Category Archives: Fiscal Freedom

(OLNEY/NEWTON) The Illinois Eastern Community College Board of Trustees met for its regular monthly meeting in July this past Tuesday night in Olney. The Board : adopted an operating fund budget for Fiscal Year 2022 worth just over $34.3 million the budget included $30,240,879 in the Education Fund and $4,065,771 in the Operations & Maintenance Fund : approved the payment of all bills as presented : approved the $208,300 bid from Grunloh Construction for the Natatorium remodeling project at Lincoln Trail College : approved updates to the 2021-2022 IECC Catalog : adopted a Human Subject Research Policy for compliance with accrediting agencies : approved agreements with the CAISA organization and the SAFE organization to provide counseling when and if needed with employees and/or students within the IECC District : and made various personnel moves accepted resignations from Linda Shidler as Director of Academic Success Center at OCC, from Dana Hart as District Coordinator of Employment & Benefits, Rebecca Carmack as Vocal/Instrumental Music Instructor at LTC, and Tracy Chastain as Custodian at OCC approved the change of employment status for Brandi Rich-Beard from Student Services Specialist at OCC to Advisor/Recruiter at OCC, for Jonathan Leach from District TRIO Upward Bound Counselor to District Retention Coordinator at WVC, for Laurel Taylor from Director of Business & Finance Workforce Education to Associate Dean of Business & Industry at FCC, and Tosha Baker from District Coordinator of TRIO Upward Bound to Marketing Business Management Instructor at WVC and approved the hiring of Cassandra Goldman as District Program Director of the International Student Program, Kimberly Wellen as an English Instructor at FCC, Clare Roosevelt as a Nursing Instructor at WVC, Julie Dehart as a Health Sciences Specialist in the Medical Laboratory Technician Program at FCC, Cole Carter as a Broadcast Services Secialist at WVC, Nickie Daniel as a District Office Assistant, Collyn Jewell as Maintenance Groundskeeper at LTC, and Brittany Longbons as a Student Services Specialist at FCC : the next regular monthly meeting for the Board of Trustees will be August 17th at Wabash Valley College in Mt. Carmel.

See more here:

IECC BOARD / MONTHLY MEETING | WSEI Freedom 92.9 FM | The Best Country in America - Freedom 92.9

According to figures obtained by the party via a Freedom of Information request, around 39 per cent of people who refused to pay fines in 2018/19 faced no further action from the justice system.

This number rose to 40 per cent in 2019/20, with the majority of cases in 2020/21 ongoing due to Covid-19 and court backlogs.

The Scottish Conservatives said these figures showed the reality of the SNPs soft-touch justice system, adding it was at odds with a statement from deputy first minister John Swinney in Holyrood earlier this year.

The Covid recovery secretary said during a justice debate that safeguards are built into the operation of fiscal fines, which are not mandatory penalties.

Mr Swinney said: Anyone who is offered a fiscal fine as an alternative to prosecution may refuse such an offer by giving notice to the court to that effect.

"In such an event, the refusal is treated as a request by the alleged offender to be prosecuted for the offence, in which case the procurator fiscal decides what action to take in the public interest.

Reacting to the figures, Scottish Conservative community justice spokesperson Russell Findlay said the number not penalised for refusing to pay fines exposed the sham of Mr Swinneys comments.

He said: These shocking new figures show the reality of the SNPs soft-touch justice system, which routinely betrays crime victims.

"This exposes the sham of John Swinney's claim, made to the Scottish Parliament, that rejection of these fines is likely to result in prosecution.

The message this sends is clear alleged offenders know they can break the law with impunity as they won't pay the price under this SNP Government.

A Scottish Government spokesperson said decisions around further action were for the Crown Office to take.

The spokesperson said: Use of non-court disposals for less serious offending is a long-standing and recognised part of the Scottish justice system, which the Scottish Parliament has legislated to provide powers for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) to use.

"Decisions in individual cases as to whether to offer a non-court disposal and the action taken if such an offer is not taken up is entirely a matter for the independent Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service.

Figures released by the COPFS for the past three financial years show the vast majority of fiscal fines issued are paid and cases resolved. A total of 18,705 fines were issued in 2019/20, with 180 charges from that pool marked no further action.

A COPFS spokesperson said: Procurators Fiscal deal with every case on its own individual facts and circumstances.

Effective and appropriate prosecutorial action is not limited to court proceedings and an offer of an alternative to prosecution is an effective response to certain types of minor crimes.

The Procurator Fiscal will decide what is the most appropriate action to take, whether criminal proceedings or an offer of an alternative to prosecution.

Where an alternative to prosecution is not accepted, the Procurator Fiscal will decide whether further prosecutorial action is appropriate in the individual case circumstances.

A message from the Editor:

Thank you for reading this article. We're more reliant on your support than ever as the shift in consumer habits brought about by coronavirus impacts our advertisers.

Here is the original post:

One in three face no action in Scotland after refusing to pay criminal fines - The Scotsman

Beacon Hill Roll Call records the votes of local representatives and senators from the week of July 12 to July 16.

The House, 150 to 0, and the Senate, 40 to 0, approved and Gov. Charlie Baker signed into law a bill that authorizes $200 million in one-time funding for the maintenance and repair of roads and bridges in cities and towns across the state. The $350 million package, a bond bill under which the funding would be borrowed by the state through the sale of bonds, also includes $150 million to pay for bus lanes, improvement of public transit, electric vehicles and other state transportation projects.

Public transportation is a public good, said Senate Transportation Committee Chair Sen. Joe Boncore, D-Winthrop. The $350 million investment is among the largest Chapter 90 bond bills to date and represents the Legislatures commitment to safe roads, reliable bridges and modernized transit infrastructure.

The longstanding state-municipal partnership established under the Chapter 90 program is critical to helping cities and towns meet their transportation infrastructure needs, said GOP House Minority Leader Brad Jones, R-North Reading. Todays agreement continues the House and Senates ongoing commitment to support this important road and bridge program.

A Yes vote is for the bill.

