Friday, October 12, 2012

The Chesbro/ Lynch Race

I've been wondering about the state assembly race. I certainly won't vote for Wes Chesbro, but do I vote for Tom Lynch or not vote at all? After reading the yesterday's Times- Standard story on the race, I think I've decided.

Lynch looks like the clear choice to me. First of all, he committed what amounts to heresy among Democrats by opposing Prop 30- the sales and income tax increase. He feels he "...hasn't seen changes in the state's spending practices" to justify it. That's pretty much along the lines of what I've been saying.

He also wants to work on public worker pension reform, something he brought up more than once during the League Of Women Voters candidate forum a while back. That's something most Democrats balk at, as well. Chesbro, of course, not really wanting to bring the issue up publicly because he helped create that problem.

As Einstein supposedly said, "A problem can't be solved by the same mentality that created it". Seems to me Lynch is the obvious choice in this race. I'll likely vote for Tom Lynch on November 6.


At 9:33 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Henchman Of Justice" says,

Agreed Fred with your prop 30 observation. The State is just saying "f-off" and wanting more taxations to be created so that locals bare the future constraints we both know will occur politically, thus creating more taxation schemes. Government has yet to acknowledge that it still is getting bigger and bigger in a BAD WAY. Voting NO on 30 and 38... People will have to do without for quite some time; otherwise, these financial constraints destroy one state falls, another will follow and follow and follow....... That is trickle down economics at its MOST RUTHLESS! - HOJ

At 9:58 AM, Blogger Fred Mangels said...

Strange as it may seem, I'm one who thinks the state may have to raise taxes to get past its chronic deficits. I realize there's waste and that government does things and spends money on things it shouldn't, but that's just the way it will always be here (until the state collapses).

I'm not sure I'd have supported Prop 30, anyway, for at least a couple reasons: first, no spending controls included. Second, it places a tax on someone other than me which I find morally repulsive (and that should be illegal).

If I'd seen at least some indication the Governor and legislature had tried to get our fiscal house in order, I might have been able to get beyond that and be more sympathetic to the tax increase, but they haven't. There's numerous examples of them approving inappropriate spending but passing funding for the start of the high speed rail line was the straw that broke this camel's back.

I'm not going to argue the merit, or lack thereof, of the high speed rail proposal here. The thing is, we don't have the money and, despite what some say, HSR will be a drain on the state even under a best case scenario.

If they'd have just put off the HSR project, saying they'd get to it in better times, that would have sufficed. As it was, they committed the state to borrowing billions more dollars that we don't have regardless of all the arguments (and public sentiment) against doing so.

I'm a strong NO vote on Prop 30 if only because of that.


Post a Comment

<< Home