Special Session Teacher Pay Raise: Worthy Goal, but Misguided Timing

Oklahoma has budget issues. People may not agree on what exactly the problems are, or what solutions are needed to remedy them, but everyone can agree that there are things that need to be changed when it comes to the state's fiscal situation.

Some think we spend too much, and are involved in areas that government doesn't belong. Others think we tax too little, and that government needs to be more involved.

The Legislature is currently in a special session to address a $215,000,000.00 "shortfall" due to appropriations being made on the back of an unconstitutional tax increase. Once the Oklahoma Supreme Court struck the illegal measure down, it created a large hole in the budgets of four state agencies: the Oklahoma Health Care Authority, the Alcoholic Beverage Laws Enforcement Commission, the Department of Human Services, and the Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services.

Legislators have been wrangling over how to address the situation, but negotiations have not gone anywhere yet. Differences between the Republican and Democrat plans, differences in the Republican caucus, and differences between the House, Senate and Governor have played roles in the delay.

Another issue is that the Governor and some legislative leaders are actually seeking to grow the deficit, thus creating the need for deeper cuts or steeper tax hikes to fill the hole (naturally, the primary route they are exploring is tax increases). Governor Fallin and legislative leaders are hoping to get a teacher pay raise passed in this special session. This was not accomplished during the last several regular sessions due to lack of available funds.

Everybody wants to give teachers a pay raise. Contrary to what the Democrats and the education lobby constantly claim, there are no "anti-Education" members of the state legislature. There is not a single legislator that wants to harm education (ironically, the same Democrats who claim that Republican are "anti-Education" tend to fight Republican efforts to direct more dollars into the classroom - who's really harming education there?). Every legislator understands the need for top-notch education for Oklahoma's children, and one of the strategies for accomplishing that is attracting and maintaining quality teachers.

However, the time has to be right. You can't spend extra money when you're already short a significant amount. Let's illustrate this.

A family has fallen on hard times. They have no money left in their savings account, the family vehicle is about to be repossessed, they've got $25,000 in credit card debt, and they're falling behind on their utility bills. As they contemplate how best to resolve their financial situation, they decide that before doing so they will first purchase a brand-new television and some new furniture for the living areas. After they expend several thousand more dollars, they will then tackle the issue of their dire financial straits.

That's essentially what the Governor and legislature want to do by adding to the shortfall with increased spending. Leave it to them to come in for a special session to deal with a $215M shortage that they caused by unconstitutional actions, increase that shortfall by several hundred million dollars, and then raise taxes to 'fix' it.

When you have a deficit, it is not the right solution to spend more money.

A teacher pay raise is a worthy goal, and one that every legislator and sensible person would like to see happen. However, raising taxes on Oklahomans is not the way to accomplish it.

Let's not forget that in 2016, Oklahomans overwhelmingly defeated a tax that was specifically dedicated to providing education with more funds. It wasn't even close, despite the pro-SQ779 side massively outspending the anti-SQ779 side $7,116,573.32 to $884,874.92.

Oklahoma is in the current budget situation for a host of issues, but one of the primary reasons is that bad economic times have hurt taxpayers and businesses alike, reducing income and in turn spending, resulting in less taxes to collect. Raising taxes now adds insult to injury.

The state legislature should limit this special session to specifically dealing with the shortfall created by their unconstitutional actions. Anything else should be considered in the regular session starting in February, allowing the proper time for transparency, public input, and thorough study by legislators.

The unconstitutional passage of the Smoking Cessation Fee cigarette tax was due to haste. Things are rarely done well when hurried. Legislators should ponder that.

A teacher pay raise is a worthy goal, but doing so during this special session and through tax hikes is misguided.

Gov. Fallin plans to call Special Session beginning Sept. 25th

Governor Mary Fallin Statement on Plans to Call Special Session to Adjust Budget for Current Fiscal Year

OKLAHOMA CITY - Governor Mary Fallin today issued the following statement on her plans to call a special legislative session for lawmakers to adjust the current fiscal year budget:

“I am planning on calling a special session beginning September 25 for legislators to adjust the current fiscal year budget. A formal call for a special session will be issued in the next few days, but I wanted to announce my intention to call a special session for planning purposes. I also want Oklahomans to know we are working diligently to address the fiscal matters of our state.”

