Gov. Paterson to demand common sense in draft legislation? Not so fast.
It took a recommendation by the Property Tax commission to do it. David Paterson has issued an executive order to the State Legislature requiring that all new legislation with attached costs must also come with a plan to pay for it. Traditionally, Albany has simply issued mandates without such a requirement, leaving local municipalities to foot the bill. Meaning, in general, insanely high property taxes. Because, evidently, we still have too much money in our pocketbooks after all the other insanely high taxes here in New York.
But, says Paterson, that is no longer the way of Albany.
“We will now have a pay -as-you-go philosophy in Albany,” said Paterson. “You pass a bill and it costs us money, you also have to show how we’ll pay for it. If not, we cannot do it at this time.”
I would echo the NY Republican leadership here, that Paterson’s new order flies in the face of his own actions:
But Republicans say the governor’s mandate relief announcement is counter to what his budget actually does. They say by passing measures like the Rockefeller Drug Law reforms, which pushes more costs down to counties, and by eliminating programs such as the STAR rebate checks, New Yorkers are hurting now more than ever
But, even if that were not the case, I am not convinced the new Executive Order actually solves any problems.
My wife and I have a policy where we never buy something we don’t have the cash for. If we can’t afford it today, we don’t get it. We own debit cards, and not a single credit card between us. This ensures our policy sticks, in the face of temptation. We are forced to recognize that buying one thing means not having money available for something else. In general, not only is this sound financial policy for families, but also for business and, yes, governments.
The problem is, for too long, states like New York have tended to act as though the taxpayer is a limitless source of income. Need to pay for something? Put it on the taxpayer. Paterson addresses a part of this tendency: Albany’s traditional policy of pushing the cost of new mandates onto homeowners. In and of itself, this seems like a good start. In reality, it treats a symptom of the greater disease, and with potential side effects that are just as bad as the symptom. It’s like treating a tension headache with a medicine that causes ulcers. It neither addresses the tension at the root of the headache nor provides the patient with real relief. It just shifts the burden.
Putting taxpayers on the hook at a hundred bucks a year for some mandate takes that money from the taxpayer. Whether it comes through property tax, income tax, or some new usage fee is beside the point. Unlike the government, the average taxpayer does not have an income source that can give out more when he lives beyond his means. And, in the case of usage fees, which seem to be Paterson’s modus operandi, what that means is that where such fees are attached, services are used less. Which means, ultimately, the money will come from somewhere else anyway.
Certain people, who either haven’t bothered to educate themselves about the truth, or are being deliberately obtuse, have painted the Tea Parties of this month as mere “anti-tax” rallies by people who want government services, but don’t want to pay for them. It may make for a good soundbite, but this clear nonsense obfuscates reality. What we want is responsible government. We want government who realizes that we don’t work in order to fund state programs, but to provide for our families and to live our lives. We want Albany — and Washington — to understand that government is meant to be peripheral, not central, to our daily lives. And, that said, we want them to start using our money — that’s our money, not theirs — more wisely.
We don’t want empty words from Paterson, finally making the suggestion that Albany behave as though they understand they actually have to pay for the things they put into law. We want action that shows that Albany understands the citizens of New York simply can’t send all their money to the State Capitol to fund every pet project that comes along.
Personally, I’d like to see an extended moratorium on all new spending. But I’m not holding my breath.
I’d settle for a State — and national — government that looked for real areas to cut spending. A lot of spending. Not these drop-in-the-bucket cuts like those suggested by Obama for Washington and Paterson for Albany, but real examinations of current spending, followed up with real reductions in beaurocracy and spending.
What we, the taxpayers, would settle for, is a government that stopped talking up fiscal responsibility, and started acting like it was a priority.
Don’t let Congress tax local radio out of existence
A couple Bills were written in the House and Senate that not many people have heard about. Labeled the “Performance Rights Act,” H.R. 848 and S. 379 would impose a “performance fee” on stations for broadcasting music. Actually, this has been brewing since 2007, but the most recent incarnations of these bills were written this last February.
Though the proponants of the bill claim money taken through these fees will go to artists, the reality is that very few newer artists actually own the copyrights to their songs. The biggest group of artists to benefit from these bills will, in fact, be those with enough clout to own their own copyrights — most of whom are already filthy rich. The main copyright holders in this industry are, in fact, record labels. And, of those new artists who do own their own copyrights, such a fee would actually be a detriment — if broadcasters have to pay for the “privelidge” of promoting these bands and songs on air, we’re certainly not very likely to waste that time on untried artists.
