here as opposed to us going to Mass for cheaper gas as the gas would be CHeaper HERE!!! 18 Wheelers would make RI a "pit stop to fuel up"

A quarterly tax (which you already pay to the town for the excise tax) is easier to pay than having to come up with $1400 in sales tax on a $20,000 car purchase.

I think that the cities and towns could collect the tax much like they do now, and pass the rest on to the state. If you have a better idea, I'm all ears. Last time I asked that question to someone here all I got was crickets.

Hey, READ the letter instead of crying. NO extra agency, as the monies go to current agencies. NO extra quarterly taxes as this would be IN LIEU of excise and sales taxes. The ONLY exceptions would be state and municipal VEHICLES, not employees.

Bill, I would imagine that we could put a limit on the amount paid (say 20,000 miles). You would not be the only one in that category, as many businesses would too. All figures I use are for argument's sake. I would expect that this would be revenue neutral, meaning we don't collect more than we do now. Just as the economy gets better, more gets raised as people drive more.
In spite of the waste in government, I would suppose that RIBTA actually runs pretty lean, as they spend what they take in on maintenance, and it shows, considering that the Pell and Mt. Hope bridges are in ewxcellent shape.

John, RIBTA has 60 full time employees.

Again you cannot tax people based on a guess.

Your idea does not take into account either actual in state miles nor does it take into account that large heavy vehicles wear more on roads and bridges than do small light cars etc.

.

Bill, I assume you are serious about the car you drive in that it must be in good shape and reliable, and therefore replaced more often than a person who puts 15k per yr on their car. According to your statement about using very little infrastructure in RI I would assume you live in Tiverton or Little Compton, maybe Portsmouth.

At 50,000 miles per year at 30 miles per gallon, you would use 1667 gallons of gas. In RI you would pay approx $500 per yr in gas tax based on a state levy of about 33 cpg. At the 5 cpg I suggest it would be $85. If you replace your car this yr and spend $20,000, thats another $1400. Property tax on the car in Tiverton would be another $382.40, LC is $278, and Portsmouth $450. Be lucky it's not Providence or it would be $1200!!!!!! But this yr you'd lay out $1400 sales tax +$528 gas tax +$382 excise and well say $8 for an odd trip over the Pell for a grand total of $2318. Next yr would be roughly the same minus the sales tax and a small reduction in excise. A 5 yr total would be about $5600. At 7 cents per mile, the total cost would be about $7300. at 6 cpm, $6300, 5 cpm $5300, (limiting the tax to the first 20,000 miles). So it is a fluid situation. As far as where you drive, it can be argued that if you fuel up in RI all the time than Mass is getting screwed because you pay the gas tax to RI at the RI gas station, yet chew up their roads. Mostly, I see that as something that evens out statewide.

I live in Bristol. I use rte 136 up to either 103 and then head into MA or up to rte 195 and into MA. I buy my gas in MA because it's convenient and cheaper. My car is a 2001 Camry that I started using to commute to work roughly around 2009 which is why it "only" has 258,000 miles on it. I use about 7 miles worth of RI roads and no bridges on a regular basis but your plan would have me paying out the nose. You also didn't mention any mileage cap in your original proposal. The best thing to do here is to keep the current system and make it work properly. Eliminate government waste needs to be the first priority. The government has enough money to function properly but because we allow them to run inefficiently they continue to do so. If your proposal is revenue neutral then they will still clamor for tolls since they want more money. Nice try but not a good solution.

Atta boy!!!!!! Sling insults instead of better ideas. I'm still waiting for that. Instead all I hear is Glum the Lillipution's famous comment; "IT'LL NEVER WORK!!!! WE"RE DOOMED!!!"

John!!!! What's up dude??? If I may correct you though, it's not another tax, but rolling the car sales tax, gas tax, and MV property tax as well as the tolls into one tax, and then dedicating that tax to road repairs and maintenance.

The things that frustrate me are that when you buy a car via private sale, they tax you at the clean retail both for sales and excise. This is a subjective valuation. I'm cynical enough that if they change the way they value our cars, they'll just raise the tax rate to make up for it. What is NOT subjective is that if you use a gallon of gas and replace it, you pay 33 or so cents in tax. If you drive a mile, it's a mile, right there on the odometer!!! Unfortunately, the gas tax is becoming obsolete in my mind because of fuel economy standards. Electric cars use no gas, yet chew up our roads and bridges at the same rate as gas cars. Washington state is toying with the idea of a tax on electricity to make up for the loss in gas tax revenue. Do we go that route???

