Bush hides gifts for rich behind small gifts to poor

Bush hides gifts for rich behind small gifts to poor
EDITOR:
The campaign for the 2002 congressional election is starting to heat up, and voters are faced once again with the task of trying to find the truth behind the political spin.
This election is very important to President Bush because if Republicans can gain control of both houses, he will have a green light to carry through his agenda. So he has stepped out of his role as national hero and resumed his role as partisan politician. He is once again promoting the centerpiece of his administration: massive tax cuts for wealthy individuals and corporations. Originally these cuts were to come from the budget surplus but now he wants to add them to budget deficits.
According to a report in the Jan. 6 Vindicator, Bush has figured, using the convoluted logic of political spin, that those who oppose continuing his tax cuts are trying to raise taxes, and he is quoted in the report as throwing down the gauntlet with "Not over my dead body will they raise your taxes."
Bush is trying to focus attention on his efforts to help the unemployed and blaming Democrats for blocking his stimulus bill which would have provided aid to those who had lost their jobs. The truth is the Democrats wanted more aid to the unemployed without the large tax cuts to wealthy corporations.
Bush has a habit of trying to hide his big gifts to the wealthy behind small gifts to the middle and lower classes. Do we want to give him a green light for his program of welfare to the wealthy? Or do we want to protect the interests of the common people? The 2002 congressional election is important and we should turn out and vote for what we believe are the best interests of the country.
PAUL and ANNE MARY GAMBLE
New Wilmington
Austintown trustees need to understand home rule
EDITOR:
The Jan. 15 article relating to the adoption of a limited home rule government in Austintown Township should serve as a wake-up call to the residents of Austintown. The trustees represent in the article that they are unsure of the rules relating to the termination of home rule.
If the triumvirate cannot understand how the form of government is terminated how can the citizens of Austintown believe that the trustees have effectively researched the home rule issue or that the trustees are prepared to execute this form of government?
Section 504.03 B of the Ohio Revised Code (Termination of limited home rule government) states that home rule can be terminated at any time by an initiative petition and that "If a limited home rule government is terminated under this section, the board of township trustees immediately shall adopt a resolution repealing all resolutions adopted pursuant to this chapter that are not authorized by any other section of the Revised Code." (O.R.C. 504.03 D).
Perhaps our elected officials should read the statute before attempting to change the people's government.
M.J. DILTS
Austintown
Like proposals of the past, center is doomed
EDITOR:
When is enough enough? The squabble about the convention center evokes a sad history about our once great city. I returned to Youngstown in 1977 after serving in the Navy for 20 years. That was also the year that the steel industry in our town died.
There have been several proposals to rejuvenate our fair city: The dirigible plant that got me through my 40s. That fiasco surrounding the effort to locate the Saturn plant here got me through my 50s. Now that I have reached my 60s, we have been promised another project -- a convention center -- that will undoubtedly die with the dissection of the 17th Congressional District.
So it really doesn't matter who is large or who is in charge. The convention center will probably die a slow and agonizing death, much like our city has been doing the past 30 years. I wonder what the city has planned for my 70s?
JOHN ZORDICH
Youngstown