Now
Fair
32°
High
42°
Low
15°
Full Forecast

Jobs

Cars

Homes

Rentals

Alerts

Subscribe
Home > Opinion > Letters
Bookmark Us   •   Make Us Your Homepage

Letters, 12/04: Why are taxes so high?

Comments 30 comment(s)  
E-mail Story E-mail Story
Print Story Print Story
Share  Share
Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

Thursday, Dec 04, 2008 - 12:17:49 am CST

In the Nov. 25 Journal Star Public Notices, the Lower Platte South Natural Resources District list of expenditures for October totaled $621,200.51 for just one month.

The items I question are Quarry Oaks Golf Club (meeting expenses) for $11,955.07. I am concerned that a better description could be golfing, wining and dining. Also, Wingate Inn meeting expenses are listed at $3,251.90. It goes on with 11 Visa charges (meeting expenses) that total $4,568.87. Other meeting expenses total $5,054.

The Lower Platte South NRD is one of the nine governmental entities listed on my tax statement. The others include the school district, city, county, Southeast Community College, etc. I hope all government agencies, including the management and directors of the Lower Platte South, are responsible to the public taxpayers.

Duane Stokebrand, Lincoln

Abolish Electoral College

JR Wolfe’s Electoral College stance (letter, Nov. 30) supports a small government ideology dating back to the founding era. But it was not the sole political perspective. Numerous key political figures of the time passionately believed in a centralized form of government.

In this light, the view that our Constitution is a small-government doctrine becomes an erroneous assumption. Its preamble declares that ours is a government of “we the people,” not “we the states.” Subsequent constitutional amendments have solidified this.

For instance, the 17th Amendment of 1913 determined that senators were to be elected by popular vote rather than appointment by individual states. Symbolically, this transfer of power is identical to that which would occur with the elimination of the Electoral College. Not a single state has lost its sovereignty or been consolidated into a province as a result of the 17th Amendment.

Furthermore, the Electoral College is a fundamentally undemocratic product of a mostly landed, white male aristocracy and reflected their distrust of the general public to make sound political choices. They also feared an uninformed public. Two hundred years of advances in communication have made this a moot point.

There is no historical evidence to suggest that abolishing the Electoral College would cause the Bill of Rights to become “null and void.” Certainly, the 10th Amendment would not be undermined, because its exact text establishes not only the powers of the states but of the people. Eliminating the Electoral College is not a transfer of power to the federal government, but to the people and is entirely constitutional and in keeping with this country’s principles.

Barb Walkowiak, Lincoln

Trip more than expected

I just made the Heartland Honor Flight on Nov. 19. It was a real honor. Your two letters on Nov. 7 were right on target, “Honor flights important” and “Thanks for WWII heroes.”

The trip was more than expected but very well organized and produced. I hope more World War II veterans will take the trip.

Rudge Vifquain, Lincoln


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Letters > Back to Top of Story

Post Your Comment

Standards and Rules
All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
Hide Comments Hide Comments   Newest First Newest First  
tim wrote on December 4, 2008 3:04 am:
" Well, if the Electoral College is "fundamentally undemocratic" then the U.S. Senate must be borderline tyrannical. Let's look at Nebraska and California. I'll generously give Nebraska 2 million and conservatively give California 40 million people. Yet each state only gets two senators, which translate to two votes on each bill that comes before the Senate. That essentially means that, in the Senate, each Nebraskan has 20 times the proportionate voting power of each Californian! That number is even more 'disgraceful' for states like Alaska and Wyoming. So why aren't people like Barb Walkowiak advocating that we amend the Constitution to change or abolish the Senate?