Rep. Natalie Blais Yes

Rep. Paul Mark Yes

Rep. Susannah Whipps Yes

Sen. Joanne Comerford Yes

Sen. Anne Gobi Yes

Sen. Adam Hinds Yes

Gov. Chalie Baker signed into law a $47.6 billion state budget for fiscal year 2022, which began on July 1. The governor and the Legislature were mostly on the same page since the Legislature approved the budget unanimously by a 160 to 0 vote in the House and a 40 to 0 vote in the Senate. Baker did disagree with the Legislature on some spending and he vetoed close to $8 million from the package approved by the Legislature. He also vetoed a section that further delays implementation of a charitable giving tax deduction approved by voters in 2000. The Legislature will soon act on overriding some of the vetoes, which takes a two-thirds vote of each branch.

The budget makes historic investments in our communities, schools, economy and workers as Massachusetts emerges from the pandemic, Gov. Baker said in a message to the Legislature. As we continue in our economic recovery, we are focused on supporting those communities that have been hardest hit by COVID-19, and this budget will complement our $2.9 billion proposal to invest a portion of Massachusetts federal funds in urgent priorities that support communities of color and lower-wage workers.

Baker continued, By working with our legislative partners to carefully manage the commonwealths finances and by reopening our economy, we now expect to make a $1.2 billion deposit in the Stabilization Fund through this budget, bringing the balance to $5.8 billion, an increase of over 400 percent since we took office. We are able to responsibly grow our reserves without raising taxes, while continuing to make historic investments in our schools, job training programs and downtown economies.

The Public Health Committee held a virtual hearing on legislation that would repeal the current law that allows parents to exempt their children on religious grounds from any required school vaccinations unless an emergency or epidemic of disease is declared by the Department of Public Health.

Current state law requires students to be immunized against diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, measles, poliomyelitis and other communicable diseases designated from time to time by the Department of Public Health. It allows exemptions in cases where a doctor certifies the childs health would be endangered by a vaccine or in cases where the parent or guardian states in writing that vaccination or immunization conflicts with his or her sincere religious beliefs.

Sponsor Rep. Andy Vargas, D-Haverhill, said that several other states, including Connecticut, New York and Maine, have removed non-medical exemptions for childhood vaccines.

Above all the lessons learned through the pandemic, perhaps the most powerful one is that, whether we like it or not, Americans, Massachusetts residents and human beings have a responsibility for the health and safety of one another, Vargas said. As lawmakers, we have to reason with the facts, listen to trained experts, trust the science and make tough decisions to stop preventable death and illness. We learned this the hard way during the pandemic.

This measure would usurp the right of parents to control the health care of their own children and empower the state to intrude into the exclusive concerns of the family, Catholic Action League Executive Director C.J. Doyle told Beacon Hill Roll Call. It would also coerce the consciences and violate the religious freedom rights of orthodox Catholics and other pro-life citizens, who find the use of fetal tissue or cell lines from aborted children, used in the production or testing of numerous vaccines, to be morally objectionable. In any conflict between a constitutional right and a compelling state interest, the American legal tradition has always held that the government should make a reasonable accommodation for the sincerely held religious beliefs of citizens. Rep. Vargas bill repudiates that tradition and prohibits that accommodation.

The Higher Education Committee held a virtual hearing on a bill that would prohibit public and private colleges from withholding a students entire academic transcript if the student owes the school money for any loan payments, fines, fees, tuition or other expenses. The measure would allow schools to withhold from the transcript only any academic credits and grades for any specific course for which that students tuition and mandatory course fees are not paid in full.

Supporters said currently schools can withhold a students entire transcript even though it might be just one course for which the student has not paid. They said this means that these students cannot use any credits to transfer to more affordable institutions or to obtain employment.

Higher Education institutions are supposed to be vehicles of opportunity, economic mobility and promises of a better future, said sponsor Rep. David LeBoeuf, D-Worcester. Continuing to foster adverse practices that disproportionally penalize low-income students go against these principles and the principles of the commonwealth. It is our responsibility to make sure those who pursue higher education are not saddled with debt or denied advancement opportunities because of limited financial resources. This bill begins to address this issue by eliminating a counterintuitive practice that has no place in Massachusetts.

Another measure heard by the Higher Education Committee bill would allow college student-athletes to earn compensation from the use of their name, image or likeness without affecting that students scholarship eligibility. Other provisions allow a student-athlete to obtain representation from an agent for contracts or legal matters; require agents to have specific credentials, verify their eligibility through a public registration process and keep detailed records; and require colleges to establish a Catastrophic Sports Injury Fund to compensate student-athletes who suffer severe long-term injuries.

Just two weeks ago, after years of delay, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) finally began allowing college athletes to earn compensation from the use of their name, image or likeness, said Senate sponsor Sen. Barry Finegold, D-Andover. I had originally introduced my athlete compensation bill last session, but I believe this bill is all the more important in light of the NCAAs recent policy shift. My proposed bill would codify the NCAAs rule change into Massachusetts law and provide additional clarity both for athletes and higher education institutions as they figure out how to comply with the NCAAs guidelines. We need to act now.

Even though the NCAA has updated (its) policy, this legislation would ensure that Massachusetts student athletes constitutional rights can never be infringed upon again in the commonwealth, said Rep. Steven Howitt, R-Seekonk, House sponsor of a similar bill (H 1340). It is important for the commonwealth to join the 24 other states who have already signed similar bills into law.

The Public Safety and Homeland Security Committee held a virtual hearing on legislation that would require EMS personnel to provide emergency treatment to a police dog and use an ambulance to transport the dog injured in the line of duty to a veterinary clinic or veterinary hospital if there are not people requiring emergency medical treatment or transport at that time.

Co-sponsor Rep. Steven Xiarhos, R-Barnstable, spent 40 years on the Yarmouth Police Department and was the officer who sent a team of highly trained officers on a mission to find and arrest an armed and violent career-criminal in April 2018. He and sponsor Sen. Mark Montigny, D-New Bedford, filed the bill in response to the tragic events on that day when Police Sgt. Sean Gannon was shot and killed and his K-9 partner Nero was severely injured and had to be rushed to the animal hospital in the back of a police cruiser. Nero survived.

Xiarhos said he will never forget the sight of K-9 Nero being carried out, covered in blood and gasping for air.

