For past Letters to the Editor, view our Archives by publication date.

Bad Links?
Other glitches?
Notify Webmaster

What our Readers Are Saying

Letters to the Editor

BoE ignores danger of Banks Rd. bus stop

On April 25, 2005, our neighborhood, Wellington Place, experienced a very unfortunate accident involving a resident high school student.

While waiting for the schoolbus, at the corner of Banks Road East and McElroy Road, this student was hit by a motorist in a traffic accident.

Fortunately, the student did not sustain life-threatening injuries. However, he has a broken ankle and bruises. Over time he will heal and hopefully will not be affected by the injuries in later life.

This tragedy affected all of the families living in Wellington Place, as we are a very tight group and support each other in health, safety and property protection.

My point is this: while I do not have school-age children riding a school bus, every child living in my subdivision is important to our community. I have concerns of their safety and well-being.

As a Wellington Place homeowner and concerned member of the neighborhood, I along with many families take the safety of the children very seriously.

The fact that our children are being mandated by the Fayette County Board of Education (FCBOE) to walk through one of the heaviest traveled sections of the county and stand at one of the most traveled intersections is a heated issue for our families.

The FCBOE mandated this new stop for the purpose of consolidating stops and saving fuel. When the families asked why place the children at the center of this cut-through road, they were answered with “Budget cuts.”

“Are budget cuts and a gallon of gas worth the life of a child?” is a question I would like for the FCBOE to answer.

Another question is, “Has any member of the FCBOE been to this bus stop location and surveyed the conditions? DO THEY ever cut through our subdivision?”

Families asked the questions and got the routine answer, “This is the most efficient bus route.” Obviously safety is not a priority for the FCBOE, as the children of Wellington Place are told to report to one of the most dangerous intersections in Fayette County to ride the schoolbus.

The backdrop for this bus stop nightmare is painted by a report of the Fayette County Sheriff’s Department Traffic Division showing Banks Road East and McElroy Road as one of the most traveled routes in Fayette County. One of the peak travel times at this intersection is 7:45 a.m.

The data show average speed of motorists to be between 35-39 mph northbound. This is the cut-through route direction of Wellington Place.

Those of you that travel our roads know that the posted speed limit is 25 mph. The Sheriff’s Department provides as much help as they can with the manpower they have available.

Now a student has been hit by a motorist and the families of Wellington Place are looking in the direction of the FCBOE to correct a problem they created. This accident could have been a lot worse.

Is the FCBOE now willing to listen to the families or are the budget and a gallon of gas more important? This whole incident could have been avoided two years ago if someone would have only listened to the voices of the families.

The traffic situation will not get any better at this intersection and the safety of the children is the main concern.

Bill Altman
President, WPHOA
Fayetteville, Ga.

BoE, please listen to Wellington residents

I am writing to let you know of a situation that happened [April 25] at a bus stop in the Wellington Place subdivision.

Two years ago, the Fayette County Board of Education decided to consolidate all bus stops within the neighborhood in an effort to conserve fuel in light of the recent budget cuts facing the BOE.

While this in itself does not constitute a problem, where they placed the bus stop does pose a problem.

The bus stop for the middle school and high school students is at the corner of Banks Road East and McElroy Road.

This is a VERY busy intersection because of the traffic coming from Clayton County and the normal morning traffic.

The residents of the neighborhood have contacted the BOE with our concerns repeatedly to no avail. This is the most efficient route for the buses is the routine answer.

[April 25] a high school student was hit by a car while standing at the bus stop. While this was a legitimate accident, it still shows the dangers of this intersection. Anywhere from 10 to 15 students are standing on the corner waiting on the bus. The student suffered a broken ankle from the accident. It could have been much worse.

The Fayette County Sheriff’s office has ample data showing the traffic patterns of this highly traveled corridor. Apparently, since a traffic light is at the corner of Banks Road and Ga. Highway 54, this is the chosen route for most traffic entering onto Hwy. 54 from the Clayton/ Fayette County line.

Far and away, the majority of the traffic traveling through our neighborhood is not originating or ending in our neighborhood.

