Allentown's Fiscal Cliff

By City of Allentown Finance Director Garret Strathearn

There's been much said recently about the recommendation to use a concession lease of the City's water and sewer utilities to address Allentown's pressing unfunded pension liability.  There has not been much said about the consequences of not doing it. As the City's Director of Finance, it is my responsibility to inform all of our residents, taxpayers and business owners of the very serious nature of these consequences.

Allentown's unfunded liability represents a $200 million and growing legally binding full faith and credit general obligation debt of the City.  If no action is taken, the City's finances will be precarious for decades to come.  Our state-mandated annual payments on this debt, our Minimal Municipal Obligation (MMO), have risen enormously.  Those payments will soon consume close to $30 million of our $90 million General Fund budget.  In short, Allentown is facing a financial tsunami of seismic proportions. 

The amount of our MMO is directly driven by the size of our unfunded liability.  We must either eliminate - or at the very least - significantly reduce it.  Without this relief, the city's ability to provide the breadth and quality of services Allentown residents have come to expect and deserve will be drastically reduced.

Unfortunately, our situation only gets worse with time.  A series of intricate actuarial changes in the way pension obligations are calculated and measured by standard setting and rating authorities will soon compound the seriousness of our situation. 

The significant savings initiatives the city has put into place over the past six years have been very beneficial.  Yet these steps are equivalent to repairing a house room-by-room.  It's now time to permanently strengthen the foundation.  Without that, the whole place will collapse under its own weight.         

We cannot save, borrow, tax or invest our way out of this problem.  For example, it would require close to a 100% real estate tax increase to just keep pace with our growing minimal pension payments.  Yet, this would have no impact at all on eliminating the problem; the debt caused by our pension plan's unfunded liability.  It's equal to making a minimum payment on a huge credit card balance; it gets you nowhere.  Taking this approach is irresponsible financial management and will lead to crippling long-term consequences for all Allentown stakeholders.  

After much research, study and evaluation of several options, it was decided the most prudent, cost-effective financing tool for the City to address this formidable problem is a concession lease that leverages the equity of our water and sewer operations in order to receive a sizeable upfront payment to reduce or eliminate our unfunded liability. 

This is the best option we have to address the City's fiscal crisis. If this option is not implemented, in less than 24 months Allentown will be another PA city making ugly headlines about bankruptcy and a lack of political will to address its obligations. We will not allow Allentown to become another Harrisburg, Scranton or worse yet Stockton, California.

We fully understand the enormous responsibility that comes with this recommendation.  A team of the country's most respected and experienced legal, financial, engineering and technical professionals has been assembled to help the City meet this challenge.  This team has been laser-focused on preserving the excellence and dependability of Allentown's water supply; including compliance with environmental standards and technical expertise; conducting thorough due diligence; and carefully crafting a concession agreement which includes a structured rate schedule and provisions for monitoring and enforcing water quality and performance standards. 

Allentown is on the road to sustained economic recovery and stability. With this option, and working with City Council and the City Controller, we can eliminate or substantially reduce our unfunded pension liability debt, stabilize our tax rate for years, and keep our important water and sewer assets in good order, condition and repair for decades to come.

I encourage you to review the information on the city's website.
http://www.allentownpa.gov and click on the Water/Sewer Concession icon. 

Also, please watch the following video outlining the details of both our pension crisis and our proposed solution. 
http://www.youtube.com/embed/YDSIbFqElDk.   

While we did not create the pension liability problem, it is our responsibility to resolve it.  Lyndon Johnson said it best, "Yesterday is not ours to recover but tomorrow is ours to win or lose." We truly believe the proposed concession lease is the best solution to preserve and protect Allentown's future.  This is a fiscal cliff we CAN -- and MUST avoid.

Marijuana Legalization is Dangerous to Pennsylvania's Youth

By Doyle Heffley, State Representative of the 122nd Legislative District
 
Pennsylvania's drug-induced deaths rank higher than the national average. In fact, a few years ago, more than 1,800 residents of Pennsylvania died as a direct consequence of drug use, compared to the number of Pennsylvanians who died from motor vehicle accidents (1,604) and firearms (1,325) in that same year.
 
