Facts, Please

As seems to be all too normal, facts about alderman pay seem to be missing or distorted in the ongoing reports from the Mount Carroll City Council.

While last fall the council did vote itself a pay increase to $40 per meeting – the first since 1993 – that new rate only goes into effect in the new fiscal year beginning May 1, 2011. No mileage is paid for city council meetings.

At present council members are paid $50 each month. According to the city clerk, that amount represents payment of $25 for two meetings. However for at least the past four years, the council has also met on the fourth Monday evening each month for committees. That means council members serve the city for three evenings, not two, each month making the actual compensation per meeting closer to $16.67 per meeting. If the intent is to truly compensate on a per meeting basis, the city should either scrap the fourth Monday event and include committee work on regular council meeting nights, or be prepared to pay citizen representatives for the third meeting.

Council meeting attendance also seems to have become a hot topic. Those anxious to turn the matter into a witch hunt might be well served to check the records before setting out the dogs. Since January 2010 the following absences are stated in the minutes:

John Boelkins - No absences

Nina Cooper - Absent 3-22-11

Diane Lego - Absent 3-22-11, 12-14-10, 6-8-10, 5-25-10, 2-23-10

Doug Bergren - Absent 11-23-10 (plus occasional committee meetings)

Mike Risko - Absent 3-22-11, 2-8-11, 1-25-11 (term began 11-9-10)

Doris Bork - Absent 3-22-11, 6-8-10

The numbers speak for themselves.

Sincerely,

Nina Cooper

Alderman, Ward 1

Mount Carroll City Council

Illinois Municipal Code

Aldermen asking legitimate questions about city expenditures and financial record keeping have in recent weeks caused Mayor Carl Bates to suggest that such information was only accessible with his permission. The Illinois Municipal Code explicitly states that aldermen as corporate authorities have access to all records at all times in the exercise of their duties as elected officials. The text follows:

(65 ILCS 5/3.1-35-40)

Sec 3.1-35-40 Treasurer: duties.

(a) The municipal treasurer shall receive all money belonging to the municipality and shall keep the treasurer’s books and accounts in the manner prescribed by ordinance. THESE BOOKS AND ACCOUNTS SHALL ALWAYS BE SUBJECT TO THE INSPECTION OF ANY MEMBER OF THE CORPORATE AUTHORITIES . . .

Anyone wishing to learn more about the fiscal responsibilities of the treasurer and municipalities more generally should consult the full statute as posted on the Illinois General Assembly website at www.ilga.gov.

Sincerely,

Nina Cooper

Alderman, Ward 1

Mount Carroll City Council

Bureaucracy vs Capitalism

A few are angry that I have condemned our legislators for passing laws favoring collective bargaining that have made government pensions so high. Much higher than that of the private sector that pays all the taxes. God bless our schoolteachers, firemen, and policemen. We need them, but through collective bargaining the government/union pendulum has swung too far left. NTUI claims there are 3,194 IL. government retirees pensions over $100,000. Now there are twice as many workers for the government as there are for all of manufacturing. Just the opposite ratio of 1960 when the economy was booming. (April 1, Wall Street Journal)

A few are also mad that I want to see more transparency in our governing bodies. They ask, how can I say these things and get farm subsidies? I have talked to my congressman and representatives going back to Ron Lawfer on cutting farm subsidies.

I spoke publicly in front of several hundred people as recently as the Kirk/Manzullo town hall meeting at Highland College, March 23. Quote: “We are so in debt. According to the National Debt Clock, when you figure in the unfunded liabilities, every taxpayer owes $1million. The only way out of this is to cut spending, especially government pensions on the upper end. We need you to set an example. Also, I get farm subsidies. Cut that!”

Don Manzullo did not comment. Freshman Senator Mark Kirk said he proposed a 15% cut across the board. Yea! Jim Sacia’s editorial two weeks ago said he would fight to protect government pensions. Even though I agree with these gentlemen much of the time, it makes me wonder about term limits.

Do you see how government, over the years, is trying to make everyone dependent on them in one way or another? It does not make sense to give out grants or subsidies that take 40 to 80 cents on the dollar to administrate. I will happily give up my farm subsidies if I do not have to pay taxes to support or compete with those who receive farm subsidies. Bureaucracy starves national growth.

