Howie Rich made the New York Times this weekend - and the Omaha World-Herald, and the Las Vegas Sun, and the Kennebec Journal, and the News-Tribune of Tacoma, Washington. Add that to the coverage he's gotten from the Oregonian, the San Francisco Chronicle, the Washington Post, the Lewiston Sun-Journal, the Helena Independent Review and PBS NOW, and you might say that this reclusive New York City real estate developer who dislikes publicity - he communicates with the media mainly through email, for example - has had a bad few months. Notwithstanding the waste of $14 million in funds spent to put the so-called Taxpayer Bill of Rights on various state ballots. But wait: from Laird Maxwell of Idaho comes a correction, constant reader. Rich is not a real estate developer, he's an "apartment owner." It's a quote, folks.
Who knew that "New York City real estate developer" carries a negative connotation? Donald Trump seems to have succeeded with it, but Howie Rich's wild-west pardner chafes at the label being bandied about to describe his special friend. Maxwell spoke with KTRV's Dan Hamilton last week to promote Rich's Proposition 2, the regulatory takings measure, when Hamilton asked about Rich, the "developer."
As Hamilton reports here http://www.fox12news.com/... he quoted Ed Keener, a member of Collister Neighborhood Association, which has joined numerous other citizens groups in announcing its opposition to Prop 2. Keener says, "It's really about outside interests trying to come in and tell us how to operate our land use rules and laws in this state," referring to, of course, Howie Rich. And Keener continues, "Land developer, likes the prospect of coming to Idaho to develop land."
Which is what set off Howie's man Laird.
"Howie Rich is not a developer, he's an apartment owner," Maxwell told Hamilton.
So does that mean Rich is just a landlord? Should we begin referring to him as "New York City landlord Howie Rich"? "Landlord" just doesn't pack the zing that is demanded by a man who directs $14 million to change state governments across the nation. "Landlord" is the balding fella who collects your rent check each month, right? Come on, Laird.
The New York Times calls him a "New York real estate investor who is chairman of the libertarian group Americans for Limited Government" in its coverage of the Rich-Maxwell ballot measure partnership here http://www.nytimes.com/.... Idahoans who have read and can see the measure's implications, like Sun Valley City Councilman Nils Ribi, aren't worried about whether Rich is a "developer" or an "investor" or even an "apartment owner." They're worried about what he's doing to their state.
"This thing is an abomination, the way it's written, the way it's being sold," Ribi says. Sold as "eminent domain" measures, they're written as "takings" laws, and they're "supported financially and logistically by national libertarian groups," the Times reports. "As of late June, Fund for Democracy had given at least $237,000 to" Maxwell's campaign committee.
Naturally, Rich avoided talking to the Times himself, sending John Tillman to answer the door again. (Bet that gets tiresome.) "We are essentially a `networking station' that brings together grass-roots activists, donors and community leaders who share a common interest," Tillman tells the Times via email. (Via email! This crowd's aversion to face-to-face communication with the media is hilarious, almost like an obsessive-compulsive avoidance.) And, o, right, just a networking station; that, too, is laughable. Does MySpace hand out million-dollar checks to the kids who use it as a "networking station"? If only!
The editors of the News Tribune in Tacoma, Washington, aren't amused by it. "Maybe Howard Rich is looking to expand his Manhattan real-estate empire to Washington state. And Idaho. And California and Arizona," they write. "Rich, the aptly-named multimillionaire New York developer, is bankrolling ballot measures in several Western states that would decimate state and local governments' ability to protect communities from inappropriate development or harmful activities.
They explain here http://www.thenewstribune.com/... "...this isn't a case of financial self -interest; it's one of ideological evangelism. Rich is a libertarian with some definite ideas about how government should exist, or not exist. (He's also for tax caps and term limits.) And he's not above furthering his crusade by meddling in other states' affairs. Rich has thrown as much as $11 million behind similar ballot measures that would roll back land-use regulations in Western states and is the single biggest donor to the Washington Farm Bureau's Initiative 933."