While the residents have come to accept this fact, it still does not downplay the dangers of people speeding down Banks Road.

In conclusion, while the residents do not argue with the BOE’s decision to consolidate bus stops, why is it necessary to have the stop at a very busy intersection? Is a gallon of gas saved worth a child’s safety?

And why can’t the stop be placed within the subdivision at a much safer cul-de-sac entrance?

These are the possible solutions that have been presented to the FCBOE over the past two years. It just seems that no one is listening.

Jody S. Roberts
Fayetteville, Ga.

10 reasons to deny Walgreens rezoning

Thursday night the Peachtree City Council will vote on whether to approve Christ Our Shepherd’s request to rezone their property from Office Institutional (OI) to Limited Use Commercial (LUC).

The rezoning would allow the church to be demolished and replaced with a 24-hour Walgreens drugstore plus a second commercial building. During the last nine months there have been numerous letters to the editor opposing the rezoning. The following 10 reasons summarize the opposition:

1. Opposed by the community.

Last July when it was announced that Christ Our Shepherd was requesting a rezoning I wrote newspaper articles asking Peachtree City citizens to join in signing or circulating a petition against the rezoning. Over one dozen concerned citizens from various parts of the city contacted me for a copy of the petition and walked their neighborhoods going door to door obtaining signatures. During a two month period, over 90 percent of the people contacted signed the petition. After 1,650 signatures were obtained it was quite clear that the vast majority of Peachtree City residents agreed with the petition and the petition drive was stopped.

2. Sets bad precedent.

If Christ Our Shepherd is rezoned from OI to LUC, what is to stop other land owners and/or churches from requesting the same? Churches such as The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, Carriage Lane Presbyterian, First Presbyterian, First Baptist, and Holy Trinity all have property next to Ga. Highway 54 and could sell their property at much higher prices than currently appraised if their land were rezoned commercial. This rezoning will also reduce adjacent residential property values. Who wants to live next to a 24-hour drugstore?

3. Jams up traffic.

Christ Our Shepherd generates approximately 100,000 car trips to the site per year. Most of the church traffic is on Wednesday nights and Sunday mornings which are slack traffic times for surrounding roads. The Walgreens with 550,000 car trips per year and a second commercial building (such as a bank with 100,000 car trips per year) are projected to generate over 650,000 car trips to the site per year with a greater proportion of the traffic on weekdays during rush hour traffic. Changing the zoning from OI to LUC will increase the number of vehicles to the site at least six-fold and change the timing so that the maximum traffic to the site will occur at times when Hwy. 54 and Peachtree Parkway will already be busy.

4. Violates a planned community.

Good zoning standards use step-down density zonings to buffer adjacent zoning designations. For example, residential zonings should be buffered by office institutional which in turn should be buffered by commercial zonings, etc. The current church site is office institutional and provides perfect buffering between the residential zoning behind the church and the adjacent commercial zonings for Ruby Tuesday and Kroger. Changing the Lutheran Church zoning to LUC is a step in the wrong direction that violates good zoning standards for our planned community.

5. Compromises our safety.

Additional traffic generated by the Walgreens site will cause accidents at the proposed new curb cut entry and exit onto Hwy. 54. Traffic on Hwy. 54 going west down the hill (from the direction of McDonald’s) often is traveling 50 miles per hour and will be deadly for cars entering and leaving the new curb cut. In addition, adding traffic to northbound Peachtree Parkway increases the risk to school children who now load and unload along the parkway.

6. Decreases fire/EMS response time.

Additional traffic on Peachtree Parkway north trying to enter the Walgreens site will delay fire trucks and EMS vehicles from the adjacent fire station from going through the Hwy. 54/Peachtree Parkway intersection. Currently when there is a red light on Peachtree Parkway, fire trucks and EMS vehicles often go against northbound traffic to enter the intersection. With northbound vehicles on Peachtree Parkway stopped to turn left into the Walgreens site, going against traffic will be restricted during rush hours.

