noankjail

Notes from the Old Noank Jail

The Poverty Line

by Ed Johnson

On Sunday, November 25, 2012 at 7:00PM, a film and speaker program was hosted for 50 guests at the Noank Baptist Church by Reverend Doctor Paul Hayes on the subject of Poverty in America. Primary speakers included David Baird of the CT Council of Churches and State Senate Chaplain, Lisa Tepper Bates of MASH and Cathy Zall of New London Homeless Hospitality Center along with CT Senator Andrew Maynard and Representative Elisa Wright.

The program began with a 40 minute film, “The Line,” which featured four individual cases involving poverty in various US locations, as well as presenting some disturbing statistics. The US has:
(a) $46 million people living in poverty, 3rd highest in the world behind Turkey and Mexico;
(b) 7 million people holding down two or more jobs at minimum wages;
(c) 1 in 4 children…25% of our kids… living in poverty;
(d) and 70% of major retail employment now being classified as part-time.

Poverty level is described as a family of four earning less than $23k annually. The four cases presented in the film included:

(a) an example of “suburban” poverty, with a divorced banker (formerly earning 6 figures annually) who lost his job and house due to another bank taking over, now a single dad with 3 sons, fighting to keep 2 part-time minimum wage jobs, and now on medicaid;

(b) a divorced, badly injured single mom trying to work her way out of a high-crime drug ghetto, whose sister was shot and killed, still trying to send her kids to school, still trying to be proud of her efforts;

(c) an older married couple with a Louisiana commercial fishing boat, trying to survive in a greatly depleted market due to Hurricane Katrina and the massive BP oil spill, with wetlands and oyster beds rapidly disappearing, in a state with the 2nd highest poverty level in the US,

(d) and a single man in Charlotte, NC…part of the “working poor” who earn between $11 – 15K annually…formerly homeless, now working as a dishwasher and busboy, finally proud to be able to live in his own apartment and not in a homeless shelter.

The speakers then followed up on the film with additional specifics on our New London County and nearby area. There is a reluctance (and pride) which causes people in trouble to feel too embarrassed to ask for help. Homeless people generally tend have a very low opinion of themselves. The poor have even less mobility or chance of success than in previous times and, with children to watch, have less ability to vote in elections and thus be represented.

Meanwhile, those people who have never experienced poverty, much less being homeless, do not feel that they are part of the problem, so they tend to think “why bother getting involved?”

Connecticut is a state of economic contrast. Compared nationally, it is wealthy, but the wealth is in the areas surrounding the larger cities, not in the metropolitan sections. The fiscal disparity of wealth in suburbs versus urban centers is a ratio of approximately 17 to 1, with CT also ranking as the 6th most expensive state in the US. Meanwhile, as example, the homeless shelters just in New London alone usually house an average between 50 to 80 residents per night…on a rotating basis…and this does not include those homeless people who find shelter wherever they can…under bridges, vehicles, or in abandoned buildings.

Many of us have heard the old saying that “the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.” Unfortunately, today, this is a fact. One of the speakers alluded to the entrepreneur Henry Ford who, due to his religious feelings (he was also a Mason) felt that everyone should feel the success of the business. He therefore basically paid most of his workers twice the prevailing wage of the day as an incentive. Contrast this with the current prominent university business school attitude of “cut costs, cut labor, maximize profits.” This is the attitude of certain businesses who pay minimum wage to part-time labor under a cloud of intimidation and fear while importing over 95% of their products from overseas. It exhibits a lack of humanity as well as an attitude of corporate greed….and the rich get richer, etc.

The overriding message of the program, and others like it being held at religious institutions across the country, is that the condition of poverty in our own backyard and in the USA itself has to be addressed by everyone, especially from the top down. There has to be a change in the attitude of our governmental representatives in Washington to stop the corruption…to stop welcoming the lobbyists for the fat cat 1%… and instead be the proper elected representatives of ALL US citizens. Meanwhile, as a country, we are already in serious financial debt….and most of us are not prepared for the consequences…we don’t even speak Chinese.

