So I received a call from the Mihos campaign today...

asking me what I would like to do, RE: volunteer work, and asking for ideas on how to get Christy's word out. Of course, I said that I will do any kind of volunteer work that time permits , as I truly believe that Christy will make an excellent governor, and be a breathe of fresh air for this stagnant state. But...I became uncharacteristically tongue-tied when asked for ideas! Damn, I was angry at myself ( and embarrasssed, too!) for not being able to come up with a few amazingly witty and provocative ideas, and just when I thought that I had made a complete ass of myself, I remembered this , my blog! Why not offer to get the word out on my blog? The gentleman that I spoke to seemed to like the idea, and also was understanding of my lack of experience(and witty/provocative ideas!)
So, here is an offering to all of my fellow sufferers here in lovely Taxachusetts as to why you should not only consider Christy for governor, but vote for him as well. I can't promise that I will'pound the pavement', shall I say, here everyday, but I will offer up any Christy news and views that I find pertinent when I can.

So, for your enjoyment and enlightenment, here is the following from www.christy2006.com, regarding Christy's Proposition 1:



Last year, Massachusetts was one of only three states to lose people, and it was the second year in a row that we ended the year with fewer people than we started with. Massachusetts is the only state in the entire country that can make that claim.
Making matters worse, these numbers aren’t just a blip. If you don’t count foreign immigrants, we’ve been losing more people than we attract every year since 1990. And it’s certainly not because of the cold weather. New Hampshire, Vermont, and Maine are gaining new citizens, and a lot of them are coming from the Bay State.
This should concern all of us. Without question, Massachusetts is the greatest state in the entire nation. We offer the beauty of Cape Cod’s beaches and the wonders of the Berkshire Mountains. We’re home to quaint New England communities, the glorious fishing and sailing communities of Gloucester and Marblehead, and the incomparable histories of Boston, Springfield, Worcester, Fall River, New Bedford, Lawrence, Lowell, Lynn, and my hometown, Brockton. We host the world’s greatest universities, the smartest population, and the Boston Red Sox.
So why would people leave?
I’ve traveled the state asking that question, and time and again, the answer is the same: skyrocketing property taxes. Most families I’ve chatted with have said they would move back to Massachusetts in a heartbeat – but only if they could afford it.
As Governor, I’ll pursue comprehensive property tax reform.
As it stands, Massachusetts localities are more dependent on property taxes today than they’ve been at any point in nearly 25 years. When you combine that fact with our booming residential real estate market, ever-increasing property taxes are easily explained.
I’m going to call my proposal Proposition 1, and I pledge to introduce it in the very first budget I submit. If the Legislature fails to act, I’ll organize and promote efforts to get it before the voters. Here’s what it’ll do:
As it stands today in Massachusetts, with Proposition 2 ½, you can’t be billed more than 2.5 percent of your home’s assessed value; generally, houses are reassessed every three years.
Further, each town’s levy – its total of tax bills – cannot increase by more than 2.5 percent each year (excluding new and expanded buildings). However, some properties within a town grow in value faster than others, and sometimes there is a shift from commercial property to residential. Add to this the overrides that pass, and we have a system in which property taxes can be as volatile as the real estate market. That’s why many Bay State residents are being taxed out of their homes.
Under California’s Proposition 13 – a ballot initiative that passed in 1978 – property values remain constant from the time of purchase and are reassessed when the property is sold. If Massachusetts had a similar system, it would provide more certainty to homeowners as to what their tax bills will be in future years. Instead of the potential for erratically-increasing property taxes, there would be more stability for those who stay in their homes, and for new owners, the tax amount would depend almost exclusively on the voluntary act of purchase.
Proposition 1 will provide this same certainty and stability.
Some people claim that this proposal will prevent new residents from moving to Massachusetts, because a new resident may find himself paying a greater sum this his next-door neighbor.
But the fact is simple: New residents will determine exactly how much their property taxes will be, because their taxes will be based not on their neighbors taxes, but on the price they voluntarily agree to pay.
Moreover, the fact that some residents will end up paying more than others for their local services shouldn’t be a concern. Services have never been related to the amount a homeowner pays in property taxes. If they were, the local fire station would only fight fires in a community’s most expensive homes. Property taxes go to a community’s general fund – and local public officials determine how to spend the money.
To compensate for the revenue limitations that may result, I pledge to set aside 40 percent of the state’s annual tax revenues for local aid. Today, less than 30 percent of tax receipts go to support localities. Such an increase would have a profound impact on municipal finances, and would provide certainty to officials about the level of aid that could be depended upon as they develop their annual budgets.
This part of my plan has come straight from the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, an independent, nonpartisan organization that focuses on state spending and tax policies. Their work on this topic has convinced me as to just how important it is. Dedicating 40 percent of tax revenues to municipalities will be an extraordinary commitment, but an extraordinary commitment is essential to our future success.
And to make sure that our priorities remain straight, the third component of Proposition One would stipulate that public schools in Massachusetts must be free of fees. By the time the full 40 percent proposal is in effect, all academic and activity fees must be removed from the local schools. There’s simply no excuse for such fees, and the state shouldn’t be putting localities in a position where they feel as if they have to penalize their own children for being active and involved in school activities.
Proposition 1 is a bold idea, and that’s what my campaign is all about.