So what these bills will actually do is keep money in the hands of the rich, by taking it out of the pockets of radio broadcasters, including small, local and independent stations. In other words, we would be looking at a situation where large corporations prosper at the expense of small business — by federal law. And let’s face it, local radio is already in some trouble. Year after year it becomes harder for independent stations to compete with large corporate entities like Citadel or Radio 1. Under a free market system, these smaller stations find ways to keep operating. They make cuts where necessary, they gain favor of local businesses… and those that don’t exactly thrive are at least surviving. These bills would be inconvenient for corporate radio. They could very well spell the end for many smaller stations.
But, the arguement goes, don’t these artists and copyright holders deserve to be paid? After all, the songwriters are being paid by the stations, so why not the other copyright owners? Well, because, put simply, artists and record companies are being paid because of what the stations do. They are paid in sales. Songwriters, many of whom do not enjoy the noteriety of recording artists, don’t get concert receipts, or promotion deals. They get paid primarily through the airplay and performance of their songs. Recording artists, on the other hand, get paid for showing up and smiling at the camera. These “other” copyright holders get paid through merchandise and other things. All of which is made possible by the songwriters, but are peripheral to specific songs. And, of course, you have the fact that many artists write their own songs, which means they are already paid for them through the current system.
But back to the value of radio to the industry, for a minute. As I said above, in a sense, these other copyright holders are indeed paid by radio stations, through free publicity. It’s true, a radio station benefits financially through playing these songs. I would argue, artists and record companies benefit even more. In fact, as a broadcaster, allow me this moment to address the artists and companies pushing for this legislation:
We give you free publicity. We do interviews with you, and specials about your upcoming releases. If it wasn’t for radio, nobody would care who you are — and they certainly wouldn’t pay obscene amounts of their hard-earned cash for your concert tickets and CDs. You would be a random name on a random CD cover (if you were lucky) that might sell a few thousand copies. You are rich because we play your music. Playing your music gets the public interested in your CDs, and in your concert tickets. That gigantic house? The limos and car collections? The throngs of screaming fans? Yeah. We did that. You’re welcome.
Now that that’s out of my system, a final thought on the proposed legislation: why is Government even being involved? This is a symbiotic market relationship. Now government has to tell us what we have to pay for, who we have to pay, and how much? Where is that responsibility in the Constitution? Not only does the government not have the responsibility to make these kinds of decisions regarding the free market, I would argue, they don’t have the right.
So, what can be done? first, go to noperformancetax.org and learn more about this legislation, and the efforts to stop it. Call your local legislature to tell them not to destroy local radio by imposing this fee. And, fellow North Country residents, call or write Rep. John McHugh to thank him personally for co-sponsoring H. Con. Res 49, a Congressional resolution committing them to the opposition of this so-called “Performance Rights Act.”
The Canton Tea Party
Any day you can drive through Northern New York with the windows down is a good day. And, considering I was about to stand on a line holding a sign for two and a half hours, this bode very well indeed. The light breeze and clear, blue sky was all the encouragement I needed that this was a darn fine day for dissent.
As I pulled into Canton and started looking for a parking spot, I stopped at a red light that put me just across the road from the protesters facing Main Street. My window down, one attendee yelled, “Hey, honk if you support us.” I smiled and honked, and avoided the temptation to grab my own gigantic signs to wave back at them as the a protester yelled, “we’re here for you, too!”
Amen to that.
Once on the line, I handed one of my two signs off to another protester, and was immediately struck by the overall friendliness of the crowd. Here we were, serious as a heart attack and mad as hell over taxation, runaway spending, and the wholesale bankrupting of generations of our offspring — but it was more like talking politics with old friends over coffee.
As car after car drove by and honked (more than one of our signs invited them to “Honk if you love Capitalism” or “Honk if you hate runaway spending”), it was just not possible to be dejected by the one or two passers by who were clearly against us, or the nearly complete lack of media coverage (to my knowledge, two local radio stations actually covered the event, mine included). Indeed, though there were fewer of us than at many Tea Party events, we knew that for a place like Canton, NY to get 100-150 people in a crowd in the middle of a work day meant that something important was happening.
Among the protesters, retirees and veterans (each of whom was thanked for his service, and by more than one person), families, working men and women, and even college students. One group of students surprised me, actually — and provided a lesson I shouldn’t have to be taught: first impressions aren’t everything. As this group of four or five students began crossing the street, I noticed the flipflops and folded signs, their young ages — and the t-shirt with the permanent-marker legend, “Save the Trees,” — and I thought, well, here we go. It’s the counter protest. Then, as they continued walking by, I saw the back of that shirt: “Stop Printing Money.”
