Amherst (and others) threatening "The Pledge"

[KBCraig]

 

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Amherst+ponders+%27The+Pledge%27+vs.+taxes&articleId=0e8ff577-1adf-4343-9edc-d8d56cd1f01b

Amherst ponders 'The Pledge' vs. taxes

By NANCY FOSTER
Union Leader Correspondent

AMHERST ? In March, voters in around a dozen New Hampshire communities will have an opportunity to let their elected officials know whether a broad-based tax is something worth discussing.

In Amherst, a petitioned article will appear on the warrant calling for a resolution to reject the "the pledge" to not support a broad-based tax that has been made by many elected officials in the state.

The text of the article will read:

"Resolved: We the citizens of Amherst, NH, believe in a New Hampshire that is just and fair. The property tax has become unjust and unfair. 'The Pledge' perpetuates a burdensome property tax. We urge our elected officials to reject 'The Pledge,' have an open discussion covering all options, and to adopt a revenue system that relieves the local property tax burden."

The resolution warrant article has been put forth by an organization called the Granite State Fair Tax Coalition, created by the New Hampshire Council of Churches, as part of its overall strategy to educate people about the problems associated with state's heavy reliance on property taxes.

Amherst resident Jeanne Ludt, a board member of political action group Democracy for New Hampshire, circulated the petition and delivered it to town hall with 33 signatures earlier this month.

"I am not a member of this group, but know people who are," Ludt said. "For me, it was a way to raise consciousness about this issue in our town."

The petitioned article will appear on about a dozen town warrants this year, according to coalition executive director Paul Henle.

"We are starting small, but hope to be on many more town's warrants next year," Henle said.

According to the Coalition, politicians who have taken the pledge to not support any broad-based taxes in New Hampshire, have put themselves and their constituents in a position where alternatives to the property tax can't even be discussed. At the same time, the Coalition says, many people, especially the elderly and those on fixed incomes, are being hurt by the steadily increasing property tax and politicians need to be able to examine the facts and come up with a viable alternative to the property tax.

Though the Coalition said it does not support any specific broad-based tax plan, the group says that there needs to at least be a dialogue about the subject, and the only way that dialogue will occur is if the pledge is rejected.

The Amherst Democrats will host speakers from the Granite State Fair Tax Coalition at their executive board meeting on Feb. 21 at Amherst Country Club.

The potluck supper, which is open to "progressive minded people from the Souhegan Valley," will begin at 6 p.m., and will include the nomination and election by members of the organization of two members for the Amherst Democrats' executive board.

More information can be obtained by calling Graham V. Smith at 673-6629, or email DemocratsOfAmherst@yahoogroups.com.

[error]

New Hampshire towns already have too much money, and waste what they have. Why should we give them even more money?

[Tyler Stearns]

This made me so angry.  I hate when people want to make a new tax to relieve the burden of an old tax.  Did anyone think of controlling spending?  Voting no on increased taxes?  What people don't realize is that NH has the 2nd lowest tax burden in the whole United States.  When you add it all up we actually don't pay that much in taxes.  It just looks bad because it comes in one big bill.

[burnthebeautiful]

Jeez, these people sure are dumb. Even if the new does result in the old tax being lowered by the same amount, you're still paying the same amount of money in taxes.

[CNHT]

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Amherst+ponders+%27The+Pledge%27+vs.+taxes&articleId=0e8ff577-1adf-4343-9edc-d8d56cd1f01b

Amherst ponders 'The Pledge' vs. taxes

By NANCY FOSTER
Union Leader Correspondent

AMHERST ? In March, voters in around a dozen New Hampshire communities will have an opportunity to let their elected officials know whether a broad-based tax is something worth discussing.

I have already alerted some Amherst voters to spread the word that they need to attend TOWN MEETING to counter this.

They are invading your town meetings folks, so they can impose STATE-WIDE taxes. DO not let them do it!

[Dreepa]

Morons... if you don't like the pledge.... don't sign it....
That is the choice you can make.

[CNHT]

Morons... if you don't like the pledge.... don't sign it....
That is the choice you can make.