It was expressed that if the economic disparity becomes any worse, it will be our downfall as a society. We will all be guilty of not speaking up, not voting accordingly, not taking charge of our obligations to others…and for that matter, not taking care of our environment. As Einstein once said, “everything is relative.”

We have “problems at home.” It is time for us to deal with them.

Notes from the Old Noank Jail

by Ed Johnson

As we all settle down from the recent storm, here are some short items:

1) Although there was damage to the East Shore of Noank, especially to some local marina docks and shoreline, most necessary repairs have now been made. Town Dock at the foot of Main Street will still need some work. And we found a large piece of missing gutter material from the Noank Baptist Church up in a nearby tree during Sunday’s church Bazaar (My guess is that it will probably stay there for a while).

2) A recent decision by the Noank Zoning Board of Appeals would seem to suggest that construction of very large houses is being discouraged, at least in the crowded Village area. Meanwhile, the Zoning Board itself is conducting a review of the existing regulations and contemplating some revisions (see also item # 8 below).

3) The Noank School review committee continues to obtain further renovation cost estimates in order to present the Groton Town Council with costs and a plan for converting the school building into a local Community Center. Several local organizations would already be able to utilize space in the building.

4) There has been recent discussion concerning possible expansion of operations at the Mystic River Homes Elderly Housing facilities. This is not a new subject and was briefly reviewed several years ago when the Congregate facility was built. Some concern has been expressed by existing residents that electrical service during power outages has been slow to restore (see # 5 below). This can have a negative effect on medical situations, such as residential oxygen equipment.

5) It was noted, following the major storm, that once again Groton Utilities had restored most electrical power within 48 hours to both Mumford Cove and Groton Long Point. By contrast, nearby areas, including Noank Village itself, had to wait six days before power was restored by Connecticut Light and Power. Some folks are beginning to explore how to improve this situation, especially with such a continued major difference in service response following major storms.

6) Some initial discussion has occurred, with input from the public, on the possible re-design of the Palmer Cove vehicle bridge that connects Noank to GLP and Mumford Cove. And, unlike the Mystic Streetscape project, this time the public input is occurring BEFORE anything is designed.

7) Related to the above, many of us have expressed concern with the manner in which the Streetscape project was handled by the Groton Town Planning Department. Other problems and complaints with that Department have been presented to the Groton Town Council recently by Mr. James Furlong of Noank. Thus far, those complaints (previously reviewed in this column) have not been resolved but we expect more attention will now be paid to the matter.

8) Recently, the Noank Historical Society voted to accept the responsibility for receiving Preservation Easements on local Noank properties that might be sold in the future. Essentially, a property owner can now request such a restriction which would then be a guiding requirement for future owners of the property. It would limit the alteration or demolition of such property, thus helping to retain the historic appearance in Noank. This could affect the sale, for example, of a building such as Main Street House for Girls being sold directly to Noank Group Homes, currently the operator of that facility (see also # 2 above).

9) The operators, board members and staff of the Noank Community Market were complimented on their efforts during the recent storm and 6 day power outage. The store was able to stay open every day, serving and helping the community, thanks to the generator at the store and the cooperation of all parties involved.

10) And finally, a Happy Thanksgiving to everyone reading this column. We appreciate your interest and constructive comments. Additionally, I think we can all be thankful that the storm, at least in our immediate area, was not any worse.

Political Campaign Observations
Posted on November 7, 2012 at 12:46 pm
Notes from the Old Noank Jail

Speaking for myself, I am glad the 2012 National Political Campaign is finished, and that Mr. Obama was re-elected so that he can finish the rest of what he was trying to accomplish. I was concerned that Mr. Romney and the opposition would try to unravel what he had already established. There was far too much distortion of facts and changing of political positions during the campaign.