EDITOR’S [Press Office] NOTE:  The state’s 2018 fiscal year budget has a shortfall of $215 million as a result of last month’s Oklahoma Supreme Court’s ruling, which struck down a proposed smoking cessation fee that was estimated to raise that amount. The $215 million represents just state funds. With the loss of matching federal funds state agencies estimate the total is nearly $500 million.

OCPA: "Messaging" Matters, So Do Facts

"Messaging" Matters, So Do Facts

by Curtis Shelton, OCPA Policy Research Fellow

As chair of the House Appropriations and Budget Committee, Rep. Leslie Osborn was one of the legislature’s budget negotiators earlier this year. She used that position to make the case for a litany of tax increases, claiming that Oklahomans are “tired of us doing things the way we’ve always done them.” This begs the question: what has the state been doing?

As one of the most conservative states when it comes to election results, some might assume that the Oklahoma legislature continually cuts taxes. In fact, the state ranks 36th in per capita tax collections. A study shows that Oklahoma historically has had an above average tax burden compared to the rest of the nation. While there have been some state tax cuts, Jonathan Small has shown that the legislature has also increased revenue.

Despite changes in tax laws and fluctuations in revenue, what has remained constant year after year has been the increase in state government spending. According to the data from Oklahoma’s most recent Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), state government has increased spending in 22 of the last 23 years. Despite recessions in 2008 and 2015, when many Oklahoma families had to make tough choices, Oklahoma government continued to spend.

During the same interview Leslie Osborn said that “more than ever the message and the meaning is going to matter more.” Message matters, but it is imperative they be not only sincere, but also based on facts. Oklahoma government has been growing, not shrinking. People might question the priorities in the budget or in how agencies spend money, but the total burden on Oklahomans is higher than ever.

The Oklahoma Supreme Court opinion striking down SB 845 states “by strictly limiting the Legislature's ability to enact laws that generate additional revenue—the people's preference that when revenues shrink, so too does their government.” This is the people’s will as expressed in the Oklahoma Constitution. Maybe the state should try doing things this way?

Fallin will call special session to adjust appropriations

Governor Mary Fallin Says Special Legislative Session Necessary to Adjust State Appropriations 

OKLAHOMA CITY – Governor Mary Fallin today said the Legislature must return in special session to deal with the $215 million shortfall caused by a proposed smoking cessation fee being struck down.

“No money can be spent from any state fund unless the Legislature specifically appropriates it,” said Fallin. "Let's be clear. The director of the Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) does not have the authority to transfer monies to the affected agencies from different sources without legislation directing him to do so.”

Article 5, Section 55 of the Oklahoma Constitution states that no money shall be paid out of the state treasury, except through an appropriation by law.

Fallin said state law (Title 62, Section 34.55) allows the director of OMES to borrow money from treasury funds to satisfy monthly allocations of appropriations made from the General Revenue Fund, but the appropriation has to be made by the Legislature.

The three agencies that received the bulk of the money from the proposed cessation fee are the Department of Human Services (DHS), the Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services (DMHSAS), and the Oklahoma Health Care Authority (OHCA).

DMHSAS would have received $75 million (about 23 percent of its total appropriation), OHCA would have received $70 million (about 7 percent of its total appropriation), and DHS would have received $69 million (about 10 percent of its total appropriation).

Without legislative intervention, DMHSAS said it would run out of state appropriations in November. OHCA said it would run out of state funds in January and DHS said it would out of state funds in May.

The funding shortfall is the result of the Oklahoma Supreme Court last week striking down a smoking cessation fee approved this past legislative session.

Fallin said she and her staff have been discussing options with legislative leaders of both parties.

“A special session is the best option,” the governor said. “Failure to meet in special session would mean $215 million would be cut mostly from these three state agencies. These agencies and the people they serve cannot sustain the kind of cuts that will occur if we do not find a solution.”

House, Senate Democrats respond to cigarette tax ruling

The House and Senate Democratic caucuses have now issued statements over the Oklahoma Supreme Court striking down SB 845, the Cigarette Tax Smoking Cessation Fee.

House Democratic Caucus Releases Statement in Response to Oklahoma Court Ruling

OKLAHOMA CITY – The Oklahoma Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that Senate Bill 845 is unconstitutional.