7. Ignores moral covenant.

The Lutheran Church 26 years ago accepted religious-use-only restrictive covenants which legally have run out. The church is now ignoring a moral covenant to the city. Most citizens of Peachtree City feel betrayed by the church’s decision to request a rezoning for a 24-hour drugstore and to protect us with another covenant (that prohibits gas stations, liquor sales, adult entertainment, fast food stores, etc.) that will expire in 20 years. Legally what happens 20 years from now when there are no restrictions to the site? This is a downward trend with no end.

8. Lessens our quality of life.

When most of us moved to Peachtree City, the driving factor was quality of life. This planned community is special with a history of strict adherence to its land use plan. The Hwy. 54/Peachtree Parkway intersection has an equal split between commercial development on two corners and churches on the other two corners. Rezoning this property to demolish a beautiful church at a prominent location and replace it with a 24-hour drugstore needlessly further commercializes the entire corner and upsets a delicate balance.

9. Super-sizes a drugstore.

The new Walgreens will be 50 percent larger than the Eckerd across the street and open 24 hours per day, seven days per week. According to the Walgreens Annual Report, they build stores where they want them to be, rather than where sites happen to be. In an average week Walgreens opens one new store a day, and two on Sunday. Losing one corner in Peachtree City certainly won’t affect their stock price. There are more suitable building sites in town with proper zoning for commercial development. Walgreens is relentless, they know what they want and they usually get it, regardless of cost. This is a chance to say no.

10. Ignores the planning commission recommendation

Two weeks ago the Peachtree City Planning Commission voted 5 to 0 to not recommend the rezoning. The members of the Planning Commission are selected for their expertise. Ignoring their recommendation is unwise.

The City Council vote on the church property rezoning is scheduled for Thursday, May 5, at 7 p.m. at City Hall. City Council could easily vote for or against the rezoning.

Mayor Brown has already indicated his support for the rezoning. Steve Rapson seems to be very sympathetic and I believe will vote against the rezoning. If you know any of the other council members (Stuart Kourajian, Judi-Ann Rutherford, or Murray Weed) and wish to make your concerns known, contact them.

The often silent majority needs to become vocal and make its position clear. Also, if you can, come to the council meeting and voice your opinion.

Bill Nigro
Peachtree City, Ga.

Trading Lutheran church for 24-hour Walgreens: PTC will be the loser

We need to demolish and replace the Lutheran Church with a Walgreens? Otherwise, Eckerd across the street will continue its monopoly position in the village?

That is what Christ Our Shepherd’s College Park consultant says in a March 2005 study provided to Peachtree City government. However, there is plenty of drugstore competition in town with nine pharmacies and a tenth on the way (at Target).

A Macon appraiser provides an equally confusing opinion. He states that the Walgreens offer — subject of course to the proposed commercial rezoning — is “four to five times the amount the property would be worth as zoned Office/Institutional.” He also says that this is “the most profitable use.”

This is quite revealing. He values the “land only” without this signature church’s 32,000 square feet of buildings.

In a third instance, before the Peachtree City Planning Commission meeting last month, Walgreens’ Orlando developer argued that the second building would act as a buffer.

Can you imagine? Build a building to buffer a neighborhood.

I guess the proposed 10-foot berm and wall with plantings is simply not enough to adequately mask this 24-hour drugstore.

Why? Walgreens plans a 28-foot high single-story building. Isn’t that really the equivalent of a three-story building?

They have presented a case with hired experts from College Park, Macon, and Orlando led by a Griffin lawyer. What if this proposed commercial rezoning is denied?

Walgreens will probably still build somewhere else in town. There are other commercial sites. They will also choose one that better fits our land use plan. A denial can bring a better result.

Simply said, this rezoning has been driven by what Walgreens wants. The very first line of their 2003 Annual Report, after the customary letter to the stockholders, reads, “We build stores where we want to be, not where sites happen to be.” Look it up.

Walgreens is a Chicago-based Fortune 500 company focused on gaining market share. That is why they often build across the street from the competition. A typical store has 25,000 items and annual sales of $7.4 million. They are a 21st century five and dime, or for some, a mini-Wal-Mart with drugs.

