Opinion: Letter to the Editor: A Self-Inflicted Hurt?

Opinion: Letter to the Editor: A Self-Inflicted Hurt?

The following letter responds to U.S. Rep. Gerry Connolly’s commentary, “GOP Tax Scheme Hurts Homeowners” in Sept. 13 Mount Vernon Gazette.

You wrote that Congress should not cause any requirement on the populace by “ramming.”

We the People then require you to make such a public statement when any party “rams.” Note: unless corrected publicly, We the People may conclude that your definition of “ramming” is to not allow/encourage/support hearings and consideration of amendments to proposed legislation.

You wrote that the tax law you addressed in you letter “will disproportionately hurt Northern Virginia homeowners’ biggest asset — their homes.”

Relative to the rest of the state, we here in Northern Virginia have the most expensive houses. We chose to buy here and taxes increase with cost. That would be kind of a self-inflicted “hurt”… yeah? Alternatives to be less-hurt would be to raise housing prices across the state to match Northern Virginia prices and/or get everybody — including government assessors — to lower the price of houses in Northern Virginia by a few hundred thousand dollars. You used the term “hurt” to describe a change to several home-related deductions that will increase taxes. Perhaps the descriptor “will hurt” may have be more accurately offered — to inspire fair thinking the citizenry — as “may affect.”

That you wrote “homes are one of the largest source of saving.”

For those whose home went for a deep dive swim a few years ago—for … well … we all know the reasons that perhaps could have (I’m a believer) been prevented — may not consider a home as a source of savings. I have to pay on my home every monthly, as the mortgage company owns it … not me. I wish my mortgage payment was going to my saving. I’m old.

You wrote that you consider money from a loan as “proceeds”… hmmm?

That thinking is an indicator of why We the People are trillions in debt. To perceive a loan — i.e. debt — as “proceeds.” It is in our culture that “proceeds” is understood as profitable income — that debt is not income. (It’s a wonderful thought that our nation is not 20 trillion dollars in debt but rather has realized that amount in proceeds. Yes!)

You wrote that he — the President — is “trying to balance the budget on the backs of federal workers.”

Since 1980, I’ve worked with deserving officers of the Civil Service and am yet still working with those officers. By comparison with the military and contractors who do much of the same work, the federal workers are compensated in pay fairly and enjoy benefits that equal and, in some-to-many respects, surpass the private sector workers supporting federal offices.

You wrote that the subject tax “puts additional pressure” on local government … do we not have local government to take on such pressure? Why should a fellow citizen in New York or Colorado have to support our great state … other than to offer their full assistance to “nationally” — Establish Justice … Insure Domestic Tranquility … Provide for the Common Defense … Promote (not “Provide”) the General Welfare?

Note: “To Form a More Perfect Union” was an admission that the Articles of Confederation were not working. To “Secure the Blessings of Liberty to Ourselves and Our Posterity” is the desired end state of our Constitution — the goal of the work of our Federal Government to serve our nation — even though it does sometimes pressure and hurt and puts things on our backs.

Nick Sottler