Herb Riede's Blog

I would like to introduce legislation. I'm writing it right here, right now...

This legislation - the addition of one word, would enable Seniors to be registered to vote and participate in the primary of their high school year whether they are 17 or 18 when April or May rolls around. This would also allow for higher turnover registration from General election to General election, as the day after each general election, a full year's worth of student's would be eligible to vote for the coming year.

Currently, If you turn 18 on or before an election, you may register now. For example, If you were born on May 17, 1987 or before, you may now register to vote in the 2005 Municipal Primary.

In 2004, this change below would have enabled the first-time 18-year old voters who turned 18 between this year's April Primary and the November Election to participate in the primary. It would also, in my opinion, make it easier for people like me to tell young'uns to register to vote NOW for the next "big" election, without the primary getting in the way.

This also makes it fairer for third party and independent registrations, who shouldn't be tied to primary schedules.

If this were enacted, instead of May 17, 1987 being able to register now and vote in the primary on that day, students born on or before November 8, 1987 could register now - and vote in May's primary if they choose a major party, or sign a third party petition.

The High School Senior Registration Act

     1  Amending the act of June 3, 1937 (P.L.1333, No.320), entitled

     2     "An act concerning elections, including general, municipal,

     3     special and primary elections, the nomination of candidates,

     4     primary and election expenses and election contests; creating

     5     and defining membership of county boards of elections;

     6     imposing duties upon the Secretary of the Commonwealth,

     7     courts, county boards of elections, county commissioners;

     8     imposing penalties for violation of the act, and codifying,

     9     revising and consolidating the laws relating thereto; and

    10     repealing certain acts and parts of acts relating to

    11     elections," further providing for the definition of 

    12     "qualified elector." 

    13     The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

    14  hereby enacts as follows:

    15     Section 6.  Section 501(a) of the act, amended June 25, 2001

    16  (P.L.674, No.61), is amended to read:

    17  Section 501.  Qualifications to register.

    18     (a)  Eligibility.--A qualified elector who will be at least 18

    19  years of age on the day of the next GENERAL election, 

    20  who has been a citizen of the United States for at least one month

    21  prior to the next election and who has resided in this Commonwealth

    22  and the election district where the qualified elector offers to vote

    23  for at least 30 days prior to the next ensuing election and has not

    24  been confined in a penal institution for a conviction of a felony

    25  within the last five years shall be entitled to be registered as

    26  provided in this chapter. If an individual is qualified to vote in

    27  an election district prior to removal of residence, the individual

    28  may, if a resident of this Commonwealth, vote in the election

    29  district from which residence was removed within the 30 days

    30  preceding the election.

Governor Rendell Please Veto House Bill 30! - Common Cause

There's no need to give Verizon their due on this, nor to pat the Republicans on their back when they don't have a Veto Proof majority in the Senate.

Let's see if Ed, Edd or Eddy will bunt or kick it out of the ball park.

Click the link above to join the cause!

Sometimes ranging from teenagers acting on halfbaked rumor and silly theory to unnerving accuracy and impressive breaking news, depending on which day of the week it seems, who is at the controls, PoliticsPA.com is as many describe it a Pennsylvania political junkie's paradise.

I personally have used services advertised on PoliticsPA, even though I despise the inches of ads at the top of their pages, such as GovNetPA and VoterListsOnline.

I'm somewhat proud, and afraid to have submitted my blog, now listed on PoliticsPA's homepage - I feel somewhat obligated to post, and somewhat of a nut to be posting publically, because who am I to tell people what I think, after all?

Of course the criteria was somewhat low to be listed, to be sure. Email the link and get listed. Maybe I'll be one of 50 to be crazy enough to want to. Maybe 500 will and nobody will pick me out of the line up. Only the stats will tell...

In any case. If anyone has any ideas or topics, go ahead and email me at blog@herbriede.com .

While I didn't like the idea of increasing the lump sum of $10 out of one paycheck to $52, and yes, I knew that it calculated to $1/week but I thought it was just someone being cute, but it appears that Gettysburg intends to enact the full $52 Emergency and Municipal Services Tax at the $1/week rate. Or at least that's how it sounds.

This is not unlike a income tax, which is more progressive and fair in my opinion, but the ability to split the $52 up puts me at ease.

If someone makes $12,000 or less, a municipality may exempt them from paying the tax. Given that once you drop below $12,000, $52 quickly exceeds a half-percent of income, I would support such exemption. I would wager making the Emergency and Municipal Services Tax a second income tax rate of one quarter of one percent would bring in more money in many places. For example, on $32,000, one quarter of one percent would be $80.

I'd rather have a flat percentage across the board in this case than one flat rate and a wide exemption. Which seems fairer?

Email me at optax@herbriede.com with your comments...

The Occupational Privilege Tax...

Bleh..

The PA House and Senate just passed HB197, an attempt to help Pittsburgh out of it's financial woes but actually a terrible failure of state government.

I actually agree with State Rep. Maitland's NO vote on concurrence in Senate Amendments, and I am ashamed that my party provided the majority of the votes for this poorly written bill.

First, my laundry list...

1. Changing the range of the taxing authority from a maximum of $10 to a minimum of $10 will require those municipalities that only tax at $5 to either raise to $10 per annum or eliminate altogether.
   
2. I wanted the elimination of the occupational privilege tax, and in fact, this has been accomplished... The tax has been RE-NAMED the "Emergency and Municipal Services Tax" and is now restricted in use by municipalities for "Police, Fire and/or Emergency Services," "Road Construction and/or Maintenance," and, "Reduction in Property Taxes."
   This means more bureaucracy and paperwork making sure these funds do not pay the secretary and treasurer's salary instead of the public works employees.
   
3. "This act shall take effect for tax years commencing on or after January 1, 2005" - bad idea. For municipalities that have a $5 occupational privilege tax (see point #1), this bill could make those taxes invalid. Note that a School District's $5 should count towards the $10 minimum, but there are some places where the School District has eliminated the Occupation Privilege tax and the municipality remains at $5. I need to look at my Adams County graph to find one around here..
   
4. "This act shall take effect immediately" - bad idea, see points 1 and 3.

While I understand the need to put controls on runaway use of new taxation and limiting such to specific categories, I have a big problem with the wholesale, overnight changes to a base tax for not only McSherrystown's budget, but so many other's as well.

How many questions will arise from the passing of this bill, and will the state put municipalities minds at ease?