Questions & MTJ Position: (See "Survey Questions" for full wording of questions)

1. Will you support a revision of our Individual Income Tax top make it more equitable and more productive?
(MTJ position = yes) 

2. Will you support legislation to require an annual state tax disclosure statement by corporations? (MTJ = yes) 

3. Do you support the elimination of the state corporate franchise tax?  (MTJ = no)

4. Do you support legislation to require review, oversight and analysis of state tax expenditures? (MTJ = yes) 

5. Do you support a constitutional amendment for a state spending limit? (MTJ = no)

 

Analysis of Responses 

69 candidates from across the state responded. This is 18% of  the candidates who received questionnaires.  51 who responded are Democrats; 13 are Republicans; 5 are Libertarians.  Candidates who are not listed failed to respond.

Q1 Re state Individual Income Tax revision: 86% (58) said YES. (49 D; 8 R; 2 L)   
7.4% (5) said NO. (3 R;  2 L)

Q2 Re state Corporate Income Tax Disclosure: 87% (60) said YES. (49 D; 8 R; 3 L)
8.8% (6) said NO. (4 R’s; 2 L)

Q3 Re elimination of state Corporate Franchise Tax:   17.6% (12) said YES. (6 R; 3 D; 3 L)
72% (50) said NO (44 D’s; 5 R’s; 1 L)

Q4 Re review, oversight and analysis of state Tax Expenditures:  88% (61) said YES. (49 D; 8 R; 4 L)
8.8% (6) said NO. (4 R, 1 D, 1 L)

Q5 Re constitutional amendment for a State Spending Limit: 16% (11) said YES. (5 R; 4D, 2L)
80% (54) said No. (44 D; 6 R; 1 L)

Candidate Information in Purple Color below indicates
the candidate lost the Primary Election, so is not a
candidate in the November 2006 General Election.

MTJ 2006 Candidate Survey — Responses
• indicates candidate sent comments. See them at end of this report.
+ indicates candidate has no opposition

District	Name	Party	Hometown	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Q5
	(MTJ Position)			yes	yes	no	yes	no
#4	+ Jeff Smith*	D	St. Louis	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#6	Ronald C. Bonar*	D	Versailles	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#8	Jason Norbury	D	Lee’s Summit	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#10	Ingrid Y. Burnett	D	Kansas City	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#14	+ Rita Days	D	St. Louis	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#16	Merrill Townley*	R	Chamois	yes*	no	yes	yes	yes
#18	Wes Shoemyer	D	Clarence	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#24	Joan Bray	D	St. Louis	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#24	John Maupin	R	St. Louis	no	no	yes	no	no
#26	Gene Tyler	D	Union	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#30	Doug Harpool*	D	Springfield	?	yes	?	yes	no
#34	David L. Mason*	D	St. Joseph	yes	yes	no	yes	no
MISSOURI HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES CANDIDATES
District	Name	Party	Hometown	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Q5
	(MTJ Position)			yes	yes	no	yes	no
#4	Richard R. Oswald*	D	Langdon	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#8	Tom Shively	D	Shelbyville	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#9	Ewell Lawson*	D	Columbia	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#13	Chuck Gatschenberger	R	Lake St. Louis	yes	yes	*	yes	*
#13	Stephanie Bell	R	Dardenne Prairie	yes	yes	no	no	no
#17	Vicki Schneider*	R	O'Fallon
#20	Don Salcedo	D	Fulton	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#21	Skip Elkin*	D	Hallsville	*	*	no	*	*
#24	Sid Sullivan*	D	Columbia	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#29	Donny Sartain	R	St. Joseph	*	no	yes	yes	no
#37	Aasim Baheyadeen	D	Kansas City	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#39	Beth Low*	D	Kansas City	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#50	Michael R. Brown	D	Kansas City	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#53	Brent T. Lasater	R	Independence	yes	yes	no	yes	yes
#55	Patrick J. Pierce*	D	Blue Springs	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#58	William C. Haas	D	St. Louis	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#59	Jeanette Mott Oxford*	D	St. Louis	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#60	Robert Bartlett	D	St. Louis	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#61	Connie (L) Johnson *+	D	St. Louis	*	yes	*	yes	no
#70	John L. Bowman*	D	St. Louis	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#75	Peter Stokan*	D	Florissant	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#85	Bob Burns	D	Affton	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#85	Tom Organ*	D	St. Louis	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#86	Martha Ott *	D	Chesterfield	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#91	James Trout*	D	St. Louis	yes	yes	*	yes	no
#92	William H. Pinkston	D	Manchester	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#92	Beverly White	D	Ballwin	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#92	Rob Pennell*	R	Ballwin	yes	yes	yes	no	no
#93	Genevieve Frank*	D	Fenton	yes	yes	*	yes	no
#97	Walt Bivins*	R	St. Louis	no	yes	yes	yes	no
#97	Venki Palamand*	D	St. Louis	yes	*	no	yes	no
#104	Robert H. Nugent	D	Bloomsdale	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#104	Richard Henry	D	DeSoto	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#105	Michael Frame	D	Eureka	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#108	Thomas A. Villa*	D	St. Louis	yes	yes	yes	yes	no
#115	Tony Barnicle	D	Eugene	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#117	John Dubovick	D	Boonville	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#118	Philip J. Sherman*	R	Sedalia	yes	yes	no	yes	yes
#118	Todd Smith	R	Sedalia	no	no	yes	no	yes
#119	Benjamin J. Casebolt*	L	Osceola	yes	yes	?	yes	?
#121	William T. Wayne*	L	Warrensburg		no	yes	yes	yes
#121	Jeffrey Alvarado*	D	Warrensburg	yes	yes	no	*	no
#125	Timothy Wells	D	Nevada	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#126	Rich Meyer*	D	Buffalo	yes	yes	no	yes	yes
#132	Bob Bartelsmeyer	R	Mt. Vernon	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#134	Christopher Brown*	D	Republic	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#139	Arthur Hodge, Sr.	R	Springfield	yes	yes	yes	yes	yes
#139	Thomas Martz*	L	Springfield	no	no	yes	yes	yes
#143	Cathy Hilliard*	D	Powersite	yes	yes	yes	yes	no
#150	Jim O’Donnell*	D	Salem	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#150	Chief Wana Dubie	L	Salem	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#155	Bernie Mowinski	R	Sunrise Beach	yes	yes	no	yes	yes
#156	Michael R. Winder	D	Marquand	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#159	Boyce Wooley	D	Dexter	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#160	Larry Tetley	D	Sikeston	yes	yes	no	yes	no
#161	Steve Hodges*	D	East Prairie	yes	yes	no	yes	no

