Letter/News Archives
Most recent at the top
Most recent at the top
|
Photos Wissahickon Scholarship Award Letters: 2010 2009 2007 |
Letter/News Archives: 2010
Taylor’s efforts should be rewarded
Ambler Gazette, Tuesday, October 19, 2010
To the Editor:
Lately the Republican Party of Pennsylvania has filled my mailbox with glossy flyers about the Nov. 2, 2010 election. Sometimes it’s hard for constituents to judge exactly what their Harrisburg representatives are accomplishing and how effective they are. These flyers say Rick Taylor cast the deciding vote on budgets and major legislation, and he’s been an important force in determining many legislative outcomes. I appreciate the GOP for recognizing Taylor’s hard work and conscientious efforts and for keeping voters informed.
Many people know there is a slim Democratic majority in the House, of which Taylor is a part, and that the Republican Party enjoys a 60 percent majority in the Senate. This means that all legislation in Pa. for the past two years has had significant bipartisan input and support in order to pass. I can only conclude that by casting his vote with the bipartisan majority of both houses that Rick is doing the job for which we elected him — that is, making laws for which there is broad appeal and consensus. I am grateful to the GOP for making the case for me and other voters as to why Rick Taylor deserves re-election in the 151st.
Marjorie Berlinghof
Dresher
© 2010 Montgomery News, a Journal Register Property
Ruth Damsker will support citizens
Ambler Gazette, Tuesday, October 19, 2010
To the Editor:
In looking at 2010 candidates for the Pa. state Senate, it is important to note the actions of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Recently, Mr. Greenleaf, the committee chairman, pushed for swift consideration of legislation to expand the rights of gun owners, much to the delight of special interest groups, such as the NRA. On the other hand, another bill, The False Claims Act, has languished in the Judiciary Committee for more than a year. The False Claims Act would allow the state of Pennsylvania to collect penalty money from companies that have been convicted of fraud. In reviewing the agenda of the Judiciary Committee, it is apparent that Stewart Greenleaf is catering to special interest groups rather than the well-being of the citizens of Pennsylvania.
In contrast, Ruth Damsker, the other Senate candidate for the 12th District, supports an agenda that puts people first. She has been campaigning hard for term limits, tax fairness and government transparency. Citizens in favor of good government should vote for Ruth Damsker on Tuesday, Nov. 2.
Leslie R. Becker-Brown
Horsham
© 2010 Montgomery News, a Journal Register Property
History has a way of repeating itself
Ambler Gazette, Tuesday, October 19, 2010
To the Editor:
Tragically, history often repeats itself. In 1929 the unemployment rate was at 3.2 percent, until the stock market crashed in October of that year. By the following year unemployment had risen to 8.7 percent; in 1931 it climbed to 16 percent; in 1932 it spiked to a whopping 24 percent; and in 1933 it peaked at 25 percent! (Compare that to where it is now: 9.6 percent). For more than three years Republican President Herbert Hoover stubbornly insisted that as long as the government balanced the budget the economy would eventually improve. It never did — until 1934, the year after Democratic President Franklin Roosevelt was sworn in.
FDR and the Democrats decided to try something new: The New Deal. The idea was to stimulate the economy through borrowing. Government spending and targeted tax cuts were used to create what was called a “fiscal multiplier effect” — meaning that for every dollar spent, another three dollars would circulate through the economy. Why? Because if a construction worker has a job, he can afford to grab breakfast at a diner; if a waitress at a diner gets extra tips, she can afford to move out of her parents’ home; if a landlord’s apartment is no longer vacant, he can invest more in the stock market; and all three can pay more taxes, thereby increasing government revenue. The original dollar just keeps growing.
In 2008 we experienced an economic calamity every bit as great as the 1929 crash. Some voters are mad as heck about measures like the “TARP,” the “stimulus,” and the so-called auto company “bailouts.” I suppose they would have preferred that we take the Herbert Hoover approach. But it is absolutely clear that if we had not taken those actions, we would surely be revisiting 1930-33. By the way, of all those billions that the government doled out, more than 90 percent is going to be paid back. And the remaining 10 percent is a small price to pay to avert another depression!
FDR managed to get the unemployment rate down from 25 percent to as low as 14 percent. Republicans like to point out that it wasn’t until World War II that we finally dug completely out of the Great Depression. That is true. What they fail to concede, though, is that World War II was in fact the New Deal in overdrive. From 1942 to 1945 the U.S. government spent massive amounts of borrowed money to defeat the Axis. This actually illustrates that the New Deal simply hadn’t gone far enough. And thanks to “the party of no,” (the GOP) neither did the stimulus of 2009.
This Nov. 2 you have a choice — between the successors of Herbert Hoover and those of Franklin Roosevelt! Please vote Democratic!
Michele Minnick
Blue Bell
© 2010 Montgomery News, a Journal Register Property
Published in the Public Spirit Willow Grove Guide
September 30, 2010
Gun Control Florida Loophole
To the editor:
On Sept. 14, 2010, the Public Spirit and Willow Grove Guide published a guest column from state Rep. Rick Taylor of the 151st District and I completely agree that we must close the “Florida Gun Loophole.”
He wrote about the flawed logic in our current law that would allow someone who was denied a “right to carry” permit by Pennsylvania to go online, pay $117 to another state that has a lower standard for gun ownership and be furnished a permit to carry a weapon on our streets.
This is not only a dangerous concept but is an obvious example of the failure of commonsense. The most recent example of this atrocious loophole was Marqus Hill, whose right to carry was rescinded after a confrontation with police officers. He appealed, lost and then proceeded to assault another officer in the courtroom.
All this made no difference to the officials in Florida as sight-unseen they granted Hill a carry permit.
Just last week he was charged with murder for allegedly killing Irving Santana, 18, using a gun he was legally carrying in Pennsylvania thanks to this loophole. This is a black eye for our state and Rep. Taylor currently has pending legislation to fix this loophole.
The National Gun Owners of America proclaims that “any law-abiding citizen in Pennsylvania has a right to carry a loaded firearm without interference from state officials,” yet it opposes House Bill 2536, which would block anyone who was denied or lost the right to a carry license to go and get a license from states like Florida.
I support Rep. Rick Taylor and his efforts to make our streets safer and pass this bill. We need our representatives in Harrisburg to support sensible gun laws like HB 2546. We need to re-elect Rep. Rick Taylor so that he can continue to sponsor good, sensible legislation and make our streets safer for our families.
Ron Stoloff
Blue Bell
Montgomery News (montgomerynews.com)
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Support legislators working to improve country
To the Editor:
So, let me get this straight. Republicans in Congress want to privatize Social Security a year after the worst stock market collapse since the Great Depression; they support the wars but not veterans’ benefits or soldiers’ pay; they are against the bailouts but want corporations to go unregulated and untaxed; they believe in the Constitution (except for those pesky provisions that ensure civil rights), they dislike “big government programs,” but happily accept their Social Security checks, Medicare coverage and very generous pensions when they retire; they don’t want universal health care for all Americans but take the free health care coverage that we taxpayers provide for them; they talk about “family values” but seem OK with adultery; they deplore the rising unemployment rate but voted against helping America’s three car manufacturers keep their plants open; they rail against the deficit but want billionaires to keep their tax breaks; they talk about energy independence but oppose solar and wind technologies and apologized to BP for all the negative publicity regarding the Gulf oil spill; they want our students to be the best educated in the world but vote against tuition tax credits and want to abolish the Department of Education; they want their food and water to be safe but want to eviscerate the agencies that protect us; they say they like women but fought to defeat both female Supreme Court Justice candidates.
When you see hypocrisy as deep as this, you know that these people are not working to make government better. They don’t see a role for government at all.
These are not small matters.
Please understand the consequences of voting for Republicans at all levels of government this fall. Support the legislators who have worked hard to improve our country, not tear it down.
Judy Hughes
Blue Bell
Montgomery News (montgomerynews.com)
Ambler Gazette, Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Vote to support positive candidates
To the Editor:
So, let me get this straight. Republicans in Congress want to privatize Social Security a year after the worst stock market collapse since the Great Depression; they support the wars but not veterans’ benefits or soldiers’ pay; they are against the bailouts but want corporations to go unregulated and untaxed; they believe in the Constitution (except for those pesky provisions that ensure civil rights), they dislike “big government programs,” but happily accept their Social Security checks, Medicare coverage and very generous pensions when they retire; they don’t want universal health care for all Americans but take the free health care coverage that we taxpayers provide for them; they talk about “family values” but seem OK with adultery; they deplore the rising unemployment rate but voted against helping America’s three car manufacturers keep their plants open; they rail against the deficit but want billionaires to keep their tax breaks; they talk about energy independence but oppose solar and wind technologies and apologized to BP for all the negative publicity regarding the Gulf oil spill; they want our students to be the best educated in the world but vote against tuition tax credits and want to abolish the Department of Education; they want their food and water to be safe but want to eviscerate the agencies that protect us; they say they like women but fought to defeat both female Supreme Court Justice candidates.
When you see hypocrisy as deep as this, you know that these people are not working to make government better. They don’t see a role for government at all.
These are not small matters.
