From:
Susan Kniep,
President
The Federation of Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations, Inc.
Website: ctact.org
email: fctopresident@ctact.org
860-524-6501
January 17,
2005
WELCOME TO THE 42nd EDITION OF
TAX TALK
Your
update on what others are thinking, doing, and planning. Send your comments or questions to me, at fctopresident@ctact.org and I will include in next week’s
publication.
Review previous Tax Talk issues on our
website at http://www.ctact.org/
********
LOOKING FOR
STATE
OF CONNECTICUT
ANNUAL
BUDGETS?
Go to this website… http://www.cga.ct.gov/ofa/BudgetBooksER.asp
********
TODAY’S NEWS: A brief summary is offered below. FCTO encourages you to read the entire news
articles at the websites referenced.
No Teacher Left Behind, By
TERRY M. MOE, January 13, 2005; Page A12
Wall
Street Journal - The teachers unions have
more influence over the public schools than any other group in American society.
They influence schools from the bottom up, through collective bargaining
activities that shape virtually every aspect of school organization. And they
influence schools from the top down, through political activities that shape
government policy. They are the 800-pound gorillas of public education. Yet the
American public is largely unaware of how influential they are -- and how much
they impede efforts to improve public schools. Continued at the following website: http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110006192
********
DMV Program Under Scrutiny - 
Rowland
Friend Benefits From No-Bid Arrangement, January
16, 2005, By JACK DOLAN And JON LENDER, Courant Staff Writers - A Waterbury
driving school owner with ties to former Gov. John G. Rowland has profited for
years from the woes of highway scofflaws.
Continued at the following website:
http://www.ctnow.com/news/local/hc-dmv0116.artjan16,1,3452708.story?coll=hc-headlines-local
********
U. S. SUPREME COURT TO HEAR NEW LONDON
EMINENT DOMAIN CASE
FEB 22, 2005
Again,
our sincere appreciation to Robert Young of the Wethersfield Taxpayers
Association for keeping us current on eminent domain issues: American Farm Bureau Supports New London
Homeowners in Eminent Domain Case…---EMINENT
DOMAIN CASE TO BE HEARD FEB. 22---The American Farm Bureau Federation was one
of 25 associations and groups that filed friend-of-the-court briefs supporting
property owners being displaced by the city of New London, Conn. Eight groups
are thought to be filing contrary briefs supporting the city in the eminent
domain case coming before the U.S. Supreme
Court. The Supreme Court is expected to
hear the case Feb. 22. The case centers on whether a government body can take
private property for the purpose of turning it over to business developers to
construct businesses that might generate higher taxes.
AFBF contends, if the court allows this practice, farm
landowners would be in jeopardy of losing land whenever a government entity
wants to help another private enterprise expand or construct a new business
enterprise. AFBF News Release continued
at this website: http://www.fb.org/news/nr/nr2004/nr1203.html
********
BILL RESTRAINING EMINENT DOMAIN: Connecticut General Assembly January Session, 2005,
Proposed Bill No. 5062, LCO No. 264, Referred to Committee on Judiciary,
Introduced by Rep. Ward, 86th Dist.
AN
ACT PROHIBITING THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL REAL PROPERTY BY EMINENT
DOMAIN FOR USE IN PRIVATELY OWNED OR CONTROLLED MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT
PROJECTS. Be it enacted by the Senate and House
of Representatives in General Assembly convened:That subsection (a) of section 8-193 of the general
statutes be amended to provide that owner-occupied residential dwellings
consisting of four or fewer residential units shall not be acquired by eminent
domain for use in a development project that will be privately owned or
controlled. Statement of Purpose: To prohibit the acquisition of small
owner-occupied residential dwellings by eminent domain for use in a municipal
development project that will be privately owned or controlled.
