How anyone with a clean conscience can vote NO on 1 is beyond me. The people aren't required to support a corrupt government, nor should they. Even today we get further word of how low our government will stoop, between finding out that not only is ACORN not being investigated in Massachusetts because the Sec. of State refuses to file a complaint, as well as learning that the Gov. gave $33K of our tax money to ACORN to rent an office in Springfield, we learn that Sec. State Galvin has been found to have been ordered by the DOJ to make sure all military absentee ballots are mailed out, received, returned and counted, something he willfully ignored to the point where only 5% of our military men and women had their votes counted. It's criminal and its just more of the same from the State, its time for them to listen to the people and clean up their act and a YES vote will ensure that.
I never agreed with your past attitude with YH, but I agree 100% with what you are saying about question 1. I am voting YES so that our state will learn HOW to spend money wisely (i.e. like a private corporation). We have to be more efficienct on how money is spent. We now throw money at a problem and hope the problem goes away. There is too much waste is government now and all aspects of government must be reviewed.
the law should be followed, and this one for good reasons. there have been problems in the past and we need to create a problem to solve it.
but lets make sure that we understand what happened and not imply something that did not happen.
i can only find the 5% reference from Michael Graham. and i'm sorry but i've heard him distort facts a little to much, he has a tendency to say things that after research are not exactly what he implied. please provide some detail if you have it since i'd like to read this for myself.
this is a country wide issue and has many other aspects.
specifically the time it takes to send and return the ballots.
if you remember this was a subject that became an issue in Florida in 2000. hence the law requiring reporting.
as for the ACORN issue, anyone that reads all of the information can come to their own conclusions.
Its certainly not black and white and there are many issues involved including state laws on registration forms and the use of 3rd party groups collecting information for money.
I've not heard of anything in Mass that would warrant an investigation of ACORN. can you please give me a link so i can read it. It certainly would have to be state law since the DOJ could start an investigation of any federal laws without Galvin's consent (not even sure if he could stop anything anyway, would it not be the Atty G that would file a complaint about this).
But...
What exactly does this have to do with Question #1?
i'm not sure what the solution to this problem is. i can see the idea of removing the tax to force a change. that may be the only way.
but i'm not sure if that really is the best way.
and one of my major issues is that there has been very little discussion about how to fix this problem (if there is one,but a completely different discussion about society, government and economic systems).
this in my mind is not how to handle public policy.
note, there is no way that you can ensure that a YES vote will cause "them" to listen to the people and clean up their act.
the only way you can reliably attempt to do that is via the voting booth for your representatives.
or try to change the constitution so that initiatives in this state are not subject to legislative tampering.
its certainly a difficult decision. much like our local vote.
Question 1 ensures nothing of the sort. I'm growing a big weary of Question 1 advocates tying every conceivable gripe against the government to vote in favor of this tax cut.
Yet, these are the same folks who get upset when opponents suggest that losing 40% of the state's revenue will lead to cuts in education, social services, health care and other crucial services.
I'm not sure how they can argue that when the last declaration in the ballot question itself says a move from Big Government into Small Government and ...
Small government leaves us with the responsibility and the resources to manage our own lives, educate our children, protect our families, care for our neighbors, and assist those who cannot support themselves.
I just view government differently. Is there waste? Yes. Will their be less waste if this passes, probably yes. Will there be less help to those who need it, most assuredly yes.
I'd rather work with what we've got than try to make some fixes with such a blunt instrument.
Tom, I have very similar feelings about many of the "advocates" of Question 1.
It's anger and frustration. And that is never when you should propose a solution to a problem.
Sadly there seems to be no real examination coming. So I can understand the reasoning.
But we need to figure out the way.
(Actually, my personal belief is that, like previous changes in society this will all occur outside of our direct control. I don't remember a vote on those Agricultural and Industrial revolutions)
Mr X. I listen to what you and many others are saying.
And sometimes I think that this might be what we should do (i don't think its the best solution, but maybe its the best right now).
There is obviously a disconnect on what government is.
Some see it as an external force to control, others see it as a way to communicate.
This is not directly related but its was an interesting quote that I read today in the Globe.
----
What President Franklin D. Roosevelt said in 1935 when he signed the Social Security Act is still true today:
"The civilization of the past 100 years, with its startling industrial changes, has tended more and more to make life insecure. Young people have come to wonder what would be their lot when they came to old age. The man with a job has wondered how long the job would last."
there won't be cuts to critical services such as education for the simple fact that our legislators like their jobs. any cuts they make will see them voted out, and thus, they are forced to address the waste rather than services. It's just a scare tactic they use to protect the system they've built. Why is it that the responsible people of this state are asked to live within their means, and the government gets a blank check to do what they wish? Change will never come as long as we are a one party state, and as long as we don't vote out our incumbents. This is the only option left on the table and to not support it is foolish.
