Don't put words into my mouth. There is enough blame to go around. As far as I'm concerned, they all suck. However, the Dems' usual whining, while at the same time holding up things that need to get done makes my skin crawl...as Fastbreak pointed out, the Dems could have had the moral high ground, but gave it up...

 

I thought Ernie was 30 points behind. What do they have to worry about? This may come back to bite them in the rear, and let Ernie back in the game...

 

It wouldn't surprise me one bit to see them let him back into the game; that would be par for the course when it comes to Dem "strategy."

 

You hardcore GOP-types better be glad I didn't go to Frankfort and get a job with the Beshear campaign or the state Dem HQ like I had planned. There would definitely be some changes in the way the party campaign machinery operates. They desperately need someone who isn't one iota scared to hurt some of these pols' feelings by telling them what they don't want to hear. Sometimes I wonder if the KDP isn't exactly like the Bush White House: No opinions differing from the group-think permitted.

I don't know how credible it is, but the most recent poll had Ernie trailing by 2 points with something like 20-30% undecided.

 

If that poll is credible, the House Dems are screwing up the election bigtime...

If the House Dems don't come back to work and get things done that need to be done, they will hand Ernie the election if indeed it is close right now...

:confused: Don't all the bills?

 

Yes, but there was some confusion initially over whether this was an issue where House members could simply say, "don't pay us," and the LRC would not have the Revenue Cabinet issue the checks. This would actually have to be in the form of a bill.

Yes, but there was some confusion initially over whether this was an issue where House members could simply say, "don't pay us," and the LRC would not have the Revenue Cabinet issue the checks. This would actually have to be in the form of a bill.

 

Ah, got ya. :thumb:

It wouldn't surprise me one bit to see them let him back into the game; that would be par for the course when it comes to Dem "strategy."

 

You hardcore GOP-types better be glad I didn't go to Frankfort and get a job with the Beshear campaign or the state Dem HQ like I had planned. There would definitely be some changes in the way the party campaign machinery operates. They desperately need someone who isn't one iota scared to hurt some of these pols' feelings by telling them what they don't want to hear. Sometimes I wonder if the KDP isn't exactly like the Bush White House: No opinions differing from the group-think permitted.

 

I agree with you Jim. Thanks for staying out of it.

 

The right move for the Dems in this special session would have been to get all the work done, and then make fun of/blast the Gov for not getting it done earlier...

 

Instead, they took their ball and went home, and the citizens (voters) lose...pathetic.

Exactly...and for people like Jim asking why now when these are some bills the Gov. vetoed earlier, the answer is the state was 100s of millions in debt when Fletcher vetoed the projects, and now at the end of his term there is a huge surplus. Hence, the money is now available...

House Dems really looking pitiful here...

 

Is this before or after the unfunded pension obligations not paid by Fletcher added in or subtracted out.

How long have those obligations not been funded?

Is this before or after the unfunded pension obligations not paid by Fletcher added in or subtracted out.

 

Like Fletcher caused the pensions to be unfunded... :sssh:

Like Fletcher caused the pensions to be unfunded... :sssh:

 

As you suggested from debt to huge surplus. The pensions went from underfunded to triple in unfunded amount. I believe it was Senator Williams who wanted to borrow 1 billion to make up the obligation. That difference is directly related in the time of the Fletcher Administration that all local entities will have to make up. So please do not suggest a surplus in the budget.

As you suggested from debt to huge surplus. The pensions went from underfunded to triple in unfunded amount. I believe it was Senator Williams who wanted to borrow 1 billion to make up the obligation. That difference is directly related in the time of the Fletcher Administration that all local entities will have to make up. So please do not suggest a surplus in the budget.

 

 

Don't know where you get your info from but it's 100% false...however, if you will provide a link I'll be happy to take a look...

While there is no question that the calling of this session was politically motivated, the real question is, so what? We had an enormous opportunity here, in a dwindling time window, to address the fuel conversion question involving the coal industry in Eastern Kentucky. Enormous amounts of revenue and grant money, free. The Democrats, thank you very much, have thrown it away so they can make a spectacle of the Governor.

 

SilverShadow, I don't know where you get your information, but the underfunding of pensions occurred for years by Democratic administrations to get us where we are today. Trying to stick Fletcher with that is like trying to stick Bush with the recession that began six days after he took office. Its a fatuous and tired argument.

While there is no question that the calling of this session was politically motivated, the real question is, so what? We had an enormous opportunity here, in a dwindling time window, to address the fuel conversion question involving the coal industry in Eastern Kentucky. Enormous amounts of revenue and grant money, free. The Democrats, thank you very much, have thrown it away so they can make a spectacle of the Governor.

 

SilverShadow, I don't know where you get your information, but the underfunding of pensions occurred for years by Democratic administrations to get us where we are today. Trying to stick Fletcher with that is like trying to stick Bush with the recession that began six days after he took office. Its a fatuous and tired argument.