********
The Center for Public Integrity
http://www.publicintegrity.org/default.aspx
Investing in
War, The Carlyle Group profits from government and conflict,By M. Asif Ismail …WASHINGTON, November 18, 2004 — The Carlyle Group, a Washington,
D.C.-based private equity firm that employs numerous former high-ranking
government officials with ties to both political parties, was the ninth largest
Pentagon contractor between 1998 and 2003, an ongoing Center for Public
Integrity investigation into Department of Defense contracts found. A dozen
companies in which Carlyle had a controlling interest netted more than $9.3
billion in contracts. Continued at
this website: http://www.publicintegrity.org/pns/report.aspx?aid=424
The Sincerest Form of Flattery, Private
equity firms follow in Carlyle Group's footsteps, By M. Asif Ismail …. More than a half dozen companies are now following in
the footsteps of Carlyle by signing up former high-ranking government and
military officials as they try to make inroads into the Pentagon and the
newly-created Homeland Security contracting business. Continued at this website: http://www.publicintegrity.org/pns/report.aspx?aid=425
********
PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT (POGO)
http://www.pogo.org/
The Project On Government Oversight has a long history of working with
individuals daring to expose corruption. Many of these individuals with whom
POGO has worked choose to remain anonymous to the public and even to POGO
itself. If you have information
regarding fraudulent or wasteful activities in the government or the industries
it regulates, and you would like to expose it in order to keep the government
accountable to its citizens, please
contact us. POGO may be able
to further research your concerns, bring public attention to any wrongdoing,
and alert those who can bring about change. We've been watchdogs since 1981.
********
Richard Pozzo, arlinepozzo@yahoo.com
Winchester Taxpayers
Association
Subject:
Update on What is Happening in Winchester
Dear Susan: Happy
New Year to you and yours! Update on the
town......we are going to a 6th referendum on January 29, 2005...the selectpeople and the board of ed are completely buffaloed
and lately have been pleading with the W.T.A. ( Winchester Taxpayer's
Association ) to stop telling the voting public to vote NO on the budgets. We
are definitely planning on sticking to our guns and have already posted over 50
signs asking the citizenry to votr NO. Had to
use a "jack Hammer" to get some of the signs in the ground but we
were successful and they are posted into the frozen ground. Town is currently
operating on last year's budget. We have definitely made an impact. The problem
is that the slectboard and the town manager do not
listen. The board has held several workshops with the idea that the opponents
of the budget should come forward and make suggestions as to where to cut. I
have attended all of the workshops and made several recommendations as to where
the budget can be cut but the suggestions are simply ignored. One major
suggestion that I made was for : ALL TOWN EMPLOYEES
and EDUCATION EMPLOYEES volountarily give back on
their benefits and that everyone contribute 20% of the health benefit premiums,
( some employees currently pay as little as 3% of the premiums, police dept for
example pay only $10 per week for their benefits).Recently I was called a
lunatic but as luny as I might be I'll continue the
battle. Have already received a lot of calls from other towns in Litchfield
county telling us ( the W.T.A. ) to keep up the good
work. None in the town has ever stood up in the past an objected to the TAX and
SPEND politicians the way that we are and we are gaining support each
time. At the last referendum the budget was defeated by a 2 to 1
margin. Mention Winchester in your next communique we feel proud of the work that we are
doing. Have a good new year. Richard
********
Ray Kovalec, rkovalec@charter.net
Member, New Fairfield Taxpayers
Association
Subject: Interesting
Article on Taxpayer Bill of Rights
Hi Susan, I found this article on the Bluegrass Institute
Website and thought you might find interesting.
A taxpayer bill
of rights for Kentuckians, By Aaron Morris
Colorado has a meaningful way of dealing
with state budget surpluses. They revert back to the people who were taxed in
the first place. In 1990, Colorado passed a
Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, or TABOR. This law limits state spending to the
combination of population growth and inflation. Government can only grow if it
serves more people and the cost of living increases. Article continued at the
following website: http://www.bipps.org/article.asp?ID=279
********
Susan Kniep, fctopresident@ctact.org
Subject: Susan Kniep’s Presentation Before the
MDC Commission
On January 10,
2005 I made a presentation before the MDC on the appointment
by Chairman DiBella of a political operative to a $110,000 position.