I’m still a registered Republican. I still want the party to rid itself of the very negative influence that came from the Tea Party movement…financed in large part indirectly by the Koch brothers (source – the New Yorker magazine) who, as most of us have now learned, have their own financial agenda. And watching the (legally authorized!) corrupting influence of anonymous “super pac” money from the very wealthy was almost as distasteful as watching certain state governors deliberately rig the voting procedures against their political opponents (source – MSNBC).

I was ashamed to see the paranoia and misinformation presented by some of the news media (such as Fox News) and various organizations (such as the NRA) against Mr. Obama…which even started right after his inauguration. The hammering, posturing, lack of support and undermining by the Republican Congress itself was relentless. And when the tables were turned and Democrats retaliated, then Republicans, led by Rush Limbaugh and encouraged by Carl Rove, cried “foul.” It was distasteful to watch…almost as distasteful as listening to the inane rantings of people like Donald Trump.

So, I hope the National Republican Party will return to a more moderate, centrist position and be more representative of the majority….rather than just represent the extremists along with the very wealthy. I look forward to that change in philosophy very much. I like to think that the era of the Nixon administration is long behind us.

Speaking of corruption, wouldn’t it be nice if we could get rid of all the highly paid special interest lobbyists? And do away with Super Pacs? And put actual limitation on campaign contributions? Can we be able to vote for people who will actually address this problem?

Meanwhile, here in CT, we had a smaller, less subtle version of the national campaign. I have never received so many negative attack flyers by one candidate (Mrs. McMahon) against another (Senator Murphy) in my 72 years on earth. It was disgusting and I sincerely hope that Mrs. McMahon will stay out of politics and donate her wealth to more worthy causes that can certainly use her help.

On a positive note, we do have some local politicians who have conducted their campaigns in very proper fashion and could serve as good role models for folks on the national level. Andrew Maynard has always conducted himself in a very professional manner and has never stooped to negative attacks against opponents. His political flyers confirm this. Elissa Wright has operated in similar fashion, always accentuating her own positions and accomplishments, without lashing out at opponents…one of whom, Rita Schmidt, actively supported her campaign.

Many of us were also impressed with the campaign by Republican Harry Watson, a local Groton favorite, who went to great efforts to canvas neighborhoods personally. Harry emphasised what he felt were the real issues needing attention, including stronger support of local business, a reduction in state mandates to municipalities (which the state itself would not help finance) and an overall reduction in local taxes.

It is possible to be aggressive without being overbearing. National campaigns can be run properly without corruption, without special interests or major expenses, and without negative attacks. We need to encourage this at all levels.

“This slow recovery was to be expected”

(The following article is printed on this blog site as a guest commentary on a political issue. It was carried in the NY TIMES and on the NL DAY on 1023/12 Ed Johnson)

by Paul Krugman – from the NEW YORK TIMES

Publication: The Day
Published 10/23/2012 12:00 AM

The U.S. economy finally seems to be recovering in earnest, with housing on the rebound and job creation outpacing growth in the working-age population. But the news is good, not great – it will still take years to restore full employment – and it has been a very long time coming. Why has the slump been so protracted?

The answer – backed by overwhelming evidence – is that this is what normally happens after a severe financial crisis. But Mitt Romney’s economic team rejects that evidence. And this denialism bodes ill for policy if Romney wins next month.

About the evidence: The most famous study is by Harvard’s Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff, who looked at past financial crises and found that such crises are typically followed by years of high unemployment and weak growth. Later work by economists at the International Monetary Fund and elsewhere confirmed this analysis: Crises that followed a sharp run-up in private-sector debt, from the U.S. Panic of 1893 to the Swedish banking crisis of the early 1990s, cast long shadows over the economy’s future. There was no reason to believe that this time would be different.

This isn’t an after-the-fact rationalization. The Reinhart-Rogoff “aftermath” paper was released almost four years ago. And a number of other economists, including, well, me, issued similar warnings. In early 2008 I was already pointing out the distinction between recessions like 1973-75 or 1981-82, brought on by high interest rates, and “postmodern” recessions brought on by private-sector overreach. And I suggested that the recession we were then entering would be followed by a prolonged “jobless recovery” that would feel like a continuing recession.