Please understand the consequences of voting for Republicans at all levels of government this fall. Support the legislators who have worked hard to improve our country, not tear it down.
Judy Hughes
Blue Bell
Published in the September 1, 2010 Ambler Gazette
GOP have a part in economic strife
To the Editor:
For many years into his presidency, President Reagan blamed the Carter Administration for all his troubles. And to this day I still hear my Republican friends get the occasional dig in on President Carter. So why do they now whine so loudly about how unfair it is for President Obama to correctly remind voters that he inherited from the Bush Administration an economy headed straight for a second great Depression?
It truly boggles the mind that so soon after the Bush/Republican policies brought us to the brink of disaster, voters would consider going down that road again. The very best argument my Republican friends can make against President Obama is that he is not fixing the economic catastrophe (that they created) quickly enough.
They complain that the stimulus was a waste and hasn’t helped. But the true reason the economy is still sluggish is actually because the stimulus wasn’t big enough. Read what Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman wrote in January of 2009, arguing for a much larger stimulus: “I see the following scenario: A weak stimulus plan, crafted to win extra GOP votes. The plan limits the rise in unemployment, but things are still pretty bad, with the rate peaking at something like 9 or 10 percent, and coming down only slowly. And then [Senator] Mitch McConnell says, ‘See, government spending doesn’t work.’” Sound familiar? Almost two years down the road we see that Krugman was spot-on correct.
But what about the deficit you ask? Well, the deficit would actually be higher in the long run without stimulus spending because if we had gone into a second depression (which most economists say we certainly would have), then the loss of revenue to the treasury would have caused huge deficits. After all, masses of unemployed people don’t pay taxes!
GOP leaders are proudly predicting major victories for Republicans this fall due to voter discontent over the economy. For the sake of the U.S. economy, let’s hope they are wrong. We must not go back to their failed policies of the past.
Matt Cooley
Ambler
© 2010 MontgomeryNews.com, a Journal Register Property
Re: "Believed Obama would end America's two
wars," letter, Monday:
I'm sorry that the writer is disappointed in President Obama's performance in office. Like him, I worked in Obama's campaign, but, unlike him, I actually listened to what Obama said. He never said he would get out of both wars, only that we should have never gone into Iraq, and that because of our distraction there, we dropped the ball in Afghanistan.
And think about the writer's comment that the "American people do not have the stomach for wars in two countries that most people here cannot even locate on a map." How many Americans could have found the Pacific Islands we fought for in World War II, or even nations in Europe, in battles that saved the world?
Ron Stoloff
Blue Bell
Ambler Gazette, June 27, 2010
Local stimulus funds put to good use
To the Editor:
When we hear discussions about President Obama’s stimulus program and its effects, it may sometimes seem like the money expended is not affecting us directly in this area, but if you drive down Penllyn Pike you will see a striking example of that money in action. A handsome, sturdy, newly rebuilt stone railroad bridge, paid for by those stimulus funds (also called the Economic Recovery Program), has now replaced the dangerous, crumbling former structure in
Penllyn. A similar reconstruction can also be seen in North Hills which tells me that our area has been very well-served by this government program.
I’m grateful that the safety of our local rail corridor has been addressed by this federal program and can only surmise that all across the country there are hundreds if not thousands of equally necessary projects being completed.
I find this most encouraging and think it shows in a very dramatic way the scope and competence of this initiative. When it seems like some people can only find fault with our federal government, I would urge them to look to our most local example of a wise public works project which benefits them directly — the Penllyn railroad bridge.
Judy Hughes
Blue Bell
From the Philadelphia Inquirer, July 26, 2010.
Prison reform has eluded Greenleaf
State Sen. Stewart Greenleaf (R., Montgomery) has been praised for reforming Pennsylvania's prison system. However, it must be noted that the problems with the state prisons have only grown worse during his 31-year tenure in the Senate.
Greenleaf is chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, yet he has been able to get only three of his seven prison-reform bills out of committee. Pennsylvania needs state senators who will be effective in bringing about prison reform. That is why I will be voting for Ruth Damsker in the 12th Senate District in November.
Jill Zipin
Horsham
Read more.
From the Philadelphia Inquirer, July 26, 2010.
Toomey's tax ads stretch the truth
Republican U.S. Senate candidate Pat Toomey has been inundating the media with ads condemning Democrat Joe Sestak for voting for the "death tax." The ads state that the government will take up to half of your assets when you die. Inaccurate and partial information is the same as not telling the truth.
This tax is really an inheritance tax, which applies only to estates of more than $1 million, and there are further exclusions that can be used to reduce this tax. To act as if all Americans are subject to this tax is just a cheap scare tactic. Why should we vote for someone who so blatantly misleads?
Gus Cileone
Conshohocken
Read more.
Marcel Groen, replies to remarks by re-elected head of Montgomery County Republican Committee
Unnecessary, Unfortunate Remarks
By Marcel Groen, Chair, Montgomery County Democratic Committee
I would like to congratulate my counterpart, Bob Kerns, on being unanimously re-elected chairman of the Montgomery County Republican Committee. It has been a long time since there has been a unanimous opinion about anything among county Republicans. Mr. Kerns should be proud.
What Mr. Kerns should be less proud of are the comments he made upon being re-elected. According to published reports,* Mr. Kerns, in exhorting the party faithful to work hard, said, "We need you in this fight. We're fighting those Democrats - those infidels - all the time, and we need your help."
Infidels? Mr. Kerns fancies himself a student of history, so he should certainly understand the connotations of such a charged term. In dictionary terms, it means "one who doubts or rejects central tenets of a religion, or one who has no religious beliefs". In practical terminology, it is a term that has been used to justify the killing of millions of innocents under the guise of religious purity.
Politics may be Mr. Kerns' religion, but in today's political atmosphere in the United States, I think we need a little less "zealotry" and little more understanding and bi-partisanship. I do not think it is productive to dehumanize our political opponents, or use terminology that conjures up the need for murder.
I will fight hard to convince people that our positions on issues are better, but I respect my opponents, their beliefs and their patriotism. Mr. Kerns does everyone a disservice by using a fanatical religious expression to describe his political opponents.
Politics is not a crusade. At its best, it is a debate between competing visions and beliefs, and in our country that means a debate between our two main political parties. I may disagree with my opponents and their views, but I respect them and realize that the country we all love is better off for that legitimate and spirited debate.
The so-called infidels that Mr. Kerns referred to in his speech are his neighbors. Like his righteous Republicans, those infidels coach Little League, volunteer in the community, attend the same churches, synagogues and mosques that Republicans attend and they are defending our country in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Democrats are not infidels, Mr. Kerns. They are working men and women, patriotic Americans, and people who simply have a different view than you do of the role of government in our society.
We have all seen and heard the excessively personal and destructive language used by all sides in the political discourse across this country in recent years. People and ideas are routinely branded with historical and evil epithets. Our Congress and legislatures have been frozen into inaction and gridlock by the same type of rigid ideology and lack of civility.
When this type of behavior occurs we are all demonstrating an "infidelity" to our Constitution and the vision and dream that our Founding Fathers had for our political discourse and our society as a whole. I urge Mr. Kerns to raise the tenor of the debate. Our ideas are fair game, as are his, but I will not allow him to denigrate and dehumanize his fellow Americans, in particular, Montgomery County Democrats, without challenging his brand of political speech.
*Read Kerns' comments in this article published in the
Times Herald on June 7, 2010.
Ambler Gazette, May 13, 2010
Remember the qualities of Joe Hoffel
on May 18
To the Editor:
To the Democrats – as we approach the May 18 primary next week, I hope we
will remember the reasons that we chose to be Democrats – respect for the
environment, gender equality, even-handed justice and equality for all,
freedom of speech and press, the positive role that the government can play in
our lives, support for public education, workplace safety, economic
opportunity and social values consistent with peace and the well-being of our
children.
I know of one legislator who has always been a champion of these values as he
represented us in Montgomery County, in Harrisburg and then in Washington,
D.C. His name is Joe Hoeffel. He has been true to those Democratic values and
has never wavered in fighting for women’s rights and sensible gun laws even
when it wasn’t convenient to do so. He has taken a prudent approach to the
drilling for natural gas in upstate Pennsylvania, thinking about safety and
the possible pollution of drinking water before being enticed by the profits
to be made from mining. He has stayed available and helpful to his
constituents and Montgomery County neighbors, always finding time to attend a
hometown event to support a good cause or to work for another good Democrat
who was running for office.
From the time we first moved here in the 1970s up to the present, Joe has been
a person who truly believed in public service rather than politics and I have
always been proud to say he lives in my county. Now he needs our help as he
runs for governor and I am glad to be among his supporters. Calling to other
Democrats across the commonwealth I found it very easy to say with complete
honesty that he is the kind of person I would trust implicitly to be a voice
for the progressives in Pennsylvania.
We in Montgomery County owe Joe Hoeffel our support on May 18. He has always
been there for us.
Judy Hughes,
Blue Bell
Controller Diane Morgan in fight to enforce County laws.
Contract storage violates state law
By KEITH PHUCAS
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Montgomery County Controller Diane Morgan may finally have some leverage in her quest to centralize storage of county contracts: Pennsylvania law.