"Bait-and-switch is a hallmark of the measures Rich finances. They promise to protect voters against out-of-control government officials but instead leave them practically defenseless against what their neighbors might decide to build next door."
And Harold W. Andersen, contributing editor of the Omaha World-Herald, finds nothing funny in Rich's imposition on Nebraska's Constitution, either. Andersen published a great editorial last Sunday, and he follows it this week with an expanded view of the Rich network here http://www.omaha.com/.... It's too good to miss.
"Last Sunday, I commented on the efforts of an ultraconservative New York real-estate developer, Howard Rich, to use his wealth to help put a number of states, including Nebraska, into constitutional straitjackets by limiting their legislatures' ability to make tax and spending decisions. (If you oppose such intrusion by an outsider who is trying to tell Nebraskans what he thinks is best for them, vote against Initiative 423 on Nov. 7. The proposition would not be on the ballot if Rich and some associates had not provided more than $800,000 to bring teams of petition circulators into the state.)"
"Today, let's look at another organization that also provides lots of money for influencing state and national political decisions, starting with big-bucks intrusions into state political campaigns. I'm speaking now of Club for Growth (of which Rich is a director) and the objective that this 30,000-member organization has set out for itself. It aims to help elect enough anti-tax members of the House and Senate to, in effect, wield decisive influence on congressional decisions on issues most important to Club for Growth's membership - especially tax and spending issues."
"Club for Growth's Internet site details the way the organization is trying to achieve its anti-tax objectives. Following are quotes from the Web site: `The Club engages in a systematic and continuing review of every congressional race in the country to find the best candidates and the most important races - the ones that will have the most impact on economic policies of the future. . . .'
"`It doesn't end there. The Club will closely monitor the voting behavior of members of Congress. We will warn them in advance of what votes we will be watching, especially tax and budget votes. Hence, the Club hopes to have a disciplining effect on the way members of Congress vote. . . . The goal will be to eventually have a Congress successfully enacting our ideas for growth and prosperity'."
"State Sen. Adrian Smith of Gering, Republican candidate for Nebraska's 3rd District congressional seat, can testify to the effect of Club for Growth's `seal of approval' in attracting campaign contributions. Contributions from 634 individuals (not all of them Club for Growth members, of course) were a major factor in providing Smith's campaign with $696,570 to finance his successful campaign against four other candidates for the Republican nomination. Those individual contributions - which were in addition to $90,267 from the Club for Growth Inc. PAC - came from 41 states."
"When we talked, Smith emphasized that Club for Growth representatives never asked him to commit himself to vote the Club for Growth line in Congress and he would, in any case, vote `my own conscience.' ...Club for Growth opposes price support programs for agricultural products (customarily described as `subsidies' for farm operators), while Smith supports such programs. The Club for Growth president indicated that Smith's positions on lowering taxes, limiting government spending and expanding free trade outweigh any differences of opinion over agriculture issues."
I've only excerpted Andersen's column; I encourage you to read the whole text for yourself. Meanwhile, a pair of Nebraskan letter-writers from Lincoln agree with Anderson's concern. Bill Blue writes here http://www.journalstar.com/... "The power behind this initiative is apparently a group, led by a Howard Rich of New York (probably an appropriate name), which reportedly has spent millions of dollars supporting this initiative. Since this measure would be in the constitution, it could not be changed without a constitutional amendment. Initiative 423 would cripple this state, as it did for Colorado, which has suspended it. Who knows what the future responsibilities of our state will be, especially in view of the federal government transferring financial obligations to the states. In addition, this provision would probably make it necessary for local property taxes and others to be increased."
And Laurie Fraser writes here http://www.journalstar.com/... "Remember being hit up by petitioners last summer? Well, where are they now? More than likely in another state, trying to place issues on someone else's ballot being financed by yet another fat cat from the East Coast. I served as a voter educator during the summer, because I care about my community and I care about how outside money and influences affect me as a Nebraskan."