9 comments:
a YES vote is crucial
How anyone with a clean conscience can vote NO on 1 is beyond me. The people aren't required to support a corrupt government, nor should they. Even today we get further word of how low our government will stoop, between finding out that not only is ACORN not being investigated in Massachusetts because the Sec. of State refuses to file a complaint, as well as learning that the Gov. gave $33K of our tax money to ACORN to rent an office in Springfield, we learn that Sec. State Galvin has been found to have been ordered by the DOJ to make sure all military absentee ballots are mailed out, received, returned and counted, something he willfully ignored to the point where only 5% of our military men and women had their votes counted. It's criminal and its just more of the same from the State, its time for them to listen to the people and clean up their act and a YES vote will ensure that.
To X,
Right On!!!
I never agreed with your past attitude with YH, but I agree 100% with what you are saying about question 1. I am voting YES so that our state will learn HOW to spend money wisely (i.e. like a private corporation). We have to be more efficienct on how money is spent. We now throw money at a problem and hope the problem goes away. There is too much waste is government now and all aspects of government must be reviewed.
X,
Eliminating the flat income tax will lead to higher regressive property taxes which will further the gentrification process in Nbpt.
hi,
what exactly was the issue with military ballots?
were there ballots that were not counted?
or was there a lack of reporting?
the law should be followed, and this one for good reasons. there have been problems in the past and we need to create a problem to solve it.
but lets make sure that we understand what happened and not imply something that did not happen.
i can only find the 5% reference from Michael Graham. and i'm sorry but i've heard him distort facts a little to much, he has a tendency to say things that after research are not exactly what he implied. please provide some detail if you have it since i'd like to read this for myself.
this is a country wide issue and has many other aspects.
specifically the time it takes to send and return the ballots.
if you remember this was a subject that became an issue in Florida in 2000. hence the law requiring reporting.
as for the ACORN issue, anyone that reads all of the information can come to their own conclusions.
Its certainly not black and white and there are many issues involved including state laws on registration forms and the use of 3rd party groups collecting information for money.
I've not heard of anything in Mass that would warrant an investigation of ACORN. can you please give me a link so i can read it. It certainly would have to be state law since the DOJ could start an investigation of any federal laws without Galvin's consent (not even sure if he could stop anything anyway, would it not be the Atty G that would file a complaint about this).
But...
What exactly does this have to do with Question #1?
i'm not sure what the solution to this problem is. i can see the idea of removing the tax to force a change. that may be the only way.
but i'm not sure if that really is the best way.
and one of my major issues is that there has been very little discussion about how to fix this problem (if there is one,but a completely different discussion about society, government and economic systems).
this in my mind is not how to handle public policy.
note, there is no way that you can ensure that a YES vote will cause "them" to listen to the people and clean up their act.
the only way you can reliably attempt to do that is via the voting booth for your representatives.
or try to change the constitution so that initiatives in this state are not subject to legislative tampering.
its certainly a difficult decision. much like our local vote.
thanks,
sds
X,
Question 1 ensures nothing of the sort. I'm growing a big weary of Question 1 advocates tying every conceivable gripe against the government to vote in favor of this tax cut.
Yet, these are the same folks who get upset when opponents suggest that losing 40% of the state's revenue will lead to cuts in education, social services, health care and other crucial services.
I'm not sure how they can argue that when the last declaration in the ballot question itself says a move from Big Government into Small Government and ...
Small government leaves us with the responsibility and the resources to manage our own lives, educate our children, protect our families, care for our neighbors, and assist those who cannot support themselves.
Read the entire text here and judge for yourself.
http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ELE/ele08/ballot_questions_08/full_text.htm
I just view government differently. Is there waste? Yes. Will their be less waste if this passes, probably yes. Will there be less help to those who need it, most assuredly yes.
I'd rather work with what we've got than try to make some fixes with such a blunt instrument.
http://www.sec.state.ma.us
/ELE/ele08/
ballot_questions_08/
full_text.htm
here I broke the URL into four parts.
Hi,
Tom, I have very similar feelings about many of the "advocates" of Question 1.
It's anger and frustration. And that is never when you should propose a solution to a problem.
Sadly there seems to be no real examination coming. So I can understand the reasoning.
But we need to figure out the way.
(Actually, my personal belief is that, like previous changes in society this will all occur outside of our direct control. I don't remember a vote on those Agricultural and Industrial revolutions)
Mr X. I listen to what you and many others are saying.
And sometimes I think that this might be what we should do (i don't think its the best solution, but maybe its the best right now).
There is obviously a disconnect on what government is.
Some see it as an external force to control, others see it as a way to communicate.
This is not directly related but its was an interesting quote that I read today in the Globe.
----
What President Franklin D. Roosevelt said in 1935 when he signed the Social Security Act is still true today:
"The civilization of the past 100 years, with its startling industrial changes, has tended more and more to make life insecure. Young people have come to wonder what would be their lot when they came to old age. The man with a job has wondered how long the job would last."
----
thanks,
sds
there won't be cuts to critical services such as education for the simple fact that our legislators like their jobs. any cuts they make will see them voted out, and thus, they are forced to address the waste rather than services. It's just a scare tactic they use to protect the system they've built. Why is it that the responsible people of this state are asked to live within their means, and the government gets a blank check to do what they wish? Change will never come as long as we are a one party state, and as long as we don't vote out our incumbents. This is the only option left on the table and to not support it is foolish.
Post a Comment