Thursday, April 06, 2006

Concerned Taxpayers Group endorses candidates

The Concerned Taxpayers’ Group PAC of Livingston County has made their endorsements. Overall, four people were endorsed.

For Howell Schools, we endorse John Arthur and Wendy Day.

For Hartland Schools, we endorse Nora Kessel and Dennis Tierney

The Concerned Taxpayers Group’ extended invitations to all of the candidates of contested school board races. Of the fourteen candidates who received questionnaires, ten candidates chose to be interviewed. Every candidate in Howell chose to be interviewed and I tip my hat to all of them for that.

We used a math system in our endorsements. Our five PAC members all graded the choices individually. All the scores were averaged out, and the two highest acceptable scores in the district received our endorsement. Our grades were based on eight core questions, with a couple of extra core questions depending on the school district.

Our PAC board was majority independent, and one of our active republicans, Bill Johnston, was by his own choice not a voting member on our PAC board. I was a voting PAC member, but I did not grade on partisanship as both Republicans and Democrats got us into the schools’ mess, and I am looking for fiscally responsible candidates to get us out of this mess. I am a Conservative first, Concerned Taxpayer Second, and Republican third.

Speaking for myself and not the Taxpayers’ Group - John and Wendy will have my vote. Jim Pratt is my third choice, and while I will not speak for others, one question made the difference among those in my own scorecard. It was close. Of those three, it is a case of good vs. best. Phil Westmoreland, Valerie Webster, and Dennis McGuire all seem like nice people, and all of these people I think will be an improvement over at least one, if not two of the incumbents at Howell who are stepping down. I did not see an arrogance factor in any of those six candidates. Howell schools will see an improvement in its board, no matter who wins election this May.

UPDATED - I added a School Board Poll as well.

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

To view interviews on-line with all six Howell School Board candidates, and listen to what they have to say about various issues, visit this website:

http://hubtv.tv and then click on the "more" next to the school board candidate interviews

Kevins said...

Gee, Wendy Day and John Arthur got the endorsement, with Jim Pratt in third. Is anyone surprised? Not me. It was a foregone conclusion. It’s laughable at best, dishonest at worst, when you claim party affiliation had nothing to do with the endorsement, and then you claim something as subjective as an endorsement interview is based on math. Please, Dan, you don’t really think the voters are really that stupid do you? I guess you do. I guess the republicans don’t want nonpartisan races.

It’s even more baffling that you picked those two after watching the taped interviews.
Wow. I already knew I wasn’t going to vote for any candidates who were members of the so-called “love” pac because they are all one-issue candidates and that issue is discrimination. But after watching the interview I feel so much better about my decision. The most important issue facing every school in the state is funding, and Arthur doesn’t even understand how Proposal A works. Somehow, he says I should vote for him because he’s on the county gop executive committee, and he’s tight with Valdez Garcia. Apparently, his most important issue is the light stands in the HHS parking lot. Then, he goes on to slam developers and wants impact fees. He kind of sounds like a liberal, which is good, but unfortunately that is the only liberal position he embraces.

I agree with Day on some things, like when she says she’s a right-wing extremist with an agenda. She homes schools her children, and to me that seems a little hypocritical. She wants to tell other people how to educate their children. Her reason for taking them out of HPS schools I understand even less. She said took her kids out of the schools because her husband was deployed to Iraq. Being a military wife is not easy, but for 20 years I have seen them cope with numerous extended deployments with courage and grace. I don’t underhand the correlation between a deployment and taking kids out of the school. It didn’t take long for me to figure out she was a republican when she took a shot at the newspaper. The blame the messenger is an old gop smear campaign. I also didn’t understand her take on regulations, and maybe she needs to run for federal office instead of school board. A do agree with her about “no child left behind” being too much useless regulation.

I liked Valerie Webster’s educational background, and she clearly has a grasp of the funding issue. Both Phil Westmoreland and Webster also knew about the MASB qualification process, which the endorsed candidates had no idea about. It was also refreshing to see the other candidates ran because they wanted to improve the schools not because they were pissed off.
Do you want to guess who gets the “love” pac endorsement? I’d bet the farm on that on.

Republican Michigander said...

Well Kevin, I don't expect you to believe me, but I didn't except your support anyway, and in fact I would worry if we did support the same people.