Capitalism made this country great. Get off our backs and let us work! Who on our governing boards will stand with me to this end? Tax Day! April 15th. In front of Stephenson Ct. Court House, 11:45 to 12:45.

Bill Dietz

Lena, IL

Defunding Planned Parenthood

Since efforts to defund Planned Parenthood are causing much grief among liberals like Julie Kilpatrick (“A Tsunami,” March 23) this is as good a time as any to recall what that evil organization is all about.

One way to do this is to quote from a “smoking gun” document released March 27 by Randy Engel, Director of the U.S. Coalition for Life.” I’m referring to a memo from Planned Patenthood Vice President Frederick S. Jaffe to Bernard Berelson, President of Rockefeller’s Population Council, describing various means of population control, including increasing homosexuality and compulsory abortion and sterilization.

The Memo was taken from “A Family Planning Perspectives Special Supplement” published by Planned Parenthood-World Population NYC NY, 1970.

The Memo was drawn up by Jaffe as a companion piece to Berelson’s paper, “Beyond Family Planning,” published in the Population Council’s February 1969 issue of Studies in Family Planning (http://uscl.info/edoc/doc.php?doc_id=83&action=inline.)

According to Berelson, federal family planning programs are “the first step to population control.” Why? “Because from a broad political standpoint it is the most acceptable one: since closely tied to maternal and child care it can be perceived as a health measure beyond dispute; and since voluntary it can be justified as a contribution to the effective personal freedom of individual couples.”

Berelson was admitting that Congress was duped into supporting Title X birth limitation programs in 1970 under the guise of maternal health care and volunteerism, when in fact, Congress was taking its first step toward population control, which unlike “family planning” includes a wide range of compulsory means of population reduction including compulsory abortion and sterilization and social constraints such as “encouraging increased homosexuality?”

If federal “family planning” programs are indeed stepping stones to totalitarian population control by the State, then it is time, indeed, that Uncle Sam got himself out of the birth limitation business. Cutting Planned Parenthood funding is an excellent first step toward this goal.

Examples of “Proposed Measures to Reduce U.S. Fertility” include Social Constraints: Restructure family (Postpone or avoid marriage, Alter image of ideal family size.) Compulsory education of children. Encourage increased homosexuality. Educate for family limitation. Fertility control agents in water supply. Encourage women to work.” Economic Deterrents: Modify tax policies: Substantial marriage tax (a ‘Child Tax” and tax the married more than singles); remove parents’ tax exemption; additional taxes on parents with more than 1 or 2 children in school; reduce/eliminate paid maternity leave or benefits; reduce/eliminate children’s or family allowances’ bonuses for delayed marriage and greater child-spacing; pensions for women of 45 with less than (2?) children; eliminate Welfare payments after first 2 children; require women to work and provide few child care facilities; Limit/eliminate public-financed medical care, scholarships, housing, loans and subsidies to families with more than (2?) children.

The list goes on: Measures Predicated on Existing Motivation to Prevent Unwanted Pregnancies (compulsory abortion of out-of-wedlock pregnancies; compulsory sterilization of all who have two children except for a few who would be allowed three; confine childbearing to only a limited number of adults; stock certificate type permits for children.)

Housing policies: Discouragement of private home ownership. Stop awarding public housing based on family size; payments to encourage sterilization; payments to encourage contraception; payments to encourage abortion; abortion and sterilization on demand; allow certain contraceptives to be distributed non-medically; improve contraceptive technology; make contraception truly available and accessible to all; improve maternal health care, with family planning a core element.

Of course, these racist and eugenic ideas might appeal to some PA readers. If you find them offensive and don’t want your tax dollars used for such purposes, make sure your Representative and Senators get a copy of the Memo at .

Richard O’Connor

Pearl City, IL

Handling “line 22”

When I opened the Advocate today I was greeted by the smiling face of Jim Sacia and his comments on the new tax law that we are to “voluntarily” pay as our conscience dictates.

An especially interesting part was Mr. Sacia’s advice to just put -0- on line 22 of your tax return.

I had contacted Mr. Sacia a while back after the Gazette ran an article on the Governor with his new OUT of state tax law. I was told that he would investigate it.

Looks like he and 177 of members of the House and Senate, investigated it and readily signed onto it.