One thing that's for sure, while the people at the State House may not manage their money effectively based on the fact that DOT bridges barely last 50 years before the are flat out decrepid and need replacing, the people in Jamestown (RIBTA) DO know what they are doing.

I'm fine with putting the tolls back on the Mt Hope bridge. I think it was shortsighted to remove them in the first place. But if they do, NO WHINING!!!!!

john your idea makes sense ,there for it would never fly. as for the mileage tax , obama mentioned that months ago.big brother can tap into the black box that is in the newer cars.

Bob, I know they could tap in, but that is Orwellian. Reporting what you see on the odo during an inspection (something that's been done forever) seems less so. If they doubled the gas tax now (both federal and state) gas prices would rise from about $3.80 to $4.30. All that would do is prepare us now to collect in 2025 what we collect today.

For John Coccio = Then why not just stand firm on the vehicle property tax or a mid way compromise of the exemption amount and restructure the proceeds to go towards the road maintenance instead of the towns individual general treasuries. Of course this would still leave the towns with a little less but so does your idea. Keep the tolls on the Newport bridge as is and let's all insist that our government and the paid employees we elect stop spending us into a hole that our children and future generations will be paying for.

Thanks. I know it's a long shot, as it's completely out of the box (personally, I'd love to see the look on all the people's faces that come from Mass and Ct to buy a car here thinking they'd pay no sales tax by buying in RI, only to find out THEY do, but we wouldn't) and unorthodox.

But back in '97 or '98 when Gov Almond proposed eliminating the tolls on the Mt Hope, I thought it was a bad idea. The saddest part was watching everybody getting a woodie thinking that the best part about not paying 10 CENTS to go over the bridge was screwing all those evil tolltakers out of their state jobs.

I wonder if we have made up the $2 MILLION it cost to remove the old toll booths plus the untold MILLIONS it's gonna cost to put them back by not paying those mean old toll takers all these years. IIRC their collective salaries were 2 or 3 hundred thousand per yr.

It is true that a truck does tear up the road more. But, at about 7 mpg they do pay, and pay dearly!!!! RI WOULD become a place where trucks could do business more cheaply, as far as local deliveries are concerned. Consider this. A fleet of box trucks or dump trucks (Mr Tattrie could speak better of this) puts 42,000 miles per yr on them. At 7 mpg, they use 6000 gallons of diesel per yr!!!! Therefore they would pay over $1500 per yr in state fuel tax alone!!! That doesn't include Sales tax on the truck or excise tax. Lets say at 7 cents per mile we limit them to the first 25,000 miles driven. That would be $1750 per year MAX, plus $350 per yr in fuel tax at 5 cpg. Do you think that delivery companies or oil companies might move their business here to enjoy those savings??? A $100,000 truck would cost $6250 up front in sales tax in Mass. Under my plan it would be just the total of $2100 (1750+350) per yr here.

Also, with a service area on 95 on both sides, imagine the revenue, even at 5 cpg, raised by truckers that would plan their refuels for RI as they go up and down 95 delivering their long distace goods to NE. A 150 gallon refuel would save $37.50 over a refuel with a 30 cpg fuel tax in another state.

I thought you eliminated the fuel tax in this plan?

Any tax plan has to be revenue neutral or cuts (a word that makes politicians cringe) would be necessary.

So who loses under your plan?

No, not eliminate it, just drop it to 5 cpg. I suppose the "losers" would be people driving older vehicles that pay very little in excise taxes. Their burden would rise based on the fact that they would be paying a "use" tax based on mileage as opposed to a "value" tax based on the value of the car they own.

However, even those people could benefit, as when the time comes to replace that old, tired vehicle with a newer one, they wouldn't have to come up with a large amount of cash upfront to pay sales tax on their purchase. That may spur some car sales, as people wouldn't be concerned with having to pay the sales tax as well as the excise tax. You just pay as you go, in essense.

When they eliminated the tolls on the Mt Hope bridge it was because the employees salaries and benefits cost more than the tolls being taken in. Placing and increasing tolls around the state will only stand to drive away the tourist and damage the tourist industry which has already been hard hit by the economy in general. We need to find ways to route out fraud and waste and become more efficient in delivering services not new taxes to support an out of control spend and tax agenda that is unsustainable. Both locally in our towns and cities as well as at the State and Federal levels.

