At a League of Women Voters forum yesterday, Del. Mitch Van Yahres (D), Del. Rob Bell (R), Del. Steve Landes (R), Del. Watkins Abbitt (R/I) and Sen. Criegh Deeds (D) debated the upcoming General Assembly session, during which the biannual budget must be established. The Democrats came out in favor of tax increases along the lines of Governor Warner’s proposals, but the Republicans were unwilling even to commit to tax increases for the purpose of maintaining basic services. The event was a preview of the 60-day session that begins on the 14th, although with considerably more decorum. Bob Gibson has the story that begin shortly.
11 thoughts on “Richmond Reps Debate Taxes”
WE NEED MORE TAXES AND I AM NOT AFRAID TO USE THEM
We need better roads, more roads, smaller class sizes, new schools, better teachers, more police officers, better public transit and more downtown parking, but by all means, DON’T DARE RAISE MY TAXES!
It makes me sick…
“Landes suggested that up to $500,000 a year could be saved by eliminating the state Council on Human Rights and up to $1 million a year by closing the Department of Minority Business Enterprises.”
When I read this I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry.
At least the Republicans are being open and honest about their priorities.
"We need better roads, more roads, " NOOOOOOO, that would invite more cars!
"smaller class sizes, new schools, better teachers, more police officers"
NOOOOOOO, that would mean more people driving with the increase of jobs
" better public transit and more downtown parking"
Good idea, we need a mass subway system that starts from Ruckersville and ends at the Downtown mall. That should elimate any traffic problems on 29.
"We need more shopping…..the sea of retail space already on 29 isn’t enough. We need more!! So what if no one has a clue as to where the half billion dollars in transportation improvements needed for 29 will come from. And who cares if I have to sit in gridlock to shop there…."
Actually, if you were to put in a subway line from Schuyler to Providence, RI, it would suit my needs perfectly. After all, since I’ve chosen to live in Rhode Island, it’s my God-given right to have access to the new Charlottesville Target!
I agree we need improvement in many areas but just once I would like to see a poll of the people who cry the loudest to raise taxes to determine if they pay taxes.
Well, as an idle inquiry, what does the State Council on Human Rights do? Who are the members? What are their salaries? What have been their accomplishments, say for 2003?What are their plans for next year? Does the Council duplicate other functional areas?What would happen if they were abolished (other than the members losing their jobs?)
Their website. Should answer your questions (mostly).
As far as I can tell, no references to specific actions, but the website makes their purpose fairly clear. What I can’t tell is whether or not another entity does this as well, but I highly doubt it. If not, eliminating this program only to have another entity do the same thing would be redundant, and thus not appropriate for Del. Landes to cite as an example.
Careful…you’re asking dangerous questions.
I read that site`s information before I posted, and I could only discern "sound and fury" – The questions I posed were questions I think should be directed to all organizations, governmental and non-governmental alike when determining their worth. Not picking on the "Council" but not omitting them either.
In this case (Council) the mission statement may be well and good but when it is not properly executed then what good is it?
Organizations which say "We investgated 411 cases of "something" seem to consider that justification for existence. The questions then should be along the lines of to what end, and ad infinitum. Produce or be abolished/restructured to an entity that can produce. I am suspicious of organizations who meet with like- minded people and talk and talk and talk to each other – in short – "Where`s the beef?"
Comments are closed.