Askov American., 1936-10-15
The Record of C.. c.. Mann
Pine County Representative Candidate for Reelection

amendment appeared that will be
voted on by the people of the state
this fall. This amendment, which
will be known as Amendment No. 2.
as you know is designed to eliminate
the state tax on either real or tangible
personal property. In its first draft
the bill excepted iron ore, mined or
unmined, from its provisions, but this
clause was later stricken out, and so
if this amendment carries the mines
will save approximately three million
dollars per year in property taxes.
This may be offset in future leglsla-
lures by higher severance taxes, such
as the occupational and royalty taxes,
but we have no assurance of that. felt
that this was merely shifting of the
burden, and not solution, and voted
accordingly. From the viewpoint OF
the Pine County property owner, by
which standard | considered most
measures to come before the Legis-
lature, | felt that it was not a good
measure and voted against it. And
although we all realize that the pre-
sent excessive cost of government must
be curtailed, and that the burden must
be shifted from property so that peo-
pie may desire to own a home again,
it cannot be done by shifting the
burden from the large property owner
to the small.
Then the much discussed omnibus
bill was evolved, and | would like to
explain my voting on this bill. This
measure, all reports to the contrary
Notwithstanding, was only one half
sales tax. The sales tax was on every
thing except foods, all fOodstuffs be-
ing exempt. 1t was sales tax on
clothing, dry goods, drugs, hardware,
implements and machinery, and in
counties like Pine would have worked
out exactly as the gasoline sales tax
does, in that we would have received
considerably more than we put in.
However, | have never been in favor
of sales tax, and when an amend
ment was introduced by Mr.. Barker
to wipe the sales tax from the bill,
| voted for the amendment, or against
the sales tax.
But as | said before, that was only
half the bill. The other half con-
sisted of increases in the net income
tax, an increase in the inheritance
and telephone gross earnings taxes,
removed many of the faults in the
present income tax law by which
much wealth is escaping taxation,
raised the moneys and credits tax,
and had gift tax with the same
rates as the inheritance, to prevent
people from signing over property be-
fore death to escape the inheritance
taxes. All these, measures that pro-
gressives have been working for for
years, were in the omnibus tax bill,
and | believe that in the interests of
the state as a whole, the governor
should not have vetoed it. Do not
misunderstood me here. think that
Governor Olson is probably one of the
most brilliant men that ever sat in
the governors chair, but l believe
that this once, at least, he put pOlitl-
cal expediency ahead of being COVER
nor.
The bill was designed to raise about
forty-four million dollars over the
next two year period. The state
general revenue fund was ten million
in the red, there was ten million for
relief, and other expenditures, includ-
ing another six million for school aid,
ran the bill to over thirty-eight mil
lion dollars that should have been
provided. This the omnibus tax bill
would have done, but the governors
veto practically nullified the work of
the entire session.
We also passed good old age pen
sion law at the regular session, which
through some error was later thrown
out, and put into effect the amend
ment that was voted on by the people
that household goods and farm ma
chinery should be exempt from tax