jmeyer
Points recieved:
- Disagree (25)
- Agree (60)
Personal Information
- First Name
- Judy
- Last Name
- Meyer
- The city or town you live in
- Buckfield
- Gender
- Female
- Profile
Sun Journal managing editor/days
History
- Member for
- 2 years 44 weeks
- Blog
- View recent blog entries
jmeyer's Comments
More information online
Robert: There are two sidebars that accompany this story, plus a 10-year timeline and a chart with details of general assistance spending that includes a comparison of spending for the Somali population and spending for the remaining population. Those sidebars and chart include the information you're seeking, and can be found at: http://www.sunjournal.com/somalidecade
Feds and state
I agreed that we certainly do have a choice in what we fund locally, which is what makes our votes in selecting state reps so important because they hold our purse strings. But, I was responding to a post that suggested the Constitution didn't empower government to take money from our paychecks and give it to someone else, and it does. The Feds take plenty from our paychecks, between income tax and FICA, and use that money to fund federal social service programs, like refugee resettlement programs, disability and the like. Then, of course, the state takes its share from our paychecks too, to fund additional programs and to pay the state's share of federally-mandated programs, such as MaineCare.
Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution
Hi Dan,
As frustrating as it is for many people, the Constitution actually does give government the right to remove money from your paycheck and give it to someone else.
Article I, Section 8 reads, in part: "The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States." The phrase "general welfare" means the health and well-being of the American people, so Congress can impose taxes and use those funds to pay for social services. That doesn't diminish your opinion that perhaps government is taking too much, but it's lawful for Congress to do so.
I'm not going to argue with you.
You are incorrect in your assumption about the error. It was mine and not Rep. McKane's. If you can't accept that truth, I don't believe there's anything I can say to convince you. I will acknowledge skewing public discourse here in support of truth over innuendo. I apologize if that fact upsets you.
Censorship?
It was hardly censorship. I corrected an editing error in the original letter, which I take full responsibility for. So, never mind that your comment pointing out the error just didn't make sense any more, leaving your disparaging comment against the letter's author would have been irresponsible since he carries no fault. Are you suggesting that I should have left your hurtful and incorrect accusation stand? That doesn't seem very nice, or at all fair.