YourTaxCut

Okay before you get started, PLEASE READ THIS.

A lot of folks just stop in to read. That's fine but try be more than that. Go ahead and leave a comment, would you? It's easy to do. LOOK, there it is at the bottom of the post, - “click here to add your comment”

Post anonymously or by name. Type in a one word thought or type out your life bio. But leave your mark. Your input is valuable – it’s your county!

Thursday, November 16, 2006

Your Ideas Are Usually The Best

Here's a simple request. Where ever you live, be that Galveston County or beyond. Open your eyes and see what is happening around you. Then think, take a deep breath and come here and post a list of changes that you see in your government that could save money. These can be city, MUD, county, state, federal or other.

Always had a gripe? Here's your chance to put out for he whole world to see.

posted by Chris Stevens @ 11/16/2006 09:41:00 PM  

13 Comments:

  • At Friday, November 17, 2006 6:48:00 PM, Blogger Chris Stevens said…

    I should have noted...
    This thread is also open to posting if you have a specific comment about what the Republican Party and conservatives in general need to be doing to get the agenda of smaller government and lower taxes back on track.

     

  • At Friday, November 17, 2006 6:58:00 PM, Anonymous ttyler5 said…

    Dear Chris,

    I think the time has come for Texas taxpayers to push not only for major reforms of the Central Appraisal Districts, the Appraisal and Protest process and the proposed new Appraisal Caps, but also for a major program of reform on the Texas State Constitutional level which will:


    1) create a new and elected Office of **The Texas Taxpayers Advocate General**, which would be funded by a percentage of all taxes, state and local, collected by all taxing entities in Texas

    2) alter the State Codes:

    ** to require a basic level of voter turnout in bond issues, and to require passage by supermajorities, for approval

    ** to require voter approval of any and all tax increases at all levels of government, and to require a basic level of turnout and supermajorities, for approval

    3) create and enforce a tight structure of fiscal management standards for all Texas taxing entities

    4) end the wasteful and unsuccesful public school monopoly over our public education funds by creating a program school choice and vouchers which is friendly to parents, students, and teachers

     

  • At Saturday, November 18, 2006 3:12:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I want Republican to stop cowtowing in congress. Why keep electing them if that's all they're going to do?

     

  • At Sunday, November 19, 2006 1:10:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Dear Chris,

    I think the republicans are messing up by believing they can take over out county overnight. The election clearly showed that there are some strong democrats that are taking votes from our base. We almost lost our treasurer's positon as a result of these stronger candidates. What do you feel about leaving these stronger candidates alone, and targeting the more vulnerable?

     

  • At Sunday, November 19, 2006 10:37:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Republicans cowtowing in Congress ? You call tax cuts, Grade A conservative judges, and a BORDER WALL doing nothing ? Tell me 2 years ago about a border wall and I'd say go back to 1992 when the MSM called Buchanan a rascist for such. Art Rascon on CH 13 went to the border last week and interviwed illegals about what they feared the most - they all said a wall was very bad.

    As for tax cuts, don't expect KSEV to tell you that appraisals caps will be very difficult, requiring a 2/3rds vote of the leg (meaning many D's) and a vote of the people. Revenue caps are a much better chance, Perry passed a version of that for the bloated schools last Spring (again, another non issue on KSEV).

     

  • At Monday, November 20, 2006 5:56:00 PM, Blogger Jimmy Trojanowski said…

    Hey Chris

    Thanks for joining us for our show last week. I think that on a national level voters feel distant from it and tend to always believe the grass is always greener on the other side regardless of side. When it’s closer to home like a county race, they believe (and rightfully so) that it could have a greater impact on their lives. That’s why I believe that on a local level, voter tend to accept status quo for fear of the extreme and immediate consequences it could have on their home, business or other aspects of their lives. In a small community like ours where everyone knows everyone, there can be deep felt repercussions by openly supporting a particular candidate. It’s just an observation sir.

     

  • At Monday, November 27, 2006 3:20:00 PM, Blogger Chris Stevens said…

    I see a lot of valuable comments on here.

    Thanks Jimmy, Tom and the various anonymous posters.

    I want to respond to the one poster who put a question to me.

    "...republicans are messing up by believing they can take over out county overnight. ...there are some strong democrats...taking votes... We almost lost our treasurer's position as a result..."

    Good points but here are some of my concerns or counterpoints.

    1) While you may say we almost lost our treasurer, I believe that almost every GOP countywide candidate other than my self came closer to winning than Ms. Banks came to defeating to GOP County Treasurer Kevin Walsh.

    2) We thoroughly depleted many of the bankrolls that various Democrat incumbents have had the chance to build up for years.

    3) We began the long painful process of name recognition for many first time runners. If you remember, Kevin Walsh and Judge John Ellisor had each run in two campaigns previously.

    4) We are a grown up party and if we believe we can perform a county function better than an opponent we should field a good candidate.

    5) We really cannot stop a candidate from running if he/she chooses to do so. We can try to discourage someone but in the end, the choice is theirs. Our increased presence, visibility and improved performance are what are drawing candidates. They aren't going to go away just because a few people ask them too. And visibly failing to support a particular candidate can hurt the whole ticket as bad as anything.

    I have a few other thoughts but I wanted to post those ones for now.

