In our democracy we have a voice on how we are governed, since the human race is actually a herd society, where each of us depends on the other, yet each of us thinks and lives differently it becomes necessary to have rules for both safety and fairness.

We become frustrated when we feel our voice is not being heard. The Internet seems to be a way to discuss our views worldwide and perhaps action can be taken to correct wrongs and provide a good future for all of us.

    General thoughts:

    1. When signatures are gathered for petition's they should not be paid for.

    2. When you are asked to sign a petition you should be offered a copy of the "bill" that they are supporting, not just a summary of what it is about.

    3.  When bills are proposed to be voted on they should contain only one subject.  (Often when a bill is passed, even if overwhelming approved they are often declared unconstitutional because there were too many clauses.)

    4.  All bills, laws and even government agencies should have a sunset clause. 

SMOKING:  The age for smoking should be raised to twenty-one years:

                        Any person providing tobacco products designed for human use to a
Minor should be cited according to the State laws.  A copy of the citation should be
presented to the parents or guardian of the under aged person.  The citation can be
Used as evidences towards delinquency, addition and health problems.

                         Any under aged person using tobacco products should be cited and
The parents or guardian's required accompanying the person to court.  If the parents
Or guardian permitted the under aged person to use tobacco products they should
Also be cited.

                            Reasoning:  Smoking by teenagers has often been considered "A
right of passage".  Adults often just look the other way; this has caused youth to
realize that they can choose what laws they can disregard.   The increased price of
tobacco produces has caused some youth to become "shoplifters".

                            Smoking control bills before Congress and the Senate should strictly control
Tobacco Products and no immunity shall be granted.  Money paid by Tobacco Companies due to Court orders should not be tax deductible.   Placing a high tax on tobacco companies sounds reasonable, but the push for high taxes by the government is suspicious, since many people will pay the higher price.  It sounds like the government is saying smoking is OK as long as we get a cut to
fund our special projects.

                            FDA should have control over Tobacco Products.

                            Export of tobacco products should be regulated as if a drug is being exported.

                            If tobacco companies move out of the country to avoid US laws then they should be regarded as foreign companies trying to import a drug.

                            If tobacco companies go bankrupted, it will be because the mission has been accomplished.  The government can step in and help those affected, including farmers to be retrained for better jobs.

                            Information on tobacco money directed towards political campaigns or issues should become public information available to the news media.

TAX  Can it be improved? Can it be fair?

    Income Tax, Unfair and unworkable.
        a.  Only the honest are taxed.  a person who provides services, legal or illegal will not be taxed as long as they leave no paper trail.   A person who sells items for cash, legal or illegal will not be taxed.
        b.  Unmarried so called "welfare cheats" can easily hide income.
        c.   People with limited (or even normal) English and Math skills seldom can fill out a tax form if they are required to fill out anything other then the general form.
        d.    Politicians like to add on special tax deceptions for special interest which sounds good to some but makes the search for deductions difficult along with the fear that if you make an error, somewhere down the line you will be fined.
                (1)      A pet peeve is the "Business Mans Lunch Tax Brake"  One job I was on the boss would entertain clients every noon, he would come back drunk and eventually the business folded.
                (2)     Business Man's Lunch Tax Brake is miss-used, Restaurants who push for lunch business conferences up the price, so the general tax payer can not use it.  Making business deals over a dinner could be considered a bribe and if liquor or sex is involved it could be illegal.
                (3)    Educational expense has so many clauses that it is difficult to use and unfair to those who learn three job skills outside of formal education.
                (4)    Business expenses often are misunderstood and an error down the line can force a tax payer into bankruptcy.

        e.    Tax preparing, when a general taxpayer must obtain professional help in filling taxes it is an indication that there is something wrong with the system.
                (1)    Often more money is spent on getting taxes professionally prepared, either out of fear of error, or looking for a tax break, represents money lost to the taxpayer or the government.
                (2)     The government should should provide tax prepares service for a reasonable cost, along with repercussion safeguards.  If the taxpayer wishes they can still go to a private tax account.

This Tax discussion is not because I feel I have been wronged, but because I feel there must be a better way, even though I do not know what it is.

        Flat income tax with no deductions.
                (1) This sounds proper but the rich could benefit and the poor suffer.  The problem is who is rich and who is poor.
                (2)  Vouchers could replace deductions.  Applying falsely for a voucher would be the same as writhing a bad check, punishable by courts.

        No Income Tax but a national sales tax.
                (1) This again would benefit the rich and harm the poor, but again vouchers could be used to cover necessities of the needy.  High sales tax would foster a "black market".
                (2) Tax on what you buy would be fairer than tax on what you earn before you get a chance to spend it or save it.

        There should be someway that a person feels they have some control on the money they send to the government.
                (1)     When a person fills out a tax form, 50% should be set aside for government operations, and the taxpayer should be able to state 50%  should not go to an agency the taxpayer dislikes,  an example if he/she did not like "foreign aid"  that amount would be deducted from the "foreign aid" budget.
                (2)     Another system would be that after 50% set aside for government, and the taxpayer feels more should be spent on education then that amount paid by the taxpayer will be added to the "education" budget.

Kenneth Starr, a threat to everyone’s freedom:

So far one person has commented to me about my thoughts about Starr’s target.  We both agreed about our dislikes of our current president but are far apart about the solution.

 I am retired military WWII, Korea and Vietnam so I did not vote for him, but I could not vote for Senator Dole because of his ties to the Tobacco Lobby.  While in the military I learned that the difference between a democracy and a dictatorship, is that elected civilians are in charge of the military.  Yes I do not like the thought of President Clinton being Commander in Chief but he was the one elected so we all expect him to properly perform the job, and pray that he has good advisors.

I do not believe we must run a person from office because of their sex life, regardless of how weird it may sound but we must focus on the issues and elect good people to become our representatives.   I sure wished we could get Colin Powell to run for President.

Starr’s agenda seems political, but many religious groups are backing him.  Religion is important to shape our nations moral standards.  Starr’s political attract is so low in the dirty tricks bag that few politicians dare risk being associated with him.

Starr started out with over $40 million to find out if Clinton broke a law in an old real-estate deal, when the rumor of sex came in the picture he drooped his contracted investigation and jumped on the tabloid sex bandwagon, which to some people is a form of sexual deviation.

How is Starr a threat to the rest of us?  He is talking about lye, but the lye also borders on a mater of honor at least to some men.  First of all if someone asked you if you had sex with another person, the question becomes personal and should not be answered.  It also deals with two people and unless a person is a sexual freak, that person feel obligated to protect the honor of their partner.  Maybe I am old fashion but that is the way I see it.

Recently sex has been used in poultices, as seen in the Hill and Jones, case, and also used as a form of revenge agents men as seen in the Tailhook Scandal.  The Tailhook convention was mishandling of one sexual harassment, and turned out that almost all of the men who attended the convention to advance their profession had their careers distorted.  The Nation also lost since it cost over a million dollars to train each Navy pilot.

Sex has been a professional service since the beginning of recorded time, so if sex is used as political gain, sex in politics is in the same category.

Please, lets fire Starr and get on with the running of our great Nation, and if we want to attract the President’s pollicies, lets have some real issues such as campaign fundraisers by all elected officials at tax payers expense.   Make it a right for every citizen to see our President or Congressman without having to don a black tie and put out a hundred dollars to attend a meeting.

Email Comments?

 please feel free to contact me via email. The response may be slow, but you should get a response. Thanks!