Tag Archives: Massachusetts

The Quiet Government War Against Guns

Posted on by

According to a Breitbart.com article posted on January 8, 2014, Operation Choke Point is an outgrowth of the President’s Financial Fraud Task Force, established by President Obama by Executive Order in 2009.

Breitbart reports:

It (Operation Choke Point) also appears to have been kicked off in secret by the Department of Justice, FDIC, and the CFPB in early 2013 without the requisite statutory authority. Officials at the Department of Justice have withheld information about the program from Congress, though they have eagerly shared details with federal financial institution examiners authorized to supervise and discipline the nation’s banks and related financial institutions.

In an article posted yesterday, the Daily Caller describes Operation Choke Point as follows:

Operated under a cloud of secrecy by the Department of Justice and in coordination with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Operation Choke Point forces banks to keep a closer eye on companies in industries that are deemed “high risk”, including gun and ammunition dealers, coin dealers, payday lenders, and debt consolidation service providers.

Sounds harmless enough, right? Well, the story at the Daily Caller was about a Massachusetts gun shop owner who was denied a loan from TD Bank because he owned a gun shop.

This is the story:

Mark Cohen, who owns Powderhorn Outfitters, a Hyannis, Mass. gun retailer, said that his longtime bank, TD Bank, refused to extend a line of credit because of the business he is in.

Cohen explained what happened in an interview with The Daily Caller on Friday.

“This year I went to apply for a line of credit, and the bank manager came by the store,” said Cohen, adding that he’s known the bank manager for over 20 years.

“Mark, I apologize,” she said, according to Cohen, “your credit history is great, but the bank is turning you down because you sell guns.”

Cohen told his friend and lender that he would have no choice but to close his accounts with the bank since they couldn’t provide the services his company needs.

…Cohen believes that TD Bank didn’t want to do business with his gun store because of a government initiative called Operation Choke Point.

TD Bank has since tried to make amends, but Mr. Cohen has said that he will no longer do business with them. There is no law against legally selling guns, and there is no indication or charge that Mr. Cohen was doing anything illegal. We currently have an out-of-control federal government. We have November 2014 and November 2016 to shut it down. If we elect people who will continue in the direction we are going, we deserve what we get.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Not Everyone Cheers When The Playing Field Is Leveled

Posted on by

Michael Graham posted an article in the Boston Herald today about the recent Supreme Court decision on campaign donations.

Michael Graham explains why the decision is important to Massachusetts:

The U.S. Supreme Court’s campaign-finance ruling is the first ray of sunshine to reach the Massachusetts Republican party in a long time.

To understand why, you need to know three simple facts about who pays for campaigns, facts that are almost never reported in the mainstream media:

• Six of the top 10 campaign donors are unions. And their money overwhelmingly goes to Democrats. Incumbent Democrats in particular.

• Sixteen of the top 25 campaign funders are liberal, Democratic organizations like ActBlue ($97 million in campaign cash since 1989), which also give disproportionately to incumbents. Only three of the top 25 are Republican.

• None of them are the Koch Brothers. (They rank 57th.)

If you haven’t figured it out, the purpose of campaign finance restrictions is to protect incumbent politicians. This shouldn’t be a surprise given that these laws were passed by … incumbent politicians.

And in Massachusetts, “incumbent” is a synonym for “Democrat.” (When it comes to federal office-holders here, that is literally true.) So any change that makes life more difficult for incumbents is good news for the local GOP.

Union money has bought and sold elections in Massachusetts and some other states for a very long time. This ruling levels the playing field and lets other people with money play. That is why the Democrat party is making such a big deal about it.

The unintended consequence of this ruling may be that being able to be in public office long enough to go from being broke to multi millionaire may no longer be possible. It may be that being in public office may no longer be a career. Keep in mind that our founding fathers envisioned a government made up of ordinary citizens. Unfortunately we have forgotten that concept and created career politicians.

Not everyone loves it when you level the playing field.

Enhanced by Zemanta

A Rather Interesting Definition Of Equality

Posted on by

Lately there has been much discussion about what health insurance should cover and what it should not cover. Obamacare has added to that discussion by requiring that approved insurance policies cover pediatric dental care for single people or that single men have coverage for birth control. Yet many cancer patients and people with serious diseases have found that they are not fully covered. We have heard their stories.

I have previously posted stories about Robert, now Michelle, Kosilek (rightwinggranny.com and rightwinggranny.com), a convicted murderer currently serving prison time in Massachusetts. These stories have focused on Mr. Kosilek’s battle to force the Massachusetts taxpayers to pay for his sex-change operation so that he can spend his time in prison as Michelle Kosilek. The latest decision to come down from the Massachusetts court was that the taxpayers should also pay for Mr. Kosilek’s legal expenses in this case.

Now a taxpayer has gone to the courts claiming discrimination in this case. Today’s Boston Herald is reporting that Anita T. Phoenix, 59, a Cambridge transgender woman, has filed a federal lawsuit earlier this month claiming that Medicare and MassHealth discriminated against her because they would not pay for her transgender treatments.

The article reports:

State Sen. Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester), who has supported the Department of Correction in the Kosilek fight, said the lawsuit shows the dangers of the controversial case.

“It will open the door not only to other law-abiding people to make that claim, but people who are incarcerated to seek other forms of surgery that they wouldn’t otherwise obtain,” said Tarr. “What we’re talking about here are extraordinary measures that most citizens can’t afford and wouldn’t undertake. If we set a precedent in allowing Kosilek to obtain this kind of surgery, what we’d essentially be doing is opening the door for all different types of surgeries that are extraordinary to become the subject of entitlement.”

In 2012, federal Judge Mark Wolf ruled the state must pay for Kosilek’s surgery. DOC is making preparations for the operation should a pending appeal fail.

