Lawmakers spend too much time on fraud.
A legislative committee was in Springfield on Wednesday looking for fraud in Medicaid.
Perhaps there is some to be found, but we suggest lawmakers are once again focusing on the wrong priorities when they talk about Medicaid. What they ought to be doing is figuring how they're going to remake the system. When the legislature slashed Medicaid two years ago to balance the state budget, they passed a bill that wipes out the current state system of state-funded indigent care by 2008. The plan, Gov. Matt Blunt and Republican legislators said, was to remake the system from scratch.
It stands to reason when the tenticles of government get intwined in areas which should be the private sector cost will definetly GO UP.
So what are they doing? They're still talking about fraud and abuse, which was their rallying cry when they made the cuts in the first place. In the meantime, real people are suffering. Children have lost their insurance. Disabled adults have quit their jobs to keep their Medicaid. We're about two years away from the system going away and we're nowhere closer to figuring out the plan to develop a sustainable Medicaid program.
If you look at the BUDGET for mediScare there wasn't a cut in cost or budget so how does the SNL proclaim there was one. Easy the electorate buys into it via the SOB stories we see on TV nightly.
The good news is that Blunt seems to understand the key issue. In an interview with the News-Leader editorial board recently, he decried the liberal myth that too many people in our system today don't have access to health care.
"Everybody has access," Blunt says. "It's the emergency room. We need to change that."
The irony, of course, is that was the Democratic criticism two years ago when he slashed the Medicaid rolls and forced too many folks to use the emergency room as their sole source of health care. That Blunt today understands that reality of our system speaks well for the potential reform of the Medicaid system, if only the governor and lawmakers can get past political hurdles and focus on the real issues.
Personally using the Emergency Room as my source of medical resourses isn't actually an intelligent idea. My pet ferret knows emergency room cost will skyrocket, so how come it is people with college degrees don't understand this?
Reforming Medicaid has little to do with fraud and abuse, and everything to do with determining sustainable levels of care that provide security for our state's residents who need it, but mostly as a transitional benefit, not a permanent state-provided health insurance system. The problem with the old system is that it grew out of control. Like other forms of welfare — from food stamps to public housing — it didn't provide the sort of flexibility that helps folks as they help themselves. Under the old way of thinking about welfare, services are provided until a certain income level is attained, and then they're cut off. That forces people who are still in poverty to choose between food and medicine, shelter or a better-paying job.
The new model of Medicaid, we believe, must include sliding scales of service that help those who need it most and charge co-pays — or slowly reduce services — for those who can afford it. The new model must reward those who improve their income by keeping services in place until folks have climbed out of poverty, rather than just cutting them off when an arbitrary new income level is reached. The new model must recognize the truth that Blunt realizes: sending folks to the emergency room is not a solution.
Remaking Medicaid should be about providing incentives for those who can help themselves and access to health care for those who can't.
It's time for state lawmakers to make real Medicaid reform a priority.
Friday, August 11, 2006
Teens are OK with drug tests
this will be interspirced with some of my commentary.
The News-Leader says that student drug testing is misguided and disturbing. So are the reasons it gave for opposing it. It cites the so-called failure of the DARE program as a reason not to test. That doesn’t mean this also will fail. If that educational program failed, then why insist on more? Why not attempt to curb drug use in a different way? Why not try a way that puts students in a position where taking a drug test will affect their extracurricular activities?
Since there are many ways to teach a student from private schools to home schooling I have no problem with this. After all going to government schools is voluntary not FORCED upon the citizenry.
If one student turns down drugs for fear of failing a drug test, then it does work. The purpose of student drug testing isn’t necessarily to catch students doing drugs. The purpose is to be a deterrent from doing drugs in the first place. It gives teens a solid reason to turn down the lure and pressure of drug use.
Once more government schooling is voluntary not FORCED!!
The News-Leader also cites personal freedoms as a reason not to test students. It’s not a disturbing trend, as it says. It’s a way to respond to drug problems in our schools. A good reason to test students is safety. It protects the student and those around them. But shouldn’t our society be used to measures that limit our personal freedom all in the name of safety? Speed limits, DUIs and underage driving laws restrict personal freedom all in the name of safety. Laws and decisions are made for our good. This decision isn’t out of the ordinary and isn’t misguided.
