Advocates of New Taxes are Neither Compassionate nor Benevolent

 Advocates of new taxes are neither compassionate nor benevolent.

"Proponents of tax increases frequently state that they have no problem paying 

more in taxes so, of course, they support the increase. They adorn the cloak 

of compassion and benevolence because they want to pay more. They are so sweet!

No, they are not.  This misses the point entirely. It is a ruse. It is fraud.

These proponents can pay more now. They can write a check to the State or to a 

charity or to their neighbor. They don't need a tax increase to do so.

They need the tax increase to make OTHERS pay more.

The desire to make others pay more is neither compassionate nor benevolent." 

D.K. Williams

Blaming the Unions does not Cut it Anymore

You can not blame the unions without blaming the teachers. Year after year they supported the union and approved unsustainable contracts. If you are a teacher who can't see that the system is unsustainable you do not have the capability of actually educating children and clearly that can be seeing by the output and results in public schools.

The following piece appeared in the Daily Herald. Be sure to visit the Daily Herald website to view the comments.

Quote of the Day - " 'I believe what is wrong with our schools in this nation is that they have become unionized in the worst possible way. "This unionization and lifetime employment of K-12 teachers is off-the charts crazy." Steve Jobs

Cathy
Spelling errors, grammar errors, misuse of homonyms and typos are left an exercise for my readers.



Teachers, public grow farther apart

If all the hardworking teachers were to speak out against the damage their unions and those who abuse their tenured positions have done to the integrity of the teaching profession, there would be more support from the public.

However, taking a paid day off to go to Springfield and demand that our property taxes be raised to supply more money while claiming "it's for the children" is doing nothing to encourage this support.

These dealings drive a wedge between the public and educators even deeper and it doesn't seem like anyone but the taxpayers care. It's unfortunate that the actions of some are creating this negative perception that includes nearly everyone in education.

The teachers, their union and the D211 school board know this and are doing absolutely nothing to change it. In fact, the D211 school board views the property tax payers as "complainers".



Until this "what's for me" ideology changes, teachers, unions and school boards will be viewed by the public as greedy, selfish entities. In addition, teachers, unions and school boards are seen as being counterproductive to their cause by utilizing these self-serving tactics. They are behaving as though their profession is nothing short of saintly.

The teachers union's funding of a board member's campaign is an irresponsible act on the part of that board member. The reasoning behind this statement is obvious.

Let's all try to work together to bring this situation back in balance. Right now the school board's methods of negotiating labor costs with the union have gotten out of control and do not reflect economic reality.

John Parker

Schaumburg

Taxpayers Should not be Paying for Computers for Students

Taxpayers should not be paying for computers for students in the first place. Laptops are not essentially for education. This article points out just one of the many problems of children having laptops. No computer should have the capability for a school to spy on students.

The following piece appeared on Wired.com.

Quote of the Day - “Putting a computer in front of a child and expecting it to teach him is like putting a book under his pillow, only more expensive” Anonymous


Cathy
Spelling errors, grammar errors, misuse of homonyms and typos are left an exercise for my readers.


School Spy Program Used on Students Contains Hacker-Friendly Security Hole
By Kim Zetter May 20, 2010

A controversial remote administration program that a Pennsylvania school district installed on student-issued laptops contains a security hole that put the students at risk of being spied on by people outside the school, according to a security firm that examined the software.

The LANrev program contains a vulnerability that would allow someone using the same network as one of the students to install malware on the laptop that could remotely control the computer. An intruder would be able to steal data from the computer or control the laptop webcam to snap surreptitious pictures.

The vulnerability was discovered by researchers at Leviathan Security Group, who provided Threat Level with a video (see below) demonstrating an exploit they developed.

They began examining the program after customers who saw media coverage of the Pennsylvania case expressed concern that the program might be exposing their employee computers to intrusion from outsiders. The same software is used by many businesses to monitor and maintain their employee laptops.

The Lower Merion School District in Pennsylvania is embroiled in a lawsuit and FBI criminal investigation over use of the LANrev software. The cases involve allegations that administrators spied on students through the software installed on 2,300 school-issued Macbooks.



LANrev is a suite of remote-management software. The primary issue in the Lower Merion case is the optional Theft Track feature in the software designed to let administrators covertly snap images through the computers’ webcams. The school district insisted that the cameras were rarely activated and only when a laptop was reported stolen or missing.

But a class-action lawsuit against the school district alleges that the program surreptitiously snapped tens of thousands of pictures of the pupils at home, school and elsewhere, through school-issued laptops that were not lost or stolen. Lawyers for the plaintiffs allege that some of the pupils were even photographed nude and partially undressed.

The district discontinued the LANrev webcam-tracking program in February after the spying allegations came to light and says it’s now addressing security issues in the LANrev software.

“The District is taking aggressive and immediate steps to ensure that issues related to security and technology are effectively resolved,” said school district spokesman Douglas Young in an e-mail.

The vulnerability in the LANrev system lies in the symmetric-key encryption it uses for authentication between the client and the server, and isn’t related to the optional Theft Track feature. Therefore, even computers that are not using the theft feature are potentially vulnerable.

The authentication key is stored in the client-side and server software and is fairly easy to decipher, says Frank Heidt, president and CEO of Leviathan. It took Leviathan just a few hours to determine that it’s a stanza from a German poem. The key is the same for every computer using LANrev.

The LANrev client software on a computer is configured to contact a server every minute or so to check in and see if the server has any commands for it. Knowing what the key is would let an attacker who has installed a sniffer on the network intercept that ping and masquerade as the server in communication back to the laptop. It requires the attacker to be on the same network as the target machine — for example, on a wireless network at the school or anywhere else that offers free Wi-Fi the student might use.

“If we give you this stanza of poetry, it’s over and the fat lady sings,” Heidt says. “There would be [hackers] turning on webcams.”


Absolute Software, which acquired LANrev last December, said it identified the vulnerability at the time it was purchasing the software and is fixing it in a more robust version to be released in July, which will use Open SSL for encryption.

“Is it theoretically possible [to exploit this]? Of course it is,” said Tim Parker, vice president of research and development for Absolute. “[But] we are not aware of any customer who ever had an issue with this. If any customer did express concern, we would immediately supply them with a patch.”

The attack only uses the LANrev software as an entry point to install malware. Because a LANrev administrator can remotely install and execute other programs on the client machines, once an attacker is on a machine, he can then install malware to take over the machine.

In the hack demonstrated in the video below, Leviathan researcher Joel Voss is seen intercepting communication between a LANrev computer and its server, and then impersonating the server to install a remote control program that gives him complete and surreptitious control over the machine. He can operate its web camera to capture imagery of the person sitting in front of the machine.

A Time For Sacrifice

Faith, Hope, Charity and Duty, our Founding Fathers felt they had a duty to our Nation and to fight for true liberty and equality for all. Our Founders made great sacrifices, it is time for us to make great sacrifices as well.

It is time for Libertarians and Conservatives across the Nation to show they truly believe in less government. We are in the predicament we are in today, in part because for generations Taxpayer Funded Socialist Indoctrination Centers aka public schools aka government schools have not been teaching American History to it's students. They have also done a stellar job indoctrinating generations of students into the socialist mindset, so much so that many see it as a badge of honor to live off of the rest of society.

I strongly believe as a parent that it is my duty to educate my children. It is not my neighbors duty to pay to educate my children. With summer break coming every conservative and libertarian who sends their children to public schools must find a way to either homeschool or send their children to a private school by Fall 2010 or Fall 2011 at the latest.