"Initiative 423 is not a Nebraska grass-roots effort, it's a bad idea being pushed on us by New York City multimillionaire Howard Rich. He's trying the same thing in other states, and the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) has been kicked off the ballot, or hasn't made it to the ballot, because of fraud in Missouri, Oklahoma, Montana, Michigan and Nevada just this year. Nebraskans just have to look west to see the ill effects of TABOR in Colorado."
"Nebraskans can think and act for ourselves. I just have to ask ... why do New York City investors want to change our state's constitution? What's in it for them? Will they be here next year to feel the effects of their efforts? Of course not, because they aren't residents of our state. Shouldn't Nebraskans be the ones to determine what is best for us?"
Not a lot of love there for New York City apartment owners...
Nor is there much to be found in Oregon, where good Oregonians are battling Rich's TABOR initiative there, Measure 48. Russell Sadler of the Daily Astorian draws a bead on the "out-of-state lucre" here http://www.dailyastorian.info/.... "Measure 48 is tarted up to look like a homegrown Oregon initiative, but it's not. It contains the same fatal assumption that caused Colorado voters to suspend a similar provision in their state constitution in the last election. Measure 48 is modeled on the far right `anti-taxers' current ideological darling - The Taxpayers Bill of Rights (or TABOR)."
Sadler identifies Rich's man in Oregon, Don McIntire, as "just a front for national interest groups using the initiative process to `shrink government.' These groups range from Americans for Tax Reform, headed by lobbyist Grover Norquist, now implicated in the Abramoff scandal in Washington, D.C. to Americans For Limited Government, headed by Howard Rich, a wealthy New York real estate investor who has given millions to libertarian causes. Rich's organization put up more than 85 percent of the money McIntire has spent to put Measure 48 on the ballot and promote it so far."
TABOR represents a "conservative trend of deliberately crippling representative government by requiring supermajorities in initiatives to make it difficult, even impossible, for elected representatives to reflect the changing attitudes of their constituents," he explains. "Conservatives want to `lock in' their currently fashionable ideological dogma. One of the purposes of representative government is reflecting constituents' changing opinions when lawmakers make decisions about spending priorities. The provisions of Measure 48 are an attack on a basic assumption of our form of government."
Speaking of Oregon, the news of the Rich network's attack on taxpayers through public-employee records requests has reached Nevada, one of the states that have been named by network operatives as an upcoming target for more attacks. The Las Vegas Sun runs the Associated Press coverage from Oregon here http://www.lasvegassun.com/....
And moving further south, Rich finds no love from the editors of the Arizona Republic, who warn voters that Rich's "regulatory takings" ballot measure is a "Trojan horse."
"Proposition 207 masquerades as protection for homeowners. But look inside. This measure is so vaguely written that it would thwart government actions to protect our military bases, our water supplies, our neighborhoods, our wildlife, our quality of life and our economic prospects" they write here http://www.azcentral.com/....
"Proposition 207 is so full of legal ambiguities that if it passes, a passel of lawyers would start scouting locations for vacation homes in Hawaii or Tuscany. It's no wonder that this insidious initiative is opposed by such a broad range of interests, including business leaders, conservation groups, neighborhoods, supporters of military bases and the Arizona League of Cities and Towns," they add.
And then there's Howie Rich: "Like the famous horse, which the Greeks used against the people of Troy, Proposition 207 was brought here by outsiders. Virtually every single dollar in the campaign comes from two libertarian groups, Americans for Limited Government and the Fund for Democracy, bankrolled by New York City real estate investor Howie Rich. Rich and his organizations aren't aiming to improve Arizona's future. We're just one of eight states in which they financed ballot measures to spread their rigid ideology."