SB845 was projected to raise more than $200 million for the current state budget by charging cigarette wholesalers a $1.50 per pack tax. During the legislative session, however, House Democrats warned Republicans that passing the unconstitutional legislation would have a detrimental impact on our state budget and state agencies. The measure passed the House with a partisan vote of 51 to 43.

The proposed revenue from the tax affects 7 percent of the appropriated budget to the Oklahoma Health Care Authority, 10 percent of the appropriated budget to the Department of Human Services, and 23 percent of the appropriated budget to the Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services.

The court’s ruling will likely prompt a special session, costing the state an additional $30,000 per day, and requiring lawmakers to return to the capitol to fix the now incomplete budget.

“In order to appease special interests, Republicans made a decision to ignore the House Democratic Caucus, Oklahoma citizens and the Oklahoma Constitution,” said Rep. Monroe Nichols, D-Tulsa. “As a result of that decision, we are now facing a $200 million hole in our current budget. It is time for the Republican Leadership to stop playing political games and to start working on real solutions to fund state government. As we have been all year, the Democratic Caucus stands ready to negotiate a long-term solution to fix Oklahoma’s funding crisis.”

Rep. Collin Walke, D- Oklahoma City, a freshman Legislator said that he was elected to work for every day Oklahomans, and reiterated, “The Democratic Caucus will not support a solution that depends on regressive taxes while wealthy individuals and corporations continue to receive government handouts through tax credits, exemptions, and a decade of irresponsible tax cuts. It is time for the Republican majority to realize that an investment in the people of Oklahoma is an investment in the future of our state and it is absolutely imperative that the cycle of crisis created by negligent budgeting practices end.”

House Democrats held a public budget forum in the House Chamber on August 3rd, inviting all members of the House to listen to statements regarding the importance of these now threatened core services and to begin the work to reach an agreement in the event any of the revenue raising measures were struck down.

After the Forum, Rep. Emily Virgin, D-Norman stated, “We were sent to the Capitol to act in the best interest of the people, to provide core services for those most in need, to fund our schools, and build infrastructure for growth. The Democratic Caucus released a compromise budget plan that incorporated stable revenue to not only fill the budget shortfall, but also began the process of restoring cuts that have taken place over the last ten years. We put out a call to ask the Majority Caucus to come to table and prepare for Special Session. Not a single member of the Republican Caucus showed up.”

The House Democratic Caucus is urging the Governor to call a Special Session immediately. Several members are requesting legislation be drafted reflecting proposals contained in the Restoring Oklahoma Plan, released in March of this year, with the intention to maximize the time used in a Special Session to not only restore cuts tied to the cigarette tax but also to put Oklahoma on a better path forward.

Oklahoma Senate Democrats Issue Statement on Today’s Supreme Court Ruling Declaring “Cigarette Fee” Unconstitutional

The Oklahoma Senate Democratic caucus issued a statement Thursday through their leader, Sen. John Sparks, D-Norman, commenting on the Supreme Court’s ruling striking down the “cigarette fee” and declaring it an unconstitutional tax:

“The opinion issued today by the Oklahoma Supreme Court finding that the so-called “cigarette fee” passed by the legislature was, in fact, an unconstitutional tax comes as no surprise. We knew this tax was unconstitutional when it was passed by the legislature back in May. We made the same arguments that the Court has articulated in today’s opinion when Republican leadership at the Capitol was playing partisan political games and pushing this desperate revenue measure through during the last hours of the 2017 regular session.

“This kind of unconstitutional legislation is nothing new from the Republican leadership at the Capitol. Unfortunately, we are used to wasting money paying lawyers to defend their unconstitutional bills. What makes this situation new, and worse, is that now we are going to have to spend hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars in a special session doing the job that should have been done back in May.

“We need to approach a special session thoughtfully with real plans for revenue measures that can fill the $215 million budget hole which has been created at the Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services, the Oklahoma Healthcare Authority and the Department of Human Services. We need to set clear priorities, take hard votes and make tough choices with all revenue options on the table for open, transparent discussion and debate. This is a time for cooperation and compromise. This is the time for a plan of action, accountability and real results. This is what our constituents demand of us and what they deserve from us with no exceptions and no excuses.