I am not in favor of the tolls but I have to laugh every time I hear someone say the tolls will drive away the tourists. If paying $300.00 a night for a hotel room is not driving them away I don't think a $4.00 toll is going to do that. I know when I plan a vacation I have never checked to see what the toll costs are going to be but I do look at hotel costs.

John I know. It's just frustrating when you think that the Pell bridge is older today than the old Jamestown bridge was when they announced that they would have to replace it. The DOT isn't doing it's job on maintenance. Mr Lewis already said he won't have the funds to do inspections and maint. on the new Sakonnet bridge. So, why did we build it if we are gonna just let it fall down in another 40 yrs???

On another subject, what do you pay in fuel tax when you fill up in RI in your dump?? How about excise tax, if you don't mind me asking.

I doubt it will last 40 years I don't think it will last 5 have you look at the bridge it has a lean to the north. I don't know if it is true or not but I herd that the footings are not built on bedrock and are sinking into the river bottom.

john when the money all goes into the cookie jar {general fund } no one knows how it was spent. and most probably not for it's intended purpose.

I know the idea isn't new. I don't agree with the idea of tracking where we've been. That is an invasion of privacy issue. My idea is a quasi "honor system" in that the mileage gets reported off the odometer at inspection time. As far as knowing where the vehicle has been ( miles driven in one state vs another ), for purposes of taxation, I believe that precedent has been set for one state to tax what happens in another state. For example, if you buy a car in New Hampshire, where there is no sales tax, you still pay RI sales tax when you register it. Also state law here compells us to report any out of state purchases and make up the difference in the tax. For example, if you go to Best Buy and purchase a $1000 TV, you pay $62.50 in sales tax. RI still wants their $7.50. Now, nobody in their right mind would actually report it and pay it, but the law is still on the books and nobody has ever challenged it's legality.

The only other option is to increase the gas tax to make up for the lost revenue due to lower fuel consumption. That is not only a RI problem, but a federal one too.

Bryan, who says anything about RAISING taxes in this??? WHO???? What I am discussing is a way to MAINTAIN the revenue that is supposed to be used for a specific reason (road and bridge maintenance) I have given a specific reason as to why this is; increased efficiency in our vehicles as well as alternatve ways to power them (electric and propane or nat gas) are eroding the revenue stream to keep the roads and bridges safe. Something needs to be done about this. I don't want to hear about "I drive in Mass, so I shouldn't have to pay RI" If they base the tax on the average miles RI'ers drive in RI (for sake of argument lets say 75% of total miles driven) you won't win the argument. And if you did, it would cost more to litigate that than you would receive in credit. If you gas up strictly in Mass, would you like RI to come after you for the gas tax you should pay for the driving you do in RI? NO!!! And it wouldn't happen either because it would cost RI too much to go after that. Not to mention that overcomplicates matters.

You say you have identified $1 billion in savings. Saving I assume you mean can go to road and bridge maintenance. That's GREAT!!!! How about some specifics??? You aren't one of these people that think we can save a Billion by making welfare enrollees take a piss test are you??

Check this out: http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/story/2012-03-18/drug-testing-welfare-applicants/53620604/1

Only 2.7% FAILED!!!!

........More......You also talk of us being one of the most heavily taxed states in the country. It is true. But if you are going to go down that road, you had better be armed with some facts. Looking at a CNN report for 2009, we ranked 10th out of 50 states. 10.2% of our per capita dollars went to state and local authorities.

However, compared with our regional states (NE and NY,NJ, and Penn) we are tied with PA at 4th, with only NH, Mass and Maine ahead of us.

But, compared with other states (the ones that get mentioned most are Texas and Florida we "suck". Now I put that in quatation marks because according to the US BEA, both those states have parts of their economies that in terms of GDP are bigger than our ENTIRE economy!!! Our ENTIRE GDP for 2010 was $49.2 billion, Florida's TOURISIM economy was $54.6 Billion you can imagine they collect more in taxes off tourism than we do period!!! Texas' Oil, gas and mining industry is $65.4 billion. They collect 7.5% of every dollar in profit from those industrie. our GDP in this area? ZERO!!!!