Rigid ideology, they call it. If Mister Wendell, sitting on his stoop in front of the ice cream store, were spouting his views on government budgeting and property rights, it would be called nonsense, because everyone knows Mister Wendell is a little foolish and thankfully has someone to look after him in his twilight years. But if Mister Wendell had $14 million to spend pushing his views on government budgeting and property rights through ballot initiatives in a handful of states, it would be called a "rigid ideology." So the difference, constant reader, between nonsense and a "rigid ideology" is about $14 million.
Makes me want to start saving my pennies now.
With Rich's coverage across the rest of the nation out of the way, let's turn our attention once more to Maine, where the Kennebec Journal outdid itself this weekend with coverage of the TABOR matter. Kudos, Kennebec Journal, and especially to reporter Susan Cover, whose feature kicks off our review.
Cover begins in Augusta, where City Manager William Bridgeo says "the state's capital city would face strict budget limits, and by one measure a budget cut, if the Taxpayer Bill of Rights is approved by voters on Nov. 7."
Bridgeo foresees the need to cut positions if TABOR constricts Augusta's budget by $100,000, and a study by the Maine Municipal Association says that's exactly what will happen. "I don't think there's any way you make significant cuts in our budget without cutting positions," Bridgeo tells Cover here http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/....
Of course, the Maine Heritage Policy Center is laboring mightily to convince voters that no budget cuts will come from TABOR. "There are no cuts required by the TABOR. It is not part of the law," says the MHPC's Bill Becker. Becker did not tell Cover whether he believes in fairies, unicorns and the Wendigo, too. But one can speculate, can't one?
From Augusta, Cover goes to Manchester, where Town Manager Mark Doyon worries that plans to buy a new fire truck and to spend a quarter-million dollars on much-need dam repairs will be "realistic" under TABOR. If TABOR is adopted, he believes the town will have to "defer routine maintenance. And "if the town can't afford to keep up with new fire equipment, it could increase the rates residents have to pay for fire insurance, he said."
"The town of Manchester is pretty responsible with what it's asking from taxpayers. There's not a lot of fat in the budget," Doyon tells Cover. "I believe citizens of every community have the right to determine what's right for them. I don't think TABOR is a one-size fix. TABOR doesn't allow a community to determine where their future is going to go."
But in Waterville, Cover finds public officials at odds. City Administrator Mike Roy, who traffics in facts and figures to manage his city, believes the MMA analysis that shows "if the measure had been in effect for the last 10 years, the city of Waterville's budget would be $2.5 million less than it is today."
"There's no way I can see reducing the budget by $2.5 million without cutting essential services and endangering public safety by doing that," Roy tells her.
But Mayor Paul LePage is a TABOR cheerleader.
Oakland Town Manager Steven Dyer, like Roy, watches the facts and figures and says "his $3.8 million budget would have been $259,000 less if TABOR had been in effect in 2005."
To augment Cover's overview, the Kennebec Journal published opinion-editorials, one by a TABOR proponent and one by a man exercising common sense.
The proponent was Jason Fortin, "a graduate of Waterville High School and Bowdoin College, [and] the director of communications for The Maine Heritage Policy Center." Reading his pamphlet, some might say that Fortin did a good job adding a brief personal note of his own to the lead of the MHPC's position paper on TABOR, you know, to personalize it. Interesting that he lamented the loss of paper mill jobs in Maine in his note, though. Likely the New York City sponsors of TABOR have no interest in the loss of paper mill jobs, or paper mills themselves.
Readers can find the MHPC position paper with Jason's note gracing it here http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/....
Mainer Peter Mills was elected to the legislature when Jason was in elementary school, so it seems appropriate that now-Senator Mills, a solid Republican, offers, ahem, "balance" to Jason's MHPC position paper.
And Senator Mills cuts to the chase: "Maine doesn't need the Taxpayer Bill of Rights."
