logo
House amends Senate property tax bill back to a statewide 50% cut

House amends Senate property tax bill back to a statewide 50% cut

Yahoo21-02-2025

CHEYENNE – After more than seven hours of debate, members of the House Freedom Caucus moved a major property tax bill back closer to the Senate's version than representatives left it last week.
The House debated 21 amendments to Senate File 69, 'Homeowner property tax exemption,' on third reading Wednesday. Three major amendments removed a county-by-county basis take on tax relief, returning the bill to a statewide, 50% assessment reduction for residential structures up to $1 million in value.
When the House voted 42-19 in favor of SF 69 on Wednesday, the bill included that 50% exemption for up to $1 million of the fair market value for residential structure for two years, but not a Senate-approved exemption for associated land. The House also added a backfill of about $200 million that the Senate did not approve.
A third amendment very different from the Senate's version of SF 69 passed; it was brought by Freedom Caucus-endorsed freshman legislator Rep. Jayme Lien, R-Casper. That amendment would include a permanent 25% property tax cut from the tax year 2027 on. The Senate's version of the bill included a two-year sunset, or no property tax cut after 2027.
Rep. Ken Pendergraft, R-Sheridan, who is backed by the Freedom Caucus and brought the first of the three approved amendments, said early in the day, while considering other amendments, that there were better amendments to come that he had crafted with other lawmakers' input.
Rep. Art Washut, R-Casper, said he was disappointed his fellow representatives were voting to take the bill back to its earlier state, and that the county-by-county approach approved on second reading would be removed.
Rep. Art Washut, R-Casper (2025)
Rep. Art Washut, R-Casper
'Remember last Thursday night, when there was a sense of freshness, opportunity, the light came on,' Washut said. 'Now here we are a few days later, ready to jettison that little ray of sunshine and go back to the original.'
Other representatives expressed dismay that nearly every other amendment failed in something close to a two-thirds vote, and questioned whether decisions were made at private meetings between second reading last Thursday and Wednesday's third reading.
Proper names of organizations are not allowed on the House floor, so no one referenced the Freedom Caucus PAC by name.
'We had a debate last week, we thought we were being productive. We thought we had come together for a consensus of something good, and I am disappointed with the direction we are going,' Rep. Cody Wylie, R-Rock Springs, said.
Rep. Cody Wylie, R-Rock Springs (2025)
Rep. Cody Wylie, R-Rock Springs
'Folks at home, this is what happens when you're bringing politics into the decisions that are going to shape our children's' future. This is what happens when you make a decision in a meeting room somewhere not on this floor,' Wylie continued.
Minority floor leader Rep. Mike Yin, D-Jackson, said later in debate that if anything, 21 amendments to the bill meant it was not ready to become law. Further, he said that the decision to amend was not made in the seven hours of debate on the House floor Wednesday.
Rep. Mike Yin, D-Jackson (2025)
Rep. Mike Yin, D-Jackson
'We had the conversations in public, but those conversations weren't the real conversations. The decision had already been made,' Yin said.
In one heated exchange between two Casper Republican representatives, Rep. Julie Jarvis said that, as amended, SF 69 was a 'political bill.' Rep. Tony Locke, who has been endorsed by the Freedom Caucus, pushed back angrily.
Rep. Tony Locke, R-Casper (2025)
Rep. Tony Locke, R-Casper
'If people are going to get up and disparage people's reason for voting in this room, that's the wrong answer,' Locke said. 'You don't walk into this room and say, 'Something's fishy and we were all set up'.'
Jarvis responded that she simply did not believe the bill was about helping the people of Wyoming.
Rep. Julie Jarvis, R-Casper (2025)
Rep. Julie Jarvis, R-Casper
'The amendments that were created and decided ahead of time — I am ashamed that I would be part of this,' Jarvis said.
Other amendments
Four amendments that would have adjusted a county-by-county procedure for calculating property tax relief — brought by Rep. Ken Clouston, R-Gillette, on second reading last week — failed. Others had to do with the percentage of tax cuts under SF 69, and whether those should be applied at 25% or 50%. Another was whether a change in the state's sales tax mechanism could be used to mitigate the property tax cuts. All were voted down.
'Do we have a strong vision on where we want to see property tax relief go? I would argue that frankly, we don't,' Yin said in the middle of debate on the eighth amendment.
Another failed amendment proposed by Rep. Steve Harshman, R-Casper, would have assessed residential property at 8.3%, a change allowed by Constitutional Amendment A, passed in November's general election. Harshman said that including the amendment in SF 69 would ensure that the voters' will be done.
Rep. John Bear, R-Gillette, former Freedom Caucus chair, and Majority Floor Leader Rep. Scott Heiner, R-Green River, both argued Harshman's amendment was unnecessary, as Senate File 153, 'Residential real property-taxable value,' is making its way to the House floor and addresses the same issue. Harshman's amendment failed.
The House's version of SF 69 must now be reconciled with the Senate's version before either could be sent to Gov. Mark Gordon's desk.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Musk predicts Trump's tariffs will cause recession amid growing spat with president
Musk predicts Trump's tariffs will cause recession amid growing spat with president

