Letters 10-24-2016

It’s Obama’s 1984 Several editions ago I concluded a short letter to the editor with an ominous rhetorical flourish: “Welcome to George Orwell’s 1984 and the grand opening of the Federal Department of Truth!” At the time I am sure most of the readers laughed off my comments as right-wing hyperbole. Shame on you for doubting me...

Gun Bans Don’t Work It is said that mass violence only happens in the USA. A lone gunman in a rubber boat, drifted ashore at a popular resort in Tunisia and randomly shot and killed 38 mostly British and Irish tourists. Tunisian gun laws, which are among the most restrictive in the world, didn’t stop this mass slaughter. And in January 2015, two armed men killed 11 and wounded 11 others in an attack on the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. French gun laws didn’t stop these assassins...

Scripps’ Good Deed No good deed shall go unpunished! When Dan Scripps was the 101st District State Representative, he introduced legislation to prevent corporations from contaminating (e.g. fracking) or depleting (e.g. Nestle) Michigan’s water table for corporate profit. There are no property lines in the water table, and many of us depend on private wells for abundant, safe, clean water. In the subsequent election, Dan’s opponents ran a negative campaign almost solely on the misrepresentation that Dan’s good deed was a government takeover of your private water well...

Political Definitions As the time to vote draws near it’s a good time to check into what you stand for. According to Dictionary.com the meanings for liberal and conservative are as follows:

Liberal: Favorable to progress or reform as in political or religious affairs.

Conservative: Disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditions and limit change...

Voting Takes A Month? Hurricane Matthew hit the Florida coast Oct. 6, over three weeks before Election Day. Bob Ross (Oct. 17th issue) posits that perhaps evacuation orders from Governor Scott may have had political motivations to diminish turnout and seems to praise Hillary Clinton’s call for Gov. Scott to extend Florida’s voter registration deadline due to evacuations...

Clinton Foundation Facts Does the Clinton Foundation really spend a mere 10 percent (per Mike Pence) or 20 percent (per Reince Priebus) of its money on charity? Not true. Charity Watch gives it an A rating (the same as it gives the NRA Foundation) and says it spends 88 percent on charitable causes, and 12 percent on overhead. Here is the source of the misunderstanding: The Foundation does give only a small percentage of its money to charitable organizations, but it spends far more money directly running a number of programs...

America Needs Change Trump supports our constitution, will appoint judges that will keep our freedoms safe. He supports the partial-birth ban; Hillary voted against it. Regardless of how you feel about Trump, critical issues are at stake. Trump will increase national security, monitor refugee admissions, endorse our vital military forces while fighting ISIS. Vice-presidential candidate Mike Pence will be an intelligent asset for the country. Hillary wants open borders, increased government regulation, and more demilitarization at a time when we need strong military defenses...

My Process For No I will be voting “no” on Prop 3 because I am supportive of the process that is in place to review and approve developments. I was on the Traverse City Planning Commission in the 1990s and gained an appreciation for all of the work that goes into a review. The staff reviews the project and makes a recommendation. The developer then makes a presentation, and fellow commissioners and the public can ask questions and make comments. By the end of the process, I knew how to vote for a project, up or down. This process then repeats itself at the City Commission...

Regarding Your Postcard If you received a “Vote No” postcard from StandUp TC, don’t believe their lies. Prop 3 is not illegal. It won’t cost city taxpayers thousands of dollars in legal bills or special elections. Prop 3 is about protecting our downtown -- not Munson, NMC or the Commons -- from a future of ugly skyscrapers that will diminish the very character of our downtown...

Vote Yes It has been suggested that a recall or re-election of current city staff and Traverse City Commission would work better than Prop 3. I disagree. A recall campaign is the most divisive, costly type of election possible. Prop 3, when passed, will allow all city residents an opportunity to vote on any proposed development over 60 feet tall at no cost to the taxpayer...

Yes Vote Explained A “yes” vote on Prop 3 will give Traverse City the right to vote on developments over 60 feet high. It doesn’t require votes on every future building, as incorrectly stated by a previous letter writer. If referendums are held during general elections, taxpayers pay nothing...

Beware Trump When the country you love have have served for 33 years is threatened, you have an obligation and a duty to speak out. Now is the time for all Americans to speak out against a possible Donald Trump presidency. During the past year Trump has been exposed as a pathological liar, a demagogue and a person who is totally unfit to assume the presidency of our already great country...

Picture Worth 1,000 Words Nobody disagrees with the need for affordable housing or that a certain level of density is dollar smart for TC. The issue is the proposed solution. If you haven’t already seen the architect’s rendition for the site, please Google “Pine Street Development Traverse City”...