It seems to me that Mr. Kosilek’s and Ms. Phoenix’s is, to some degree, elective surgery. Health insurance does not pay for face lifts or Lasik eye surgery because they are considered optional. When I had cataract surgery, the toric lens they implanted was not covered by my insurance–I had to pay for it–the insurance company would have paid for a lens that had no prescription, but that would have left me still paying for eyeglasses. Frankly, I am much more sympathetic to Ms. Phoenix’s cause than I am for Mr. Kosilek’s cause. It would be a travesty of justice if Mr. Kosilek, a convicted murderer, has access to free health care that Ms. Phoenix, an average taxpayer, is not able to access freely under her health insurance.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Let The Squabbles Begin

Posted on by

The Boston Globe posted an article today about the fight among the New England States for ObamaCare grants to set up websites. Originally, Massachusetts was given a $45 million federal innovation grant to build a state-of-the-art consumer platform for President Obama’s insurance program.

Massachusetts is a bit of a ‘techie’ state, and it was hoped that they would share the technical knowledge used to build their ObamaCare website with the other New England states. That sounds like a very reasonable idea in theory. Unfortunately, in practice it didn’t work.

The article reports:

Massachusetts has failed to produce a successful computer model to share, and in the meantime Connecticut’s insurance marketplace, built by Deloitte LLP, is working so well that the state is now offering its computer system as a model for other struggling states.

Counihan said five states have expressed interest in piggybacking off Connecticut’s insurance marketplace, but not Massachusetts.

“Some states were trying to build a Maserati. We built a Ford Focus,’’ Counihan said. “It might not be as glamorous but it runs. It can get you to the store.”

So what’s the problem? The article explains:

Connecticut health care officials are now mounting a campaign to collect a portion of a $45 million federal innovation grant that was awarded to Massachusetts to build a state-of-the-art consumer platform for President Obama’s insurance program.

…But, Rhode Island state Representative Joseph McNamara, a Democrat on the General Assembly’s Permanent Joint Committee on Healthcare Oversight, said he thinks Rhode Island could benefit from the money. Federal grants for the Rhode Island insurance marketplace end by July 2015, when the state would face a $24 million shortfall, he said.

“It’s a liability that we’re starting to discuss right now,” McNamara said. “We would appreciate any assistance from our friends in Massachusetts.”

Somewhere along the way, someone needs to remind these states that this is not ‘free’ money. It comes off the backs of overtaxed taxpayers who are paying upwards of 40 percent of their earnings in taxes. At some point we need to admit that ObamaCare is costing considerably more money than anticipated and repeal it. Unfortunately, as long as states are willing to fight over federal tax money in order to avoid spending their state tax money, the federal deficit will continue to grow.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Discussion About Common Core Continues

Posted on by

Today I attended a public meeting of a joint legislative committee in North Carolina that is studying Common Core and will likely make recommendations on its implementation in the state. The Common Core State Standards Initiative is a set of standards for K-12 in English and Math. It will later include Science and Social Studies. It is a top down program coming from Washington, D.C., that is copyrighted and not tailored to meet the needs of each individual state. The Common Core program is heavily funded by the Bill Gates Foundation.

There were sixty speakers at the meeting and another forty or fifty in the audience listening to the arguments. Generally speaking, those who supported Common Core spoke of the need for educational standards. I don’t think anyone would dispute that educational standards are needed–the question is whether those standards will be handled locally or handed down from Washington, D.C.

The arguments against Common Core were varied. Some people argued that the dictation of educational standards from Washington, D. C. was unconstitutional. Other speakers expressed concern about the amount of data that will be collected on the students in the Common Core program and what will be done with that data. There was a serious question as to whether privacy rights of students and parents will be protected.

The most convincing argument against Common Core came from parents of children in kindergarten through grade three. Those parents were nearly in tears as they described the impact Common Core was having on their children–the children hate school and are suffering anxiety attacks due to the pressure of constant testing. The children are also being asked to understand concepts that are not age-appropriate to them.

Two other objections to Common Core were that the program has not been tested and that no one has put a specific price tag on the cost of implementing and maintaining the program.

After listening to the statements made this morning, I can only conclude that it would be unwise to implement a set of academic standards without adequately testing them or knowing how much they would cost. I would strongly suggest that the State of North Carolina set its own academic standards by observing other states that have been successful in doing this. Massachusetts (before Common Core) is a very good example of a state that greatly improved its academic standards without any help from the federal government. This is probably the only time I will ever suggest that North Carolina follow the example of Massachusetts, but this is the one time Massachusetts has set a good example.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Law Enforcement In Connecticut Knows What the Second Amendment Says Even If The Lawmakers Don’t

Posted on by

Yesterday The Examiner posted an article about the latest development in Connecticut’s war on gun owners.

The article reports:

Gun rights legal expert and activist David Hardy reported Friday that 250 law enforcement officers in Connecticut have signed an open letter stating that they will not enforce the new anti-gun and magazine laws, which they consider to be a violation of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

David Hardy is reporting that Tyler Jackson, the head of the Connecticut Peace Officers Association, has emailed him a letter stating that the head of the Connecticut Peace Officers’ Assn has released an open letter stating that the police will not “be party to the oppression of the people of the state by enforcing an unconstitutional law.” So far 250 LEOs have cosigned the letter.

The Second Amendment states:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Why is the State of Connecticut attempting to disarm its citizens?

