Letter: Shouldn't Rauner cut government first?

I am getting enjoyment reading your articles about Governor Rauner's plans and comments from governmental agencies, charitable organizations, etal. opposing them.

Rauner's latest plan to "freeze" real estate taxes with increases approved only by referendum would be avidly supported by voters but with his authoritative powers would he also freeze all costs? Could we chalk this up to a "political statement" or is it a grandiose plan dreamed up by his highly paid new assistants who know how to run "businesses," like presidential candidate Carly Fiorina, former CEO of HP, who almost ran the company broke before being fired.

Wouldn't a good business plan be to first implement his grand plan to reduce the numerous levels of government to see how large a tax reduction is needed?

Tax reductions sound great to voters until their favorite service or services are eliminated as residents of Kansas are experiencing under the austerity measures imposed by Gov. Brownback, whom they elected.

Now they are complaining. Decades ago voters supported the building of new schools until construction expanded rapidly. Then their comments changed to, "Not in my backyard."

My greatest pleasure is realizing the Daily Herald endorsed Rauner for Governor with the comment in their endorsement that he did not provide details of his budget plan. Now they must publish articles of criticisms about his plans. Shouldn't knowing these details have been a condition of his endorsement? Stu Paddock would have insisted. The pigeons are coming home to roost.

Clayton W. Brown

Kildeer