Sarah Palin for Vice President

John McCain has selected 44 year-old Alaska Governor, Sarah Palin as his running mate for the November presidential election. In what may eventually be seen as a bold political masterstroke, McCain has selected a running mate with: youth, strong conservative credentials and executive/gubernatorial experience. Moreover, as the mother of five, she is a strong advocate for traditional family values. Coming a day after the wrap up of the Democratic Convention, it is impossible to miss the supreme irony that it is the Republicans who are putting a woman on the ticket.

I am writing this with the TV on, awaiting the official announcement by John McCain in Ohio. The cavalcade of talking heads is already hammering away at Palin's seeming lack of experience, especially in foreign affairs and national defense. But if lack of experience is an important issue, we need to look first at the top of the Democratic ticket.

This choice is clearly a gamble for John McCain, who passed over several "safe" choices for VP in favor of Sarah Palin. It now remains for her to be tested by the fire of public scrutiny, which has been known to be an enormous stumbling block. But if she is successful, she just may win the hearts of the American people and help John McCain win the presidency. Several commentators have characterized this choice as being highly visceral, and knowing John McCain, this is probably true. After watching her impressive acceptance speech, The View applauds his decision and shares this optimism.

A Great McCain Ad

I guess sometimes you find truth and wisdom in the strangest places. This is an old ad brought instantly up to date with a new and ironic ending. A hat tip to Red Mass Group for picking up this You Tube McCain AD.

Hollywood East, The Saga Continues

As reported PREVIOUSLY, plans for the Hollywood East studio continue to emerge as the promoters meet regularly with the Plymouth Planning Board. The overall approval process is ramping up in advance of the October Town Meeting, which will have the final say on this project slated for the Waverly Oaks Golf Club site on Long Pond Road. These meetings are open to the public and may also be viewed on Comcast Channel 15. The dates for the next several meetings is as follows:

Monday, August 25- Planning Board Workshop

- Design guidelines
- Building façade
- Landscape buffers/ screens

Wednesday, August 27- Planning Board Workshop

-Traffic impacts & mitigation
-noise analysis

Wednesday, September 3- Planning Board Workshop

-Review Impacts and mitigation
-Final Review MEPOD language

Meetings will begin at 7:00 p.m. at Plymouth Town Hall., 11 Lincoln Street. Please call 508-726-1968 with any questions regarding these important meetings".

For a look at a Hollywood East slide presentation showing the proposed site layout and other details, click
HERE

Plymouth Rock Studios maintains a WEB SITE with information about the organization and the proposed studio project.

After months of discussion, it now looks as though the Town of Plymouth will reach a decision on the studio project within the next six weeks.

The View Turns One

When The View was launched, a year ago, its stated goal was to examine and discuss the important issues of the day, as determined by the View. As we post our one hundredth article, we look back over those issues with a satisfaction that, for the most part, that goal has been achieved.

Initially, the subjects were eclectic as they ranged from book reviews to a recap of personal and family events as well as a smattering of eulogies for loved ones and some well-known personalities. But as the year progressed, the subjects began to focus more and more to issues of politics and government at the local, state and national level. One of the strengths of our form of government is the process of debate whereby the issues are subjected to differing opinions, drawing out the pluses and minuses of the various points of view. The results are not always perfect, but if the process has been allowed to work, they are generally accepted as being in the best interest of all. To the extent that such debate is precluded, the legitimacy of the system itself is brought into question. No where is this danger more present than in our home state, dominated by one political party.

So as we move into our second year, we reaffirm our intent to continue to provide "a measure of cogent counterpoint to the herd mentality of the blue state left." For the most part, this will reflect the conservative point of view. And while, admittedly, this small effort is akin to lighting a single candle in the dark, it is part of a much larger effort by like-minded individuals at ensuring that the issues be well-tempered by the heat of debate.

Finally, thanks to all who have provided feedback and comments. There is nothing more gratifying than shaking loose a few paragraphs from the blogosphere and knowing that we have provoked some thought.

Taxachusetts no more? Right.

