The Sept. 25 Letter to the Editor by Tom Anderson should have stated that “over 4,000” Kurdish villages had been annihilated by their government. The Pilot had incorrectly typed in “400,000.” We regret the error.
Curry County’s economy shows few signs of recovery in the near future, and we continue to face an unemployment rate well above the national average. This is not the time to ask voters to approve an increase of at least 25 percent in their property taxes for a law enforcement levy.
No one is against law enforcement, but many people are against the county’s indiscriminate spending and continual hiring. One recent letter writer, a member of the Curry County Budget Committee, exclaimed in the Sept. 15 issue of the Curry Coastal Pilot and the Curry County Reporter, “We knew the O&C money would not be around forever.” Our county leaders have had over 15 years to prepare for the eventual loss of federal funds but still they refused to be fiscally responsible by cutting staff and dropping unaffordable programs.
Raising property taxes is not the answer; reining in the county’s spending is the solution. Curry County government can no longer be all things to all people. No matter how indispensable some employees may seem, and how noble some programs may appear, there comes a time when they are unaffordable.
The current discussion regarding the proposed law enforcement tax levy should be about the need to cut spending versus the need to raise taxes. It should be about how to pay for the quantity and quality of law enforcement we need in our county. There are other avenues available other than raising property taxes if only our local leaders would use good judgment, do the job they have been entrusted with, and show the courage to make the difficult decisions. Laying the blame on the voters if the levy does not pass is not an option; planning for a fiscally responsible county government is the answer.
Front page of the Manchester Guardian alerted me to FDA decisions being made this week regarding genetically altered salmon to be grown in US waters. Here is a link to the AP story:
Can any of these people imagine what might happen in our depleted, endangered wild stocks if these genes got loose?
Talk to any heritage farmer about trying to keephis crops “Round-up” free.
Or any farmer who tried to grow his own seed, only to be sued by Monsanto.
Or any European, where GMOs are banned.
Dr. Larry Witt
Today, Sept. 23, marks the 6-month anniversary of the Affordable Care Act. This means many important measures are now in effect.
Because of the Affordable Care Act, all insurance plans will now offer young adults up to age 26 options to be covered under their parents' plan if they have no other healthcare. It means that insurance companies can no longer deny coverage to children with pre-existing conditions. It means that most insurance plans will offer preventative care at no cost, that is, not even co-pays or deductibles.
These are just a few of the huge benefits to you, your family and your friends who are struggling with the high cost of healthcare. But, Republican lawmakers and candidates are promising to repeal this important Act!
I ask you, Republicans, how will you face your grandchildren when they ask you if your vote helped to force them off their parents' healthcare plan before they were able to find a job? How will you face them if they wonder why their parents had to struggle to put food on their table, just to pay for the huge medical bills caused by one of their children who happened to have a pre-existing condition? Or if they grieve for their relative who died due to lack of simple preventative healthcare measures?
These are real questions to ask before you vote in November. Peter DeFazio, along with the other Democratic candidates on our ballot, understands the importance of protecting the health of our citizens by strengthening, the Affordable Care Act. Think about this when you cast your vote!
I cannot understand it! The U.S. has thousands of adults and countless children who cannot get adequate medical care, but Republicans want to do away with the new health care law that is finally starting to cope with this problem. Of course, not caring for these folk may reduce the country’s debt, and they probably do not vote anyway!
Besides doing away with health care, the Tea Party wants to do away with Medicare, on which many seniors rely for medical expenses, and Social Security, which is the only income some older people receive. Again, this might ease the national debt, but it will lead to more people being poor and sick. But raise taxes on the wealthy to help finance these programs? Heaven forbid!
Of course, members of Congress have health care (provided by our taxes), as well as enough money to pay for it, anyway, to judge from the amount they spend when running for office.
So, would someone please explain why it is bad to raise taxes on the rich, but all right to cut health care, Medicare, and Social Security for everyone else?!
Final wish: Return to the big pond
Gone fishing forever.
Something good to say about my great friend: The five of us boarded a boat Saturday and set out on a course of 225 for five miles. This was where Moose Lasley wanted his friends to return him to (the big pond), where he spent the last 20 years chasseing fish with a multitude of friends.
His wonderful wife read an inspirational Indian poem as we sprinkled the big man back to the sea. We set roses from his yard on the water than lowered a nice fishing pole, complete with his famous “electric chicken,” and a ball cap into the cool green sea, knowing he would need these items in his next life.
I can’t remember having such a great time carrying out a person’s last wishes. I thanked his wife and friends as I walked up the boat ramp thinking to myself, we all have so much to be thankful for here in our quiet little fishing community. What great people we’ve come to know as our friends.
In his letter to the Pilot of Sept. 25, “Iraq: Right to go, right to leave,” Tom Anderson wrote: “I know of no constitution in the world that protects its people from excessive taxation like the new Iraqi constitution.”
Really? I suggest that Mr. Anderson find an old copy of the U.S. Constitution printed before 1913, before our constitution was “amended” to impose the Federal Income Tax on us.
The founders of our country greatly feared the tyranny of a strong central government and deliberately gave our original federal government only very limited powers and a budget measured in thousands of dollars instead of the trillions of today. All that changed in 1913 when the 16th Amendment was successfully rammed through. This loosely worded amendment effectively gave the federal government unlimited access to our money and allowed the inevitable creation of hundreds of giant federal bureaucracies to control every aspect of our lives.
Freedom? I recently saw that concept dismissed by a liberal writer as “freedom and all that bla-bla-bla” while urging more federal regulations on us.