Our PAC was majority independent. At least three of the voting members were independent, and I suspect there was a fourth indy as well. I was also the only voting member on that board who knew John and Wendy (as Bill did not vote). At best, you could theoretically claim one "biased" vote. Our PAC leader was also an independent.

As for the math system, that's exactly what we used. We had eight core questions for the candidates. We also had two Howell specific questions and one Hartland specific question. We rated all the candidates A,B,C,D,F per "stance" depending on their answers and statements. Two of them were weighed double.

Lastly, I have no idea the political affiliation of Nora Kessel or Dennis Tierney. For all I know, they may be democrats. They may be republicans. They may be independents. I have no idea. All I do know is that they graded the best on the interviews for the Hartland candidates and have earned our endorsement.

The number one issue for me is fiscal responsibility. Currently, that's not being accomplished, and one of the incumbents (A Republican if I may add) is the loudest at passing the buck and running his mouth about lawsuits. Let's get our schools on the right track and hold our boards accountable to us, the taxpayers.

Anonymous said...

Fiscal responsibility is a Democratic value, not a Republican one! Republican's think cutting programs for children and the elderly is fiscal responsibility.

They believe that borowing until you have a huge debt that we know owe to China is fiscal responsible. You have no right to ever claim fiscal responsibility as a Republican value. It's a lie.

Huge tax cuts for millionaires who have made their millions in our country need to pay their fair share and they do not. This is why we have the problems we have today.
It is stunning how irrresponsible the Republicans have become.
It is like cutting the SBT without creating another source of revenue! It's irresponsible and very Republican.

Republican Michigander said...

There wasn't a balanced budget in the first place until the Republicans took over congress back in 94.

And then in Michigan, we had the Taxman himself, Jimmy Blanchard who left us billions in debt.

Democrats are about as fiscally responsible as they are pro-gun - Talk one way and vote the other.

Kevins said...

What a joke. All of your sleight-of-hand about math formulas, voting members and majority independent are nothing but camouflage. The endorsement was in the bag when you asked the first question;. What’s your party affiliation? You have turned a nonpartisan race into a one-party, political race. Like you said when the county gop endorsed the same candidates, republicans endorse republicans, but the problem is it’s a nonpartisan race. As for the Hartland race, I don’t know anything about, nor did I ever say one word about it.

As for the balanced budget, that was primarily President Clinton’s hard work. It was Clinton that made the hard choices against a hostile, and I mean hostile, Congress. It was Clinton who stood up to snoot gingrich, who shut the government down, and the American people saw what gingrich was really about. I was in the military then, and many of us had to struggle to support our families without a paycheck while snoot shut the government down to show how powerful he was.

And I think you’re confusing James Blanchard with john engler. I agree with you that Democrats are fiscally responsible, and republics are not. If you need any proof of that, take a look at this White House and the Michigan Congress. By the way, Democrats are pro-Second Amendment, not pro-gun.

Republican Michigander said...

The Taxpayers' Group did not ask party affiliation. It is a multi-partisan PAC.

Democrats pro-2nd Amendment? That's why they run so-called hunters like anti-freedom stalwart John Kerry for president who votes to ban all centerfire ammunition. Legendary anti-freedom leaders Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow are also anti-constitution and anti-2nd amendment.

Kevins said...

Doesn’t it seem funny that you jump on something you can defend with name calling instead of addressing real issues and questions because you have no ground to stand on?
Fine, I understand Dan. First question. You say it’s multi-partisan, and that doesn’t make it so.
Second rant. The answer is yes. Sen. John Kerry is not “ant-freedom.” It’s so funny you call Kerry that when bush has chipped away at the Bill of Rights is his self-proclaimed “war or terror” yet you say nothing. Again, where in the Constitution does it guarantee “centerfire ammunition?”
Senators. Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow may be “Legendary” and leaders, but they are neither anti-freedom, anti-constitution nor anti-2nd amendment.

John Doe said...

Dan, why do you let this idiot kevins post here? He should have been banned a long time ago.

Kevins said...

Hell, john, I’d ban me too after I keep calling you guys on your misinformation, inaccuracies and lies. It wouldn’t really bother me to be banned, I’d get a lot more work done, but I can’t let some of this stuff pass without setting the record straight.

Anonymous said...

Ban Kevin? The only voice of reason? What happened to fair and balanced?