This means taking a good hard long look at your fiances to support the tuition of a private school or to learn to live on one income so that you will be able to homeschool your children. You will have the whole summer to work on a plan and get your finances to line up to do this as well. If you google living on one income you can find plenty of resources on how to live on one income.

This move would aid the conservative/libertarian agenda on so many fronts it would weaken the teachers' unions, reduce the size of government, improve the educational outcomes for generations to come, improve family structure, save families from paying thousands of dollars in property taxes and with one parent coming home to educate their children it would reduce unemployment.

I realize there are single parents out there but there are single parents who do send their children to private school you will have to learn to sacrifice. Homeschooling families could aid by homeschooling a child of a single parent. All will have to sacrifice for us to undo the damage that was caused by liberals, RINO's and progressives over the last 100 years.

Cathy
Spelling errors, grammar errors, misuse of homonyms and typos are left an exercise for my readers.

The Slow Awakening

When Jim and I started fighting for education reform and education spending reform in Harvard many people did not like us or trust us but people eventually came around. We know the tax eaters, those living off the taxpayer teat and socialist will never like us and that is okay. In Illinois eventually more people came around to our side, hopefully someday more people will come around to our side in Croydon as well.


The following piece appeared on the Northwest Herald.

Cathy
Spelling errors, grammar errors, misuse of homonyms and typos are left an exercise for my readers.

Education reform

To the Editor:

I can’t even begin to tell you how much it warmed my heart to read the comments to Tony Casalino’s letter to the editor entitled “Supports tax increase” (May 1).

My husband, Jim, and I fought for education reform and education spending reform for four years before we decided not enough people were on board and Illinois was on a nonstop train to bankruptcy due to its spending problems and pension problems.

Good luck to you all, but you must do more than just respond to letters to the editors in newspapers. You must educate your friends and family, start tax-fighting groups, run for public office and, most importantly, support and vote for people who will be fiscally responsible and fight for true education reform.

Do not vote for any candidate who is funded with teachers union dollars. These are just your own education dollars working against you and your children’s futures.

Cathy Peschke

Co-founder Citizens for Reasonable And Fair Taxes, Croydon, N.H.



johnqpublic wrote on May 7, 2010 5:32 a.m.
"Think the NWH just published this letter to show their extensive reach? Not much going on in New Hampshire, huh?"

taxpayer wrote on May 7, 2010 7:20 a.m.
"Well said, Cathy. Finally the people are being made painfully aware of the situation."

kenbob wrote on May 7, 2010 7:23 a.m.
"This letter makes a lot of sense. Money doesn't solve education issues, true reform and a solid family values is what will make education work again. The astro-turf idiots in Springfield demanding to "raise my taxes" are nothing but a bunch of union goons. Throw money at the problem (while taxing everyone at higher rates) is their answer. Not in these days and not in any days is that the right answer."

Wake up America wrote on May 7, 2010 7:37 a.m.
"Hi Cathy....Yes, things have changed in the last few years....people have realized they've been massively ripped off by the schools....BOE's, Administrators and Teachers are now .....on the run.... Thanks to you and Jim for getting the facts out there...it was the start of today's movement..."

50 caliber wrote on May 7, 2010 10:56 a.m.
"John Q Public (Employee) caught RED HANDED! Take you anger out on your union. Thank you Cathy & Jim! The corrupted CRAZY TRAIN.... ALLLLLLL ABOARD, HA, HA, HA, HA, has crashed and burned like "so" many predicted. Your seminar's were damaging to the establishment and the liar's sitting on these school board's. Thank you very much. You are ALWAYS welcome back. "

Curmudgeonman wrote on May 7, 2010 11:30 a.m.
"So, Jim & Cathy, just what sort of reform did you fight for? From what I have read of your cybersquats, the only thing you fought for was to abolish public education. Is that the "reform" you speak of - get rid of schools? No wonder you couldn't find a following: you had no real, tangible ideas of reform. Go back to your maple trees in NH and continue grinding your one-room school district into the ground. "

Mr. Schneebly wrote on May 7, 2010 1:11 p.m.
"Cathy... you had me till the last sentence. Basically ou just used the vehicle of "school reform" to tout your anti-union hatred. Any reform to education should directly involve teachers. Oh and by the way they happen to belong to the union. If you are suggesting any sort of reform happes WITHOUT input from teachers you need to really look at your priorities. Instead of trying to use all parties to fix the problem you just want tos hove whatever concept of education reform you have down our throats. Sorry, anyone with half a brain won't support that!"

Mr. Schneebly wrote on May 7, 2010 1:14 p.m.
"You're talking about labor reform, not education reform. Figure out what your issue is and then try to deal with it. Stop concealing your real agenda with "education reform" and stay the heck away from decisions that effect MY children!"

GoodCitizen wrote on May 7, 2010 1:28 p.m.
"Schneebly, I think Cathy's term of Education Reform is fine in the context of the big picture. Teachers appear to support the Union's policies. Those policies have been shown to be not in the best interest of our children. Teachers have gone from being underpaid, to now being grossly overpaid. I'm not letting administrators off the hook with that statement. Administrators are nothing more than highway robbers. These costly teachers contracts get approved because parents can't take off work while a teachers strike. It's all out of control."

juschill wrote on May 7, 2010 1:30 p.m.
"Mr. Schneebly, what do you say we stay away from desisions that affect your kids and you agree to educate your kids and stay away from our wallets? Or are we supposed to give you our money, but not our input? "

pryan1967 wrote on May 7, 2010 3:57 p.m.
"Curmudgeonman-Where did Jim or Cathy EVER say "do away with public education"? On the other hand...where did the teacher's union (and, by extension, the teachers themselves) ever say "Let's do what's best for the KIDS, rather than what will fatten our wallets"?"

warmfuzzy wrote on May 7, 2010 4:12 p.m.
"Shneeb-You’re wrong! Education Reform will enable LABOR reform. Do this first. Start with getting rid of TENURE. Let the good ones stay and the bad ones get FIRED. The Education System is broken because of a decision that put the needs of workers ahead of the needs of children. Other states that surround Illinois don't have TENURE. Get rid of it and you will see great leaps in education reform. Labor won't like it, but it will take a bite out of Labor's strength. Remove Labor from ALL Public Sectors-You will see HUGE changes and REAL Gov’t reform. Do you get it? Unions are the PROBLEM."

imhotep wrote on May 7, 2010 5:26 p.m.
"Poster Poll, Question 1. The purpose of a public education system is: a.to provide quality education for our children, b.to provide well paying jobs and pensions to "education workers" (teachers & bureaucrats)? 2. If Government mismanagement has bankrupted our Public Education system, the brunt of austerity measures should be borne by: 1."education workers/bureaucrats", or 2. children? "

+froggy+ wrote on May 7, 2010 6:49 p.m.
"nobody wants to takes your poster poll nancy"


IL Tax Payer wrote on May 8, 2010 7:59 p.m.
"Cathy-your letter is right on the mark. I believe MOST Illinoisians are finally getting it. Thanks to YOU and JIM for getting the REAL financial story out there and getting the education of the tax payer ball rolling - e.g., out of line salaries, benefits, 100% of TRS being paid by the tax payer, sick days, more vacation days than anyother sector, and on and on. For years we all believed the "woe is me poor educator" story - we all now know the real story."

Tea Party Today - Manchester

Ten after Five and the crowds are coming. 20 more minutes before the party begins.

It is our Duty to Preserve Liberty - Manchester Tax Day Tea Party

April 15, 2010 – MANCHESTER TAX DAY TEA PARTY
Save this date for a local event right in downtown Manchester in Victory Park from 5:30 PM to dusk.