Yahoo

time35 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Musk predicts Trump's tariffs will cause recession amid growing spat with president

Former presidential adviser and confidante Elon Musk escalated his growing feud with President Trump by saying the president's tariffs would result in a recession later this year. 'The Trump Tariffs will cause a recession in the second half of this year,' he wrote on his social media website, X. The remark is the latest dig at Trump's policies since the tech billionaire left his role in the administration last week as head of the government cost-cutting panel known as the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. Musk blasted Republicans' tax-and-spending-cut bill this week, which Trump helped to shepherd through the House last month, calling it a 'disgusting abomination.' 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore,' Musk wrote on X on Tuesday. 'This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.' Beyond the president's policies, Musk also attacked Trump personally, claiming Thursday that Trump is mentioned in files pertaining to Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted child abuser who died in jail in 2019. 'Time to drop the really big bomb: [Donald Trump] is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!' he wrote on X. Musk's efforts with DOGE during his time in the Trump administration stirred a flurry of controversy and led to resignations of top officials in multiple agencies, including the IRS and the Treasury Department. Concerns about his team's access to private data have resulted in lawsuits. 'DOGE's mission to advise OMB and the White House on how to slash regulations and cut expenditures puts at risk important consumer safeguards and public protections,' Robert Weissman, co-president of Public Citizen, an advocacy group that brought a lawsuit against the administration, said in a January statement. Controversies have also been swirling about Musk's personal life. A recent New York Times investigation found that Musk was 'juggling … a drug habit far more serious than previously known.' Musk's criticism is channeling concerns among economists and business leaders about the prospect of a recession resulting from tariffs. Trump's tariffs — notably his 'reciprocal,' country-specific tariffs and triple-digit tariffs on China — have been walked back, but a highly elevated overall U.S. tariff rate relative to recent decades has remained in place. The overall tariff rate is somewhere between 10 and 15 percent now, according to various estimates, and Trump's tariffs are expected to pull in about $2.5 trillion in federal revenues. The Federal Reserve has repeatedly painted a stagflationary picture of the economic outlook in recent months. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) factored a boosted inflationary prediction of 0.4 percentage points as a result of the tariffs into its budgetary calculations this week. However, a recession is far from guaranteed, and many predictions about the economy have grown more positive as trade negotiations have continued. The U.S. trade deficit narrowed by a record amount in April following intense front-running of tariffs by importers in the first quarter, causing a collective sigh of relief from many investors. 'The drop in imports should have a positive impact on GDP, quelling any fears of a recession in the near term,' Damian McIntyre, vice president at investment firm Federated Hermes, commented Thursday. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Opinion - Trump-Musk divorce threatens the president and the entire Republican Party
Opinion - Trump-Musk divorce threatens the president and the entire Republican Party

Yahoo

time35 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Opinion - Trump-Musk divorce threatens the president and the entire Republican Party

Few expected the relationship between President Trump and Elon Musk to survive four years, but the spectacular collapse of this partnership has shocked even seasoned observers with its speed and intensity. Now, as two of the world's most powerful men openly clash, there are seismic implications for the country as a whole and the Republican Party specifically. Put another way, not only does this fissure expose cracks in the GOP and MAGA coalition, it's also a considerable threat to Republicans' midterms hopes and Trump's signature legislation. The fight, which began two weeks ago when Musk expressed 'disappointment' with Trump's 'one big, beautiful' bill had initially been confined to disagreements over the legislation, rather than personal attacks. Then, on Thursday afternoon, it escalated in unprecedented, dramatic fashion. Following Trump's recent comment that he would have won Pennsylvania without Musk's help, Musk replied 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate.' That was just Musk's opening salvo against the man he spent roughly $300 million to get elected. The tech billionaire then went on a blistering war path. He claimed Trump was on 'the Epstein list,' supported impeachment — a touchy subject for the twice-impeached Trump — and claimed that tariffs would cause a recession. Not content with attacking Trump, Musk has also threatened to fund primary challenges to Republicans who support the bill, and has criticized both Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.). With unprecedented speed, Musk went from the man who could pour hundreds of millions into Republican coffers to Republicans' enemy number one. Influential commentator Steve Bannon pushed for Musk's deportation, claiming he's an illegal alien, and Trump threatened to cancel all government contracts with Musk's multiple companies, saying Musk 'went CRAZY.' Whether or not the rumors of an impending détente between the two is enough to heal the rupture remains to be seen, but it's unlikely that all of the pieces will ever get put back together. Given Musk's deep pockets and control of social media platform X, where he has a cult-like following, Trump and the Republicans now find themselves in a treacherous spot at a precarious time. Indeed, even before the dramatic escalation, Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' was in limbo in the Senate. As Alexander Bolton noted in this publication prior to Thursday's blowup, Trump's bill is 'losing momentum in the Senate in the face of blistering attacks from Elon Musk.' To that end, Musk's criticisms of the bill and threats to primary its Republican supporters has already led two House Republicans who voted for the bill, Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and John Rose (R-Tenn.), to come out against some of it. It appears that this fight has brought some Republicans back into Trump's fold. Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), who had been opposed to the bill prior to its passage in the House, condemned Musk, saying he 'crossed the line.' And Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn), another House conservative, dismissed Musk's influence, saying he is 'just another shiny object.' For their part, Republican senators who may have had doubts about Trump's signature legislation now risk being seen as taking Musk's side and being disloyal to the president. However, it would be a mistake to overlook the implications of the breakup or the dangers for Republicans. If he wants, Musk could very easily fund primaries against vulnerable GOP House members, and his control of X gives him unprecedented influence over the media ecosystem. Further, Musk's influence among the Silicon Valley cohort that moved stridently to the right in 2024 could peel off a new group of Republican voters and donors. In that same vein, there are possible electoral consequences for Republicans, even if tempers between Trump and Musk cool down. Trump was counting on the bill's passage to be a significant political tailwind that would boost his polling numbers and Republicans' midterm hopes, particularly given the ongoing chaos over tariffs and trade policy. Now, whichever version of the bill eventually passes, Republicans look like the party of chaos. It is entirely possible that this ongoing feud dents voters' confidence in Republicans' ability to competently govern, something Democrats are clearly hoping for. As the Wall Street Journal reported, Democrats are 'reveling' about the fight, with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) reposting Musk's attacks and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) taking digs at the 'GOP civil war.' To be sure, despite Musk's efforts, it remains likely that a version of Trump's 'one, big, beautiful bill' will still pass, but Republicans now have a bigger headache. Ultimately, divorces are always messy, but the Trump-Musk divorce is unprecedented, and it could not have come at a worse time for Republicans. With razor-thin margins in the House and the absence of Trump's much-touted trade bills, it poses the most significant threat to Republicans' midterm hopes, and by extension, the rest of Trump's term. Douglas E. Schoen and Carly Cooperman are pollsters and partners with the public opinion company Schoen Cooperman Research based in New York. They are co-authors of the book, 'America: Unite or Die.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Ayotte issues first veto as N.H. governor, keeping transportation mandatory for half-day kindergarten
Ayotte issues first veto as N.H. governor, keeping transportation mandatory for half-day kindergarten

Boston Globe

time40 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

Ayotte issues first veto as N.H. governor, keeping transportation mandatory for half-day kindergarten

'To no longer require transportation for these children to and from these schools would place an undue burden on working families,' Ayotte said, lauding half-day kindergarten as a tool to help give students a strong foundation for success later in life. Get N.H. Morning Report A weekday newsletter delivering the N.H. news you need to know right to your inbox. Enter Email Sign Up 'While school districts throughout New Hampshire should be actively looking for ways to effectively utilize their funding, this is a step in the wrong direction,' she added, referring to the legislation. Advertisement Ayotte vetoed HB 319 on Tuesday, according to an entry added to The bill's prime sponsor, Representative Keith Ammon of New Boston, said he respects Ayotte's veto authority, but was surprised by her decision. 'This bill, requested by the New Boston school board chair, would have saved our district $75,000 annually by eliminating an unfunded state mandate that forces our district to run nearly empty buses in the middle of the day,' Ammon said. Advertisement 'Unfortunately, the governor's first veto may send a chilling message to legislators trying to eliminate the many unfunded state mandates that drive up property taxes for New Hampshire families,' he added. The legislation had passed with a 204-171 vote in the House in March and a 13-8 vote in the Senate in May, which suggests lawmakers are unlikely to muster the two-thirds majorities needed to override the governor's decision. Aside from her first veto, Ayotte also announced Friday that she had signed 19 more bills into law, including legislation related to rights and complaints in special education (HB 76, HB 753, and HB 754), financial assistance for those victimized in cases of sexual assault or harassment while serving in the national guard (HB 62), and a requirement that public schools observe Constitution Day with patriotic exercises (HB 571). This article first appeared in Globe NH | Morning Report, our free newsletter focused on the news you need to know about New Hampshire, including great coverage from the Boston Globe and links to interesting articles from other places. If you'd like to receive it via e-mail Monday through Friday, Steven Porter can be reached at

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store