We have several issues with the editorial in today"s GLOBE trumpeting the "progress" made by Massachusetts in terms of the tax burden it levies on its citizens, according to a study by the National Tax Foundation, which compares the total annual state and local tax burden for each state with annual income to come up with a "tax burden" index, which the Globe somehow likens to a wind chill factor. The "progress" in question is the fact that Massachusetts ranks 23rd this year in terms of the state rankings, a significant advancement from its second place showing in 1980. Like many statistical studies, however, it pays to look a little deeper and unpeel the onion.

Among the data included in the STUDY (scroll down to 2008) is the total annual amount of state and local taxes paid, per capita, for each state. Expressing the total tax amounts on a per capita basis allows for comparisons between states of various sizes. Ranking the states on this basis, however, shows that Massachusetts ranks sixth with $5,377 per capita vs. the average for the US of $4,283. If our taxes are ranked relatively high, then it must be the income numbers that are pushing down the tax burden ranking.

According to the study, Massachusetts ranks second, behind only Connecticut in terms of per capita income at $56,661, compared with a national average of $44,254. Who knew we were living in such high cotton? But even assuming that this number is correct, what does it imply for tax policy. The Globe, and perhaps the National Tax Foundation is telling us that we shouldn't complain as we have the means to pay taxes at a rate 25% above the national average. In other words, don't worry, be happy and pay up for the T deficits, the Big Dig overrides, free health care and, of course, those marvelous pensions. If the recently passed pork-filled budget represented anything close to fiscal responsibility, maybe the "tax burden" argument might hold water.

Another point that deserves a further look is the comparison being drawn between the current ranking and the 1980 ranking. If there has been progress since 1980, it would seem that the prime driver would be the limitations on growth in property taxes due to the adoption of Proposition 2 1/2. With the growth in property taxes essentially capped, the growth that has put us in sixth place is primarily due to increases in state taxes, which, it would appear, has more than offset the relief from 2 1/2.

The editorial's last paragraph provides us a glimpse of what is behind this smokescreen:

"In November, voters will be faced with a ballot question to eliminate the state income tax. The tax foundation's report shows Massachusetts moving in the right direction. It should help inform a debate based on facts, not slogans."

The fact is that the most effective tax containment measure on the books is proposition 2 1/2. While eliminating the state income tax (Question No. 1 on the November Ballot) could be seen as heavy-handed, it has increasingly become clear that this may be the only way for the taxpayers to rein in the big spenders on Beacon Hill.

Sam's Club Republican

In spite of the fact that we have been sure to keep our lines of communication open, John McCain has yet to contact The View regarding our thoughts on his selection of a running mate. And while that may never happen, handicapping McCain's possible Vice Presidential picks can be an interesting exercise in itself as well as an additional point of view on the main contest.

Two of the last men standing on the short list are former Mass. Governor, Mitt Romney, and Minnesota Governor, Tim Pawlenty. We here in the Bay State know a little bit about Mitt, but Pawlenty is more of an unknown. Both have experience as republican Governors in Blue states. (Minnesota has gone democratic in every presidential election since 1960, except for 1972.) As a result, both have had to sail close to the wind, i.e take moderate positions, in order to be able to govern effectively.

An interview in today's WALL STREET JOURNAL, provides an interesting description of the man and his politics, both of which deserve careful attention. The following excerpt from one of Pawlenty's recent speeches highlights his centrist orientation:

"I'm the son of a truck driver and a housewife from a meatpacking town," he introduced himself, "who wants to provide a better quality of life for ordinary folks without growing government." His audience stirred: This was clearly a different sales pitch than they were used to. "We must be the party of Sam's Club Republicans, not just country club Republicans," he continued.

In addition to a strong personal rapport with McCain, his views on the issues generally line up pretty well with those the GOP presidential candidate, which brings up the sensitive subject of his own centrist tendencies. But before throwing McCain under the bus due to concern for his conservative bona fides, it is wise to remember that the election is not going to be won solely on the strength of conservative principals as the successful candidate must also be able to convince the great middle that he can govern effectively. When asked what lessons he had learned from Ronald Reagan, he gave an insightful answer:

"He was proudly conservative," he replied, "but we sometimes forget he got things done as governor and president that represented compromises. If today you went to someone and outlined Reagan's record without using his name some conservatives would want to throw him out of the party. But he never wavered on core principles and he made the country a better and more conservative place."

