“I can respect someone voting no to #MAPS3, except when their decision rests on ignorance, lies, and bad math. Vote yes.”
That’s how this all began. That’s my quote from Twitter, after reaching my fill on Angus fertilizer about MAPS 3.
While attending a luncheon Wednesday where MAPS was discussed and questioned, Porter Davis, one of the leaders of the efforts to stop MAPS 3, stood up and proclaimed the need for debate about the proposal, while pointing everyone to a list of the “Top 10 Reasons to Kill the MAPS Tax.” I don’t claim for one minute to be someone whose opinion counts more than anyone else’s, nor do I claim to represent any group or concern. I do, however, have a vested interest in honest debate for personal philosophical reasons. Most people who know me would probably agree that a) I tend to voice my opinions in a forceful manner, but b) I willingly concede points that seem logically valid and factually substantiated. I save my attacks for where I feel the truth is being ignored, overlooked, or hidden. By my account, that’s what’s happening within the debate around MAPS 3. I hope this piece contributes to a closer examination of the facts and the arguments.
The loose collective of interest groups against the MAPS 3 initiative has coalesced around the efforts of two somewhat affiliated (or at least similar in purpose) campaigns: the Not This Maps campaign (found at nomaps3.com even though they list their URL as NotThisMaps.com), and the Kill the Maps Tax campaign (found at KillTheMapsTax.com). Some part of the collective attempt to say that it’s merely THIS Maps tax to which they object, while others stress that it is taxes in generally that they oppose. For the purpose of this piece, and because the various interest groups have lumped themselves together, I will do so as well here by referring to them as “KMT” (for Kill the Maps Tax).
Therefore, I present my rebuttal to the aforementioned “Top 10 Reasons to Kill the MAPS Tax”. In the reverse of the order they were originally presented...