In Carbon County alone, there's been a sharp increase in drug overdose-related deaths since 1996.  In 2007, four adults died of drug overdoses in our county. That figure spiked significantly in 2010, when 18 county residents, including one person under the age of 21, died of drug overdoses.
 
With marijuana being the second most abused drug in Pennsylvania, I can't help but wonder why some state lawmakers are pushing legislation to legalize recreational use of this gateway drug.
 
State Rep. Daylin Leach (D-Montgomery), in his recent opinion-editorial, "Legalize Marijuana: We're Locking Up Pennsylvanians for No Reason at Great Cost," said the only crime committed by those who smoke marijuana is "smoking a plant which makes them feel giddy," and that the perception of marijuana being a gateway drug is false.
 
Well, here are the facts.
 
A 2012 Yale University study, which appears online in the Journal of Adolescent Health, showed that alcohol, cigarettes and marijuana were associated with an increased likelihood of prescription drug abuse in men ages 18 to 25. In women of that age, marijuana use was also linked with a higher likelihood of prescription drug abuse.
 
More specifically, the Yale researchers focused on a sample of more than 55,000 18- to 25-year-olds. Of those, about 12 percent reported that they were abusing prescription opioids. Of the group abusing these drugs, more than 34 percent had used marijuana. Among both men and women, those who had used marijuana were 2.5 times more likely than those their age who abstained to later dabble in prescription drugs.
 
Perhaps it's a mere coincidence that the most abused drug in Pennsylvania is heroine? After all, the increase in prescription drug abuse is fueling a rise in heroin addiction, according to a recent NBC News report. A growing number of young people who start abusing expensive prescription drugs are switching to heroin, which is cheaper and easier to buy.
 
According to Pennsylvania's most recent "Youth Survey Report" results, nearly 20 percent of students in grades six, eight, 10, 12 across the Commonwealth admitted to using marijuana at least once in their lifetimes. More than 5 percent of those students also admitted to abusing painkillers.
 
Marijuana legalization brings questions to the minds of parents and causes confusion for our children. Frighteningly, it can also cause the misperception that marijuana is not a harmful drug.
 
Studies have shown that teen marijuana use can aggravate depression and affect the pre-frontal cortex of the brain, which is not fully developed in teens. The list of negative affects is long, but that message can be challenged in the minds of our youth with marijuana legalization.
 
It is important that parents in Carbon County and the entire state keep talking to their kids about the harmful effects of marijuana and educate themselves on marijuana facts.
 
I am hosting a free Carbon County Drug and Alcohol Awareness Expo on Thursday, April 18, from 6-8 p.m. at the Lehighton Area High School, for parents and educators to gather more information on substance abuse.
 
Keep the message straight with the youth across the Commonwealth: Despite talks of legalization, marijuana is still a dangerous drug.

North Whitehall Airport Matter

In early January, the body overseeing zoning for North Whitehall Township denied the author permission to establish a heliport. View article on wfmz.com.

 

By Michael Selig, MD, FACC, CFI-H - The issue in this case, is that the zoning ordinance lists private airports as a reasonable and permitted commercial use by special exception in the AR zoning district.  An airport is inclusive of heliports or helicopter use by definition of the Ordinance and the State Bureau of Aviation.  The ordinance that allows airports was determined and written into law with extensive deliberation by legislation. The ordinance already considered the potential impact on the community by limiting the number of flights is just 15/week.  There are 2 private heliports in North Whitehall.

If people object so strongly to airports, then they needed to undergo the proper procedure to remove it from the ordinances, so individuals such as myself do not waste their time and money to pursue what is a listed and permitted use.  If people are so opposed to having airports/heliports in their area, they needed to review the ordinances ahead of buying their property and find a dwelling elsewhere.  This goes to Usufruct, the right under the constitution to enjoy ones property according to listed uses.

The land mass, surrounded by farmland and elevation of this property provides a large natural buffer.  It was selected for just that reason. The helicopter is only a single engine, 2 bladed helicopter, about half the size of the medivac helicopters (twin engine, 4 bladed) the Townspeople kept relating to and nearly half the noise level; to that of a lawn mower.