"The Taxpayer Bill of Rights' failure in Colorado is now common knowledge. When the bill, commonly known as TABOR, was enacted after its third petition drive in 1992, it slowly became apparent in town after town that it was not working," writes Mills, who has served 12 years in the Maine Legislature. "The controversy finally erupted at the state level, as the result of a campaign led by the Colorado business community, culminating in a vote to rid the state itself of TABOR in November of 2005. It split the Republican Party and ultimately lost it control of the Colorado legislature. During all of this time, TABOR has been adopted nowhere else in America despite 18 years of well-funded advocacy by the wealthy western zealots who wrote it and backed it."
He writes here http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/... "...if TABOR passes statewide on November 7, it will impose its provisions all at once on 489 towns, 16 counties, 285 school units, numerous sewer, water and trash districts and the Maine Turnpike Authority -- but not on the state itself, which is constitutionally exempt from TABOR's constraints."
"The good thing about TABOR is that it has brought this discussion of taxes and spending into the campaign season in a graphic way. The bad thing is that it may pass without the emergence of a responsible alternative. If that happens, hang onto your saddle while we repeat the same wild bronco ride that Colorado is recovering from after 14 years of senseless and damaging turmoil."
Thank you, Senator Mills, for your 12 years of legislative service and your salient analysis of TABOR. And thank you, Jason, for your personal note atop the position paper. A-plus for effort.
Constant reader, watch for another anti-TABOR resolution to be adopted Tuesday night in Farmington by the School Administrative District 9 board of directors. You may recall that "directors at their Sept. 26 session considered a draft resolution by Maine School Management labeling TABOR as harmful to schools," as reported by Don Waterhouse here http://morningsentinel.mainetoday.com/... but that they "wanted to hear comments from the measure's supporters before making a stand."
Well, Waterhouse reports, "Six board members and SAD 9 administrators attended a forum sponsored by the Western Maine Caucus Sept. 28 at the University of Maine at Farmington where opponents and supporters of TABOR pleaded their cases." And as we've seen before, the more Mainers know about TABOR, the more likely they are to oppose it.
Directors in SAD 34 are skating by on the kindness of its vendors, writes reporter Tanya Mitchell here, http://waldo.villagesoup.com/... and they're worried about their ability to pay their bills if TABOR passes. Assistant Superintendent Bruce Mailloux says the district still owes "about $828,000 from the 2005-06 school year" and that "the district is behind on its payments by 30, 60 and sometimes 90 days."
"The staff has also shown understanding in tight times," Mitchell tells us. "This year, fewer employees are on the payroll due to cuts in the current year's budget. The district cut a total of 30 positions. Of the people who lost jobs as a result, the district has re-employed two educational technicians and five teachers, all of whom were recalled to work in other jobs that people had left or retired from."
And that's before the specter of TABOR. Interim Superintendent Wayne Enman says that district's plan to manage its debt "will depend on whether TABOR passes or not. I am not against tax reform, but this in my opinion is not tax reform. It is very restrictive in that it does not allow for exceptions for individual circumstances, like our deficit."
You know how much your Sandlapper relies on the thoughts of real Mainers to aid in his decision-making. This weekend, he found a number of them helpful, like this one from Carol Cupples of New Portland http://morningsentinel.mainetoday.com/... "TABOR would cut public services at every level throughout our state. TABOR is part of a national agenda to cut funding for essential health, education and public safety programs. We need local control, not TABOR control, of our public services."
Seems Carol know about Howie Rich, as does Stephen Aucoin of Waterville, writing here http://morningsentinel.mainetoday.com/... "TABOR is the product of a handful of very wealthy individuals with the lead being taken by New York City multimillionaire Howie Rich. Mary Adams may be the Maine face of it, but in seven other states the same initiative is being sponsored by the crowd from New York City. Before anything else, TABOR is an attack on democracy; a wolf in sheep's clothing. It creates a system where one-third of the voters can block the will of the remaining two-thirds. The people pushing this initiative are the ones who think the common folks cannot be trusted."