Why is recovery from a financial crisis slow? Financial crises are preceded by credit bubbles; when those bubbles burst, many families and/or companies are left with high levels of debt, which force them to slash their spending. This slashed spending, in turn, depresses the economy as a whole.

And the usual response to recession, cutting interest rates to encourage spending, isn’t adequate. Many families simply can’t spend more, and interest rates can be cut only so far – to zero but not below.

Does this mean that nothing can be done to avoid a protracted slump after a financial crisis? No, it just means that you have to do more than just cut interest rates. In particular, what the economy really needs after a financial crisis is a temporary increase in government spending, to sustain employment while the private sector repairs its balance sheet. And the Obama administration did some of that, blunting the severity of the financial crisis. Unfortunately, the stimulus was both too small and too short-lived, partly because of administration errors but mainly because of scorched-earth Republican obstruction.

Which brings us to the politics.

Over the past few months advisers to the Romney campaign have mounted a furious assault on the notion that financial-crisis recessions are different. For example, in July former Sen. Phil Gramm and Columbia’s R. Glenn Hubbard published an op-ed article claiming that we should be having a recovery comparable to the bounceback from the 1981-82 recession, while a white paper from Romney advisers argues that the only thing preventing a rip-roaring boom is the uncertainty created by President Barack Obama.

Obviously, Republicans like claiming that it’s all Obama’s fault, and that electing Romney would magically make everything better. But nobody should believe them.

For one thing, these people have a track record: Back in 2008, when serious students of history were already predicting a prolonged slump, Gramm was dismissing America as a “nation of whiners” experiencing a mere “mental recession.” For another, if Obama is the problem, why is the United States actually doing better than most other advanced countries?

The main point, however, is that the Romney team is willfully, nakedly, distorting the record, leading Reinhart and Rogoff – who aren’t affiliated with either campaign – to protest against “gross misinterpretations of the facts.” And this should worry you.

Look, economics isn’t as much of a science as we’d like. But when there’s overwhelming evidence for an economic proposition – as there is for the proposition that financial-crisis recessions are different – we have the right to expect politicians and their advisers to respect that evidence. Otherwise, they’ll end up making policy based on fantasies rather than grappling with reality.

And once politicians start refusing to acknowledge inconvenient facts, where does it stop? Why, the next thing you know Republicans will start rejecting the overwhelming evidence for man-made climate change.

Oh, wait………

Notes from the Old Noank Jail

President Obama wins 3rd Debate

by Ed Johnson

With the exception of died-in-the-wool Tea Party members and paid Fox News staff, most of us would probably agree that President Obama came out ahead of Governor Romney tonight in the debate. This was in spite of the moderator giving Mr. Romney some time leeway at least twice.

There were some classic moments, such as Mr. Obama explaining to Mr. Romney that we now use aircraft carriers and submarines, or Mr. Romney telling us that Iran needed to go through Syria to get to the sea, and that he (Mr. Romney) did NOT state that the auto industry should go bankrupt…but now actually claims that he had advocated federal assistance. And it was amusing to hear Mr. Obama’s calm understatement as he described Mr. Romney taking “an airbrush” to historical facts.

I noted that Mr. Romney had, once again, changed his political position very recently on some notable foreign affairs issues and, as examples, was now agreeing with Mr. Obama’s handling of drone attacks and withdrawing troops from Afghanistan by 2014. And I was amused when Mr. Romney complained that Mr. Obama was attacking HIM….after the way Mr. Romney behaved toward Mr. Obama during the prior debates.

A CBS poll gave statistics on local voter opinion for this third debate, listing 53 % favoring Mr. Obama, 23 % for Mr. Romney, with 24% undecided. One of the major concerns, expressed by more than one newscaster, was that Mr. Romney had now created a feeling of uncertainty as to his quality of character as a leader by making so many last minute foreign policy changes just prior to this debate.