     

  • At Tuesday, November 28, 2006 3:12:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Mr. Stevens-

    After looking at the numbers, there were nine contested county-wide races. In five of the races(Criss, Yarbrough, Quintanilla, Burwell, and Daigle), the democrats did better than Mr. Walsh. The other four were very close to the results of the treasurer. I have concerns with many of the current leaders, but believe that it may be a better strategy to target the weaker ones first. After talking with some people who have looked at the numbers, they reported to me that Yarbrough and Criss did not deplete their treasure chest, as they only spent money that they raised this election cycle. They were also able to rally their troops and organize a strong political force, which may hurt us in the next election cycle. The other problem that I see with just running people in an attempt to gain name recognition is that they are looked upon as just another politician looking for an elected position. Please give some feedback and thought about these concerns.

     

  • At Wednesday, November 29, 2006 7:22:00 AM, Blogger Chris Stevens said…

    Thanks for that last post. Your concerns are valuable. I understand the take the weak ones first point. I just don't believe that it is very workable.

    Either we will be dismal failures as a party or we will be successful. If we are consistent failures, candidates won’t come. If we are consistent winners, candidates are going to come and election law gives neither the party leadership nor the electorate the right to turn them away.

    I have been chastised for suggesting that we should have a "No Candidate" ballot choice to select on races. Then if people felt fielding a candidate in a particular race was a mistake they could mount a "No Candidate for XXXXX" campaign and let the party voters decide.

    I am not sure about Criss because I didn't personally see her spending much money but I do not believe that Yarbrough only spent what he raised this year. I saw his campaign and I know what those expenses are like. He may have money left but not as much as he started with.

    I am not worried that they rallied their troops or organized a strong political force. From what I could see, they were the beneficiaries of the national political mood. They have ALWAYS had troops and ALWAYS had organization. As a matter of fact, though they were very much more organized this year, there involvement/volunteer level looked to be down from previous years. Our problem is that we HAVE NOT always had those things. Failing to field candidates is a sure way to make sure we never do.

    On name recognition, we are running candidate to win and do a better job than the Democrats could do. Gaining name recognition is one of the benefits of running even if a candidate doesn't win. Like I said, Mr. Walsh and Mr. Ellisor each had had to run twice before winning. Likewise, Lonnie Cox had run in a primary previously and lost, Cheryl Johnson had served on the CCISD Board before being elected.

    On a reverse note, not challenging these Democrats in their terrible malfeasance of performance allows certain lies to perpetuate unchallenged and THAT is how they grow so strong. My previous opponent is a perfect example. He is a free spending, tax and spend liberal. He supports liberal causes and liberal candidates. Yet people want to say, “Well Jim is almost a Republican anyway.” It is not true. We should have been mounting a credible candidate against him every cycle. We should have been holding his feet to the fire. We should support those candidates who do take him on. It is no wonder Bonnie Hart didn’t want to get out in public and campaign in 1998. If she had to endure the trash I had to put with from Commissioner Clark (who I still consider a friend) and other Republicans (who I helped put in office), I can’t blame her.

    NOTE TO ALL: I do not want this BLOG or the rebuilt www.YourTaxCut.com website to become a referendum strictly on whether I should have run in 2006 or whether targeted campaigns vs. full ticket is a better strategy. These are valid topics and can be discussed here but there should also be a broader conversation about how to cut taxes, shrink government and push forward the Conservative Cause.

     

  • At Wednesday, November 29, 2006 6:33:00 PM, Anonymous Jim Dalton said…

    Why let the democrats have it all? We beleve in things and they're worth fighting for. I don't live in your county but I would have voted for many if not all of your Republicans like I did here.

     

  • At Thursday, November 30, 2006 8:35:00 AM, Anonymous Barbara Hogan said…

    Dear Chris,
    When asked why I vote Republican I tell people it is because as a Christian I cannot in all good conscience vote for anyone in a party that stands for abortion, special rights for a small segment of the population and that does not support America and Israel. I've never had anyone come back at me after that.

     

  • At Sunday, January 21, 2007 8:45:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Ye who worship Pat Robertson and Isramerica is NOT a Christian, blasphemer.

     

  • At Thursday, February 08, 2007 11:35:00 AM, Blogger P. Moratto said…

    TTyler has some great ideas. If the form which the state is required to provide property taxpayers wishing to protest or question their taxes is an indication of taxpayer rights, then we apparently have the right not to be re-taxed by multiple tax entities purporting to provide the same services, especially when only one of them provides the services.

    Yet the appraisal board in LaMarque, headed by a battle axe who single-handedly orchestrates a board of teetering old doddards on Valium, who can barely muster vague nods of approval at anything she says, flatly refused to address the protest that I properly entered on the state's form. In fact, she admitted that she hadn't even seen the form.

    I would add to TTyler's proposals that overlapping entities such as so-called MUD districts, counties that tax inside incorporated cities, etc all be disallowed.
    In L.A., if you live in the city, you pay city taxes. If you live outside the city, you pay county taxes. NOT both.
    Only one entity bears the obligation to provide services, and that should be the only one we pay.

    Another gross injustice is school taxes. For much of my adult life, I have paid school taxes in three states, but have never had a student in any of them. Others have students in private schools, but they still pay for the failed public school systems just like I do. The schools are choking on all the money they rake in, at the same time they are always crying poverty. It's a monumental scam.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home