Results tagged “taxes” from Gilford Town Republican Committee
Just trying to catch up on some things that I didn't have to put up when I ran across them. This from Betsy's Page is one of them:
Incredibly this man is one of the leaders of our nation. Watch this video of Harry Reid explaining over and over and over again that the United States has a voluntary tax system. Libertarian interview, Jan Helfeld tried to ask Reid about how people feel when their money is forcibly taken away from them to pay for welfare for others, but Reid refuses to accept the premise of the question because, as he repeats several times, the government doesn't force people to pay taxes and that we have a voluntary system. He can't claim that he misspoke since he is quite forceful in his repetition that our system is voluntary. His explanation is that we have deductions for mortgages and medical costs and so the entire system is voluntary. Imagine that.
Remember this as you are filling out your tax forms. The Senate Majority Leader insists that the system is voluntary.
Amazing.
When the Democrats try to demonize John McCain for his ignorance on economics, I hope that the Republicans will blanket the media with this video.Well, we're trying!
I commented earlier
(Belknap County Republicans website) that the Democrats are not worried at all with what they wrought with
the latest State budget ("The senator insisted that “new” spending
measures added up to “barely
3-percent”, with the rest of the increase caused by “things we had no
control over”).
Well, in the same article (Daily Sun, P20), an NH House Democrat candidate was quoted this way:
Looking around the Lakes Region, it is clear that this fundamental necessity for success, high population density, is missing. In fact, even the Winnipesaukee Transit System's own numbers shows that taxpayers might as well give each rider almost $26 each time they get on one of those always empty buses. It would probably be more cost effective to give out taxi vouchers and let the private sector provide that service more efficiently.
From the Coordinated Transit Study Final Report:
The Downeaster, running down from Portland to Boston still requires a taxpayer subsidy of pretty much $20 / rider / trip. We are talking millions in subsidies!
Once again, Democrats seem willing to provide a solution for which there is no problem. Once again, they are willing to spend lots of other peoples' money to benefit very few.
Well, in the same article (Daily Sun, P20), an NH House Democrat candidate was quoted this way:
The problem with her statement is that it may well be true that, indeed, the only places that mass transit may be needed is at the area's ski lifts. Mass Transit systems only work where the population is high density (think large urban areas like Boston and New York City). Even with that as a given, Mass Transit systems are not self sustaining - they continue to operate only with massive taxpayer subsidies that yield a "reasonable" fare per rider. Thus, many are dinged for the few."Ellen McLung of Gilford — a candidate in House District 5 – got off the best one-liner of the day, saying she was interested in mass transit issues but her home state’s only real example to date is ski lifts."
Looking around the Lakes Region, it is clear that this fundamental necessity for success, high population density, is missing. In fact, even the Winnipesaukee Transit System's own numbers shows that taxpayers might as well give each rider almost $26 each time they get on one of those always empty buses. It would probably be more cost effective to give out taxi vouchers and let the private sector provide that service more efficiently.
From the Coordinated Transit Study Final Report:
No way that this could be judged to be a successful program (unless you are one of the very few riders that WTS does have). It could be said that all that the WTS seems to provide is jobs for the bus drivers and their management. And just think of all the carbon offsets that are needed to compensate for burning all that gas / diesel while running empty the vast majority of the time.
- A budget of $194,077 per year
- A ridership of 7,566 people per year
- This breaks down to $25.65 / rider - trip
- Given an 8 hour operational day, that is only 21 riders / day, or if you prefer 2.5 riders per hour.
- That is out of a possible ridership (as estimated in 2000) of 15,500 living with 1/4 mile of all the stops.
The Downeaster, running down from Portland to Boston still requires a taxpayer subsidy of pretty much $20 / rider / trip. We are talking millions in subsidies!
Once again, Democrats seem willing to provide a solution for which there is no problem. Once again, they are willing to spend lots of other peoples' money to benefit very few.
By Dave Horvath
Laconia Daily Sun, P. 4 7/8/08
To the editor,
Ellen McClung, wife of Scott Cracraft, self-proclaimed proud ultraliberals, recently announced she was running for the District 5 legislative seat that includes Gilford, Belmont, Alton and Barnstead. McClung’s letter was very understated in its announcement. Her and her husband’s viewpoints, published on many occasions in this newspaper, are admittedly part of the far left, agenda-driven culture that has overtaken the once proud Democrat party. This is true locally, statewide and nationally. It is my opinion, of a person raised in a Democrat household, that most Democrats are centrists and don’t hold the extreme viewpoints that McClung and Cracraft have espoused in the past.