I'm not to complaint on the way the writer has decided to use safety as a means to limit personal freedoms. The Autobahn in Germany clearly shows that speed limits have nothing to do with safety. Many people die in auto accidents when they are complaint to the speed limit, obeying the law didn't save their lives.
DUI's don't tend to offer any safety either. Should I choose to go get drunk and drive it would be a RARE instance if I were to be stopped by the police.
I was driving at the age of 12, I still haven't been involved in an accident that has been my fault, hense the underage driving law protected NO ONE.
Drug testing isn’t intrusive or against the Constitution, as some say. The Supreme Court says this. It isn’t discriminatory either. Educators will say that participating in extracurricular activities isn’t a right, but a privilege. Those who want to participate need to submit to random drug tests. Drug testing isn’t punishment or discrimination. We shouldn’t view this as something negative, but helpful based on the current drug use by teens.
BAD argument!!! The SCOTUS also says that stealing ones property to give to a developer for economic gain to a community is constitutional as well.
I wonder if Mr Loomis would mind if Wal-Mart or any other retailor absconded with his property???? I would wager he would be complaining loudly.
However I still agree with random drug testing in the government school system since attendance is voluntary.
I offer my viewpoints based on personal experience. I am employed by the company who performed the drug tests on the Branson students and on the board members who approved it. I have given hundreds of drug tests to students.
Countless times a teen will tell me they don’t do drugs because they have so much to lose. More teens tell me they think it’s a good idea than those who complain about it. If they are the ones taking the tests and don’t mind, then why should the News-Leader mind?
Bill Loomis resides in Springfield and is a drug technician.
The News-Leader says that student drug testing is misguided and disturbing. So are the reasons it gave for opposing it. It cites the so-called failure of the DARE program as a reason not to test. That doesn’t mean this also will fail. If that educational program failed, then why insist on more? Why not attempt to curb drug use in a different way? Why not try a way that puts students in a position where taking a drug test will affect their extracurricular activities?
Since there are many ways to teach a student from private schools to home schooling I have no problem with this. After all going to government schools is voluntary not FORCED upon the citizenry.
If one student turns down drugs for fear of failing a drug test, then it does work. The purpose of student drug testing isn’t necessarily to catch students doing drugs. The purpose is to be a deterrent from doing drugs in the first place. It gives teens a solid reason to turn down the lure and pressure of drug use.
Once more government schooling is voluntary not FORCED!!
The News-Leader also cites personal freedoms as a reason not to test students. It’s not a disturbing trend, as it says. It’s a way to respond to drug problems in our schools. A good reason to test students is safety. It protects the student and those around them. But shouldn’t our society be used to measures that limit our personal freedom all in the name of safety? Speed limits, DUIs and underage driving laws restrict personal freedom all in the name of safety. Laws and decisions are made for our good. This decision isn’t out of the ordinary and isn’t misguided.
I'm not to complaint on the way the writer has decided to use safety as a means to limit personal freedoms. The Autobahn in Germany clearly shows that speed limits have nothing to do with safety. Many people die in auto accidents when they are complaint to the speed limit, obeying the law didn't save their lives.
DUI's don't tend to offer any safety either. Should I choose to go get drunk and drive it would be a RARE instance if I were to be stopped by the police.
I was driving at the age of 12, I still haven't been involved in an accident that has been my fault, hense the underage driving law protected NO ONE.
Drug testing isn’t intrusive or against the Constitution, as some say. The Supreme Court says this. It isn’t discriminatory either. Educators will say that participating in extracurricular activities isn’t a right, but a privilege. Those who want to participate need to submit to random drug tests. Drug testing isn’t punishment or discrimination. We shouldn’t view this as something negative, but helpful based on the current drug use by teens.
BAD argument!!! The SCOTUS also says that stealing ones property to give to a developer for economic gain to a community is constitutional as well.
I wonder if Mr Loomis would mind if Wal-Mart or any other retailor absconded with his property???? I would wager he would be complaining loudly.
However I still agree with random drug testing in the government school system since attendance is voluntary.
I offer my viewpoints based on personal experience. I am employed by the company who performed the drug tests on the Branson students and on the board members who approved it. I have given hundreds of drug tests to students.