Quote of the Day -


Still, if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not so costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no chance of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." Sir Winston Churchill

Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.

It is our Duty to Preserve Liberty - Manchester Tax Day Tea Party

April 15, 2010 – MANCHESTER TAX DAY TEA PARTY
Save this date for a local event right in downtown Manchester in Victory Park from 5:30 PM to dusk.

Quote of the Day -

"Still, if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not so costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no chance of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." Sir Winston Churchill

Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.

Those Who Voted for the Children are Suckers

It was never for the children and those who voted for the children are suckers and took the intelligent voters down with them. Public schools were hijacked long ago by the people who work in them, they have hijacked them and made them their own entitlement programs. The following piece appears on the American Thinker.

Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.


Taxpayers: Eat your hearts out, suckers
By Ed Lasky


A looming problem has received far too little coverage from a liberal-dominated media: the power of public pensions to destroy our nation's finances and ransack our wallets.

For many years, government workers have enjoyed munificent benefits: relatively high salaries for lenient work demands; gold-plated retirement benefits that allow most of them to "retire" at a young age with very high pensions and generous health care benefits. Days off for holidays that few of us would even recognize.

All courtesy of us: the lowly taxpayer toiling away at jobs that may vanish at a moment's notice and that certainly don't guarantee the value of any retirement package. Not true for the ever-expanding ranks of government workers.

A recent Forbes magazine article highlights the absurd benefits that public sector workers enjoy on the job and off the job when they retire. The article, describing the leisurely life of retired government employees, could be lifted from the pages of Travel and Leisure magazine. The poster boy for the problem? A retired 42 year old policeman lollygagging on a beach, comfortable with his $2 million pension.



But there are more tales from across our land: a fireman who can be "retired" at 55, collect a pension and still collect a salary while keeping the job he "retired" from (don't ask about the logic-this is the government); a thirty eight year old teacher in New Jersey earning twice the state ‘s average income who works 10 months a year and barely contributes to a pension that will allow early retirement with quite the golden nest egg; California prison guards earning $300,000 a year.

In my own area, the superintendent of a small, suburban school district earns -- well, makes -- over $400,000 a year and has a slew of benefits to boot (medical care during his retirement, 100% comped for him and his family) . Remember that story when teachers' unions decry low salaries.

These anecdotal stories of staggering benefits received by the government worker elites are companied by reams of statistics that display the ticking time bomb of government salaries and golden parachutes. Forbes notes:

In public-sector America things just get better and better. The common presumption is that public servants forgo high wages in exchange for safe jobs and benefits. The reality is they get all three. State and local government workers get paid an average of $25.30 an hour, which is 33% higher than the private sector's $19, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. Throw in pensions and other benefits and the gap widens to 42%.


Four in five public-sector workers have lifetime pensions, versus only one in five in the private sector.

Those pensions are guaranteed by state law, regardless of how pension investments fare, because you, the taxpayer, guarantee them with your tax dollars. It is the law, made by our legislators or incorporated in state constitutions.

The problem is national in scope and severity. Often public sector employees claim early retirement for disabilities -- and sometimes find loopholes to claim disabilities when none in fact exist -- and they are able to work in other jobs. Pensions are often boosted by goosing final years' salaries that are used to determine lifetime pension levels. The practice is called "spiking" and recently prompted criticism of a California fire chief who, three days before announcing his retirement (at the grand old age of 51, no less), had his salary suddenly increased so as to boost his annual pension to $241,000. The practice is unfair because employees or employers contribute to pensions based on salaries. When a salary is boosted around retirement, a shortfall is created between what a pension system has collected for an employee and what it must pay out for his lifetime.

Cooking the books to goose public pensions? What astute fiscal management! This problem is exacerbated by the fact that politicians use faulty and overly optimistic projections about future investment returns to justify high pension payouts. Politicians can run but they cannot hide for too long even if they rely on Stupid Debt Tricks to disguise the problems.

Remember the scandals over welfare queens and executive salaries? These are dwarfed by the ticking time bomb of inflated government salaries and crippling pension obligations for us to pay off in our taxes.

Already, communities are declaring bankruptcy, done in by skyrocketing public employee salaries and pension costs. We have only glimpsed the future and it is colored red-in more ways than one. As government revenues sink and government obligations rise, the red ink will spread across the nation; as will steps by Democrats to take our savings. We are only at Act One of this tragedy to come.

How bad is the problem?

This "Hidden Pension Fiasco" will cost us over one trillion dollars. Barack Obama and fellow traveling Democrats will hoist this problem on our shoulders via tax hikes yet to come. This trillion will be to benefit government workers, a key Democrat constituency, who know who butter their bread at our expense. Forbes:

"The tax hikes you face [to fully fund public pensions] will have a much more tangible impact on your financial life than anything a Social Security fix will entail," says Alicia Munnell, who runs Boston College's retirement center..

Government employees could care less about how well the investments backing their pensions fare, since they are guaranteed. Nor do they care who invests them. But we should. Pension funds are often turned over to politically connected firms, who may know the right people, but not the right way to invest. Our once and former car czar, Steven Rattner, is embroiled in what looks like a classic pay-to-play scandal involving politically connected investment boutiques being rewarded by politicians with deals to invest government pensions.

Money can be spread around by the pension fund managers to help politicians win campaigns. If their returns come up short, well, who cares? The taxpayers pay the price.

Why do government workers enjoy such sweet deals? They determine their own benefit packages, for one. But another fact plays a role: their powerful union, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), which can devote its resources -- money, votes, volunteer labor during campaigns -- to help elect Democrats win elections. The quid pro quo is sweetheart contracts that reward union members, and punish us, for the rest of their lives.

This is disgraceful.

Our money should not fund dream retirement packages for government workers. Government workers should not lead lives insulated from the risks and travails most of the public must bear. Are politicians too in hock to public unions to care that we may go in hock to fulfill their absurd deals?

Who will stop them?

Some far-sighted people are responding to this crisis in the making. These include an activist group seeking to publicize the problem websites that publicize the problem; even apostates who feel they have unjustly benefited and are outraged at ways public employees milk taxpayers. .

Even a legendary auto union leader, Barry Bluestone, sees risks of taxpayer revulsion leading to taxpayer revolt. How fitting that his op-ed (A Future for Public Unions) ran in the Boston Globe, home of the original Tea Party. Bluestone warns that the future of public unions is in jeopardy should they follow the practices that helped wreck the American-owned auto industry. He looks back at how auto unions often:

... insisted on job classifications and work rules that undermined efficiency and compromised the industry's competitiveness.

He sees history repeating itself:

Will public-sector unions follow the same path? Nationwide, these unions represent over 35 percent of federal, state, and local employees, roughly the same as in 1980. Over the years, they have won improved wages and benefits for their members. Yet the leaders of many of these unions, particularly in Massachusetts, seem to be setting the stage for the same kind of deterioration we see in unions like the UAW.

Teachers unions refuse to make changes in work practices that could help improve the chances of children succeeding in school. Police unions fight against lowering the cost of details at construction sites. The MBTA union and others representing transport workers lobby vociferously against reforming the state's transportation system. Municipal unions refuse to permit their local communities to join the Group Insurance Commission that would save their towns millions without compromising the quality of their members' medical care.

As a result, between 2000 and 2008, the price of state and local public services has increased by 41 percent nationally compared with 27 percent in private services. Even in the face of the worst fiscal crisis in decades, many state and local union leaders refuse to consider a wage freeze that could help preserve more of their members' jobs.

Bluestone notes that citizens and ultimately their elected representatives, will object to tax increases to pay for bloated union contracts and poor public service. Bluestone does not address the public pension time bomb that will only make our problems worse.