It is more about using the property tax as a wedge-issue to force people to accept an income tax.

You never know how well the wisdom of adding one tax to reduce another will be received.

There should be counter-demonstrators to stand up and say "show me ONE single case where other taxes were reduced or eliminated upon the imposition of a sales or income tax?"

[anthonybpugh]

They are simply trying to give cover to politicians so they can break the pledge claiming that 'the people' want them to.

In terms of public finance, the property tax is better than the income tax in many ways.  It is not like you can scoop up your property and move it somewhere else in order to avoid a tax.  Property tax will not result in a loss of land.  Income tax can result in a loss of jobs since jobs are mobile.

Can't you also deduct your property taxes on your federal income taxes?  You cannot deduct sales tax or state income tax on your federal taxes either. 

[KBCraig]

Jeez, these people sure are dumb. Even if the new does result in the old tax being lowered by the same amount, you're still paying the same amount of money in taxes.

Not the way they want to structure it. If they got their way, someone else would be paying those taxes.

[CNHT]

Jeez, these people sure are dumb. Even if the new does result in the old tax being lowered by the same amount, you're still paying the same amount of money in taxes.

Not the way they want to structure it. If they got their way, someone else would be paying those taxes.

They want to centralize the tax structure so they can control it and your money. As it stands now YOU have control. (That is if 'you' would get out to vote NO on spending) And you have 400 legislators representing you.
Next thing you know they will want to cut the representation in half like in Mass. and pay them.
This is what happens when Democrats take control -- DO NOT LET THEM DO IT.

Remember, it's pretty pathetic when you have a town of 20,000, with 13,000 voters, 100 show up for town meeting, and 70 vote to spend, affecting the other 19,930 people?

ABSURD! But, it's the rest of those 12,900 people who are to blame for not showing up for one or two lousy nights!


Go here and tell DFNH what you think of their hair-brained idea to reject the pledge.

http://www.democracyfornewhampshire.com/node/view/3328

[lildog]

Jeez, these people sure are dumb. Even if the new does result in the old tax being lowered by the same amount, you're still paying the same amount of money in taxes.

Depends on what new tax they put in its place.  With income tax the socialists can have their wish of sticking it to the rich and taxing them MORE.  And as one NH democrat already defined, the rich in NH is anyone making a household income of $70,000 or more.  They are the ones "not paying their fair share".

Personally I think it should be pointed out that if these people want people who will tax us more in different ways there is nothing stopping them from electing people who refuse to sign the pledge.  Problem is they know their ideas don't float so they want to hide them.  That's why the democrats on the national level are cheering on a blank slate for a top choice (Obama).  What does that say about their party that they get behind someone who's ideas aren't known?  hmmmm....

[CNHT]

People were dumb enough to vote for Democrats whose positions were largely unknown (they did in my town) but simply demonized the opposition instead, and so I guess they realize that this just works with the sheeple who don't bother researching how they probably would be replacing a librerty-oriented candidate with a much less liberty-oriented candidate. (Such as CSPorter instead of Bass)

[lildog]

People were dumb enough to vote for Democrats whose positions were largely unknown (they did in my town) but simply demonized the opposition instead, and so I guess they realize that this just works with the sheeple who don't bother researching how they probably would be replacing a librerty-oriented candidate with a much less liberty-oriented candidate. (Such as CSPorter instead of Bass)

People voted against Bush and Iraq instead of for issues.

As a result you now have Democrats who are claiming a mandate for all their wacko ideas.  In two years you'll see people voting against the wacko ideas.

The REAL elections take place in the primaries.  Those are the elections more should be watching as those determine who we see as the alternative to what people vote against.  And in most cases only the educated voters show up in the primaries.  Says a lot about the democrats who openly support blank slates as candidates because they know anyone who's views are know would be openly rejected.

[CNHT]

The problem is, how many damaging NH bills will be passed that are irreversible like some of these election law bills, increased user fees, more controls and bans, and increased spending?

A US law was just defeated that would have greatly curtailed the activities of this website, and many other grassroots groups.

Of course, HILLARY CLINTON and her cohorts all voted for it...

John Sununu did NOT.