The developer’s proposal calls for a bigger than average 14,600 square foot building with a very high ceiling for surveillance cameras. This is considerably larger than an average Eckerd. They also do a lot more business than a typical Eckerd or CVS, at least 60 percent more.

Christ Our Shepherd Lutheran Church seems sold on this as the only option. If their objective is to move, they can still move regardless of the decision. There are other reasonable alternatives that have not been pursued thus far.

If they wish to expand their ministry, I for one have faith that there are other ways to succeed. That is, without leaving a long-term mess in their wake.

Again, what if this proposed commercial rezoning is denied? Senior Lutheran Pastor John Weber stated in last month’s Planning Commission meeting that they would find a way to move on regardless. “It just may take longer.”

Doesn’t this all seem like such an unnecessary waste? Hire outside consultants so you can tear down a signature church for yet another drugstore: 24 hours of convenience at what price to our quality of life? All for a church representing only about 3 percent of the city’s population.

Remember why we moved here in the first place. Peachtree City is a planned community. It’s a delicate balance. Let’s stay the course and uphold both the current zoning and our land use plan.

B. Ray Helton
Peachtree City, Ga.

Who really represents us in the Ga. legislature?

I was reading a review of the historic 2005 session of our Georgia legislature when I was overcome by a sense of shame and sorrow.

You see, I always thought that the state legislature was composed of middle-class people like you and me. People who have to take out loans to send their kids to college or buy a car or even to replace the furnace when the old one gives up the ghost.

I thought these legislators would care about middle-class concerns like our school system or property taxes or even just property rights.

You know you have joined the middle class when you own your home. Be it ever so humble, it’s still a sacred place to you and only in the direst circumstance would you ever give it up. Our oldest and most inviolable laws are based upon an individual’s property rights.

Yet the new majority in power tried to slip through a bill that would allow the state under eminent domain to condemn your home. Not for any compelling government need, like a hospital or fire house or interstate highway, but for a mega-market, drug store or another strip mall.

“Why?” you may ask, would some of our representatives risk the wrath of the middle-class voter on such an unseemly bill? Because it’s time to pay back the developers and chain stores for their massive campaign contributions.

This bill was never supposed to see the light of media scrutiny. When it was revealed in the press, it was quickly sent back to committee, not to die a slow death, but to be resurrected again when the electorate isn’t looking.

It can cost one legislator up to $100,000 to run for a state House seat. We had better keep a watchful eye on our new legislature, because the “house” they allow their friends to bulldoze may be our own!

Kevin Madden
Peachtree City, Ga.

College student: Here’s what F’ville really needs

Letter to you, editor, sir: This and that; blah, blah, blah. That and this, lalala.

Why don’t we really banter? I mean we do, but why not over something worthwhile and maybe important. And Fayetteville isn’t totally mediocre, is it?

Something about top 10 percent, or maybe that’s just PTC or Delta or bigger business, nicer restaurants and battery-powered wheels that move you from hole five to 16 and Kroger versus Publix.

Per capita maybe; maybe it’s soccer and raising your perfect families, your kids’ education and pharmacies on every corner, 24-hour chicken fingers or the occasional wet or dry martini.

So why are we still just lame and provincial? Is it our South; is it the suburbs? Is it hearty Americanism?

Are we really some “city” of Fayetteville or merely a safe place, nightly headrest for the morning grind, the dawny wheel-cogging of Atlanta life or other such more similar endeavors?

And why do we sell off our trees like ... and here just manufacture your own simile? Why do we pretend to be a real pulsing place?

Why don’t we have a real downtown with shops and people walking, enjoying the fresh of summer nights and lapping down an ice cream cone and talking bout whose football team might beat whom come fall?

Now that’s a city! That’s what Fayetteville could be with a little just imagination and heart. So give the kids their place to play so they don’t have to cave-away and drink when mom or dad’s out of town till the police storm the beeramids and paddy-wagon each and all ‘cause they should really earn their wages; right?

Why not plant a park, a real one big, for strollers, lovers and mallards and poets to promenade or smell the flowers?

Keep the simple sobbing, the venting rural attitudes but make her great, this Fayetteville; make her something of a city and not a just stretch of state highway we might just pass through, just to get somewhere else or buy a maybe cola, maybe.