Knowing the next generation cares, too, is a good feeling.
Nancy Foster, the local GOP Chair who organized the event, took note of the distances traveled by some supporters in her correspondence with me:
Thank you for coming out today to support the Canton Tea Party. There were over 150 men, women, and children in attendance from the North County: Brasher, Canton, Chateaugay, Churubusco, Clifton, Cranberry Lake, DeKalb, Hammond, Herman, Lisbon, Louisville, Madrid, Malone, Massena, Norwood, Ogdensburg, Oswegatchie, Parishville, Pierrepont, Potsdam, and Winthrop (hope I did not skip any). The signs were amazing and the respect shown for the democratic process was a great lesson for the children in attendance. I must admit, every time I think about the support we got from passing traffic, I smile. …
Many of those in attendance, including my husband & I, had never before participated in a protest of any type. It is our hope that our state and federal representatives recognize that this national grassroots effort cannot be ignored.
It’s true, for many of us — in protests around the country — this was indeed our first time out. In truth, the “progressives” of Move On and other organizations seem to have cornered the market on such activities. It’s an unfortunate but understandable fact of life: Conservatives tend to have jobs, and don’t get government grants to carry signs.
But we came out anyway. We took our lunch hours, or took days off, and we came out to send this message. It is not okay to steal from our children, which is exactly what the government is doing with their absurd fiscal policy. This is government run amok, and it cannot continue.
Yesterday morning, as I was preparing a signs, my son, Trey noted that one of them had a giant letter “T.” Since he assumes anything with a “T” on it must belong to him, he asked, “Daddy, is that for me?”
And, you know what? It was.
retail sales down? WTF?
Against all odds, in spite of trillions of dollars being funneled to auto manufacturers, insurers and financial institutions, billions of dollars spent on state and federal makework projects and millions in proposed new taxes, people just aren’t buying stuff. According to Fox News, sales dropped 1.1 per cent — further than the .03 per cent originally projected.
Listen, people. Your children aren’t going to bankrupt themselves. And, frankly, there is only so much the government can do — even the government under Barack Obama. Sure, the man can perform miracles, but you have got to do your part, too.
Now, in his benevolence, Obama is still trying to help, through increased business taxes, which will of course be passed on to you. But you’re an important part of this equation. Pay your taxes — it is, after all the patriotic thing to do. And, for God’s sake, stop squirrelling away your money. The President has shown the way to nickel and dime your kids out of prosperity, and it is time we learn from his example. So drop those remaining dollars on iPods, DVD collections — whatever.
The Obama administration has worked hard to get money into the hands of people who need it least; it is up to you, now, to do your part.
(Cross-posted at RedState)
What makes him a hero?
Yesterday, Captain Richard Phillips was rescued by Navy SEALs from the hands of the four pirates who held him for five days. And now, he’s getting a hero’s welcome at home.
But what makes him a hero?
Our society, longing perhaps, for heroes lately, tends to throw the word around pretty loosely. Society, in our seemingly endless quest to venerate the mediocre, bestows the title, “Hero” on everyone from fathers who merely act as fathers should, to people who happen to have contracted a deadly disease. This is not to denegrate any of these acts, or the individuals who accomplish them (or to whom they happen). Indeed, there is a shortage of good fathers, or teachers. But heroism is not merely doing what is (or should be) expected of you — it is going above and beyond.
Our culture, in its celebration of victimhood, often elevates the victim to the status of “hero” — based solely on the fact that something bad has happened to him. This is not heroism. It is unfortunate. But it is not, by itself, some noble thing.
If you want a definition of “hero,” look to the men and women of our Armed Forces, who willingly put themselves in harm’s way for the defense of their countrymen. Look to the men and women who become police officers, risking much, up to and including their lives, to uphold the laws of our society. Look to the men and women who run headlong into a burning building, risking all for the lives and safety of their fellow citizens.
No, heroism is not merely doing the right thing. Heroism is knowing that the right — the necessary — thing could well come at a great cost to you… and then doing it anyway.
The word “hero” is being bandied about now, regarding the rescue of Cpt. Phillips. Fanatic supporters of the President even use the word to describe Obama — simply for doing what he should have done long before finally deciding to do it.
The men and women of the Navy, and the SEALs who effected this rescue are heroes. They always were. And, yes, Phillips is a hero.