I found it funny that now that she is a candidate that she has shied away from the hard left wing rhetoric. Perhaps I shouldn’t find it that funny as Obama, the most left wing presidential candidate (and least qualified ) this nation has ever seen is now running to the right of Senator John McCain. Why do ultra liberals feel its necessary to hide who they really are? Or call themselves “progressives”?
Many things in her announcement should be addressed, space allows me to only comment on a few. Whether McClung and her cohorts want to wish us into a recession, the United States is not in one and haven’t been since the one that President Bush inherited from Clinton and his terrible tax policies. As she and her husband continue to remind us that they are educators (indoctrinators? ), they might want to do some fact checking before they speak.
A married couple earning $60,000 a year pays $3,000 per year less in federal income taxes now than in the last year of Clinton’s presidency. Look it up. That extra money is helping me with my choices in life. Liberal Democrats want to repeal this and other beneficial policies initiated by President Bush that help the average American. They want to create more government.
Once in my life I would like a liberal to say the high taxes we are imposing on our citizens is making difficult choices for Americans. Our citizens have to chose between medical bills, food, energy and are struggling, WE MUST CUT TAXES NOW! But that won’t come from an archetypal left wing liberal like McClung. She would rather see my home and lifestyle in jeopardy than to renounce high tax, big government entitlement programs. Whether in Concord or on a national level, government does nothing better than the private sector. But it is precisely McClung’s policies that make it more difficult for the poor and elderly.
The $400-million dollar, 17.5-percent budget increase given to us by the current ultra liberal Democrats in Concord is costing a family of four in New Hampshire over $1,200 more per year than we have already been paying. I for one would like that money back to make choices with. My lifestyle has not improved because of this tax increase, has yours? We don’t need a McClung to add to our statewide fiscal woes. The first Democrat Legislature in Concord in one hundred years has been nothing short of a disaster. McClung doesn’t seem to understand that this tax increase hits the least among us the hardest.
The problems that we see in the cost of energy have been building for over 40 years. We can’t build nuclear plants, clean coal fired plants, refineries or drill for oil at locations of large known reserves. Wind farms and solar power are okay as long as you can’t see them from Senator Kennedy’s cape compound. But these are unreliable and the power grid needs backup sources at higher costs still to support such an ill conceived sole source program. McClung states that she wants good paying American job opportunities, great, you and your liberal policies need to get out of the way. Over 500 high paying union jobs were lost in Laconia alone, at Bergen-Paterson Corporation when nuclear power fell out of favor because of liberal policies. Do some more homework and find out what one power plant or refi nery would do for job creation let alone going forward with a coherent national energy policy.
So as McClung asks for your support, I ask that you as fellow taxpayers do your homework. I have. I have followed the liberal litany of her and her husband’s past stated positions. We do not need any more high tax, big government liberals at any level of elected office. Find someone better to vote for than her.
David R. Horvath, Sr.
Gilford
Laconia Daily Sun, P. 4 7/8/08
To the editor,
Ellen McClung, wife of Scott Cracraft, self-proclaimed proud ultraliberals, recently announced she was running for the District 5 legislative seat that includes Gilford, Belmont, Alton and Barnstead. McClung’s letter was very understated in its announcement. Her and her husband’s viewpoints, published on many occasions in this newspaper, are admittedly part of the far left, agenda-driven culture that has overtaken the once proud Democrat party. This is true locally, statewide and nationally. It is my opinion, of a person raised in a Democrat household, that most Democrats are centrists and don’t hold the extreme viewpoints that McClung and Cracraft have espoused in the past.
I found it funny that now that she is a candidate that she has shied away from the hard left wing rhetoric. Perhaps I shouldn’t find it that funny as Obama, the most left wing presidential candidate (and least qualified ) this nation has ever seen is now running to the right of Senator John McCain. Why do ultra liberals feel its necessary to hide who they really are? Or call themselves “progressives”?