This hearing became a venting session and character assassination vs dealing with the matters of law.  North Whitehall residents have limited knowledge pertaining to these legal matters and to helicopters, so it became an emotional issue for them.  Many local people were rallied up by a low income mobile home park owner, who lives in another Township and financially benefits from her property.  She was worried about her mobile park income, when her mobile home park has greater negative effects on property values.  Private airports and heliports increase property values. Look at how many of them are in Somerset, NJ where some of the most beautiful estates in the country are located.

The principle purpose for purchasing this property was for the Airport.  Before the purchase of the property I spoke with the zoning officer, we reviewed the ordinances who stated he did not see a reason for not allowing it and wrote a letter stating this.

I have served this community for the last 25 years as a solo, private practice cardiologist, did cardiac catheterization for 15 years and genuinely have concern about our community.  Obamacare has closed down most all private practice in our area and has negatively impacted my private practice.  Seeing this trend, I have been transitioning into the helicopter business I started with a friend in year 2000.

Not only do the residents of North Whitehall live in microcosms of indifference towards organ donation, shortages, and disease processes that necessitate the need for transplantation; it is apparent that they are prepared to preserve their "quality of life" without regard to others.  These same people spent several sessions proclaiming their concern only for themselves yet were unconcerned about the 12 years of prior EPA violations on the 309 property, a litany of violations that contaminated their streams and wildlife.  Not one of those people protested or requested remediation of that destruction, not the nurse, the mobile home park owner, or the agricultural land barrens.  Lost in the shuffle was the primary reason for the airport, to provide low cost transport of donor organs and advocacy services so I can continue to promote and preserve life.  This requires at times, rapid access to the aircraft and rapid departure.  Living on the property and avoiding the tower control of ABE allows that.

The matter is not yet closed, I believe my rights were violated; therefore I will pursue a request for reconsideration or appropriate appeals.  I suspect the Common Pleas will not grant me relief, but perhaps at the Commonwealth or Supreme Courts where the matter can be looked at purely as a matter of right and a matter of breach of law, to see if the written law has been properly applied. 

 

Learning from Sandusky Case

October 9, 2012

Dear Editor,

For many, the sentencing of Jerry Sandusky for his sexual abuse of 10 boys over 15 years can't come soon enough. Sandusky's abusive behavior and Penn State's initial response has been a painful reminder of ways in which adults and organizations fail to protect our vulnerable children. The unprecedented NCAA sanctions against Penn State and the more general condemnation of some college’s “over the top, win at any cost" culture of sports has been an eye opener. Our surprise has not been that this culture exists, but with the fact that it can so dramatically compromise the safety of our children.

For all that is disturbing about this case and all those that have been harmed, there is the potential for good to come from what we have learned.

Estimates suggest that each day tens of millions of youth participate in activities that could be made safer by systematic prevention activities. While many organizations already incorporate prevention efforts, ALL organizations working with children or teens would benefit from stronger screening policies, regular self-assessment, and greater efforts to empower staff to keep youth safety in the forefront. The Sandusky case also reminds us that we need to do more to educate parents and the public about the everyday role that they can play in creating safer environments for children. SARCC is committed to ending sexual violence by educating adults and children in how to prevent violence by learning the skills necessary to be a good bystander. We can’t do this work alone. It takes a community to change this norm.

In the long run, the real tragedy of the Sandusky case will be measured by how we respond to this tragedy. Child sexual abuse is preventable and there is a role for all of us. Take time today to find out what you can do in your community to make the world safer for all of our children.

Sincerely,

Jenny Murphy-Shifflet
President/CEO
SARCC

For additional resources, visit SARCC’s website www.sarcclebanon.org or www.sarccschuylkill.org to volunteer.

Voter ID Needed To Combat Voter Fraud

By U.S. Rep. Charlie Dent (PA-15)

In several Pennsylvania newspapers, I've recently read letters to the editor and opinion pieces opposing our Commonwealth's new voter ID law. Many of these essays erroneously claim voter fraud is a rarity in Pennsylvania, making the new law unnecessary. The truth is voter fraud has a long and well-documented history in our state. Want proof?