Moving to North Carolina from Massachusetts has been something of a culture shock in a number of areas. One of those areas is the attitude toward guns. Generally speaking, I can assume that wherever I am in North Carolina there are probably at least three or four people around me with concealed carry permits that are carrying guns. Although I am not particularly interested in carrying a gun myself, I feel perfectly safe in the midst of people who do concealed carry. Actually, I feel safer than I did in Massachusetts. I know if someone comes into the mall with bad intentions, he will be met with a number of armed citizens with good intentions. That’s a good thing. Most of the mass shootings we have had have been in gun-free zones. People who intend to harm people generally like to do it where they will meet the least resistance. I have no problem with gun permits, but guns should not have to be registered, and they should not be subject to seizure by the state or federal government. Taking guns away from law-abiding Connecticut citizens is not gun control–it is disarming the civilian population–never a good idea!

Enhanced by Zemanta

I Love The Irony In This

Posted on by

Yesterday the Daily Caller posted an article about the impact of ObamaCare in Massachusetts–the home of RomneyCare. RomeyCare was supposed to be the model for ObamaCare, but when you look closely at RomneyCare, there are some significant differences. Neither one did what was promised, but at least RomneyCare did not totally wreck healthcare in Massachusetts. It has taken ObamaCare to do that!

The article reports:

Starting in 2007 — over a period of three years — Massachusetts spent $3,449,520 developing a first-in-the-nation online health exchange, which allowed the state’s citizens to purchase health coverage. And when President Obama campaigned for the passage of his own federal health law, he leaned on the Massachusetts experiment as a model for the nation.

But the changes mandated by Obama’s Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, have actually gutted the effectiveness of Massachusetts’ once-working model.

Thanks to Obamacare, in 2012, Massachusetts began a transition to a new federally compliant health exchange, budgeted to cost $69 million. But to date, not one person has purchased health care through that federally funded exchange.

…The Massachusetts legislature didn’t even vote until June of 2013 to authorize the Connector Authority to change from their original functioning exchange over to the new system. Shortly after that vote, as The Boston Globe reported, officials started warning the Health Connector that the website would not work.

…On the unsubsidized side, Connector Authority spokesman Jason Lefferts told the Daily Caller, “We have worked with carriers to define the most similar plan to current coverage. The members will get a notice with the details. If they like it, all they do is pay the bill and they are all set. If they don’t, they are able to shop for a new plan. This new mechanism will allow these people to keep coverage without having to go through the website. All members will get notices within the next week.”

Yet four and a half months after the launch date of the new exchange, there remains no end date in site for the fixes.

Yang summed up the current situation at the last board meeting: “We have to work harder,” she said, according to the Boston Globe. “That means I need to tell the staff members they’re not doing a good enough job and I’m telling them that, even though they have been doing this tirelessly for months, and they’re exhausted.”

RomneyCare was no bargain, but it has taken ObamaCare to ruin it completely.

Enhanced by Zemanta

You Can Qualify For Free Optional Surgery By Murdering Your Wife

Posted on by

In May of 1990 Robert Kosilek murdered his wife. He left her body in her car parked at Emerald Square Mall in North Attleboro, Massachusetts. He was convicted of the murder and sentenced to life in prison without possibility of parole (Massachusetts does not allow the death penalty).

Since his incarceration, Mr. Kosilek has been claiming that it is his Constitutional right to have the Massachusetts taxpayers pay for the cost of his sex-change operation. While I sympathize with Mr. Kosilek’s desire to have the surgery, I question the fact that the Massachusetts taxpayer should pay the bill. Unfortunately, a federal judge has taken the opposite view.

The Blaze reported today:

A federal appeals court on Friday upheld a ruling that said the state must provide a taxpayer-funded sex change for a convicted Massachusetts murderer as part of the individual’s constitutional rights.

In a 2-1 ruling, the court noted that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled courts “must not shrink from their obligation to enforce the constitutional rights of all persons, including prisoners,” according to the Boston Globe.

The article further reports:

Kosilek was named “Robert” when convicted of murdering his wife, Cheryl McCaul, in 1990, the Associated Press reported. After prison officials declined to provide a sex reassignment surgery, Kosilek sued the Department of Correction and a federal judge later ruled in 2012 the surgery was the “only adequate treatment” for the gender identity disorder Kosilek purportedly suffered from.

This man is a convicted murderer. Wouldn’t it make more sense to put him in a facility for dangerous criminals and forget about paying for the surgery?

Enhanced by Zemanta

The War On The Fishing Industry Continues

Posted on by

On Thursday, the Washington Examiner posted an article about the Obama Administration’s continuing war on the fishing industry. Having lived in Massachusetts for a number of years, I saw the results of this war. I also saw that on occasion Massachusetts elected people to Congress who would fight the Administration on this issue. Scott Brown was one of those people, and oddly enough, so was Barney Frank. Both men understood the importance of the fishing industry to New England and also understood that the environmentalists who were fighting that industry were often fudging the numbers they were using in that fight.

The article at the Washington Examiner points out the money behind the attack on the fishing industry. The article has an illustration of the groups that are funding the attack. Please follow the link to the article and view the chart–it is amazing.

The article reports:

For more than a decade, the National Marine Fisheries Service has devoured fishing fleets while Big Green’s money octopus prods the feds by waving grant-eating enviros in its tentacles, causing them to hook the public’s attention with mindless frenzy against “overfishing.”

…Stolpe (Nils Stolpe, veteran executive, consultant, and advocate for the commercial fishing community) hopes to get fair play. He spoke of the House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings, R-Wash., and panel members’ concern over attacks on the seafood industry. Stolpe said, “They’ve had four hearings this year, getting ready to reauthorize the primary ocean fisheries management law.”

That law, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, has had provisions for a thriving, respected seafood industry since it was first passed in 1976 — but Big Green pressure has blotted out everything that would help production.

University of Washington fisheries Professor Ray Hilborn focused on that problem in a September committee hearing, pointing out that the Magnuson-Stevens Act provides not only for rebuilding fish stocks, ensuring conservation and protecting essential habitat, but also, “the Act makes it clear that one objective is to provide for ‘the development of fisheries which are underutilized or not utilized … to assure that our citizens benefit from the employment, food supply and revenue which could be generated thereby.’”

