CLT
UPDATE
Sunday, June 22, 2003
Teachers union dogs tax hike, by any
and all means
The budget headed for Gov. Mitt Romney's desk totals $22.3 million. It contains no new broad-based taxes, but would extract about $400 million in new revenues through increases in fees and fines. It also contains about $400 million in one-time revenue diversions, often criticized as "gimmicks" by some of the same leaders who grudgingly adopted them. The possibility of a tax hike this fall is still raised sometimes in State House corridor conversations.
Despite the daily talk of historic state finance problems, the compromise budget increases spending overall by about 2 percent, just about the same amount budget writers anticipate revenues to increase next fiscal year.
State House News Service
Weekly Roundup - Week of June 16, 2003
[Excerpt] Budget compromise reached quickly, details released
That number does not include about a billion dollars taken off budget by Democrats this year.
State House News Service
[Excerpt] Advances - Week of June 23, 2003
Even with the cuts, however, the budget is larger than this year's, in actual dollars. And before the fiscal year is out, there will be the traditional supplemental budget to make up for deficits in some programs.
A Patriot Ledger editorial
Saturday, June 21. 2003
An on-time state budget
On the budget compromise reached by legislative leaders, the House voted 118-37, with Republicans and liberal Democrats voting "no" to demonstrate their opposition to the secretive process used to produce the budget and the policy changes included in it. The Senate approved the budget 32 to 6, with only Republicans voting against the bill....
Certain budget cuts were denounced by a wide array of interest groups, including teachers' unions, the Conservation Law Foundation, and the Massachusetts Municipal Association. Cities and towns are set to see their first significant reduction in state aid in more than a decade; many communities will see their education aid cut by as much as 20 percent....
Several Democratic senators told their colleagues that they would have preferred borrowing or new taxes to the level of cuts set in the Legislature's budget. Senator David P. Magnani blamed Romney's no-new-taxes pledge for the cuts, though he voted in favor of the budget in the end.
Senate President Robert E. Travaglini said the Senate would "revisit and evaluate" the need for new revenues later this year, whether in the form of taxes, borrowing, or gambling expansions.
The Boston Globe
Saturday, June 21, 2003
Romney praises timely passage of budget with no new taxes
But $23.1b plan may face governor's line-item vetoes
Romney immediately vowed to veto the bill which would give House and Senate leaders free reign to dole out hefty bonuses to loyalists.
Opponents of the pay raise bill called it "indefensible" to send it to the governor yesterday along with what many observers called the barest of state budgets in more than 20 years....
Early on, Romney steered a wide path around the issue, saying each house should be able to organize itself and hand out extra pay as long as it didn't raise costs.
But more recently he has changed course, saying the bill as written would tie the hands of future governors. The switch has particularly infuriated House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran, members said.
"Finneran is ripping mad on this," a House member said. "This is an important initiative to him that has been stymied by Romney's unwillingness to stick to a deal."
Finneran, who critics claim is trying to consolidate his already powerful grip on the House, met with several members of his leadership team Thursday, encouraging them to reach out to wayward members who voted against the measure in April.
Opponents believe they have the votes necessary to sustain Romney's veto but admitted yesterday that the margin is razor thin. House members need a two-thirds majority to override a veto.
The Boston Herald
Saturday, June 21, 2003
Battle begins as thin budget, pay hike hit gov
The Council for Fair School Finance alleges that is far too little and is suing to force the state to pump even more money into the system.
Can they be serious? Public schools have been getting the lions share of state spending increases for a decade, even after the slack economy put the brakes on state revenue growth.
Just what is this Council for Fair School Finance anyway? ...
But the attempt to enlist the courts to grab an even bigger share of the states limited revenue smacks of greed.
Just who is behind this "fair finance" litigation?
The legal action is spearheaded by the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts. Other members, not surprisingly, include groups that stand to benefit financially: the Massachusetts Association of School Committees, the Massachusetts Association of School Superintendents, the Massachusetts Federation of Teachers and, of course, the Massachusetts Teachers Association, whose top priority currently seems to be to drum up support for higher taxes.
A Telegram & Gazette editorial
Thursday, June 19, 2003
The gimme gang
Who's behind latest education lawsuit, anyway
Boudreau said the MTA will continue to urge lawmakers to increase revenues in order to undo the damage done by this budget, that was created in an anti-tax climate fueled in part by Gov. Mitt Romney's staunch opposition to raising revenues.
"State lawmakers cut taxes deeply during the boom times of the 1990s," Boudreau said. "Well, those boom times are over. It is time for a serious debate about raising revenues to protect education and other core services."