In 2007, canvassers working for ACORN in Berks County filed fraudulent voter registration forms to qualify for pay bonuses from the organization, resulting in a prison sentence for one perpetrator. In 2008, fraud occurred in nearby Dauphin County when an ACORN employee similarly filed more than 100 bogus registrations over the course of a single week. Within the last few years, numerous well-documented cases like these have been investigated across Pennsylvania.

Regrettably, the Commonwealth's largest city, Philadelphia, has developed a deplorable reputation for incidents of voter fraud. Many of us remember when U.S. District Judge Clarence Newcomer unseated State Senator Bill Stinson (D-Phila) in 1994 after it was discovered widespread voter fraud -- perpetrated through the absentee ballot process -- helped Stinson steal an election from Bruce Marks (R-Phila). Philadelphia's most memorable case of fraudulent activities is well documented in court records, the Philadelphia Inquirer and other regional media outlets.

In the early 1990's, Pennsylvania had a sensible policy of purging individuals' names from the voter rolls if they had not voted within a reasonable time period. Consequently, in a few weeks we are likely to learn that in Philadelphia there will be tens-of-thousands of more registered voters than citizens of voting age. Sadly, this should come as no surprise, as better than 100 percent turnout has been reported in some voting precincts in Philadelphia during recent Presidential elections. While the purging of voter rolls ensured those who died or relocated were no longer registered, even that practice could not guarantee the identity of legitimate voters.

Unfortunately, voter fraud is not isolated to Pennsylvania and has an inglorious history in many states. How can we forget Cook County, Illinois, where in the 1960 presidential race, ballots were miraculously cast by countless deceased voters. Or New York City, where in 1993 the Rudy Guiliani campaign for mayor famously witnessed individuals riding buses from poll to poll to cast multiple votes.

And just like Pennsylvania, voter fraud remains a serious problem across the country today. In 2008, Senator Al Franken (D-MN) defeated incumbent Senator Norm Coleman (R-MN) by a mere 312 votes. Later, it was revealed over 1,000 convicted felons, a population ineligible to cast ballots, voted in the Minnesota election -- enough votes to affect the outcome of the race. And just a few days ago, a Democratic Congressional candidate in Maryland was forced to abandon her campaign when it was revealed she voted in both Maryland and Florida during the 2006 general election and 2008 presidential primaries.

In the United States, the principle of one man one vote is sacrosanct. A fraudulently cast vote negates one cast by an honest American. I believe it is imperative we not only count every vote, but ensure the integrity of every vote. While some will claim voter fraud is not a serious enough problem to warrant the new law and argue it will fail to eliminate all fraudulent activity, it certainly is a reasonable approach to achieving greater integrity in our democratic process.

Other than far left political activists and media antagonists, I have discovered few reasonable people believe the requirement to present photo ID when voting is an electoral barrier. In fact, the proposal has garnered widespread public support throughout our region, where residents are accustomed to presenting photo ID to cash a check, board an airplane, or buy a beer at an Phillies game.

Iran, a Nuclear Bomb and Why a Sixteen Year Old Thinks They Shouldn't Have It

By Nicholas Mellen

After tumultuous years of proliferation drove our planet to our current state of mutually assured destruction, the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran refuses to end their quest to enter the world arena of sorts.  Nuclear deterrence is at this point on our planet a side program that governments have to maintain in a global strength contest.  Weaponization of a nuclear energy program in Iran is a waste of time both for the government of Iran and for the countries that will inherently feel the duty to deter the Iranian strike capability.  To analyze this I visualize three scenarios: the first being sanctions on Iran fail to force the government to abandon its program and Iran proceeds to publicly test a nuclear weapon; the second being sanctions force the government of Iran to continue development but only to a breakout capability discussed later; and third being sanctions on Iran succeed to force the government to end their nuclear program. 