Make her something specialer, for she’s all ready and special to all of us, isn’t she?

Or maybe that’s why we don’t speak when we strip her land of oak and pine and monkey-clap at our newest fast-food and surplus stores.

Or maybe that’s just Fayetteville. Maybe that’s just, Fayetteville.

alejandro miguel justino crawford
alexc718@uga.edu

Mayor Brown, come to yourself

Dear Steve (Mayor Brown): It may surprise you to hear from me but you must remember I always had a very special feeling towards Peachtree City. Believe it or not, I still read about the progress of Peachtree City on the Internet. On my visits I now look at the new developments with dismay.

I clearly remember you took a stand against rezoning for higher density, big boxes and the like and that was the main reason everyone worked so hard to get you elected mayor.

Now you have Wal-Mart, Home Depot, a Target coming and I hear you’re in favor of the Westside Village and annexing by Peachtree City.

But to allow the rezoning which would allow the tearing down of the Lutheran church to put in a Walgreens is completely unreasonable and has thus prompted me to write this letter.

I understand the City Planning Commission turned it down.

Steve, I can’t understand your thinking. You were the one against so many things and you’re the one that said the citizens should be listened to. Why don’t you do what you preach and take a second look at that rezoning?

Mildred Harris.
Vancouver, B.C.

Closing Cargo Kids: What a waste

I belong to a knitting group in Peachtree City; we meet weekly at TeaFusions in The Avenue. We noticed this week that the neighboring store, Cargo Kids, had closed up. And we were disgusted to hear that the store destroyed their remaining inventory, slashing mattresses, breaking furniture, because it would cost too much to ship to other stores.

Please understand that several members of our knitting group make scarves, blankets and hats for local charity organizations, so this information sickened us. What would it have cost to pick up the phone and call a local agency, church or even the Peachtree City Police Department to donate the items?

As an individual, I make it a practice to donate furniture, clothing and other items to local charities. My family and friends do the same.

This large corporation chose to turn their back on the people in the community, preferring to destroy and discard items that could have been used for children in need. (Cargo Kids is owned by Pier 1 Imports; I verified it on their Web site. Unfortunately, there was no way to e-mail them regarding this destructive act.)

In my job (I’m the editor at the Coweta/Fayette Guide magazine), I celebrate the good works and donations of individuals, organizations and businesses for area causes, as I know you, and all the area publications, do. This flagrant act of careless destruction disturbs me, the members of our group and anyone else who has heard about or witnessed it.

For my part, I’m choosing to no longer shop at Cargo Kids or Pier 1 Imports.

Kathy Vogeltanz
ktvogeltanz@earthlink.net

PTC mayor lauds mothers

I would like to say a special thank you to all of the mothers and grandmothers in our community. Throughout the year I try to recognize the people that do things to improve the way we live. More often than not, one of our beloved mothers is the person being recognized.

Our mothers and grandmothers soften the edge of life and show the rest of us love and compassion. The old saying is true that mothers hold their children’s hands for a short while, but their hearts forever.

There is no greater source of encouragement than our mothers and grandmothers.

While a child and father are blessed when a woman becomes a mother, she proceeds to take on a most valuable but often thankless job. All mothers are working mothers.

Peter De Vries was on target when he said, “A suburban mother’s role is to deliver children obstetrically once, and by car forever after.”

The most caring, loving, protective and mindful word that ever comes off of our children’s lips is “mommy” and it stays that way until the day we die.

Our community has the most beautiful, caring and talented mothers and grandmothers in the world. Thank you for making our city such a great place to live. Happy Mother’s Day!

With love and appreciation,

Steve Brown, mayor
Peachtree City, Ga.

Epps’ tolerance late but welcome

It took 50 years, but the love of God finally convinced Father David Epps that Catholics are His children, too (“About Catholicism”, April 22)!

If only Epps could take back his earlier sermons such as “Smells and bells, incense and other nonsense.”

Words of fear and mistrust from the pulpit do much to legitimize a climate of intolerance, whether the target is Catholics, homosexuals, or women.

