<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Raising Money For CT Legal Aid</title>
	<atom:link href="http://aconnecticutlawblog.com/2008/12/raising-money-for-ct-legal-aid/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://aconnecticutlawblog.com/2008/12/raising-money-for-ct-legal-aid/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 13:52:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter G</title>
		<link>http://aconnecticutlawblog.com/2008/12/raising-money-for-ct-legal-aid/comment-page-1/#comment-781</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter G</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 07:26:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aconnecticutlawblog.com/?p=673#comment-781</guid>
		<description>I definitely want to see the legal aid organizations adequately funded....but put a surcharge on court fees &quot;from small claims on up&quot;?  Why should poor and working people pay more so that Connecticut can give it to lawyers who represent poor and working people? 
 
I have a better idea.  Have the State of Connecticut act like providing legal assistance to those that can&#039;t afford it is a matter of policy not charity.  At least for the next two year period, while the country is in the deepest recession since the 1930&#039;s, allocate the funds necessary to maintain all legal aid organizations at their 2008 budget levels.  Raise the funds - and the funds to avoid similar budget cuts that will devastate working and poor people in Connecticut - by shifting the tax burden to the rich and corporations. 
 
Yes, it goes against every ounce of political wisdom that the corporate-owned media and the corporate bought-and-paid-for politicians have to dispense.  But considering that right now there is not a single &quot;sacrifice&quot; that is being discussed in the next budget that doesn&#039;t fall 100 times harder on the working class than it does on the rich, I can&#039;t think of a single good reason why the rich shouldn&#039;t have to pay their share. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I definitely want to see the legal aid organizations adequately funded&#8230;.but put a surcharge on court fees &quot;from small claims on up&quot;?  Why should poor and working people pay more so that Connecticut can give it to lawyers who represent poor and working people? </p>
<p>I have a better idea.  Have the State of Connecticut act like providing legal assistance to those that can&#039;t afford it is a matter of policy not charity.  At least for the next two year period, while the country is in the deepest recession since the 1930&#039;s, allocate the funds necessary to maintain all legal aid organizations at their 2008 budget levels.  Raise the funds &#8211; and the funds to avoid similar budget cuts that will devastate working and poor people in Connecticut &#8211; by shifting the tax burden to the rich and corporations. </p>
<p>Yes, it goes against every ounce of political wisdom that the corporate-owned media and the corporate bought-and-paid-for politicians have to dispense.  But considering that right now there is not a single &quot;sacrifice&quot; that is being discussed in the next budget that doesn&#039;t fall 100 times harder on the working class than it does on the rich, I can&#039;t think of a single good reason why the rich shouldn&#039;t have to pay their share.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