Many things in her announcement should be addressed, space allows me to only comment on a few. Whether McClung and her cohorts want to wish us into a recession, the United States is not in one and haven’t been since the one that President Bush inherited from Clinton and his terrible tax policies. As she and her husband continue to remind us that they are educators (indoctrinators? ), they might want to do some fact checking before they speak.
A married couple earning $60,000 a year pays $3,000 per year less in federal income taxes now than in the last year of Clinton’s presidency. Look it up. That extra money is helping me with my choices in life. Liberal Democrats want to repeal this and other beneficial policies initiated by President Bush that help the average American. They want to create more government.
Once in my life I would like a liberal to say the high taxes we are imposing on our citizens is making difficult choices for Americans. Our citizens have to chose between medical bills, food, energy and are struggling, WE MUST CUT TAXES NOW! But that won’t come from an archetypal left wing liberal like McClung. She would rather see my home and lifestyle in jeopardy than to renounce high tax, big government entitlement programs. Whether in Concord or on a national level, government does nothing better than the private sector. But it is precisely McClung’s policies that make it more difficult for the poor and elderly.
The $400-million dollar, 17.5-percent budget increase given to us by the current ultra liberal Democrats in Concord is costing a family of four in New Hampshire over $1,200 more per year than we have already been paying. I for one would like that money back to make choices with. My lifestyle has not improved because of this tax increase, has yours? We don’t need a McClung to add to our statewide fiscal woes. The first Democrat Legislature in Concord in one hundred years has been nothing short of a disaster. McClung doesn’t seem to understand that this tax increase hits the least among us the hardest.
The problems that we see in the cost of energy have been building for over 40 years. We can’t build nuclear plants, clean coal fired plants, refineries or drill for oil at locations of large known reserves. Wind farms and solar power are okay as long as you can’t see them from Senator Kennedy’s cape compound. But these are unreliable and the power grid needs backup sources at higher costs still to support such an ill conceived sole source program. McClung states that she wants good paying American job opportunities, great, you and your liberal policies need to get out of the way. Over 500 high paying union jobs were lost in Laconia alone, at Bergen-Paterson Corporation when nuclear power fell out of favor because of liberal policies. Do some more homework and find out what one power plant or refi nery would do for job creation let alone going forward with a coherent national energy policy.
So as McClung asks for your support, I ask that you as fellow taxpayers do your homework. I have. I have followed the liberal litany of her and her husband’s past stated positions. We do not need any more high tax, big government liberals at any level of elected office. Find someone better to vote for than her.
David R. Horvath, Sr.
Gilford
By Rep. DAVID HESS
For the Monitor
July 13, 2008 - 12:00 am
No matter how hard they try, Democrats in Concord just can't sugarcoat their tax, borrow and spend policies of the last two years. A case in point is the recent opinion piece authored by House Speaker Terie Norelli ("Republicans left costly problems for us to solve," Monitor Forum, June 25).
Despite the harsh accusations, half-truths and just plain misstatements, she can't turn this year's budget disaster into an M&M chocolate.
Let's look at the facts. First, state spending. In the 2006-07 biennium, general fund appropriations totaled $2.71 billion. Under the leadership of the Democrats this session, that figure jumped to $3.19 billion; that's an increase of $475 million, or 17.5 percent. This money is raised from taxes and fees paid by you, the taxpayers of New Hampshire.
So how are the Democrats planning to pay for this? First they raised no less than 15 taxes and fees, including a second increase in the cigarette tax in two years. They also found new things to tax, such as charitable games of chance, cigars, registry of deed filings, court filings and many more.
But that wasn't enough to correct the deficit, so they decided to bond $90.5 million to pay the state's current expenses. They did that in a single, hurry up "special" legislative session that ended at midnight June 5 - all without referral to a committee, without a public hearing and with inaccurate information and misrepresentations
on the House floor.
Bonding school building aid
The history of this issue is particularly disturbing. In early May, the governor proposed bonding $80 million in school construction aid to help pay for the budget deficit. After a hearing before a joint House-Senate committee, this proposal was unanimously rejected - with the House Democratic leadership leading the charge. Then, barely three weeks later, during our midnight special session, and without a word of explanation or justification, the Democratic leadership did a 180-degree turnaround and passed this bonding on a straight party- line vote.