I pray that is doesn’t take another lifetime for Fr. Epps to celebrate mass with a gay priest, in sincere love. (But I won’t hold my breath!)

Suzanne Sports
Peachtree City, Ga.

Anti-GOP? Must be Parker again

I was reading a letter to the editor online and by the second line of virulent anti-Republican rhetoric I said to myself, “This must be by that Tim Parker guy.”

Sure enough, I scrolled down two pages and saw his name at the bottom.

I generally don’t agree with him and find his letters very nonsensical, but at least he is consistent.

Steve Justice
Tyrone, Ga.

Paper overboard on skinny-dippers

Re: “Police nab skinny-dippers” by Lee Williams. What a disgusting revelation of salacious details in the April 15 report.

Your story was the capture and arrest of the wrongdoer. Divulging his business, details about his wife and the police officer’s observations was nothing more than tabloid “journalism.”

Len Robichaud
Sharpsburg, Ga.

Only smokers should inhale smoke

Until law requires it, businesses that profit by ignoring the danger [of second-hand smoke] will continue to do so thus forcing their competitors to do the same (just like with child labor, sweatshops, fire safety, or the extra steps needed to protect from bacterial contaminations). Public health regulations are the proper use of government.

The only right the Smoke-free Air Act infringes on is the right to needlessly harm others and by requiring it of all, protecting our health stops being a luxury business cannot afford.

By May 10 we will know if Governor Perdue’s priority is to protect our families’ health or the right to needlessly harm others.

Kathie Cheney
Peachtree City, Ga.

President asked for ideas, so F’ville reader offers his Social Security fix

In the 1990s President Clinton and many in Congress talked about the eminent failure of the Social Security System, but no reform was implemented. In 2005 President Bush tried to advance plans on this problem, and as of this writing, those plans have met with significant political opposition.

President Bush also stated that he was open to ideas, from anyone. It is with that in mind that this plan has been formulated, and is to be sent to President Bush for consideration.

This plan is very simple and tries to address two main points. The first, most important point is to provide more funds for people in their retirement.

The second point, and far less important, is to address the political acceptance of this idea.

It is important to read the plan completely as both the plan and foreseeable criticisms are both laid out and addressed.

THE METHOD OF REFORM

We should allow unlimited contributions to a ROTH IRA account. This will give tremendous and obvious incentive to save money to the taxpayer. These accounts will be able to produce much better rates of return than are currently delivered by the Social Security system.

Money can be invested in many ways. Money that is invested in even very conservative portfolios will yield a better rate of return. By keeping in a ROTH IRA account, the money will still be targeted for retirement, i.e., the money will not be distributed until age 60. However, in case of an emergency the funds deposited can still be retrieved if necessary.

During working years, the Social Security taxes are still to be paid by the employee and employers as they are now. This will mean that there is no shortfall of contributions into the Social Security system.

The Unlimited Roth contributions are made with after-tax dollars, so there is also no immediate shortfall to the general treasury from income taxes.

People who like this idea, and are willing to take responsibility for themselves, should have the option to use this plan. If they use this option, they would note this, each year, in filing their tax returns. Those who exercise this option would then receive a reduced benefit from Social Security in retirement.

I propose that this benefit be reduced by a maximum of 25 percent. The percentage, from zero percent to 25 percent, would be based on how many years the individual opts to use the Unlimited Roth IRA as the main retirement vehicle. This would be based on a 50-year work-life, starting at age 20.

For example, a person works from age 20 to age 70 (50 years). In those 50 years, this person opts to make Unlimited Roth contributions for 25 of those 50 years. This person would then have the Social Security benefits reduced by 12.5 percent. This is arrived by using 25 percent as a maximum reduction amount, divided by half of the work-life.

In those 25 years, this person is likely to have significant funds available from the Unlimited Roth. If this person was able to retire early, say at age 60, then contributions to the Social Security system would be slightly less. Hence, the benefits would be reduced accordingly, again, just as they are now.

It will be important to have a minimum amount for consideration here as to whether a person must declare a given year of Unlimited Roth.