Despite the paramedics present wanting to help save him, they could not legally touch K-9 Nero as current Massachusetts law prohibits helping a police animal wounded in the line of duty, Xiarhos said. Instead, the police officers placed K-9 Nero in the back of a police cruiser and drove him to the closest veterinary hospital.

These incredible animals risk their lives to work alongside law enforcement in dangerous situations, Montigny said. It is only humane to allow for them to be transported in a way that reflects their contributions to our commonwealth. Sgt. Gannon was a native son of New Bedford and therefore his K-9 partner Nero is part of our communitys extended family. We hope that this never has to be used, but it demonstrates the respect for the crucial work these animals do.

The Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure held a virtual hearing on a measure that would require all applicants for a new or renewal of a license to be a hairdresser, barber, cosmetologist, electrolysis, manicurist or massage therapist to complete, in person or online, one hour of domestic violence and sexual assault awareness education as part of their educational requirements to be licensed in their field.

Domestic violence and sexual assault are life-threatening issues in our communities, which were only exacerbated by COVID-19, said the bills sponsor Rep. Christine Barber, D-Somerville. Nearly one in three women statewide have experienced rape, physical violence or stalking by an intimate partner. As legislators, we have a duty to provide resources and support to survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault. Salon professionals often build trusting personal connections with clients and are uniquely positioned to see the details of their clients bodies, as they work directly with their skin, hair, heads and hands. Their unique role puts them in a position to observe potential signs of domestic violence or sexual assault and has the potential to minimize violence and save lives.

See original here:

Beacon Hill Roll Call: July 12 to July 16, 2021 - The Recorder - The Recorder

Who is likely to be affected

Individual members of registered pension schemes who do not have a protected pension age but take scheme benefits before age 57 after 5 April 2028 or those who would like to have taken a benefit but who now will not be able to. However, members of the firefighters, police and armed forces public service schemes will not be affected by this increase.

Scheme administrators of registered pension schemes will need to modify their systems to accommodate for these changes.

This measure increases the normal minimum pension age (NMPA), which is the minimum age at which most pension savers can access their pensions without incurring an unauthorised payments tax charge unless they are retiring due to ill-health, from age 55 to 57 in 2028.

A consultation on the implementation of the increase and a proposed framework of protections for pension savers who already have a right to take their pension at a pre-existing pension age. This was launched on 11 February 2021 via a Written Ministerial Statement (WMS) by the EST. The consultation closed on 22 April 2021 and received 142 responses.

This measure supports the governments agenda around fuller working lives and has indirect benefits to the economy through increased labour market participation, while also helping to make sure pension savings provide for later life.

The NMPA was introduced in 2006 and it increased from age 50 to age 55 in 2010. In 2014, following the consultation on Freedom and Choice in Pensions, the government announced it would increase the NMPA to age 57 in 2028 to coincide with the rise of state pension age to 67.

Following the consultation on a proposed framework of protections this measure will legislate for the increase in NMPA.

The increase in NMPA will have effect on and after 6 April 2028.

Registered pension schemes must not normally pay any benefits to members until they reach NMPA. Tax legislation provides that from 6 April 2010 the NMPA is age 55 (before 6 April 2010 it was age 50). Sections 165(1) and 279(1) Finance Act 2004.

Registered pension schemes are also not permitted to have a normal pension age lower than age 55 and this applies equally to individuals in occupations that usually retire before 55 (for example, professional sports people).

Although the legislation provides the minimum age at which benefits can be taken, the rules of a scheme will state what benefits can be taken and the age at which they can be taken from. The age at which they can be taken from can be higher than NMPA.

If a registered pension scheme does pay benefits to a member before the NMPA unauthorised payment charge liabilities may arise unless the benefits are paid on ill-health grounds, or the member had a right on 5 April 2006 to take benefits before the NMPA. An individual may have a right to take benefits before the NMPA where this is not dependent on anything else or somehow qualified for example requiring employer or trustee consent. Where certain conditions are met these individuals may take their benefits earlier than age 55 without a tax charge. This is known as the individuals protected pension age. Paragraphs 21 to 23 Schedule 36 Finance Act 2004.

If an individual has a protected pension age, the tax rules provide that it replaces the prevailing NMPA for all purposes of the pensions tax legislation except for the lifetime allowance reduction that may apply where the protected pension age is less than 50 and benefits are taken before NMPA. This means, subject to that exception that when taking benefits from the relevant registered pension scheme, the tax rules apply to the member based on their protected pension age rather than the prevailing NMPA.

A consultation on the implementation of the increase to NMPA and a proposed framework of protections for pension savers who already have a right to take their pension at a pre-existing pension age concluded on 22 April 2021 and received over 145 responses.

Following the consultation, legislation will be introduced in Finance Bill 2021-22 regarding the framework of protections and the increase to the NMPA from age 55 to 57.

This measure is not expected to have an Exchequer impact within the scorecard period. Impacts from the implementation date onwards will be subject to scrutiny by the Office for Budget Responsibility and will be set out at a future fiscal event.

This measure is not expected to have any significant macroeconomic impacts.

This measure will impact individuals approaching retirement age who will be affected by the 2-year increase in the NMPA.

Customer experience is expected to remain broadly the same as this measure does not significantly alter how individuals interact with HMRC.

This measure is not expected to have an impact on family formation, stability or breakdown.

This measure will impact men and women equally as the NMPA is the same for both genders. Whether individuals are affected will depend on the circumstances of their scheme.

This measure will impact older individuals more than younger ones. This is because it is raising the pension age and those closer to this age will be immediately impacted more than those who are 10+ years away as they will have ample time to adjust and financially plan.

It is not anticipated that there will be any particular impact on other groups sharing protected characteristics.

This measure is expected to have a negligible impact on businesses administering registered pension schemes.

One-off costs for businesses will include familiarisation with the changes and could also include updating systems to reflect changes to the national minimum pension age. Additional one-off costs could also include training staff of changes, legal and consultation advice and managing a potential communication increase from customers.

There are not expected to be any continuing costs.

Customer experience is expected to stay broadly the same as this measure does not significantly alter how pension schemes interact with HMRC.

This measure is not expected to impact civil society organisations.

Minimal changes will need to be made to the online guidance on GOV.UK. This will be handled as part of the routine end of year updates at nil cost.

Other impacts have been considered and none has been identified.