According to state law for second-class counties, the controller is tohave custody of "all contracts entered into by or on behalf of the county."
But Morgan says weeks of researching county contracts revealed many departments keep those records in their own offices.
This week, she took reporters on a tour of county offices housed in the Human Service Center, at DeKalb and Fornance streets, in Norristown, which included Aging and Adult Services, Office of Children and Youth, Office of Child Care Services, Department of Health and Behavioral Health/Developmental Disabilities Department.
Officials there keep contracts stored in steel file cabinets.
"We have our (current) contracts right here in case we have to update them," said Eric Goldstein, Behavioral Health's administrator.
Stacked boxes in other rooms held outdated contracts. By law, the county must keep paperwork seven years beyond a contract's expiration. After the "destruction date," documents are shredded.
Morgan had wanted to show reporters lots more boxes of old records stacked on the building's warehouse-like fourth floor.
However, Human Services Director Joseph Roynan forbid this, saying the area posed a safety risk and "because there is confidential and personal material."
Though Roynan repeatedly pointed out documents filed in various offices were confidential, but file drawers were not locked. The state ruled locked doors provided sufficient security.
"It's all illegal storage," Morgan said after the tour. "By statute, all original contracts are supposed to be in my office."
This is the latest revelation of officials violating the county's own laws.
In February, officials admitted not following a 1998 ordinance governing professional services solicitations.
And in March, the county's Web site still had not posted financial statements as mandated a year earlier by the ethics policy.
In October 2008, Morgan asked for $325,000 to centralize records in a searchable computer database to improve record-keeping efficiency, but the county refused to fund a system.
At that time, she was told to apply to the County Records Improvement Fund (CRIF). Though willing to accept $150,000 reportedly budgeted for information technology (IT), she learned the funding was gone.
Though the proposal fared no better in 2009, Morgan's department was given a scanner to begin digitizing contracts stored in her office. But there was no way to index or search the scanned documents.
"If you've trying to build a foundation, all we got was a facade," said Kevin Hoke, the First Deputy Controller.
Following admission of the solicitation violation in February, Commissioner Bruce L. Castor Jr. and Morgan requested a list of all the county's professional contracts from the solicitor, and the controllers' staff worked to locate contracts on their own.
Morgan's staff had scanned 266 contract documents.
Morgan missed the commissioners April 1 meeting and was irked to learn the IT and purchasing departments were credited for putting contract information on the county's Internet site.
On Tuesday, she sent a letter to commissioners Chairman James R. Matthews, complaining the other departments were taking credit for work her office performed.
"However, I was never consulted, the indexed material was removed without notice, and the presenters on April 1 would have you believe that the IT and purchasing departments did all of this work themselves within a four-week time span," Morgan wrote in the letter.
She said the information was taken from a shared scan drive.
"This is my department's work, and they took it," Morgan said Thursday.
She claimed the CRIF program had $1.6 million, which is more than enough to fund the computer automation and is asking officials to reconsider funding the project.
© 2010 thereporteronline.com, a Journal Register PropertyOriginal article.
From Senator Daylin Leach:
This is the letter that I, along with many of my Democratic colleagues, have written to send to PA Attorney General Tom Corbett in response to his intention to initiate a suit against The United States of America challenging the constitutionality of the historic Health Care Reform legislation. As you will read below this will cost PA millions of dollars, jeopardize constituent resources and services and inevitably lead to higher taxes. What's conservative about that? I hope you will join me in speaking out against such partisan political posturing at our expense. Please call your Representatives in Harrisburg and urge them to stand with me. We will be holding a press conference tomorrow morning at 10 in the Capitol.
March 23, 2010
Tom Corbett
Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General
16th Floor, Strawberry Square
Harrisburg, PA 17120
Dear General Corbett:
In the past few days there have been news reports indicating that you plan to join the Republican Attorneys General of a number of other states in filing a lawsuit to have the recently passed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act struck down. The effect of your lawsuit, if successful, would be to obviate and render null all of the provisions of said bill.
Certainly, there is some room to disagree about the wisdom of providing health insurance to approximately 800,000 Pennsylvanians who are not currently covered, prohibiting insurance companies from denying people coverage for pre-existing conditions, or reducing the federal deficit by 1.4 trillion dollars over the next two decades. However, what is undeniably true is this: If the lawsuit you are contemplating is successful, it will cost Pennsylvania approximately 102 Million Dollars in the 2010-2011 fiscal year and billions more in the short term.
Specifically (assuming there are no major surprises in the reconciliation bill’s path to passage), this year we will lose funds by losing the authorization contained in the bill for eligibility by Managed Care Organizations to claim rebates for pharmaceuticals. In future years, our losses will fall into three categories
1. Medicare Drug Payment reimbursements from PA to the Federal Government, that the bill phases out currently cost our citizens $474 Million annually and will have to be paid each year if your lawsuit prevails.
2. The bill federalizes the AdultBasic insurance program, saving the taxpayers of PA at least $200 Million per year. That is money that will have to be paid each year if the Health Care Bill is struck down.
3. Similarly, covering the “doughnut hole”, as the bill does, will save PA taxpayers approximately 60 Million Dollars per year and is growing annually.
Further, expanding Medicaid eligibility will provide additional savings to Commonwealth taxpayers as well as provide more services to PA residents. As you can see, striking this bill down will cost PA taxpayers billions of dollars over the next several years.
As I’m sure you know the legislature and the governor have assumed that this money would be available for deposit into the general fund. Fully funding our various Medical Assistance Programs is completely contingent upon the full receipt of those funds. This means that if you are successful and we lose this money, it will create a huge budgetary problem, and will ultimately result in Pennsylvanians either losing vital services or being required to pay a large tax increase to make up the difference.
We, the undersigned, are hoping that as an elected official and a resident of Pennsylvania, you will lend your skills, talents and efforts to fighting for Pennsylvania, rather than joining a partisan effort which has the potential to cause so much harm to our state.
This lawsuit seeks to overturn the will of the people as expressed through their elected representatives. It is being pursued exclusively by one party, whose national leaders speak openly about how they hope efforts like this lawsuit will help them in the midterm elections. It is highly inappropriate for you, an official elected to serve all Pennsylvanians regardless of party, and a candidate for higher office yourself, to use the tax dollars paid by Pennsylvania citizens to ask a court to stop the federal government from returning this crucial federal support to the Treasury of Pennsylvania.
We would further note that you are not needed in this lawsuit. The Republican Governors of other states will continue the lawsuit with or without you. The results will be the same whether you join or do not join the litigation. So it is again unclear why we would be spending Pennsylvania’s tax dollars on this partisan endeavor.
We are asking that you remove your name from the lawsuit and desist from using the resources of our citizens to reduce the services they receive or increase their taxes. Thank you for taking the time to review this letter.
Very Truly Yours,
Senator Daylin Leach
Published in the Ambler Gazette, Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Letter: Corbett’s move is a waste of money
To the Editor:
The ink is not even dry on the Health Care Reform Act and we see that Pennsylvania Attorney General Corbett is joining the attorney generals of Alabama, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Michigan, Nebraska, Texas, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah and Washington in a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the bill. Great to be in the august company of Alabama and Nebraska!
Is it merely coincidence that all of these just happen to be Republicans? Could they be using our tax money to continue the obstructionism that the Republicans have been waging for over a year to block even the consideration of the bill that finally became law just today?
Perhaps Corbett has it in his mind that he’s running for the governorship of Pennsylvania and he thinks this will play well to his base?
When — and if — he is on the ballot in November, I hope we all remember how Corbett has misused his office and our tax money for such blatantly political purposes.
Ron Stoloff,
Blue Bell
Actual
article.
© 2010 MontgomeryNews.com, a Journal Register Property
From the Ambler Gazette, Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Bill opponents will be harshly judged
To the Editor:
Shame on all those who voted against the health care reform package this past weekend. Come November, I hope voters will remember who was for the people, and who was for the insurance lobbyists.
This is what every Republican member voted for and against: They voted to continue letting insurance companies deny coverage due to pre-existing conditions. They voted against giving health care coverage to 32 million Americans who can’t afford skyrocketing insurance rates. They voted against letting individuals stay on their parents’ health insurance until they reach age 26. They voted against the creation of health exchanges that individuals and small businesses can (but do not have to) join in order to pool their bargaining power and dramatically reduce their insurance costs. They voted against giving tax credits to small businesses to help them do the right thing (i.e., insure their employees). They voted to continue letting insurance companies place a lifetime cap on health benefits. They voted against deficit-reducing measures like eliminating wasteful Medicare practices. They voted to keep in place the Bush/Republican Medicare “doughnut hole” scheme of 2003, which left a giant gap in coverage for seniors.
To defend their outrageous votes they offer a litany of deceitful excuses, such as: The legislation would set up “death panels” to “kill grandma” — it doesn’t. They said it would use tax dollars to fund abortions and care for illegal immigrants — it doesn’t. They said it would mean that big government would make important health decisions for you — it doesn’t. They said it would balloon the deficit — it actually reduces it in the long run. They said it would raise taxes on Americans; this part is true — if you make more than $200,000 per year ($250K for married couples); and many Americans will see reduced taxes in the form of health insurance tax credits. To verify these claims consult the nonpartisan Web sites politifact.com and factcheck.org.
