Run-off election would undo damage of...

Run-off election would undo damage of phone message

Re: “Consultant cops to phony phone message,” Nov. 21.

It seems as though we’ve had more than our share of questionable

election and campaign procedures over the last couple of years in

Newport Beach. Whether the actions of campaign consultant Dave Ellis,

hired by Councilman Gary Adams, affected the outcome of the election

is impossible to prove and immaterial. The real issue is that these

tactics cast doubts about the integrity of Adams and the entire

process.

Ellis’ argument that they placed the “message in the queue with

the instructions to the vendor not to execute it” is a typical

political ploy to divert blame. If it weren’t intended for use, it

should never have been in a position to be used. And, because Adams

hired Ellis, Adams is ultimately responsible.

I suggest that either we have a run-off election between Adams and

Rich Taylor, or that Adams step down.

J.B. LITVAK

Costa Mesa

Sleazy campaign practices need to be stopped

Good for Rick Taylor. Finally, someone cares enough to challenge

deceptive campaign tactics by taking the time for some investigative

work. Now, let’s hope our government follows up, that the guilty

people will suffer consequences and an example might be set for

future elections.

Campaign consultant Dave Ellis lied at least twice when he denied

any involvement in the telephone calling scheme intended to garner

more votes for Councilman Gary Adams, his client. Then, when

presented with proof, he changed his story and admitted he designed

the false message, but didn’t authorize it to be sent. How naive does

he think we are?

Sleazy campaign practices like this must be stopped. It undermines

our whole system of representative government because voters make

decisions based on false information.

CLAUDIA DOWNS

Newport Beach

No telling who will be affected by the Death Tax

Michel Moore’s statistical information on who is affected by the

Death Tax (“Few really succumb when Death Tax comes to call,” Nov.

27) certainly does not line up with my own experience, and it reminds

me that figures can lie. I have found average income families are

affected by the unfair estate tax law.

My father and mother unexpectedly passed away. They owned land and

farmed in the Midwest, and while financially comfortable, they

certainly would not be considered rich. They made personal financial

sacrifices in order to keep the land, wanting to pass it on to my

sons, who were interested in farming. What a shock to learn that the

Death Tax was so high we could not pay it and still keep the

property.

Even if my parents would have been wealthy, they bought that land,

faithfully paid taxes on it and kept it for their heirs. The

government was morally irresponsible to tax it again. No matter what

the dollar amount, the end result is that the Death Tax entitles

government to steal a person’s inheritance. It is a giant step closer

to socialized government.

I hope Rep. Chris Cox continues to press Congress for a very

needed change.

JILL BROWN

Costa Mesa

Killing the Death Tax benefits average families, too

I absolutely disagree with Wallace Wood’s comments about the

inheritance tax (“End of the estate tax will only benefit the

wealthy,” Nov. 20).

My family is far from wealthy. However, three brothers (one of

which is my husband) pooled their resources to buy a small piece of

land, build and begin a business together. It has become the sole

source of all three families’ income. The business has proved

successful, with an enormous amount of dedication and hard work, and

we have managed to buy a home, car and other necessities of life.

If one brother should unexpectedly die, the only way the family

could pay inheritance taxes would be to sell the property and

business, thus losing the source of everyone’s income.

There was a time the inheritance tax only affected the rich, but

that just isn’t the case today.

DARLENE WOOD

Costa Mesa