Countless times a teen will tell me they don’t do drugs because they have so much to lose. More teens tell me they think it’s a good idea than those who complain about it. If they are the ones taking the tests and don’t mind, then why should the News-Leader mind?
Bill Loomis resides in Springfield and is a drug technician.
How have we allowed plundering of taxpayers' money go on?
could it possibly be that the citizenry has become complaint to what the mainstream politicians tell them??
could it be that when someone questions the expenditures of the elite elected officials they are BEATEN down by a news media organization for being a "MOONBAT"??
One only need to look in the mirror Ms. Sarah Overstreet and to where this article was printed to discover the answer.
Funny I thought the newspapers had INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS, to write about this type of stuff.
KUDOS to Doug Burlison and the members of the Libertarian Party of Greene County for getting this subject on the forefront. Many thanks to the individual members of the police department, firefighters, and concerned citizens of Springfield.
There are two crimes I really can't understand:
a.) Serial killing. I've watched documentaries titled such as "The Mind of a Serial Killer." It's like I'm watching videos voiced in Farsi. Nothing computes.
b.) Embezzlement. I have to keep my bank account current (by subtraction, mostly), or My Good Friends Who Gave Me the Toaster to Sign Up With Their Bank will charge me a hefty fee for overdrawing.
So doesn't that beg the question, "How does someone in public life get away with it so easily, if the Gestapo at the bank are looking at every jot and tittle of my finances?"
Easy. In public life, sometimes no one's watching. The emperor has no clothes. No one wants to say anything, lest he or she be pilloried for pointing it out or suggesting we need CPAs, too.
Just a couple of examples — from the most current to the mists of history — where there were no checks and balances in southwest Missouri's past.
Some $1.2 million disappeared from the Springfield Municipal Court between Jan. 1, 2000, and June 13 of this year.
This is the court where we pay our fines for all the sins we commit, from driving transgressions to having our dogs roam at large. These tickets are not inexpensive. Look at the city's record of keeping watch of the money, and all you can do is get sick. The City Finance Department told News-Leader reporter Jenny Fillmer earlier this year that the city does not regularly check to make sure the money that gets deposited into city bank accounts balances against the money it collected.
What happened to the money, before and now? "It would be very difficult for us to know," the city's director of finance, Mary Mannix-Decker, told Fillmer. Again, since the city's Finance Department doesn't check the dough to see where it goes, they dunno. Why?
The official excuse the city has used is that it doesn't have the money to look after our money, even after a state audit showed in 2000 that "vulnerabilities" have existed in our Municipal Court for years.
And how long has this kind of thing been going on?
That would be a great game-show question.
At least since the late 1980s. That's when ex-Greene County Collector's Office employee Lois Long, former Collector Gene Wickliffe's head bookkeeper and cashier, took an estimated $94,000 from the office.
It seems like every few weeks, there's a new news release about a local embezzlement: a Springfield PTA treasurer, a children's basketball organization's treasurer, lawyers for private trusts, all kinds of bookkeeping burglary in private industry.
It's reprehensible when parents and supporters sweat buckets to plump up children's activities and someone steals it. It's gut-wrenching when crooks rob old people who think they're making investments that will take them through their lives. When employees are allowed to plunder from the taxpayers. Why have we let it go on so long?
Are we NUTS?
could it be that when someone questions the expenditures of the elite elected officials they are BEATEN down by a news media organization for being a "MOONBAT"??
One only need to look in the mirror Ms. Sarah Overstreet and to where this article was printed to discover the answer.
Funny I thought the newspapers had INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS, to write about this type of stuff.
KUDOS to Doug Burlison and the members of the Libertarian Party of Greene County for getting this subject on the forefront. Many thanks to the individual members of the police department, firefighters, and concerned citizens of Springfield.
There are two crimes I really can't understand:
a.) Serial killing. I've watched documentaries titled such as "The Mind of a Serial Killer." It's like I'm watching videos voiced in Farsi. Nothing computes.
b.) Embezzlement. I have to keep my bank account current (by subtraction, mostly), or My Good Friends Who Gave Me the Toaster to Sign Up With Their Bank will charge me a hefty fee for overdrawing.