Of course, the key point is the need to make our elected representatives themselves pay for the steps they have taken over the years to enrich public unions at our expense. That is the only type of payback they understand: our votes. They should not come as cheaply or carelessly as they have in the past. They have cost us too much already.

Ed Lasky is news editor of American Thinker.

This Belongs in the No Poop Sherlock File

Schools that accepted stimulus funds now have big budget holes. I pointed out months ago that this would happen if schools slept with the devil and used mortgaged money from the very children they are educating. Schools are supposedly filled with bright Superintendents, respectable school administrators and responsible school boards so why would they accept the stimulus funds in the first place? Greed not need. Budget holes are a result of greed and not need and our public schools are filled with greedy people. Thank you to the Croydon School Board members who did not grab the dangled carrot put out by Newport last Fall, thank you Croydon School Board Members for rejecting the stimulus funds.

Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.



The following piece appears on the My Way News website.

Schools face big budget holes as stimulus runs out
Feb 14, 2:54 PM (ET)

By TERENCE CHEA

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - The nation's public schools are falling under severe financial stress as states slash education spending and drain federal stimulus money that staved off deep classroom cuts and widespread job losses.

School districts have already suffered big budget cuts since the recession began two years ago, but experts say the cash crunch will get a lot worse as states run out of stimulus dollars.

The result in many hard-hit districts: more teacher layoffs, larger class sizes, smaller paychecks, fewer electives and extracurricular activities, and decimated summer school programs.



The situation is particularly ugly in California, where school districts are preparing for mass layoffs and swelling class sizes as the state grapples with another massive budget shortfall.

The crisis concerns parents like Michelle Parker in San Francisco, where the school district is preparing to lay off hundreds of school employees and raise class sizes because it faces a $113 million budget deficit over next two years.

"I'm worried they're not going to have the quality education that's going to make them competitive in a global society," said Parker, who has three kids in district elementary schools.

Around the country, state governments are cutting money for schools as they grapple with huge budget gaps triggered by high unemployment, sluggish retail sales and falling real estate prices. A recent report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that 41 states face midyear budget shortfalls totaling $35 billion.

"The states are facing a dismal financial picture," said Jack Jennings, president of the Center on Education Policy.
The Obama administration's $787 billion federal stimulus package provided roughly $100 billion for education, including $54 billion to stabilize state budgets. In October the White House said the stimulus created or saved 250,000 education jobs.

But many states have used most of their stimulus money, leaving little to cushion budget cuts in the coming fiscal year.

Experts say the looming cuts could weaken the nation's public schools, worsen unemployment, undermine President Obama's education goals and widen the achievement gap between students in rich and poor districts.

Wealthier communities are filling school budget gaps with local tax increases and aggressive fundraising, but could worsen inequality and undermine the larger system for paying for public schools, said John Rogers, who heads the UCLA Institute for Democracy, Education and Access.

In Michigan, which has the nation's highest unemployment rate, school districts lost 2 percent of their state money this year
and could lose another 4 percent next year because of a projected government shortfall of $1.6 billion. Most of more than $1 billion in federal stimulus money is gone.

Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm has proposed an incentive program to entice about 39,000 public school employees to retire, but that plan has been criticized by the state's largest teachers union.

"Our districts don't know what the next step is," said Don Wotruba, deputy director with the Michigan Association of School Boards.

In Washington state, school districts that lost $1.7 billion in state money over the past two years are bracing for another round of cuts as lawmakers try to plug a $2.8 billion state deficit.

Seattle Public Schools, the state's largest district, plans to lay off nonunion staff, freeze hiring, create more efficient bus routes and increase class sizes further to close an expected budget shortfall of $24 million.

In Florida, public schools are being squeezed by state budget cuts and an unexpected increase in student enrollment, including an influx of Haitian students in the aftermath of Haiti's devastating earthquake.

Districts have been coping by closing schools during breaks, cutting energy costs and changing transportation routes, but the next round of cuts is expected to hit classrooms.

"We're at a point now where you just can't stretch that rubber band any further," said Bill Montford, CEO of the Florida Association of District School Superintendents.

In California, school districts have already laid off thousands of teachers, increased class sizes and slashed academic programs.

But state officials are warning the worst is yet to come because the state has already handed out most of its $6 billion in stimulus money.

Per-pupil spending for K-12 schools fell 4 percent last year and would be slashed another 8 percent under Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's proposed budget for 2010-2011, according to the state Legislative Analyst's Office.

"It's cataclysmic. It hasn't been seen since the Great Depression," said Bruce Fuller, an education professor at the University of California, Berkeley. "Now you're talking about sizable layoffs and further increases in class sizes."

More districts are expected to look like Vallejo City Unified School District, which has laid off most of its middle school guidance counselors and no longer offers music or art in elementary school. Last year it laid off 60 of its 860 teachers and raised K-3 class sizes from 20 to 28 students, and officials are considering more layoffs and even bigger class sizes this year, said Christal Watts, who heads the teachers union.

Lori Peck, a first-grade teacher at Vallejo's Patterson Elementary School, said the larger class size means she can no longer give her students the individual attention they need.

"I feel like my class in general is further behind where they should be," Peck said. "My concern is they don't reach the standards by the end of the year."

In San Francisco, Superintendent Carlos Garcia said he's worried the cuts will reverse the district's progress in narrowing the achievement gap between black and Hispanic students and their white and Asian classmates.

"These cuts hurt some of our poorest and neediest kids," Garcia said. "The decisions that school boards and superintendents have to make pretty much go against the grain of everything we believe in."
---
Associated Press Writers Tim Martin in Lansing, Mich., Donna Gordon Blankinship in Seattle, and Christine Armario in Miami contributed to this story.

The NEA Is Not about Education it is about Unions

Parents need to wake up, public schools are about meeting the greedy desires of most of the educators, administrators and other interests groups within the schools that suck off the teat of the taxpayer. Most don't give a darn about your child's education or your desire to educate your child as you see fit or allowing you to take your child's tax dollars to the institution of choice. Just look at what Michelle Caccavaro and the other Newport bullies are doing to try to derail the town's desire to break the agreement with Newport. They don't care that the majority of the town would like to get out of the agreement. They also think that those that choose to get out of the agreement just do not know what is good for them. Educators care about themselves they have hijacked public schools as their own entitlement program.

Don't believe me just wait for the town meeting.

Cathy


The following piece appears on Hot Air.com. Feeding the beast at the local level, feeds the beast all the way to DC this is one case where trickle up economics works.


A Less Perfect Union

POSTED AT 6:06 PM ON FEBRUARY 11, 2010 BY DOCTOR ZERO


John Stossel reports on the forced unionization of day-care centers in Flint, Michigan:

"Michelle Berry runs a day-care business out of her home in Flint, MI. She thought that she owned her own business, but Berry’s been told she is now a government employee and union member. It’s not voluntary. Suddenly, Berry and 40,000 other Michigan private day-care providers have learned that union dues are being taken out of the child-care subsidies the state sends them. The “union” is a creation of AFSCME, the government workers union, and the United Auto Workers."

Stossel explains that AFSCME receives about $3.7 million from the Department of Human Services. It achieved its conquest of the Michigan day-care industry through a mail-in vote, which included votes from only 6,000 of the 40,000 day-care providers in the state. You can expect much more aggressive unionizing if some version of the Card Check bill ever manages to slither past Congress.