The fact is, much of the Constitution was written to be a compromise between small states and large states. Some parts favor the large states (like the House) and some favor the small states (like the Electoral College and Senate). So in that sense the USA has never been a true democracy and never will be unless the Constitution is severely gutted. "

 Ken wrote on December 4, 2008 5:45 am:
" Don't you understand that if you eliminate the Electoral College you could (would) end up with the same problems as Florida, Massechusetts, Georgia, Alaska, etc. with recounts after recounts. Trying to recount the vast amount of votes in the USA would take weeks if not months if not years. You know the losing party would contest any recount that was made making it one recount after recount. Who would be running the country in the mean time. "

 sw wrote on December 4, 2008 7:26 am:
" tim, if you do the math, the House also favors the small states. For example, California has one rep for roughly every 690,000 people while Wyoming has one for every 530,000 and Nebraska has one for every 600,000. "

 Val Yer Pal wrote on December 4, 2008 7:37 am:
" Duane, I recommend contacting the LPSNRD directly if you have questions regarding their expenses. I'm certain that they would be able to better break down their budget and what is done during their meetings. "

 CS wrote on December 4, 2008 7:42 am:
" The US has never BEEN a democracy-a form of democratic government, sure, but never a true democracy. It is a Constitutional Republic, and talking it to death won't change that fact. "

 Ignignokt wrote on December 4, 2008 8:42 am:
" For once, I completely agree with CS. I can't understand why ANY Nebraska resident would want to have their vote effectively silenced. Elimination of the electoral college would allow future presidents to COMPLETELY ignore smaller states like those surrounding Nebraska. Why campaign for Nebraska's approx. 750,000 votes when there are over 12 million votes up for grabs in California? And if the presidents don't have to concern themselves over the hopes and fears of those in small states, then why should they care if any law signed angers anyone in those small states...in fact, why care about anyone in those small states at all?

Now, I would support a "change" in the electoral college...but not its outright removal. I think the rest of the states should divvy up their electoral votes they way Nebraska does...winner take all on for the Senatorial electoral votes...and then each Representative district casting their electoral vote for the candidate that won the district. Think about THAT!! Now candidates don't just show up in 1 or 2 districts, but begin traveling to many districts since they are all up for grabs. "

 Nina wrote on December 4, 2008 9:08 am:
" Property taxes ARE higher than those in surrounding states. But sales tax is in the medium range. What I've never understood is how Missouri can have mostly blacktop rural roads, and ours in Nebraska are poorly maintained, washboardy, with diminishing rock and gravel coverage. (When was the last time you saw even an entire mile of new rock or gravel?) See, I'm willing to settle for second-best, but not the pitiful maintenance we have now, since our taxes are higher than other states which do better by their roads. An added whammy is that auto registration taxes cost so much more here (and rural folks' cars take more of a beating because of the roads). Why don't we study what others are doing right and copy them? "

 CS wrote on December 4, 2008 9:38 am:
" Ig and I agree on something completely! Get out yer snowblowers boys and girls! "

 Pete Allen wrote on December 4, 2008 9:57 am:
" The Founders put the Electoral College in place for the same reason we MUST keep it today. If presidents were elected by popular vote just 10 major metropolitan areas would elect a president. Nebraska's vote would not count. Nor would Iowa's. Nor would the vote of any of the people living on 99 percent of the land area of the United States. Abolishing the Electoral College would essentially disenfranchise half the American people. And that is a very bad idea. "

 Right on wrote on December 4, 2008 10:46 am:
" Yep, Nina is right on. My property taxes are 6 times higher than in the
3rd state east and you will never find a county, state or cow path NOT
blacktopped!!! Nebraska has wasted alot of money thru the years grading and graveling roads. What my family said for years when one did the grading. I also licensed my new vehicles from between $250.00 to $$300.00, and came here and it cost me $750.00. And never had to pay
wheel tax ever before I moved back here! Nebraska looses alot of money
because travelers well aware what Nebraska does to ya, fill up before
crossing the border into Ne. and try not to eat or not shop. Even some
friends from the east took a bus tour to the west, told me they viewed
Omaha and the rest of the trip thru Nebr. was NON STOP until they got to
Colo. except for a leg stretch. They told me, as they went on I 80 by
Lincoln, the bus driver said, "oh thats Lincoln over there", pointing but
they didn't stop, pull off or NOTHING. They said they thought it was kinda
funny because they had stopped in little towns and cities in the other
states and viewed their capitol and interesting places. How Nebraska gets
its reputation. Believe me, I had to listen to the laughing for years. "

 yeah pete wrote on December 4, 2008 11:10 am:
" Yeah! 10 places can determine the president! Its not like there are any states out there that that the canidates focus on to get the all or none electoral college votes. Its not like there are any critical states the might swing the vote that every election the canidates focus on while ignoring all others. It would be terrible if a handful of states could swing the vote. "