The measure will be kept under review through communication with affected taxpayer groups.

If you have any questions about this change, contact Steve Darling on Telephone: 03000 512336 or email: pensions.policy@hmrc.gov.uk.

Read the original post:

Increasing the normal minimum pension age for Pensions Tax - GOV.UK

Thanks to the blessings of decentralization, life can vary greatly in America depending on where you sit. Those differences are growing into a chasm of philosophical and practical contrasts between two basic models for the American future. Call them the California way and the Florida way.

On many critical questions facing our culture, our economy and our society, California and Florida offer radically different answers.

Should lots of new housing be built in the interest of affordability? California says no, Florida says yes. Should homeless people be allowed to turn public spaces into tent cities? California says yes, Florida says no. Should public elementary schools teach critical race theory? California says yes, Florida says no. Should gas be $4 a gallon? California says yes, Florida says no. Should biological males be allowed to dominate girls sports? Florida says no. California not only says yes, but it is trolling Florida by forbidding its employees to take state-funded trips to Florida, as well as 16 other states.

California fancies itself imposing its cultural values on other states and tackling global warming independently; Florida has a more modest view of what a state government does. People are voting on all of this with their U-Hauls. Californias population in 2020 shrank for the first time ever, by 180,000 people, whereas Florida had the second-highest increase in population, after Texas.

During the pandemic, California introduced some of the harshest lockdown measures in the country, crashing its economy, while Florida was among the first states to begin reopening, way back in May 2020, and has been almost entirely open since September. Disney World reopened in July 2020; Disneyland reopened at the end of April 2021. One survey found that Florida had the second-fewest coronavirus restrictions; California ranked 45th by the same measure.

Though Florida has the second-highest percentage of old people of any state, the death tolls look like they will come out about even. Florida stands 26th in COVID-19 fatalities (1,769 deaths per million) while California is 34th (1,614). Yet Californias economy is still suffering, its unemployment rate standing at 7.9 percent in May, the most recent survey. Florida hasnt seen such a high jobless rate since last August; its unemployment has stood below 5 percent throughout 2021.

Whether lockdowns are effective remains an open question, but there is no question that they bring economic calamity.

As for the psychological and emotional effects of locking children out of schools, we may never be able to measure the harm California did to its youngest citizens. The data firm Burbio, which has been tracking school reopenings, ranks California dead last on its index of in-person learning, with four out of five students learning remotely on average. Florida scored 95 percent in-person learning, third-best in the nation.

Relative to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (a Republican), California Gov. Gavin Newsom (a Democrat) seems to have gotten very little in exchange for this devastatingly high price. Widespread disgust with his leadership means he will be forced to present himself to voters in a recall election to be held on Sept. 14, although polling suggests he will probably hang on to the office to which he was elected in 2018 with a 62 percent majority.

Newsoms state has a horseshoe economy built to serve two classes of people: the rich and the poor. The middle-class sags, neglected, in the middle. Ordinary working families are all but being invited to go find another state.

Tightly restricted housing policies, high taxes and punishing, traffic-clogged commutes make California increasingly untenable for average earners as wealthy progressives buttress themselves behind high gates, go to work on glistening corporate campuses, and shrug at tax hikes, knowing their property values will continue to zoom upward because its so hard to get anything built.

On the other end of the income scale, a chilling phrase has entered common usage in the Golden State: sanctioned encampments. California has a colossal problem in homelessness, and it is determined to take steps to make it worse. Sanctioned encampments is a euphemism for taxpayer-funded Skid Rows, and Democrats who run California think theyre a great idea. California is mocking its middle class by simply removing grassy lawns, sidewalks and other public spaces that ought to be usable by the middle class and giving them to its underclass. (Great news, though: Some areas of the camps are socially distanced. So, no worries about diseases spreading through these places.)

Democratic Party activists and progressives keep pushing the state and its cities to be ever more indulgent toward the homeless.

Tent cities have popped up in both Northern and Southern California, public defecation is the norm in some areas and the progressive mindset says: Put out the welcome mat. Do so, and people will arrive on your doorstep: Despite having only 12 percent of Americans population, California has one-quarter of the countrys homeless. The more hospitable it becomes to hobos, the more of them it will attract.

In Los Angeles, the city is spending such a mind-boggling amount of money on tents $2,700 each, per month, or more than the average one-bedroom apartment costs to make the homeless comfy that even NPR was taken aback.

Nonprofit agencies calling themselves advocates for the homeless are the middlemen lining their pockets in this boondoggle, seeking and getting lavish government contracts to take care of things like providing portable toilets. The San Jose City Council keeps pushing, reports KPIX in San Francisco, to formalize the hands-off approach to some encampments which meet certain criteria such as not being near a school, not blocking streets or sidewalks and not being in a waterway. The city would also include hygiene and supportive services. Its already doing some of that by paying unhoused people to pick up trash in their encampments, and by providing porta-potties and wash stations.

Near the San Jose Airport, in the largest city in Northern California, hundreds of homeless people are squatting on a nearly mile-long stretch of territory as local and state officials shrug; only the FAA is complaining.

Middle-class Californians scratch their heads, glance at gasoline prices that are more than a dollar above the national average, and think: Seriously? This is what my tax dollars go to? Paying homeless people to pick up their own garbage? Paying homeless advocates $2,700 a month to install a tent in a parking lot?

With all of this wasted public expenditure, its no surprise that California is second only to New York in the category of highest marginal income tax rate. In overall tax burden, it ranks 10th-highest in the nation, according to one survey that ranks Florida as the fifth-lowest. Floridas budget is $102 billion; Californias is $262 billion. (Californias population is less than double that of Florida, 40 million to 22 million.)

Each year, more bad decisions get made on where to direct Californias billions. The Defund the police movement led to a reduction of funding of $150 million for the Los Angeles police, while San Francisco lawmakers stripped $80 million from the cops budget while proposing to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to bolster the tent cities that look like social rust to everyone not trained in elite thinking.

The combined effects of a 2014 statewide referendum to reduce thefts valued at less than $950 to misdemeanors and a vow by San Franciscos leftist district attorney, Chesa Boudin, not to prosecute minor crimes is being taken as an engraved invitation by San Francisco shoplifters; the middle class suffers as favorite retailers such as Walgreens and Target say they are forced to close their doors.

