The debate in our nation’s capital over the Affordable Health Care Act continues. Even though Republicans own a majority in all three branches of government, there has been no consensus on how to repeal/replace it.

It seems from the rhetoric of the American people, there are actually parts they like such as having their children stay on their policy till they reach 25 years of age, and allowing people with pre-existing conditions to get some kind of health care coverage.

The biggest hurdle may be in what the act has become known as; “Obamacare”. Republicans  seem to have the attitude of “we don’t much care for Obama” and anything with his name on it is an abomination. I can’t help but wonder if both sides could fix it/make it better if his name wasn’t associated with it.

Ironically, the Freedom Caucus, is asking republicans to work with conservatives and throw out the whole thing which sounds strange to me when you consider the fact that most every Republican would claim they already are conservative.

It’s not easy, even President Trump commented “who knew health care could be so complicated” (actually anyone who relies on P.P.O.’s and co-pays already knew that). Trump even threatened to work with Democrats (insert gasp here) to get something done much to chagrin of Republican law-makers.

The Republicans point out more insurance companies are bowing out and rates are sky-rocketing which is true. Democrats warn a full repeal would cause millions to lose coverage which is also true. So where does the answer lie? Perhaps in the provable middle where few dare to tread and even fewer are able to politically return.

“My number one priority is making sure president Obama’s a one-term president.”
— Senate Minority leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky

“We all want what’s best for this country. That’s what I heard in Mr. Trump’s remarks last night. That’s what I heard when I spoke to him directly. And I was heartened by that.”
— President Barack Obama

I believe you can judge a person not when they’re winning, but when they’re losing. How they respond tells a whole lot about their character. That’s why I was pleased to hear President Obama take the high road when meeting with reporters after the Trump/Clinton election.

It may just have been rhetoric and maybe he really doesn’t believe what he says, but tone matters. Back in 2008, Sen. McConnell felt it was in the best interest of the country to do whatever he could to not allow Obama a second term. You can argue that, blocking Obama would be in the best interest for the country, but do you really want to say it like that? Could we at least put some lipstick on the pig?

I may have missed it, but I don’t recall the kind of bombastic language this year by presidential candidates in the past elections. Deplorable and nasty soon became buzz words for both parties to rally around. I realize the country is divided, but maybe it’s because of our tone of discourse. Maybe if we step back, listen (now there’s a concept) and work at addressing our issues in a calmer manner we can get more things done. I understand not everyone will be able to do this, I’m just saying it would be nice to see a little more of it.

I think Elwood P. Dowd in the film Harvey summed it up best when he said; “In this world, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant.” Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. You may quote me.”

There is always a lot of talk about taxes in Austin. One of the selling points politicians like to make is reminding people we have no state income tax (other states with no state income tax are Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington and Wyoming).

That sounds really good, until you ask yourself how Texas pays the bills without one. The answer is sales and property taxes. Texas has the 12^th highest sales tax in the nation at 8.17 percent (Tennessee is the highest with a 9.46 percent).

Texas also has a higher-than-average effective property tax (Fifth highest in the nation). This has gotten the attention of Austin lawmakers who are crying foul and looking to find ways to have municipalities cutback on their tax rates, but education officials say not so fast. Thanks to Austin cutting back on funding for education, schools and other government entities look to property tax to fill the gap.

A 2010 report from the Texas Conservative Coalition Research Institute found funding for education in Texas to be “antiquated”. The study group was co-chaired by Dan Patrick, now Texas’ lieutenant governor.

While an argument can be made on both sides of the issue of state income taxes, one thing seems to be very clear, not having a state income tax hurts the poor. Why? Because a state income tax is based on what a person earns. Sales taxes are considered regressive because they don’t change based on a person’s income. Someone making $15k a year pays the same tax for a gallon of milk as someone who makes $150k annually.

If you look at taxes paid as a percentage of income on the poorest to the wealthiest, Texas ranks fifth in the nation for having the most regressive state tax system. The poorest 20 percent pay 12.6 in taxes compared to the middle class (8.8 percent) and the top 1 percent (3.2).

Much like the federal tax system, the Texas tax system needs some fixing. It’s a simple question; how do we want to collect money to pay for state services. The answer? Well that’s a little harder.