deep aqua

“We are SM County Republicans” .. yea, right ..

I found particularly irksome, the “Dave Pine for County Supervisor” endorsements from so-called “Republicans”. One, county controller Tom Huening, supported the proposed county sales tax increase a few elections ago.

Here are these “Republicans” :

Cathy Baylock
Brent Britschgi
Dave Burow
Jerry Carlson
Dani Gasparini
Pedro Gonzales
Jim Tucker
Paula Uccelli
Tom Huening

Big-government, high-taxing “Republicans” should be drummed out. They are ruining the brand name of the party “of lower taxes and less government”.

Who NOT to vote for SM County Supervisor

Today, in the mail, a couple of expensive election flyers. One, “Dave Pine: he’ll get the job done”. And another: “We are San Mateo County Republicans .. for Dave Pine”. More or less.

Dave Pine is a long-time board member of the most profligate school district I’ve ever seen, the San Mateo Union HS District. Over $1 BILLION in taxpayer obligations, over roughly the last decade. Strike one. Endorsed by Jackie Speier: strike 2. And the Sierra Club: strike 3. As far as I can tell, this guy is a registered Democrat: strike 4. Sheriff Don Horsley likes him, too: strike 5.

I could go on, but why? Dave Pine touts his tax-raising votes on the school board as “creating jobs in San Mateo County”. No mention of the local taxes raised for these jobs, and the effect these outrageous tax obligations have on the cost of living here.

My friends in the know say that Dave Holober is no better. And from what I see of Democrat Gina Papan, the rape of taxpayers is certain under any of these three.

DO NOT VOTE FOR PAPAN, HOLOBER OR PINE !

My friends are voting for Michael Stogner. I have not yet decided my vote.

CA Assembly Republicans : Principles Forgotten

Jerry Brown, tilting at the CA budget windmill, has come up with the money-saving idea of abolishing the CA “redevelopment agencies”. These agencies are rife with corruption and inside dealing, persecute the politically weak by condemning their property, wreck large swathes of our cities’ lands in never-ending “redevelopment”, and even when “successful”, more often than not leave the objects of their attention less well-off than the monies spent would indicate. In other words, they waste taxpayer dollars and use the force of government to dispossess the poor and reward cronies.

One would think that abolishment of these agencies would be welcome news to any Republican favoring smaller and less expensive government. Think again.

Instead, CA GOP assembly members nix the idea. They think they are giving the Governor a black eye, but in reality they are once more showing their lack of principle. Playing politics appears more important than serving CA citizens.

Don’t take my word for it – The Volokh Conspiracy and Cato’s Reason have much, much more.

Less charitably, I wonder if the graft so readily fostered by Redevelopment agency largesse, has perhaps watered the lawns of enough influential developers to cause their GOP buddies to balk at halting this gravy train? There are certainly enough past GOP-endorsed state bond measures for “public works” along these lines, principles of “lower government spending and debt” be damned.

If anyone has a good explanation for this vote, I’d sure like to hear it. From here it looks like the work of RINOs.

Prop 23: Idiotic Voters

Today I read in the Wall Street Journal, the factoid, “in a … poll …, 41% of likely voters said that “California doing things to reduce global warming” would result in more jobs, and 26% said it would result in fewer jobs”.

The majority opinion here is, to be blunt, idiotic. There are a million reasons why, but explaining them appears to be pointless, as the common citizen has a poor grasp of basic economics, and little understanding or appreciation of how it is that our economy keeps us clothed, sheltered, and fed.

A basic summary: resources will be diverted from more productive uses, to reducing “greenhouse gases”. Energy costs will rise. Business costs will increase and businesses will have less money to hire. Nothing could be more certain. This is not to say that “reducing greenhouse gasses” is not the right thing to do – but it is saying that it will entail a cost. The cost will inevitably be higher unemployment, and fewer jobs.

One need look no further than Spain, to see where “green jobs” got them: every green job there cost 2.2 regular jobs. Net result: fewer jobs and higher unemployment. This link has some information. Yes, it’s anti-23, but what can one expect? In this economy, no one is going to vote for fewer jobs! It is a masterpiece of propaganda – and at once, a monument to the mush passing for brains in the California voter – that the anti-23 crowd have managed to convince a plurality, at least as of last September, that continuing to “reduce greenhouse gases” will magically increase jobs and reduce unemployment.