Scenario #1
"Iran tests nuclear device!" reads international headlines as the Iranian government displays a successful nuclear test on national television.  This scenario has most likely brought Iran already into a deep world of trouble.  Israel, with an already unchecked nuclear capability in the region, has likely stepped up efforts to infiltrate and attack Iran's nuclear program, possibly with full scale attacks such as bombing of facilities and political assassinations.  If Iran would even attempt to retaliate to any of these activities outside of influencing terrorist groups, resources and manpower for a nuclear program would dry up instantly as facilities would be bombed with precision by Israel and the human element of innovation would be gone as well.  So, inevitably in this scenario, Iran weathers significant attacks upon its infrastructure and has a government that with all of its anti-Israeli rhetoric does not attack Israel.  This part is not impossible as the ayatollahs are still sensible officials who want to ensure the survival of their nation and culture. 

The government of Iran now faces issues much greater than before the test.  Unlike other deterrence scenarios referenced by officials such as India and Pakistan or the United States and the Soviet Union, Iran's likely minimal nuclear program is both deterred and overwhelmed by Israel and its ally the United States.  For perspective, if a nuclear volley were launched at Israel, and the United States wanted to both deter the threat and attack Iran, it could do so with merely a Virginia class submarine and the current naval fleet already stationed in the Middle East supporting operations in Afghanistan.  If Iran develops a nuclear program, they are not deterred; they simply possess an excuse to have nuclear weapons used against them.  Beyond that, the influence of the United States and its Western allies on the world stage will likely demand even tighter sanctions, to a point likely worse than sanctions imposed on North Korea.  With a nuclear weapon, the ayatollahs are inviting their society to suffer from a lack of medical supplies and starvation.  Iran has no ability to compete on the world stage economically or militarily, and its people likely foster resentment for the government because of its actions, outside of the current youth who resent government policy. 

Scenario #2
"Iran possesses breakout capability" tops international headlines as the Iranian government has successfully deployed nuclear reactor facilities across the country and through this enterprise has developed the necessary infrastructure to build and test a nuclear bomb, yet reserves the ability to do so at the moment.  This scenario invites similar heat from the Israeli government with respect to infiltration and attacks on scientists and facilities and invites a similar response from the rest of the world with a quest for transparency.  The transparency argument splits two different ways.  For a true and swift breakout capability, Iran must have facilities that are producing highly enriched uranium which has no use in nuclear energy.  Facilities which produce such a unique enrichment of uranium would have to be hidden very well to keep international observers from discovering them and moreover Western intelligence from finding them.  Therefore with the lack of resources to build more enrichment facilities either underground or well hidden above ground, it is unlikely Iran would allow international observers to accurately gauge the extent of their nuclear program.

There is though a second transparency scenario, in which Iran develops less extensive infrastructure for weaponization and does not proceed to manufacture highly enriched uranium or develop test sites and other necessary facilities.  With this, Iran is poised to allow international observers to witness a program that at that very moment solely provides for a system of nuclear energy.  There is though an obvious downside to the Iranian government, in which developing a nuclear weapon with sufficient knowledge of the technology would take measurably longer than the first transparency scenario, as uranium would have to be enriched and weapons-specific facilities would have to be constructed, all with the full knowledge of the world that these events were occurring.  All evaluated, a breakout capability scenario invites still more trouble to Iran then the weapon itself is worth.

Scenario #3
International headlines read "Iran abandons nuclear program!" as the government of Iran shuts down all reactor and enrichment facilities and slowly invites international observers to evaluate the extent of their program and negotiate the removal, repurposing and destruction of facilities and other infrastructure related to the Iranian nuclear program.  Sanctions are dropped against Iran promptly after all fissile material exits the country or is properly secured, while Western nations reopen diplomatic channels.  Immediately, Iran and its people are in a much more secure and stable situation, and can continue normal economic functions such as oil exports and foodstuffs imports.  This scenario truly is the best for Iran, as the government has the opportunity to bring nationally unprecedented economic growth and prosperity as seen in other oil rich Middle Eastern nations.  Nearly all nations on the planet consume a large amount of oil and oil rich nations should be in a position to benefit from this.  Iran has a largely inefficient state sector and reliance on its oil industry, but with proper economic policymaking and patience, the government can develop sustainable growth.  Iran by 2011 estimates has a trillion dollar economy placing 18th in the world, but ranks 4th in oil production and 3rd in oil exports.  With a reference to the Islamist culture issues in the nation, Iran is experiencing a tug from traditionalists to keep a strict grip on the economy and a tug from a new generation, who want the country to grow and develop and truly expand their production capabilities as an economy.  In this modern era, economic supremacy dominates world affairs and trivial culture issues tear at nations with otherwise healthy economic affairs.