Balancing one's conservative principals with a "get-it-done" attitude is easier said than done. But when a state task force recommended a Massachusetts-style requirement for the purchase of individual health care, Pawlenty rejected the proposal citing the burden on the already stretched budgets of low-income citizens. Mitt Romney, on the other hand, still crows about the passage of health insurance reform in Massachusetts, which occurred on his watch. While the two state plans have differences, Romney's claims of accomplishment in this area, may well turn out to make him a untenable as a VP candidate.

As reported in today's GLOBE, Massachusetts, yesterday,requested the fourth two-week extension of the federal waiver that has allowed federal Medicaid funds to be used in a non-conforming manner to fund the state's Commonwealth Care program. The waiver was scheduled to expire on June 30th, and there is some indication that the US Department of Health and Human Services is balking at accepting the state's policies on coverage. If this waiver is not extended, it is almost certain to bring down the financial house of cards that is keeping health care reform aloft. Such a failure will have politicians of all stripes running for cover and will certainly take some of the lustre off Romney's list of accomplishments.

Keep an eye on T-Paw. We may be hearing a lot more about him as we move towards the Republican convention in early September

Remedy for Fiscal Irresponsibility

For forty years the Retired State, County and Municipal Employees Association of Massachusetts has provided retired public employees their own voice on Beacon Hill.

As the legislative session wound down last week, a bill to provide a special cost of living raise to state retirees was passed on a voice vote with no debate. While supporters of the bill were quick to point out that this increase amounts to only $10 per month per pensioner, the total cost of this increase is $1 billion. Actually, the cost would be "only" $1 billion" if the legislature stepped up and funded the increase in the current budget. As is noted in an editorial in TODAY's GLOBE, the legislation provides a funding schedule that is worthy of a Ponzi scheme:

"The problem is that the legislation puts off even beginning to pay for the pension increases until 2024. That is just as the state's current large unfunded pension liability is scheduled to be retired. The Legislature's proposal would delay that date by three more years - long after most of today's legislators are safely out of office. It is irresponsible to saddle future generations of taxpayers with debt - estimated at more than $3 billion - to gain a political benefit today"

In a recent GLOBE ARTICLE, Ralph White, President of the Retired State, County and Municipal Employees Association of Massachusetts, cited the lack of legislative opposition for the bill:

"In the Legislature itself? No," White said yesterday. "There were varying opinions but no one opposed it. I think we did a god job of lobbying, truthfully."

Who was lobbying for the taxpayers against this bill that the Boston Globe says "is just too expensive for the state to afford?" Moreover, pumping up its unfunded liability weakens the pension system itself.


If, as reflected by the lack of opposition, or for that matter, any debate, this increase was in the best interest of the people of Massachusetts, then it falls to the legislature to first of all recognize the significant costs involved, and second, review the rest of the budget and delete enough spending so as to fund the increases and balance the budget. Since the state budget is already way out of balance as we are already in the hole for items like road and bridge repairs, this would be some heavy lifting, not the type of work the legislature likes to perform. Instead, increased pensions have been given to some 100,000 retirees and the cost is pushed off on future taxpayers. Yes, it is an election year, but it makes you wonder if the Solons have any children who might be among those who they just saddled with $3 billion of future debt?

This is exactly the kind of fiscal irresponsibility that is fuelling the initiative to eliminate the state income tax. When both the Boston Globe and the Wall Street Journal both contain editorials criticising the fiscal ineptitude of Massachusetts government on the same day, perhaps the stars really are aligning for a big change. In today's WSJ editorial, the stage is being set for a battle between embattled taxpayers and the entrenched special interests that feed at the public trough. To wit:

"The forces of the tax and spend status quo will descend on this initiative like British troops after the original Boston tea party, but someone has to make an effort to stop the relentless growth of government."