“We cannot continue to let the most vulnerable Oklahomans suffer because of a continued lack of leadership among the Republicans at the Capitol and their unwillingness to do the hard work and take the hard votes necessary to properly and fully fund our healthcare agencies.”

Lamb, Richardson comment on Oklahoma Supreme Court ruling

Continuing comments on the Supreme Court striking down the Cigarette Tax Smoking Cessation Fee, here are statements from two of the top Republican candidates for governor: current Lieut. Gov. Todd Lamb and attorney Gary Richardson:

Lamb Issues Statement Regarding OSC Ruling on Cigarette Fee Proposal

OKLAHOMA CITY, OK - Lt. Governor Todd Lamb issued the following statement this
morning regarding the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s ruling that a proposed fee increase on
cigarettes is unconstitutional:

“I am not surprised by the court’s ruling regarding the cigarette fee measure as I believe it
contradicts the intent of SQ 640. With the ruling, the legislature must now focus first and
foremost on identifying existing state funds to allocate to the healthcare-related programs that
were scheduled to receive appropriations from the cigarette fee measure. It is my belief this can
be done without drastic cuts to agencies. State government can and must operate more
efficiently, and this ruling provides an excellent opportunity to start that process.”

Richardson Issues Statement in Response to Supreme Court Striking Down Tobacco Tax 

Tulsa, OK, August 10, 2017 – Gary Richardson issued a statement today in response to the Oklahoma Supreme Court striking down the revenue raising portion of SB 845, which levied a $1.50 per pack "fee" on cigarettes.  "We are encouraged by the Supreme Court upholding the intent of SQ 640, which was passed by the voters in 1992 to require either a supermajority of the legislature to raise revenue or send the measure to a vote of the people," said Richardson.  "We were fully supportive of this challenge as it violates Article 2, Section 33 of the Oklahoma Constitution just like the three bills I challenged in court."

Richardson then highlighted part of Justice Wyrick's opinion in paragraph 49, which stated the following:

"If this quintessential excise tax can be transformed into a fee merely by calling it a fee and adding some regulatory gloss to the measure enacting it, then the promise of Article V, Section 33-a promise made to citizens in 1992 when they went to the polls and enacted the amended version-will be an empty one. The 'tax relief' to be expected from the requirement that all 'future bills "intended to raise revenue" . . . be approved by either a vote of the people or a three-fourths majority in both houses of the Legislature' will have been illusory. And that, we think, would be an abject failure to carry out 'the manifest purpose of the framers and the people who adopted it.'"
(NAIFEH v. STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA TAX COMMISSION)

"It is heartening to see the Supreme Court bring clarity to this issue," said Richardson.  "We hope that Supreme Court will view our challenges to the car sales tax, electric and hybrid vehicle fees, and the decoupling of the standard deduction through the same lens when they release their decision on the other challenges to the revenue-raising measures."

Fallin, McCall, Schulz comment on Cigarette Tax ruling

State leaders are starting to weigh in on the Oklahoma Supreme Court striking down the Cigarette Tax Smoking Cessation Fee. First up, the three members of state government who pushed the unconstitutional tax and were named in the lawsuit: Governor Mary Fallin, House Speaker Charles McCall, and Senate Pro Tem Mike Schulz.

Governor Mary Fallin Statement on the Oklahoma Supreme Court 

Striking Down Smoking Cessation Fee

OKLAHOMA CITY – Governor Mary Fallin today issued the following statement in response to the Oklahoma Supreme Court striking down a smoking cessation fee approved this past legislative session:

 “I am disappointed to hear the Supreme Court struck down the smoking cessation fee, but I certainly respect the justices’ authority. I will be discussing with legislative leaders from both parties the need to address the $215 million shortfall this will create for the Department of Human Services, the Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services and the Oklahoma Health Care Authority, the three agencies that received the bulk of the money that was to be generated by the cessation fee.

“These agencies and the people they serve cannot sustain the kind of cuts that will occur if we do not find a solution. My belief is we will have to come into special session to address this issue.”

House Speaker McCall Releases Statement after Court Ruling

OKLAHOMA CITY – House Speaker Charles McCall issued the following statement today regarding the Oklahoma Supreme Court's decision on Senate Bill 845.

"The Court has made their ruling and now it is up to the Governor and legislative leaders to agree on the best course of action moving forward.