CANDIDATES’ COMMENTS

(You may notice spelling or other errors in these “Comments.” Comments are copied from what candidates wrote.)

Senate

Jeff Smith (D), Senate #4

Q1: Yes. I strongly support tax reform along the lines of HB 1960. This bill would have raised an additional $1 billion in revenue—revenue which our state desperately needs right now—while reducing the tax burden for most Missourians. That is the kind of smart policymaking Jefferson City needs. One of my key proposals is to increase the state’s role in financing public education. Combined with efforts to make the state tax system more progressive, this will ease the unfair and regressive property tax burden and ensure that the wealthiest taxpayers in the state do their part to provide every student with a quality public education.

Q2: Yes. Corporations and their representatives in government often claim that they pay too much in taxes, yet they are too often unwilling to be honest with the people of Missouri about what they pay. With better information, we can do a better job of building a fair tax system. 

Q3: No. At a time when the legislature is cutting needed services for the poor, it should not be simultaneously getting rid of taxes on the state’s wealthiest corporations. 

Q4: Yes. Too often, governments forego needed tax revenue to finance projects that provide little or no benefit to the community. These costs are often borne by school districts that cannot afford further drops in resources. St. Louis has seen this time and again as city government has funded sports franchises that use public money to build skyboxes and fail to provide a reasonable return on public investment. Better oversight and analysis can only help governments to protect their constituents’ interests. 

Q5: No. Efforts to restrict spending by putting harsh limits on the legislature are shortsighted and foolish. They have had horrible effects in states like Colorado, and they can only contribute to Missouri’s under-funding of needed public services like healthcare and education. Even the Colorado business community eventually called for the elimination of their spending limits.

Merrill Townley (R) #16

Q1: Yes, But it depends on how it is revised.

Q2. No. This is just more paperwork and is an invasion of privacy.

Q3: Yes. But it depends on what method is used to replace the lost revenue.

Q5: Yes. If the beaucracy doesn’t have the money, they can’t spend it.

Ronald C. Bonar (D) #6

Q1: Yes. I would like to know more about HB 1960…it sounds good.

Q2: Yes. If a corporation operates a business in Missouri and receives income from Missourians they should pay Missouri income taxes.

Q5: No. The Hancock Amendment does not set aside enough for rainy day needs.

  Bonar sent lengthy additional statements about tax injustices he has acted on and is concerned about.