I suggest that we use the current maximum amount, or $3500, as a minimum amount to be contributed before being able to declare it as an optional year exercised.

If a person contributes less than this amount, this person should just be considered as we currently do now. In other words, a person who contributes less than the maximum would be treated exactly as they are today.

This will allow people who cannot afford to take full advantage of an Unlimited Roth to still have a vehicle available that allows them to supplement their Social Security account.

Conversely, anyone who makes contributions above the current maximum would then be considered as having exercised the Unlimited Roth that year. Since Form 1099s can still be utilized, this would be an easy way to double-check everyone as they file their tax returns.

This plan should make everyone a winner. First, the individual has the opportunity to provide more funds for retirement. Second, the general treasury is not affected immediately. Third, the current Social Security contributions are maintained. Fourth, and most importantly, the Social Security system has the opportunity to develop surpluses from the reduced benefits paid to individuals that have opted to use the Unlimited Roth.

ADDRESSING CRITICISMS

One criticism that can be anticipated is using the Roth vs. Traditional IRA accounts. It is important to use the Roth to address inevitable political debate over taxes to the general treasury.

By using a Roth, we are using after-tax funds. This means that there will be no immediate shortfall to the general treasury (this plan also means no immediate shortfall to the Social Security funds either).

This will give time for the federal government to address budgets years in the future. This plan would certainly translate taxable savings into non-taxable savings in the future.

This may be the toughest part of the plan to get approval for, in practical terms, because it will force the federal government to address spending issues in the future. It bears reminding, however, that the government will have a few years to make adjustments.

We should also bear in mind that it is quite likely that the overall economy will grow as part of this plan, and that income to the general treasury will likely grow anyway. While this plan cannot and does not address the economic impact, it is likely to have a positive effect in many areas.

The alternative would be to use the Traditional IRA account. If Traditional IRAs were used, this would produce a much more immediate shortfall to the general treasury. This would clearly be politically unacceptable.

Another criticism may be the plan actually raises taxes for those who opt in. These people would pay into Social Security and would not receive full benefits. This point must be examined because it can be spun politically either way.

Yes, some people would pay into the system and get reduced benefits. However, at the back end there would be potentially much more gained.

The Roth distributions are tax-free. Since these distributions could be worth much more in terms of retirement income, these people would actually receive a tax break.

Again, we must remember the goal here, to preserve Social Security and allow people to have more money in retirement, not to make this a political football. Individuals will gain greatly, while at the same time preserving Social Security to those who will need it.

It is possible that this plan would be very successful in building wealth for educated investors/taxpayers. This may create a perception of the rich getting richer.

Education levels are statistically tied to income levels. Those who earn more will have more opportunity to contribute to the Unlimited Roth IRA.

This perception must be dealt with in a blunt fashion, and not be mitigated by political correctness. We really must ask, so what if people retire wealthy? Isn’t that goal, and hope of all Americans?

We must also remind ourselves that Social Security was not devised, designed or implemented with the goal of redistributing wealth.

This plan will give desperately needed encouragement to all classes of people to save money and take more personal responsibility.

It is important to remember the goal here. We are not to trying to make everyone equal in retirement, we are trying to help people retire with adequate funds, and provide a system for those who can not afford to save much money on their own.

POLITICAL REALITY

There simply is not enough money coming into Social Security to support it. Consequently, someone, somewhere is going to wind up losing. The questions really is, how to avoid the collapse of Social Security without just raising taxes.

Liberals will want to raise taxes on the rich. In fact, at the time of this writing, they have already suggested so (by raising the current $90,000 income level which is taxable for Social Security). Conservatives will push for some, if not total, privatization of Social Security. Both ideas are likely to fail and will only generate political debate and no solution.

This plan is an attempt to bridge that gap. Up-front taxes are clearly raised. Yet, in the end, the taxpayer may make a significant gain over the present system, and generate significant sums of tax-free income.

This plan also keeps a public system available to those who will need it. Still, the individual would have much more control over his/her future. This plan may not be perfect, but it may be better than anything offered at this time.

Thomas Erik Lewis
Fayetteville, Ga.