Philip L. (Phil) Boots (POLITICAL HOG)

Watchdog Indiana Home Page Indiana General Assembly & Governor Ratings Legislative Voting Record 11/02/04 Candidate Questionnaire 05/04/04 Candidate Questionnaire 11/05/02 Candidate Questionnaire 05/07/02 Candidate Questionnaire

Address: 5061 South Sherwood Cove, Crawfordsville, IN 47933
Phone: (765) 362-1504
E-mail: S23@ai.org
Website: http://www.in.gov/legislative/senate_republicans/homepages/s23/index.html

Watchdog Indiana Candidate Questions - November 4, 2008, General Election
1. BACKGROUND: Senate Joint Resolution 1 passed the Indiana Senate 40-7 and the Indiana House 79-20 on March 14, 2008, and was signed by the Governor on March 19, 2008. SJR 1 amends the Indiana Constitution to cap homeowners' property tax bills at 1% of assessed value, rental and agricultural property at 2%, and business property at 3%. For property taxes first due and payable in 2012, 90 of Indiana's 92 counties must have a homeowner property tax cap that is 1% of the gross assessed value. Until 2020, existing debt service prior to July 1, 2008, is exempted from the 1% homeowner gross assessed value cap in Lake and St. Joseph counties ONLY. The result of these two existing debt service exemptions equates to a 1.88% homeowner cap in Lake County and a 1.52% homeowner cap in St. Joseph County. The homeowner caps for Lake and St. Joseph counties must become 1% in 2020. The exact same version of SJR 1 that passed in 2008 must again pass in the General Assembly in 2009 to put the 1% constitutional homeowner property tax cap amendment on the 2010 ballot. We the people can then vote to make the 1% homeowner property tax cap a permanent part of the Indiana Constitution. Never has it been so easy to separate those who are part of the property tax relief solution from those who are part of the property tax spending problem. A General Assembly candidate who pledges to vote for Senate Joint Resolution 1 in 2009 is part of the solution, otherwise the legislator is part of the problem. QUESTION: Do you pledge to vote in 2009 for the exact same version of Senate Joint Resolution 1 that passed in 2008? DID NOT RESPOND.
2. QUESTION: Do you wish to make some additional comments about your candidacy? Do you have an E-mail address? Do you have a website? DID NOT RESPOND.

2008 General Assembly Voting Record
Voted YES on Senate Joint Resolution 1, which amended the Indiana Constitution beginning 2012 to include a cap on homestead property tax in 90 counties at 1% of gross assessed value. Until 2020, existing debt service prior to July 1, 2008, is exempted from the 1% homeowner gross assessed value cap in Lake and St. Joseph counties ONLY. The effective constitutional homeowner property tax caps in Lake and St. Joseph counties are 1.88% and 1.52% respectively until the 1% cap takes effect in 2020.
Voted YES on House Bill 1001, which phases in the SJR 1 constitutional property tax caps by 2010. Also, 2008 property taxes are reduced 26% from the prior year. An increase in the sales tax from 6% to 7% and local option income taxes will be used to replace the property tax revenue reductions that result from the property tax caps.

2007 General Assembly Voting Record
Voted NO on House Bill 1001, the budget bill that is Taxpayer Friendly because the General Fund & Property Tax Replacement Fund $26.0722 billion expenditures total for the 2008 and 2009 fiscal years is less than the $26.1946 billion revenues total. HB 1001 also includes additional homestead credits from the Property Tax Reduction Trust Fund of $300 million in 2007 and $250 million in 2008.
Voted YES on House Bill 1478, which is Taxpayer UNfriendly for the following reasons: (1) Homeowner property taxes will increase 1.2% each year from 2009 through 2013 with annual decreases in the Homestead Standard Deduction. (2) The 2% Circuit Breaker Cap on residential property taxes passed by the General Assembly in 2006 has been watered down to the point where it is almost eliminated. (3) The new local option income tax for property tax relief will be offset by future property tax increases unless the new local option income tax to replace property tax increases is implemented. (4) Using the new local option income tax to replace property tax increases means that income tax increases on Hoosier working families would lower the proportionate tax burden of businesses and utilities by freezing business and utility property taxes without a corresponding increase in other business and utility taxes. (5) A new local option income tax has been authorized for public safety.
Voted YES on House Bill 1835,which is Taxpayer Friendly because it uses slot machine licensing fees and wagering taxes to establish the Property Tax Reduction Trust Fund, which is to be used for property tax relief in any manner prescribed by the General Assembly.
Voted YES on Senate Bill 401, which is Taxpayer UNfriendly because state legislators voted themselves a perpetual pay increase that is 20% more than the typical Hoosier working family earns during an entire year. SB 401 also eliminated taxpayer-paid lifetime health insurance and the $4 taxpayer match for each $1 of legislator pension contribution, but General Assembly members should not have received an excessive salary increase in return for eliminating extravagant perks they should not have in the first place.