Last time I checked, it would be impossible for our legislature to pass a law mandating the average temperature in RI be 75 degrees in January or that there be 5 trillion barrels of claimable oil under our border.

John, my point is that we are one of the highest taxed states and just one area of our spending is over 90% the revenue we make. In that one area, just looking at the budget for FY2013, I identified over a billion dollars in cuts we could make, and like I said, that's without the individual department's budget (the nitty gritty, so to speak) where I could identify savings in the day to day operation of the department.

I like your "Piss test" straw man. It's funny because I didn't mention that and then you go into other areas that I didn't mention (sources of revenue that other states are lucky to have).

Here's a letter I wrote to the Projo, all of the stats were current as of when I wrote the letter and I'll be happy to post the cites here if you want them.

http://news.providencejournal.com/letters-to-the-editor/2011/11/bryan-m-palumbo-soldier-pleads-please-fix-ri.html

As of that time, only 8 states had a higher tax burden for businesses (we were 42nd, for lowest to highest). Our personal income tax, we were fifth highest. Property tax? Fifth. Our cost of living? Seventh highest.

So what did we get for all those taxes? Worst in roads and bridges (I think it was the third year straight, I can't remember), Our schools were towards the bottom third.

More coming...

Our Legislature can't make it so we have tourists show up, or make oil appear. What they can do, however, is lower taxes to attract more businesses and cut out all the crap in the budget so we can live within our means. Stop "buying votes" with the Unions by giving them contracts that we can't afford. Overall, just stop wasting money.

How this is rocket science for some people is beyond me. If we make $3.5 billion in revenue with those stats relayed above (meaning we really can't go any higher because people like Nancy are already fleeing the state and businesses aren't coming at the current rates), and we're spending $7 billion (which is the case right now). There's only one place we can fix things, that's spending.

You can bring out "piss test" strawmen arguments all you want, but it doesn't change the facts, whether you like to hear it or not.

Won't get into all the other stuff right now John, However I do have to take issue with why we can blame the Dems in this State for every single problem.

The legislature has had a super majority that far exceeds the GOP, for over 78 years and counting, the longest running majority in the history of this country of one party control of a State.

The governorship has never mattered, for 2 reasons, one the legislative majority, (A veto, only means somthing if there is a possibility it cannot be over rode). That does not exist in this State. A veto is only allowed if it benefits the DEM agenda, no matter the party of the Governorship. Lets face it, Dem governors do not do any better than GOP, when it comes to the legislature.

Two; All we heard all thru Carcieri administration was how he wanted the legislature to change it's rules, given by the RI constituton that give more powers to the House Speaker than the Governor actually. Naturally Fox refused. No surprise there.

To blame any other party in this State is not accurate nor is it even possible.

I don't think it would matter if the GOP were in control either, corruption has and allways will be the politics of record in this State. Until that changes, it does not matter who is in power. Would be interesting to see after 78 years, though what the GOP would actually do in this State if the had super majorities for a few years lol.

Until the people get control it remains status quo.

So, because we have a lot of things stacked against us... lets add out of control spending and extremely high taxes to that? When the state financially falls apart, how exactly does that help matters?

For your specifics, RIte care has raised RI Medicare spending from $600k, to $1.6 billion. That's the One billion I saw immediately that could be cut. Why, when we're already billions in debt that our wonderful government adds another $1 Billion to it, I'll never know.

But I do know why they keep getting elected year after year, people like you.

Sorry, meant to say $600 million, not 600k.

So, you suggest ending RIte care. OK. Fine. That is a specific item. Very good.

However, did you know that RIte care covers children of working families??? You suggest punnishing working families because their employer doesn't offer insurance? You don't care cuz Uncle Sam's footing your medical bills. Mass doesn't worry about that because they have Romney-care!!!

So, cut that out, and shove the burden on the hospitals that are already overtaxed. After 25 yrs of rescue, all I see is people using the ER for their PCP, and it's all free thanks to Uncle Ronnie!!!!

Again our tax burden is middle of the road, not high for this region of the country.

Did you know that the patron sain of the Tea Bagger movement, Sarah Palin is responsible for repressive windfall taxes on the oil industry up there??? If it's not the government's job to redistribute wealth, then why does Alaska??? They tax the oil industry at 25% of their profits (2.5X's Texas') up to $52 a barrel. Then, it RISES .2% for every dollar a barrel of oil rises, up to 50% Currently the oil comapnies pay about 33% on their profits to Alaska, and they send their residents a refund check ($1142/yr) and have $41 BILLION in reserves. Is that not government gluttony???