The current tribute unions demand from their Democrat servants is the “High Road Contracting Policy,” which would give preference for federal contracts to companies that pay a government-defined “living wage,” which would be suspiciously close to the wages unions already demand for their members. As with all subsidies, this living wage would be extracted from the pockets of taxpayers, who will be expected to go on living while their take-home wages shrink, and their jobs evaporate.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with the concept of private-sector labor unions. Every worker is the vendor of his own time, and since individuals have the right of free association, there’s nothing immoral about a group of people with related skills banding together to engage in collective bargaining. Over the past century, however, unions have bathed in the radiation of centralized State power, and mutated from defensive alliances of exploited workers, into de facto arms of the government.

In order to prosper, a union requires two essential advantages: solidarity and exclusivity. Solidarity means the members of the union must remain loyal, provide a steady stream of funding through payment of dues, and obey the instructions of the union leadership. There’s not much power to be gained from calling a strike, if half the union membership decides to go into work anyway, and collective bargaining agreements must be honored with minimal debate.

Unions also require privileged access to labor markets, or else independent workers willing to hire on for lower wages will undercut them. A company paying for expensive union labor cannot compete with an open shop that doesn’t have to pay artificially high wages, or provide elaborate benefits. A union could gain exclusivity by providing a vastly superior work product, providing value equal to their high wages. Naturally, the public-relations arms of labor unions like to claim this is the way they operate… but in the real world of 2010, it’s rarely the case.

There is a much easier way for unions to gain exclusive control of labor markets: they can barter the money and voting power they gain from the solidarity of their membership, to politicians with a ravenous appetite for these delicacies. In exchange, the politicians can use the compulsive power of the State to create monopoly playgrounds for the unions. The teachers’ unions are a particularly grotesque example, pushing an obviously inferior work product onto a captive population of students, while politicians patrol the schoolyard fence with truncheons of rolled-up campaign donations.

The National Education Association is the largest union in America, and one of its most powerful political forces, donating millions to Democrat candidates and spending millions more in lobbying… including over a million dollars in donations to the criminal organization ACORN over the last two years. The NEA also provides invaluable political indoctrination, inserting propaganda for statist causes like global warming into education curricula. In exchange, the Democrats are universally sworn to oppose vouchers and school privatization, no matter how much it hurts other constituencies they profess to care about. There are many fine teachers among the ranks of the NEA, but their individual merits vanish beneath the vast corruption of the union establishment.

We’ve also seen billions of taxpayer dollars spent to bail out General Motors, for the benefit of the labor unions whose parasitic embrace ended its free-market life. The unions set a wage level that rendered GM unable to turn a profit, becoming what Mark Steyn describes as “a vast welfare plan with a tiny loss-making commercial sector.” Every American taxpayer was fleeced by the Obama Administration to rescue the unions from the consequences of their actions. Why should they mediate their demands or become competitive with independent labor, when they can hire politicians to follow them around with a club in one hand, and lifesaving cash transfusions in the other?

These events are entirely predictable, because where the supply of votes and political cash from unions meets the demand from Big Government, a transaction is bound to occur. In a centralized state, the power of a political collective is vastly greater than individuals, or most corporations. Plenty of big companies spend cash buying political influence, producing all manner of mischief… but they can’t deliver the kind of packaged voting power that a labor union or racial grievance organization can provide, because they cannot compel – or even encourage – their employees to vote a certain way. The NEA and AFSCME have a lot more than dollars to spend in the political marketplace.

This kind of thing is inevitable, as long as we allow political control over industry, and place huge amounts of tax money in the hands of our government. The depth of corruption can be measured with the value of a congressional vote… or the presidential seal. Despite its overwhelming presence in every aspect of our daily lives, Big Government acquires many characteristics of anarchy, in which the diminishing resources of a moribund economy become the spoils for feuding warlords. One of the hallmarks of civilization is that no one should ever discover they have involuntarily been conscripted into a gang, or the government that increasingly resembles one.


Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.

FEC Fails To Investigate

I am getting a little tired of hearing it is not the union members fault it is the union leaders fault. Yes, in some cases it is the union leaders fault but the unions members are to blame too. They have made no attempt to stop the problem and jump on board when they can screw the taxpayers who pay them or the companies for which they work. Math teachers worth the paper their degree is written on should be able to figure out they work in an unsustainable system. If they don't they should not be teaching or luckily the greedy people in the end will get what they deserve. When you decide to lay down with the devil ....... well you know the rest.

The following piece appears on the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, Inc. website.


Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.

FEC Fails to Investigate Teachers’ Complaint of NEA Union Money Laundering Scheme
Employee rights advocate weighs federal lawsuit

Washington, DC (January 5, 2010) – Apparently without conducting a field investigation, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) dismissed a complaint against one of the most politically active unions in America after evidence surfaced that union officials deposited illegally laundered dues money into its political action committee (PAC).



Citing in part lack of sufficient funding to enforce the law, the FEC junked a complaint filed by the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation and two Alabama teachers who discovered a union scheme to divert convention reimbursements into the National Education Association (NEA) union’s PAC.

When attending the NEA’s 2004 national convention, Daphne Middle School science department chair Claire Waites was deceived into supporting the NEA’s PAC and was determined that it would not happen again. However, Waites and Assistant Principal Dr. Jeanne Fox, both members of the Baldwin County Education Association (BCEA), Alabama Education Association (AEA), and NEA unions, discovered the practice continues.

In July 2008, Waites and Fox attended the NEA’s annual convention in Washington, DC as delegates of the BCEA. According to their sworn testimony, BCEA union president Saadia Hunter informed the educators that contributions in their names were made to a “children’s fund” using money included in their expense reimbursements for their trip to the convention.

Although Hunter told Waites that these contributions were not political in nature, they actually went to the NEA’s PAC. Hunter later admitted that the money would be contributed to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign. AEA union bosses also admitted to the educators that the PAC contributions were paid with BCEA members’ dues.

Foundation attorneys are considering a lawsuit against the FEC for shirking its duty of upholding the integrity of the political system, particularly since it is suspected this scheme affected many other teacher delegates to the union convention.

“The FEC made a conscious decision to not take these charges seriously,” said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation. “We suspect this scheme could involve many more teachers – potentially to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.”

It is illegal for union officials to encourage and solicit contributions under false pretenses and without informing workers of their right to refuse to contribute without any reprisal. Federal law also forbids campaign contributions made in the name of another person.

Everyone has the Right to Know

Everyone has a right to know how their taxes are being spent. Every school, city and town as well as the federal government should allow access to the taxpayers via a website how the people's tax dollars are being spent. Peyton Wolcott's website will show you how to ask your school to be fiscally transparent. Too bad it is not happening here in Croydon, Jim has asked numerous times for the information but Jim Vezina has not given him said information.


Hurrah for the State Supreme Court ultimately these monies started out as tax dollars and we should know how they are being spent.


The following piece appears in the Union Leader. Be sure to visit the Union Leader website to see the great links.



Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.

Benefits manager ordered to unveil payroll
By TOM FAHEY
State House Bureau Chief



CONCORD – A state Supreme Court ruling yesterday forced the Local Government Center to disclose salary information revealing 18 of its top employees make more than $80,000 a year.

The Professional Firefighters of New Hampshire fought the center, which manages health insurance for about 76,000 New Hampshire public workers — including local police, firefighters and teachers — for the information.

In a unanimous decision the Supreme Court agreed with the firefighters that the center, funded by member towns and cities, is a public agency covered by the state’s Right-to-Know law.



“Knowing how a public body is spending taxpayer money in conducting public business is essential to the transparency of government, the very purpose underlying the Right-to-Know law,” the court said in an opinion written by Chief Justice John Broderick.

He noted the center “is subsidized by money generated through tax collection.”