Disorder has a way of feeding on itself. San Francisco has become the nations leader in property crime, and statewide murders were up 31 percent last year. (They were up 15 percent in Florida.)

Any visitor to Florida can tell you the state simply looks orderly. Florida municipalities use a variety of measures to discourage loitering on the streets, including arresting for trespassing, and it largely works: When was the last time you read about an epidemic of homelessness in Fort Lauderdale?

As a society, we shouldnt want people sleeping on the streets. If the police stop them from doing so, theyll either find someone to stay with or report to a shelter. It is an insult to the public for its government to simply ignore concerns about orderly streets out of fear that some advocacy group hoping for a fat payout will denounce its agents as mean for denying people the right to set up camp on the streets.

Maintaining basic order and the rule of law is the first duty of government; a healthy society depends on people feeling secure. Secure people are free to pursue their dreams.

Florida in 2020 feels reminiscent of California in the 1950s, writes Jacksonville resident Charles C.W. Cooke in National Review, calling it a place to which ordinary people are flocking in order to take advantage of the nice weather, good economy, open spaces and explosive construction.

California may be a dynamic and diverse state, but Florida is no slouch in either department, a place where youre equally likely to meet refugees from socialist Venezuela or socialist New York.

Florida is Americas freest state, according to a Cato Institute survey: No. 1 in fiscal freedom, No. 1 in educational freedom. Cato dubs California one of the least free states and flat-out dubs it the most cronyist state in the union, meaning government and its chosen allies work to milk the public purse for all they can.

Somehow Floridas lean government even manages to operate efficiently. British emigre Cooke writes that when I moved here from Connecticut, I walked in without an appointment and, within 18 minutes, I had two new license plates and two new drivers licenses, and my wife had registered to vote. This was typical.

Even the famous Florida Man news items of hilariously eccentric doings are a sign of healthy government: Due to sunshine laws, criminal proceedings and virtually everything else related to government are accessible on demand. Other states give us less to laugh at because they are less transparent.

A 2016 survey gave Florida a grade of A for providing online access to how it spends its taxpayer dollars; California got an F and was the worst-scoring state.

It wasnt long ago that America looked to California for guidance; even Ronald Reagan implicitly promised to spread the California way across the nation. Now California is a model only for dysfunction, and if Newsom attempts to follow Reagans path to the White House, hell be as much of a punchline as his predecessor, Jerry Brown, the man who first started to steer California on its present heartbreaking path.

No one from Florida has ever become president, nor has any Italian American. The success of DeSantis as governor of Americas model state suggests he could be the man to shatter both of those molds.

See the rest here:

California and Florida battle for the soul of a nation - New York Post

Austin, TX, 21 hours ago Dont Miss The Back Mic

An exclusive look inside Texas politics and policy, every Friday.

Governor Greg Abbott included property tax relief on the list of special session items, but a Texas Democrat has called on him to be more specific about the charge.

Rep. Richard Pea Raymond (D-Laredo) called on Abbott to include a $5 billion property tax compression of school district Maintenance & Operations rates similar to what the legislature did in 2019 to the special session agenda.

I have asked Governor Abbott to allow the people of Texas to vote on a property tax cut this November. We can do this by using $5 billion from the Rainy Day Fund, Raymond said in a press release.

If it passes and I believe it would pass with overwhelming support it would still leave at least $6.5 billion in the Rainy Day Fund.

Texas school finance system functions like a seesaw: as the states share of the funding increases the local school districts share decreases, reducing rates at the local level. The tax compression last session injected $5.1 billion toward reducing local tax rates.

Raymonds proposal would take similar shape.

Abbotts campaign announced Thursday he has accumulated a $55 million war chest. This comes after a 10-day fundraising period during which the incumbent governor raised $18.7 million.

Our record-breaking fundraising period is a testament to the success of the 87th Legislative Session and paints a clear picture of what matters most to Texans: freedom, opportunity, and economic prosperity, Abbott said in a release.

These values embody the spirit of Texas, and these values are what our campaign fights for every single day. Thanks to the generosity of our supporters, we will continue to secure an even brighter future for the Lone Star State by keeping Texas red and ensuring our state remains the greatest state in the nation.

Abbott is facing a three-person primary challenge between former state Sen. Don Huffines, conservative humorist Chad Prather, and outgoing Texas GOP Chair Allen West.

The Texas governors fundraising rush is likely at least partially due to the endorsement of former President Donald Trump.

The July semiannual filing deadline passed on July 1, but the reports are not due until July 15. Once that passes, the financial situation of the GOP gubernatorial primary and the challengers proximity to Abbott will become more clear.

About a year after the dire projection of a $4.6 billion budget shortfall, the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts now estimates a $5 billion surplus for the 2020-2021 fiscal year. He also projects about $8 billion more in available general revenue spending for the 2022-2023 biennium compared with his January estimate.

The legislature appropriated $116 billion in general revenue funds less than the $123 billion estimated by the comptroller this month.

The Texas economy rebounded strongly this spring as vaccination rates increased and the economy opened more fully, and we remain optimistic about growth in the near term as the states economy continues to return to pre-pandemic patterns, Comptroller Glenn Hegar, said in a letter to state leaders.

Hegar further projects an over $3 billion deposit into the State Highway and Economic Stabilization Funds over the next biennium the latter estimated to end the biennium with a balance of $12 billion.

Citing the global supply chain stress combined with increased demand for goods and the nations rehiring struggles, Hegar pumped the brakes on total fiscal optimism.

Until supply-side issues are resolved, economic output may remain below its potential, and rising costs could erode consumer purchasing power.

Read more from the original source:

The Back Mic: Democrat Calls for $5 Billion Property Tax Cut, Abbott Announces $55 Million War Chest, State Revenue Estimate Improves Fiscal Outlook -...

The Democrat/liberal motto is: If it aint broke, well break it!