Doug Harpool (D) #30

Q1: (no answer) Wrote, “Depends on details”

Q3: (no answer) Wrote, “Depends on details”

David L. Mason (D) #34

Q1: Yes. Education funding and restoration of Medicaid are my two top issues. Tax reforms and equitable taxation are essential to a properly funded state government. 

Q2: Yes. Corporate taxation that is fair and equitable can relieve some of the short-fall in government funding and the burden on many taxpayers. 

Q4: Yes. I talked to the Missouri DOR two years ago about sales tax exemptions. If people want better services and lower taxes this issue must be pursued.

Q5. No. It did not work in Colorado and it would be devastating here.

 

Comments:  House of Representatives

Richard R. Oswald (D) #4

Q1: Yes. I think the rise from 6% to 8.5% should be more gradual. Until corporate businesses fund their health plans fully, a family with income of $50,000 should not be expected to pay more in taxes to the state.

Q3: No. There are huge funding questions to be answered before any tax cuts should be made. 

Q4: Yes. And corporations that seek tax credits should also meet strict criteria regarding funding of employee pension and health plans.

Q5: No. Lawmakers should be accountable, not just for the decisions they made, but also for the ones they dodge. Any law that allows legislators to avoid accountability by shielding them from that is wrong.

Ewell Lawson (D) #9

Q3: No. I do support changing the requirements to benefit certain small businesses.

[Lawson sent a campaign statement that says, “Ewell is a strong advocate for public education, health care access, and building prosperous rural communities.”]

Gregory Arrigo (L) #11

Q1: No. An income tax will never be “equitable”, however it is revised because moneid interest (sic) will get enough loopholes to offset higher rates.

Q2: Yes, But, for the reason that “we the People” charter and provide priviledges to corporations, not for the reasons stated. 

Q3: Yes. Especially IF (and I do not know) this is paid by enterpreneurs buying into a franchise.

Q4. No. Elected officials should only authorize those “tax expenditures that are available to the general public, not target them in social and economic engineering schemes.

Q5: No. Elected officials should DO THEIR Jobs, and only spend state funds on constitutionally mandated things.

 
Chuck Gatschenberger (R) #13

Q1: Yes. I also need more info on this before I am 100% sure.

Q3: With this info I would vote no, but I need more info also.

Q5: (no answer) – “need more info”

 
Skip Elkin (D) #21

Q1: no answer “Possibly. Depending on the language of the bill.” 

Q2: no answer “I am supportive of tools that will allow the state to evaluate corporate tax rates.” 

Q3: No. Local governments depend on franchise taxes for a source of revenue. 

Q4: no answer  “Possibly. Depends on the details and specific requirements.”

Q5: no answer “As you mentioned, we already are required to balanced budget and we have state revenue limits ‘Hancock’, we have to be very cautious that spending limits could upset the balance on overall state budgets.”

 
Sid Sullivan (D) #24

Q1: Yes. If elected, I will introduce a proclamation to end U.S. involvement in Iraq war. Too much federal money is being siphoned away from state programs.

Q4: Absolutely

Danny Sartain (R) #29

Q1: Yes. I want a flat individual income tax with No Loopholes, deductions, or shelters.

 Q2: No. I want to end taxes on Business and Corporations only have a Flat personal Income tax with no loopholes, deductions, or shelters. 

Q3: Yes. Only after or simultaneously upon implementation of a flat individual tax which contains no deductions, shelters, or Loopholes. 

Q4: Yes. I want to see all tax expenditures, credits, and exemptions eliminated and implementation of a flat individual income tax.

Beth Low (D) #39

Q2: Yes. I sponsored this legislation this year.

 
Patrick Pierce (D) #55

Q1: Yes. This is a rather simple and seemingly common sensical idea. 

Q2: Yes. There is nothing wrong or intrusive with knowing or finding out the facts.

Q3: No. What’s the end result here? Fewer services and more families, kids, and elderly struggling to survive so a corporation can make a buck or two? That is flat out wrong!!! 

Q4: Yes. A review & analysis of state tax expenditures is perfectly acceptable. This is merely a review and something that must take place.

Q5: No. I the responsibility of financial issues/concerns in Missouri should be held squarely on the shoulders of the General Assembly. If Missouri residents are unhappy, they must elect new legislators.

 
William (Bill) C. Haas (D) #58

Q4: Yes. Excellent idea!

 
Jeanette Mott Oxford (D) #59

Q1: Yes. I would be honored to be lead sponsor again.

Q2: Yes. I co-sponsored in 2006.