That he was held hostage by pirates and rescued — that he was victimized — is not what makes him a hero. Plenty of others have been in that situation who are simply not deserving of the title. What makes Captain Richard Phillips a hero is that he willingly gave himself to the situation, to save his shipmates. He understood this act of pure selflessness may well be his last, and he did it anyway.
And it is his willingness to trade himself for the lives of others that makes Captain Phillips a by-God True American Hero.
Sen. Gillibrand hosts economic conference — but what’s the point?
New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand was in Cortland Tuesday, speaking with local business leaders about how to best stimulate local economy. Basically, the idea was to seek grant proposals for money that is already earmarked for the State — we have x amount of dollars, NOW let’s decide how to spend it.
Now, let’s forget, for the moment, that Obama’s so-called “stimulus” package, um, isn’t. Let’s forget that you don’t put the nation in debt in order to stimulate economic wellbeing. Let us pretend, as Obama and the Legislative democrats are doing, that tossing money at states (to the detriment of our childrens’ economic future) is indeed the right move to make. Even so, shouldn’t discussions about where, and how much money should be spent, have already happened? Shouldn’t the government, since they’re evidently going to try playing the investment game, have some ideas already in mind before they start shelling out money?
And – since we’re going down the road of what questions the government should have asked and when — shouldn’t the government, perhaps, have asked whether those investments should even be made? Or, since many Americans gave answers to that question without being asked by government anyway, shouldn’t the government, perhaps, have even pretended to listen?
But they didn’t. They knew what they wanted to do, and, without regard to consequence or even a moderate view of economic reality, they went ahead and did it. And now, in standard Democrat Party fashon, they want to have their cake, and eat it too. They want to be able to pass these tax and spending increases, all the while claiming to not like them. All the while claiming to be listening to the cries of their constituency. This, like the AIG bonus tax, is nothing other than Democrats trying to cover their collective ass — and should be taken as nothing else.
Gillibrand’s acknowledgement of “concerns about government spending in the face of mounting budget deficits” sound suspiciously like talking points coming out of most politicians who voted for this thing — and ring just as hollow.
But, says Gillibrand, now that the money’s been spent, it’s time to decide how to use it.
“With a national unemployment rate of five percent and a local unemployment rate at eleven percent, we’ve got a lot of work to do. And so by coming here, I can listen to all our community leaders, our business leaders, our leaders in education and health care and hear directly from them what the problems are and also what their ideas are for the best solutions,” said Gillibrand.
It just seems like a conversation that should have happened a couple months ago, rather than now, after Obama and Company has already sold our future to foreign powers.
Canton Tea Party, April 15
The President’s budget (much like our Governor’s budget) cuts spending from all the wrong places, fails utterly to eliminate wasteful spending from the worst offenders (the several bureaucracies on the National and State level), raises the deficit to such an extent that our childrens’ childrens’ children will still have no idea how to pay for it. And, to cut some of the gigantic costs, the President (much like our governor) is raising taxes and fees where ever he can. Though he claims he’s sticking it to the rich and the corporations, in reality, businesses don’t pay taxes. You and I do.
But we’re not stupid. We know that you don’t get out of debt by piling it on. You don’t save money by borrowing against your future.
On April 15, in 300 cities across America, citizens are uniting to remind the Government that we, the people, are boss — and that we, the people, aren’t happy. For Northern New York, that “Tea Party” will be held in Canton, from 11 am until 2 pm. I’m going to try and make it, and I hope you’ll join me.
“Don’t think we’re not keeping score” — bipartisanship under the Obama administration
(cross-posted at RedState)
The President may be a lot of things, few of them flattering, but one thing he is not is politically stupid. Becoming known for calling out Republican rivals, Obama is now, carefully, working to spread the word that His Excellency will brook no deviation from within the ranks. And, though he has the political acumen to hide his threats in laughter, even those on his own side aren’t missing the underlying message.
In a meeting of House Dems on Monday, Obama recalled Oregon Rep Peter DeFazio’s dissension regarding the disastrous “stimulus” bill:
“I know you think we need more for that because you voted against” the stimulus bill in February, Obama told DeFazio during a question-and-answer session with about 150 House Democrats at the Capitol.
“Don’t think we’re not keeping score, brother,” Obama added, as other lawmakers howled with laughter. …
This is, indeed, new politics here in the US. Obama promised change, and now we begin to see the scope of it. Not only is Barack Obama not even trying to keep his campaign promises of openness and bipartisanship, but we see now that he will accept no alternatives or dissent from his liberal agenda — from anybody.
Message received, Mr. President. Your laughter isn’t fooling anyone.