"It is important to remember that the reason our budget has been suffering is because Oklahoma families and businesses have been struggling.  State revenues are a reflection of the people of our
state.  When our citizens have less money in their pockets to spend the state will realize less revenues.  I am a firm believer that government must live within its means.

"The tobacco fee for health care was passed in an effort to avoid significant budget cuts. After House Democrats refused time and again to support increased revenue measures, the fee was our only opportunity to balance the budget without deeper cuts. The minority party decided to play games with the budget, and now that opportunity has passed.

"I look forward to working with the Governor and the Senate to overcome this latest challenge."

Senate Pro Tem comments on Supreme Court ruling

Statement from Senate President Pro Tempore Mike Schulz on Thursday’s Oklahoma Supreme Court ruling regarding the cigarette fee.

“While I disagree, I appreciate the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s quick ruling allowing the governor and the Legislature to immediately address the matter. There are several options available to us, and Senate leadership will continue to work with the governor’s office and House on deciding the best move forward.” – Pro Tem Mike Schulz, R-Altus

Oklahoma Supreme Court strikes down cigarette tax

In a swift and unanimous decision, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled that the Cigarette Tax Smoking Cessation Fee passed by the state legislature and signed by Governor Fallin violated the Oklahoma Constitution.

Here's the summary from the opinion (which can be read in full at this link):

Petitioners, who are manufacturers, wholesalers, and consumers of cigarettes, challenged Senate Bill 845, alleging that it is a revenue bill enacted outside of the procedure mandated in Article V, Section 33 of the Oklahoma Constitution. The parties agree that the passage of SB 845 did not comply with Article V, Section 33; so the case turns on whether SB 845 is the kind of "revenue bill" that Article V, Section 33 governs. Applying the test we have utilized since 1908, we conclude that the primary purpose of Sections 2, 7, 8, and 9 of SB 845 is to raise new revenue for the support of state government through the assessment of a new $1.50 excise tax on cigarettes and that, in doing so, SB 845 levies a tax in the strict sense. As such, Sections 2, 7, 8, and 9 of SB 845 comprise a revenue bill enacted in violation of Article V, Section 33 and are unconstitutional.

The scathing opinion was written by Justice Patrick Wyrick, the newest addition to the Oklahoma Supreme Court, and came less than 48 hours after the Court heard oral arguments on the case.

Some nuggets from the opinion:

[ś22] As a threshold matter, Petitioners present compelling contextual evidence in support of their claim that the Legislature's primary purpose in enacting SB 845 was to raise new revenues. The State Respondents urge us to ignore that evidence, and understandably so; it strongly indicates SB 845's passage was motivated by the Legislature's need to raise revenue so that it could satisfy its constitutional obligation to enact a balanced budget. We agree that a measure's purpose must be measured by its actual operation and effect, rather than by any legislator's statements as to what motivated his or her vote for the measure. But this dispute over the relevance of contextual evidence is ultimately of no consequence because SB 845's text-and text alone-conclusively demonstrates that the primary operation and effect of the measure is to raise new revenue to support state government.

More:

[ś42] The position taken by the State Respondents is, in this regard, extraordinary. In their view even a measure that explicitly levies a massive new tax, can evade Article V, Section 33's "revenue bill" requirements so long as the tax is enacted for a "regulatory" purpose. In this respect, the State Respondents are willing to go even further than the House of Representatives because, under their view, even a measure which explicitly levies a new excise tax on cigarettes - like the four failed House measures - could have been enacted with a bare majority vote. This is so, insist the State Respondents, because the purpose of the new $1.50 assessment has always been to discourage smoking. The logical end point of this position is that the Legislature can impose by bare majority any tax whose purpose is to discourage behavior disfavored by the government. One can imagine the gasoline tax being doubled "to reduce traffic congestion and wear and tear on our roads, the costs of which are overburdening the Department of Transportation," or the income tax on the top 1% being tripled "to reduce the societal ills that arise from income disparities among our citizens." Surely the people did not intend that the Legislature could blatantly tax them without complying with Article V, Section 33, by merely wordsmithing their bills to describe some "regulatory" purpose for the tax. Thus, we reiterate that whether a measure is "intended to raise revenue" must be the overarching consideration in determining whether a measure is a "revenue bill." If so, the Legislature must either muster enough votes to satisfy Article V, Section 33, or submit the measure to the people for their approval.