Greg Conlon : vote NO

Another e-mail from the Conlon campaign arrived today. Saying, important news! Conlon opposes the high-speed rail line going through the peninsula …. if it’s above ground rather than tunneled or trenched!! On Conlon’s ‘about’ page, he reports, “Greg has served on the Atherton Rail Committee for the last several years, helping to be certain that the High Speed Rail Train is built in an environmentally acceptable manner to protect the property values along the adjoining right-of-way”. Well, surprise! Can’t have Atherton residents’ million – and multi-million – dollar homes negatively affected! It’s not as if the rail will benefit them, after all – quick limo ride to the airport to the private jet to get to LA, no problem!

Sarcasm aside, this amply illustrates why a vote for Conlon is a vote for Big Government.

Greg, we are broke. The county is broke. The state is broke. The federal government is broke. Even if this new high-speed rail initiative were a good idea – it isn’t – or financially sound – it isn’t – we can’t afford it. It’s no secret that this whole project is an obscene boondoggle – see for instance Reason Magazine. Big Government Republicans, especially those who’ve a-gotta-theirs and live in Atherton, love these projects. They spread the money around like fairy godmothers waving their little wands, in the process, shall we say,”making Important Friends” for future needs. Unfortunately, the taxpayer is not invited to join this good ‘ol boys club (which, by the way, is very bipartisan, democrats and GOP both).

No one holding to the principles of lower taxes and smaller government would ever be endorsing such a complete waste of taxpayer monies – raised rail beds or not.

Take back the GOP. Drum Conlon and every one of his big-spending cronies out of the party and out of our lives completely. Do not vote for him under any circumstance. Better to have a Democrat to own the disaster this will be. Who can then be replaced by a responsible Republican, next election.

Conlon would ruin the GOP brand name. Keep him where he will do least harm – tending to his Atherton garden, perhaps. Not in any house of the people.

San Mateo County Election: Local Measures

The local MyLiberty voter guide is excellent for local measures. But some of these measures lack arguments against in the ballot. Lets go down them:

Measure M: Vote NO. A very nice video (see below for that and more information) of the arguments is here. And here are the ballot argument against and rebuttal.

Measure O. Vote NO. The most egregious bond request I have ever seen. If voters approve it, the total taxpayer obligation incurred by the San Mateo Union High School District over the last 11 years, will be greater than $1 BILLION (yes, $1,000 MILLION). The ballor arguments are most informative: Argument against; and rebuttal. Measure O proponents have some slick, expensive campaign materials out there; don’t be fooled.

Measure I: Vote NO. The well-off Belmont – Redwood Shores school district has good funding, well over $10,000 per student. As with many other school districts, it has chosen to spend its money on employee pay and benefits (up way above inflation the last ten tears), rather than fix leaky roofs. You, the taxpayer, should now bail them out?

Measure J: Think about it! The South San Francisco Unified School District appears to have been financially prudent compared to most other districts. Voters should decide for themselves if they can afford this $162 million bond issue at this time.

Measure K: Vote NO. This City of Half Moon Bay 1% sales tax is not a solution to its woes. Half Moon Bay voters are the real problem: they have placed on the council, big-spending NIMBY environmental no-growthers year after year, and are now reaping the bitter harvest they have sown. Will they wake up this time? Who knows.

Measure L: Vote YES! At last, Menlo Park citizens are proposing to curtail obscene public pensions in their municipality. Of course, the unions and democrats are dead set against this. Argument For. Rebuttal.. Measure L supporters also have more information here.

Measure N: Vote NO. Another Belmont – Redwood Shores bond measure to “fix leaking roofs”. Is it too much to ask that this school district put essential maintenance ahead of luxury pay and benefit increases for employees? Apparently, it is!

Measure P: Think about it! Can you afford the Jefferson Union $96 parcel tax at this time? This school district appears to have prudently managed its finances, which would bode well for good use of the monies. Unlike others above!

Measure R: Vote NO. City of Pacifica wants a tax increase on hotel rooms. Bad idea. Tourism is already way down.

Dr. Don’s Election Picks

Well, well, well … I have found someone who agrees with me on all the issues and, most gratifyingly, on the error of knee-jerk voting for anyone with an ‘R’ after the name:

The John and Ken Show’s Picks for California

Never seen that show but I’ll have to, now.

