No taxes = no services

The following should run as an editorial in the Roxboro Courier-Times either June 30 or July 4.



Editor
Roxboro Courier Times


Dear Sir,

I prefer elected officials who are responsible, responsive and far sighted, and, as such, I am glad that our democratic county commissioners voted for the recently passed budget.
In the Courier-Times of 6-27-07 both republican commissioners expressed their approval for the increases in financial support to education and public safety yet both opposed the .05/$100 property tax increase. Both republicans attended several budget working sessions, the budget has been available for a month, yet neither could cite a single specific example of the excessive spending they complained about nor did they offer any well thought out alternatives.
Mr. Puryear suggested that the budget should be left as it was but without the .05 increase, running a deficit for the second year in a row and drawing the fund balance down to 15%, which would be at least 10% below recommended levels. Endangering the financial security of the county and procrastinating in such a way seems both irresponsible and immature.
We now have a budget that improves funding for schools and law enforcement, both important economic draws for getting new industries to come to Person County, and improves the long term financial health of the county by restoring the fund balance to near recommended levels.
The average homeowner’s taxes will go up by about $60 a year, and the property tax rate will put Person even with Granville and still way less than Durham and Orange. Caswell is lower than Person but has 70% of the population and a barely positive growth rate.
The future is not revenue neutral. Gas price increases, fickle weather, population increases and inflation necessitate either revenue growth or a decrease in services. I applaud Mr. Lunsford, Mr. Clayton and Mr. Bowes for supporting a budget that takes care of our needs responsibly while ensuring the long term financial health of Person County.

Thank you.


Thanks for reading.
Mike

Dole and Burr buddy up to Big Oil

Yesterday, June 22, our esteemed senators voted against HR 6, the energy bill that was up for a final vote in the Senate, having already been approved by the House. HR 6 does some very nice things that have been needed for a long, long time. It raises the national fuel standards for passenger vehicles 40% and closes the SUV loophole, promotes alternative energy sources, stiffens penalties for price gouging, and promotes ethanol and energy efficient technologies. The CAFE standards (cars's MPG) hadn't been adjusted since 1989, and now even communist China's cars have better overall fuel efficiency than the United States. If American auto makers follow these new standards and don't find a way to weasel out of them as they did in California in the 90's, then by 2020 our cars will be as efficient as China's are now.

Along the way to the final vote, Burr and Dole voted against rasing 29 billion dollars in taxes on the oil industry over 10 years to pay for clean energy promotion. The excuse is that it would hurt the industry and drive up prices at the pump. Of course our dynamic duo must have overlooked the fact that Exxon and friends made 101 billion dollars in profits in 2006.

You may be thinking - "I wonder if Dole and Burr got any donations from Big Oil in their last elections?". Well, yes they did. According to opensecrets.org Dole received over $120,000 in 2002 and Burr got over $220,000 in 2004. They were 11th and 8th respectively on a list of recipients of contributions from the oil industry.

A CBS/New York Times poll taken in April found that 92% of respondents favored higher fuel efficiency standards for cars made in the US (full poll results here ). As their votes reflect a total lack of respect for the views of the people and put the interests of an industry fat with profits ahead of the public interest, Dole and Burr should have some serious political consequences to face come election time. Too bad only Dole will be on the ballot next year.

Thanks for reading.

Mike

Tax cuts = revenue, not necessarily

Oh course this is the golden excuse republicans give for cutting taxes. They throw a bone or two to the middle and lower classes and then they hack at corporate, capital gains, dividend and estate taxes for all they're worth. Recently John McCain tried to perpetuate the myth that by cutting taxes, the government gains revenue because the economy expands and the private sector ends up paying more in taxes as a whole. This is the foundation of Bush's reasoning behind wanting to make his 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent.

The truth is, of course, not mentioned by McCain nor by Bush administration officials. Here's a dose of reality courtesy of Factcheck.org:

In fact, the last half-dozen years have shown us that we can't have both lower taxes and fatter government coffers. The Congressional Budget Office, the Treasury Department, the Joint Committee on Taxation, the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers and a former Bush administration economist all say that tax cuts lead to revenues that are lower than they otherwise would have been – even if they spur some economic growth. (Robertson, 6-11-2007)

The full story with analysis and sources can be found here: http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/supply-side_spin.html


You would have thought that McCain would have known better, and at one time he did as he voted against the 2003 tax cuts. He has become such a toady for the right wing now that he now feels he must genuflect before the altar of supply side dogma.

Next time you hear that "tax cuts = revenues" nonsense just think about that wonderful supply side catch phrase from the Eighties - "Trickle down eoconomics" and remember just who it was that got trickled on then and who it is that is getting trickled on now.

Thanks for reading.

Mike

First post - Leadership (or not)

Hello blog readers. The following are some musings on politics at local, state and national levels. I shall try to relate how politics at the various levels affects individual lives and what individuals can do to cause positive changes through political involvement.

First, I wish to say that the United States of America has exactly the wrong leadership in office at this critical juncture in history. The Bush administration has used misinformation, disinformation, misdirection, fear mongering and lies to keep itself in power. Unfortumately, it took 6 years for America to figure it out. Meanwhile we are involved in a "war" that kills 2-3 american soldiers a day and costs over a billion dollars a week. Evidently the one book W. read was 1984, or perhaps Laura read it to him, for we have as close to an Orwellian situation as a constitutional democracy can become in 6 short years - constant war, information control, limited civil rights and a nebulous and changing enemy to fear.
Now I am all for going after the schmucks that attacked the USA on 9-11, but the waste of thousands of lives and billions of dollars in Iraq could have been averted had this country had a real leader with real vision.
Imagine having 150,000 soldiers and half a trillion dollars at your disposal for four years. What could be accomplished?
With even less resources it would have possible to make a good start in restructuring the energy infrastructure of the United States toward renewable, non-nuclear sources. Improved subsidies for building energy efficient buildings and purchasing hybrid or electric vehicles, improved mileage requirements for all personal vehicles, government incentives to power companies to build wind, tidal, solar and geothermal power generating facilities all could have been a reality after four years of work by leader with vision.
But of course we have an oil man with a penchant for cowboy diplomacy - "If you're not with us you're against us.".
If we had a leaders with vision we could be well on the way to not caring about that nasty black liquid under the sands of the Middle East, and we would have more real security, and our children would have one less mess to deal with.

Thanks for reading.