A race worth watching: Hamill's bid for state House
by The Anniston Star Editorial Board
Jul 07, 2009 | 1179 views | 12 12 comments | 14 14 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Newspaper editorial boards, including this one, usually shy away from lengthy comments on state legislative races before they begin. What's more, this page often has little to say about races in districts unless they are close to the readers we serve.

However, the race for the seat in House District 63, which includes the city of Tuscaloosa, promises to have statewide significance if for no other reason than Susan Pace Hamill has announced as a candidate.

Hamill is a law professor at the University of Alabama who holds a degree in theology studies from Beeson Divinity School of Samford University in Birmingham. She burst on the Alabama scene a few years ago with a series of searing newspaper articles that did what so many Alabama leaders should have done long ago, but didn't.

She took the state's tax code and funding priorities (tax law is one of her specialties) and compared what we were doing to what the Bible actually says we should do about justice, fairness and our responsibilities for "the least of these."

The result was a scathing indictment of the state's taxation and funding system, not so much in her words as in words from the Scriptures.

Hamill, a Democrat, now is running for the state Legislature, and her platform looks deceptively traditional. She says she will work to cut state income taxes, cut sales taxes and repeal the grocery tax. She also promises to work for increased and equitable funding for education.

But as anyone who has studied Alabama's regressive tax system knows, those changes cannot occur without tax reform that shifts the burden of supporting the system over to those who have traditionally profited from it but have not paid for what they have earned.

In other words, the under-taxed affluent will have to contribute more to make up for what was once paid by the overtaxed poor and middle class.

The under-taxed affluent will not like this. And those who represent this segment of the economy, the so-called "big mules," will likely do what they can to defeat her.

It is not often that a campaign holds the possibility of drawing for Alabamians a clear line between those who would, as her Web page says, apply "Christian principles to public policy," and those who will seek to justify the system as it currently exists and discredit those who want to change it.

A morality play is shaping up in the legislative race for District 63. How the characters act their parts and how the audience, in this case the voters, responds, will say much about the future of tax reform in Alabama.

It will also tell us a lot about ourselves.
comments (12)
« alvinhurst@bellsouth.net wrote on Wednesday, Jul 08 at 08:48 PM »
And Pines, if it is not about raising taxes, are you saying she is going to lower them? Really?
« alvinhurst@bellsouth.net wrote on Wednesday, Jul 08 at 08:45 PM »
Our taxes are among the lowest. I suspect CA is among the highest. Which state is doing better?

« susandibiase@yahoo.com wrote on Wednesday, Jul 08 at 08:37 PM »
Dr. Hamill was speaking out about making our taxes more FAIR. What she said was not about raising them. In Alabama, the poor pay about 11% of their income in taxes and the wealthy pay about 4 %.

Alabama's sales taxes are very high (and we even tax groceries). Our income taxes are high for lower income groups, though Gov. Riley moved us in the right direction. Our property taxes are close to the lowest in the country. And we give tax breaks to the wealthy in the form of a federal tax write-off.

Dr. Hamill has been saying that we should make things more fair so that everyone makes their fair contribution to buying the things we need--schools, police protection, roads, etc. It's not fair that the poor (who can't afford it) should pay more than those who are fortunate (who can).
« alvinhurst@bellsouth.net wrote on Wednesday, Jul 08 at 08:30 PM »
Downsouth, I taught a few years myself.

But she does want to raise taxes, if I remember her emails and previous piece in the Star. I didn't just infer that.

No doubt that her heart is in the right place but I disagree with the method.

I could be wrong but I think the Bible says that we, not the state, should help the poor, not the state. And I agree that we should help the poore, even though the Bible also says that he who would not work shall not eat. You see why we don't need to run use the Bible in pushing our political

philosophy? And I find it strange that the Star and Ms. Hamill would use the Bible in furtherance of political matters. Surely they are not advocating implementing scripture into our laws. I would bet your last dollar they believe in the so called separation of church and state.

You too, have a great day.

« 123@easystreet.com wrote on Wednesday, Jul 08 at 07:59 PM »
unpc,

I am an old retired school teacher who probably lives in a make believe world. I take people at their word. If Ms. Hamill says that she will work to help the poor, then I will support her.

If Ms. Hamill quotes the Bible and says that the state is obligated to help the poor, I don't see that as trying to raise my taxes. It may in fact raise my taxes, but we really do need to do all we can to feed the hungry, clothe the naked and etc....

I am not a Roman Catholic, but I understand the Catholic Church has stated that tax avoidance is a sin.

When I was a teacher, I had students every year who tried to work the system to get what they wanted. It is easy to focus on them and forget the rest. But 99.9% of the people are good. I choose not to focus on the .1% (although it is so easy to get caught up in that).

Like I said, I am a bit simple in my outlook, but until someone proves they are lying, I tend to take them at their word. I am much happier that way.

Even though we disagree, I wish you well.