The Republicans they cross off their list are: Meg Whitman (they suggest the Libertarian; I propose Uncle Jerry, see below); Abe Maldonado (Lt. Gov, vote instead for democrat Gavin Newsom), and Mike Villines (Insurance commissioner, vote instead for democrat Dave Jones). Both Maldonado and Villines stabbed the GOP in the back with votes for bigger government and more taxes. I agree: they’ll ruin the GOP brand name and the people and the party are better off without them.

Click on the above link for measure and candidate recommendations. I agree 100%.

The local MyLiberty voting guide (link below) in my opinion is wrong on the three GOP candidates named above, all of which they endorse. Putting RINOS in official office is not progress. It is a setback. They will compromise away our liberties, all the while with a big ‘R’ on their chests.

Ruins the brand. Bad idea.

The Chinese Professor

Frighteningly on target …

This blog’s first embedded TouTube video … “enjoy”. Hat tip, Instapundit is where I found it.

Governor Meg Whitman : The Last Thing Republicans Need

The San Mateo GOP heartily endorses all the Republican candidates for office, as far as I can see. One expects nothing else of course; but I’m feeling a bit more independent these days. This county party is all Rah-Rah-Rah! for the big election scenes, but (as noted way below several times) is out to lunch on the hard work of cutting taxes and cutting government, at the local level. Jaundiced that I am, I sometimes suppose they enjoy partying with Big Shots in Nice Places with Fine Dining, more than trudging to the elections office and driving all over the place to get arguments written and signed, and I can’t really blame them.

An alternative explanation is that the local GOP is infested with Big Government Republicans, attracted to political power with all its trappings. If so, why annoy the monied locals with pesky local issues like school bonds, road taxes, and so on? The Big Pockets barely notice those things, anyway. Far better to cuddle up with Big Shots, who, if elected, can deliver goodies to friends and helpers. No matter that the populace pays for these favors – that’s what Big Government does, after all.

Enter Meg Whitman. Former contributor to and supporter of Barbara Boxer. Silicon Valley Big Shot herself. Meg’s slick ad campaign repeatedly tells us how she will mend our boo-boos. She will “help” small business. She will “fix” education. She opposes the initiative to suspend the bogus carbon emissions law until the economy improves, and this position presumably to buy more votes.. She will be using Government to run things. She is an unprincipled Big Government Republican. Worse yet, I believe she is a Crony Capitalist (prime evidence, the Boxer association, above). There’s no shortage of those in the GOP, sad to say. Winners and losers will be chosen. Tax breaks will be parceled out. Friends will be rewarded and foes punished. The SMGOP loves kissy-kissy with Meg.

Don’t get me wrong here; this is how all politics works, county, state, and nation-wide. And the Democrats are worse, by far. But I for one am fed up with it. I believe Republicans should drum out anyone whose first priority is not cutting the size and power of Government. I believe the Tea Party is about that – cutting government spending, cutting government control.

Well, let’s have a short history lesson here. How did the Democrats and Obama get in? Answer: the electorate was sick of soaring government spending and log-rolling under the previous Republican administration and Congress. The Republican “brand” was ruined. Republicans were perceived, and rightly so, as no longer standing for lower taxes and smaller, less intrusive government. In that case, let’s try “Plan D”.

So how’s that working out for us?

Whitman will, like our Governator Arnold, ruin the Republican brand. She’s saying nothing very different than our Arnold did before his election – a rare truth in Jerry Brown’s electioneering ads. Unlike Arnold, we don’t have to wait until she is in office to find out that she has no particular governing philosophy. She endorsed Boxer in the past, for being “helpful” to Silicon Valley. She already caved on public safety pensions. Should Meg get in, I predict another Pete Wilson style massive tax increase, shortly after the usual budgetary mating dance. Both parties will share in the spoils, and only us Citizens will be worse off. In other words, more of the same situation we now have. And the Republicans will again be part of the problem.

This is supposed to induce voters to put the GOP in charge of the State Assembly and Senate? What’s the point? The public prefers the crooks they know!

We need REAL CHANGE. We need a shiny clean Republican brand: LESS government spending, LESS government control, MORE personal freedom, FEWER boards, agencies, regulations, FEWER government employees … and so on. Meg Whitman, in my opinion, is an unprincipled big government crony capitalist who will bring further grief to the already badly tarnished Republican brand in this state.