So doesn't that beg the question, "How does someone in public life get away with it so easily, if the Gestapo at the bank are looking at every jot and tittle of my finances?"
Easy. In public life, sometimes no one's watching. The emperor has no clothes. No one wants to say anything, lest he or she be pilloried for pointing it out or suggesting we need CPAs, too.
Just a couple of examples — from the most current to the mists of history — where there were no checks and balances in southwest Missouri's past.
Some $1.2 million disappeared from the Springfield Municipal Court between Jan. 1, 2000, and June 13 of this year.
This is the court where we pay our fines for all the sins we commit, from driving transgressions to having our dogs roam at large. These tickets are not inexpensive. Look at the city's record of keeping watch of the money, and all you can do is get sick. The City Finance Department told News-Leader reporter Jenny Fillmer earlier this year that the city does not regularly check to make sure the money that gets deposited into city bank accounts balances against the money it collected.
What happened to the money, before and now? "It would be very difficult for us to know," the city's director of finance, Mary Mannix-Decker, told Fillmer. Again, since the city's Finance Department doesn't check the dough to see where it goes, they dunno. Why?
The official excuse the city has used is that it doesn't have the money to look after our money, even after a state audit showed in 2000 that "vulnerabilities" have existed in our Municipal Court for years.
And how long has this kind of thing been going on?
That would be a great game-show question.
At least since the late 1980s. That's when ex-Greene County Collector's Office employee Lois Long, former Collector Gene Wickliffe's head bookkeeper and cashier, took an estimated $94,000 from the office.
It seems like every few weeks, there's a new news release about a local embezzlement: a Springfield PTA treasurer, a children's basketball organization's treasurer, lawyers for private trusts, all kinds of bookkeeping burglary in private industry.
It's reprehensible when parents and supporters sweat buckets to plump up children's activities and someone steals it. It's gut-wrenching when crooks rob old people who think they're making investments that will take them through their lives. When employees are allowed to plunder from the taxpayers. Why have we let it go on so long?
Are we NUTS?
Monday, August 07, 2006
U.N.?
for years most republicans tried to distance themselves from the U.N. for obvisous reasons. It is an organization which is hell bent on controlling the world. The democrats like this as it fits into the social agenda of which guides the party.
the party that baffled me to some extend was the complaince with the party leaders and the mainstream republicans. this notion however has subsided since I've come to the conclusion that the current administration is using the U.N. resolutions as the scapegoat for going into Iraq.
No longer can many mainstream republicans, nor can the party faithful object to the status of the U.N. after all they used it quite nicely to deflect some criticism with our current quagmire.
the light has been shown on the party of principle and we have learned they have none, which means the faithful that don't agree with the U.N. position should either not vote or vote third party right?? not a chance they will continue to support their party, since people like me are deemed conspiracy theorist. it isn't until its too late that we find out post like these were correct.
government, government schooling and a complaint media have dumbed down a whole generation and a half of the citizens. is it too late to retrieve "our" country from the ruins of which it is headed?? for my kids sake I hope so.
the party that baffled me to some extend was the complaince with the party leaders and the mainstream republicans. this notion however has subsided since I've come to the conclusion that the current administration is using the U.N. resolutions as the scapegoat for going into Iraq.
No longer can many mainstream republicans, nor can the party faithful object to the status of the U.N. after all they used it quite nicely to deflect some criticism with our current quagmire.
the light has been shown on the party of principle and we have learned they have none, which means the faithful that don't agree with the U.N. position should either not vote or vote third party right?? not a chance they will continue to support their party, since people like me are deemed conspiracy theorist. it isn't until its too late that we find out post like these were correct.
government, government schooling and a complaint media have dumbed down a whole generation and a half of the citizens. is it too late to retrieve "our" country from the ruins of which it is headed?? for my kids sake I hope so.
GIVE UP RIGHTS FOR THE "COMMON GOOD"?
Sound like anyone here in the local area??
Where people fear the government you have tyranny; where the government fears the people, you have liberty.
