flatts1
02-26-2003, 12:48 PM
This article was passed along to me by a friend.
I am passing it along here because I think that there are many folks who are on the fence when it comes to the issue of a mandatory saltwater license. I hear many folks say "Well if I knew that 100% of the money raised would go to fishing related efforts then I would be all for it".
This is a reasonable opinion and seems to be shared by many. After all, wouldn't it be great if we had more boat ramps, shore access, and fish population studies. However, I can't stress it enough that politicians can promise all they want that funds raised from fishing taxes would be earmarked solely for fishing related endeavors but the bottom line is this. DIVERTING REVENUE FROM FISHING FEES OR TAXES TO THE GENERAL FUND IS **ALWAYS** AN OPTION FOR POLITICIANS. The folks in Rhode Island came to this very same conclusion when they were tasked with ascertaining the viability of a saltwater license in their state. Even if a law was written to strictly forbid using sportsman's dollars for general use, the legislature can always simply rewrite the law.
In Massachusetts, we essentially have a single party system (democrat) in both legislatures. They literally have zero accountability when they vote because they run unopposed in their districts. They know this and they have no reservations about voting against the will of the people. In fact, if I recall correctly, Massachusetts voters recently voted overwhelmingly, via referendum, in favor of the Clean Elections Act and to lower the state income tax. These bills should have been the law of the land but in both cases the laws were promptly overturned and rewritten by the legislatures with enough votes to override the Governor's veto.
Folks the system is broke and, as this article states, we need to be very vigilant when they start coming after the fees and taxes we already spend when buying tackle or a freshwater fishing license. If they can do this with existing fees and taxes, it won't be long before that isn't enough and they make new ones in the guise of a saltwater license.
I don't know how, but somehow we need to make our politicians accountable otherwise we really have no say in the matter anyway and this thread and article are moot!
An excerpt follows and the original link may be found at...
http://www.ecnnews.com/cgi-bin/frame/getpage2.pl?cgi-bin/n/nstoryv2.pl+slug-ASISGW
Best,
Mike Flaherty
The newest problem I see for sportsmen could be, as usual, in process in the state of Massachusetts, as we speak. State leaders, realizing the immensity of state debt, are looking everywhere for money. Do you in your wildest dreams think they are not going to try to steal our dedicated Fish and Wildlife funds to help balance the budget? These monies are different than educational budgets, they are dedicated, but Beacon Hill will try to move them to the General Fund.
We must be careful. We must be watchful. It is in "our charge." There can be no crying afterwards around the campfires, like in Question 1. There will be no "Duh! What happened?" like after the passage of the chapter 180 gun laws. The shop will be frozen, and the plants will be dead! Whether you fish fresh or salt water, hunt with bows or gun, or just watch the outdoor station on TV, if there is just so much as an inkling of a taking of sportsmen's funds, there need be no hesitation to act. I want to see every sportsman and sportswoman in the governor's office. For the first time I want to see unity. This type of legislation would extinguish the sports flame forever. The shop would certainly freeze.
We must be watchful in the next weeks, and be ready to unify and act at a moment's notice. The call to rally, if needed, will be loud and clear. It will be unmistakeable. The rest is up to us.
I am passing it along here because I think that there are many folks who are on the fence when it comes to the issue of a mandatory saltwater license. I hear many folks say "Well if I knew that 100% of the money raised would go to fishing related efforts then I would be all for it".
This is a reasonable opinion and seems to be shared by many. After all, wouldn't it be great if we had more boat ramps, shore access, and fish population studies. However, I can't stress it enough that politicians can promise all they want that funds raised from fishing taxes would be earmarked solely for fishing related endeavors but the bottom line is this. DIVERTING REVENUE FROM FISHING FEES OR TAXES TO THE GENERAL FUND IS **ALWAYS** AN OPTION FOR POLITICIANS. The folks in Rhode Island came to this very same conclusion when they were tasked with ascertaining the viability of a saltwater license in their state. Even if a law was written to strictly forbid using sportsman's dollars for general use, the legislature can always simply rewrite the law.
In Massachusetts, we essentially have a single party system (democrat) in both legislatures. They literally have zero accountability when they vote because they run unopposed in their districts. They know this and they have no reservations about voting against the will of the people. In fact, if I recall correctly, Massachusetts voters recently voted overwhelmingly, via referendum, in favor of the Clean Elections Act and to lower the state income tax. These bills should have been the law of the land but in both cases the laws were promptly overturned and rewritten by the legislatures with enough votes to override the Governor's veto.
Folks the system is broke and, as this article states, we need to be very vigilant when they start coming after the fees and taxes we already spend when buying tackle or a freshwater fishing license. If they can do this with existing fees and taxes, it won't be long before that isn't enough and they make new ones in the guise of a saltwater license.
I don't know how, but somehow we need to make our politicians accountable otherwise we really have no say in the matter anyway and this thread and article are moot!
An excerpt follows and the original link may be found at...
http://www.ecnnews.com/cgi-bin/frame/getpage2.pl?cgi-bin/n/nstoryv2.pl+slug-ASISGW
Best,
Mike Flaherty
The newest problem I see for sportsmen could be, as usual, in process in the state of Massachusetts, as we speak. State leaders, realizing the immensity of state debt, are looking everywhere for money. Do you in your wildest dreams think they are not going to try to steal our dedicated Fish and Wildlife funds to help balance the budget? These monies are different than educational budgets, they are dedicated, but Beacon Hill will try to move them to the General Fund.
We must be careful. We must be watchful. It is in "our charge." There can be no crying afterwards around the campfires, like in Question 1. There will be no "Duh! What happened?" like after the passage of the chapter 180 gun laws. The shop will be frozen, and the plants will be dead! Whether you fish fresh or salt water, hunt with bows or gun, or just watch the outdoor station on TV, if there is just so much as an inkling of a taking of sportsmen's funds, there need be no hesitation to act. I want to see every sportsman and sportswoman in the governor's office. For the first time I want to see unity. This type of legislation would extinguish the sports flame forever. The shop would certainly freeze.
We must be watchful in the next weeks, and be ready to unify and act at a moment's notice. The call to rally, if needed, will be loud and clear. It will be unmistakeable. The rest is up to us.