The opponents of health care reform conveniently say they “don’t oppose providing health care to those without it.” Yet, somehow they never do anything about it; even when they had control of Congress for 12 years they did absolutely nothing. They say the president and Democratic leaders refuse to listen to their ideas. Yet, there are several provisions of the bill that come directly from Republican sources, including the clauses that let children stay on their parents’ coverage up to age 26; let families buy insurance coverage across state lines; offer tax breaks for small businesses. These were all GOP suggestions. What’s more, Democratic leaders stripped the bill of one key provision that Republicans objected to — and most Democratic voters strongly supported: The “public option.” This would have made the bill even better by offering an alternative to the greedy insurance companies. But in the name of bipartisanship, the GOP got its way on this too.
Shame on those who voted with the insurance companies and against the American people! History will harshly judge your disgraceful act.
Matt Cooley,
Ambler
© 2010 MontgomeryNews.com, a Journal Register Property
From the Ambler Gazette, Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Letter: Don’t forget: there’s a primary in May
To the Editor:
In attempting to urge citizens to register and vote, last week’s editorial may have given the impression that there is only one election this year – the one in the fall - and that residents need not bother registering until later this year. I hope everyone knows that there are two elections this year and every year – the primary in the spring and the general in the fall. The primary is when candidates vie against others within their own party to secure the spot on the fall ballot. The general election is when the winners of each party’s nomination square off against each other.
This year’s primary election offers many significant choices: For Democrats, will you choose Joe Sestak or Arlen Specter to run for the Senate against the Republican candidate in the fall? In the Governor’s race, will you choose our own Joe Hoeffel or one of the other Democratic candidates from other parts of the state?
Committee people are also selected this year. They are out right now collecting signatures on their petitions in order to represent you in your neighborhood. They are the most local and most visible representatives of your party as they work at the polling places on Election Day and do voter registration throughout the year. If you have any interest in running for this position, it’s not too late to offer your services. Call your party’s county headquarters right away and they will advise you.
Neglect the primary election at your peril because this is your chance to have the greatest impact on candidate selection. Register as soon as you can because this election happens on May 19 and your registration needs to be submitted no later than 30 days before the election. Outstanding candidates may lose out if you do not make your voice heard this spring.
Note: Residents who have registered as Independent or Non Partisan may not vote in the spring primary. I personally think this is most unfortunate and hope that if enough of us express our opinion about this, this rule can be changed. Just another reason to get involved.
Judy Hughes
Blue Bell
Original
article
© 2010 MontgomeryNews.com, a Journal Register Property
From The Times Herald, Friday, February 19, 2010
Controller plans investigation
By KEITH PHUCAS,
Times Herald Staff
COURTHOUSE —Montgomery County Controller Diane Morgan threatened to withhold payment on any professional services contracts that run afoul of the county’s law, according to a letter the controller sent to commissioner Bruce L. Castor Jr. Wednesday night.
Morgan, who plans to investigate accusations that county officials violated Ordinance 98-2, has requested copies of any and all county professional services contracts awarded since January of 2008.
“Based on my duty as the County Controller and under the terms of the County Code, I will not authorize or approve the expenditure of any funds under contracts which may have been awarded in violation of Ordinance 98-2, and any such payments pursuant to those contracts shall be immediately suspended pending completion of my investigation,” according to Morgan’s correspondence.
The controller letter was a response to Castor’s correspondence Tuesday charging that Morgan was not fulfilling her fiscal watchdog role by staying silent after county officials admitted at a Feb. 4 meeting they had not sent out solicitations for legal services for a $35-million bond deal as required by the 1998 ordinance.
Morgan admitted being unaware the 12-year-old ordinance existed. The law, which was put in place to safeguard against political patronage, requires that at least five request for proposals, or RFPs, be sent out to qualified vendors interested in providing services to the county.
Castor, who is not consulted when officials decide on which professional services vendors to award contracts, has alleged deals are being arranged behind closed doors.
Morgan drew the ire of commissioners’ chairman James R. Matthews when she talked about withholding payments to vendors.
“I will enforce this law as it’s written,” she said. “If you want to change it, that’s up to you.”
Matthews, who glared at Morgan sitting two seats away on the dais, would not accept the possibility that she might not pay current contractors who were not solicited for work.
“I’m saying you’re going to honor our contracts,” he said.
Solicitor Barry Miller warned against breaking or voiding any existing contracts.
“There’s no (legal) basis to do that,” Miller said. “I suggest the controller revisit that position.”
The controller repeated her intent to follow the ordinance. In her letter, Morgan cited a state law (Title 16 PA Statutes, Section 1702) that defines a county controller’s function.
“The Controller may only refuse to authorize any fiscal transaction which is, by law, subject to her supervision or control where it appears that transaction is not authorized by law or has not been undertaken according to law, or has not received approval according to law, or as to which he desires upon reasonable grounds to investigate for or has already discovered any. neglect of any officer or other person of the county relating to their public accounts and transactions,” her letter reads.
Commissioner Joseph M. Hoeffel, who championed the ordinance when he was commissioner in 1998 to improve competition for county work, repeated his call for officials to review the law.
“It has not been fully honored over the last 12 years,” he said. “We absolutely want a competitive process ... and full transparency.”
To promote more “openness and transparency” in government, Morgan wants digitize all county documents, including contracts and RFPs, and make them publicly accessible on a Web site. She made the request 18 months ago.
“If we had that system, then the public could see where its money is being spent,” she said following the meeting.
The controller couldn’t predict how long it would take her to investigate the professional services contracts she’s requested.
Original article© 2010 timesherald.com, a Journal Register Property
From the Philadelphia Inquirer, February 8, 2010
Letter: Don't paint all with the same brush
Since an angry letter Tuesday ("What do Pa. lawmakers know about public trust?") did not name the state legislators being criticized, by implication all state lawmakers were painted with the same harsh stroke. Certainly some deserve it, but others don't.
Although one wouldn't know it from some of the sensational headlines, there are honest legislators who truly believe in public service and work very hard at it on a daily basis. Some have left jobs that paid tens of thousands more. Some regularly work 12-, 14-, or 16-hour days. All sacrifice time with their families.
Tarnishing the good apples as if they were the bad ones discourages qualified, well-meaning people from entering the profession and has a deleterious effect on our view of government. If we want improvement, it is up to us to get involved beyond voting once or twice yearly.
Beverly Hahn,
Blue Bell
From the Ambler Gazette
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Letter: Tell Supervisors your feelings on taxes
To the Editor:
It is with a sense of outrage and dismay that I look at the 39 percent tax increase proposed by the Whitpain Board of Supervisors. Whatever could have prompted such an outrageous increase in the township budget, especially in strained economic times as these? Indeed, costs are rising for us all, township government and residents. However, is it necessary to give bonuses and raises when we are so cash-strapped and cannot meet our ordinary obligations? Granted, the township government and their employees are doing a great job and also need to exist, but in a year when even the Social Security COLA is zero can we not forgo these extra payments?
When one considers that everywhere, people are getting less and paying more for their healthcare is it necessary and even fair to pay $18,221 per employee for six employees under the Fire Marshall Group Health Benefits? Is there no other plan which will give decent benefits and cost less? What are the health care costs for the other Township employees? Is the cost for their healthcare benefits also this high? Do our part-time supervisors get full health coverage too?
Our supervisors should have better tried to hold the line on township costs such as construction. Why is Whitpain considering building expenditures of over $400,00--well beyond the budgeted $59,000 (only $245,426 of which will be reimbursed with Solar Project Grant money)?
Sewer fund land and building costs are projected to rise 350 percent over 2009 projected totals. What are these costs and why are we facing these costs this year? Could not costs have been held down and even cut in other areas without endangering public safety and services, as for example, not automatically buying new vehicles for the police department every two to three years, but rather replacing them on an as-needed basis?
Lower Gwynedd has held the line on its expenditures and did not raise taxes. Why didn’t the Whitpain Supervisors do the same? In fact, Whitpain has a rainy day fund, and I wonder why our supervisors did not tap this for at least part of any necessary additional costs incurred. For many of us, this is a rainstorm of major proportion. We need to have supervisors who live in the same world as do we and are aware of the problems which we face in this time of economic downturn.
I hope that many of you will make your feelings known by contacting our supervisors at: Board of Supervisors, Whitpain Township, P.O. Box 800, 960 Wentz Road, Blue bell, PA 19422 and ask them to reconsider by giving us a budget that is realistic, yet accommodates the needs of the citizens of the township and is affordable.
Carol Kreitchet
Blue Bell
© 2010 MontgomeryNews.com, a Journal Register Property
From the Ambler Gazette
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Letter: Increased taxes taint incumbents’ record
To The Editor:
As a resident and taxpayer in Whitpain Township and the Wissahickon School District, I am certainly happy that no Democrats serve on the township board and only one out of nine are on the school board.
Why am I so happy? Because if there were more Democrats on those boards, our taxes would actually be going up. Thank goodness we are protected from outlandish increases.