Politicians, bureaucrats and especially judges would have you believe that too much freedom will result in chaos. Therefore, we should gladly give up some of our RIGHTS for the good of the community. In other words, people acting in the name of the government, say we need more laws and more JURORS to enforce these laws -- even if we have to give up some RIGHTS in the process. They believe the more laws we have, the more control, thus a better society. This theory may sound good on paper, and apparently many of our leaders think this way, as evidenced by the thousands of new laws that are added to the books each year in this country. But, no matter how cleverly this Marxist argument is made, the hard fact is that whenever you give up a RIGHT you lose a "FREE CHOICE"!
This adds another control. Control's real name is BONDAGE! The logical conclusion would be, if giving up some RIGHTS produces a better society, then by giving up all RIGHTS we could produce a perfect society. We could chain everybody to a tree, for lack of TRUST. This may prevent crime, but it would destroy PRIVACY, which is the heartbeat of FREEDOM! It would also destroy TRUST which is the foundation for DIGNITY. Rather than giving up RIGHTS, we should be giving up wrongs! The opposite of control is not chaos. More laws do not make less criminals! We must give up wrongs, not rights, for a better society! William Pitt of the British House of Commons once proclaimed,
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human liberty; it is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
INALIENABLE, [UNALIENABLE] OR NATURAL RIGHTS!
NATURAL RIGHTS ARE THOSE RIGHTS such as LIFE (from conception), LIBERTY and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS eg. FREEDOM of RELIGION, SPEECH, LEARNING, TRAVEL, SELF-DEFENSE, ETC. Hence laws and statutes which violate NATURAL RIGHTS, though they may have the color of law, are not law but impostors! The U.S. Constitution was written to protect these NATURAL RIGHTS from being tampered with by legislators. * Further, our forefathers also wisely knew that the U.S. Constitution would be utterly worthless to restrain government legislators unless it was clearly understood that the people had the right to compel the government to keep within the Constitutional limits.
Where people fear the government you have tyranny; where the government fears the people, you have liberty.
Politicians, bureaucrats and especially judges would have you believe that too much freedom will result in chaos. Therefore, we should gladly give up some of our RIGHTS for the good of the community. In other words, people acting in the name of the government, say we need more laws and more JURORS to enforce these laws -- even if we have to give up some RIGHTS in the process. They believe the more laws we have, the more control, thus a better society. This theory may sound good on paper, and apparently many of our leaders think this way, as evidenced by the thousands of new laws that are added to the books each year in this country. But, no matter how cleverly this Marxist argument is made, the hard fact is that whenever you give up a RIGHT you lose a "FREE CHOICE"!
This adds another control. Control's real name is BONDAGE! The logical conclusion would be, if giving up some RIGHTS produces a better society, then by giving up all RIGHTS we could produce a perfect society. We could chain everybody to a tree, for lack of TRUST. This may prevent crime, but it would destroy PRIVACY, which is the heartbeat of FREEDOM! It would also destroy TRUST which is the foundation for DIGNITY. Rather than giving up RIGHTS, we should be giving up wrongs! The opposite of control is not chaos. More laws do not make less criminals! We must give up wrongs, not rights, for a better society! William Pitt of the British House of Commons once proclaimed,
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human liberty; it is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
INALIENABLE, [UNALIENABLE] OR NATURAL RIGHTS!
NATURAL RIGHTS ARE THOSE RIGHTS such as LIFE (from conception), LIBERTY and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS eg. FREEDOM of RELIGION, SPEECH, LEARNING, TRAVEL, SELF-DEFENSE, ETC. Hence laws and statutes which violate NATURAL RIGHTS, though they may have the color of law, are not law but impostors! The U.S. Constitution was written to protect these NATURAL RIGHTS from being tampered with by legislators. * Further, our forefathers also wisely knew that the U.S. Constitution would be utterly worthless to restrain government legislators unless it was clearly understood that the people had the right to compel the government to keep within the Constitutional limits.
take it for what you will!!!
A SUMMARY OF THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO
The Communist Manifesto represents a misguided philosophy, which teaches the citizens to give up their RIGHTS for the sake of the "common good," but it always ends in a police state. This is called preventive justice. Control is the key concept. Read carefully:
1. Abolition of private property.
2. Heavy progressive income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights on inheritance.
4. Confiscation of property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Central bank.
6. Government control of Communications & Transportation.
7. Government ownership of factories and agriculture.
8. Government control of labor.
9. Corporate farms, regional planning.
10. Government control of education.
Looks to me like our citizenry has allowed the federal government along with the willing accomplises sitting on the Supreme Court to achieve all 10.