Hopefully the attack on the fishing industry can be stopped before all of the small fisherman are put out of business.

Enhanced by Zemanta

I’m From The Government…

Posted on by

Michael Graham is a Massachusetts talk show host who writes a blog called “The Natural Truth.” As a resident of Massachusetts, he understands some of the unbelievable things that go on in this state. Today he posted an article entitled, “I’m From The Government And I’m Here To Inspect Your Guns.” No, in Massachusetts that is not a joke .

A Swampscott Massachusetts Board of Selectman member introduced an enforcement discussion Wednesday that he hopes will lead to the safeguarding of guns in town — keeping them out of the hands of children. Keeping guns out of the reach of children is a good idea. However, his methods were unconstitutional. Under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, gun owners are required to keep their firearms locked away or rendered inoperable. That’s not a bad thing, but the problem is how to enforce the law.

The article states:

If this incredibly bad goose-stepping attack on gun ownership sounds familiar, it should. The state of Washington considered it earlier this year. Then some lawyer read this thing called the Constitution and it went away.

But we’ve never been big on that whole “Bill of Rights” thing here in Kennedy Country. And so the town of Swampscott is going to decide whether or not to send the local cops door-to-door to visit lawful gun owners and, you know, just have a look around.

What could possibly go wrong?

At some point, we need to get back to the U. S. Constitution. We are in danger of losing our most basic rights.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Political Speak In Massachusetts

Posted on by

Holly Robichaud posted an article in the Boston Herald today about the tech tax passed by the legislature and the governor earlier this year. It was repealed on Friday. It was understood from the beginning of the negotiations on the tech tax that the law would be confusing and detrimental to businesses in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. However, the governor and the legislature chose to pass it anyway. Now the elected officials in the Massachusetts House and Senate find themselves in the embarrassing position of having to explain why they voted for the tax to begin with and why they repealed it.

Ms. Robichaud quotes many of the very interesting explanations in her article:

Rep. Danielle Gregoire was against the tech tax, for the entire tax package and then against the tech tax. To cover up her inconsistency and having more positions on an issue than John Kerry, Gregoire wrote to her local paper attempting to spin the record. According to her, opponents are “using parliamentary minutiae for political gain.”

How dare her political opponents protect the interests of the voters.

Another interesting explanation:

Rep. Carolyn Dykema, whom I have worked against, tweeted “impact of tech tax more broad than understood. Will have ripple effect across economy.” Dykema voted against holding a public hearing on the tech tax, then voted to strip the tech tax out of the bill, then voted three times for the tax package, and then voted to repeal the tech tax.

This makes my head spin.

And another one:

Rep. Diana DiZoglio went with the Clinton defense of blaming politics. “It is my hope that any political games over this would be stopped. My Republican colleagues and I were on the same page regarding this tax vote. Unfortunately, we differed on whether or not to sustain the governor’s veto.” Let me translate — Republicans knew to vote against overriding the veto and I caved to pressure from the speaker.

As long as the voters of Massachusetts keep electing these people, this will continue. We have the leadership we deserve.

The Need To Balance Rights

Posted on by

CBN News posted a story today about a new law passed in San Antonio, Texas, to prevent discrimination against LGBT Texans. Now before I go into exactly what the law does, I want to go on the record as saying that I do not support discrimination against anyone for any reason. However, there are certain situations where common sense needs to dictate decisions regarding people with different views on various issues. For instance, I have no problem with civil unions, but I do not support gay marriage. Why? Because as soon as the state endorses gay marriage, is it obligated to force pastors of churches who believe homosexuality is a sin to perform those marriages? I watched the Catholic adoption agencies leave Massachusetts because the state would not grant them a religious exemption to allow them to deny adoptions to gay couples. Their right to practice their religious beliefs in the adoption process were denied. If you pass a law against discrimination against LGBT people, is a pastor who holds the Biblical view on homosexuality free to state that view from the pulpit?

The article points out:

For San Antonio’s faith community there are several red flags. The ordinance criminalizes those with a biblical view of sexuality as it forbids bias against homosexuality or bi-sexuality.

Those charged and declared guilty by the city will face a Class C misdemeanor on their record and fines of up to $500 a day.

Also, the ordinance forbids appointed officials on city boards from showing any bias. 

Allan Parker, president of The Justice Foundation, a San-Antonio-based Christian legal non-profit, has worked to analyze and explain the ordinance for San Antonio’s churches.

He said the ordinance is vague and unclear but he believes it can and will be used against Christians, especially those in the business world who disagree with unbiblical sexuality.

“The leverage of the city to pressure any business to caving in is enormous under this,” he explained.

Would this law punish a bakery if it chose not to bake a cake for a homosexual wedding because of their religious beliefs? What about the rights of the bakers? Are their religious beliefs as important as the wedding participants? Where does the First Amendment (the government shall not interfere with the free exercise of religion) play into this?

As I said, I don’t support discrimination against anyone, but I do support the right of everyone to practice their religion and state their religious beliefs. This law is not in agreement with the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Speakeasy Restaurants???

Posted on by

CBS 2 in New York City posted an article Wednesday about an investigation they had done into New York City’s illegal dinner parties. There are a number of underground supper clubs operating in the city, and they are as of yet, unregulated.

The article reports:

But some critics have concerns about these unregulated dinner parties.

“It definitely falls into a gray area,” said Leon Lubarsky, owner of Letter Grade Consulting.

Lubarsky’s staff of retired New York City health inspectors advises restaurants on health regulations.

When asked if the underground restaurants should be regulated, Lubarsky told Leitner, “Yes, they should be regulated by the same system that regulates every restaurant in New York City.”

The article continues:

But if caught hosting an underground dinner party, the hosts could be fined $2,000 and ordered to shut down.

