Letters in support of Kitty Rhoades
Likes Kitty in Madison
While many people have criticized the last state budget process because it was drawn out so long, I disagree with their criticisms. The difference between the two houses of our state Legislature couldn't have been more dramatic.
The governor and the Democrat-controlled Senate wanted billions in new taxes. Kitty Rhoades stuck to her guns throughout several months of a budget stalemate because she knew that the residents of our area who would have been paying those increases can't afford to pay them.
In the end, her bargaining prevailed and the bipartisan agreement eliminated or reduced most of the proposed tax hikes.
As a resident, taxpayer and someone who wants our elected officials to stand up when it's important, I applaud Rep. Kitty Rhoades for her stand against the billions in increased taxes and spending in the last state budget. I want Kitty Rhoades back at the Capitol representing us next session.
Jerry Karras, Hudson
Bruch means higher taxes
After reading Sarah Bruch's recent article in the Star-Observer, her political philosophy, if elected will result in higher taxes, bigger government and less freedom of personal choice.
She is following the typical democratic mantra: evil corporations, evil rich people, class envy and less individual responsibility.
When asked, "How will you fund education," your response of, "working with your colleagues to come up with the best solution," in other words, to me, means higher taxes. Also, when asked about the budget, Bruch favored taxing businesses more. By taxing businesses, businesses are going to cut back, which means cutting back on jobs. This sounds like she has an "anti-business" philosophy.
Currently, taxes in the state of Wisconsin are very high already; our concern is not only about young families but also, the retired folks, on a fixed income, that are having a hard time affording their homes because of high property taxes.
If Sarah Bruch gets into office, the taxes will only continue to escalate. A better choice would be to have Kitty Rhodes elected, who will work to protect "us," the taxpayers.
Dick and Jean Pearson, Hudson
Backs Kitty for Assembly
By now we all know the buzz word among DFL candidates is "change" -- but what exactly are those candidates trying to tell us needs to be changed?
One of the definitions in my American Heritage Dictionary says change is "a substitution of one thing for another" (but it doesn't say that is necessarily positive) so what good is "change" simply for the sake of change?
Given the positive history of Kitty Rhoades, our state Assembly person, I wonder what Sarah Bruch thinks she should "change? (if it ain't broke, why fix it!)."
Kitty worked to see that Senior Care, the prescription drug program for low-income seniors is fully funded, she stopped the $18 billion tax increase that Gov. Doyle and the DFL wanted to impose upon our families, and her hard work saw that a property tax freeze was approved.
With Sarah Bruch's support of the proposed government-run Healthy Wisconsin health care plan, (read socialized medicine anyone?) she would bring "change" with a $15 billion price tag, which means we, the tax-payers, lose more of our paycheck every month!
Her "change" also means we'll give illegal aliens, the unemployed and even people who don't live in Wisconsin great health care. Can you afford that?
Kitty has worked long and hard in our state government to build bi-partisan relationships so she can get these things done! If we prize experience in our doctors, pilots and teachers (among others), why would we want to replace our experienced Assembly person, Kitty Rhoades? She has proven herself able, hard-working, honest and a woman of integrity with someone with no political experience whatsoever.
I trust Kitty's experience and hard work. I hope you will too!
Meredith Berg, Hudson
Kitty controls spending
I just finished reading the story on the Pierce County Journal's Web site about Wisconsin getting $3.5 billion for light rail from the federal government. We have not had a pay-as-you-go administration or Congress, with the exception of the Clinton years, since Reagan took office. During those tax-and-spend Clinton years we actually ran a surplus.
Truman came in with a post-war national debt that was 60 percent of the GDP. Until Reagan's trickle-down economics, that ratio actually decreased. During those pre-Reagan years we educated our vets, built the freeway system and fought another war. Now, after all that trickle-down, we are back at a national debt that is 60 percent of the GDP.
As an independent voter, I have always supported Kitty Rhoades because she believes in fiscal responsibility. If you don't got it, you don't spend it.
I know that it rankles some folks that their pet program doesn't get funded, but funding every pet program with a dribble of dollars, $3.5 billion, I suspect, doesn't buy much fast rail. It's those tax cuts and dribbles that kill our national budget.
The continuation through the years of Reagan's trickle-down economic policy has been proven a flawed policy. It is what has put us in the financial straits we now suffer. If you are not going to tax, you must control spending.
I am voting for Kitty in November.
Richard Oehmke, Hudson