Living Wage, Not Tall Buildings Our community deserves better than the StandUp TC “vote no” arguments. They are not truthful. Their yard signs say: “More Housing. Less Red Tape. Vote like you want your kids to live here.” The truth: More housing, but for whom? At what price..

Home · Articles · News · Other Opinions · Budget Battling Bingo
. . . .

Budget Battling Bingo

Stephen Tuttle - July 18th, 2011
Budget Battle Bingo
We’ve learned at least two things as Congress and the president stumble
and fumble raising the debt ceiling and creating a budget.
First, it appears President Obama is actually willing to take a crack at
changing both Social Security and Medicare. At the very least, he is at
least willing to discuss it.
Second, House Republicans aren’t willing to meet the president halfway, or
a quarter of the way, or even an inch of the way when it comes to
increasing revenues. They’ve decided that pretty much anything and
everything that increases the amount the feds take in is a tax increase.
Allow a temporary tax to expire and that’s a tax increase. Close even the
most egregious tax loopholes through which large corporations drive
truckloads of tax-free cash and that’s a tax increase. Increase the tax
rate on the richest 5% of Americans and that really is a tax increase.
Their new rallying cry, one supposes straight from their most recent push
polls, is they must save the “job creators” from any additional tax
Of course, those job creators have been absent any such new taxation for
the last couple of years and have done precious little to create new jobs.
They’ve been profitable, they’ve stockpiled cash in the trillions, they’ve
enjoyed the full array of tax breaks and shelters and still they
won’t hire.
It is peculiar that a president often accused of wanting to do nothing
more than expand the federal government has proposed budget reductions of
more than $4 trillion over the next decade while his self-proclaimed
budget slashing Republican adversaries slinked in at about $2.7 trillion.
Speaker John Boehner said they should aim for an even “less ambitious”
number than that.
The President has proposed significant cuts in discretionary spending
including farm subsidies and foreign aid and cuts in defense spending. He
has also suggested he would not be opposed to increasing the Medicare
eligibility age and changing the method by which inflation is figured for
future Social Security cost of living adjustments.
(The president has, not as was widely reported, suggested cutting Social
Security benefits. His idea would reduce the amount of potential annual
increases but the basic benefit would remain unchanged.)
Republicans, still enamored of Paul Ryan’s budget plan, have proposed cuts
aplenty and a new Medicare system involving private insurance. They
refuse to even consider any tax increase for anybody. They’ve already
rejected, out of hand, allowing the so-called Bush tax cuts to expire
though doing so would raise a bit more than $3.6 trillion over the next
decade. They’ve also rejected a return to the tax rates that existed
during the Clinton presidency though that would raise about $3.9 trillion
in the next decade.
Actually, this is a two act drama both sides have insisted on combining
into a single mess.
The first act is raising the debt ceiling by August 2, which requires an
act of Congress. Failure to do so would result in the United States
defaulting on existing debt obligations and destroy our credit, making
borrowing impossible. It would be a very bad thing.
The second act is the creation of a budget.
For reasons that make little sense, both sides have decided they will not do
one without the other,
wildly complicating the process. Congress won’t raise the debt ceiling
absent a budget proposal and the president won’t approve a budget unless
the debt ceiling is raised.
We have intransigent Republicans refusing to even consider any proposal
that includes tax increases, intransigent Democrats unwilling to look at
changes to either Social Security or Medicare and a third group of tea
party acolytes who think it would be just swell if we defaulted on our
obligations and created a budget calamity.
Is this fun or what?
To be fair, President Obama has taken an enormous political risk by even
suggesting that Medicare and Social Security, both of which are sacrosanct
to Democrats, be on the table. And Speaker Boehner gives every indication
of someone who wants desperately to work with the president but is
completely hamstrung by his own party.
The result of all of this, so far, has been absolutely nothing. There is
no deal in place to raise the debt ceiling and there is no budget. The
hardcore left and the hardcore right, neither of which represent anywhere
near a majority of their own party much less the country, now get to hold
the rest of us hostage.
Those on the right fringes claim voters in 2010 made it clear they want
no new taxes and those on the left fringes claim voters in 2010 said
they wanted our two gigantic entitlement programs left alone.
Both sides are wrong, of course.
2010 was not a referendum on a tax increase for the richest 5% of
Americans. “Protecting really rich people from a tax increase” did not
show up in the exit polls as a reason people voted the way they did. Nor
were Social Security or Medicare front and center in 2010.
But now, unfortunately, the 2012 elections have begun and common sense is
no longer welcome in any debate about anything. Far better to disparage
potential opponents, refuse any hint of compromise and then blame someone
else for the resulting failures.
If you think the discussion on important issues facing us is going to
improve in the next 16 months, you are sadly mistaken. If, on the other
hand, you think we’re likely to see more accusations, more insults,
another budget mess and few results... bingo.

  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5