From:
Susan Kniep, President
The Federation of Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations, Inc.
Website: ctact.org
860-528-0323
March 24, 2004
WELCOME TO THE 25th EDITION OF
TAX
TALK
Your update on what others are thinking, doing, and planning
Send your comments or questions to me, and
I will include in next week's publication.
Please note that TAX TALK is now on our Website
Susan Kniep, fctopresident@ctact.org
East
Hartford
Taxpayers Association
Subject: New Britain Taxpayers are on the Move
March 24, 2004
I had an opportunity to attend three meetings in New Britain in the past few days. New Britain taxpayers are speaking out against
Binding Arbitration and for strong Ethic Laws. CONGRATULATIONS to the
leaders of these tax groups and I will soon be posting their success on our
website. Susan
*********************************************************
John Durand, JohnD@leed-himmel.com
Tolland Taxpayers Association
Subject: Comments on
Social Security Reform
March 22, 2004
I must respond to Enough Talking about Fiscal Responsibility -- Let's Cut
Spending by Veronique de Rugy, a fiscal policy analyst at the Cato
Institute which refers to entitlement reform. "Social Security and
Medicare costs will explode when the baby boomers retire."
"Senate Budget Committee Chairman Don Nickles (R-Okla.) wants billions of
dollars of reductions in entitlements. He's right." I am a fiscal
conservative. I also believe reform is required, however, it is immoral,
unfair, unjust and irresponsible to pull the rug out from under the feet of
those who are nearing retirement and have paid into the system in all good
faith their entire working lives. If you are going to penalize anyone, do
it to those politicians who have raided the SS fund over the years and put it
in this condition. Yes, your children will pay a price. Reform MUST
hold sacred that promise made by our Government to those who are now going to
depend in large part or in full for this entitlement. Any reform which may
effect current or near term recipients should be limited to those who have an
income and retirement package which does not depend at all on SS /
Medicare formula. Reform MUST NOT leave anyone stranded. Those same
citizens who thought they would be retired soon, will not be able to, let alone
stay in the homes they worked so hard to obtain and pay off. Medical
bills are horrific. The local property tax load alone is going to force
many out of their homes. On top of that you think it's right and
just to take away the entitlement they earned? We are fighting this
battle in Tolland as you read this .... taxes more than doubling in under six
years if the Education budget requests are allowed, not even including new school
bonding costs which kick in next year. "Longer life spans and rising
health care costs will e xacerbate the tax-burden on our children if
entitlement programs are not reformed." So be it!
What you mean is it's okay to over burden those who already paid their own way
and probably yours and at this time in their lives have no remedy other than to
perhaps become homeless. This is acceptable? Those who have not yet begun
their adult lives have plenty of opportunity to plan and modify lifestyle if
they know what is coming. The FIX for the problem should begin with that
thought as a basis for reform. I'm sorry, but this kind of thinking ... we
can't over burden our children .... really strikes a nerve. There are many ways
to reduce the future tax burden without interrupting the payout to those who
earned it and can't change what they did in the past or adjust their
future. Government costs (cost of running government) can be cut 5-10%
without anyone noticing if efficiency was an unfunded mandate. The truth
is, SS and MEDICARE costs are a big target and it takes WORK to look elsewhere.
[John Durand]
*********************************************************
Robert Green, green_robert@hotmail.com
Salem Taxpayers Association
Subject: Comments on
article Enough Talking about Fiscal Responsibility -- Let's Cut Spending in
last edition of Tax Talk
March 22, 2004
Another fine edition of taxpayer education! Perhaps we should call this
the Institute of Advanced Taxation Study! One minor correction to Veronique de
Rugy's article; the U.S. Postal Service was privatized
during the Nixon administration over 30 years ago. The USPS
receives no funding for its operation (including its mail delivery fleet)
from the Federal budget. All revenues are generated via postage rates
that are approved by the Postmaster General. Bob GreenChairman, Salem RTC
*********************************************************
Jack Walton, jacc45@hotmail.com
Oakville-Watertown Taxpayers Association
Subject: Website tells
you who is contribution to whom
March 22, 2004
Sue....you hit the jackpot on fundrace.org....the site is jammed
constantly....jack
********************************************************
Tom Durso, TDurso8217
Oakville-Watertown Taxpayers Association
Subject: 55 and over tax
freeze
March 23, 2004
Starve the Monster! Everyone loves kids but with
our expensive government education monopoly/bureaucracy we taxpayers are on the
hook for over $8000 per child per year in Watertown. With the current batch of state
legislative leaders carrying water for the teachers union, we're stuck with
this Soviet-type education system but we do have control over the number
of children who are held hostage to the union. How? Imagine if Watertown reinvented itself and became a
bedroom community of 55- and -older residents. Unless you're Superman or
Superwoman, at 55 years you're days of child rearing are long
gone. If our Town Council leaders were to enact a
55 and older property tax freeze, Watertown/Oakville would evolve into a
magnet for the childless seasoned set . Instead of
sub-divisions popping up like mushrooms, our Town would attract buyers who
don't feed the public education monster's appetite for our tax dollars. Even
those residents under 55 of age will stay to take advantage of this sensible
tax break. Until we can break the government monopoly on our education
tax dollars , controlling the number of student hostages is the next best
thing.
*********************************************************
Robert Green, green_robert@hotmail.com
Salem Taxpayers Association
Subject: COURT RULES
TOWNS CAN DIVIDE BOARD AND TOWN BUDGET REFERENDUMS
March 23, 2004
Good morning, Sue. The residents of Salem will be glad to hear this, but the Board
of Ed is going to have a major kitten over it. Maybe the Board's other
eight members and the teachers' unions will finally realize that the town
coffers are not their personal piggy banks. Bob Green, Member, Salem Board of
Education
**********************************************************
Fred Standt, FStndt@aol.com
Brookfield Taxpayers Association
Subject: COURT RULES TOWNS CAN
DIVIDE BOARD AND TOWN BUDGET REFERENDUMS
March 24, 2004
Dear Susan, What is most important to me is that the Connecticut Supreme Court
stated "The HOME RULE ACT "gives municipalities the right to draft
and adopt rules for issues that are strictly local. The legislation was enacted
to enable municipalities to conduct their affairs to the fullest possible
extent ... upon the principle that the municipality itself knows better what it
needs rather than the state at large." No where is the consequence of
failure to follow this more evident than in public education. Will anyone deny
that education is a primary concern of the town? The major part of local
budgets go toward education but where the money is spent is more influenced by
the state department of education and by state approved teachers unions than by
the locals. That's not counting the federal control through "No Child Left
Behind" fred