Regards,

« alvinhurst@bellsouth.net wrote on Wednesday, Jul 08 at 04:42 PM »
Downsouth, I forgot to address the woman's place issue. You will notice that I said in that post that I do not necessarily believe this. The point was that if she is going to use the Bible (which is open to many interpretations) she should also use the part about a woman's place. And she is not the only one. People quote the parts that they believe in and ignore the ones which they do not like.

In retrospect, I guess I was attacking her but not as a person but as to her beliefs and sleight of hand in quoting the Bible.
« alvinhurst@bellsouth.net wrote on Wednesday, Jul 08 at 03:52 PM »
Downsouth, I was not attacking her as a person. In fact I emailed her a time or two when she had a piece in the Star a few years ago about this same topic. In fact, she was quite nice. But that is how I am familiar with her beliefs.

But I do generally attack anyone who wants to raise my taxes. People should know what is being proposed. As to her agenda, it is obvious. She wants to raise our taxes. As to the wisdom of that idea, I have already commented on that.

As to what other states do, that they do something does not make it a good idea. Again, see CA.
« 123@easystreet.com wrote on Wednesday, Jul 08 at 03:09 PM »
Plus, you do know how Alabama property taxes compare to surrounding states I hope. It is my understanding we have the lowest property taxes of any state in the South. I could be wrong, but that's what I've heard all my life.

I do not have a problem paying taxes. I think it is a part of living in this culture. I know there is waste, but you find it in any activity. I think waste and corruption should be rooted out and dealt with (read more government regulation and regulators), but I don't want to give up the services I receive from government and cut off my nose to spite my face.

Anyway, I wish you a pleasant rest of the day and tomorrow too!

Regards,
« 123@easystreet.com wrote on Wednesday, Jul 08 at 02:59 PM »
unpc,

I felt you were attacking her. making tongue in cheek references to "a woman's place."

Tell me, what is Ms. Hamill's agenda that you referred to? I think her agenda is that the state has an obligation to help the poor. I don't think I read that she is advocating increased taxes. Could you point me to the reference that she is "...after your money...." Pointing out the so called liberal agenda won't convince me, sorry.

But now after thinking about it, I shouldn't have responded to you in like fashion and once again, for that I do apologize.

Sorry.

Regards,

« alvinhurst@bellsouth.net wrote on Wednesday, Jul 08 at 10:11 AM »
Downsouth, I am amazed that you call me callous and cavalier. It seems to be a pattern with some to cast insults toward those who they do not agree with.

First, part of my comments dealt with using the Bible to push an agenda. She is a seminary graduate and I would assume somewhat spiritual. She should know better. But maybe she does. It seemed to work to an extent for Judge Moore.

As to taxing to help the poor, nowhere did I say we should not help the poor. The problem is that this woman has liberal ideas. Increasing the taxes is the solution for everything. Well, look at CA and NY. They raised taxes and ran off the people with money who could create jobs.

As I recall, she wanted to raise property taxes. Do only the rich own houses? I know plenty of people who work hard and are able to buy a house and can barely make the payments. They are doing the right thing, the thing that would elevate others if they too would do that. But some want to discourage that by raising their taxes. Heck, we should be reducing property taxes if anything. The more people we have living in houses that they bought and living a productive life, the less the crime rate.

And what about not only reducing taxes for auto manufacturers and even giving them money to come here? Are you for that, even if it means jobs? If so, then you understand that lower taxes increases wealth for everyone.

Of course we do need some taxes but what I am against is thinking that higher taxes is the answer to everything.
« 123@easystreet.com wrote on Tuesday, Jul 07 at 09:47 PM »
unpc,

I stand amazed at your callous cavalier comments.

I came from extreme poverty. My parents worked in cotton mills. My dad was a part time preacher. I never saw a doctor or dentist until I joined the Air Force. I joined the Air Force after I graduated from high school and all the clothes I had were on my back. The sole on one of my shoes slapped on the ground as I walked into the Air Force Recruiter office. I was 6'1" tall and weighed 160 lbs. I wanted to make a life.

I have been very fortunate. I went to college on the G.I. Bill and eventually made a little progress. I am not wealthy by any means.

What I feel for the poor is deep compassion. I will do anything I can to help them to get out of the rut of poverty. My heroes are the folks who man the soup kitchens and the used clothing stores,the folks who build homes for habitat.

I just do not understand how some people do not feel compassion to help the poor. I'm not talking about just a handout, I'm talking about a hand up.

In my opinion Susan Pace Hamill puts the "Hay down where the goats can get it." Personally, I don't mind paying more taxes to help. Hell, when my life is over, it won't matter how much money I made or saved. What will matter is what I did with it.

I know that we have to practice tough love but when I think of those little kids who suffer and have no health care, I will opt on the side of compassion. I may not be able to change their parents, but I will spend money to help change their children.

Regards,

« alvinhurst@bellsouth.net wrote on Tuesday, Jul 07 at 08:17 AM »
Yeah, I remember her. She wants to raise our taxes and is using the Bible to push her agenda. Somebody remind me about what the Bible says about women remaining silent. While I don't necessarily agree with that, this does present a good case for that belief. Maybe she will read the whole Bible.

Watch out folks. She is after your money. Maybe she needs to move to CA. They would love her out there.