But as to whether this debate will actually have a major effect on the election itself, only the poll takers can give us any answers until November 6th and it will still be a close race. For reasons of leadership consistency, mixed with my own desire for a more centrist, more cooperative and less conservative and obstructionist Republican party, I will still vote for Mr. Obama to finish the job he started.

And, yes…the very wealthy 1% really do need to pay their fair share.

Notes from the Old Noank Jail

Groton Road Referendum

by Ed Johnson

Recently, following my own inquiry for opinions, I received a number of E-mails from a variety of Groton residents and town officials concerning the upcoming Referendum on November 6th pertaining to the proposed Bonding for road repairs. Briefly, all of the residents’ replies I received are not favoring this proposal. A brief summary of some of their feelings is as follows:

———————————————–

“In an economy that is as unsettled as this, I think bonding that much money is risky, at best. That’s a huge amount of money in interest, and I don’t think the $60,000 per application justifies it.”

“My concern is that they (the town) might try to run sewers and water mains to other outlying districts (which will increase sprawl) while supposedly just putting a new cover on the road surface.”

“My reasons include the fact that it makes no sense to me to pay almost $2.4 million (20% ) in interest on $11 million. Bonding should be reserved for only very large projects (like building or renovating a school) that cannot be paid for as part of an annual budget. That is not the case for roads and streets, which have always been done as part of the annual budget.”

“While some argue that, in recent years, not enough was funded, that is the choice of our local elected representatives, acting on our behalf to keep taxes down as best they can. I do not myself see that roads throughout Groton Town, City and Groton Long Point are in such terrible disrepair.”

“I see no reason to spend 20% on interest charges to borrow the money. That’s a waste of $2.4 million in my opinion. Just because interest rates are low, that doesn’t mean you borrow money you don’t need to borrow.”

“The issue of the explanatory text, not clearly explaining to the voters, that doing this increases the cost by $2.4 million (in interest charges) is a legitimate concern…but…probably what is true is that explanatory texts have never done that. They only indicate an “increase in the mil rate”…which includes the cost of paying for the interest. But, you can’t separate out principal and interest.”

——————————————————–

From Town Officials, I received the following:

“The explanatory text for any Referendum in not required to be produced. But our town has made it a standard policy to send out an explanation to residents when the Town Council and RTM ask for bond packages to be voted on. The state has requirements that towns must follow if they choose to send out any explanatory text. Our Town Charter also requires the Bond Council and Town Attorney review of the text. The text must also explain in unbiased terms the scope of the project. ”

“There is no requirement to include the cost per assessed property like the table that is in the current text. That table depicts an estimate that a taxpayer would incur on every $100,000 of assessed property. Remember that assessments are based on 75% of the market value. Having said this, be aware the town has never been required to include interest charges that may or may not be applied, because the bond does NOT include interest. The town cannot borrow money to pay interest. Instead, the interest is included in the budgets that are approved by the Town Council and RTM every year. These funds are paid for out of the General Fund, i.e. the taxpayers.”

—————————————————————————

And from Town Government representation, I received the following:

“The Town is not bonding the entire $11.2 million all at once. We would “bond as we go” over the period of 2013 through 2017. If, during any given year and depending on the economy, the Council and RTM feel they can include highway maintenance funds into the actual budget, that would mean the Town could bond less of the total amount approved for bonding of the highway maintenance project.” .

“With almost daily fluctuations in the interest rates on municipal bonds, in conjunction with not knowing when or exactly how much we will be bonding at any given time, it would be impossible to include, in the advance test of the referendum question, the exact amount of interest we would/will be paying. Another thing to consider is that periodically the Town re-finances the outstanding bonds when the interest rates are lower. Thus we lower the overall [interest] costs of bonds previously taken out.”

———————————————————————————-

In summary and conclusion of the above, my personal feeling is that a road project of this size does not warrant a referendum for a bond. My primary reason is that I have also recently been advocating for an annual referendum on the Groton Town Budget itself (a large sum of money) in the event that the Council and RTM allow property tax increases to go above 3% for any residential property. We need to have this protection and I am sensing a resistance by the Council to changes in the Town Charter that would allow this to happen.