Oh, wait. Our township taxes are going to go up nearly 40 percent and while the Wissahickon School taxes are “only” going up 1.9 percent. That’s only because of some amazing coincidences: the WSB is eating into its fund surplus by taking out $4 million – incidentally created the last time the board was lead by a Democrat – and receiving $1.3 million from the federal government, a 55 percent increase from last year because of that Democratic President Obama’s Recovery Fund program.
Even with this federal help our taxes are going up. Don’t these township and school board members listen to their Republican leadership? The way to increase revenue is to actually cut taxes. So why are they trying to sabotage our local economy and send our property values down the porcelain drain?
Perhaps it would be a good idea for residents and taxpayers of Whitpain Township and the WSD to remember this in the next election when the incumbent Republicans are sure to begin touting their financial acumen.
Ron Stoloff
Blue Bell
© 2010 MontgomeryNews.com, a Journal Register Property
Letter: Bad decision by the Supreme Court
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
To the Editor:
Want to know the difference between Democrats and Republicans? Just look at last week’s 5-4 U.S. Supreme Court decision that overturned a century-long ban on large corporations and unions from directly injecting themselves in electoral politics. The court split down the middle, with five GOP-appointed justices voting in favor, and three of the four votes against the ruling by the Democratic appointed justices. Republican congressional leaders called it a “victory for freedom of speech.” What it means is that corporations and unions can now spend as much money as they please to elect or defeat any candidate they want. This is perhaps the worst decision ever rendered by the Supreme Court! It will alter our democracy in so many bad ways.
Most people hate political TV ads and you think there is way too much money involved in politics already. Well, this decision has just exploded both those problems. From now on, in the months leading up to every election — whether state, local and national — we are going to be totally swamped with truth-distorting political attack ads day and night.
And moneyed interests will now have a huge impact on electoral outcomes. Imagine the congressman or congresswoman who actually wants to do the right thing. Maybe there is a dispute between what many of his/her constituents need and what some big company wants. All some lobbyist has to do is come to their office and say, “My client has $5 million; they can help to defeat you or help to back you next fall. Your choice, Congressman.” Is that democracy?
Think about this: Contrary to what Republicans have been saying for years, allowing huge corporations to voice their opinions in such an unfettered way actually reduces our freedom of speech. In today’s marketplace of ideas, money is like a giant megaphone. You and I, as individuals, have a normal size megaphone. We can scream out and yet never be heard over the loud and gigantic megaphones that large banks and corporations have always had. Thanks to the Republican-controlled Supreme Court, big corporations’ megaphones just became many times larger; and our tiny megaphones just became miniscule in comparison. Is that democracy?
Republicans see this decision as a good thing because, in their minds, big corporations somehow didn’t have enough of a voice. Are they serious? Do they really think our democracy will be improved by giving more power to the very same big banks and companies that gave us the economic calamity that we are now mired in? The GOP counters that unions will benefit too. Well, if you think that unions can come close to matching the resources that corporations have, I have a certain bridge I’d like to sell you. Make no mistake, the Republican Party is not for common people. They are on the side of the rich and powerful. This ruling makes that very clear. That is not democracy.
I urge all citizens who value true democracy to write to your lawmakers. Ask them to do everything possible to pass legislation to minimize the consequences of this horrible ruling.
Bob Waldman,
Blue Bell
© 2010 MontgomeryNews.com, a Journal Register Property
Letter: Necessary reform is being bogged down
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
To the Editor:
Recent polls suggest that support for health care reform has gone from very high to very low — just as it did in 1993-94 when President Clinton tried to reform our health care system. Yet, when polls ask voters about individual parts of the House and Senate bills they are very much in favor of them.
So what do they oppose? They oppose a caricature of health care reform. They oppose all of the outright lies that have been told about it. They oppose lies like so called “death panels,” which are not in either bill; they oppose the idea of paying higher taxes for it, even though it is clear that both plans are funded either by “Cadillac” health plans or by taxes on very wealthy individuals only. They oppose taxpayer money paying for coverage of illegal immigrants — another lie; both bills strictly prohibit this. They oppose this bill because they think it is “radical,” when in reality it doesn’t go far enough to fix the problems in our current system.
These are all lies, promoted by the insurance lobby and radical right-wing media whose stated agenda is to torpedo Barack Obama’s presidency and return Republicans to power. They don’t care about you and me or the good of our great country despite all their flag waving. They care about power. Do not forget how they abused their power when they had it. They brought our nation to its knees in a near financial meltdown. Now, they are using their power to obstruct everything Democrats propose, unfortunately, even much needed health care and health insurance reform.
So what do the two bills propose? House bill: Has a public office and a national exchange for the uninsured and small businesses to purchase health insurance for much less than they pay now; businesses that have payrolls of more than $500,000 will be fined if they refuse to offer health insurance to their employees; insurance companies are prohibited from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions; eliminates the Medicare “doughnut hole,” adopted under a Republican-controlled Congress that left a giant gap in coverage for seniors; reduces overpayments to doctors; and imposes a 5.4 percent tax on individuals who make more than $500,000 and couples who make more than $1 million per year.
The Senate bill has many of the same provisions as the House bill, with these exceptions: Requires individuals to purchase health insurance (for the same reasons that states mandate drivers be insured — so that the rest of us don’t have to pay for them); extends tax credits to individuals and families earning up to 400 percent of the poverty level; permits states to opt out of the “public option”; establishes health insurance exchanges — a marketplace where individuals, small businesses and others could purchase health care coverage for less money than they currently do; allows children to stay on their parents’ insurance plan until age 26 (currently they are kicked off at age 18 or at college graduation).
So if you are one of the people who “opposes” the proposed health care reforms, which of the things listed above are you against? Perhaps is it just the caricature of lies that has filled the right-wing- dominated airwaves for the last several months that you oppose. Ask any senior citizen if they would give up Medicare. Bet you can’t find one person willing to give up this successful government-run health insurance program.
Don’t let huge health insurance money and the blind greed of Republicans for political power kill our best opportunity to heal a health care system that currently works only for the wealthy and leaves the rest of us in the cold. Rush Limbaugh, during his recent health scare pronounced that, “There’s nothing wrong with our health care system.” Right. When you make $37.5 million a year, everything is just great.
Olga Guerra,
Penllyn
© 2010 MontgomeryNews.com, a Journal Register Property
Letter/News Archives: 2009
Letter: What I'm thankful for ...
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
To the Editor:
As Americans, we have many things to be thankful for. These are just some of the things I gave thanks for this past Thursday: I gave thanks for the fact that I live in a country that gets more things right than it gets wrong. I am thankful that we currently have an administration that is competent, and that for the first Thanksgiving in many years the President is a smart, thoughtful, and decent person. I am thankful that we are finally about to get health insurance reform to fix the most ridiculous “system” (if you want to call it a system) of healthcare delivery one can imagine (The U.S. ranks 37th in patient satisfaction). I am thankful that most Americans are smart enough to know that labels like “socialist” are nothing more than scare tactics, and that the very same label was given to Social Security and Medicare – both of which are now wildly popular, especially with older Americans, which I hope to someday be.
I am ever grateful that this administration has rejected go-it-alone, cowboy diplomacy that got us nowhere. By working with our neighbors we quietly get things done. As evidence I would cite last week’s IAEA 23-3 vote in favor of sanctioning Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Never before has either China or Russia voted in our favor, against Iran. This is a very significant development; without Russian and/or Chinese support, Iran can no longer afford to flout international will.
I am thankful that the Obama administration had the courage to go ahead with the stimulus package earlier this year because almost all economists agree that had we not done this, instead of climbing out of a major recession, we would be in the midst of a minor depression.
I am thankful that we now have a president who does not rush into huge decisions of whether to send brave American soldiers into war without appropriately weighing the pros and cons. The last administration’s rush to war in Iraq on false premises cost this nation dearly in lives and treasure.
The last things I am thankful for are three reputable web sites that challenge falsehoods and outright lies. The next time you receive an e-mail that slams the administration for this, that and the other thing, please search: snopes.com, factcheck.org and politifact.com; the last one has a tab called “Pants on Fire” fibs that expose some of the worst ones. Right now there are so many horrendously false stories being spread one has to wonder why we should believe anything the opposition ever says.