Now, I can read the US Constitution as well as the next man and found out that it is an ILLEGAL law according to Article 1, Section 9, Paragraph 5, which states:

“No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.”

Article 1, Section 10, Paragraph 2, which states:

“No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what shall be absolutely necessary for executing it’s inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the revision and Controul of the Congress.”

We are about to the middle of the “AMNESTY” period the Gov. gave us. What do you suppose will happen after October 2011?

Remember the SEAT BELT LAW, that was put into effect and we were told that “You will not be stopped for a seat belt check, only be given a ticket if you are in an accident and it is not buckled.”

Well, thanks to Gov. Blogo, it now is a fact that we can be ticketed just for that alone. No accident, just an officer wanting to fulfill his weekly quota.

This looks to me like an illegal camel nose under the tent folks. What is the next step going to be? Your guess is as good as mine.

Respectfully submitted,

Greg Coleman

Milledgeville, IL

Republican Take-over Spells Trouble

During the last election, the majority of senior people voted for Republicans which helped the Party to regain the US House of Representatives. In this region, they also voted to re-elect Congressman Manzullo, a Republican who votes according to his leadership’s direction. With that, I’ll repeat my statement made in one of my previous letters to the Editor that if the Republicans take over the Government, paying taxes will be the least of our problems.

No Compromise

Now, it seems we are seeing the results. The Republican’s budget proposal continues to cut taxes for the rich and corporations at the expense of the rest of the American people: the old, the middle class and the poor. Following are some comments about the Republican budget from news organizations and institutions.

New York Times Editorial:

“If the House Republican budget blueprint released on Tuesday is the “path to prosperity” that its title claims, it is hard to imagine what ruin would look like. The plan would condemn millions to the ranks of the uninsured, raise health costs for seniors and renege on the obligation to keep poor children fed. It envisions lower taxes for the wealthy than even George W. Bush imagined: A permanent extension for his tax cuts, plus large permanent estate-tax cuts, a new business tax cut and a lower top income tax rate for the richest taxpayers. […] The deficit is a serious problem, but the Ryan plan is not a serious answer.” [New York Times, 4/13/11]

Associated Press:

“Most future retirees would pay more for health care under a new House Republican budget proposal, according to an analysis by nonpartisan experts for Congress that could be an obstacle to GOP ambitions to tame federal deficits. […] “A typical beneficiary would spend more for health care under the proposal,” the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated in an analysis released late Tuesday.” [AP, 4/13/11]

Wall Street Journal:

“The House Republican plan for overhauling Medicare would fundamentally change how the federal government pays for health care, starting a decade from now, likely resulting in higher out-of-pocket costs and greater limits to coverage for many Americans.” [WSJ, 4/13/11]

USA Today:

“Republicans unveiled a budget-cutting plan Tuesday that would dramatically revamp the twin health care pillars of the Great Society, taking a huge political risk that could reverberate all the way to November 2012 and beyond. Medicare, the government-run health insurance program covering about 47 million seniors and people with disabilities, would be run by private insurers and would cost beneficiaries more, or offer them less. Medicaid, the federal-state program covering more than 50 million low-income Americans, would be turned over to the states and cut by $750 billion over 10 years, forcing lesser benefits or higher copayments. Social Security eventually would be cut, too.” [USA Today, 4/13/11]

Roll Call:

“Still, while the plan envisions paying off the national debt sometime after 2050 principally by squeezing spending on health care and other programs, it would still add more than $8 trillion to the national debt over the next decade — reaching $23 trillion in 2021. Indeed, the plan does not come close to balancing the budget in any year over that span. That violates proposed balanced budget amendments to the Constitution backed by every Senate Republican and a majority of the House.” [Roll Call, 4/13/11]

National Journal:

“The tax and spending roadmap put forth Tuesday morning by Ryan, the Wisconsin Republican who heads the House Budget Committee, is backed by a set of extremely optimistic assumptions about how the budget would stimulate private investment, hiring, and broad economic growth. […] But the forecasted growth is so high that it falls on the outer edge of what most economists say is plausible—or even desirable—for the next decade.” [National Journal, 4/5/11]

These Republicans that proudly follow the ignorance of the Tea Party and the far right will eliminate all of the safety net programs, including Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. Programs that made this country great! Call Representative Manzullo and thank him for it!