Not only that, but they threw in another $20 million in bonding to boot, all with no public hearing or any public input whatsoever. So much for the democratic process.
And what about some of the other misleading comments in Speaker Norelli's piece? Yes, indeed, the State House roof was leaking in the spring of 2007, but it was the previous Republican House that passed the appropriations to fix it.
As for the vaunted retirement plan fix, the House did - unanimously, and on a voice vote - pass an excellent bill that was fair to retirees, current employees, employers and taxpayers alike, only to see the big public employees' unions dismantle it in the Senate. In the face of extreme union pressure during the committee of conference, the House Democratic leadership backed down on virtually every major point. So we will be back trying to fix this again next year.
10-year highway plan
Finally, the 10-year highway plan. The Democrats didn't fully fund that either. In fact, when Commissioner Charles O'Leary presented the plan, he realistically asked for a six-year plan, which was unanimously endorsed by committee Republicans because it was fully funded, honest and straightforward in its design. Again, the Democrats chose smoke-and-mirrors legislation.
Maybe if Speaker Norelli and House Democrats were less concerned with blaming Republicans and appeasing the governor, but instead concentrated on doing the work of the people, we wouldn't be in the mess we are in today.
(Rep. David Hess of Hooksett is the deputy House Republican leader.)
For the Monitor
July 13, 2008 - 12:00 am
No matter how hard they try, Democrats in Concord just can't sugarcoat their tax, borrow and spend policies of the last two years. A case in point is the recent opinion piece authored by House Speaker Terie Norelli ("Republicans left costly problems for us to solve," Monitor Forum, June 25).
Despite the harsh accusations, half-truths and just plain misstatements, she can't turn this year's budget disaster into an M&M chocolate.
Let's look at the facts. First, state spending. In the 2006-07 biennium, general fund appropriations totaled $2.71 billion. Under the leadership of the Democrats this session, that figure jumped to $3.19 billion; that's an increase of $475 million, or 17.5 percent. This money is raised from taxes and fees paid by you, the taxpayers of New Hampshire.
So how are the Democrats planning to pay for this? First they raised no less than 15 taxes and fees, including a second increase in the cigarette tax in two years. They also found new things to tax, such as charitable games of chance, cigars, registry of deed filings, court filings and many more.
But that wasn't enough to correct the deficit, so they decided to bond $90.5 million to pay the state's current expenses. They did that in a single, hurry up "special" legislative session that ended at midnight June 5 - all without referral to a committee, without a public hearing and with inaccurate information and misrepresentations
on the House floor.
Bonding school building aid
The history of this issue is particularly disturbing. In early May, the governor proposed bonding $80 million in school construction aid to help pay for the budget deficit. After a hearing before a joint House-Senate committee, this proposal was unanimously rejected - with the House Democratic leadership leading the charge. Then, barely three weeks later, during our midnight special session, and without a word of explanation or justification, the Democratic leadership did a 180-degree turnaround and passed this bonding on a straight party- line vote.
Not only that, but they threw in another $20 million in bonding to boot, all with no public hearing or any public input whatsoever. So much for the democratic process.
And what about some of the other misleading comments in Speaker Norelli's piece? Yes, indeed, the State House roof was leaking in the spring of 2007, but it was the previous Republican House that passed the appropriations to fix it.
As for the vaunted retirement plan fix, the House did - unanimously, and on a voice vote - pass an excellent bill that was fair to retirees, current employees, employers and taxpayers alike, only to see the big public employees' unions dismantle it in the Senate. In the face of extreme union pressure during the committee of conference, the House Democratic leadership backed down on virtually every major point. So we will be back trying to fix this again next year.
10-year highway plan
Finally, the 10-year highway plan. The Democrats didn't fully fund that either. In fact, when Commissioner Charles O'Leary presented the plan, he realistically asked for a six-year plan, which was unanimously endorsed by committee Republicans because it was fully funded, honest and straightforward in its design. Again, the Democrats chose smoke-and-mirrors legislation.
Maybe if Speaker Norelli and House Democrats were less concerned with blaming Republicans and appeasing the governor, but instead concentrated on doing the work of the people, we wouldn't be in the mess we are in today.
(Rep. David Hess of Hooksett is the deputy House Republican leader.)