Q3: No. This was already slashed in past sessions. Corporations should pay their fair share. 

Q4: Yes. I raised a concern this year that we depend too much on tax credits to fund community needs. 

Q5: No. I opposed Bearden’s bill and advised by e-mail about the TABOR petition.

 
Connie Johnson (D) #61

Q1: no answer. “Need more information”

Q3: no answer. “If this helps more companies come to Missouri I support it!

 
John Bowman (D) #70

Q1: Yes. I co-sponsored the tax reform legislation.

Peter Stokan (D) #75

Q1: Yes. This will be a priority for me.

 
Tom  Organ (D) #85

Q3: No, But it could be reduced. We should find common ground on this issue.

 
Martha Ott (D) #86

Q5: No. I strongly oppose TABOR!

 
James Trout (D) #91

Q 2: Yes. Disclosure, yes without administrative burden to the company or the state (Don’t we know it’s too low?)

Q3: No – Not unless replaced with an equitable corporate tax. 

Q5: No. There has to be a better way of developing public policy that respects change & stewardship, right?

 
William H. Pinkston (D) #92

Q1: Yes. The ancient guideline show how out of date the system is.

Q2: Yes. This would show the true nature of their business!

Q3: No. It’s like a work permit so it should stay.

Q5. No. The constitution should rule.

 
Rob Pennell (R) #92

Q2: Yes. I see no problem in providing that information for large corporations but would oppose such a requirement for small businesses.

Q3: Yes. An additional level of tax placed solely on assets within the state creates a disincentive for investing in the state with large capital expenditures.

Q4, No. Perhaps I am not understanding the question fully but I am not comfortable with “requiring review, oversight…” as that sounds as though one has to prove adequate resources but I would support economic impact analysis requirement.

Genevieve M. Frank (D) #93

Q3: No answer. Whether or not I would support any particular tax cut or tax increase would depend on the totality of circumstances & tax laws at the particular time.

 
Walter Bivins (R) #97

Q1: No. The bill was withdrawn, however such an increase would cripple Missouri’s economy.

Q2: Yes. At first blush this sounds like an okay idea. I would want to hear the provisions before making a final decision.

Q3: Yes. The corporate franchise tax is in addition to income tax and amounts to double-taxation!

Q4: Yes. I would support legislation that would monitor the effect of tax credits to insure they are having the desired purpose.

Q5: No. The Hancock Amendment controls spending at all levels of government in Missouri.

 
Venki Palamand (D) #97

Q2:  No answer “Not sure.”

 
Tom Villa (D) #108

Q3: Yes. 111 voted Aye on 4-24-06; 39, no. I voted yes with mixed emotions.

Ben Casebolt (L) #119

Q1: Yes. I couldn’t find any information on HB 1960 because it has been withdrawn.

Q2: Yes. Provided that will benefit both sides. This could help or hurt corporations depending on what’s going on in the state or with the economy.

 
William T. Wayne (L) #121

Q1: no answer. “I support eliminating the Income Tax and replacing it with the Fair Tax.

Q2: No. Taxes on corporations stifle economic activity and are passed on to consumers anyway.

Q3: Yes. This tax harasses business – should be replaced by user fees to pay for regulatory support.

Q4: Yes. I oppose tax credits.

Q5: Yes. There needs to be a limit on spending growth – Hancock has not worked.

 
Jeffrey Alvarado (D) Warrensburg #121

Q1: Yes, but I have to see the language of the bill.

Q4: Neutral: have to see the flow chart and language.

 
Rich Meyer (D) #126

Q4: Yes. We need corporations to pay their fair share that do business in Missouri.

 
Christopher Brown (D) #134

Q1: Yes. I support a fair tax proposal.

Q5: No. I endorse a pay as you go spending limit. Therefore if you allow to spend more money by cutting other areas you may exceed a preset limit.

 
Thomas Martz (L) #139

Q1: No. I can’t find anywhere in the state constitution where government can force citizens to provide for others.

Q2: No. I would like to see abolishment of all structured taxes to be replaced by a NRST.

Q3: Yes. See comments from above.

 
Cathy Hilliard (D) #143

Q3: Yes. As a realtor, working for a franchise, which is a small business, I believe that money paid for the state franchise tax, would be used to enhance business, especially small business.

Q4: Yes. Because our elected officials have blindly legislated many fiscal fiascos – this is only common sense.

 
Jim O’Donnell (D) #150

Q2: Yes. I believe its time for corporations to pay their fair share.

Steve Hodges (D) #161

Q1: Yes. All levels of income should pay a fair share.