►List of Local Government Center salaries
►State eyes court fight with Local Government Center

In 2007, the center released general salary information to the firefighters group that showed 112 full-time workers made salaries totaling $6.1 million.

The center’s entities include the New Hampshire Municipal Association, LGC HealthTrust, LGC Real Estate, LGC Property-Liability Trust and LGC Workers Compensation Trust.

Seven center executives make more than $100,000, including Maura Carroll, interim executive director, $189,200; Sandal Keeffe, chief financial officer and deputy director, $171,960; Wendy Parker, assistant executive director for risk services, $166,994; Jonathan Steiner, assistant executive director for member relations, $138,775; and Judy Silva, assistant director for legal services and government affairs, $122,000.

Carroll said yesterday the case was about providing more clarity on the center’s status.

“It’s never been about hiding anything. It’s always been about making sure we follow the law appropriately, and in several instances the law has not been clear,” Carroll said.

The firefighters won a Supreme Court case in 2004 that gave them access to the records. The center held off releasing information, however, after it reorganized itself internally shortly after the decision and raised questions about which of its new entities were subject to the public records law.

“We need to open the doors, throw the curtain back and let the sunshine in to let the public have access and look at where they are spending their money,’’ Professional Firefighters of New Hampshire President David Lang said. “My fear is this is the tip of the iceberg.”

Lang said he wants to look at how an operation that collects less than $1 million in dues from member cities and towns can have a payroll that exceeds $6 million. He said it seems to him that money towns pay for health insurance is going toward other costs, including lobbying the Legislature.

Carroll said the center provides coverage to 76,000 public workers and collects more than $300 million in premiums annually.

The center transferred $14.5 million, about 1 percent of employer insurance premiums, out of HealthTrust between 2004 and 2008, Carroll said. The transfers funded a strategic review of operations, marketing and membership work and development of new programs, she said.

Lang argues the transfers were illegal and that all the money needs to be put back into the HealthTrust account.

Now that the court has ruled the center and its other operations are public, Lang said, he will file more requests for information, including details about benefits and retirement packages.The center’s former executive director, John Andrews, retired recently after overseeing much of the growth of the New Hampshire Municipal Association and then the center.

In addition to the firefighters’ suit, the center is under scrutiny by the state Bureau of Securities Regulation, which subpoenaed three years of the center’s records.

The bureau is investigating a private complaint to its office that the center intermingled health insurance premium money with its other operations.

Subpoenaed documents include all financial records and a list of all employees and their duties with each center sub-agency.

A change in state law took effect in July that gave the Secretary of State’s Office, which oversees the bureau, regulatory power over the agency. Prior to that, no state department had any oversight of risk pool management agencies like the center.

20 Random Thoughts and Beliefs.

1. 911 was not an inside job.
2. The Holocaust did happen.
3. We did land on the moon.
4. I think that some people who believe contrary to the above three can and will cause great harm in our world.
5. Global warming is a hoax we have been going through periods of warming and cooling since the beginning of time. This is just yet another way to control the masses.
6. There is absolute insanity in those who support the killing of innocent people (abortion) and oppose the death penalty for horrible and evil serial killers or child killers.
7. Voting to increase your neighbors taxes is immoral.
8. The government taxing without representation is theft.
9. Some wars are a necessary evil.
10. The War on Poverty has kept 13% of the population in poverty since the 1960's this is one more War that must end.
11. The welfare system is a way to keeping people slaves to the government.
12. When you rely on the government to take care of you, you lose your ability to take care of yourself. Case in point Haiti and New Orleans. We have had tragedy just as large in California, Texas, Florida and New York the people who survive for the most part dust themselves off and put their lives back together.
13. People kill people guns don't kill people.
14. Laws will never stop evil people. Good people don't need laws.
15. Our Country has been on the decline for decades. Republicans, Democrats, Progressives and Independents have had a hand in messing up the Country. When you relinquish your rights to the government you will lose them.
16. Sadly evil does triumph over good at times.
17. If you like Chavez, Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Marx, Castro, Che Guevara or Mussolini you are either really ignorant or really evil.
18. Unions that once built this Country are now destroying our Country.
19. Good hard working people no longer need Unions.
20. Public Pensions are nothing more than a Ponzi Scheme that will bankrupt States and our Country.

Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.

Schools Can Never Get Enough Money and Call it What it is Please.

When you pay your property taxes to the schools that is not the only place the money is coming from, it is also coming from your income taxes and your state taxes. But for the greedy people in the schools that is not enough they want more money. For example from corporations, schools plead to corporations that they don't have enough money. With that comes programs like the box top fund, Campbell soap labels and programs that WalMart and Target have which give schools even more funds. Anyone ever have to sell candy bars for your schools? Yep more money because they don't have enough (sarcasm). Then there are grants and lets call federal grants what they really are YOUR TAX DOLLARS.



School funds really need to be investigated to make sure they are being spent properly. Rich Conely did a great investigative report into the slush funds at my old high school. It turns out some of the money was used by some of the administrators for themselves.

The following piece appears in the Union Leader.




Quote of the Day -
"Money is like manure. If you spread it around, it does a lot of good, but if you pile it up in one place, it stinks like hell." -- Clint W. Murchison , Texas financier
My interpretation of this quote is that money should not be given to the government but should stay with the person that has earned the money. When you pile all the money in Washington DC or with government programs like public education it starts to stink.

Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.


School district plans to apply for Race to Top funds
Tuesday, Jan. 12, 2010



MANCHESTER – The school district is moving ahead with plans to apply for federal Race to the Top money.

School board members voted last night to take the next step in the application process, authorizing Mayor Ted Gatsas to sign a memorandum of understanding.

Superintendent Tom Brennan said he has been spending most of his working hours preparing the district's bid for the money, which is being made available by the Obama administration. The state is hoping to receive between $20 million and $75 million, and city officials have estimated Manchester's share could amount to between $3 million and $6 million.

The money would benefit five Manchester elementary schools: Beech Street, Parker-Varney, Henry Wilson, Gossler Park and Bakersville.

You be the Judge. Liar or not a liar?

"I can make a firm pledge, under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes." Barack Obama Liar, Liar Pants on Fire.


Last year you as a taxpayer had an additional standard deduction, up to $500 for individuals and $1,000 for couples, for state and local property taxes (section 63) (Personal Tax Incentives), this year this deduction no longer exists.




In my book that is a tax increase how about yours? Don't forget Newport and the SAU want to raise the Croydon school budget 29% over last year. Do you have the money to pay these extra taxes?

To read about other tax increases go to the Heritage Foundation's website.

Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.

Yes Taxes Are Immoral

The following piece appears on Townhall.com. I totally agree that taxes are immoral, I have found that most people who support taxes either live off them via wages or welfare.

Quote of the Day - “There is no such thing as a good tax.” - Winston Churchill

Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.

The Left Is Right -- Taxes Are a Moral Issue
by Dennis Prager

One principle that all those on the left hold is that taxes constitute more than an economic issue; they are, first and foremost, a moral one. Economists on the left may argue for higher taxes on economic grounds but they and we know that at bottom, higher taxes, especially "taxing the rich," is what they believe morality demands.

For example, there are obviously only two possible ways to reduce government deficits: reduce spending or increase taxes (or some combination of both). The left advocates the later; the right advocates the former. Left-wing spokesmen, such as New York Times economics columnist and Princeton University professor of economics Paul Krugman, may offer economic arguments for raising taxes in order to lower government deficits, but their real motivations are moral: reducing economic inequality (by redistributing income) and expanding government (because government is the most effective way to help all citizens).