As you will recall DiBella had been asked to
step down from his position in 2004 by former Democrat State Chairman George Jepsen to avoid – and I will use Mr. Jepson’s own words –
“the appearance of impropriety, after allegations by federal authorities that
he accepted nearly $375,000 in a deal involving now imprisoned former Treasurer
Paul Sylvester.” You can read my
comments in the Hartford Courant: http://www.ctnow.com/news/local/hc-mdc0111.artjan11,0,2817978.story
Presentation Before the MDC
By Susan Kniep, President,
The Federation of Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations,
Inc.
January 10,
2004
It’s become apparent that state agencies to include quasi
public agencies and the MDC, financed with taxpayer and ratepayer dollars, have
become fiefdoms for the politically connected.
This has been to the detriment of taxpayers and ratepayers as evidenced
by the loss of $220 million through CRRA, double digit incentive payments
totaling $161,000 to 17 executives at the Connecticut State Lottery, and
now the political appointment by Chairman DiBella to
a $110,000 job which the public has been excluded from vying for. State Legislator David McCluskey
of West Hartford recently said and I quote “it may be time
for the General Assembly to launch its own review of quasi-public
agencies. "Since we're supposed to
be in this new spirit of accountability in state government, maybe we need to
know in advance what each quasi-public agency has planned." Sen. Edith G. Prague said she believes it's time for the legislature
to take a closer look at salaries in the quasi-public sector. She further stated and I quote "There
is a double standard, obviously,"
adding that since quasi-public agencies typically oversee millions of
state dollars, their employees should not be viewed any differently than
workers in more traditional state agencies.
"They get the same benefits. They are part of the state
system," she said. "They should come under the same kinds of
restrictions that other state employees -- who are doing their jobs -- come
under." As the President of the
Federation of Connecticut Taxpayer
Organizations, we believe that an investigation should be launched immediately
in to the practices of quasi public agencies beginning with the MDC and the
proposed hire of David Papandrea. There is something to be said for coming up
in the political ranks. But the MDC
should not be a political football to be tossed to political insiders but
instead should be managed to the benefit of those who financially support it –
the ratepayers and taxpayers of our State.
These same ratepayers should be allowed to offer their resume for any
quasi public agency position for which they are qualified. The reputation of our State and cities has
been marred by corruption at the highest level. The public does not elect those who
comprise quasi public agencies. The
public does however expect those whom we do elect to establish rules and
regulations of these agencies to avoid any appearance of impropriety or
favoritism, to guarantee that those who are fiscally responsible for our money
are hired not because of their political connections but their capabilities,
and to terminate any member of these agencies who fail to represent the public
to the highest ethical standards possible.
********
Ray Kovalec, rkovalec@charter.net
Member, New Fairfield Taxpayers
Association
Subject: Clarification
of Defense Secretary Rumsfeld Comments
Hi Susan, On your web site you
printed an article that appeared in the New York Times regarding a National
Guardsman asking Defense Secretary Rumsfeld why his
unit digs through landfills to find armor for their vehicles. The New York Times, and it seems all the
media, reported Rumsfeld replied, “As you know,
you go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to
have at a later time.” This
out-of-context comment, a small part of his reply, made him sound callous/uncaring. His actual reply was, according to the
Pentagon Web site:“I talked
to the General coming out here about the pace at which the vehicles are being
armored. They have been brought from all over the world, wherever they’re not
needed, to a place where they are needed. I’m told that they are being-the Army
is-I think it’s something like 400 a month are being done. And it’s essentially
a matter of physics. It isn’t a matter of money. It isn’t a matter on the part
of the Army of desire. It’s a matter of production capability of doing it. As
you know, you go to war with the Army you have. They’re not the Army you might
want or wish to have at a later time. Since the Iraqi conflict began, the Army
has been pressing ahead to produce the armor necessary at a rate they believe -
it’s a greatly expanded rate from what existed previously - but a rate that
they believe is the rate that is all that can be accomplished at this
moment.” Rumsfeld’s
response contained over 90 well-chosen words before getting to the little
snippet presented by the media. Later, a
reporter admitted planting the question with the soldier. The media knew it was
a cheap shot to embarrass Rumsfeld. They magnified it
for the public. Also, the media didn’t
report 800 (98%) of this unit’s 820 humvees are
armored. They also didn't report that adding additional armor to vehicles has
been a common practice in the military for many, many years. Its called “yellow
journalism”! Ray Kovalec,
Member, New Fairfield Taxpayer
Association
********
John Berthoud, sbatkins@ntu.org
President, National Taxpayers Union
&
National Taxpayers Union Foundation, www.ntu.org,
Phone - 703-683-5700, Fax - 703-683-5722
Subject:
Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Coalition Letter
Dear Taxpayer Advocate: The National Taxpayers Union is circulating
a coalition letter on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. I’ve pasted the letter
in below. If you’d like to add your organization’s name to the letter, please
email a reply to this account (sbatkins@ntu.org) giving your organization’s
name, the name of the person representing the
organization and their title, and your state. We need to hear back from you by
Wednesday, January 19.