And Bruce Olsen of Waterville, who writes here http://morningsentinel.mainetoday.com/... "TABOR is not the home-grown initiative its supporters say it is. It and other initiatives on the ballot across the country are being brought to Maine by millionaires Howard Rich and Grover Norquist, neither of whom have any actual connection to what's going on in this state. I doubt that they understand that local control is important to the people who live here, that what might work in Portland is not necessarily what's going to work in Presque Isle. But that is what this initiative is -- a cookie cutter approach to a problem that should have a thoughtful solution."
Donna Dachs of Manchester finds the argument that TABOR will cut taxes offensive. She writes here http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/... "It will not reduce property taxes. What it will do is affect programs and services for the handicapped, children and the elderly. If TABOR passes, tuition costs will be raised -- denying many of our citizens the opportunities to attend and afford community and University of Maine systems. Health care for children and seniors, money to finance public safety, public services, road maintenance -- the acronym, TABOR, Taxpayer Bill of Rights -- did not live up to its name in Colorado. Our state should not slip into the same black hole."
And, offering today's final word, Peter Konieczko of Augusta is offended that TABOR is called a "bill of rights," he says here http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/.... "It's not the bill of rights it claims to be. TABOR is just a tax cap on steroids."
"TABOR is like a free lunch. It seems like a good deal until you find out what it really costs. There is no free lunch in the real world. In Colorado, they lowered taxes. That was the free lunch. To pay for bare essentials, they had to raise fees. That was the cost of the free lunch. In the end, Colorado collects and spends more per capita than Maine if you include fees as well as taxes."
Thanks to the folks who did all the work:
ARIZONA
http://www.azcentral.com/...
Editors, "Prop. 207 is Trojan horse"
IDAHO
http://www.nytimes.com/...
Reporter William Yardley, "Anger Drives Property Rights Measures"
http://www.fox12news.com/...
KTRV Reporter Dan Hamilton, "Debate continues over Prop 2"
MAINE
http://morningsentinel.mainetoday.com/...
Mainer Bruce Olson, "TABOR isn't a homegrown idea"
http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/...
Mainer Donna Dachs, "TABOR would hurt much-needed services"
http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/...
Mainer Peter Konieczko, "TABOR is not bill of rights it claims to be"
http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/...
Maine Heritage Policy Center, "Passing it means lower taxes, more economic opportunity"
http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/...
Reporter Susan Cover, "TABOR: A problem, or the solution?"
http://kennebecjournal.mainetoday.com/...
Senator Peter Mills, "We need a fiercely moderate alternative"
http://morningsentinel.mainetoday.com/...
Reporter Don Waterhouse, "SAD 9 officials scheduled to discuss TABOR"
http://waldo.villagesoup.com/...
Reporter Tanya Mitchell, "Vendors' patience gives SAD 34 time to address deficit"
http://morningsentinel.mainetoday.com/...
Mainer Carol Cupples, "State needs local control, not TABOR budget cuts"
http://morningsentinel.mainetoday.com/...
Mainer Stephen Aucoin, "Think about real agenda before voting on TABOR"
NEBRASKA
http://www.omaha.com/...
Editor Harold W. Andersen, "Enmity toward taxes, farm aid drives Club for Growth agenda"
http://www.journalstar.com/...
Nebraskan Bill Blue, "Vote no on Initiative 423"
http://www.journalstar.com/...
Nebraskan Laurie Fraser, "423 not a Nebraska idea"
NEVADA
http://www.lasvegassun.com/...
Associated Press, "Oregon cities, school districts, agencies hit with big FOIA request"
OREGON
http://www.dailyastorian.info/...
Columnist Russell Sadler, "Out-of-state lucre fuels Oregon Measure 48"
WASHINGTON
http://www.thenewstribune.com/...
Editors, "Civic disasters courtesy of Howie Rich"