Watchdog Indiana Candidate Questionnaire - November 7, 2006, General Election
1. BACKGROUND: Effective December 1, 2002, the Indiana sales tax increased from 5% to 6% with a promise that the proceeds would be used to decrease homeowner homeowner property taxes by 16.3%. As summarized at http://finplaneducation.net/betrayal_incompetence.htm, Indiana General Assemblies and Governors have turned the promised 16.3% decrease into a Pay 2007 property tax increase of 20.3% for the average Hoosier homeowner. Local governments are now pushing for more flexibility to levy income, sales, and other taxes under the guise of property tax relief. QUESTION: Should local Indiana governments be allowed to impose additional income, sales, and other taxes? HAS NOT RESPONDED.
2. BACKGROUND: The state's budget the last two fiscal years has been balanced without fund transfers for the first time since 1998-99 (see http://finplaneducation.net/indiana_cash_flow_data.htm). QUESTION: Should the state's total budget expenditures be no more than total revenues for the next biennium? HAS NOT RESPONDED.
3. BACKGROUND: The state's current budget is balanced with the inclusion of a one-time increase from $35,000 to $45,000 in the state-paid Homestead Deduction for Pay 2007 property taxes. This decreases property taxes for the average homeowner by 6%. QUESTION: Should the $45,000 Homestead Deduction be continued beyond 2007? HAS NOT RESPONDED.
4. BACKGROUND: Mandatory full-day kindergarten for all of Indiana's 75,000 kindergartners could cost up to $150 million. QUESTIONS: Should the state pay for full-day kindergarten? If YES, where should the state get the funds needed for full-day kindergarten? HAS NOT RESPONDED.
5. BACKGROUND: The $3.7 billion proceeds from leasing the Indiana Toll Road ("Major Moves") will be used to establish a Bond Retirement Account to pay off bonds selected by the Indiana Finance Authority, an Administration Account, an Eligible Project Account for highway improvements throughout Indiana, and a $500 million Next Generation Trust Fund to be used exclusively for the provision of highways, roads, and bridges. QUESTION: Do you anticipate the need for any state gas tax increases the next ten years? HAS NOT RESPONDED.
6. BACKGROUND: "Major Moves" projects include $694 million for a new terrain I-69 extension from Indianapolis to Evansville as well as a $500 million Next Generation Trust Fund. QUESTION: Should the "Major Moves" expenditures be combined with the Next Generation Trust Fund proceeds to build a new terrain I-69 extension without state tax increases? HAS NOT RESPONDED.
7. BACKGROUND: The 2006 "Major Moves" legislation authorizes a toll road for an I-69 extension between Martinsville and Evansville. QUESTION: Do you favor legislation that removes the toll road authorization for an I-69 extension? HAS NOT RESPONDED.
8. QUESTION: Do you wish to make some additional comments about your candidacy? Do you have an E-mail address? Do you have a website? HAS NOT RESPONDED.

Watchdog Indiana Candidate Questionnaire - May 2, 2006, Primary Election
1. What will be your guiding principles for the 2007-2009 biennium budget? Specifically, what mix of spending cuts, tax increases, and/or reserve depletions will you support? RESPONSE: I will strive for spending cuts. I do not believe we need tax increases at the state level.
2. What are your opinions regarding homeowner property taxes? Specifically, do you favor freezing all property taxes and funding budget increases through both individual and business income tax increases? Or, do you favor a mixture of income tax, sales tax and meals tax increases to reduce property tax growth while providing additional revenue to local governments? RESPONSE: I favor proposing income tax increases & sales tax increases to reduce property taxes.
3. Considering the "Major Moves" legislation passed by the General Assembly this year, do you anticipate the need for any state gas tax increases the next ten years? RESPONSE: Probably sometime within the next ten years gas taxes will have to increase, or better yet, eliminate tax subsidies for alternative fuels.
4. What is your position regarding the construction of an interstate from Indianapolis to Evansville? Specifically, should the $500 million Next Generation Trust Fund that is part of "Major Moves" be used exclusively for a new terrain I-69 extension so as to avoid state gas tax increases? RESPONSE: I favor a route via I-70 & US 41.
5. Do you wish to make some additional comments about your candidacy? Do you have an E-mail address? Do you have a website?

This page was last updated on 06/19/08 .