 Chip wrote on December 4, 2008 11:26 am:
" Funny how we complain about high taxes, BUT we also have a balanced budget, don't overspend and currently have a surplus during a recession. While other's are running for handouts from the government, our "pay as you go" mentality has paid off for Nebraska. Our economic situation is significantly better than many places in the nation.

Do I like to pay taxes? Nope.

And to Nina, move into town if you want paved roads. I lived in MISERY for a few years and, while most roads do seem to be paved, they still have a whole ton of one-lane bridges, ungodly hills that no one seems to want to level slightly so one can drive up and not get high-centered at the top and much narrower roads in some places. Besides that, you'd probably have to be a Tiger's fan. Yuck! "

 Kevin wrote on December 4, 2008 11:35 am:
" I read these posts a lot and I dont often agree with Ignignokt, but am 100% in agreement. And as a side note, to refer to the current population as 'informed' because of the modern world (internet) is recklessly optimistic. "

 Taxes wrote on December 4, 2008 12:18 pm:
" If you really compare all taxes, property, sales and income, Nebraska is listed in the middle for taxes paid.

People complain about high property taxes in Nebraska but forget that most of the surrounding states have a higher income tax. That is how they can have lower property tax.

To all you complainers: If you want lower property taxes, go ahead and move but beware, you will be socked with more in income tax. "

 Speaking of taxes wrote on December 4, 2008 12:30 pm:
" Indiana (aka three states east) recently raised their state sales tax to 7 percent. Some counties now pay 9 percent sales tax on certain items.

It's all relative... "

 Yes to Barb wrote on December 4, 2008 12:39 pm:
" And lets also put an end to spending a billion dollars during an election cycle. However, even with all those advances in communication and education, somehow Bush got elected twice. His platform was a superior economic policy but it failed to stimulate the economy as promised or create the jobs promised. Today alone announced the loss of over 15,000 jobs. Small wonder he didn't win the Nobel prize for economics. "

 Not higher wrote on December 4, 2008 1:25 pm:
" Wyoming has no state income tax. Electoral college. Why presume Nebraska would always vote contrary to the popular vote? Inhabitants of small states could want the same president as larger states. We'd do just fine without the electoral college. Case in point, we are able to elect our own Senators by popular vote without using an in-state electoral college. "

 Nina wrote on December 4, 2008 1:28 pm:
" I wouldn't mind being a Tiger; then our Missouri relatives wouldn't send me a sympathy card every time they beat the Huskers. But somehow, our farm has a way of staying put. Many things to like about Nebraska (property taxes not being one of them) and many things to like about Mighty Mo, land of my birth, too. I figured someone here would 'show me.' "

 Tim wrote on December 4, 2008 1:38 pm:
" Since we are talking elections I will put in my 2 cents worth. First, they need to set the maximum cap level for fundraising total. Say 15 million and no loop holes, period.
Second if you run for any political office and you are currently employed by the government ie. house, senate, gov. you have to quit your position.
Third, Presidential elections will only be able to start 8 months prior to November of the election year. "

 Chip wrote on December 4, 2008 1:46 pm:
" My point, Nina, is to say that regardless where you go there is something to complain about. We happen to be sitting pretty right now as far as our financial situation.