We may not be living in a communist nation yet but every vehicle is in place for the allowance of the tranisition.
The Communist Manifesto represents a misguided philosophy, which teaches the citizens to give up their RIGHTS for the sake of the "common good," but it always ends in a police state. This is called preventive justice. Control is the key concept. Read carefully:
1. Abolition of private property.
2. Heavy progressive income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights on inheritance.
4. Confiscation of property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Central bank.
6. Government control of Communications & Transportation.
7. Government ownership of factories and agriculture.
8. Government control of labor.
9. Corporate farms, regional planning.
10. Government control of education.
Looks to me like our citizenry has allowed the federal government along with the willing accomplises sitting on the Supreme Court to achieve all 10.
We may not be living in a communist nation yet but every vehicle is in place for the allowance of the tranisition.
Sunday, August 06, 2006
Vote yes on city/county parks tax(News-Leader take)
YES, folks this is the very same news forum jounalism which gave us the infamous WE DON'T NEED NO STINKING AUDIT.
Doug Burlison was made out to be a nut case with an axe to grind, the individual members of the Libertarian Party,with individual police officers, fire fighters, and concerned citizens of Springfield were told we were barking up the wrong tree. After all KPMG is such a world reknown auditing firm that the concept of mismanagement of funds was unthinkable.
Once again the SNL has decided to recommend that we the taxpayers allow a government entity to take even more of our hard earned money so the City of Springfield can achieve some status within the state.
The following links dispell the notion that somehow building all these extravagant venues is going to raise the revenue into the city coffers by people visiting the area. When something is built with taxpayer funds then continues to need taxpayer funds for maintenance and upkeep it is hardly a windfall for the citizenry. If parks are so needed and generate revenue why isn't the private sector stepping up to the plate to funds these MONEY making propositions?
Quite easy really they don't make money and the cost to maintain these properties isn't offset by any financial gain.
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=2830
Growth demands need for parks improvement.
There are two simple reasons to support the Springfield/Greene County parks tax increase when you vote on Tuesday:
1. The parks board has been a good steward of your tax dollars.
2. If the city and county want to continue to have a world-class parks program as the area grows, then more revenue will be needed.
We believe both of those premises are true, and that's why we encourage voters to say yes to a quarter-cent sales tax increase for parks in Greene County.
The proposal, which will raise $50 million over five years, is a continuation of a long-term vision that was developed by citizens and has been supported by the community time and time again. Voting yes finishes improvements to Dickerson Park Zoo that were started with the last parks tax increase. Voting yes spends money on improved parks and aquatic facilities in the north (Doling Park and Grant Beach Park) and gets the ball rolling on a park and family center east of U.S. 65, a fast-growing and underserved corridor. Voting yes continues to improve sports complexes such as the Cooper Tennis Center that serve as an economic development engine, bringing millions of dollars to our city when families fill up hotel rooms and buy food and other goods in our community during trips to Springfield for soccer, softball or tennis competitions. Voting yes protects watersheds and brings about necessary improvements to historic parks such as Sequiota Park. Voting yes continues an efficient cooperation between the parks board and the Springfield Public Schools as taxpayers dollars create flexible green spaces that can be used by schoolchildren and taxpayers.
Voting yes fulfills the promise of a higher quality of life for our community.
There is a downside, of course, to higher taxes. If voters say yes, they will have created a permanent quarter-cent sales tax over the past 10 years. Eventually, these fractions of a cent add up. In Springfield, with its multitude of taxing districts, recently approved bond issues for a power plant and better schools, eventually the added taxes will create a burden for those on fixed incomes. Frankly, we hear the voices of some critics who wonder why we would continue to approve parks taxes in our community while saying no to higher law enforcement taxes or sitting idly by as our city struggles to find money for raises for police officers and firefighters.
But we believe it's important to see the bigger picture. Saying no to the parks tax will not magically free up some money in the general revenue accounts of the city. Quite the opposite. Better parks lure businesses to town and help others maintain quality employees. Better parks help pay for themselves by bringing visitors to town who help produce higher sales tax revenue. This year's sales tax collections in Springfield, for instance, increased by more than 8 percent as of March — more than triple last year's increase during the same time. This doesn't happen by accident.
