Babies and Bathwater

"I'm against ending the Income Tax. You are throwing the baby out with the bath water." - Massachusetts Public School Teacher

"Ending the state income tax would mean laying off teachers, police and fire-fighters, closing schools and shutting down road projects," claims Senate President Therese Murray.

She cautions,"We mustn't throw out the baby with the bathwater."

The Massachusetts Teachers Union's whisper campaign is littered with fear-inciting language and images against the income tax elimination initiative:

"devastation," "decimation," "gutting of public services," "massive layoffs of teachers, police, and firefighters," "closings of police stations, fire stations, schools, and hospitals."

'Don't You Dare Throw Out the Bathwater - or the Baby's Going to Get Hurt' - opponents warn taxpayers.

For hundreds of years, Western babies have been bathed in buckets, small barrels, or baby baths. This was safer - and it was easier to heat the water.

After the baby was bathed, the mother emptied out the dirty bathwater.

This common experience became an easily grasped figure of speech, a proverb:

Do not throw out the good with the bad, nor the desirable with the undesirable.

Do not throw out the necessary with the unnecessary, nor the essential with the waste.

Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

If a person can't tell the difference between a baby and dirty bathwater, he should not be put in charge of either.

If she can't show you which is the baby and which is the bathwater, would you let her bathe or care for your baby?

If he doesn't know the difference, if he can't show you the difference, why would you let him advise you on your baby and your bathwater?

Now let's consider the Massachusetts government budget baby - and the government budget bathwater.

The Massachusetts state government statutory budget is $28 billion (FY 2009). The state government also spends an additional $6 billion to $14 billion OFF-BUDGET each year. (Undisclosed, undocumented, and unreported to YOU: the taxpayer.) Total state government spending for this year? $34 billion to $42 billion.

Massachusetts towns and cities will collect and spend an additional $18 billion to $20 billion this year.

Total Massachusetts’s local and state government taxes and spending for the next year? $52 billion to $62 billion.

Governor Deval Patrick, Massachusetts state legislators, Massachusetts state government officials, as well as local government officials:

Show us the baby - and show us the bathwater.

Show us each government program baby - and each government program bathwater.

Show us each government program or service's cost baby - and each government program or service's cost bathwater.

Show Massachusetts taxpayers the bad, the undesirable, the unnecessary, and the waste in the government programs, services, and spending.

Taxpayers and voters are dead sure you've covering up and protecting massive amount of government bathwater.

"41 cents out of every tax dollar is wasted," said voters in an April 2008 poll. That's a massive amount of bathwater. But you just can't seem to put your finger on budget bathwater.

You hint or suggest or brazenly claim: there isn't any budget bathwater; there never
was any bathwater; there ain't never going to be any budget bathwater. And anyone who disagrees is a baby hater.

I don't believe you. I don't trust you.

Neither do the 3,000,000 Massachusetts workers and taxpayers that earn the money that you take, who pay the bills you make.

'Don't You Dare Throw Out the Bathwater - or the Baby's Going to Get Hurt' -- you and your allies tell taxpayers.

The first time I heard that remark, I gave you the benefit of the doubt. I assumed you were counseling taxpayers to be careful.

But now I'm wondering: Is it a warning - or a threat?

Our State Representatives had their chance to roll back the income tax level, and it was voted down. What do they expect? Massachusetts taxpayers are ready to toss out the bathwater, the baby will be just fine.

Massachusetts Farmers Say No to N.A.I.S.

The purpose of NAIS is to provide 48-hour traceback of all animal movements. NAIS will not prevent diseases from occurring. It does not address animal management, such as feeding cow parts to other cows or the other practices of factory farms that lead to animal health problems. It does not prevent wild animals and insects from spreading diseases, nor does it protect against foreign animal diseases from being brought into this country through lax inspection of agricultural shipments. All it does is provide after-the-fact information on where a sick animal has been. So what does the government plan to do with this information?

Call it mature capitalism or call it something else, but the fact is that we have been steadily, inexorably moving to an industrialized, centralized food production system. It is a terrible plan, that could really discourage small farms while it encourages corporate factory farming methods.

There is not much time left. The animal tracking, logging, and reporting components of NAIS will come into effect nationwide in January 2009. The USDA has been authorized to engage in tough enforcement measures -- fines, inspections of properties, and confiscation or redistribution of livestock without trial or legal hearings and with no compensation to the owner of the animals. Failure to register your home or farm with a Premise ID already faces a $1,000 fine in some states.

Once fully implemented, the NAIS program would require every person who owns even one livestock or poultry animal (a single chicken or a pet pony) to register their property with the state and federal government, to tag each animal, and to report “events” to a database within 24 hours. Reportable events would include such things as a private sale, a state fair, or a horse show.

There was some doubt that this was a state issue, as the mandates are coming down from the federal level. Here in Massachusetts, N.O.F.A. has been active in helping friendly state legislators draft and propose legislation to stop state compliance with this program.

N.A.I.S. is currently voluntary at the federal level, which means that state agricultural Departments will be charged with implementing the NAIS, and the USDA has already allocated over $60 million to them to do it.

Clearly, the ball is in our park, at least for now. Other states such as VT have managed to pass legislation stopping state participation in the program, at least temporarily.

What can you do as a consumer? Patronize farmers who raise meat, milk and eggs in a way you support.

If you are interested in learning more, go to:

MA legislation regarding N.A.I.S.

List of Massachusetts Legislators who sponsored and co-sponsored legislation to stop N.A.I.S.

Here is N.A.I.S. First Step PDF and N.A.I.S. Fact Sheet

"It is difficult to imagine any acceptable basis for the (USDA) to subject the owner of a chicken to more intrusive surveillance than the owner of a gun." -Mary Zanoni

Locavore

What is a locavore? It’s a part of the concept of local purchasing and local economies and a preference to buy locally produced goods and services. Those who prefer to eat locally grown/produced food.

There are twenty-six farms in Hampden County alone and there are 34 Buying Clubs or Community Supported Agriculture (CSA’s) in Massachusetts, http://www.organicconsumers.org/which generally use environmentally sustainable, biodynamic growing techniques using no pesticides, herbicides, or chemical fertilizers of any kind. They see their farms as a living system, where its elements work together to build and maintain soil fertility. Through a balanced crop rotation and a strict composting and cover cropping system, they leave the land better than they found it.

Personally, I buy all of my spring, summer and fall produce locally and I’m considering sponsoring a Locavore Challenge to area residents, (see the 100-Mile Diet below).

A locavore is someone who eats food grown or produced locally or within a certain radius such as 50, 100, or 150 miles. The locavore movement encourages consumers to buy from farmers’ markets or even to produce their own food, with the argument that fresh, local products are more nutritious and taste better. Local grown food is an environmentally friendly means of obtaining food, since supermarkets that import their food use more fossil fuels and non-renewable resources.

“Locavore” was coined by Jessica Prentice from San Francisco Bay Area on the occasion of World Environment Day, 2005 to describe and promote the practice of eating a diet consisting of food harvested from within an area most commonly bound by a 100 mile radius. The word "Localvore" is sometimes also used. The New Oxford American Dictionary chose locavore, a person who seeks out locally produced food, as its word of the year 2007. The local foods movement is gaining momentum as people discover that the best-tasting and most sustainable choices are foods that are fresh, seasonal, and grown close to home. Some locavores draw inspiration from the 100-Mile Diet or from advocates of local eating like Barbara Kingsolver. Others just follow their taste buds to farmers' markets, community supported agriculture programs, and community gardens.

Another effect is the increase in food quality and taste. Locally grown fresh food is consumed almost immediately after harvest, so it is sold fresher and usually riper, as it would be from a home garden. Also, the need for chemical preservatives and irradiation to artificially extend shelf life is reduced or eliminated.

So, why am I writing about this on a Republican Blog? Because I believe we should encourage our Massachusetts lawmakers to actively oppose legislation, which burdens family farms with an estate tax, which in some cases will prevent that farm from remaining in a family and may be forced to close. 2010 will see the tax completely repealed, while in 2011, the tax will be reinstated at a federal exemption level of $1 million per person. The reason for this flip-flopping is that Congress didn't have the votes to permanently push through such a tax cut, so it settled for a temporary fix that passes the buck of settling the matter to the future lawmakers.

The Massachusetts estate tax is “decoupled” from the federal estate tax system. So that any tax demanded from the IRS is viewed as a credit by Massachusetts. While the Massachusetts credit for tax paid in another jurisdiction appears to prevent multiple state death taxes from being imposed on the property of a Massachusetts resident decedent, it does not prevent Massachusetts from effectively taxing a resident decedent’s property located outside of Massachusetts.

Under the current Massachusetts estate tax, the amount of the tax payable by the estate of a resident decedent is equal to the amount of the credit for state death taxes that would have been allowable by the resident decedent’s estate computed under Internal Revenue Code. For example, a Massachusetts resident decedent who owned Massachusetts real estate valued at $5,000,000 and Florida real estate valued at $5,000,000, calculates his estate tax starting with a gross estate of $10,000,000.
Assuming no deductions, the Massachusetts estate tax is calculated as follows:

Taxable Estate $ 10,000,000
Less: $60,000 per IRC § 2011(b)(3) (60,000)
Adjusted Taxable Estate $ 9,940,000
Times: Effective Tax Rate 10.74%
Total Massachusetts Estate Tax $ 1,067,600

There appears to be evidence that this is unconstitutional.

Let’s do all we can to preserve our family owned farms in Massachusetts, first by trading with them and then by giving our lawmakers a little home-grown direction.

Opinions expressed on this site are those of the relevant contributors. Not all committee members necessarily share those opinions.

Meet Benjamin Dickmann

Here is Ben's Delegate speech in it's entirety:

Hello, my fellow Republicans! It’s really great to be here. My name is Benjamin Dickmann, I live in Agawam, and I have been a resident of Massachusetts my whole life, so it is a relief to be in a room filled with Republicans, seeing as that is a rarity in this State. I was raised in a Conservative family, was taught to work hard and what it means to earn the things that you want in life, and would like to carry these cherished principles of mine to the Republican National Convention.
Growing up, I was constantly reminded by my father to never take for granted the freedoms that this wonderful country has to offer. As a child I never understood why he always put these ideas into my head. But as I got older I started realizing that he didn’t have the freedoms and luxuries that I was born with when he was growing up in Indonesia. He is a proud citizen of this country, but, unfortunately, him and I and many other hard working Americans have been noticing a decline in this country’s direction. Here are some issues I’d like to address:
The Second Amendment: I believe that any law-abiding American citizen deserves the right to keep and bear arms, and to protect their homes, family, and themselves. It does not make sense to me that people in inner cities are restricted a gun licence for all lawful purposes when it is those people who are exposed to most violent crime. This amendment should never be tampered with, as it is the protector of all of our other rights, as well. As a gun owner, I do not stand for any legislation that prohibits any responsible American from exercising this important right.
National borders: If we are going to fight a war on terrorism, then why are our borders left wide open? Borders should have been up immediately after 911. We cannot defend this country properly from our enemies when our doors are left unlocked. It’s time we lock our doors and place our soldiers there to guard this house. Not to mention to keep people from outside of this country from entering it illegally. With that being said, this brings me to the next issue:
Illegal immigration. We must enforce visa rules and deport anyone who overstays their visit. I do not stand for giving amnesty, welfare, or birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants. Government should never reward people for breaking our laws. Enforcing these rules will give illegals the incentive to come to this country legally and go through the same waiting periods as other countries. It is just not fair to people like my father who immigrated to this country, played by the rules, and worked hard to achieve what he has today.
Healthcare: Being a Republican, I know better than to support a socialized healthcare system. Emergency rooms are usually packed as it is, and instilling a socialized health system will only pack them even more. No one should have to wait an outrageous amount of time for treatment to a real emergency. We must give people more choices by encouraging a free market healthcare system and to allow doctors to negotiate with insurance companies to drive down prices of medicine and treatment. We must also remove federal regulations that restricts smaller businesses from offering health insurance.
Lower taxes: If there is one thing that makes any Republican a Republican, it’s lower taxes. Americans should keep more of their own money because individuals should decide how to spend the money themselves and not have a government dictate how they should spend it. Lower taxes encourages more spending, saving and investing which benefits the economy. Tax cuts do not hurt the economy. What hurts the economy is a government that takes money from the private individual’s paycheck and spends it on something that not everyone wants or needs. Private investing, saving and spending is what drives this economy and keeps it strong. Because of the liberal spending this government has been experimenting with, our economy is weakening and the value of our dollar is dropping day by day.
I would like to go to the National Republican Convention to share and spread these philosophies so our country can improve. This is a great country and we can make it even greater if we can embrace these ideas of freedom and economic prosperity. Thank you!



Copyright © Benjamin Dickmann, 4 April 2008
"used with permission by the author."