Conclusion
Looking past Iran's own actions in this world affair, Western governments must reexamine their stances on nuclear weapons.  While there is obviously a threat from a nation attacking another with a nuclear weapon, much direr and much more likely attacks are being developed and make a mockery out of mutually assured destruction due to a lack of deterrence.

Cyber warfare for example seems like a nuisance to the public, but in reality, a government aligned hacking collective with the ability to control power stations, commercial industries, and military hardware threatens more lives than a deterred nuclear threat from another nation. 

Conflicts in space are also another serious issue, as nations develop independent GPS and communication systems; they are vulnerable to attack just like any ground or air target, but with much more devastating consequences.  If, for example, a country destroys 9 or so of our current 31 healthy GPS satellites, positioning efforts across the country would fail, disrupting all commercial aviation and shipping, and severely weakening our military's ability to navigate a large section of the Earth's surface until repositioning could occur.

Overall, much larger threats exist in our heavily economically dependent nations, and nuclear ambitions are likely to evolve into a serious prospect for many nations as the technology becomes more readily available and the materials are more easily created.  Weaponization should become nearly a spinoff of what could be a prosperous era in nuclear energy efforts through both fission and fusion, along with other alternative energies.  In short, the world is ready for a new shift in energy dependency, away from the Middle East and out into the unknown, and nations like Iran just happen to not understand that. 
   
I would hope that this rational Iranian government does not pursue nuclear efforts at this time.  It is ever more likely that when proven oil reserves dry up and processes to gather natural gas reserves threaten public safety, a new era of peaceful proliferation in nuclear energy will occur spreading the enormous wealth of efforts in fusion and more efficient fission.  While more developed nations will likely control the commercial aspects of the nuclear industry, the prospect of nuclear energy in the Global South is more likely then rather than now as production or purchase of radioactive material will become more available to these developing and least industrialized nations. 

The author is a senior at Wyomissing Area High School, and president of the school's Model U.N.

Don't forget military deaths

By Ron Titus of Phillipsburg, NJ

For the last two days all news media has been non-stop 24/7, reporting on the tragic incident at the Aurora Mall Movie Theater in Aurora, Colo., where 12 people had been killed with 58 injured. Big black newsprint appeared in headlines with size comparable to when the bombing of Pearl Harbor occurred. Now don't get me wrong, I am not without feelings of sadness for the senseless killing. My thoughts and prayers are with the victims and the families of those impacted by this event. But my thoughts and prayers are also with others the mass media chose not to report.....

On Saturday, 7/15/2012, it was reported that Sgt. Michael E. Ristau, 25, of Rockford, Ill., died July 13th in Qalat, Zabul province, Afghanistan, of wounds sustained when his vehicle was attacked with an enemy improvised explosive device.

He was assigned to the 5th Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment, 3rd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2nd Infantry Division, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, Wash.

On Tuesday 7/17/2012 it was reported that Staff Sgt. Carl E. Hammar, 24, of Lake Havasu City, Ariz., died July 14, in Khost province, Afghanistan, of wounds suffered from enemy small arms fire. Hammar was assigned to 1st Battalion, 501st Infantry Regiment, 4th Airborne Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division, Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska.

Sgt. Erik N. May, 26, of Independence, Kan., died July 14, in Ghazni province, Afghanistan. May was assigned to 2nd Battalion, 16th Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division, Fort Riley, Kan.

Two soldiers who were supporting Operation Enduring Freedom died July 16, in Wali Kot District, Afghanistan, from injuries suffered when their vehicle was struck by enemy rocket propelled grenades. The soldiers were assigned to the 81st Troop Command, Indiana National Guard, Indianapolis, Ind. Killed were Spc. Sergio E. Perez Jr., 21, of Crown Point, Ind., and Spc. Nicholas A. Taylor, 20, of Berne, Ind.

