{"id":12279,"date":"2010-07-27T07:58:58","date_gmt":"2010-07-27T12:58:58","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/?p=12279"},"modified":"2010-07-27T10:02:52","modified_gmt":"2010-07-27T15:02:52","slug":"why-does-margaret-anderson-kelliher-hate-senior-citizens","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/?p=12279","title":{"rendered":"Why Does Margaret Anderson Kelliher Hate Senior Citizens?"},"content":{"rendered":"

I’ve often wondered how senior citizens pay our various cities’ rampant and always-rising property taxes on fixed incomes.<\/p>\n

The House DFL doesn’t!<\/p>\n

May 5, 2008 – the House was debating HF3149, regarding property tax reform. \u00a0Laura Brod proposed an amendment that would have had the state refund a portion of a property owner’s property taxes, provided he\/she was\u00a0eligible for property tax relief, on a sliding scale depending on their (low, low) income. \u00a0The end result – a person would pay no more than 5% of their income in property taxes.<\/p>\n

The amendment came to a vote<\/a> (see page 11323). \u00a0Tom Emmer (and Brod, naturally) voted to help struggling property owners.<\/p>\n

Margaret Anderson Kelliher voted against it, along with most of the DFL; the amendment failed 71-58.<\/p>\n

Later in the day, Brod offered a similar amendment, limiting the refunds to people over 65 (scroll down to page 11325)<\/p>\n

Emmer and Brod voted for it. \u00a0Kelliher voted against it.<\/p>\n

Apparently she’d rather get publicity for talking <\/em>about capping property taxes <\/a>than actually do <\/em>ot.<\/p>\n

I suppose that DFLers voting against squeezing revenue out of people would be a little like vampires voting agianst free blood.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

I’ve often wondered how senior citizens pay our various cities’ rampant and always-rising property taxes on fixed incomes. The House DFL doesn’t! May 5, 2008 – the House was debating HF3149, regarding property tax reform. \u00a0Laura Brod proposed an amendment that would have had the state refund a portion of a property owner’s property taxes, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[60,20,2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12279","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-campaign-10","category-democrats","category-minnesota-politics"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12279","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=12279"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12279\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12287,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12279\/revisions\/12287"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=12279"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=12279"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.shotinthedark.info\/wp\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=12279"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}