x-sender: governor.haley@sc.lmhostediq.com x-receiver: governor.haley@sc.lmhostediq.com Received: from mail pickup service by IQ12 with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 7 Oct 2015 21:21:49 -0400 thread-index: AdEBZ7SmFe5fKVPKRlq0/tNGQy2N9A== Thread-Topic: Taxes & Flood Relief From: To: Subject: Taxes & Flood Relief Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 21:21:49 -0400 Message-ID: <2F4B66C6083D4DA19C33311FC292F949@IQ12> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message Importance: normal Priority: normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.1.7601.17609 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Oct 2015 01:21:49.0560 (UTC) FILETIME=[B4B6E780:01D10167] CUSTOM Ms Linda Berri SC citizen 116 Cedar Creek Circle Central SC 29630 lwberri@aol.com TAX Taxes & Flood Relief 99.5.126.202 Governor - For 6 years, you have preached no new taxes, cut expenses, etc. Now we have a flood. From everything I've heard, you have done a good job preparing and dealing with the flood. However, one of the first things you did is contact the federal govt. for relief money. I think that was a good idea, but somebody's taxes have to pay for it. You and all the other republicans think that all taxes are bad, but they're not; some things we need, such as disaster relief. Is federal disaster relief ok because it's not SC taxes? There's a very severe contradiction between your words and actions here. Things that taxes pay for are ok, except YOU can't be responsible for approving them. (Gasoline taxes and failing infrastructure come to mind.) How are roads and bridges damaged by the flood ok for payment by taxpayers, but roads and bridges that are too old are not ok for an increased gasoline tax?