On Thursday 7/19/2012 it was reported that two soldiers died July 18, in Ghazni City, Afghanistan, when their vehicle was struck by an enemy improvised explosive device. The soldiers were assigned to the 548th Combat Sustainment Support Battalion, 10th Sustainment Brigade, 10th Mountain Division, Fort Drum, N.Y. Killed were Sgt. Daniel A. Rodriguez, 28, of Baltimore, Md., and Sgt. Jose J. Reyes, 24, San Lorenzo, Puerto Rico.

On Friday 7/20/2012 it was reported that two sailors died in a helicopter crash July 19 in Oman. They were Senior Chief Aviation Warfare Systems Operator Sean P. Sullivan, 40, of St. Louis, Mo., and Naval Air crewman (Helicopter) Second Class Joseph P. Fitzmorris, 31, of West Monroe, La., were declared deceased following an extensive search of the wreckage and the surrounding areas of the crash.

There you have a week's worth of death in our military and no big black print. Not even little print, just no print. By the way one sailor was injured and one, known to have been at the theatre that evening, is currently unaccounted for. Two airmen were also injured at the Aurora Mall Movie Theater in Aurora, Colo. And no print.

Easton's Proposed Commuter Tax Not The Answer To Solving A Decades-Old Problem

By Jeff Warren, Member of Easton City Council

When it comes to government finances, we hear the catchphrase all the time -- we need to do more with less. These words are uttered from public officials in the federal government to our local school board members. This is also painfully true in millions of households across America as we continue to see costs rise and wages plateau. Settling for the same ol', same ol' just isn't working anymore when darker financial pictures are on the horizon, especially when it comes to local government's public pensions.

Earlier this year, my City Council colleagues and I were presented with a proposal that would raise the commuter tax on all non-residents that work in the city from 1 to 1.75 percent. City Council has been advised that the tax is needed to cover $1.35 million of a projected $1.85 million shortfall in the city's pension obligations. Raising the commuter tax would soften that blow.

First, there is genuine concern within our business community that this tax will be a deterrent for commuters and patrons to support our city and for employers to want to stay and keep operating their businesses. Will small business owners living outside our borders want to pick up and relocate their businesses to Easton? Will we witness merchants taking their business elsewhere? What will happen to our local economy?

Second, there is a concern that we will hurt and deter regional cooperation by targeting other's paychecks and wallets. Will our neighboring local governments be discouraged to embark on inter-municipal agreements down the road? Will we begin an alienation process that lasts for decades as we strive to enhance cooperation? Do we balloon and manifest the "city vs. suburb" mentality that is already prevalent here in the Lehigh Valley?

These are all valid questions that have no easy answers, but they contribute greatly to the debate. The overall question as we move forward is: why is this happening and why is the commuter tax even an option?

Laws mandating defined benefit plans for municipal workers' pensions are the issue. Investment losses affect contribution requirements instead of the benefits. Further, state law currently prevents municipalities from making the changes they might want to make to their pension system.

Accordingly, our state government then graciously allows local governments to institute a commuter tax to specifically help fund pensions. If one looks at the overall picture, this is a mechanism for the state to continue passing the buck onto our local municipal governments.

Harrisburg needs to step up to the plate for every taxpayer, worker and local government in the Commonwealth and address the pension issues that truly affect us all. While the General Assembly worked on the public pension issue in November 2010, the end result did not go far enough. In essence, the state legislature continues to push costs down to local governments and ultimately, the taxpayer. They need to come to the aid of local governments and they need to do it now without hurting Pennsylvania's workforce in the process.

City Council, in the meantime, still needs to find a solution to the gap in our pension obligation. I, along with other City Council colleagues, have been a proponent of instituting a PILOT (payment in lieu of taxes) on properties within Easton that are tax exempt. If one were to look at the dozens and dozens of properties in the city that have received tax exempt status over the years, one would be shocked. The PILOT option would generate significant revenue for the city, since over 40% of the property in Easton is tax exempt.

Finding solutions and mechanisms to cut costs within local government budgets is increasingly difficult. It is the main reason the concept of regionalism must remain at the forefront of the Lehigh Valley's public agenda for the long-term. Municipal governments like Easton must have the opportunity to enhance our ability to enter into inter-municipal cooperative agreements with our neighboring municipalities in order to cut costs.

