James Talarico was pressed during a CBS News Texas interview about a 2019 vote that has returned to the center of the state’s U.S. Senate campaign.

Reporter Jack Fink asked the Democratic nominee why, while serving in the Texas House, he voted against a constitutional amendment prohibiting the state from imposing an individual income tax. Talarico answered that an income tax was already barred under Texas law.

Fink immediately sharpened the question: the proposal would have made that prohibition permanent. Talarico called the legislation “duplicative government overreach at its worst.”

He argued that Republican lawmakers were staging a political fight over a tax he said he has always opposed. The exchange came during a broader interview about his contest with Republican nominee Ken Paxton, campaign spending and the issues likely to define the final stretch of the race.

Watch the exchange:

!function(r,u,m,b,l,e){r._Rumble=b,r[b]||(r[b]=function(){(r[b]._=r[b]._||[]).push(arguments);if(r[b]._.length==1){l=u.createElement(m),e=u.getElementsByTagName(m)[0],l.async=1,l.src=”https://rumble.com/embedJS/u2vbt6g”+(arguments[1].video?’.’+arguments[1].video:”)+”/?url=”+encodeURIComponent(location.href)+”&args=”+encodeURIComponent(JSON.stringify([].slice.apply(arguments))),e.parentNode.insertBefore(l,e)}})}(window, document, “script”, “Rumble”);

Rumble(“play”, {“video”:”v7czyri”,”div”:”rumble_v7czyri”});

The vote itself is not in dispute. Texas Legislature Online identifies HJR 38 as a proposed constitutional amendment prohibiting the imposition of an individual income tax.

ADVERTISEMENT

The House took its record vote on May 9, 2019, and Talarico voted no. The measure nevertheless passed the House, later cleared the Senate and went to Texas voters as Proposition 4 in November.

There is an important distinction between the vote and some of the campaign shorthand now surrounding it. Voting against HJR 38 was not a vote to create or impose a state income tax; it was a vote against replacing the Constitution’s existing voter-approval mechanism with an outright prohibition.

The official record therefore supports two facts at once: Talarico opposed the permanent constitutional ban, and that vote did not itself enact any income tax. That is the tension Fink’s follow-up put directly in front of him.

The Texas House Research Organization explained that the Constitution already required a statewide referendum before lawmakers could impose a net individual income tax. Approval required a majority of all registered voters, rather than only a majority of people who cast ballots in the referendum.

HJR 38 would remove that pathway and state that the Legislature may not impose such a tax. The ballot language also covered an individual’s share of partnership and unincorporated-association income.

Supporters said the amendment would eliminate future uncertainty, protect the state’s economic model and make clear that Texas would not adopt an individual income tax. Opponents argued that the existing referendum requirement already set an exceptionally high bar and that a permanent ban could restrict future lawmakers during a severe fiscal crisis.

That disagreement supplies the context for Talarico’s “government overreach” answer. Texas voters ultimately approved Proposition 4, making the prohibition part of the state Constitution.

The exchange landed as Republican groups intensified their attacks on Talarico’s tax record. MAGA Inc., the main pro-Trump super PAC, released a pair of ads presenting the Texas Senate race as a choice between higher and lower taxes.

The first ad states the group’s claim:

ADVERTISEMENT

A second spot promotes Paxton’s tax agenda:

Paxton amplified the contrast from his own account, accusing Talarico of supporting higher taxes while promoting his “Protecting the Texas Promise” agenda:

Those posts are campaign messaging, not neutral descriptions of the 2019 vote. The Texas Tribune reported that the super PAC committed $10 million to the Texas Senate race, with half supporting Paxton and half funding negative messaging against Talarico.

The report said the two new ads focus on taxes and contrast Paxton’s proposals with Talarico’s record. It also noted that Talarico’s current economic plan calls for higher taxes on corporations and billionaires while expanding tax credits for parents and lower-income workers.

Talarico spokesperson JT Ennis rejected the ads’ characterization and pointed to Talarico’s votes for property-tax relief. Texas Public Radio has separately made the same factual distinction about the 2019 dispute: Talarico did not vote to establish a state income tax; he opposed a constitutional amendment that permanently barred one.

The 2019 no vote is real, and Fink’s follow-up highlighted the difference between Texas’s existing voter-approval requirement and a permanent constitutional ban. The official record also shows that the vote opposed the ban; it did not impose an income tax.

This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.

 

Join The Conversation. Leave a Comment.