I don't see a lot of value in investing more money in country roads. They are what they are. They serve their purpose. We could argue that Omaha should be paved with platinum too, but that ain't gonna change the fact that we have a limited number of resources to go around and if I have to choose between my kid getting a good education and somebody getting a "smoother ride" in the country, I vote for the school "

 Cheaper wrote on December 4, 2008 2:03 pm:
" I think the elections would be cheaper if those running paid us directly for the votes than paying for the newspaers and tv ads. Just think how many of us there are and the hundreds of millions spent on the elections not even counting the presidential election. "

 Being nostalgic wrote on December 4, 2008 2:43 pm:
" It's nice to see a compromise between to ideological spectrums come together in agreement. I say this because I use Nebraska's model of divying up it's Electoral College votes. The regulated version of government wants to keep its proper ways of maintaining order during the chaos of an election. Yet while people who want more voice into politics demand greater influence among their domicile. I see Nebraska's way of doing Federal elections stellar and I thank the Legislature for this wise choice. Yet on the same time I see state elections as just competent, but perhaps it's because I demand better from the candidates running than the people doing the counting on the local level. Either way, you just can't beat Nebraska's method of politics. "

 Nina wrote on December 4, 2008 3:28 pm:
" Hey, Chip, I vote for the country kids having a smoother ride in their schoolbuses, too. Country roads are what they are, and what they are in Nebr. is not what they are in Mo and Ia. "

 Alan wrote on December 4, 2008 3:32 pm:
" I'll take the higher income tax since that means you have the ability to pay. The only way to cut your property taxes is to leave the state or at least Lancaster county. I'm looking forward to retirement so I can move to a lower tax state like Missouri or even Colorado. "

 Roads wrote on December 4, 2008 3:48 pm:
" I always think it's funny when people who live in the city tell people who live in the country to move to the city if they don't like the condition of the roads. Does that mean one can only complain about roads if one lives in the city? We pay taxes in the sticks too. And until you've driven on some of these roads, you don't reallly know how bad they are. I live in Otoe County, too, Nina. I feel your pain. (So do my kids!) "

 Eric wrote on December 4, 2008 4:37 pm:
" How come no one ever suggests aligning the electoral college with Congressional districts? I'm not suggesting doing it "like" Maine or Nebraska. I'm suggesting having the Congressional districts BE the electoral college. "

 suliemon wrote on December 4, 2008 5:13 pm:
" I read all the comments of country roads versus city. Has anyone seen the streets of Lincoln recently? Some potholes are large enough to lose some of those new efficient cars in! And we pay extra in the "wheel tax" yet the money somehow seems to disappear down a rathole or goes to the schools. "

 visitor wrote on December 4, 2008 9:34 pm:
" A better solution might be to amend the way the Electoral College votes.
Nebraska and Maine are the only states that use the Electoral College as a true democratic tool. Each Congressional district gets a vote and 2 votes go to the winner of the popular vote. If all states divided their votes the same way it would show a truer picture of what the people want. A candidate can win California by 1 vote and take all 65 electorates.So essentially 49.9999% of the people are not represented by their vote. It would make the candidates work harder in all districts and not just focus on the 12 states that get them elected. That's the change that needs to be implemented. "

 Comm UnSense wrote on December 5, 2008 6:53 am:
" Nebraska is the 17th highest out of 50 in state and local taxes. I'd say that's hardly middle-of-the-pack. Every single surrounding state is lower. Kansas is the closest at 21st. Wyoming is 48th. Do these states really have worse roads, schools, etc. Want the absolute lowest in the country - that would be Alaska. "

 Stephanie B wrote on December 7, 2008 11:35 pm:
" All the streets INSIDE the city are not even paved. I have afriend who lives not even 3 blocks off O Str and she has to drive thru a gravel road to get to her house! The City leader insist upon cramming eerything in to our tiny downtown area and wont even consider utilizing our interstate access. Millions of dollars DRIVE BY every year because the only thing you see when you drive by Lincoln is car dealerships, a couple gas stations and sommy ratty old hotels by our "airport". I live in a wonderful neighborhood to the North and it is faster for e to get to Omaha most weekends to shop or go to a reseraunt than to drive south. It is really pathetic. Even the smallest towns on I-80 know to put resteraunts, gas stations and nicer hotels on the interstate. It is easy money. But then again Lincoln has proved time and again that we are willing to let Omaha take it all. "

Ads by Yahoo!