More:

[ś49] Lastly, were we to hold otherwise, the distinction between fees and taxes-and thus the protections against taxation provided by Article V, Section 33-would be meaningless. The State Respondents tell us that this is a common refrain from those raising such challenges, and one we should thus ignore. But despite any prior false alarms, this cry of "wolf!" rings true. If this quintessential excise tax can be transformed into a fee merely by calling it a fee and adding some regulatory gloss to the measure enacting it, then the promise of Article V, Section 33-a promise made to citizens in 1992 when they went to the polls and enacted the amended version-will be an empty one. The "tax relief" to be expected from the requirement that all "future bills 'intended to raise revenue' . . . be approved by either a vote of the people or a three-fourths majority in both houses of the Legislature" will have been illusory. And that, we think, would be an abject failure to carry out "the manifest purpose of the framers and the people who adopted it." 

Read the full opinion here.

This end result was very clear to anyone who was not dead-set on raising taxes on Oklahomans this past legislative session. The constitutional provisions regarding raising taxes are not rocket science, they're crystal clear, and it is beyond the pale that the Legislature (with some exceptions) and Governor sought to so blatantly violate the Constitution and the will of the people of Oklahoma.

If this measure was not struck down, the Legislature would have been given unlimited ability and power to raise taxes. The Supreme Court made the absolute right decision.

Lawsuit filed over new cigarette tax

A lawsuit has been filed to block the new $257M cigarette tax "smoking cessation fee" passed by legislators in the final week of the legislative session last month. The lawsuit was filed by R.J Reynolds Tobacco Co. and Phillip Morris USA (the two largest tobacco companies in the country), along with two convenience stores, a wholesaler, and two individuals.

Specifically noted by the lawsuit:

• Passage of SB845 violated the Constitution's requirement that revenue-raising measures receive 3/4ths vote majority in both houses
• Passage of SB845 violated the Constitution's requirement that revenue-raising measures originate in the House, rather than the Senate
• Passage of SB845 violated the Constitution's ban on revenue-raising measures being passed in the final five days of session

The full brief as filed can be viewed here (courtesy of KFOR-TV).

Conservatives, and even Democrats, warned that this measure (and others) would fail to meet constitutional muster, but Governor Fallin and legislative leaders plowed ahead anyway.

If struck down, it would create a hole in the FY18 budget that would either trigger a special session this summer, create automatic cuts down the road, or mean that legislators would need to pass a supplemental funding bill very early in the 2018 session for the end of FY18.

State Senate passes $6.8B budget; House vote likely tomorrow

Shortly before 10:00pm this evening, the Oklahoma State Senate passed the FY2018 state budget by a vote of 33-13. SB 860 now goes to the State House, where it will likely be voted on tomorrow (rather than Friday, the final day of session).

All six Democrats voted against the appropriations bill, with seven Republicans also joining in opposition (Josh Brecheen, Nathan Dahm, David Holt, James Leewright, Adam Pugh, Joseph Silk, and Anthony Sykes).

Some details of the budget, including appropriation summaries by agency, are in this article that I posted last night. 17 agencies receive no spending cut, or get slight boosts in funding, in the SB 860 budget measure. List is below, courtesy of Jordann Lucero with Oklahoma City's KOKH FOX 25:

The Senate also passed SB 845, the "Smoking Cessation and Prevention Act of 2017", which [unconstitutionally] raises about $257,841,000 in new revenue. That measure can now be heard by on the House floor as well. The Senate vote was 28-18, with 12 Republicans and all 6 Democrats opposing it.

House JCAB passes $381M in "new revenue"

The House Joint Committee on Appropriations and Budget met late this evening and, among other measures, passed two bills that raised over $381,000,000 in new revenue.

SB845: Creates the “Smoking Cessation Act of 2017”. Bill proposes to assess a fee of $1.50 per pack of cigarettes to be paid by the wholesaler. Estimated Fiscal Impact: $257,841,000

HB2433: Bill proposes to amend the sales tax exemption for motor vehicles to provide that a portion of the state sales tax levy (1.25%) will apply to sales of motor vehicles. Estimated Fiscal Impact: $123,383,000

How this gets around the State Constitution Article 5, Section 33 (SQ640) is beyond me: