ShareThis Page
Letters to the Editor

Eliminate property taxes? Not so fast

| Saturday, March 19, 2016, 9:00 p.m.

Regarding “Anti-Property Tax Campaign Courts Westmoreland County” : I am against Senate Bill 76 on a business and personal level. Unlike the hosts of the property tax forum that were from “mostly eastern Pennsylvania,” I actually live in the 39th Senatorial district.

Coming from a family of business owners, we pride ourselves in knowing our math to balance our books and account for every last penny.

I have many problems with the Senate bill, including the pool of money to be redistributed to other school districts, the increase in the personal income tax and the 50 new additional taxes on items and services.

If this bill really solved the problem in a fiscally responsible manner, then why hasn't a single conservative or business organization — such as the Commonwealth Foundation, Americans for Prosperity, National Federation of Independent Business or a chamber of commerce — endorsed it? As a small-government conservative, one of my core beliefs is that a government that is closest to its people governs best, which is why I don't think it's a good idea to centralize spending and decision making in Harrisburg. It's the people who live here, work here and raise our families here who understand our community best — not some government bureaucrat in Harrisburg. I understand the other side of the state has major property tax problems. But it makes more sense to elect fiscally responsible people to one's own local offices rather than have a one-size-fits-all government solution to property tax elimination.

PAUL JONNET

IRWIN

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me