Therefore, I suggest that we defeat this request for a bond to do road repairs, on the grounds that it really isn’t necessary. Let’s instead be sending a message to both the Council and the RTM that we want an annual referendum on the Town Budget to protect ourselves before we entertain any more special bonding. We already voted down Phase II in a 3 to 1 landslide. Lets do it with this one as well.

Notes from the Old Noank Jail

President Obama scores in second debate

Tonight was a clear victory for President Obama in the second debate.

Mr.Romney remained consistent in his aggressive style from the first debate but it didn’t work as well for him this time around. In addition, he got caught flat-footed on a foreign policy issue.

Admittedly, I am in the minority that felt Mr. Obama did perform properly, if somewhat reserved, in the first Presidential debate. He was calm, responded properly and tried to follow the rules established by the moderator. But Mr. Romney, by contrast, was very aggressive, frequently interrupting both the moderator and Mr. Obama. And although some of Mr. Romney’s statements in that first debate were factually untrue, most of the public comments I have read declared him the victor and most people seemed to prefer his bullying style.

As I said at the time, I still prefer order over chaos.

The tone and format of tonight’s debate was much different, perhaps mostly because of Mr. Obama’s more forceful presentation and more specific attacks on many of Mr. Romney’s previously stated positions…positions which Mr. Romney appeared to be changing almost on the spot. On the whole, I felt Mr. Obama had the edge, until Mr. Romney started to attack him on foreign policy and then blame him for the ambassador’s murder. But then suddenly, Mr. Romney got caught with one of his own lies concerning the “terrorist” issue. More embarrassing that that, he even had to be corrected by the moderator herself.

At that point, Mr. Obama became the clear winner…even the crowd itself responded… after which he delivered the final summary blow. This time around, Mr. Obama finally mentioned the Romney “47%” remarks previously caught on tape, thus exposing what many people believe are Mr. Romney’s true feelings twoard many American citizens.

Again, although I am a registered Republican, I have been continually embarrassed by the Tea Party Extremists and their “Fox News” attitude towards Mr. Obama. And, in my opinion, the “elephant in the room” is still the fact that the majority of Republicans in Congress, with their obstructionist attitude, have resisted almost everything Mr. Obama has tried to accomplish in the past 4 years.

As I said previously, I still hope that President Obama will remain in office for four more years and is able to accomplish most of his goals. In the meantime, this could serve as a lesson to the Republican party extremists that the wealthy 1 % do NOT represent all the American citizens. Let the party return to the centrist politics that I’m sure most of us prefer and would like to see again.

The Vice Presidential and CT Senate Debates
Posted on October 12, 2012 at 1:12 pm

For the Vice Presidential Debate, I felt the overall “winner” in total points was Mr. Biden. He had the more accurate information and grasp of the international situation. Mr. Ryan did better than I expected but his attack on foreign policy was not accurate and Mr. Biden called him on it. It is a fact that our image abroad has improved during the Obama administration. We have more allies on common issues.

I also prefer to have the candidates sitting at a table because I think it allows them to be slightly more relaxed and focus on the issues more easily. And it is perfectly OK to take notes in a debate….

As for aggression, it was evident on both sides. Perhaps this was in reaction to the first Presidential debate, where Mr. Romney was very aggressive and frequesntly interrupting while Mr. Obama seemed more composed. Apparently, I am in the minority that prefers order over chaos….

As for the Connecticut Senatorial debate between Mrs. McMahon and Mr. Murphy, I felt that Mr. Murphy came out ahead on points and was correct when he stated that the debate should focus on the issues and not personal, negative attacks. His grasp of the financial issues within the state seemed more knowledgeable.

And although both candidates have had financial issues, it became obvious that the McMahons recently paid back some creditors only because the issue became public. Moreover, we continue to receive large quantities of negative and misleading ads against Mr. Murphy by the McMahon organization. For example, Mr. Murphy actually has a 97% attendance record for floor votes in Congress itself. This is independant of committee or subcommittee hearings. Mrs McMahon’s literature tries to suggest otherwise.