Massachusetts Teachers Association
NEWS RELEASE
June 19, 2003
Budget called "a disaster" for higher education and public schools
As House-Senate conferences work out differences between the repetitive bodies' budget proposals, a number of items look to be ripe for well stroked gubernatorial vetoes. With the help of
Citizens for Limited Taxation and Common Cause - advocacy groups that by no means agree on all of them - here are a few candidates for extinction....
The proposed "technical accounting change" would exclude money communities have to set aside for tax abatements from the 2½ percent limitation. According to
Citizens for Limited Taxation, this would effectively let local officials raise taxes by as much as 4.37 percent without getting an override vote. If this last item gets to the governor, he should veto it before all the rest, for it is an assault on a precursor of Massachusetts' economic success for 20 years.
The Patriot Ledger
Saturday, June 21, 2003
A lineup of items Romney should veto
By David A. Mittel Jr.
Milton voters shot down a $1.5 million Proposition 2½
tax override aimed mainly at preventing school budget cuts.
School officials now say the quality of education in Milton will drop, while override opponents doubt that, saying it's a story they've heard before....
"We've been listening to that story for a long time," Mullen said. He said the timing of the measure was bad - a special election that cost $25,000 less than two months after the regular election. He said Milton voters who have approved a series of overrides in the past 15 years have had enough....
There have been a total of 161 override votes in Massachusetts cities and towns this year, more than double the normal number of recent years. Voters have approved 89, or about 55 percent of them.
The Boston Herald
Saturday, June 21, 2003
Milton voters nix Prop 2½ tax override
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
You will note that the budget passed by the
Legislature on Friday (yes, they actually appeared on Beacon Hill on a
summer Friday!) is bigger than the current year's budget ... in
the midst of the much-touted "fiscal crisis." What ever
happened to that "$3 billion deficit" they wanted to add to
their spending?
And that $22.3 billion budget doesn't include "about a billion dollars taken off budget by Democrats this
year," according to the State House News Service. Nor does it
include "the traditional supplemental budget" that will be
added on to the total later, as the Patriot Ledger points out.
The Beacon Hill pols are doing pretty good for
themselves in the midst of an alleged "fiscal crisis," though
still they added on $400 million in new fees and fee increases.
So good that they believe they deserve another pay
raise through Finneran's power grab.
"State spending on public higher education is cut sharply for the third year in a row. In addition, higher education faculty and staff will be required to pay substantially more for health insurance even though over 8,000 of them have not received a raise in two years and won't receive a raise for the third year under this
budget," Massachusetts Teachers Association President Catherine
Boudreau whined.
That's 8,000 out of 70,000 MTA members who demanded and got obscene pay
raises despite the impending "fiscal crisis." What's amazing
is that this small minority of MTA members didn't get their greedy hands
in our pockets too. The teachers union is slipping.
"The cuts in higher education will mean higher tuition and fees for students, reduced course offerings and the further loss of full-time
faculty."
That is a direct result of those obscene pay
raises secured by the MTA despite its recent $2 million media blitz
claiming a "fiscal crisis"! The teachers union personifies
special interest naked greed, and they hope to make you feel guilty
for not letting them take even more.
After this week's exposé by the Eagle-Tribune
Publishing Company, "Marked
Absent," revealed the
most-generous-in-the-nation and most-abused sick-leave policy for
teachers, union bosses would still be digging holes deeper to hide in --
if the MTA wasn't so contemptibly shameless.
Overrides were defeated in Essex, Milton, Pembroke (3,171-1,898) and crushed in Middleboro (1,746-634) over the past few
days, but democracy and elections obviously don't matter to most pro-tax
advocates unless they win.
Essex defeated its override by 11 votes last week (624-613)
-- but already its town selectmen have announced a new override
set for July 22 -- no doubt hoping that at least 6 taxpayers are away on
vacation. Selectman Rolf Madsen said, "The vote was so close then perhaps we should try
again. I'm personally in favor of it."
"Close" doesn't even matter in Lexington after its override was defeated.
Selectman Peter Kelley said, "It's time to allow the taxpayer to make choices," when
selectmen proposed new "bundled," "unbundled," and "tiered" $5 million overrides despite their
constituents' mandate just three weeks ago.
"Time to allow the taxpayer to make
choices"?
Mr. Kelley may not like the voters' last choice, but
by god they made it on June 2. He needs to learn to recognize and live
with democracy. "No" is only a two-letter word. I wonder what
part of it the tax-and-spenders like him don't understand?
|
|
|
Chip
Ford |
State House News Service
Weekly Roundup - Week of June 16, 2003
Budget compromise reached quickly, details released
[Excerpt]
The budget headed for Gov. Mitt Romney's desk totals $22.3 million. It contains no new broad-based taxes, but would extract about $400 million in new revenues through increases in fees and fines. It also contains about $400 million in one-time revenue diversions, often criticized as "gimmicks" by some of the same leaders who grudgingly adopted them. The possibility of a tax hike this fall is still raised sometimes in State House corridor conversations.