The price to get into one of these underground supper clubs ranges from $40 to several hundred. Some of the hosts say they are in it simply for the love of food, while others hope to turn a profit.

I have very mixed emotions about this. In Massachusetts I was involved in a church that was offering a monthly free dinner to whoever wanted it. Our kitchen help had to be certified, all food had to be cooked on the premises, and all ingredients posted. The rules were there to protect those eating the food. My feeling is that if the hosts (or hostesses) of these dinner parties are charging for the dinners, they should be regulated–they are essentially operating a restaurant–in their homes or wherever. I also wonder what would happen if anyone got sick after one of these dinners. Would the host (or hostess) be at risk of being sued?

I am not a big fan of government regulation–I think taking salt off of the table at restaurants or banning large sodas is stupid. However, I do think that food preparation should be overseen by the Board of Health in order to protect the public.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Your Tax Dollars At Work

Posted on by

Boston Business Journal posted an article today about one aspect of bringing ObamaCare to Massachusetts.

The article reports:

More than 200,000 in Massachusetts could actually lose health care coverage in the switch to ObamaCare next year. To prevent that, state officials are pulling out all the stops to make sure members of state-subsidized health plans, established under Massachusetts’ own health care reform, don’t lose coverage in the shift.

In order to prevent those state residents from losing their health care coverage, the state is launching a heavy-duty public education campaign, including 230,000 outgoing phone calls urging those currently covered under Massachusetts health care plans to switch to ObamaCare. The new ObamaCare plans are called ConnectorCare plans

The article further reports:

The price tag for all those phone calls – just one part of the outreach effort – is $4.4 million, which will be paid to vendor Dell Services, the services arm of Dell Inc. (Nasdaq: DELL). But there are strings attached. The contract includes penalties for not converting the majority of eligible Commonwealth Care members by Jan. 1, 2014. There will also be a per-member penalty if Dell fails to reach benchmarks by the end of the open enrollment period on March 31, 2014.

It says something about the appeal of ObamaCare that Massachusetts has to pay $4.4 million to get people to enroll in it.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Democracy In Action

Posted on by

Tonight I attended the “Post-Negotiation” Forum with the Town of Plainville presented by the Cummings Team. This forum was the final phase of the meetings held before the September 10th election where Plainville residents get to vote on whether or not to allow slot machines to be installed into Plainridge Raceway.  What was supposed to be a rather orderly process was complicated recently when the Massachusetts Gaming Commission declared  OurWay Realty (the former owners of Plainridge Racecourse) unfit to manage the proposed slot machines due to some prior business practices. To review some recent history, the Town of Plainville Board of Selectmen decided to proceed with the election, stating that the owners were disqualified–not the site or the town. The original purpose of the meeting was to explain to the voters the details of the Host Agreement Plainridge had signed with the Town. That was done very thoroughly, but obviously those attending the meeting were very interested in learning about the company that had bought Plainridge. All of the information about the Host Agreement between Plainridge and Plainville can be found on the Town of Plainville website. The Assignment and Assumption of Host Community Agreement can also be found on Plainville’s website. The agreement is between Ourway Realty, LLC, and Springfield Gaming and Redevelopment ,LLC (a company formed by Penn National Gaming). The agreement did not change–it was simply transferred to the new owners.

This week it was announced that Penn National Gaming has taken over Plainridge Racecourse and will apply for the license for the slot machines. Penn National Gaming representatives gave a short presentation about their company and explained that very few changes would be made to the original plans for the Racino. They gave a brief history of the company, which is publicly traded on NASDAQ. Chris McErlean, Vice-President, Racing, explained that the company’s forte is racing/gaming facilities. Eric Schippers, Senior Vice-President, Public Relations, explained that the goal of Penn National Gaming in getting involved in Plainridge was to save the racetrack. He explained that Penn National Gaming has a decentralized management philosophy and believes in local managers involved in the communities where their facilities are located.

The meeting was very positive, and I believe that Penn National Gaming would be a very suitable organization to run Plainridge Raceway. The representatives from Penn National Gaming did remind us that the vote in Plainville was only a part of the process. Even if the voters approve the slot machines, the Massachusetts Gaming Commission will decide whether or not to choose the site.

I would like to applaud the Plainville Board of Selectmen for allowing the vote to go forward on September 10 even though it looked as if there might not be anyone to takeover the racetrack. I would also like to applaud the representatives of Penn National Gaming for a very thorough and concise presentation explaining who they are and what their plans are for the future of Plainridge Raceway. Because of the foresight of the Board of Selectmen and the willingness of Penn National Gaming to get involved midway through the process, Plainville voters will have a chance to express their opinion.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Twists And Turns Of Bringing Slot Machines To Plainville

Posted on by

On September 10, voters in Plainville, Massachusetts, will go to the polls and vote to determine whether or not to bring approximately 1200 slot machines into Plainridge Raceway. As you drive around Plainville, you see a lot of lawn signs. The majority of the ones I have seen support the slot machines, but I haven’t driven through all parts of the town. On Thursday there will be an information meeting for the voters held at the Wood School in Plainville, and on Sunday there will be a meeting held by the opponents of the slot machines at the Senior Center in Plainville. I plan to attend both meetings.

The Sun Chronicle featured two stories about the slot machines on its website today. The first story, titled “Gaming commission wants to hear from Plainville residents on transfer of slots agreement,” states that the Gaming Commission is holding off a decision on whether or not to approve the sale of Plainridge to Penn National Gaming until it has a chance to hear from the residents of the town. I assume that means that members of the Gaming Commission will be present at Thursday’s meeting.

The second story in the Sun Chronicle is titled, “Penn National has track record on race tracks, gambling venues.” That story deals with the reputation and past performance of the Penn National Gaming company.