Did you know that Children were already covered under Medicaid and costs $1 Billion less?

That's the stuff I'm talking about. Why did we need this new $1 billion dollar expense? We didn't.

Ah, "Tea Bagger" very mature. How about this? We make $3.5 Billion in revenue, we make our budget $3.5 Billion?

Fact is we are taxed more than just about anyone else. Comparing us to the other Liberal states that are well on their way to the same sort of spectacular ending, doesn't mean much to me. Saying RI is small doesn't mean anything to me (CA isn't small, Washington isn't, Illinois isn't but they are all heading in the same direction too).

Alaska can do that because their budget is LESS than what they make in Revenue. Like I said before, this isn't rocket science but based on how Liberals like yourself see things maybe it is to some people.

You can't continually pay out more than you have. Is that what you do with your personal finances? Make $50k a year but spend $100k? How long until you're living on the streets?

It's as if you don't seem to care where our state is heading, to bankruptcy. What happens then? Then, no one gets ANYTHING. No handouts at all. Not even the safety net that all sides want the government to provide.

I only have five more months to find a new job and figure out where I'm going to live. Because of people like you, it's looking less and less like RI will be an option. Thanks!

This article reminds me of people like you, John.

http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wrni/news.newsmain/article/0/0/1930275/.World./Defiant.Greek.leftist.refuses.to.back.austerity

Government already going bankrupt, Pensions out of wack, and they're standing at the end of the precipice and instead of backing away, cutting spending, you want to jump off and commit financial suicide.

Government's job is NOT to make money for their residents. Alska's revenue is more than their expense because they have a de feacto WINDFALL TAX on oil profits. When the Dms in Congress proposed this Governor Hypocrite howled just like all the other Repubs. Medicaid doesn't help families that have jobs.

Jim's right. 7 years and no payments in. If we did that, the bank would take our house.

John, if Alaska was run like RI is, there wouldn't be any "windfall". There wouldn't be a payout to the tax payers. Instead, people that you seem to like to elect would find a way to spend every damn cent, and then another 50% more.

Bryan, there is a comment I can't argue with (how about that????) We received hudreds of millions in compensation from tobacco lawsuits, and all they did was plug the holes in the budget with them, pat themselves on the back, and get on with their lives.

As for RIte care/Rite share, gutting it wholly may be difficult. Here is the state's Q&A page:

http://www.dhs.ri.gov/Portals/0/Uploads/Documents/Public/RCRS/rcrs_factsheet_eng.pdf

As you can see Rite share helps pay the employer's premiums for WORKING families that can't afford them. This helps to keep them off of welfare, thus off of RIte care, which is specifically for non working families

Now, if we want to talk about reforming welfare (like saying you must be a resident of RI for 12 consecutive months before applying, thus keeping indigents from moving here and getting the assistance) that's different.

Yet we keep electing those people. Why? If people on opposite ends of the political spectrum can see the problem, why do the same people/type of people keep getting elected over and over?

Also, Medicaid already did that, John. Why add another billion to the budget when, #1 we don't have a billion dollars (already in the hole 2.5 billion a year) and #2, we don't need it(Medicaid already took care of working families who made under a certain threshold?

And the expense is only going to get worse, the ACA (Obamacare) has raised rates tremendously already (enough that some businesses have already dropped healthcare because they can't afford it), and that's with only half the program going. By 2014, when the full thing is in effect there was a poll from last year that stated 30% of businesses would be forced to drop it then, or go out of business.

It's just ridicules.

Bryan, go to dhs.ri.gov . There are different standards for both.

RIte care appears to be for people on "welfare" and pregnant women. There is a premium to be paid for this program.

RIte share is for working families below 250% of federal poverty guidlines. This helps them pay for premiums through their employer. They still pay a premuim as well.

"Medicaid" is for the disabled. Only adults who are disabled or the elderly that do not qualify for "medicare" because they have less than 10 yrs work in their lifetime qualify.

Again, John, if we're already in debt up to our armpits and are operating with a yearly deficit, WHY DO YOU ADD ANOTHER $1 BILLION DOLLAR PROGRAM?