Here is a list of broke: God, Jesus and any stance on Christianity; family unity; American patriotism, exceptionalism; education: public education; most colleges; preschool (in lieu of lowering taxes for mothers to stay at home with their children and teach them themselves); mostly all roads; Boy Scouts; Girl Scouts; elections; marriage; sexuality; civility; law and order; justice systems; legal institutions; civil service; the armed forces; truth; history; science; disciplining children with logical and natural consequences; work force; work ethic (brought to you by AFL-CIO); incentive to earn a living; entrepreneurialism; medical facilities; medical professions; taxation without representation; banking; fiscal responsibility; home ownership; liberty; communications: entertainment; mainstream media; movies; sitcoms; commercials; radio airwaves (NPR); newspapers (including The Tribune-Democrat); environmental (mis)management; fish and game sports; all sporting (except hockey, for now); Super Bowl; NFL; freedom of speech is equal to, lets just say, every Constitutional freedom outlined by our founders; sanity; respect for anything but themselves; race relations; wars on: poverty, drugs, terror, etc.; immigration; America; freedom; mental health; traveling; security; justice in general; accountability; fairness; self-sufficiency; presumptuous weather predictions; and, this just in: Olympics.

Just to name a few. Who wants to align with that debacle?

Politicizing everything and more, the left continues to divide America by way of the almighty American idol the television, technology and public education systems.

Paul told the Galatian church: I really wish that these people who weigh you down with corrupt counsel would mutilate themselves! Dittos from me.

Janet Lord

Jerome

We are making critical coverage of the coronavirus available for free. Please consider subscribing so we can continue to bring you the latest news and information on this developing story.

Read more from the original source:

Letter to the editor | Democrats will break it - TribDem.com

Inflation continued to be a problem in 1971, with forecasts showing an acceleration into 1972, which presented a growing political problem for Nixon.

Inflation continued to be a problem in 1971, with forecasts showing an acceleration into 1972, which presented a growing political problem for Nixon. Although inflation was unpopular, so were actions such as higher interest rates to moderate it. Those on the left had a simple answer: wage and price controls. On July 20, 1971, Harvard economist John Kenneth Galbraith, who had helped administer wage and price controls during World War II, testified before the Joint Economic Committee that there was really no choice in the matter because there was no combination of monetary or fiscal policies that could curb inflation without sharply raising the unemployment rate. Continuing, Galbraith said:

There is only one way to have an effective economic policy. That is to leave the monetarists and fiscalists to continue their academic quarrel and recognize that adequate employment and reasonably stable prices can only be reconciled by coming to grips with the wage-price spiral. That requires controls. The first step in getting an effective economic policy must be a general freeze.

Ironically, Galbraith, who was widely known for being a supporter of Keynesian economics, added that Mr. Nixon has proclaimed himself a Keynesian at the moment in history when Keynes has become obsolete. Galbraith thought that big corporations could now charge monopoly prices, which negated Keynesian policies.

Nixons CEA chairman Paul W. McCracken was alarmed by Galbraiths testimony and penned an attack on it in a Washington Post op-ed article on July 28. Wage and price controls would seriously erode personal freedom, McCracken said, and quickly collapse unless the underlying monetary and fiscal sources of inflation were restricted. He was also dubious about the governments ability to administer an all-encompassing set of wage and price controls.

What really set in motion the actions of August 15 was a demand by Britain to exchange $3 billion of U.S. dollars it held from running a trade surplus for gold. Although American citizens were prohibited from owning gold, the Bretton Woods system permitted governments to do exactly what Britain wanted to do. The problem was that the U.S. had only about $10 billion of gold at that time and had no intention of giving such a large chunk of it to the British. Every other country holding dollars would have instantly demanded gold as well and there wasnt enough to go arounda classic run on the bank.

See more here:

The Day That Richard Nixon Changed U.S. Economic Policy Forever - The New Republic

Over the past four decades, it has become common to refer to social rights as second generation rights as recent additions to the civil and political rights bequeathed by the European Enlightenment. This generational theory emerged in the 1970s as a kind of shorthand for categorising rights but soon took on a life of its own. This is a shame because it obscures the deeper and more interesting history of social rights.

Like civil and political rights, social rights stretch back to the eighteenth century, and arguably, much further. Throughout the medieval and early modern eras, poverty was considered a legal condition entitling the poor to assistance. Ironically, it was during the age of the Enlightenment that social rights lost much of their legitimacy. Neither the English Bill of Rights of 1689, which grew out of the Glorious Revolution, nor the American Bill of Rights of 1791, promulgated after the American Revolution, acknowledged them.

The French Revolution stands out as an exception and a quite significant one. Social rights appeared in the Jacobin rights declaration of 1793, promulgated just as the Revolution was sliding into the Terror. But these rights had already been proposed in 1789, well before Jacobins and sans-culottes sprang into existence. Whats more, they were proposed by individuals who would be considered conservatives or free-market liberals today.

Take, for example, the rights proposed by Pierre-Samuel Dupont de Nemours a free-market theorist, ministerial advisor under Louis XVI and direct ancestor of the American Dupont dynasty, which would fund neoliberal think tanks in the mid-twentieth century. He declared that All men have the right to assistance from other men and that society had a sacred debt to provide jobs for those who could work and subsistence for those who couldnt. Yet, he also believed that the best welfare policy a government could adopt was to spend little and let capital and labour drive the economy (laisser faire le peuple).

To understand this seeming contradiction, we must put aside anachronistic notions of the welfare state. Duponts social rights expressed his belief that a regenerated society could morally and economically regulate itself. Once property was secure (he called for property rights) and markets were free (the corollary of property), abundance would follow, lifting all boats. Social rights necessitated the duties to work and provide charity, but these were the responsibilities of individuals, not the fiscal-redistributive state.

Despite strong support, social rights were not included in the final draft of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789. But Duponts liberal-economic vision was widely shared and shaped early revolutionary policies with disastrous results. The more the economy was liberalised, the more unstable the situation became. After the monarchy was toppled and a republic was declared in 1792, revolutionaries had to draft a new constitution. Calls to include social rights came from all parts from radical sans-culottes, who also clamoured for price controls, to well-heeled moderates in the National Convention, who still believed that economic freedom would remedy deprivation. Even some anti-revolutionary Catholic priests were espousing social rights at the time.

This consensus on social rights papered over deep divisions over how to finance them. The Constitution of 1793, which included rights to work, subsistence, and education made society the duty-bearer. What society meant, however, was anyones guess. Did it refer to philanthropic individuals or the fiscal-redistributive state?

