Featured Article

The Gods of Liberalism Revisited

 

The lie hasn't changed, and we still fall for it as easily as ever.  But how can we escape the snare?

 

READ ABOUT IT...

Tuesday, October 07, 2008

Elli Schwiesow on Taxes

The South Dakota Legislative District 32 Senate race has shaped up to be one of the most interesting in our state.

This year, three candidates will be running for the single seat. Incumbent Democrat Tom Katus was backed by "Republican" Stan Adelstein in 2006 after that year's incumbent Adelstein lost in the Republican primary to Elli Schwiesow. Though he supported Katus against his own party's nominee in 2006, Adelstein is running against Katus this year on the Republican ticket. Rather than face a tremendously expensive primary against the wealthy Adelstein, Schwiesow decided to run for the seat as an Independent this year.

Dakota Voice will be publishing a series of articles in the coming weeks examining Schwiesow's position on various issues.

Today she talks about taxes.


As a conservative, Schwiesow believes taxes should be as low as possible while providing the revenue to fund necessary government functions.

"Property taxes have risen in spite of the effort to reduce them," says Schwiesow. "I know my property taxes are back at the level they were previous to property tax reduction efforts. The city and county grows so it would seem the tax base would be growing too but there is still the need, we are told, to increase property taxes."

Schwiesow believes that whether it is city, county or state government, every line item in the budget should be reviewed to determine whether it is actually necessary, and at what level.

"Limited growth of government is the best way to limit or reduce taxes," she says.

Schwiesow says she is okay with sales taxes for the consumer in general, but has mixed sentiments on the food tax.

"Most items we purchase are discretionary, such as whether we want a newcoat, new shoes, etc.," Schwiesow says. "But food is a necessity. Since food is a necessity we require to live, taxing food is not a good idea."

One tax which Schwiesow believes is a good idea is the alcohol tax which was proposed earlier this year in the legislature.

Schwiesow says, "When it's broken down by drink, it doesn't make a huge impact on the consumer. Alcohol can cause a lot of detrimental behavior. Who pays for that? The taxpayers do.

"Drugs and alcohol problems affect something like 85% of those incarcerated in our jails and prisons."

According to Schwiesow, the specific revenue allocations in the bill proposed in the legislature this year seem fair. Those requirements specify what percentage of the alcohol tax revenue would go to counties, the 24/7 sobriety program, treatment programs and so on.

The proposed alcohol tax bill was killed in the legislature and proponents attempted to get it on the ballot through a petition. Due to lack of organization, that effort did not succeed.

"The alcohol lobby makes it difficult to pass something like this in the legislature," said Schwiesow. "They are one of the most powerful lobbies in the state.

"The wine industry is a little different. The per-drink tax doesn't affect them that much on the surface, but they run into problems when they ship wine out of state and are competing with other wines in other states."

Related:

South Dakota Family Policy Council Voter Guide
Project VoteSmart

Next time: Schwiesow discusses her longstanding passion for firearms and Second Amendment rights.


South Dakota Dist. 34 Candidates on Adult Oriented Business Regulation

From the South Dakota Family Policy Council's 2008 general election voter guide, comparing South Dakota District 34 legislative candidates on regulating adult oriented businesses:

Support an act to regulate the location and hours of operation of adult oriented businesses? e.g., strip clubs, massage parlors, adult book stores, cabarets, adult theaters.

D House Lisa F. Cook
D House Bonny Petersen
R House Ed McLaughlin N
R House David Lust N
D Senate Gary L. Hargens
R Senate Craig Tieszen N*

*=Extended Answer


Monday, October 06, 2008

Palin Puts War Protester in His Place

This is Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin putting an anti-war protester in his place:



HT to Michelle Malkin.


South Dakota Dist. 35 Candidates on Adult Oriented Business Regulation

From the South Dakota Family Policy Council's 2008 general election voter guide, comparing South Dakota District 35 legislative candidates on regulating adult oriented businesses:

Support an act to regulate the location and hours of operation of adult oriented businesses? e.g., strip clubs, massage parlors, adult book stores, cabarets, adult theaters.

D House Fern Y. Johnson Y
D House Curtis R. Marquardt
R House Don Kopp Y
R House Mark Kirkeby Y
D Senate Theresa Spry
R Senate Jeffrey K. Haverly Y


Obama Surrogate Was Keating Five Member

After Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin did the "mainstream" media's job for them over the weekend by pointing out Barack Obama's close association with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, the Obama campaign retaliated by bringing John McCain's status as one of the "Keating Five" back into the media limelight (notice I used the word back).

Amanda Carpenter points out something interesting about this, though:

If Barack Obama is so outraged at John McCain’s involvement in the Keating Five scandal, why is John Glenn, another Keating Five member, doing surrogate work for Obama?

But Obama doesn’t seem to have any quarrel with Glenn. The former Democratic Ohio senator introduced Bruce Springsteen at a benefit concert for Obama in Ohio on Sunday, October 5. He's also done other surrogate work for Obama as well. According to Obama's presidential website Glenn held a conference calls with reporters for Obama in August.

A day after Glenn urged people to register to vote for Obama in Ohio, Obama’s campaign began a multimedia campaign to remind the public McCain was one of the “Keating Five” although he was eventually cleared of all charges.

Like McCain, Glenn was also found not guilty of violating any Senate rules.

Though Obama is quite willing to condemn McCain for his involvement with the Keating Five, he seems to have no qualms taking help from Glenn for his campaign.

Something else to consider: McCain bailed on his dealings with Keating when he realized what was going on, and has admitted his bad judgement in getting involved with Charles Keating, calling it "the worst mistake of my life".

Meanwhile, Bill Ayers is unrepentant for bombing the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon and several other government buildings; in fact, Ayers said on September 11, 2001 "I didn't do enough."

What's more, while Barack Obama has mouthed a condemnation of Ayers' terrorist activities, Obama had no qualms taking a job at an organization Ayers created, working with Ayers on the board of that organization and in other projects, or attending a meet-and-greet Ayers threw for Obama at Ayers' home to help launch Obama's political career.

I have never heard Obama express regret for his involvement with Ayers the way McCain has expressed regret for his involvement with Keating.

What's worse: someone regretful for limited dealings with a financial shyster, or someone unrepentant for their dealings with an unrepentant terrorist?


Dakota Voice
 
Clicky Web Analytics