Medicaid is for anyone who can't afford healthcare. There was no need for a whole new program and we can't afford a whole new program even if we did need it.

Like I wrote earlier NOTHING is going to be funded if we keep doing this. Once we run out of money, we'll run out of money... I know you guys like your government programs, but come on! Even you must be able to see what's coming if we don't stop.

We're so much like Greece it's sickening. In the early 2000s, I was a liaison to a Greek Infantry company. There was this one guy who used to like to practice his English with me and he would laugh at our country, saying he went to school for free, his health care was free, this was free, that was free, ect. ect. He thought we were stupid because we used to pay for our own stuff...

Right now, that jackass is probably one of the guys on the street throwing rocks at Police because of his nation's financial meltdown. I wonder if you'll be one of those guys, John, when the state can't afford anything, much less a new billion dollar unneeded health care program.

According to the Medicaid website;
http://www.medicaid.gov/Medicaid-CHIP-Program-Information/By-State/Rhode-Island.html

we spent about $1.8 billion on medicaid in 2009 (last available yrs stats) $690 million (DOWN $163 million from 2008) was our cost, and the Feds kicked in the rest. Up until last yr, WE paid on average about 47% of the cost, with the rest on the feds. 2009 we were down to over 36%

Florida and Texas, on the other hand get a biiger chunk (about 69%) of their costs covered by the feds.

HOVEVER, where we struggle is about 22%(!!!!!) of our population is enrolled, vs 18.3% (Fla) and 18.1% (Tx). Now, is that just a sign of the economic state we are in or does it reflect on our population. Nothing is noted. But government corruption isn't the problem there. If anything, it could be fraud on the part of the applicants.

So, John, you want to add another billion to that?

We're already spending twice as much as we take in... yeah, let's add a billion.

Does that make any sense? Imagine doing that at home! "Hey honey, I know we're spending twice as much as we make... let's add some more expenses!" I'm starting to think these guys that we elected are on crack.

Dave, I do not propose a "new" tax but a combining of taxes into one use tax via mileage. At one time their used to be exactly what you said. Trucks used to be "plastered" with a stamp from each state they drove in. There is now a "treaty" if you will between the Northeast states for trucks.

I agree that we should be doing what we can to attract companies to RI. One has to wonder the appetite for that after the 38 Studios debacle. We have already reduced the tax rate to 5.99% from 9.5%. Industrial electricity is cheaper here than in any NE state except Maine

One problem that my idea does solve is the lopsided excise tax we pay on our cars. My friend lives in Pawtucket. She was born and raised there, and bought a 3 decker so she could be close to her family. She owns a 2007 CHevy Equinox w/ about 80,000 miles on it. Modest by any means. But her excise tax in Pawt.? $800!!!
That's outrageous for a $15,000 car. Here in Bristol it would only be about $260, and in Little COmpton she would pay less than $150

John, I believe 38 Studios only came up with that money because the State allowed them to sell tax credits that in all reality they aren't qualified for and absolutely weren't qualified at that time because they were in default. Remember they tried to give the State a bad check even letting them know that so the State would give them tax credits to sell.

Regardless, every dollar in State film tax credits they sell for 75 cents on the dollar will cost the State one dollar in otherwise revenues. The film tax credit is designed to reward a film company spending a lot of money here in a short period of time which benefits a lot of Rhode Island companies like hotels, caterers etc 38 Studios is located here and while they may use some video for their games that's aside from the reason for film tax credits.

They are asking for film credits for 2011 and this year. That's how they are going to make their $50 million a year in payroll plus other expenses like employee taxes, their lease payments etc. So for the next 2 years they will suck up $100 million in tax revenue. The big game they were sure would be ready this September has had it's roll out date moved to September 2013 and I figure 6 more months since they don't seem to be honest with their estimates.

Thank Carcieri, Paiva-Weed and Fox for the huge tax increase this will end up as. They were the ones who pushed this through.

Call me out on what? Nothing you said is at odds with anything I said.

I don't know what a municipal worker makes at retirement, I just know what Police, Fire, ER people do (because I have family... close family, that retired with those jobs) and they made more in their second year of retirement than they did when they retired.

It is the politicians fault. It's not your fault, or my family member's fault. They(you) take what their Union gets them. You are screwed because your Union leaders and your politicians made agreements that kept them both in power, ignoring the fact that the state and local governments would never be able to afford it.