America today already has more puffed-up government officials and more laws and regulations per square foot than any other country in the world. We can hardly take a deep breath without seeking a permit from some federal agency. Liberals, who see themselves as modern versions of Plato’s “philosopher-kings,” may see that as “for our own good,” but it would horrify the founders of our country!
I am begging the folks in Curry County to get rid of those horrific cat houses on the North Jetty in Gold Beach.
I have contacted the mayor of Gold Beach about this issue and she said that is not the jurisdiction of Gold Beach, rather the port.
Yesterday afternoon I went down to the jetty to give those poor cats some cat food that my fussy cat didn’t want. Well, I opened the roof of the houses, put the food in the dishes, and by the way, the drinking water was filthy, closed the roof, walked away and six of the fattest raccoons raced to the houses, coming up from the rocks. I chased them away only to have them come racing back. So much for any food that goes in there for the cats.
Between the raccoons, who are vicious and will kill the cats (in this case kittens), the place reeks of skunks and the gulls are gobbling what food they can get to.
This is a disgraceful, feel good situation that needs to be addressed. I happen to be a cat lover, and I know for a fact that if those cats were dogs, people would be enraged to see them starving, left to the elements, and eventually suffering a cruel death. This is a dumping ground for these cats and it needs to stop.
Please, will someone take down those broken down, filthy buildings, trap what cats are left, and the kind thing would be to euthanize them. They have all turned feral.
After I finish this e-mail I am going to call the Brookings Humane Society to see if they can help. Remove these lost soul before the rains come, please.
On Friday evening my family an I went to Brookings to enjoy the High School football game. We paid our way in, and to our dismay their was no bleacher space available. Small home stands, and no visitor stands.
All that tells me is that the district does not have enough respect or faith in there student athletes to believe they can draw enough spectators to fill the seats. It is unfortunate that people travel to these games and have to stand for hours, because the cost of bleachers is more important than pride and respect for your students and there families (not to mention the visiting teams/fans that only get a postage stamp sized piece of the inadequate bleachers provided).
These kids and fans deserve more. Build it and they will come.
I had the very great privilege of meeting Mr. Jim Huffman, the senatorial candidate running against Ron Wyden, two days ago at a Port Orford “meet and greet.”
Fortunately, for those of you that missed this opportunity, he is returning to the South Coast. Senate candidate, Jim Huffman, is returning twice to Coos Bay. First, a “meet and greet” Thursday Sept. 30 at 6 p.m. at the GOP Headquarters in Pony Village Mall (next to the Orange Julius). Second, a “Huffman For Senate” Rally Monday, Oct. 4 at 5 p.m. at the Coos Bay Boardwalk, followed by a sit-down with the candidate at the ESD building at 1350 Teakwood Ave., Coos Bay.
He is a true constitutional conservative, running against Ron Wyden, and is exactly what our state, and our country, needs in our time of peril. Please attend one or both venues and let’s make our voices heard once again.
It’s the Democrats who misinform the public. Mr. Seither claims no Democrat ever stated Bush tax cuts were for the rich only, but he failed to cite one example. That seems his tactic: telling me I’m wrong, but providing no proof.
Here’s a recent example demonstrating Democrats’ GOP’s “for the rich only” position. President Obama, in his weekly radio/Internet address 25 September, clearly indicates his belief Republicans did not cut middle class taxes: “The Republicans who want to take over Congress offered their own ideas the other day. Many were the very same policies that led to the economic crisis in the first place ... It is grounded in the same worn-out philosophy: cut taxes for millionaires and billionaires...and cut the middle class loose to fend for itself.”
Actual facts about the Bush tax cuts:
• All tax brackets were reduced (e.g., 15 percent to 10 percent, 28 percent to 25 percent, 38.6 percent to 35 percent);
• Ended Marriage penalty;
• Increased Child Tax credit;
• Decreased Dividends and Capital Gains Taxes;
• Added IRA/401K tax advantages;
• Eliminated “Death” Tax.
These helped everyone, even those who pay no taxes (people who pay $0 but get a check increased from 30 to 40 million). Please note that Senator Weyden and Representative DeFazio voted against these tax cuts, along with the majority of Democrats. If it isn’t socialist redistribution of wealth, it seems they don’t like it. Democrats won’t admit Republicans helped all, not just the rich.
Shirley Hyatt ( Sept 22) seems it “hilarious” that I want our government to protect all innocent human lives. The government got too involved in abortion when it claimed to have the authority (or grant such to others) to deprive some human beings of their right to life. Most of us want it to rectify the error.
Earning a BA in History at Iona College meant learning that those who wrote “all that written down stuff that makes us Americans(sic)” were consistent in insisting that the Creator bestows life, the first and foremost of all natural rights, and that upon which all the others rest. (No life, no freedom; No life, no opportunity to pursue happiness.) Our government was established to secure these rights inherent in our nature as human beings.
Hyatt implies inconsistency in those who value that guiding principle, fear that the government has strayed from it, and want it to return. How do those who support abortion justify their position with the writings and intentions of our founding fathers?
“That freedom stuff (sic)”? Yes, Liberty is the second right mentioned. Our professors taught that freedom is the right to do what we ought to do and that one’s freedom ends when it impedes the legitimate freedom of another. The government’s job is to prevent this infringement. When someone’s “choice” destroys innocent human life, it is no longer a private matter. Even though the majority does not determine right and wrong, it agrees with me in this case.
I trust that not many here, even those who have different values, consider it hilarious that it pains me to be forced to support with my taxes something I think hurts all: the unborn child, the mother, our country.