Our city is growing because it's a wonderful place to live. The parks are a big part of that equation.
Tuesday's vote continues to fulfill a vision that citizens had long before some of us came to the Ozarks. It's a vision that sees a growing city and makes sure that we have a connection to all parts of the city through our parks and trails system. The brilliance of the plan is that with every yes vote, the parks board secures enough money to pay for the future improvements. That's important because some day, money might be tight and we will have to say no.
That's not the case today. The parks board has earned the trust of voters in Springfield and Greene County. It has a job to do to continue to make this a beautiful place to live.
Let's give it the money to do that job.
Vote yes on the local parks tax.
VOTE NO on all tax increases, bond measures, and vote out all incumbents. We demand accountability.
Tom Martz(libertarian)
candidate for the 139th
Doug Burlison was made out to be a nut case with an axe to grind, the individual members of the Libertarian Party,with individual police officers, fire fighters, and concerned citizens of Springfield were told we were barking up the wrong tree. After all KPMG is such a world reknown auditing firm that the concept of mismanagement of funds was unthinkable.
Once again the SNL has decided to recommend that we the taxpayers allow a government entity to take even more of our hard earned money so the City of Springfield can achieve some status within the state.
The following links dispell the notion that somehow building all these extravagant venues is going to raise the revenue into the city coffers by people visiting the area. When something is built with taxpayer funds then continues to need taxpayer funds for maintenance and upkeep it is hardly a windfall for the citizenry. If parks are so needed and generate revenue why isn't the private sector stepping up to the plate to funds these MONEY making propositions?
Quite easy really they don't make money and the cost to maintain these properties isn't offset by any financial gain.
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=2830
Growth demands need for parks improvement.
There are two simple reasons to support the Springfield/Greene County parks tax increase when you vote on Tuesday:
1. The parks board has been a good steward of your tax dollars.
2. If the city and county want to continue to have a world-class parks program as the area grows, then more revenue will be needed.
We believe both of those premises are true, and that's why we encourage voters to say yes to a quarter-cent sales tax increase for parks in Greene County.
The proposal, which will raise $50 million over five years, is a continuation of a long-term vision that was developed by citizens and has been supported by the community time and time again. Voting yes finishes improvements to Dickerson Park Zoo that were started with the last parks tax increase. Voting yes spends money on improved parks and aquatic facilities in the north (Doling Park and Grant Beach Park) and gets the ball rolling on a park and family center east of U.S. 65, a fast-growing and underserved corridor. Voting yes continues to improve sports complexes such as the Cooper Tennis Center that serve as an economic development engine, bringing millions of dollars to our city when families fill up hotel rooms and buy food and other goods in our community during trips to Springfield for soccer, softball or tennis competitions. Voting yes protects watersheds and brings about necessary improvements to historic parks such as Sequiota Park. Voting yes continues an efficient cooperation between the parks board and the Springfield Public Schools as taxpayers dollars create flexible green spaces that can be used by schoolchildren and taxpayers.
Voting yes fulfills the promise of a higher quality of life for our community.
There is a downside, of course, to higher taxes. If voters say yes, they will have created a permanent quarter-cent sales tax over the past 10 years. Eventually, these fractions of a cent add up. In Springfield, with its multitude of taxing districts, recently approved bond issues for a power plant and better schools, eventually the added taxes will create a burden for those on fixed incomes. Frankly, we hear the voices of some critics who wonder why we would continue to approve parks taxes in our community while saying no to higher law enforcement taxes or sitting idly by as our city struggles to find money for raises for police officers and firefighters.
But we believe it's important to see the bigger picture. Saying no to the parks tax will not magically free up some money in the general revenue accounts of the city. Quite the opposite. Better parks lure businesses to town and help others maintain quality employees. Better parks help pay for themselves by bringing visitors to town who help produce higher sales tax revenue. This year's sales tax collections in Springfield, for instance, increased by more than 8 percent as of March — more than triple last year's increase during the same time. This doesn't happen by accident.
Our city is growing because it's a wonderful place to live. The parks are a big part of that equation.
