ShareThis Page
The election cycle |

The election cycle

| Monday, July 14, 2014 9:00 p.m

That Democrat gubernatorial candidate Tom Wolf already is proposing to increase taxes if he is elected comes as no surprise.

It’s what Democrats do: raise taxes to pay for endless government programs. It’s the same blueprint we see in Washington. It’s an effective strategy, especially after a Republican spends four years cutting back programs and controlling spending.

This is pretty much standard practice in two-party politics. We elect someone who spends like a drunken sailor. We get fed up, toss him out and elect a guy to stop the insanity for some temporary austerity. Later, we boot him out for not spending enough. Rinse and repeat.

It’s too bad there is no strong third voice in our state government. Of course, we all know one of the few things the two parties work together on is the effort to quash any possible third party. This allows them to maintain their stranglehold on power, so all they must do is be satisfied taking turns shafting the citizens.

One thing neither entrenched party wants is someone asking tough questions — questions like: “Why are we paying so many hidden taxes, such as auto emission testing fees, when only a tiny fraction of cars fail?” or “How did our legislators manage to turn a profitable turnpike into a giant albatross?”

Don’t expect answers from either side in the campaign ahead.

Tim Kaczmarek

Natrona Heights

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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