The state is headed for disaster. Nothing can stop it, save a complete U-turn which the Democrats will never allow. The best course of action here is to let the Democrats own it.

Hold your nose and vote for Jerry Brown.

This isn’t that far out. Ann Coulter had similar views on the McCain-Obama contest.

By the way, I’d kick out Maldonado (Lt. Gov candidate) also. Same reason. Ruins the brand. And yes, the SMGOP heartily endorses him, too.

Vote NO on Measure M

Here’s a link to the Peninsula Community Media Center’s election coverage. Scroll down for the internet link to the Measure M videos:

http://www.communitymediacenter.net/elections_Nov_10flag.html

There are two 5-minute videos presenting the arguments against and for Measure M, the $10 car tax for San Mateo County. Listen to Glenn Rice as he explains why this new tax is not in the best interests of San Mateo County citizens. He is a passionate “NO!”.

I also draw your attention to the scare tactics – threats, really – of the Measure M proponents, in both the ballot arguments and the video. Rocks might hit your windshield! Potholes might damage your suspension! As The Godfather might say,

“Nice roads you got there. Shame if anything happened to them …”

I hope that voters by now are too smart to fall for this.

I’ll post more on this, and also Measure O – another even bigger “NO!” – when some free time appears …

Our thanks to the Peninsula Community Media Center for this public service.

Democrats: The Party of Higher Taxes and Bigger Government

I have in my hands the official Democrat party “official endorsement” doorknob hanger, for state and local ballot measures, for San Mateo County.

Bottom line:

• If it increases taxes, they are for it.
• If it increases the size and control of government, they are for it

At the state level, the Democrat Party would very much like redistricting to be done by the majority in the state legislature; that is, themselves. Simple majority state budget would also be nice – no need then to listen to any outlandish views on spending restraint. Vehicle license surcharge? YES! Prohibit the state from taking local funds? NO! – that is, the state overrides the little people. Suspend the idiotic carbon emissions rules at least until unemployment is reduced – NO! Increase taxes on business? YES! 2/3rds vote for tax increases? NO!

At the local level, EVERY tax or fee increase is a YES! The Menlo Park public employee retirement measure – starting to slow down that gravy train – is a NO!

One might be excused for thinking that this is a parody. Is is really true that California – and San Mateo County – Democrats, never saw a tax increase they did not like? Or that increase in government power and control is always good, as far as Democrats are concerned?

Sadly, this one-dimensional portrait of our ruling party is an accurate reflection of all that is left of its policies. No need to look into the financial or management history of any request – if it’s a tax increase, obviously it’s needed! No need to ask whether the people are better off governing themselves – obviously, Sacramento or Washington should be telling us all what to do!

The local tea party around here has, in my view, a far superior set of voting recommendations, here.

Not every tax increase is opposed; there is thoughtful analysis behind every recommendation. Almost all supported candidates are Republican, but given the lock-step Democrat ideology of bigger government and higher taxes, it is lunacy to vote for a Democrat absent a very convincing reason.

I highly recommend My Liberty, the San Mateo County Tea Party. Get involved – before it’s too late.

Greg Conlon : In computer parlance, a “no-op”

I’ve just been watching various YouTube videos by, or for, Greg Conlon. For congress (Tom Lantos, RIP, seat).

I’m a registered Republican – and I am sure far to the right of Greg Conlon – and even I voted for Democrat Jackie Speier, over Conlon.

Why’s that?

Jackie Speier is genuine. Authentic. Stands up for what she believes in.

Go back through past San Mateo County ballot pamphlets. You will see Speier’s name regularly there, signing for what she believes in – in every case I can remember, higher taxes, but at least – she is out there. No question what she supports and what she doesn’t. I was on the other side of those, and she won some, lost some, but you have to give her credit: she stepped up to the plate.

In my memory, going back as far as I have been involved since 2003, I have never seen Greg Conlon’s name in the ballot pamphlet, for or against any city or county measure. The county GOP has likewise been absent on almost all San Mateo county measures for raising taxes, increasing the size of government, etc. etc. Greg Conlon, and the San Mateo County GOP, are “no-op”s on county issues. For you non-engineers out there, a “no-op” is a computer instruction that does exactly “nothing” – it marches on the spot. Goes nowhere.

I’ll never vote for any “no-op”.