Matt Cooley,
Ambler
© 2009 MontgomeryNews.com, a Journal Register Property
Burton focus on academic successTuesday, October 20, 2009 To the Editor: Election Day is fast approaching, and I would like to take this opportunity to once again thank all of my supporters. I will join all of you at the polls on Tuesday, Nov. 3 as we seek to earn a seat on the Wissahickon School Board. I say we, because my voice is your voice, and together we will put forth the issues that impact our schools, families, and community. As I have said before, I am not a politician. I am still just Val, your friend, neighbor, customer, volunteer, and John and Tori’s mom. It is because of all of you that I have this opportunity to be elected as one of the school directors on the Wissahickon School Board. I am humbled by your trust and loyalty, and I can assure you that I will always be guided by the knowledge that I represent your interests. My approach to excellence in school starts with a basic premise; every child, regardless of circumstances, has the capacity to learn and enjoy a successful school career. Each child that walks through the doors of one our schools holds the key to our success as a community; and they must be aware of that promise. Without thriving, exceptional public schools anchoring our neighborhoods, and developing successful students, we all lose. If, as we proclaim, are a “Community of Learners,” we must live up to that claim. Community, by definition, means common good. To that end, all of us, especially the students, must understand that the success of one student, at the expense of another student’s failure, does not benefit the community. Our teachers must have the freedom to depart from the prescribed lesson plans, so that they are allowed to reach each and every child in the room, and reveal his or her potential. The act of focusing on a student who is struggling, takes nothing away from the classroom. I would suggest it adds an element of cohesiveness among classmates when they are allowed to become a part of the process, as opposed to spectators viewing a distracting sideshow. One of my team’s key objectives is safety in our schools. My concept of safety goes far beyond protecting students from the physical harm of one another. It means ensuring an environment where every student is free from ridicule, embarrassment, and disrespect. There should be no preferential treatment in academics because of extracurricular activities. Every student should be valued for his or her abilities and accomplishments. All decisions made in the schools should be for the benefit of students. We will continue to stand together, as we seek academic success for our children, fiscally responsible decisions for our schools and community, a demand for transparency from the school board and excellence from our educators. Thank you again for your continued support, I have thoroughly enjoyed this experience. I have met some really wonderful people, and I look forward to meeting even more of you. I’ll see you at the polls on Tuesday, Nov. 3, where I will be asking for your vote for myself and the other members of my team, Teresa Williams, and Ron Stoloff. Val Burton Original
letter. Stoloff will bring education experience
|
WSB victory an appreciated honorTo the Editor: I wanted to take this opportunity to sincerely thank all of the people who voted for me on May 19. I really appreciated all the help and support I received during the campaign process. It meant a lot to me to hear your words of encouragement especially after the grueling hours of that day. As a Wissachickon School director, I have served as/on:
As an Ambler resident, I am especially grateful for the approval you have in my past performance, so that I may continue my service to our town. For me, the past eight years have gone by very quickly. However, with confidence, I say the experience has been very rewarding and a growing one. However, the primary is just the beginning and we have unfinished business to take care of to ensure victory in November. As always, my goal has been to ensure the safety and security of our students in addition to making sure all our students receive the quality education they deserve. To those who voted for me in the election I will strive to continue to meet your expectations. However, for those who didn’t I will work very hard to gain your confidence and support. Teresa Williams, The following letter was submitted but not published
in the To the Editor Thanks to many of you, I will be moving on to the ballot in November to run for a position on the Wissahickon School Board. I would like to congratulate all the candidates that were successful on Election Day, but particularly the other endorsed Democrats for the Wissahickon School Board, Teresa Williams, Ron Stoloff, and Chris Cormier. There are many people I would like to personally thank, but today there is a more pressing matter I would like to address. A very disturbing event that was designed to negatively impact the election, and undoubtedly did, has disturbed me. It was brought to the attention of the Democratic Candidates running for the Wissahickon School Board one week prior to the election, that our opponents on the Endorsed Republican ticket paid a visit to the residents of Normandy Farm Estates. Under the leadership of Barb Moyer, our current Vice-President on the Wissahickon School Board, Dawn Roberts and Marjorie Brown arranged a meeting with these senior residents. They brought with them a letter in support of their efforts from current board member Dick Stanton. The purpose of the visit was to put forth a message to these residents that the candidates running on the Democratic ticket would impose a Personal Income Tax, which would severely impact anyone on a pension. Nothing could be farther from the truth and I find it reprehensible that anyone, for any purpose, and in particular, political gain, would dare to frighten seniors. The Democrats were denied equal access to these residents, to set the record straight. Fortunately, I had the opportunity to speak with many of these seniors on Election Day, as these loyal voters streamed steadily to the polls. They all wanted to know if I would vote for imposing a Personal Income Tax on their Social Security or pensions. I looked them in the eyes and assured them that I would not, and I apologized for the outrageous behavior of my opponents. I am very passionate about the protection and respect extended to our seniors, and I will go to great lengths to ensure that no one exploits this demographic in our district. The Wissahickon School Board is supposed to be a bipartisan board of directors that operates in the best interests of students, educators, and residents in the community. In light of this political tactic, it is my position that Barb Moyer and Dick Stanton should apologize, and I respectfully ask that the Republican Party reconsider its endorsement. I further feel that Marjorie Brown and Dawn Roberts have rendered themselves ineligible to represent the best interests of this community and should withdraw their candidacy. Integrity is the least that we can ask of those who represent our interests and our children’s interests. These candidates have shown both a lack of integrity and a blatant disregard for the concerns of some of our most vulnerable constituents. This behavior must be dealt with immediately and deliberately; we must not allow these candidates to blemish our district any further. Val Burton To the Editor: On May 19th voters in the Wissahickon School District will be able to vote for four positions on the Board. I am running for one of them and would like you to know who I am and what I offer you and the students in the District. First, I was a teacher in public school for 35 years and throughout those years was heavily involved in developing several successful reform movements – attempts to make the educational experience better for students. I think it is an excellent idea that someone on the Board know what life is like after the classroom door is closed where theory gives way to reality as only students and teachers are left to interact. No Board member, without this experience, can meet and make judgments about the future of our schools and I plan to share my experiences as we wrestle with all the problems that face modern education. While attending a recent Board meeting I was startled to discover that the Wissahickon School District is investigating the use of Small Learning Communities (SLCs). I found this fascinating: This is what I was involved in for the last 15 years of my carrier. I was one of the founding members of an SLC – then called a Charter. Following that I was a member and then chair of the Restructuring Council in my school as we heard and decided which SLC proposals would be accepted as we moved into Career Centered SLC’s – the very same path Wissahickon is pursuing now. Because of this I feel that I would be an excellent resource for the Board if I am elected. I attended Temple University and received a Masters from Beaver/Arcadia University and was involved in writing and testing curricula for high school. I made many presentations at numerous conferences on the implementation of technology in the classroom and was the technology coordinator at my school. Since my retirement I’ve been involved in a program that recycles computers and offers them at low cost or gives them away for free and have arranged for over 150 students at my former school to get these life changing tools. I loved getting up each morning and heading out to teach and hope that part of my responsibility on the new Board will be to help support that passion in our teachers and lift burdens that come between the teacher and the student so that we can look forward to our students making us all proud of their achievements in the Wissahickon School District. Finally, check out our web site, The Great School Team at www.GreatSchoolTeam.org for more information about me and the others running with me: Theresa Williams, incumbent, Val Burton and Chris Cormier. All three have, had, or soon will have, children in the District. Ron Stoloff, Unpublished but submitted to Ambler Gazette, May 10, 2009 Burton promises fresh approachTo the Editor: My name is Val Burton; I am an endorsed Democratic candidate for the Wissahickon School Board. I am not a politician; I am a parent, friend, neighbor, volunteer, and consumer. I have lived in the Wissahickon School District for 16 years. I have a junior at the high school and a seventh-grader at the middle school. I have volunteered extensively in the district for the past 12 years, and I hope to continue my volunteer work for many years to come. I served on the Home and School Association executive board for three years at Shady Grove Elementary. I have chaired the Executive Board Nominating Committee, Excess Funds Committee, and co-chaired Kids C.A.R.E. Community Service Program, and Grant Writing Committee on behalf of the H&SA. The Wissahickon School District is an intricate mosaic of rich cultural diversity, tasked with improving the discrepancies in achievement, and thereby alleviating the economic disparity that is directly linked to an unsuccessful school career. If this is not tackled head on, its negative effects will reverberate throughout our community. I believe members of the Wissahickon School Board are charged with balancing the success of the schools in the district, committing to transparency and making fiscally responsible decisions on behalf of our students, staff and community. I am mindful of the challenge before me to guard the interests of all parties, and keenly aware of the inherent struggle that can sometimes ensue. However, I believe a healthy and thriving community begins with, and is sustained by, a successful public school system. It is the bedrock from which all subsequent value in the district is measured. It is not without passionate opposition that I adamantly proclaim that every child has the capacity to learn and be a successful student. However, this can only be achieved if we ensure that our curriculum allows for purposeful, diversified, effective teaching. We must also have a commitment from families and community leaders, to donate time and resources, so that students are on a level playing field. I am firmly against continuing processes that have proven to be ineffective or find any student at a disadvantage. I am vehemently opposed to wasteful spending. Fiscal responsibility must be adhered to for the benefit of all constituents. Every financial decision must be an ethical investment that is statistically sound, with measurable profitability that is viewable to the naked eye. To that end, I would seek to employ the most sensible, cost effective methods available to fund any necessary expenditures. Please join me in my effort to ensure transparency throughout the district. I want you seated at the table offering input into the decisions that will affect your family and livelihood. I am appreciative and humbled by the bipartisan support I have received throughout the district. So, it is with great humility that I ask the students, educators, staff, residents, and business owners in the Wissahickon School District to allow me to represent your interests as a member of the Wissahickon School Board. Vote for Val Burton on Tuesday, May 19, 2009, it’s time for a fresh voice and a new approach. Val Burton Burton will bring tireless dedicationTo the Editor: As past co-president of the Home & School Association of Shady Grove elementary, I have had the pleasure of working with Val Burton for more than five years. Val is a woman with a tireless dedication to serving the needs of children in our area. She has actively volunteered her time throughout the district in a variety of capacities. As such, she has a thorough understanding of the needs of our students and faculty. Val is committed to being directly engaged in the activities of the district. Her core belief that every student has the ability to achieve success will be a strong basis for setting policy and standards for the district. As an advocate for our children, she will closely listen and represent all members of the community regardless of party affiliation. She is an independent, free thinker who can bring valuable new perspectives to the issues facing our community. She has earned my respect and admiration and if given the opportunity, I’m sure she’ll earn yours too. Please vote for Val Burton as a candidate for the Wissahickon School Board on May 19. Michele Minnick |
Letter Archives: 2007
From the Montgomery County Democratic
Committee
21 East Airy St., Norristown, PA 19401
610-272-2000
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 27, 2007
Contact: Marcel Groen
(215-918-3557)
MONTCO DEMOCRATIC CHAIR CALLS FOR CASTOR’S RESIGNATION
Norristown, PA (September 27, 2007) – Montgomery County Democratic
Chairman Marcel Groen today issued the following statement:
Today I am calling for the immediate resignation of District Attorney Bruce Castor for abuse of his office and prosecutorial misconduct. As the top law enforcement office in the County, the district attorney’s office is supposed to be used to impartially protect the people of this county. It is not intended to be used as a public relations tool for private political gain. It is not supposed to be used for self-serving press conference after self-serving press conference. It is supposed to be used for trying to keep our citizens safe from criminals who do us harm.