Now, as it happens, not only is there is nothing wrong with being animated by moral concerns -- we should all be. The problem with the left's advocacy of higher taxes is not that it is rooted in moral concerns. The problem -- actually the two problems -- are these:

First, higher taxes are rarely morally defensible. In fact, on purely moral grounds -- in other words, even if they did effectively reduce the deficit without paying an economic price for doing so -- they are usually not moral. More on this below.



Second, higher taxes are usually economically counterproductive. This does not matter to the left, however, because economic growth is not what most interests the left. Since Karl Marx, the left has always been far more interested in economic equality than in economic growth. It is true that liberals such as John F. Kennedy were more concerned with economic growth than with economic equality -- which is why he advocated lowering taxes -- but for much of the last century, unlike today, there was a major difference between liberal and left.

Now to return to the moral arguments, my difference with the left is not that I oppose morality dictating economic policy. I believe, in fact, that virtually all social policies should be rooted in moral concerns. My difference with the left is that I am convinced that moral considerations dictate lower, not higher, taxes.

It is too bad that libertarians and conservatives rarely take on the left on moral grounds because the left's moral foundations are as weak as their economic foundations.

The very notion of an income tax is morally debatable. On what moral grounds can the state force a citizen essentially at gunpoint to give away his legally and morally earned money? Why isn't taxation a form of legalized stealing? The obvious answer is that common sense dictates that citizens have the moral right, even the moral obligation, to vote to give money to, at the very least, enable a government to fund a police force, sustain a national defense, and help those incapable of helping themselves or of being helped by others.

But at some point beyond that, taxation becomes nothing more than legalized stealing. Obviously, people will differ over where exactly that point is, but no rational person disputes that such a point exists. No one could argue that a 100 percent tax -- even if it paid for every need every member of the society had -- was moral and not simply a form of theft.

So moral problem No.1 with taxation is the morality of forcing other people -- under threat of violence -- to give their money away.

A second moral problem is having some people give at a greater percentage rate than others. The biblical notion of tithing, for example, is entirely universal -- everyone gave a tenth what he had. No one was forced to give half while others gave a tenth.

A third moral problem is allowing those who pay no tax (such as the federal income tax) to vote on how much others will be forced to pay. It is quite difficult to morally defend the fact that about half of Americans pay no federal income tax, yet they determine how much the other half will be forced to pay.

A fourth moral problem is that the higher the taxes, the more decent people become cheaters. One of the leading religious ethicists of our time, Rabbi Joseph Telushkin, author of two volumes of Jewish ethical law, told me years ago when he lived in Israel during the height of its socialism with its correspondingly high taxes that he witnessed the finest citizens, religious and secular alike, having to cheat on taxes or be rendered impoverished. I have never forgotten that.

I know no one in America today -- and I know extraordinarily honest and generous people, liberal and conservative -- who does not in some way "cheat" on taxes -- as, for example, reporting expenses as business expenses that are not really so. I place the word cheat within quotation marks because not all cheating is illegal. Some people figure out how to avoid paying what the law demands through completely legal, but ethically questionable, means.

At a certain level of taxation, virtually every honest person is reduced to cheating either legally or illegally.

A fifth moral problem is that the higher the tax rate, the lower the charity rate. This is universally true. The more people give to the state, the less they give to their neighbor -- and even to members of their family -- in need.

And sixth and only finally because of the limitations in size of a single column, the higher the taxes, the less people are inclined to work hard. Why should they? At a given point, people just conclude that work is for suckers.

And I haven't even begun to discuss the economic failings of higher taxes.

So, next time someone on the left advocates higher taxes, remember two things: He or she is coming from a moral, not an economic, position. And the moral case against higher taxes is far more powerful than the moral case for them.

Critical Period in American History

The next 8 - 12 weeks will be a critical period in America's history. With the recently elected President and the Democratically controlled House and Senate and soon a set of Justices with the whom the majority will legislate from the bunch we are facing change our Founding Fathers would not believe.




Now is the time to know what they changes will be and how the will affect your family. There are four critical Bills that if passed will change the fabric of our nation. They are the Cap and Trade Bill, Card Check Bill, "Food Safety" Bill HB 2749, and the Health Care Bill. After you read the information I sent you read more learn how these bills are about a power grab, a destruction of wealth and a way to control the people. Call your senators and representatives tell them to vote no on these Bills that will change the very fabric of our Country.

The problems that we are facing were not only caused by Democrats but Republicans as well. Every person who is apathetic is to blame as well. If you are not a part of the solution you are a part of the problem.

Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.


"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling the money and its issuance." -- James Madison

Your Taxes Will Go up if Obama Care Passes and Will be Bad for Your Family

A great article from a doctor explaining why Obama Care will not work. Remember Obama care is not good enough for our legislators, president, his family and union members it is not good enough for you either. The following piece is a must read and appears on the American Thinker. After reading the piece please call your legislator and tell them to oppose the health care Bill.

If we are going to improve the quality of health care in America we must get the government out of health care.

Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.

ObamaCare and me
By Zane F Pollard, MD


I have been sitting quietly on the sidelines watching all of this national debate on healthcare. It is time for me to bring some clarity to the table by explaining many of the problems from the perspective of a doctor.

First off the government has involved very few of us physicians in the healthcare debate.While the American Medical Association has come out in favor of the plan, it is vital to remember that the AMA only represents 17% of the American physician workforce.



I have taken care of Medicaid patients for 35 years while representing the only pediatric ophthalmology group left in Atlanta, Georgia that accepts Medicaid. For example, in the past 6 months I have cared for three young children on Medicaid who had corneal ulcers. This is a potentially blinding situation because if the cornea perforates from the infection, almost surely blindness will occur. In all three cases the antibiotic needed for the eradication of the infection was not on the approved Medicaid list.

Each time I was told to fax Medicaid for the approval forms, which I did. Within 48 hours the form came back to me which was sent in immediately via fax, and I was told that I would have my answer in 10 days. Of course by then each child would have been blind in the eye.

Each time the request came back denied. All three times I personally provided the antibiotic for each patient which was not on the Medicaid approved list. Get the point -- rationing of care.

Over the past 35 years I have cared for over 1000 children born with congenital cataracts. In older children and in adults the vision is rehabilitated with an intraocular lens. In newborns we use contact lenses which are very expensive. It takes Medicaid over one year to approve a contact lens post cataract surgery. By that time a successful anatomical operation is wasted as the child will be close to blind from a lack of focusing for so long a period of time.

Again, extreme rationing. Solution: I have a foundation here in Atlanta supported 100% by private funds which supplies all of these contact lenses for my Medicaid and illegal immigrants children for free. Again, waiting for the government would be disastrous.

Last week I had a lady bring her child to me. They are Americans but live in Sweden, as the father has a job with a big corporation. The child had the onset of double vision 3 months ago and has been unable to function normally because of this. They are people of means but are waiting 8 months to see the ophthalmologist in Sweden. Then if the child needed surgery they would be put on a 6 month waiting list. She called me and I saw her that day. It turned out that the child had accommodative esotropia (crossing of the eyes treated with glasses that correct for farsightedness) and responded to glasses within 4 days, so no surgery was needed. Again, rationing of care.

Last month I operated on a 70 year old lady with double vision present for 3 years. She responded quite nicely to her surgery and now is symptom free. I also operated on a 69 year old judge with vertical double vision. His surgery went very well and now he is happy as a lark. I have been told -- but of course there is no healthcare bill that has been passed yet -- that these 2 people because of their age would have been denied surgery and just told to wear a patch over one eye to alleviate the symptoms of double vision. Obviously cheaper than surgery.