Greg Conlon is a Pete Wilson retread. Pete Wilson – or rather, his tax increase – is why we left California in the early 90s. Both are Big Government republicans, my opinion. No need to oppose local tax measures – that only affects the little people. The county GOP, same thing. Fancy suits. Robert’s Rules of Order. Motions seconded and passed. Getting anything actually done opposing local tax increase measures? A “no-op”.

Today, tea-party candidates in Delaware and New York shocked the GOP machines in those states, by defeating their annointed. Those GOP machines are of of touch with voters. And so are Greg Conlon and the San Mateo GOP.

If anyone were to read this blog (unlikely), I’d expect complaints for “not being a team player”, being Republican and all. Well, stuff that. I have completely had it with Big Government republicans. They have ruined the brand name. I’m with Ann Coulter on this one – if the big government guy is going to win, make sure it’s a Democrat. Then when things go to hell you’ll know who to blame – and where to go for the antidote. The Tea Party revolt currently under way is exactly of that sentiment – vote conservative full speed ahead and damn the torpedoes.

A no-op will never get around to doing what needs to be done – cutting the size of government. Most you will ever get out of a no-op is a promise. But don’t hold your breath. Once your no-op is in his comfy elected office, staying there is all he will care about.

I oppose everything Jackie Speier stands for. But one thing is for sure: she is not a “no-op”. That’s why she had my vote over Conlon.

I like to think that the county GOP will give us a good choice in November, for Speier’s seat. Fat chance. We get nutcase Mike Moloney, who called the late Tom Lantos an “international terrorist” – and so on. I don’t think so. At least Moloney is not a “no-op”. But I won’t vote for a nutcase, either. Of course, that description of Mr Moloney is just my opinion. It’s slim pickin’s again this November.

Coastside Parcel Tax, Measure E : Vote NO

Constantly countering misinformation is a tiresome task. It is especially tiresome when its purveyors are the nominal guardians of the public trust – and here I mean, the so-called “news” media. The theory is along the lines of, organization Blah-Blah issues a news release saying how wonderful their Thing-a-ma-bob is; then your public-spirited and professional newspaper staff tests this announcement against known facts, and reveals to its readers the truth – or otherwise – of said news release. All is well with the world, and the public readership is again saved by impartial journalism.

Welcome to yesterday. Today, things are different, and here’s how. The local school district – or the state education department, or the federal education department, or the state budget office, or pretty much any government body – issues warnings of dire emergencies caused by “cuts in funding”. Has anyone NOT seen these lately? Next, your local newspaper, or state organ, or national daily, will simply repeat these predictions of doom as God’s own truth. No need to look at the actual budget numbers; nothing to see here, move along now.

Readers beware. The Half Moon Bay Review is not investigating on your behalf. That is either too much work, or inconvenient in its conclusions. Review editorials repeat with authority a sad litany of education funding cuts. But the truth is that education funding is up, not down. As the chart below shows, we’ve had more district revenue per student in recent years – not less. Remember 1999? We’d love to go back there! We had school busing, arts and music programs, and so on. Since 2004 the district has had more revenue per student – adjusted for inflation – than in 1999, but you’d never know it. We lurch from crisis to crisis, and all due, as they would have us believe, to “cuts in funding”.

Things are the same at the State level, for the whole budget. The Governator is proposing cuts which legislators equate to taking California back to the stone age, but again adjusted for inflation, they mean in reality stepping back just a couple of years to what spending was in 2008 or 2007 or so. Were those years so bad?

The voters are to blame for this stupidity, though this blog won’t win any friends for pointing this out. Year after year, we elect representatives who spend us into oblivion, raising spending above the inflation rate, above population growth, and above what we can actually pay for. To the extent that misinformation is the cause, the news media – the Half Moon Bay Review included – are to blame. They have become so infested with big government ideologues that they no longer honestly report the facts on which voters might base a rational voting decision. In the case of Measure E, you will hold your breath in vain for the Review to present any objective analysis of the district budget over time. Such as the graph below.

For what it’s worth, state spending on education also has soared. So has Federal education spending. I just can’t be bothered to look up the latest numbers (as I did in 2003 and 2006, for previous parcel tax measures). Let the fourth estate do it.

