Walker's Super Majority Vote for Tax Increases may Stop Republicans from Raising Taxes on Poor.

 What goes around comes around, unless you had something else in mind. But the law is the law, and words have meaning.

When Gov. Walker and the Republicans came into power, they passed a law that required a super majority vote to increase taxes. But now, Republicans are raising taxes on the poor, and they’re arguing it’s not really a tax increase. You know, like the Bush tax cuts that were set to expire.

jsonline: Nonpartisan legislative attorneys found it more difficult to say whether a two-thirds vote of lawmakers would be required. That's significant because to reach the two-thirds threshold Republicans would need to accomplish the unlikely task of winning over significant numbers of Democratic votes.

The Joint Finance Committee voted to cut the Earned Income Tax Credit by $56.2 million over two years … That move has been scored as an income tax increase by the Legislature’s non-partisan budget office since it will either lower refunds or raise taxes for some low-income state residents.

That has Democrats asking (for a) a two-thirds vote of lawmakers to approve any increase in state sales or income tax rates.

But…but…but we didn’t intend that!

Rep. Robin Vos (R-Rochester), the co-chairman of the Joint Finance Committee … the tax credit program doesn’t raise state income tax rates and because most of the tax credits go to state residents without any income tax liability as a way to make low-wage work more attractive.

Slightly off topic; the credit, according to Vos, “make(s) low-wage work more attractive.” Can we then assume that since most people in this "disaster capitalist" economic time are already making low wages, we no longer need to be concerned? Or is Vos just dropping all pretenses of concern.

But I love the new down the rabbit hole logic offered by Vos, with reckless disregard for the actual language of the law:

“When I voted for the bill it was about rates and people who owe money based on the work that they performed,” Vos said.  

Oh, that's what he meant when he helped pass the law. But does the law stipulate? 

A report by the Legislative Fiscal Bureau says that a majority of non-partisan legislative attorneys consulted on the proposal agree that a two-thirds vote won’t be needed.

But, “others suggested that an argument could be made that the proposed changes could trigger the requirement because the change is economically equivalent to (a tax increase),” the report says. “It is not possible to determine how the courts will interpret the provision.”

Ah, the courts, again. But didn't Republicans just say the courts don't have any business in poking their nose into the legislative branch of government...except this time?