From my seat on City Council, a commuter tax doesn't seem to be the best solution to a decades-old problem. In the end, it's just not good government, which is perpetrated by the Commonwealth. While it is never a good time to place an added tax on individuals, at this point in our economic recovery it's certainly not ideal. It penalizes middle-class working families who are lucky enough to be employed, isolates our neighbors, and may very well hurt Easton's local economy for many years to come.

Act on Jobs, Not on Political Gamesmanship

By Matt Cartwright, Democratic Candidate for Congress, PA-17

Two weeks ago, the Supreme Court upheld the Constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. In response to the court's ruling, Republicans in the House of Representatives decided to hold a vote to repeal the health care law completely. The timing of this could not be worse; neither could the flagrant political posturing.

It is important to realize what a full repeal of this bill would mean. The Medicare prescription "doughnut hole," would remain open, once again placing the burden of full payment on our seniors. People with pre-existing medical conditions, including cancer patients, could once again be denied the possibility obtaining affordable care. According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the federal deficit would increase by $210 billion. 3.8 million Pennsylvanians have already used a free preventative service provided by the Affordable Care Act- this would cease. These popular benefits and many other reforms the ACA brings must not be repealed.

Beyond being bad policy, this push to repeal the Affordable Care Act is a meaningless political game. During their time in the minority, these Republicans remarked that health care was the wrong priority, and that Congress should be focusing on other job creation measures. Yet during their time in the majority, Republicans have voted thirty-two times to repeal measures contained in this health care law, and they have already voted once for a full repeal. We know that the Senate will not vote to overturn this law. Now is not the time to engage in these types of useless political games- now is the time for bold action.

Last week, we saw the best of Congress. Working across the aisle, Democrats and Republicans passed a Transportation Bill that promises to create or retain 2.9 million jobs in the construction industry, a sector that has been battered in this recession. The American people are looking to Congress for more of this job-creating legislation. Let's hope that they will deliver.

State Education Subsidy In Pennsylvania's Budget

by Senator Bob Mensch, 24th Senatorial District

Within the next several days it is likely the Pennsylvania legislature will have finalized the operating budget for the fiscal year July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2013. This will be the second year in a row, and only the second in the last decade, where the budget is on-time and only spends existing state revenues.

But to accomplish a balanced budget there has been some rearranging of the state's spending priorities - purposeful efforts to make our state spending and delivery of funds more efficient. One of the areas of continuing discussion in the budget is education funding, and specifically the state education subsidy for K-12. It is instructive for all of us to take a look at the facts, so let's look at the last decade of the state education subsidy for K-12 (all numbers are rounded).

• 2002 --$4 billion
• 2003 - $4.2 billion
• 2004 - $4.36 billion
• 2005 - $4.49 billion
• 2006 - $4.78 billion
• 2007 - $4.95 billion
• 2008 - $5.2 billion
• 2009 - $4.8 billion
• 2010 - $4.75 billion
• 2011 - $5.35 billion
• And proposed for 2012 - $5.42 billion

A review of data shows the subsidy was actually reduced in the years 2009 and 2010, but the subsidy was fully restored and increased to its highest level ever in 2011, and the 2012 amount is fully expected to become the highest level of funding ever for the K-12 subsidy! Equally important, student enrollment has been decreasing across the state during this same ten year period, which means the funding per student has been increasing.

So then, why do some complain that the subsidy is being cut? The federally provided stimulus dollars have gone away, plain and simple. Actually, the stimulus funds were added to the subsidy in 2009 and 2010 to create an illusion that the subsidy had been increased to $5.5 billion in 2009 and to $5.77 billion in 2010. But everyone in our nation realized the stimulus was a two-year cash infusion. Yet there are those who argue that we have cut funding, simply because the federal stimulus dollars have disappeared.

You take a look at the data and you decide.

Remember, last year, with no new taxes, and with an inherited deficit of $4.5 billion, we were able to balance the budget and still deliver the highest K-12 subsidy in the state's history. So next time sometime tries to tell you the legislature cut school funding; just show them the data above, and ask them "what cut?"

It's important for all of us to be involved in this debate, but it is just as important that real, factual and credible data be the basis for that debate.