Read the rest of this entry »

The Stupidity of “Cash for Clunkers”

Am I alone? How stupid is this program? It’s called “cash for clunkers” on the assumption that the car is, well, a “clunker”. But lots of these “clunkers” are anything but. My wife drives a very nice – for a Ford – “clunker”, a 1996 Lincoln Continental, or something like that (it’s not worth my knees to go downstairs and see the exact model). Mileage, pathetic, was 14 mpg, now closer to 16, but a very competent vehicle and entirely appropriate for someone that doesn’t drive much, and needs a big car with room in the trunk for a good size wheelchair. That’s why my Dad had it, until his eyeballs gave out and he gave it to us.

Why on earth would we crush this car? Assuming some owner would really rather be driving a Prius or something else, wouldn’t this car be of good use to many people, in an appropriate setting? To those of you screaming “but what about the gas mileage! Save our environment!” I answer: Silly people. Don’t you know how much energy and material resources it takes to make a new car?  For low-mileage drivers, driving this car – 13 years old and still going well – makes much more sense than buying a new car, with its manufacturing environmental impact. Your old Uncle Jo and Auntie Em will be long dead before the superior gas mileage of the new car will make up for its manufacturing impact.

This is the problem with government programs. They take a supremely stupid proposal (crushing a perfectly good running vehicle) and sell it to the populace, assuring us that the normal rules of prudent asset management apply only to the little guy, and not to The Government.

Wake up, people: Government does not have a magic fairy wand which somehow makes a real economic loss – the crushing of a perfectly good car – into any sort of “gain”. People should ask themselves what they would do with that asset. A genuine clunker is good for parts, such that scrapyards and tow trucks will come for it, but even scrapyards are turning up their noses at the cars destroyed in the “cash for clunkers” program.

This is a monumental waste of assets which leaves our country poorer in the end – not richer. And the billions of dollars used to encourage this insanity, come from taxes collected from citizens who do prudently manage their affairs.

My suggestion: instead of wrecking the engines and towing the cars etc, sell ‘em to Mexicans or Canadians across the border. The US will still be the poorer for giving our neighbors the bargain, but at least those assets will be well used – somewhere.

It seems that Congress, and by implication, the public at large (there having been no outcry over this program), still believes in the tooth fairy. Leave a clunker under your pillow, amd poof! $4500 appears the next morning. The clunker goes to the fairies, and your money fell off the money tree.

The World has Gone Mad

We live in a different world today then last August. The federal government:

• Owns Chrysler and GM, pretty much, apart from the bits Obama gave to the unions
• Is printing and spending money by the $trillions
• Has send hundreds of $billions to Goldman-Sachs, et al, mostly Democrats by the way – surprise!
• Is getting ready to pass “carbon emissions” restrictions that will send us back to the stone age – and all for nothing
• Is readying legislation to turn our health care system into a mirror of the pathetic systems of Canada or the UK, at huge expense … and all the above will be ….
• Paid for by the non-parasites – that is, the working producers – through vastly increased taxes, both direct and indirect. Assuming anyone is left who believes thrift and industry worthwhile.

It’s no secret that I’m not a fan of big government and higher taxes. But the rate at which the federal government is printing and spending money, goes far beyond any partisan notion of what, long term, is good for our children and grandchildren. Every deficit dollar spent today will be repaid “tomorrow”, either in higher taxes, or in inflation, and in either case, with a lower standard of living for our young loved ones and their progeny.

Am I alone in thinking this is irresponsible and immoral? Forget your political party – we all love our children. Why would we steal from them in this way? More to the point – why are we?

The world has gone mad.

The Giant has Woken

Well, hardly. Here we are – June – and blimey! I haven’t posted since last August?

Obviously I am not cut out for the title of “blogger”. Still, it’s time to get started again. This is a start – though it is content-free …

Update: San Mateo County GOP Web Site

UPDATE, September 17, 2008 :

The San Mateo GOP site is up again at this address: http://www.smgop.org

==============================================================

Looks like it’s curtains. I was told the state party pulled funding from the county. (I assume from all counties but I don’t know). Executive Director gone, web site gone, and now it’s all-volunteer.

That’s too bad.

The county GOP has enough problems without malcontents whacking them for this and that, so I  am moving on to complain about other things. One thing for sure – the county GOP needs some $$ to maintain some semblance of a presence here. If I find out where to send it, I’ll announce it as a comment to this post.