That article reports:

This much is known: Penn National is one of the largest gambling concerns in the country. It owns 28 facilities that include casinos, race tracks with slot machines and stand-alone race tracks.

Michael Perpall, president of the Harness Horsemen’s Association of New England, said Penn National has a good reputation among horsemen and he is optimistic it would do a good job at Plainridge.

Clyde Barrows, who studies gambling at University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth, also said the firm is a well-respected operator in the gaming industry.

“Penn is a publicly-traded company on NASDAQ with a recent share price above $53 and 2012 net income of $211.9 million,” he said.

The opposition group in Plainville is lead by Mary-Ann Greanier. Generally speaking, she has objected to everything said and done by the town and by Plainridge in this process. Her current complaint is that voters do not have enough information on Penn National. It seems to me that their reputation with both horsemen and the gambling industry is an indication that they are reputable people we can do business with. It would be nice if Ms.Greanier would simply admit that she doesn’t want the track and that she will oppose it on any grounds possible.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Need For Fiscal Accountability At Some Of Our Colleges

Posted on by

The cost of a college education has skyrocketed in recent years. Parents and students are going into serious debt to finance a higher education. So where is the money going? Some of it is going to repairing buildings on campus, building better physical education facilities, better science laboratories, and other things that provide a better environment for the students. However, not all colleges are spending their increased tuition money responsibly.

Yesterday the Daily Caller posted an article about a recent controversy at Westfield State College. Since one of my daughters and one of my sons-in-law graduated from Westfield State in the 1990’s, I am somewhat familiar with the school. It is a small state college with a beautiful campus. Their website shows tuition, housing costs, and fees for resident students ranging from about $15,000 per year for state residents to about $23,000 per year for out-of-state residents. I believe that when my daughter went there in the 1990’s, the cost was about $6,000 a year.

So what is the controversy at Westfield State?

The article at the Daily Caller reports:

John P. Walsh, owner of a cosmetics company, has decided to withdraw his $100,000 donation to Westfield, a public university in Westfield, Massachusetts.

The reason? Walsh is fed up with the spending habits of Westfield President Evan Dobelle, who charged thousands of dollars in luxury hotel and shopping bills to the university’s credit card.

…Dobelle charged the university $8,000 for a four-night stay in a luxury hotel in Bangkok, Thailand. He has also traveled out-of-state on Westfield’s dime some 76 times during his 5 years as president, according to Inside Higher Ed.

Dobelle has defended the expenses, calling them a necessary component of his plan to increase Westfield’s national and international renown.

After being presented with evidence of Mr. Dobelle’s financial violations, the board of trustees at Westfield State gave him their full confidence.

Obviously, more information is needed to determine exactly what is going on here, but I will admit that $6,000 for four nights in Thailand seems a bit much. I question why the Board of Trustees approved the spending habits of Mr. Dobelle.

Because of the dramatic expansion of student aid by the federal government in recent years, colleges have been able to raise their tuition without having to worry about students’ ability to pay. While I think student aid is a really good thing, it has created an unreal situation where tuition is not subject to free market forces. We definitely need some balance here. At the moment we are encouraging young people and their families to go into serious debt to receive training for jobs that are not available. That does not make sense.

Enhanced by Zemanta

One Reason I Love To Listen To Hugh Hewitt

Posted on by

Hugh Hewitt has a Salem Network talk show. He is a college law professor, a practicing lawyer, and a talk show host. Because I live in Massachusetts, I have to listen to him on the Internet at Townhall.com. I love his show.

Last night one of his guests was Karen Finney. She claims that Ted Cruz is the same as Joe McCarthy–both are very unhealthy for the country. When Hugh Hewitt asked her if Alger Hiss was a Communist, she refused to answer the questions and eventually hung up on Mr. Hewitt. That is an important question. After the fall of the Soviet Union, America was allowed to go through many Soviet records of subversive activity in the United States. Those records confirmed that Alger Hiss was a Communist, so even if you disagreed with Joe McCarthy’s style, his information was correct.

The audio clip of the exchange can be heard at Mediaite.

As I said, Hugh Hewitt is a lawyer. He asks logical questions, and explains often, “This is not a debate–it’s an interview.” If Ms. Finney is going to be a guest on the Hugh Hewitt Show, she might consider being willing to discuss actually facts rather than simply toss out allegations.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Voting With Your Feet

Posted on by

CBN News posted a story today about the relationship between tax rates in different states and where people choose to live.

The article reports:

Brown (author Travis H. Brown) discovered that the nine states with no personal income tax gained $146.2 billion in AGI. Those states include Alaska, Florida, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming.

Conversely, the states with the highest personal income tax rates lost a total of $107.4 billion. They are California, Hawaii, Oregon, Iowa, New Jersey, Vermont, New York, and Maine. Washington, D.C., was also included.

Another measurement delivers similar results. Brown looked at the 10 states with the lowest per capita state and local tax burdens and found they netted $69.9 billion in AGI. Those states include Alaska, South Dakota, Tennessee, Louisiana, Wyoming, Texas, New Hampshire, Alabama, Nevada, and South Carolina.

The 10 states with the highest state and local tax burden lost $139 billion in AGI. They are New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, California, Wisconsin, Rhode Island, Minnesota, Massachusetts, Maine, and Pennsylvania.

This story has personal relevance to me. My husband will be retiring at the end of the year, and we are about to put our house on the market. (If anyone wants a five-bedroom house in Southeastern Massachusetts, please leave a comment). We are moving for many reasons–one of those reasons is the cost of living in Massachusetts. We will be headed to North Carolina where we have family and the cost of living is lower.