And I do confess to a bias…I feel the wealthy should not receive tax cuts.

The Presidential Debate
Notes from the Old Noank Jail

People asked me what I thought of the Presidential debate. I felt Mr. Obama could have been more aggressive and very easily thrown more mud but he chose not to do this. He remained calm and professional, was accurate on his facts and tried to abide by the rules that the moderator failed to properly enforce.

I confess that I’m not a Mr. Romney fan. This is partly because of his position flip-flops…last night was a classic example…and failure to properly explain what he actually plans to do and how he will do it. This leads me to not trust the man…because I have worked for such people before. I still feel that he primarily represents the wealthy, as clearly evidenced by his previous…and now very public… “47 percent” remarks.

And although I am still a registered Republican, and hope for an improvement to a more centrist philosophy within the party, I am still ashamed of the way we have catered to the “Tea Party Extremists” and their Fox News propaganda, who have made every effort to thwart all of Mr. Obama’s programs…no matter what they are. And I think most of us are fed up with Congress anyway.

And, for Mr. Romney, I am not one who believes that being obnoxiously aggressive, making false statements and interrupting another person speaking makes you the “winner” in a debate. Being noisy does not make you right…it just means you are being noisy…and that’s ALL it should mean.

So, last night, Mr. Romney threw a gauntlet on the table and, in the process, he made some “position adjustments” that are now on record. He will have to live with those if he wins the election, unless of course he decides to change his positions…once again…after he is elected. We need to think about that possibility. One thing is for sure…he won’t cancel the tax credit for the very wealthy…no matter what he says right now.

There are 2 more presidential debates and one VP debate. The public debate “game” is by no means over, as we are only in the first quarter. From a personal standpoint, I prefer that Mr. Obama be re-elected and finish what he started. This will give the Republicans a message that the extremists and the very wealthy do NOT call the shots for the rest of the American people. Hopefully, this will also allow the Republicans more time to return to the more centrist position and be more representative of the total party.

Here is a list, so far, of Romney’s “mis-statements”……

Romney lied:
When he claimed that “pre-existing conditions are covered under my plan.” They’re not.
When he said that President Obama had “cut Medicare by $716 billion to pay for Obamacare.” Obama didn’t.
When he denied proposing a $5 trillion tax cut. He did.
When he said President Obama had “added almost as much to the federal debt as all the prior presidents combined.” Not even close.
When he resurrected “death panels.” That was called “one of the biggest whoppers of the night.”
When he stated that half the green energy companies given stimulus funds had failed. Only if three out of nearly three dozen is half.

Connecticut Property Tax
Posted on September 29, 2012 at 2:01 pm
Email
Print
Comment

I call everyone’s attention to the current PATCH article concerning Connecticut’s overdependence on Property Tax.

Five years ago, I wrote some articles on property tax. Here are some excerpts from one of them:

“Our local geographical area did not fare well during this past CT Legislative session regarding the issue of reducing Town dependence on Property Tax. Despite an effort by Governor Rell herself to address this issue, the subject eroded into yet another conflict between the Republicans and Democrats.

For two years in a row, no real progress has been made.

Some of our existing local legislators were voted into office because many of us felt that they would be able to help accomplish the task of getting our local governments away from dependence on the property tax. Running out of time, these legislators are now tasked with finally accomplishing this in the next legislative session.

They need to find a way for both political parties to cooperate on solutions, rather than to continually get bogged down criticizing each other in the press, as has happened lately.

Otherwise, they should find some other pastime and leave politics because far too many of us are fed up with being taxed on unrealized gains, completely out of proportion to our incomes. For us older folks who have lived in our homes and served our communities for 30 to 50 years, it is now the primary political issue of our lives.”

We have another chance now to correct this problem in Hartford. There’s an election for area representatives and senators in November. Vote for the one who promises to take direct action on this issue…and then follows through with