Tuesday's vote continues to fulfill a vision that citizens had long before some of us came to the Ozarks. It's a vision that sees a growing city and makes sure that we have a connection to all parts of the city through our parks and trails system. The brilliance of the plan is that with every yes vote, the parks board secures enough money to pay for the future improvements. That's important because some day, money might be tight and we will have to say no.
That's not the case today. The parks board has earned the trust of voters in Springfield and Greene County. It has a job to do to continue to make this a beautiful place to live.
Let's give it the money to do that job.
Vote yes on the local parks tax.
VOTE NO on all tax increases, bond measures, and vote out all incumbents. We demand accountability.
Tom Martz(libertarian)
candidate for the 139th
Contractors group supports tax
This is a no brainer. An organization that receives fees from the very same people that are going to be bidding on these contracts for so called improvements only makes sense. The city has already proven it is NOT to be trusted with any funds let alone supplying them with MORE.
Sorry but if the citizenry of this area willingly bows over and allows this to happen then they deserve NO less representation then they get. Sometimes I wonder if the people in this area ACTUALLY pay attention to the matters at hand, or are they to busy trying to get little Johnny and Suzy to be world class athletes in a town not known for its athletic prowess.
The people of this area need to wake up and observe the people they place into office. We the people are being lied to, ripped off and NO ONE seems to care. Well I care and will carry that voice to Jeff City to stop the abuses of government. I am but one voice but together we can and will be HEARD.
The Board of Directors of Springfield Contractors Association encourages the citizens of Greene County to "vote yes, to continue your parks' success" and approve the proposed quarter-cent sales tax on Aug. 8 ballot.
The sales tax is expected to raise approximately $50 million over the next five years. These funds will be used to continue to improve existing parks and provide new parks in under-served areas of Greene County.
Besides the direct economic benefit a vibrant and comprehensive parks system provides by serving our citizens and attracting visitors, the $50 million spent to improve our quality of life will also turn over in our hands to deliver about $150 million in impact of dollars spent in our community.
Several necessary water quality projects have been designed into the overall parks plan. Improving our water quality with the same dollars we use to improve our parks is good use of taxpayer money.
The comprehensive details of the planned improvements are available at www.voteyesparks.com.
We encourage you to find the answers to any questions you might have and most important: Go vote yes on Aug. 8.
Sheryl Letterman, Springfield The author is the executive director of the Springfield Contractors Association
Make a break from politics as usual, support third party candidates and throw out the people that refuse to listen to the voice of the people.
Vote Libertarian
Tom Martz
candidate 139th district
Sorry but if the citizenry of this area willingly bows over and allows this to happen then they deserve NO less representation then they get. Sometimes I wonder if the people in this area ACTUALLY pay attention to the matters at hand, or are they to busy trying to get little Johnny and Suzy to be world class athletes in a town not known for its athletic prowess.
The people of this area need to wake up and observe the people they place into office. We the people are being lied to, ripped off and NO ONE seems to care. Well I care and will carry that voice to Jeff City to stop the abuses of government. I am but one voice but together we can and will be HEARD.
The Board of Directors of Springfield Contractors Association encourages the citizens of Greene County to "vote yes, to continue your parks' success" and approve the proposed quarter-cent sales tax on Aug. 8 ballot.
The sales tax is expected to raise approximately $50 million over the next five years. These funds will be used to continue to improve existing parks and provide new parks in under-served areas of Greene County.
Besides the direct economic benefit a vibrant and comprehensive parks system provides by serving our citizens and attracting visitors, the $50 million spent to improve our quality of life will also turn over in our hands to deliver about $150 million in impact of dollars spent in our community.
Several necessary water quality projects have been designed into the overall parks plan. Improving our water quality with the same dollars we use to improve our parks is good use of taxpayer money.
The comprehensive details of the planned improvements are available at www.voteyesparks.com.
We encourage you to find the answers to any questions you might have and most important: Go vote yes on Aug. 8.
Sheryl Letterman, Springfield The author is the executive director of the Springfield Contractors Association
Make a break from politics as usual, support third party candidates and throw out the people that refuse to listen to the voice of the people.
Vote Libertarian
Tom Martz
candidate 139th district
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)