Recently, Massachusetts raised the taxes on cigarettes. I don’t smoke, so that doesn’t impact me, but I was in a store yesterday in Rhode Island near the Massachusetts state line. The person ahead of me in line was commenting that she would no longer be buying cigarettes in Massachusetts because they were cheaper in Rhode Island. Right now, gasoline is more expensive in Rhode Island than in Massachusetts, but since the gasoline tax in Massachusetts is now indexed to inflation, I wonder how long that will be the case.

When people have an option, they give less money to the government, whether it is state or federal government. The Laffer Curve explains one aspect of that.

At some point, government needs to realize that at some point it has all of the money we have earned that it is entitled to. The question is exactly where the point of enough taxes is reached.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Lt. Col. Allen West Speaks In Stoughton

Posted on by

Tonight I had the privilege of hearing Lt. Col. Allen West speak at the Ahavath Torah Congregation in Stoughton, Massachusetts. The subject of his speech was America’s past promises and current realities. Below are some of his observations:

Col. West reminded us that Massachusetts was the birthplace of America. The spirit that gave birth to those documents was born in Massachusetts. The promise was one of limited government whose power rested in the individual. That promise has allowed America to exist for 237 years. The promise included the individual freedom to participate in the free market. Part of the promises of the past was faith in something bigger than ourselves.

We need to protect the promises of the past. In our own homes we need to practice fiscal responsibility. We need to demand that our government also practice fiscal responsibility.

Booker T. Washington described the three pillars of society as education, entrepreneurship, and self-reliance. Right now our children are not receiving the education they need to prepare them to be responsible citizens, the government is taking more control of the economy, and the government is encouraging dependency by actively recruiting people to sign up for food stamps. Our current government is destroying the promises of the past.

We need to bring America back to the promises of the past.  Col. West ended his planned remarks with a question all of us need to ask ourselves, “What did I do today to insure that my children and grandchildren will have a greater America?”

During the question and answer period after his remarks, Col. West pointed out the need for a select committee to investigate Benghazi. He suggested that we tell our Congressmen to support House Resolution 36. He also pointed out some of the areas that we as Americans need to challenge the current politicians. He mentioned that school choice is the number one issue in the black community, yet one of the first things President Obama did after taking office was to shut down a school choice program in Washington, D.C. As Americans who care about our country, we need to learn to frame the issues in a way that shows how those issues impact people’s lives every day. Abstract numbers are not nearly as effective in getting out a candidate’s message as pointing out to a person how something the government is doing directly impacts their standard of living.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Hooray For The Average American

Posted on by

On Friday Long Island Newsday posted an article about this year’s participants in the 26th annual Runner’s Edge Tobay Triathlon which will be held on August 24 at Oyster Bay, Long Island.

Triathlon coach Jose L. Lopez of Mineola, who won the first Tobay Tri in 1988, notes that the demographic of the Triathlon has changed.

The article reports:

Cases in point in this year’s race: Julian Acevedo, 26, a former diver and mountain climber; Dave Patton, 46, a martial artist and Kathy Griswold, 40, a yoga teacher.

All three are doing Tobay for the first time; each found the sport through a different route.

…Griswold was a high school shot putter and softball player back in Massachusetts. This past winter, when her gym held a mini indoor tri — participants swam in the pool, pedaled a stationary bike and ran on a treadmill — she jumped in and enjoyed it.

“I decided maybe I should do a real one.” said Griswold, a Plainview resident who teaches yoga at two local studios.

“I will finish, and I will have a blast doing it,” she said.

Hooray for amateur athletes who are willing to rise to the challenge of something new.

Enhanced by Zemanta

It’s Not Over Until The Fat Lady Sings

Posted on by

It’s not over until the fat lady sings. Well, she is about to enter the green room to warm up. Yesterday I reported on the decision of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission to rule out Plainridge Racecourse as a suitable applicant for a slot machine license (rightwinggranny.com). I support the slot machines for a variety of reasons and was very disheartened to read that the Gaming Commission had disqualified Plainridge. However, after reading about the reasons for the decision, I could totally understand why that decision was made.

If the decision stands, the Town of Plainville is the loser in this deal. Plainridge has operated in the town for fifteen years. Plainridge Racecourse is the only harness racing track in operation in Massachusetts. It has not made a profit during its time in Plainville, but has continually been a good neighbor to the town. It has paid taxes to the town and provided employment for a number of people in the town. There is a serious question as to whether or not Plainridge Racecourse will stay in business without the slot machine license. If Plainridge closes, is there a future for harness racing in Massachusetts? What happens to all of the beautiful horse farms in Plainville? So where are we now?

Domenic Longobardi was kind enough to give me a few minutes of his time today so I could ask him some questions about the past and future of Plainridge. He expressed disappointment that the Massachusetts Gaming Commission did not try to work with Plainridge to resolve the issue of misdeeds under previous management. He also pointed out that the people involved in those misdeeds are no longer in charge. He reminded me that from the time Plainridge was built the idea was to eventually bring in other avenues of gambling in order to keep the track afloat.

I asked Mr. Longobardi if the 9% of slot machine money that will go to support harness racing would be enough to keep Plainridge alive. He explained that the 9% of slot machine money would go to the harness racing purses–not to operating expenses at the tracks.

Mr. Longobardi mentioned the investment Plainridge has made in order to move forward with the slot machine permit. Plainridge has paid application fees to the Commonwealth of Massachuestts, paid consulting fees for the Town of Plainville, and invested money in a large parking garage to accommodate additional people visiting the facility.

Mr. Longobardi pointed out that although Ourway Realty is disqualified from obtaining the license to operate slot machines at Plainridge Racecourse, the location itself is not disqualified.

A reliable source told me this afternoon that there is another management organization planning to take over Plainridge and resubmit the application to the Massachusetts Gaming Commission. That organization is experienced in the gaming industry and would actually be a better candidate to run Plainridge.