 

Whatever. I believe the call was Waste, Fraud and Abuse. If you wish to accept substantial REDUCTIONS in contributions to the funding levels as good government go right ahead. If you wish to think it is a profitable answer to force increases on local governments to cover the current gaps, go right ahead. BUT, it was the great REPUBLICAN Senator Williams who tried for a billion dollar loan on money owed already. When Fletcher started the unfunded portion was somewhere around 150 million. It has ballooned to over 1 billion. Prior Kentucky budgets accounted for the unfunded as an expense to show surplus and/or debt to state operations. Under Fletcher, the unfunded portion is ignored and now claims a surplus. Smoke and mirrors or perhaps some who wish to think of this as improved fraud. Besides, making your arguement Fletcher was stuck with 150 million, who do you give credit for the 1 billion more added? Want to blame the Congress, fine, then give them credit for the supposed surplus. No matter how it cuts, it has and continues to be ignored. The citizens of 25 years from now, just like Social Security will have a huge debt to handle. I bet they cut it out or off and say to heck with us arrogant baby boomers who have financially failed our society and not hold anyone and particular those who passed it along and made it worse. By the way, I feel pretty strong on my information.

While there is no question that the calling of this session was politically motivated, the real question is, so what? We had an enormous opportunity here, in a dwindling time window, to address the fuel conversion question involving the coal industry in Eastern Kentucky. Enormous amounts of revenue and grant money, free. The Democrats, thank you very much, have thrown it away so they can make a spectacle of the Governor.

.

 

Is there not a firm commitment to support from all parties in Frankfort? How is that not good enough for Peabody? And why cannot this be the only issue to deal with instead of quite a bit of silly agenda/political items?

Whatever. I believe the call was Waste, Fraud and Abuse. If you wish to accept substantial REDUCTIONS in contributions to the funding levels as good government go right ahead. If you wish to think it is a profitable answer to force increases on local governments to cover the current gaps, go right ahead. BUT, it was the great REPUBLICAN Senator Williams who tried for a billion dollar loan on money owed already. When Fletcher started the unfunded portion was somewhere around 150 million. It has ballooned to over 1 billion. Prior Kentucky budgets accounted for the unfunded as an expense to show surplus and/or debt to state operations. Under Fletcher, the unfunded portion is ignored and now claims a surplus. Smoke and mirrors or perhaps some who wish to think of this as improved fraud. Besides, making your arguement Fletcher was stuck with 150 million, who do you give credit for the 1 billion more added? Want to blame the Congress, fine, then give them credit for the supposed surplus. No matter how it cuts, it has and continues to be ignored. The citizens of 25 years from now, just like Social Security will have a huge debt to handle. I bet they cut it out or off and say to heck with us arrogant baby boomers who have financially failed our society and not hold anyone and particular those who passed it along and made it worse. By the way, I feel pretty strong on my information.

 

1. False

2. Still no link

Whatever. I believe the call was Waste, Fraud and Abuse. If you wish to accept substantial REDUCTIONS in contributions to the funding levels as good government go right ahead. If you wish to think it is a profitable answer to force increases on local governments to cover the current gaps, go right ahead. BUT, it was the great REPUBLICAN Senator Williams who tried for a billion dollar loan on money owed already. When Fletcher started the unfunded portion was somewhere around 150 million. It has ballooned to over 1 billion. Prior Kentucky budgets accounted for the unfunded as an expense to show surplus and/or debt to state operations. Under Fletcher, the unfunded portion is ignored and now claims a surplus. Smoke and mirrors or perhaps some who wish to think of this as improved fraud. Besides, making your arguement Fletcher was stuck with 150 million, who do you give credit for the 1 billion more added? Want to blame the Congress, fine, then give them credit for the supposed surplus. No matter how it cuts, it has and continues to be ignored. The citizens of 25 years from now, just like Social Security will have a huge debt to handle. I bet they cut it out or off and say to heck with us arrogant baby boomers who have financially failed our society and not hold anyone and particular those who passed it along and made it worse. By the way, I feel pretty strong on my information.

 

So do I. I was at the KET roundtable on this with Williams, Jody Richards, and Rep. David Floyd of Bardstown back in February. Even Richards conceded that the underfunding had occurred beginning 20 years ago. The loan request by Williams (which I agree was farcical) was intended to cover future items as well, to include buyouts and formula limits.

 

Your better argument is that the pension formula became egregiously underfunded when Pres. Bush changed the national funding formula to correlate with the 10, rather than the 20, year bond. States followed suit, and public AND private pensions suddenly found they had been caught red-handed shorting pension contributions for years.

 

I currently have a class-action lawsuit pending on this issue, so I feel pretty confident in my information, too.