Thanks for your consideration of this request.
January 25, 2005, An Open Letter to the 109th
Congress:
We, the undersigned taxpayer, consumer, and
policy groups representing
hundreds of thousands of Americans, applaud the 109th Congress for
addressing the long-term unfunded liabilities of the Social Security
system. But, we urge you to also focus on another looming threat to
taxpayers the potential liabilities inherent in America’s two
Government-Sponsored Enterprises, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
The past year has offered story after story of financial mismanagement and
accounting scandal at the two government-backed lending giants. Of even
greater concern to taxpayers, however, is the potential cost if either of
these entities faces bankruptcy or default. Financial columnist Robert
Samuelson recently summarized the situation quite well:
In financial markets, both Fannie and Freddie are seen as quasi-government
agencies. Their debt enjoys low interest rates just above Treasury rates. A
default by either would be considered a government default a crisis. The
result is a potential disaster for taxpayers: It’s a
heads-I-win-tails-you-lose proposition. If Fannie and Freddie prosper,
benefits go to shareholders; if there’s trouble, government will almost
certainly rescue them. Mr. Samuelson’s
article in its entirety can be found at the following website: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48621-2005Jan4.html
In the short-term, shoring up regulation would be a good start. But
realistically, the best answer to ending the threat to taxpayers is
complete privatization of these two entities. Both Fannie Mae and Freddie
Mac have proven themselves to be far too sophisticated political players to
be held in check by regulatory reform for very long. The Savings &
Loan
crisis of the 1980s was a cautionary tale of politically-deft financial
entities skirting regulation, ultimately leading to disaster. While it
may
help lessen the threat to taxpayers for a limited period, a regulatory fix
is not a permanent solution.
A good starting point for full privatization is the plan that was developed
by Peter Wallison, Tom Stanton, and Bert Ely for the
American Enterprise
Institute. Their plan provides a blueprint for the federal government to
safely cut ties with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac thereby protecting
taxpayers. And their plan outlines how to ensure even lower interest
rates, to the benefit of America’s homeowners.
In the 1980s, some of us warned about potential problems with America’s
Savings & Loans. Many Members of Congress chose to simply ignore the
situation, and hope that problems would never materialize. The history
books will record that their lack of leadership in addressing the issue
ended up costing Americans hundreds of billions of dollars. It would be
tragic to see the same scenario play out all over again. We urge the
109th
Congress to act decisively to avert another financial disaster, and we all
look forward to working with you in this endeavor.
********
Connecticut
Legislative Public Acts which took effect Jan 1, 2005 can be found at the
following website: http://www.cga.ct.gov/2005/rpt/2005-R-0070.htm
********
Office
of Legislative Research Report on Property Tax Freeze Program: http://www.cga.ct.gov/2005/rpt/2005-R-0053.htm