I spent two year in the US Navy during the Viet Nam war and was well treated by the military.There was tremendous rationing of care and we were told specificially what things the military personnel and their dependents could have and which things they could not have. While I was in in Viet Nam, my wife Nancy got sick and got essentially no care at the Naval Hospital in Oakland, California. She went home and went to her family's private internist in Beverly Hills. While it was expensive, she received an immediate work up. Again rationing of care.

For those of you who are over 65, this bill in its present form might be lethal for you. People in England over 59 cannot receive stents for their coronary arteries. The government wants to mimic the British plan. For those of you younger, it will still mean restriction of the care that you and your children receive.

While 99% of physicians went into medicine because of the love of medicine and the challenge of helping our fellow man, economics are still important. My rent goes up 2% each year and the salaries of my employees go up 2% each year. Twenty years ago, ophthalmologists were paid $1800 for a cataract surgery and today $500. This is a 73% decrease in our fees. I do not know of many jobs in America that have seen this sort of lowering of fees.

But there is more to the story than just the lower fees. When I came to Atlanta, there was a well known ophthalmologist that charged $2500 for a cataract surgery as he felt the was the best. He had a terrific reputation and in fact I had my mother's bilateral cataracts operated on by him with a wonderful result. She is now 94 and has 20/20 vision in both eyes. People would pay his $2500 fee.

However, then the government came in and said that any doctor that does medicare work cannot accept more than the going rate ( now $500) or he or she would be severely fined. This put an end to his charging $2500. The government said it was illegal to accept more than the government-allowed rate. What I am driving at is that those of you well off will not be able to go to the head of the line under this new healthcare plan, just because you have money, as no physician will be willing to go against the law to treat you.

I am a pediatric ophthalmologist and trained for 10 years post-college to become a pediatric ophthalmologist (add two years of my service in the Navy and that comes to 12 years).A neurosurgeon spends 14 years post -college, and if he or she has to do the military that would be 16 years. I am not entitled to make what a neurosurgeon makes, but the new plan calls for all physicians to make the same amount of payment. I assure you that medical students will not go into neurosurgery and we will have a tremendous shortage of neurosurgeons. Already, the top neurosurgeon at my hospital who is in good health and only 52 years old has just quit because he can't stand working with the government anymore. Forty-nine percent of children under the age of 16 in the state of Georgia are on Medicaid, so he felt he just could not stand working with the bureaucracy anymore.

We are being lied to about the uninsured. They are getting care. I operate at least 2 illegal immigrants each month who pay me nothing, and the children's hospital at which I operate charges them nothing also.This is true not only on Atlanta, but of every community in America.

The bottom line is that I urge all of you to contact your congresswomen and congressmen and senators to defeat this bill. I promise you that you will not like rationing of your own health.

Furthermore, how can you trust a physician that works under these conditions knowing that he is controlled by the state. I certainly could not trust any doctor that would work under these draconian conditions.

One last thing: with this new healthcare plan there will be a tremendous shortage of physicians. It has been estimated that approximately 5% of the current physician work force will quit under this new system. Also it is estimated that another 5% shortage will occur because of the decreased number of men and women wanting to go into medicine. At the present time the US government has mandated gender equity in admissions to medical schools .That means that for the past 15 years that somewhere between 49 and 51% of each entering class are females. This is true of private schools also, because all private schools receive federal funding.

The average career of a woman in medicne now is only 8-10 years and the average work week for a female in medicine is only 3-4 days. I have now trained 35 fellows in pediatric ophthalmology. Hands down the best was a female that I trained 4 years ago -- she was head and heels above all others I have trained. She now practices only 3 days a week.

Even if the Government Took all Their Money it Would Not be Enough

The Obama administration and the current set of legislators seem hell bent on destroying the wealth of this Country but why? Why deficit spend and add debt to this Country unless your intent is to destroy this Country. Even if everyone who earns over 500,000 dollars a year were to pay all their income as taxes it would be only 1.3 trillion dollars the current budget is 4 trillion dollars. Tax revenues are the lowest since 1932.

Obama has spent his life time idolizing communist, socialist and black theologian mentors. He wants to destroy the wealth of the Country to build it into something it has never been before. I think Fred Thompson stated it well, "You know the big difference between Obama and the Joker? The Joker had crazy killers, career criminals and other radical losers as henchmen. Obama has them as mentors!"

Don't be distracted by all the news protect your family, replace current legislators as soon as possible with those who represent the principles on which the Country was founded. You must know who you are and know the constitution and your rights change that you never expected is coming and your family should be prepared.

The following piece appears in the Wall Street Journal.

Cathy
Spelling and grammar errors as well as typos are left as an exercise for my readers.



Teeing Up the Middle Class
Joe the Plumber’s tax vindication is nigh.

Few of President Obama’s 2008 campaign pledges were more definitive than his vow that anyone making less than $250,000 a year “will not see their taxes increase by a single dime” if he was elected. And he was right, very strictly speaking: It’s going to be many, many, many billions of dimes.



Asked about raising taxes on the middle class on Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” White House economist Larry Summers wouldn’t repeat Mr. Obama’s pre-election promise. “It is never a good idea to absolutely rule things out no matter what,” Mr. Summers said—except, apparently, when his boss is running for office. Meanwhile, on ABC’s “This Week,” Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner also slid around Mr. Obama’s vow and said, “We have to bring these deficits down very dramatically. And that’s going to require some very hard choices.”

These aren’t even nondenial denials. The Obama advisers are laying the groundwork for taxing the middle class while claiming the deficit made them do it.

The liberal establishment is even further along in finally admitting that Mr. Obama wasn’t, er, telling the truth. A piece in the New York Times over the weekend declared in a headline that “the Rich Can’t Pay for Everything, Analysts Say.” And it quoted Leonard Burman, a veteran of the Clinton Treasury who now runs the Brookings Tax Policy Center, as saying that “This idea that everything new that government provides ought to be paid for by the top 5%, that’s a basically unstable way of governing.” They’re right, but where were they during the campaign?

In an editorial on February 26, “The 2% Illusion,” we wrote that the feds could take 100% of the taxable income of everyone in America earning more than $500,000 and still have raised only $1.3 trillion even in the boom year of 2006. The rich are fewer and less rich now, while the Obama budget is nearly $4 trillion.

Democrats already plan to repeal the Bush tax cuts, but that won’t raise enough money. So they’re proposing an income tax surcharge on “the wealthy,” but that won’t raise enough either. Democrats have no choice but to soak the middle class because only they have enough money to finance the liberal dream of yoking the middle class to cradle-to-grave government entitlements.

Democrats have already taxed the middle class by raising cigarette taxes to pay for the children’s health-care expansion. They’re also teeing up average earners with their cap-and-tax energy bill. Mr. Obama had hoped that cap-and-tax would raise some $646 billion over a decade, but Democrats in the House had to give most of that away in bribes to business to pass their bill. To finance ObamaCare, they’re also proposing another 10-percentage-point increase in the payroll tax on firms and individuals that don’t purchase health insurance. But this won’t raise enough money either.

So waiting in the wings is the biggest middle-class tax increase of them all: a European-style value added tax, or VAT. This tax would apply to every level of production or service, and it is beloved by politicians in Europe because it raises so much money so easily without voters noticing. Ezekiel Emanuel, a White House aide and brother of Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, has advocated a 10% VAT to finance national health care. Look for a VAT to be one of the prominent options when Mr. Obama’s tax reform commission issues its report later this year.

The undeniable reality is that you can’t run a European-style welfare-entitlement state without European-style levels of taxation on the middle class (and eventually without low European-style growth and high jobless rates). It’s looking more and more like Mr. Obama’s no-middle-class-tax pledge was one of the greatest confidence tricks in American political history.