Paul Gonzalez

Lake Carroll, IL

Morthland Passes FOID Card Privacy Bill

State Representative Rich Morthland (R-Cordova) passed legislation Friday to protect the privacy rights of Firearm Owner’s Identification Card holders.

House Bill 3500 adds an exemption to the Illinois Freedom of Information Act protecting the personal information of Firearm Owner’s Identification (FOID) Card holders. The bill prohibits State and local governments from publicly releasing the names or other private information of FOID card holders or applicants. HB 3500 passed the Illinois House of Representatives on a vote of 98-12.

“This is a major victory for law-abiding gun owners across Illinois,” Morthland said. “The privacy and safety of gun owners and their families should be paramount. I’ve worked hard to garner bipartisan support for this legislation and today it paid off.”

Morthland’s legislation is in response to a ruling by Attorney General Lisa Madigan that declared the names of FOID Card holders to be public information that must be disclosed.

The Illinois State Police, which oversees the program, opposes the Attorney General’s ruling. The National Rifle Association also opposes releasing the names and addresses of FOID Card holders.

“There should be a reasonable expectation of privacy for FOID Card holders,” Morthland said. “Releasing their names or other personal information would be like giving a shopping list to criminals who want to steal guns.”

House Bill 3500 now goes to the Illinois Senate for consideration.

For more information, please email or call .

Guest Commentary . . .

Where Are the Jobs?

By Larry Plachno

In our current economy with substantial unemployment, a typical question asked over and over is: “Where are the jobs?” The simple answer is that like people, jobs go where they are wanted and leave where they are not wanted.

When we go shopping, we often compare prices and value at several different stores. Some of us may buy the least expensive option and others may like the most expensive. Many people look for the best value after comparing prices to what they get.

With today’s massive improvements in transportation and communication, many companies also have choices. They can shop for the best value in taxes, regulations and wages and then move their jobs accordingly. Businesses are increasingly moving to places like China, India and even Russia where they feel welcomed and out of countries like the United States where they do not feel welcomed.

If you look around, you will see that many jobs that can move elsewhere have already done so. Many of the jobs and businesses that remain are the ones that cannot move, like retail, services, and bus drivers.

Even as recent as World War II this was not the situation because transportation and communication had not developed enough to create a global economy. Back then, the DC-3 was the queen of the airlines, people still crossed oceans on ocean liners and long distance telephone calls were difficult to make and expensive.

Improvements in transportation and communication were slow in coming and somewhat insidious but they propelled us into a global economy whether we wanted it or not. What we should have done was to reduce taxation, reduce regulations and labor costs to encourage manufacturing and similar jobs to remain in the United States, and hopefully encourage the creation of more jobs.

Instead, our elected officials did exactly the opposite of what was needed. They increased taxes, increased regulations, and borrowed from future generations and other countries to create a false standard of living which prompted many companies to move their jobs elsewhere. To some extent, our politicians pandered to special interest groups and added earmarks to legislation to gain their favor and votes. Worse yet, with massive debt, continued confidence in the American dollar is declining.

Added to the improvement in transportation was a recent explosion in communication technology because of telephone and the Internet. Today it is both simple and inexpensive to make long distance calls. Call centers in other countries have taken over American jobs. The Internet now allows immediate outsourcing of programming, Web development and even some engineering. You can order a personally engraved i-Pod on the Internet and it will arrive at your door from China in four days. Our world has shrunk considerably from 50 years ago and it is obvious that we are competing with other countries for jobs.

I have to credit the Tea Party movement for trying to bring some sanity to our economy. The recent November mid-term elections showed that many Americans are starting to realize that tax and spend does not work. Eventually you run out of other people’s money.

Corporations and investors have money to invest but are not expanding or creating American jobs. Why not? There is no movement because there is no incentive to invest in expanding or creating American jobs. What is interesting is that several of the international companies have indicated that it is not so much American wages but American taxation and regulations that keep them from expanding in the United States.

Can we compete for jobs on the global economy? The reality is that if we reduce taxation, reduce spending and eliminate special entitlements and programs, we can make a major change and once again entice companies to create and expand jobs in the United States. It is far better to work for a $15 per hour job that exists than hope for a $30 per hour job that has gone elsewhere.