Here's an article that illustrates perfectly what we're both saying.

http://dailyreckoning.com/bankruptcy-from-greece-to-rhode-island/

Here's another for you to read.

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2011/10/23/rhode-island-athens-of-america/

Central Falls hasn't paid a penny to fund their own school system since 1991. Up till Flanders made them raise property taxes they had only raised them 3% over 20 years. Over the same time period the average property tax increase in all the other RI municipalities was 134%. Meanwhile people there were retiring in their 40's and 50's.

The same school funding formula that says Bristol and Warren should lose millions in funding says that Central Falls can afford to pay $12 million a year towards there schools. That's based on income and property values along with how many kids qualify for free meals. The State has already created a fund to pay even what the formula states they can afford.

Flanders' charges are one time costs in order to get the city back to being self sufficient.

Chapter 9 bankruptcy has one purpose to allow the municipality to fund itself and its ongoing business. Contracts go out the window legally along with retirement commitments.

We all pay for Central Falls. They are a bunch of deadbeats.

You need to reread it. It was 600 million last year, now it's 1.6 billion. That's an additional billion. The Army has me in a weird place right now, so your link is still opening but I can see it's the 2012 budget. I used the FY2013 budget... that's probably the disconnect and why it's saying it's going from 600 mil to 1.6 billion and you are just saying 600 million.

As it opens, I did see see that they spent $1.4 million for the "Rhode Island Commission for Human Rights".... yeah, that's useful.

http://www.budget.ri.gov/Documents/CurrentFY/BudgetVolumeII/4_Department%20Of%20Human%20Services.pdf

If this is the page you are looking at (I'm not sure) It gives a 4 yr running budget. The Medical benefits line is what I see as about $1.6 billion every yr. Fy 2013 is not yet populated. If you look further, it shows the federal funds line at $1.3-1.4 billion every yr, but fy 2013 as $550 million. I wonder if the amount has yet to be determined.

When I get home, I'll be able to open the PDF links (in a couple of days). That said, I'm looking at the FY2013 budget which shows an increase of $1 billion. From 600ish mil in that budget (670 mil to be specific, as you pointed out) to $1.6. It doesn't show RIte Care spending, until 2013... probably because it's "actual" spending they use and they won't know that until November.

Regardless... we are operating at a 100% deficit. Even UK newspapers are calling RI the "Greece of the US"... why are we upping spending on anything? Even if it's a dollar?

What happens when our bonds turn junk (not in the business sense but that they are actually junk)? What happens when we can't just keep spending wealth that we don't have?

You know what's going to happen? That RIte Care stuff is going to go from a budget of 3 billion to 0, not because they don't want to spend 3 billion on it but because we won't have a dollar to spend on it. Who fixes the roads and bridges for free? What happens to tuition for our kids? (My daughter goes to RIC), what happens when the state police checks bounce? What happens when we can't renew our driver's license or register our vehicles because no one is working? Speaking of that, what happens when the unemployment rolls are filled with state workers because we can't afford them anymore?

Why do we have to wait for that point before something is done? Are we really that stupid of a people?

The fy2013 budget is not yet finished. That report is not complete. Our share of it is about $670 million. RItecare/share and Medicaid are all listed under one line item called "Medical Assistance" The total expenditures for med. assistance is about $1,7 billion, with $1.1 billion coming from the feds.

We are NOT running a 100% deficit. The actual numbers for FY 2012, which ends THIS June 30th is a $125 million or so SURPLUS!!! A lot of this is due to unexpected revenue (2 lottery jackpot winners)!!!!! We still need to work on things as the projected DEFICIT for FY2013, which begins July 1 st, is about $250 million or so, after this yr's surplus is applied.

Take a look at this:

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/05/30/states-asking-congress-for-the-right-to-add-toll-roads-to-close/

Quote;
"Beyond the recession, the reasons for busted highway and infrastructure budgets are manifold, from people driving less – and so less collected in gas taxes, to more fuel efficient cars – requiring less gas and so again, less in gas taxes, to roads and bridges that cost more to construct. A Congressional commission wrote that the U.S. needs to spend $137 billion more every single year to keep up with infrastructure needs; meanwhile less money is flowing to coffers and the federal highway fund is expected to be run down to zero in 2013"

That is why I think replacing the gas tax with a mileage tax makes sense. BUT.....those revenues MUST be for roads ONLY!!!!