Advertisement

Archive for Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Business interest

September 14, 2010

Advertisement

To the editor:

On Sept. 2, the Journal-World carried an article about the Kansas Chamber of Commerce holding a fundraiser for Republican gubernatorial candidate Sam Brownback.

My dictionary defines “business” as “commercial or mercantile activity.” I thought that was the purpose of the chamber of commerce. Also my dictionary defines “chamber of commerce” as being a promotion of commercial and industrial interest in the community, and “commerce” as an exchange or buying and selling of commodities. What type of commodity is Sen. Brownback, and how much does he cost?

On Sept. 4, the Journal-World carried an article about Lawrence being named the top town for triathlons. The Lawrence Convention and Visitors Bureau seemed to be responsible for this very positive rating. I would think that this would be what the chamber of commerce would be about. They were not mentioned.

Comments

Richard Heckler 4 years, 3 months ago

A chamber of commerce does receive tax dollars. Therefore should never endorse political candidates. They have no idea how these people as elected officials will manage local finances as our city commissions and USD 497 clearly demonstrate in their sometimes laissez faire manner. Bypassing the opportunity to allow voter approval way too often.

How could a Chamber endorse a party that has been responsible for turning a blind eye twice to financial institution corruption that destroyed retirement plans,forced retired golden agers back into the work force,wiped out millions upon millions of jobs each time and then expected tax payers to bail out the corrupt establishments? lordy lordy.

Yes remember the Reagan/Bush savings and loan heist and the Bush/Cheney Wall Street heist? Both wrecked the USA economy in a big way.

notajayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

"A chamber of commerce does receive tax dollars. Therefore should never endorse political candidates."

So do the members of a state employees union. Who'd they endorse, mertle?

cato_the_elder 4 years, 3 months ago

To the letter writer: The Kansas Chamber of Commerce represents its members. Its members own and operate Kansas businesses, especially small businesses. The Kansas Chamber of Commerce exists to advocate what's best for its members. Its Political Action Committee supports candidates who are pro-business. It receives no tax dollars whatsoever.

In recent years the Kansas Chamber of Commerce has begun to take its job much more seriously by moving away from the country club mentality that characterizes the Lawrence Chamber, for example, and instead actively working to support candidates who will help businesses grow and prosper, including the advocacy of sensible levels of taxation. Because of the flack that the Kansas Chamber has received from liberal, pro-taxation groups, a few Chamber members, especially those that often receive government contracts or exist in communities in which a large number of their citizens are employed by government, have been pressured into resigning their memberships.

There is a big difference between the country club, mutual back-scratching, good old boy attitude that characterized this organization some years ago and what it is doing now to provide real support to Kansas businesses, including holding down their tax burdens at all levels as much as possible.

Under those circumstances, if you can't figure out why the Kansas Chamber's Political Action Committee would support Brownback instead of his opponent, who has consistently been a supporter of increased taxation of all kinds at all levels, then you're naive in the extreme. His opponent has received the endorsements of many groups that strongly advocate increased taxation, which is also perfectly appropriate in an election year.

Jimo 4 years, 3 months ago

"In recent years the Kansas Chamber of Commerce has begun to take its job much more seriously by moving away from the country club mentality that characterizes the Lawrence Chamber, for example, and instead actively working to support candidates who will help businesses grow and prosper, including the advocacy of sensible levels of taxation."

Translation: The Chamber has been taken over by ideologues who push a single partisan agenda that seeks business subsidy, freedom from regulatory constraint and the avoidance of taxation on its members both organizationally and personally. (All hail, Ayn Rand.)

Needless to say, business owners, particularly small business, are dismayed at this politicization of their goals and are hardly in agreement that these partisan activities are the best use of Chamber money.

cato_the_elder 4 years, 3 months ago

Says who, Jimo? Give me an example of a small business in Kansas that is a member in good standing of the Kansas Chamber and is "dismayed" as you allege.

notajayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

Please don't ask Jimo for facts. It confuses him badly.

He probably believes that all union members agree with the political endorsements and contributions of the union.

weeslicket 4 years, 3 months ago

"The Kansas Chamber of Commerce represents its members. Its members own and operate Kansas businesses, especially small businesses. The Kansas Chamber of Commerce exists to advocate what's best for its members. Its Political Action Committee supports candidates who are pro-business."

question: then why have so many local kansas chambers of commerce "distanced" themselves from the state chamber of commerce?

cato_the_elder 4 years, 3 months ago

  1. Read the second paragraph of my comment.

  2. Your use of the term "so many" is an unacceptable stretch when all local chambers are considered on a statewide basis. The situation is as I stated. It's like comparing a few prominent establishment RINOs to the much greater number of real Republican conservatives who, on a statewide basis, actually want to do something about profligate government taxation and spending at all levels.

weeslicket 4 years, 3 months ago

ok. good response. agree with your redirection on #1. think maybe on #2 we could agree on the use of the word "many" rather than the phrase "so many".

(and then there followed an "unacceptable stretch")

notajayhawk 4 years, 3 months ago

Just think of the hydrocarbons that won't be burned if they stay home - those mT buses blow out a lot of CO2.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.