Homeland Security to fight....Global Warming??

[BT]

So it was designed to allow new fees to be imposed on the public without the need of a super majority vote?

[sirs]

Nope, it was designed to disallow new taxes to be imposed on the public, in the appearance of fees, thus superceding the supermajority requirement.  Then again, we've already been over this

[BT]

It allows for new unreasonable fees to be passed by a super majorority and new reasonable fees to be passed by a simple majority.

Be that as it may.

No where does it say fees are the same as taxes . It says they will be treated the same as taxes.

Some states treat may want to treat rape the same as murder but that does not mean rapes are the same as murder.

[sirs]

No where does it say fees are the same as taxes . It says they will be treated the same as taxes.

And that's exactly what I've been saying.  One last time, I made it clear that at no time does the proposition say fees = taxes.  It merely treats them the same, thus disallowing legislators the end-around gimmick by calling what would be a tax, as a fee, and bybassing the 2/3 majority required in raising a tax
 

[BT]

No where does it say fees are the same as taxes . It says they will be treated the same as taxes.

And that's exactly what I've been saying.  One last time, I made it clear that at no time does the proposition say fees = taxes.  It merely treats them the same, thus disallowing legislators the end-around gimmick by calling what would be a tax, as a fee, and bybassing the 2/3 majority required in raising a tax

So all in all you have debunked your earlier assertions that fees are taxes because in California they are treated as taxes, but that doesn't get you off the hook for the other 49 states.

 

[sirs]

Actually, I made it clear, and then clearer still, that Prop 26 was put on the ballot to stop legislators from doing an end around the 2/3 vote requirement to raise taxes, by merely referring to them as fees.

It was a loophole in this state.  Can't vouch for the other 49

[BT]

Actually, I made it clear, and then clearer still, that Prop 26 was put on the ballot to stop legislators from doing an end around the 2/3 vote requirement to raise taxes, by merely referring to them as fees.

What you made clear in your earliest assertions was that fees=taxes, that was before your furiously started backpedaling.

The definition of fees never changed, in California or the 49 other states.

[sirs]

No, no, and no.  I made it clear that fees were being used like taxes.  That's why I made it clearer still when I made specific reference to fees do NOT equal taxes.  The "technical" definition never changed, and I never claimed it did.  I made it abundantly clear, since the beginning of this tangent, that CA Legislators were using the term "fees" to actually mask taxes that they couldn't get passed with the 2/3, but could with a simple majority with the nifty name change.  -------> Prop 26 stopped that

[BT]

Let's put it this way Bt, if you want to hold onto the notion that a new Government division is taking money from another source within their dept or Federal budget, lessening what the other dept was to get, you go right ahead and believe that pipedream

This isn't a new government program, it is a task force.

Right.....and a fee isn't a tax

Sirs says:

Right.....and a fee isn't a tax

For those who know the difference, a fee is not a tax.

The State of California has concluded otherwise.

[sirs]

And for those who have no problem reading for context, And before Bt even tries, no it doesn't say fee = tax.  It says, quite clearly though, that it is to be address(ed) as a tax.  It was put on the ballot precisely because Democrat legislators were getting around the 2/3 majority requirement to increase taxes, by calling what would be a tax, a "fee" instead.  This passed proposition. put an end to that

Note also I was specific to CA, so your attempt to pull in the other 49states is.....a strawman.  But at least we got that concession.  I think this horse is dead.  We're just going to have to agree to disagree

[BT]

And for those who have no problem reading for context, And before Bt even tries, no it doesn't say fee = tax.  It says, quite clearly though, that it is to be address(ed) as a tax.  It was put on the ballot precisely because Democrat legislators were getting around the 2/3 majority requirement to increase taxes, by calling what would be a tax, a "fee" instead.  This passed proposition. put an end to that

Note also I was specific to CA, so your attempt to pull in the other 49states is.....a strawman.  But at least we got that concession.  I think this horse is dead.  We're just going to have to agree to disagree

So you admit you backpedaled. Good we are making progress.

Now about that assertion of yours that the FBI reports to Homeland Security.

You sticking with it or are you ready to backpedal?

[sirs]

I admit that someone needed some serious clarification.  And even after, is still pushing positions not taken......surprise, surprise

[sirs]

And before you try taking this off into yet another irrelvent tangent, my best recollection of DHS had all other agencies reporting to them.  A quick google search, seems to reinforce that, "for the most part"

The Department of Homeland Security officially took form on January 24, 2003, with Tom Ridge serving as the first secretary of the department. However, the department only had a skeletal structure until March 1, 2003, when the majority of agencies that would constitute the bulk of the new department were formally transferred into it. On March 1, 2003, the following federal agencies were transferred to the department:
the Coast Guard;
the Secret Service;
the Customs Service;
the Federal Emergency Management Agency;
the Transportation Security Agency;
the Commerce Department's Critical Infrastructure Assurance Office,
the Defense Department's National Communication System;
the FBI's National Infrastructure Protection Center,
and the functions of the former Immigration and Naturalization Service.

The act also aims to facilitate homeland security information sharing procedures in an effort to maximize intelligence data analysis and utilization capabilities.

[BT]

FBI's National Infrastructure Protection Center,

I could see how an agency formed in 1998 could be confused with the entire Federal Bureau of Investigations.

Glad you fine tuned your broad stroke.

[bsb]

Federal Emergency Management Agency
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
500 C Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20472
(202) 646-2500


So than, the right department is looking into what kind of planing should take place regarding the effects of global warming. Of course, why wouldn't they? How dumb would you have to be not to? How stupid would you have to be to sit on your ass and wait until polar bears are walking around the streets of Portland Oregon before trying to figure out what we might be able to do?

bsb