Lacking clarity, officials took matters into their own hands. They solicited, taxed, and extorted according to their predilections and the circumstances. As prisons filled up with enemies of the people and guillotines rolled into cities across France, the Jacobin constitution became associated with terror. What was, at its root, a problem of reconfiguring obligations for an egalitarian society was simplistically recast as the problem of social rights. When still another constitution was drafted during the conservative backlash of 1795, social rights were decidedly omitted.

Throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, republicans were increasingly willing to adopt social provisioning measures, but only as a matter of government, not as a matter of right. Alexis de Tocqueville drove home this distinction in a speech to the National Assembly in the Revolution of 1848. Countering socialists, he drew inspiration from the Revolution of 1789, the social aims of which, he insisted, had been limited to introducing charity into politics. With charity, recipients dont have claims on givers. There is nothing [in the 1789 revolution] that gives workers a right in respect of the state [] nothing that authorizes the state to intervene in industry, to impose restrictions upon it. Socialists, for their part, had only minimal, if any, commitments to social rights. Many saw human rights as nothing more than bourgeois claptrap. Like the free-market liberals of the Enlightenment, they held a vision of a morally and economically self-regulating society. But unlike those liberals, they did not use the language of rights to express it.

For a variety of factors, social rights re-emerged in the twentieth century, appearing in constitutions in Europe and the Americas: Mexico (1917), Weimar Germany (1919), Ireland (1922, 1937), USSR (1936), and elsewhere. In his famous speech of 1944, Franklin Delano Roosevelt called for a Second Bill of Rights, which included freedom from want. Eleanor Roosevelt chaired the Commission on Human Rights at the United Nations, which included social rights in its draft of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. Despite the growing recognition of social rights, they remained contested, especially after the start of the Cold War. The French Revolution, I believe, can shed light on the reasons why.

The failure of revolutionaries to agree on the terms of obligation in 1793 (who pays and on what terms?) undermined social rights by facilitating the view that they lead to violence and oppression (the Terror). Many of the arguments levied against social rights in the twentieth century harken back to the Terrors aftermath, when liberals rejected social rights for the authoritarian risks they were thought to entail. In On Revolution (1963), Hannah Arendt concluded that attempts to resolve the social question through political means the rights of the sans-culottes are inevitably doomed to terror. Her view was echoed by Aryeh Neier, first Director of Human Rights Watch, who stated in his memoirs of 2001: Authoritarian power is probably a prerequisite for giving meaning to economic and social rights.

For critics of social rights, the French Revolution looms as a cautionary tale. But perhaps the real lesson is how important, yet difficult, it is to achieve a consensus on the terms of social obligation in a society based on equality rather than hierarchy. Social rights traversed the medieval and early modern eras; they stumbled through the modern. Rather than dismissing them as nave or dangerous, we might do better to reflect more deeply on our social contract on what free people owe each other as equal members of society. In practice, this means doing what historian Rutger Bregman did at the World Economic Forum in Davos in 2019, when, before a crowd of billionaires, he distinguished between charity (stupid philanthropy schemes) and taxes. In the end, social rights depend not on altruism but on the obligation to pay ones fair share.

See the original post here:

What the French Revolution can tell us about the history of social rights - OpenGlobalRights

CONCORD New Hampshire's Republican lawmakers have inserted, and the governor has signed, a state budget that prohibits the teaching of so-called "divisive concepts" related to race and gender by public schools, state agencies and contractors. But whatexactly does that mean?

Though the term divisive concepts no longer appears in the language attached to thetwo-year $13.5 billion statebudget, many of its themes are repackaged into several lines oflegislation beginningon page 154 ofthe 220-page bill, according to civil rights groups and educators.

One of the central problems with this bill is its ambiguity in what constitutes a banned so-called divisive concept,' said Gilles Bissonnette, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire. One part of the bill aims to permit workplace sensitivity training while other portions of the bill ban speech aimed at addressing unconscious racism in the workplace. Similarly, one part of the bill purports to protect academic freedom while another portion bans the teaching on so-called divisive concepts. Frankly, the bill is indecipherable and internally contradictory.

More in education: US Supreme Court to hear Maine religious school tuition case

The biggest area of concern for opponents of the budget language areits potential impacts on education. The law allows for teachers found in violation to be brought before the state Board of Education for disciplinary proceedings and potential loss of their educators credentials. Guidance on how the provision of the law will be enforced is still being formulated at the state department of education, as well as in the state attorney generals office, according to numerous sources interviewed for this story.

(The budget) comes across draconianbecause if a teacher violates it, they can be hauled in front of the state board and lose their license over a law that is confusing to say the least, said Oyster River Superintendent James Morse, a former member of Republican Gov. ChrisSununu's Advisory Council on Diversity and Inclusion. Morsewas among 10 members who recently resigned from the councilin protest over the "divisive concepts."

Its a fundamental affront to academic freedom in teaching in terms of teachers making decisions on how they apply the curriculum set by the school board, he continued.

Morse said the budget language is an intrusion into local education matters, where school boards set their districts'curriculums, such asteaching American history andincluding racist elements that plague the nation's past and present.

'Systemic racism does exist in NH': Diversity council members quit over 'damaging' budget

Megan Tuttle, president of National Education Association of New Hampshire, said the budget allows potential bad-faith complaints to the Department of Education or attorney general that could put teachers livelihoods at risk. She did not rule out the possibility of mounting a legal challenge on behalf of member teachers.

What educators are trying to do is be honest in education, but because our profession has been politicized to this point, its concerning to say the least, Tuttle said. History always has different views, but the historical facts dont change. (Teaching history) now runs the risk of losing the critical thinking piece if we are unable to teach history in its truest form.

Bissonnette, of ACLU-NH, said educators and other public employees will be inclined to self-censor and not engage on topics of race, out of fear of being the subject of a complaint.

This is the real danger of the bill and it may very well be the point of it namely, to cause people to censor themselves in having important conversations on race, Bissonnette said.

Ben Vihstadt, spokesperson for Sununu, said the purpose of the languageis to give parents greater ability to report cases of discrimination against their child to the state. He reiteratedthe term "divisive concepts" does not appear anywhere in the budget language.

The governor has always acknowledged that elements of racism exist in our communities, Vihstadt said. Nothing in this budget prevents schools from teaching any aspect of American history, such as teaching about racism, sexism, slavery, or implicit bias, as long as those discussions are done without prejudice or discrimination against any student."

Republican state Sen. Jeb Bradley, the Senate majority leader, amendedthe original "divisive concepts" language contained in House Bill 544 to make it more palatable to the Senate and governor in the state budget. He pointed to the amendedlegislation'sspecific language stating the provisions of the budget are, not to be construed as prohibiting academic discussion and exploration on historic and present issues of race and discrimination.

Rep. Meuse: With his signature, Sununu owns worst budget in NH history

The legislation is crystal clear, Bradley said. People are trying to create an alternate narrative that this is censorship, that it tries to discourage conversations of past racism, current racism or prohibit anti-bias training. It does none of that, and anyone making those assertions either hasnt read the legislation or is willfully misrepresenting it.

The notion of divisive concepts was introduced by New Hampshire House Republicans in House Bill 544, which defined as divisive assertions that New Hampshire or the United States were"fundamentally racist or sexist" or that "by virtue of his or her race or sex, members of any race are inherently racist or are inherently inclined to oppress others, or that members of a sex are inherently sexist or inclined to oppress others."

The bill, originally touted by House Republicans, prohibited the propagation by public employees, private businesses and current and prospective state contractors of these so-called divisive concepts, including, an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously, and an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, bears responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex.

House Bill 544 was tabled in the current legislative session. However, members of the the governor's Council on Diversity and Inclusion,the Manchester chapter of the NAACP and the state teachers union believe many similar themes from HB 544 found their way into HB2, the state budget.

The language of this bill is scary, its scary for educators, public employees; all of us who want to have, who need to have, deep conversations about the issues really affecting New Hampshire, said state Rep. Jim Maggiore, D-North Hampton, who resigned in protest from the governor's Council on Diversity and Inclusion. Were not just talking about race, ability, gender and sexual orientation; its everything that touches our lives. (With this budget), what weve said is were going to put a gag order, and put up a time limit on history, and only talk about a historical context that is undefined.

Sununu previously saidthe diversity council was entering a "transition period." He accused the ACLU of "trying to insert politics" into the council's work. ACLU-NH Executive Director Devon Chaffee has said publicly the mass resignation was started by others.

Previously: Sununu signs NH's $13.5B budget with abortion restrictions, ban on 'divisive concepts

Sen. Bradley, R-Wolfeboro, introduced the amended language in the budget to the Senate. He saidthe new language serves only to enhance the states existing anti-discrimination law. The language in the budget now only applies to public employees, such as state workers, educators and law enforcement officers after numerous private businesses came out against HB 544.

Bradley points to language that states the budget, declares that practices of discrimination against any New Hampshire inhabitants because of age, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, creed, color, marital status, familial status, mental or physical disability, religion, or national origin are a matter of state concern, that discrimination based on these characteristics not only threatens the rights and proper privileges of New Hampshire inhabitants but menaces the institutions and foundation of a free democratic state.

The budget strengthens anti-discrimination laws, its a very different approach than HB 544, Bradley said. It prevents the kind of training and teaching, that by virtue of a persons characteristics at birth, anyone is superior or inferior to another person, or one group of people is oppressive; thats what the budget says.

The state budget also contains language stating educators cannot teach, That people of one age, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, creed, color, marital status, familial status, mental or physical disability, religion, or national origin cannot and should not attempt to treat others equally and/or without regard to age, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, creed, color, marital status, familial status, mental or physical disability, religion, or national origin, in part. It also allows public employees to opt out any trainings where these components would be purportedly taught without fear of being disciplined.

Opponents of the budget language say these components makethe entire section of it contradictory. They believe the budget language was construed in a similar vein to legislation adopted in other states in that have recently passed provisions against teaching public school students so-called critical race theory, a law school theory examining how racism is institutionalized in American law.

Superintendent Morse of Oyster Riverrejected the notion that critical race theory is being taught in any of the state's public school districts. He said he believes this language in the budget will be ultimately litigated in court.

Superintendent Morse: NH's 'divisive concepts' bill designed to hide and deny racism and prejudice

Its a collegiate legal theory that has nothing to do with K through 12 education.Weve been teaching diversity and equity in our curriculum for at least five years, Morse said. Do we want to live in a world where we dont address the significant social issues of the day where there are all kinds of examples of racism, sexual bias and gender discrimination happening? How do we change that? We do it through education that gives students a foundation by teaching from our history.

Vihstadt, Sununus spokesperson, said the governor would have preferred not to have language around so-called divisive concepts included in the budget, but did not want to veto the entire budget over its inclusion.

The governor believes that it should have been taken up as a standalone bill, but he chose not to veto an entire state budget and risk shutting down government because this was the route the legislature chose to take, Vihastadt said. The governor has always discouraged non-budgetary items from being included in the budget. Unfortunately, every legislature over the past three decades have always added non-budgetary items to the process.

Numerous stakeholders aren't buying what Bradley and Sununu are selling in the way they portray the language of the law.

JerriAnne Boggis, executive director of the Black Heritage Trail of New Hampshire, said the budget is an affront to democratic values.

The Black Heritage Trail of New Hampshire is displeased by the passing of a state budget and bill that impedes the ability for New Hampshire's citizens to engage in open and honest conversations about racism and other forms of systemic oppression, Boggis said in a statement. It silences the voices of many people in our state, banning from public schools and state agencies specific types of conversations about histories of inequality and their continuing legacy. This is a step backwards, not a step forward.

James McKim, president of the Manchester NAACP, called the inclusion of non-fiscal items such as the modified divisive concepts language, the abortion ban after 24 weeks and school voucher program, disturbing, surprising and disappointing.

He said the budget language makes New Hampshire unwelcoming for young people looking to start their careers here, especially younger people of color, for a state with one of the oldest populations in the country.

We really need to continue the dialogue if we are to get past the divisions we face in our country today, McKim said. Having these honest conversations will not deepen our divisions, it will only help heal them.

Go here to see the original:

'Divisive concepts' ban is NH law. Will it affect the way teachers do their jobs? - Seacoastonline.com