Mr. Castor has used his office in a manner similar to how the Bush administration and Alberto Gonzalez have used the U.S. Justice Department. The District Attorney's office has become a place where only Republicans need apply; a place where staffers are used for political activity; a breeding ground for political ambition, where your status is measured not by the work you do, but by your political aspirations; a place where you have assistant district attorney, after assistant district attorney running for office.
In addition, there are the Rovian actions of the office. Investigations are routinely leaked to the press for political advantage. Mr. Castor destroys the reputations of good people for political gain. Mr. Castor is not satisfied with winning, but must have the kill.
In the most recent case, Mr. Castor doesn’t have the search warrants sealed, because he realizes that if you make it public you can embarrass and hurt without naming names, and you can make political headlines and destroy a political opponent. KYW is leaked the story before there is an arrest, or you hold a press conference to detail the charges. The Matthews Castor political website links to the KYW story hours before Mr. Castor holds his press conference.
When the press called and asked if this investigation was politically motivated, I danced around the question, because I did not want there to be retribution against anyone. That is not the way our legal system is supposed to work, where people are afraid of retribution for speaking out.
We know Mr. Castor and his political supporters have been gloating about “getting” a Democrat for weeks, and have held the results of the investigation for the “right time.” It is curious that the right time was the day after a deluge of press stories criticizing Castor’s running mate, Jim Matthews, for taking tens of thousands of campaign funds from a person convicted of political corruption.
Let me make a few things clear. Joanne Olszewski is one of the finest people I have ever met. The attempt to destroy such a person for pure political gain is criminal. As jury commissioner she has done more to upgrade that office than anyone in history. She has fought hard for the comfort of the jurors, appeared in numerous court rooms to ensure the system was working properly and has made us all proud. In a short time, she has gained the respect of all of the people in the courthouse, mostly Republicans, with whom she works.
As a person she has given tirelessly to civic causes. She has been a leader, not just politically, but also in a variety of civic endeavors in the Flourtown area where her bar is located, and has given to so many causes it's impossible to list them all. Most of her charitable giving has been done quietly and anonymously.
The Democrats in this County are not perfect. We make mistakes, but I believe the people of this County share our values. Let me share some of them with you.
We stand by our friends.
We don't try to destroy good people for political gain. I can assure you that during my term as chairman I have received numerous bits of information that I could have used to embarrass and destroyed a good person’s reputation for political gain. I have chosen not to follow that path. To have done otherwise would have been unfair, inappropriate and would have sent a chilling effect on our political system.
A perfect example is when a prominent Republican elected official in the county became involved in an ugly situation in which a court issued a protection from abuse order against him. Democrats said nothing.
Democrats did not use the situation for personal political gain. Your running mate, Jim Matthews, publicly commended the Democratic party of Montgomery County for respecting the situation.
We run as a team and stand with each other. I couldn't imagine running two people for County Commissioner who need two separate campaigns.
We don't think we're above the law. We don’t make no-bid, sweetheart deals with vendors, and then take over $40,000 in political contributions from the CEO of that company. If the law requires us to bid contracts over $10,000, we do so.
I could go on, but the message is clear. Mr. Castor's personifies politics at its worst. Since he can't be trusted in this political season not to use the DA's office for political gain, he MUST resign today. It is imperative that our law enforcement agencies be impartial and non-political. It sets us apart from the Irans and North Koreas of this world. This is Montgomery County, not Teheran. The voters will speak. They will recognize political shenanigans for what they are.
Letters to the Editor
|
To the Editor: [2007]
In response to the article appearing in the May 2nd
Ambler Gazette, I wanted to offer some additional context to the statement
accurately attributed to me. In lauding the debt approved by the voters in
Upper Dublin for the construction of a new high school, I was
not
suggesting that the Wissahickon School District needed to do the same.
I was, in
fact, expressing my respect for those voters in having not deferred a future
financial obligation to a later generation. It should be noted that the
Upper Dublin referendum represented the first consequential Act 1
initiative to date, and was approved by 62% of the electorate.
The Wissahickon School Board seems to have far less faith in the
electorate. In its tiresome and played out pledge of “No New Taxes”,
the District has quietly paid for expenditures by eroding away its fund
balance. In effect, they are paying for expenditures from past savings.
Ultimately, when the savings well runs dry, they will be forced to do what
they have shamelessly vowed no to do.
In the 2007 proposed budget, the Board projects revenue increases
at $2.6 million, and expenditures increases at $ 3.1 million. This
reflects an expenditure increase of 3.86% over the 2006 budget, and
increased deficit spending of over a half a million dollars. Some history:
in the budget years 2001-2005, no fund balance amount was used to balance
the revenue and expenditures.
In
the 2005/2006 budget, $700,000 was used to balance the revenue and
expenditures. In the 2006/2007 budget, $550,000 was used to balance the
revenue and expenditures. And in the 2007/2008 budget $1,043,000 is used
to balance the revenue and expenditures.
Yet as recently as last week, the incumbent board members declared
their worthiness for re-election on the transparent claim of no increases
in taxes.
While no one would wish for $120 million debt for any school
district, Upper Dublin was up front and honest with its constituents.
Their board trusted their community with pertinent financial information
and encouraged them to vote on the tax increase as informed persons.
One final fact on the budget: in its Five Year Capital Improvement
Plan for 2006 to 2011, the Wissahickon Board has projected capital
spending for their own refurbished offices at $ 2.13 million, but only
appropriated $1.72 for the middle school altogether.
Ironically, all of the fiscal considerations surrounding the budget draw
us all away from what is most important in this election: identifying the
most promising curriculum guidelines and related programs to advance all
of our children in the modern age. My continued faith in the wisdom of the
voters assures me that education will never be sacrificed for what is
fiscally expedient. My entire candidacy for school board membership is
based on ensuring that I will gain the entire community’s insights and
experiences, in order to make informed decisions around teaching and
budgeting. I consider myself lucky to have access to such a diverse and
educated community, and their tremendous insights into the current issues
surrounding our school district.
Patrick Hennessy, Candidate, Wissahickon School District
In their coverage of the September 10th Wissahickon School Board
meeting, the Ambler Gazette reported on the Wissahickon School
District’s Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). As reported, Shady Grove
Elementary and Wissahickon High School have been placed on Warning Status,
as they failed to satisfy one of three mandated indicators directly linked
to No Child Left Behind legislation. As a resident and parent of two
children currently enrolled in the district, I was alarmed by these facts
and inclined to do some additional research.
The AYP measures
include
Both Shady Grove and Wissahickon failed to meet
academic performance goals. A closer look at the data reveals two
immediate concerns: at Wissahickon High School, black students are at a
modest 30.8% proficiency in math, and students overall are at 71.3%
,
which is 3.6% lower than the
previous year. At Shady Grove, reading proficiency scores for children
in the Economically Disadvantaged category had a failing percentage of 42.6%,
which was an alarming 20.6% decline from the previous year. In the aggregate,
students overall at both Wissahickon High School and Shady Grove passed in math
and reading. But Wissahickon High witnessed percentage declines in both Math
(-3.6%) and Reading (-1.3%) from the previous year.
Ironically, concerned parents with children currently attending
Blue Bell Elementary appeared before the School Board at the same
September 10th meeting, and expressed their concerns at the
expanding class sizes in place. Their rhetorical questions remain
important and unanswered: can students expect to achieve academically when
class sizes extend to the upper maximum limit? Can teachers give the
instruction and guidance that they genuinely desire to give when the
numbers are that large? Reading comprehension and math proficiency are the cornerstones of
functional literacy. They are the disciplines from which elegant thought
and abstract discipline reside. They are also the fundamental tools for
the future work force in an age where global competition is our economic
reality. It is imperative that the district address these deficiencies,
not only for the good of our children, but for the preservation of what is
best in our community.