Party regulars shouldn’t get too excited, though – readership of this blog being what it is. If I find something interesting to say, maybe it will improve Until then, I wish my readers – both of them – the very best!

San Mateo County GOP Web Site: RIP ?

The saga continues! A visit today to the county GOP web site reveals not the county web site, but a register.com page, filled with ads, presumably tailored to appeal to conservative customers, and including on the front page a nice military photograph!!! A click on the link “Why are there ads here?” answers that question:

These ads appear on websites after a domain name has expired and has entered our administrative grace period.

I toyed with the idea of bidding for this valuable domain name, which “may soon be available”; minimum bid, $99, in case anyone is interested; but instead, I left telephone messages for Chairman Karen King, and county Executive Director (I believe) Catherine Brinkman, in case they did not know, as a late renewal appears possible still if they get on it. Speaking to a live person would have been preferable, but I did not disable my caller ID They would have thought I was pestering them about the upcoming election, a not unreasonable assumption.

I wonder how long it will take the county GOP to get their web site up again …. guesses, anyone? The down time might just be innocent (changing registrars or hosting, for example), but if so, it’s a mystery to me why they would choose to do it so close to such an important election.

Stay tuned for more updates on this exciting development!

Local Elections are here; Will the San Mateo GOP participate ?

The filing season for the upcoming November election, is upon us. There are numerous city and count tax increase measures on the ballot; they are now listed on the County elections web site here.

As an aside, when is the last time we had a local tax decrease measure to vote on? I can’t remember one …

County wide, an 8% parking lot tax, and a 2.5% car rental tax, are proposed for unincorporated areas. Other measures include 3 school district parcel taxes, one school district bond, and one city gross receipts tax. This ballot is a tax-increaser’s Nirvana

Today I stopped by the GOP booth at the San Mateo County Fair and dropped off an election calendar, with ballot argument dates highlighted, and with my name and e-mail address. Two county committee members were there to graciously accept it. Let’s hope this little nudge improves the dismal record of the county GOP in opposing “bigger government and higher taxes” locally, in years past. It would be wonderful to have the “party of lower taxes and smaller government” stand up and be counted, this election. Stay tuned for updates.

For any San Mateo County residents reading this, please respond to this post if you would like to help us defeat yet more tax increases, piled upon citizens even as we struggle with our own family budgets in this recession, with increased costs for gas, food, and other necessities, reduced employment security, soaring home foreclosures … and so on. Tax increases now are insane.

Ballot arguments for and against these measures are due Friday, August 15. Contact me to help – it will be appreciated.

San Mateo County GOP: Promoting Higher Taxes!

I thought I’d browse the SMGOP web site, old though the links are. And what do I find, on my first click? A pro-tax-increase post.

For those unable to see the link, or if it is conveniently removed, here is the money quote:

Forging ahead with a can-do attitude Wednesday night, a majority of the Millbrae School District Board unofficially supported an idea to proceed with mail-in ballots for another parcel tax on May 6. Another option is to do it on June 3. … should the board agree on a May 6 election, it would have an estimated cost of $40,000. The later date would cost the district about $23,000, because it is a regular election … “The early date is the one we should shoot for. The mail-in ballot is a much better opportunity and we have to go after the parents. The (last) parcel tax missed by a very small margin”.

This answers some of the questions I have had regarding the SMGOP extreme reluctance to oppose school parcel taxes. The county sales tax increase measures still puzzle me in this regard, although the evasiveness of the SMGOP was just as evident when asked to stand and be counted.

This web site has plenty of evidence on the luxurious funding here of government-run education, compared to other countries which do far more with far less; see here. I find it baffling that the party “of lower taxes and smaller government” would not actively propose necessary – and far more effective – education reforms, rather than supporting – or at best, neglecting to oppose -increased funding for the failing status quo.

Has the SMGOP not noticed that the real beneficiaries of such increased spending are the teacher unions, rather than our children? And on which political party, pray, do the teacher unions bestow their largesse? Hint: it is not the GOP. What’s more, our children are left worse off than before, even after the massive increases in education spending we’ve seen the last few decades. We don’t expect the Democrat party to highlight this failure, but the GOP can – and should – aggressively promote better policies to benefit our children – even if at the expense of the 800-pound-gorilla of the teacher unions.

I’ll post more on education spending and results, at some point; meanwhile, the above link should provide plenty of food for thought.