The bottom line is simple. It’s not over yet, and smart businessmen are working to find a solution that would meet the requirements of the Gaming Commission and the needs of the people of Plainville. I sincerely hope that something can be worked out.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Happening In Massachusetts

Posted on by

If you are upset that the gasoline tax in Massachusetts is now indexed to inflation, here is how you can change that:

TANK THE AUTOMATIC GAS TAX HIKES

 
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                               August 6, 2013Contact: Holly Robichaud
781-378-1798

 

TANK THE AUTOMATIC GAS TAX HIKES

 

Ballot Initiative Will Stop Taxation Without Representation

Boston, MA…Today a group of taxpayers gathered on the outside State House stairs to announce that they are filing a ballot initiative to cut the linkage between the gas tax and inflation which the legislature recently passed.

“It is outrageous that Beacon Hill is increasing our gas tax every year for the rest of lives without a vote.  That’s taxation without representation.  It is wrong and we are going to stop it,” said Steve Aylward, who is the Republican State Committee man that ran the very successful signature drive for Mike Sullivan last winter.

The initial supporters of the ballot initiative include Marty Lamb, Chris Pinto, Republican National Committee woman Chanel Prunier, Les Gosule who passed Melissa’s law in 2012, Jeff Bailey, State Representative Leah Cole, Stephen Coulter, Alex Vispoli, State Representative Geoff Diehl, State Representative Jim Lyons, State Representative Marc Lombardo, Rick Gleason of the Massachusetts Motorcycle Association, Rich Howell, Paul Craney of Mass Fiscal, Desiree Awiszio, Jamie Kang, Mike Mosca, Marylou Daxland, Katie Regan, State Representative Shaunna O’Connell, John O’Mara of the Northborough Tea Party, Barbara Anderson of Citizens of Limited Taxation, and many more.

Last month the legislature passed the so-called transportation bill which included a gas tax hike, a new tax on computer software, and a cigarette tax increase. It also linked the gas tax to CPI which allows the gas tax to increase every year without a vote of the legislature.

“This year our state took in over $600 million above projections.  We don’t need this tax package.  I voted against this bill in the House and I am not going to sit on the sidelines now while the state reaches into our wallets every year for the rest of our lives for more and more money without an accountable vote being taken,” said State Representative Diehl.

“How much more will Beacon Hill take from our wallets?  We don’t know.  We just know it is going up automatically with no debate, no input and no oversight,” said Pinto. 

“Our elected officials have failed us.  Our only alternative is to pass a ballot question that will stop this taxation without representation,” said Marty Lamb. 

The attorney for the group is former U.S. Attorney Mike Sullivan.

Since launching the facebook page last week the group has over 695 friends.  The plan is to launch a website shortly in preparation for collecting  100,000 raw signatures. 
Enhanced by Zemanta

One Man’s Actions Result In A Major Loss For A Town

Posted on by

The Attleboro Sun Chronicle reported today that the Massachusetts Gaming Commission has removed Plainridge Race Track, Plainville, Massachusetts, from consideration from Massachusetts’ one slot machine license.

The article reports:

It voted unanimously that the owners of the harness track had failed to demonstrate they could properly run a gambling establishment after admitting they did not realize former President Gary Piontkowski had been taking money from the track for years.

The track is now out of the running for the state’s sole slot machine license that had had five suitors.

The actions of one man will cost the Town of Plainville a projected income of $2 million a year.

The article further reports:

“But it has always been our commitment to establish that the integrity of this process is our single highest priority. No other considerations will compromise that commitment. I would like to take this opportunity to commend the tremendous work by the Investigations and Enforcement Bureau as well as our many partners in their ongoing efforts on these important matters.”

The bureau had uncovered the Piontkowski practice of taking money from the track, while the track reported the actions as disbursements.

When the bureau began asking questions, Piontkowski was replaced in April, although he and track officials claimed it was for health reasons.

Chief Financial Officer Timothy Peterson then resigned and did not appear at a commission hearing on the matter.

Principals Stanley Fulton and Alfred Ross said they were unaware of the situation and were passive investors.

Plainridge Race Track has been losing money for years. The slot machines were considered something that would save the track and save harness racing in Massachusetts. It is unfortunate that the actions of one man may result in the death of harness racing in the state.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Tax Increases In Massachusetts Take Effect Today

Posted on by

CBS Boston reported today that Massachusetts is increasing taxes on gasoline and cigarettes (effective today) and adding a 6.25% sales tax on computer software services.

The gasoline tax in increasing 3 cents a gallon, it will now be 24 cents a gallon, and the cigarette tax will be increasing $1 to $3.51 per pack.

On Monday, The Examiner reported:

Massachusetts made state history July 29th by implementing a new gas tax increase that is pegged to inflation. The new tax that takes effect Wednesday, following an override of Governor Patrick’s veto, adds 3 cents to the state’s already relatively high 21 cents per gallon tax. Adding in federal taxes, the total tax on a gallon of gasoline in Massachusetts is now 42.4 cents per gallon. Depending upon which grade is chosen, drivers now pay about 11 percent in taxes for the gas they use. That is the highest tax rate of any product one can buy in Massachusetts except cigarettes. Smokers also saw a one dollar tax increase per pack in this new bill.

Please note–THE GAS TAX INCREASE IS PEGGED TO INFLATION. This means that elected officials in Boston can avoid responsibility for future tax increases. The tax on gasoline will automatically increase, and the legislators can say, “I didn’t do that–it was automatic.” Governor Patrick vetoed this bill–therefore he can claim that he did not vote for the tax increases in it (of course he knew that the Democrat legislature would override his veto and still be voted back into office in the next election).

Until the Massachusetts voters begin to vote the current legislators out of office, they can expect more of this kind of shenanigans. It’s time to wake up and put people in office who actually care about the burden they are placing on taxpayers.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta