Latest news with #CenterSquare
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
New Texas Laws Boost Homestead Exemptions For Homeowners
Gov. Greg Abbott, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, and House Speaker Dustin Burrows hailed the passage of legislation aimed at delivering property tax relief on May 30, though critics argue the measures fail to address escalating tax burdens driven by government spending. The Texas Legislature passed Senate Bill 4, Senate Bill 23, House Bill 9, Senate Joint Resolution 2, Senate Joint Resolution 85, and House Joint Resolution 1, which, if approved by voters in November, will increase homestead exemptions and business property tax exemptions. 'Never before has the Texas Legislature allocated more funds to provide property tax relief than they did this session,' Abbott said in a press release. 'I will sign these bills into law to deliver lasting relief for Texans and their families, and I urge Texans to approve the new increases in the homestead and business property tax exemptions this November.' Senate Bill 4 raises the homestead exemption to $140,000 for all homeowners, while Senate Bill 23 increases it to $200,000 for seniors and disabled individuals. House Bill 9 enhances tax exemptions for business inventory, a move small businesses have pushed to eliminate. The joint resolutions propose constitutional amendments to make these exemptions permanent, pending voter approval. 'When I became Lieutenant Governor in 2015, the homestead exemption was a tiny $15,000,' Patrick said in the press release. 'Since then, we have increased it to $100,000, and with the passage of Senate Bill 4 and Senate Bill 23, it is now $200,000 for seniors and $140,000 for non-seniors. The average senior homeowner will no longer pay any school property taxes for the rest of their life as long as they live in their home.' Speaker Burrows added, 'With the Legislature's overwhelming passage of additional property tax relief, Texas home and business owners are on their way to keeping more of their hard-earned money.' Abbott declared property tax relief an emergency item in his 2025 State of the State Address, following a 2023 session in which Patrick called that year's relief package 'the largest property tax relief package in Texas history, and likely the world.' Despite these claims, property taxes rose by $5.4 billion in 2024, a 6.6% increase from 2023, according to state comptroller data cited by economist Bill Peacock, per Center Square. Counties raised taxes by 10.4%, school districts by 6.4%, special districts by 6.1%, and cities by 3.9%. Critics, including economist Vance Ginn, argue that the Legislature's approach of temporarily compressing rates and increasing exemptions merely shifts the tax burden without reducing it. 'Texans want to own their homes – not rent them from the government forever,' Ginn said, according to Center Square. 'They want a government that lives within its means, just like they do. And they want honesty – not headlines – from their elected officials.' Ginn advocates capping state and local spending growth to population growth plus inflation, requiring a two-thirds vote for increases, and using the state's surplus to eliminate school district maintenance and operations taxes. Fiscal conservatives have criticized the current budget as 'a bloated, big-government plan masquerading as conservative reform,' warning, as Ginn did, 'If we continue down this path, Texas won't just resemble California – we'll become it.' Taxpayers on social media have echoed these concerns, arguing the Legislature's spending habits undermine relief efforts.
Yahoo
13-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion - How misleading coverage inflates support for Trump's return-to-office mandate
An article from the non-profit Center Square news wire recently proclaimed with certainty that 'a majority of Americans' applaud President Trump's order forcing every federal employee back to the office. Scratch the surface, though, and the arithmetic crumbles. The poll itself, conducted by the news wire reveals that only 43 percent of respondents endorse returning all federal workers to their desks, a figure printed in the third paragraph of the story. That's not a majority. Another 27 percent support an order that affects 'essential' employees. Yet those men and women were already in the office under former President Joe Biden's return-to-office requirement. By fusing those two camps together and labeling the sum a 'majority,' the article inflates support for Trump's sweeping mandate. This buries the inconvenient fact that no, 57 percent do not back sending every telework-eligible civil servant back into downtown D.C. The distortion deepens when you examine the opposition numbers. Sixteen percent flatly reject any in-office mandate, and 14 percent remain unsure, according to the same survey. Even with this doubt on the record, the piece frames skepticism as fringe. The structure of the questionnaire supplies the trick; it blends Biden's status-quo option with Trump's radical shift and reports the blend as enthusiasm for universal in-office work in the federal government. That sleight of hand does not survive a second look, yet many readers never get that second look because the packaging feels authoritative. The framing matters because headlines travel farther than footnotes. They surface in social feeds, news apps, and inbox summaries stripped of context. Moreover, the headline causes what psychologists call the effect 'anchoring bias.' Once a first number lodges in the mind, later corrections struggle to dislodge it. When the first figure is misleading, the damage lasts. The Center Square, funded through opaque conservative donor networks, produces content with a free-market, anti-labor tilt. It thrives on a syndication model designed for today's hollowed-out local newsrooms. Cash-strapped editors searching for content can drop its statehouse copy straight onto the page at no cost. Ohio's Highland County Press and many similar outlets did exactly that within hours of the poll's release, headline intact and context stripped. Readers trust these papers because they anchor community life. Gallup and the Knight Foundation find that Americans exhibit more than twice the emotional trust in local outlets as in national media. When an inaccurately framed wire story like this one flows through that trusted channel, skepticism plunges. You, the reader, wield a sharper tool than any syndicated headline: deliberate attention. Start by reading the original survey questions rather than just the press-release summaries. Ask whether response categories overlap or conflate separate policies. Calculate percentages yourself; subtraction exposes the missing half of every inflated majority. Then trace the publication's funding — in this case donor-advised funds committed to an agenda of shrinking government. Broader vigilance also relies on competing data from quality sources. For example, a poll by AP-NORC found support for a blanket federal return-to-office policy hovering near 40 percent in January 2025. This is a lot closer to what the poll above actually showed. When one outlet proclaims an overwhelming consensus, yet multiple independent surveys with higher credibility depict a divided public should not be accepted uncritically. Finally, readers should hold local editors to their own civic mission. Write a short letter flagging the numerical contortions of this coverage. Demand a follow-up that presents the full distribution of opinions and clarifies that 'essential' employees were already in the office before Trump's order. Request that the newspaper's editors and reporters take the Pro-Truth Pledge (and take it yourself). Most hometown journalists care about accuracy and community trust. They usually lack the bandwidth, not the will, to vet every free wire story. When readers supply evidence, corrections often follow. Each alert reader who challenges deceptive framing makes it harder for fringe statistics to masquerade as consensus. Each editor who pauses before copying wire text slows the pipeline that carries partisan narratives into living rooms. Journalism regains credibility not through grandiose pledges but through thousands of such micro-checks, day after day. A democracy that values open debate cannot rely on arithmetic trickery. The Center Square poll repackaged minority support as a sweeping mandate, then rode the credibility of local papers to national notice. By dissecting the numbers, following the funding, and insisting on rigorous standards from every outlet, you protect the public square from manipulation. The task demands patience and persistence, yet the reward is a discourse grounded in fact, not spin. Gleb Tsipursky, Ph.D., serves as the CEO of the hybrid work consultancy Disaster Avoidance Experts and authored the best-seller 'Returning to the Office and Leading Hybrid and Remote Teams.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
13-05-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
How misleading coverage inflates support for Trump's return-to-office mandate
An article from the non-profit Center Square news wire recently proclaimed with certainty that 'a majority of Americans' applaud President Trump's order forcing every federal employee back to the office. Scratch the surface, though, and the arithmetic crumbles. The poll itself, conducted by the news wire reveals that only 43 percent of respondents endorse returning all federal workers to their desks, a figure printed in the third paragraph of the story. That's not a majority. Another 27 percent support an order that affects 'essential' employees. Yet those men and women were already in the office under former President Joe Biden's return-to-office requirement. By fusing those two camps together and labeling the sum a 'majority,' the article inflates support for Trump's sweeping mandate. This buries the inconvenient fact that no, 57 percent do not back sending every telework-eligible civil servant back into downtown D.C. The distortion deepens when you examine the opposition numbers. Sixteen percent flatly reject any in-office mandate, and 14 percent remain unsure, according to the same survey. Even with this doubt on the record, the piece frames skepticism as fringe. The structure of the questionnaire supplies the trick; it blends Biden's status-quo option with Trump's radical shift and reports the blend as enthusiasm for universal in-office work in the federal government. That sleight of hand does not survive a second look, yet many readers never get that second look because the packaging feels authoritative. The framing matters because headlines travel farther than footnotes. They surface in social feeds, news apps, and inbox summaries stripped of context. Moreover, the headline causes what psychologists call the effect 'anchoring bias.' Once a first number lodges in the mind, later corrections struggle to dislodge it. When the first figure is misleading, the damage lasts. The Center Square, funded through opaque conservative donor networks, produces content with a free-market, anti-labor tilt. It thrives on a syndication model designed for today's hollowed-out local newsrooms. Cash-strapped editors searching for content can drop its statehouse copy straight onto the page at no cost. Ohio's Highland County Press and many similar outlets did exactly that within hours of the poll's release, headline intact and context stripped. Readers trust these papers because they anchor community life. Gallup and the Knight Foundation find that Americans exhibit more than twice the emotional trust in local outlets as in national media. When an inaccurately framed wire story like this one flows through that trusted channel, skepticism plunges. You, the reader, wield a sharper tool than any syndicated headline: deliberate attention. Start by reading the original survey questions rather than just the press-release summaries. Ask whether response categories overlap or conflate separate policies. Calculate percentages yourself; subtraction exposes the missing half of every inflated majority. Then trace the publication's funding — in this case donor-advised funds committed to an agenda of shrinking government. Broader vigilance also relies on competing data from quality sources. For example, a poll by AP-NORC found support for a blanket federal return-to-office policy hovering near 40 percent in January 2025. This is a lot closer to what the poll above actually showed. When one outlet proclaims an overwhelming consensus, yet multiple independent surveys with higher credibility depict a divided public should not be accepted uncritically. Finally, readers should hold local editors to their own civic mission. Write a short letter flagging the numerical contortions of this coverage. Demand a follow-up that presents the full distribution of opinions and clarifies that 'essential' employees were already in the office before Trump's order. Request that the newspaper's editors and reporters take the Pro-Truth Pledge (and take it yourself). Most hometown journalists care about accuracy and community trust. They usually lack the bandwidth, not the will, to vet every free wire story. When readers supply evidence, corrections often follow. Each alert reader who challenges deceptive framing makes it harder for fringe statistics to masquerade as consensus. Each editor who pauses before copying wire text slows the pipeline that carries partisan narratives into living rooms. Journalism regains credibility not through grandiose pledges but through thousands of such micro-checks, day after day. A democracy that values open debate cannot rely on arithmetic trickery. The Center Square poll repackaged minority support as a sweeping mandate, then rode the credibility of local papers to national notice. By dissecting the numbers, following the funding, and insisting on rigorous standards from every outlet, you protect the public square from manipulation. The task demands patience and persistence, yet the reward is a discourse grounded in fact, not spin. Gleb Tsipursky, Ph.D., serves as the CEO of the hybrid work consultancy Disaster Avoidance Experts and authored the best-seller 'Returning to the Office and Leading Hybrid and Remote Teams.'
American Press
03-05-2025
- Automotive
- American Press
Jim Beam column:Vehicle inspections to continue
Louisiana motorists don't much care for vehicle inspections but a state legislator's five-year effort to end them has failed again.(Photo courtesy of Louisiana Rep. Larry Bagley is like the Energizer battery 'bunny that keeps on ticking.' The Republican from Stonewall lost his fifth effort Monday to try and eliminate the state's vehicle inspections and the odds are that he will try again. Two other bills affecting Louisiana motorists are enjoying more success. One raises the fine for slow drivers who stay in the left lane too long. The other, if approved, would eliminate, except in school zones, all speed and red light cameras used to catch drivers who are violating traffic laws. The House Transportation Committee voted 6-5 to defer Bagley's House Bill 232. Three of the five votes for the bill were cast by GOP Reps. Ryan Bourrique of Grand Lake, chairman of the committee, Rodney Schamerhorn of Hornbeck and Phillip Tarver of Lake Charles. The Center Square reported that Bagley argues that the current inspection system is outdated, ineffective and ripe for abuse. Under current law, passenger cars, trailers and low-speed vehicles must display valid safety inspection stickers issued by the state. Bagley's bill would have only kept inspections for commercial and student transportation vehicles. Bagley's 2024, 2020, 2019 and 2017 bills never got far. The 2019 bill got out of committee but died on the House calendar before a final vote. Louisiana State Police have received some of the $10 cost of annual inspections and that has always been a problem for Bagley. However, he had a solution this year with HB 221 that would have levied a $10 motor vehicle inspection tax. The state Office of Motor Vehicles that handles inspections would have received $1.25 of the $10. State Police would have received $4 for training police officers and $4.75 for traffic enforcement. Radio 710KEEL in Shreveport quoted Bagley who said, 'What I'm going to do is add $10 a year to the registration fee, which is what you would pay anyway, but you won't have to go down and keep up with the inspection sticker. And if you get caught without one (inspection sticker), it's $200.' Only 13 states don't require regular safety, emissions or VIN inspections for vehicles owned by residents, according to They are Alaska, Arkansas, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Florida, Washington and Wyoming. I watched the committee debate at the Legislature. I'm guessing that the woman who testified that there are 500 inspection stations in Louisiana may have given legislators a major reason for opposing Bagley's bill. That is all that many of those stations do. State Sen. Jay Luneau, D-Alexandria, is sponsor of SB 11 that raises the fine of slow drivers who stay in the left lane from $100 to $150 on first offense, and the fine increases for additional offenses within a year. The bill cleared the Senate 35-3 and is in the House. Sen. Stewart Cathey Jr., R-Monroe, is sponsor of SB 99 that started out clarifying that public officials violating traffic camera regulations constitutes malfeasance in office. However, the Senate didn't object to an amendment by Sen. Alan Seabaugh, R-Shreveport. The bill then passed the Senate 32-6. The amendment eliminates all speed enforcement devices except for those used in school zones during specified hours. And it prohibits the use of red light cameras in Louisiana. The legislation also mandates clear signage that indicates the presence of automated speed enforcement devices and mobile speed cameras. Local authorities that sponsor those devices and cameras would also have to disclose revenue from the devices. Traffic law violators usually get mail notices that they have been photographed and Cathey's bill requires local authorities to establish an administrative hearing process for appealing citations. Legislators have tried many times to do away with all of the traffic monitoring devices but have been unsuccessful. Whether they will accept Cathey's bill in the House the way it has been amended remains to be seen. KEEL News asked Cathey about revenue from traffic monitoring devices and he called them 'a huge money grab for many towns.' Cathey said Clayton, Louisiana, got $21,000 in traffic fines in 2022 but in 2023 after speed cameras were installed the town took in almost $500,000. Vehicle inspections are questionable government operations. However, they do improve traffic safety. Whether members of the House will accept Cathey's bill the way it has been amended remains to be seen. Whatever happens, look for Bagley to be back next year. Jim Beam, the retired editor of the American Press, has covered people and politics for more than six decades. Contact him at 337-515-8871 or Reply Forward Add reaction