Patrick Hennessy, Candidate, Wissahickon School District
Support Burunda Paul Reiback, Ph.D. Your concerns matter to Sellman I would like to extend my sincere thanks
to all who have supported me in the Borough Council race for Ward 3. I
appreciate you opening your doors and opening up dialogue about the real
issues on your minds that we face in our town. We have had heated,
important conversations about absentee landlords and the declination of
some our neighborhoods due to a several year span of code enforcement
neglect. We agree that there are good codes
already on the books and that a crack down and then diligent monitoring is
expected going forward. We have brainstormed about civic involvement to
see our streets and sidewalks improved for the safety of especially our
disabled and older neighbors, but also for the re-beautification of once
enviable areas of the borough. I heard many times the call for a
full-time Borough Manager with credentials. I will work hard to see this appointment through. The revitalization efforts depend on the works
from this position. (continued) |
We have discussed the great need for maintained and
updated communication channels to provide greater transparency for
taxpayers wishing to be informed, updated and involved in I their local
government. I would like to propose a part time position be created to
update and maintain our website and resurrect a quarterly newsletter.
Those were your most common concerns. But, of course, we've talked about
baseball.
I suggest we work toward good, clean government for our town. You deserve it. Ambler deserves it. PS: I want to thank AJB for the
face to face discussion initiated by Lou Silverblank and Mark
Wenckus last week. We appreciate your promise to remain neutral in
all aspects regarding the upcoming election and for being candid
with your questions and openness to ours. I look forward to
improved relations whether from my front porch or from Borough
Council. A good leader must be well informed - 10/31/2007 To the Editor: In 1994 the newly elected mayor of New York City, Rudy Guiliani, hosted a series of conferences aimed at addressing the city's poor record in advancing economic development and containing the spread of violent crime. Guiliani concluded that these problems were highly complex, and that a broad base of expert opinion was needed to realize viable solutions. To his credit, Guiliani actively asked many people what they thought and what they proposed. Seeking out the opinions of others is one of the common traits of great leaders. Recognizing the importance of timely data is another. In May 2007, the Pittsburgh Business Times published its annual list of the state's best performing public school districts. Here are the highlights: Lower Moreland (7), Lower Merion (10), Upper Dublin (11), Methacton (29), Abington (34), Jenkintown (40), and HatborolHorsham (41). Wissahickon School District? How does 46 grab you? All of the schools mentioned ahead of Wissahickon are within a 20 mile radius of Ambler, Whitpain, and Lower Gwynedd. As a result, it's relatively easy for us to contact and learn from neighboring districts with proven track records of success. In almost all instances, commitment to class sizes under 15 students per Full Time Employee has been the key. Wissahickon, conversely, is approaching 17. There are other important issues to address. Presently, Wissahickon faces specific consequences inherent in No Child Left Behind legislation if it does not remedy the failures documented in two of its seven schools currently in Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Warning status. After two successive years at AYP Warning status, districts must provide a choice of another public school to attend for those affected students at the district's cost. After the third successive year, the introduction of supplemental educational services is mandated, as well as the provision of private tutoring. As taxpayers and concerned citizens, we have a moral responsibility to these students, and a fiduciary responsibility to do better. We can start on the road to victory if we humble ourselves and ask (a) What has been proven to work and (b) what has been the best use of money to support the best approaches. Since the May primary, it has been my pleasure to have spoken to so many of you on the topic of public education. It is clear to me that our community is fortunate to have decent, well-informed citizens that value education and strive for excellence in all of our schools. Please vote on Nov. 6, and remember my pledge to keep you informed, and to bring you back into the discussion. Patrick Hennessy, Candidate, Wissahickon School District Choose effective leaders for WSB - 10/31/2007 To the Editor: The Center for Public Education has published a
document that highlights 5 characteristics of an effective school
board. They are the following: 1) Effective boards focus on
student achievement, These five attributes are clearly five simple factors that can measure success or failure. During the next four years, the Wissahickon School Board will have to effectively develop strategic plan mandated by the state that focuses on quality leadership, artful use of infrastructure, quality teaching, and a continuous learning ethic. The next set of school board directors will have to effectively determine who will be our next Superintendent and Assistant Superintendent to lead our students to become global 21st century thinkers. The next five school board directors will have to effectively work together to continue to raise the standards for academic achievement for all students by recognizing that all stakeholders must playa part in achieving success. On Tuesday Nov.6, you have a choice to vote for five effective
people that should stand for one school community, one school
district and one Wissahickon! Your vote has the power to truly
represent your voice! Local elections can make an impact in local
communities. Stand up and make a difference! I would be honored to
represent you and your interests and your concerns. Ambler's issues can be
addressed - 10/31/2007 Many important issues are facing Ambler, and I hope to shed some light on how I will deal with these issues. For example, Ambler has been operating without a full time professional borough manager for several years. A town that is undergoing the kind of revitalization that we all want, requires a manager who is well versed in writing grant proposals, dealing with many potential development projects, dealing with lawyers, engineers and residents alike. Code enforcement has also been lacking in Ambler for many years. From the unacceptable condition of the ACME market, to the deteriorating conditions in the row home neighborhoods, code enforcement must be a priority if we wish to attract new businesses and new homeowners The conditions in the row home
neighborhoods have been deteriorating for years now. Up until a
couple of months ago council paid little attention to this
situation. We have too many rentals in these neighborhoods, with
too many unrelated occupants in some of these rental units.
Neighborhoods where young families could buy affordable homes, are
now facing the loss of many good, stable families. We must hold
absentee landlords accountable for the maintenance and proper
rental of their properties, while encouraging the transition back
to owner occupied housing. My hope is for Ambler to continue
to grow while preserving the small town qualities that make Ambler
such a special town. We must ensure that Ambler does not become
just another suburb, but rather a destination for the residents of
the surrounding suburbs. We must restore the neighbor- hoods that
are faltering, making them a place where young families can own
their homes. And we must encourage the redevelopment of the rail
corridor in a manner that |
This letter appeared in the June 15th, 2007 Philadelphia Inquirer and was in reply to a letter from Kate Harper (R-Montgomery 61st District)
SEPTA needs help, not a lecture
In a letter June 3, Pennsylvania State Rep. Kate Harper (R., Montgomery), suggests the state is doing a wonderful job in support of SEPTA. She accuses SEPTA Chairman Pasquale T. Deon of "trying to threaten [or] cajole the General Assembly" for more money.
Yet she is against permanent, stable and predictable funding for SEPTA and other transportation systems. She would rather have the yearly "game" of SEPTA's coming hat in hand to the legislature, begging for funding to keep going for another year, and then do it again the next year. This is foolish. No organization can plan effectively without predictable funding.
I am not wedded to any particular funding method; that is for the legislature, SEPTA and the counties SEPTA serves to work out. But to continue the current system is wasteful of time, resources and good will.
To those who don't use SEPTA and are saying, "Why should this interest me?" I say it should. The vitality of southeastern Pennsylvania depends on a dependable mass transit system to move people both into Philadelphia and out to the suburbs.
Already, businesses must pay a premium in salary to get workers because of the time and expense of commuting. This will get worse as the demand for workers increases and the cost of gas for those who drive increases. The suburbs need SEPTA to thrive.
Ron Stoloff
Blue Bell
The writer, a Democrat, ran against Harper in 2006.
This letter appeared in the January 24th, 2007 Ambler Gazette, page 7.
Local Democrats oppose troop surge
To the Editor:
We stand categorically opposed to President Bush's plan to increase troop strength in the Iraq War. Furthermore, we strongly urge Congress to oppose it by any means that the Constitution will permit. The Iraq Study Group, Congress and, overwhelmingly, the American people believe that inserting more troops would be a tragic mistake.
For four years this president has been telling the American public to trust him and his judgment on the most grave of national issues: War. Time after time that trust has been betrayed. Time after time his judgment has proven not only wrong, but also downright negligent. The result has been a calamitous loss of precious life and waste of resources.
Through a series of incorrect assumptions, incoherent reasoning and plain bad decisions, President Bush has placed us in a predicament that has made us less safe and offers no truly good options. The president may be correct in claiming that a withdrawal from Iraq would mean short-term disaster for that country - perhaps for the entire region. Unfortunately, though, adding more troops will not change that. President Bush's war in Iraq is already a total and practically irreversible disaster. And no matter whether we escalate, de-escalate or stand pat, it promises to remain the same or get worse. So we ask: Why squander more lives of our brave soldiers, sailors and Marines? Why waste more taxpayer money? Why dig a deeper hole?
The president ignored his generals in 2003 when they advised that it would take more troops to secure an area as vast as Iraq. And now he ignores his generals when they insist that more troops would do no good - that it is simply too late.
Nevertheless, we are asked to believe - after all of the president's gross miscalculations - that he knows best. This is simply intolerable.
At this stage the best we can hope for is to mitigate the damage done. More troops, more aggression and more disregard of advice will make things worse, not better. The answer - to the extent there is one - lies in prudent, gradual withdrawal coupled with lots of sincere global diplomacy.
The stakes are too high this time to let the president have his way again.
The Wissahickon Democratic Committee Co-Area Leaders,
Shelly Waldman,
Sibby Phiambolis
Top