Issues 8 & 9
Previous posts have outlined libertarian positions on state Issues 1 through 5. Here are my thoughts on two local Issues, 8 and 9.
NO on Issue 8
Remember the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, and the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation Act of 1987? Neither do I. Both of these laws mandated a balanced federal budget. However, the government's current financial situation seems to indicate Gramm-Rudman has been…less than effective.
Issue 8 is a "reform" that would "…require that Council individually ratify any increase in the salaries payable to members of Council, by a vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the members of Council…" The thinking is that if Council members have to go on the record with their approval or disapproval of pay increases, they will be less likely to raise their own salaries.
Laws to reform politicians do not work. Gramm-Rudman didn't create a balanced federal budget and Issue 8 will not hold down Council salaries. Politicians will always find a loophole (or ten) to get the money they want.
Cincinnatians don't need more laws, they need less. Vote NO on Issue 8.
YES on Issue 9
Businesses leave our city every day. This contributes to our population loss, which averages 12 people a day. In a few years we will be the fourth largest city in the state behind Cleveland, Columbus and…Toledo. And one reason that businesses are leaving is to move to places with lower taxes, including lower property taxes.
Issue 9 would phase out the city's property tax over the next 9 years. The current tax rate, which is set by City Council annually, stands at 4.89 mils on the dollar of assessed valuation. Issue 9 would reduce that rate to 4.0 mils in 2006 and then reduce it by .5 mils each year until it reaches zero in 2014.
Phasing out the property tax would reduce the City's income by about 1% each year. If city officials can't reduce the bloated City budget by 1%, they're just not trying.
Issue 9 will lower taxes and reduce the size of government. Vote YES on Issue 9.
Paul Green
Chair
Hamilton County Libertarian Party
NO on Issue 8
Remember the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, and the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation Act of 1987? Neither do I. Both of these laws mandated a balanced federal budget. However, the government's current financial situation seems to indicate Gramm-Rudman has been…less than effective.
Issue 8 is a "reform" that would "…require that Council individually ratify any increase in the salaries payable to members of Council, by a vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the members of Council…" The thinking is that if Council members have to go on the record with their approval or disapproval of pay increases, they will be less likely to raise their own salaries.
Laws to reform politicians do not work. Gramm-Rudman didn't create a balanced federal budget and Issue 8 will not hold down Council salaries. Politicians will always find a loophole (or ten) to get the money they want.
Cincinnatians don't need more laws, they need less. Vote NO on Issue 8.
YES on Issue 9
Businesses leave our city every day. This contributes to our population loss, which averages 12 people a day. In a few years we will be the fourth largest city in the state behind Cleveland, Columbus and…Toledo. And one reason that businesses are leaving is to move to places with lower taxes, including lower property taxes.
Issue 9 would phase out the city's property tax over the next 9 years. The current tax rate, which is set by City Council annually, stands at 4.89 mils on the dollar of assessed valuation. Issue 9 would reduce that rate to 4.0 mils in 2006 and then reduce it by .5 mils each year until it reaches zero in 2014.
Phasing out the property tax would reduce the City's income by about 1% each year. If city officials can't reduce the bloated City budget by 1%, they're just not trying.
Issue 9 will lower taxes and reduce the size of government. Vote YES on Issue 9.
Paul Green
Chair
Hamilton County Libertarian Party
posted by CincinnatiLibertarian at 1:44 PM
2 Comments:
Issue 8
With the current set up, can the council cut their own pay ?
This is something that has been brought up mainly by Leslie Ghiz but has been supported by several candidates.
As far as I can tell, they can vote themselves a salary decrease. The city charter only prohibits excessive pay hikes.
I also know that a city council member does not have to accept their salary. They are allowed to give it back to the city. It would be interesting to see which council winners will actually will give back a portion of their salary, and which ones will just talk about lowering their salary.
Post a Comment
<< Home