Some of the controversial policy decisions made by the Senate were left out of the conference report. The budget is silent, for example, on a statewide smoking ban passed by senators. It does not contain any exemptions to MCAS testing; House members had passed a provision exempting special needs students. The document does expand the MCAS test appeals process for special ed students. The "Pacheco Law" that makes it difficult to privatize state services was untouched by the conference report. No moratorium on charter schools is contained in the budget.
The highest-visibility policy change in this budget is the repeal of the 1998 Clean Elections Law, which legislative leaders have been changing, underfunding or ignoring for years on the grounds it is badly drafted, unworkable and unaffordable. Repeal sets up an interesting choice for Romney, who talks often about the will of the voters.
The budget contains deep cuts in many social and human services programs, and about $170 million in reductions in local aid, but those cuts have been coming for so long that inclusion in the final budget did not come as a surprise. The compromise budget did bring some cheer to health advocates. They praised the restoration of health coverage for 36,000 Medicaid recipients, the continuation of the Prescription Advantage program to help seniors pay for medication, and full funding of the anticipated costs of free hospital care to indigents next year.
The Quinn Bill, which provides increased pay to officers who earn college degrees but has been criticized as funding low-quality classes that don't return the taxpayers' investment, is substantially changed in the budget. New officers will be eligible for a sharply curtailed version of the perk.
The budget consolidates power in the judicial system in the hands of the Boston Municipal Court, almost exactly the opposite of what Gov. Romney proposed. But many of his reorganizations, for example in the Health and Human Services agencies, were adopted.
Despite the daily talk of historic state finance problems, the compromise budget increases spending overall by about 2 percent, just about the same amount budget writers anticipate revenues to increase next fiscal year.
Return to
top
State House News Service
Advances - Week of June 23, 2003
[Excerpt]
This first week of summer finds Gov. Mitt Romney perusing the first budget to cross his desk since he took office in January vowing to change the look and course of state government. He'll view the document as a mixed bag. Concern over its bottom line of $22.3 billion may prompt him to wield his veto pen freely.
That number does not include about a billion dollars taken off budget by Democrats this year.
The governor, who has received less than two dozen bills from the Legislature in six months, also now has 715 separate legislative proposals, also known as outside sections, to consider along with the budget.
Despite raising fees and imposing deep spending and service cuts, state spending is already on track to exceed available revenues in the fiscal year ahead by at least $400 million. That hole has been covered by one-time revenues, but the budget crisis continues.
"Clearly we couldn't do it all this year," House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Rep. John Rogers (D-Norwood) said late Friday morning on the House floor. "I think the dark clouds will be over our heads for the next two or three fiscal years. I hope and I pray that I'm wrong."
Senate Democrats agreed. "We have not yet bottomed out and we have to plan accordingly," Senate Ways and Means Chairwoman Therese Murray (D-Plymouth) said as the Senate began considering the budget Friday afternoon....
When Romney signs the bill, he'll also send lawmakers a message containing his vetoes. The Republican governor can veto or reduce items not to his liking. Democratic legislative leaders will review the vetoes and decide which they may want overridden quickly.
In almost every case, leaders send to the floor only those vetoes they have the votes to override. It takes two thirds of the members in each branch to make the governor's vetoes or dollar reductions law over his objections. His vetoes remain in effect until and unless overridden. Because budget vetoes cannot be carried forward into the second year of a two-year session, they will automatically move beyond the reach of lawmakers at midnight on Jan. 6, 2004....
Return to
top
The Patriot Ledger
Saturday, June 21. 2003
Editorial
An on-time state budget
The budget the Legislature sent to Governor Romney on Friday is neither a model of reform nor as stripped down as it should be. But change does not come easily on Beacon Hill, and state politicians are unwilling to address the enormity of the state's revenue crisis.
They'll wait until next year.
However, this is the first time in a generation that the Legislature was willing to take on some sacred cows. So let's focus on the positive. There is management reform in the budget, instigated by much broader change that the new governor proposed but which could never win approval in the first go-around. Changing the way the state delivers services to the poor and others needing services could have wide-ranging implications for years to come. This was a centerpiece of Romney's gubernatorial campaign. Duplication among state agencies - several of which have contact with the same families and keep separate records with little interaction among them - seems obvious and wasteful. The state should be able to save money and employees, and at the same time have things go more smoothly for those in need under a new arrangement that emphasizes a single point of entry.
The much-maligned Metropolitan District Commission will be dismantled and its functions performed by other agencies. That's important to the South Shore, home to parks and roads now under MDC control.
In the sacred cow department, the costly Quinn Bill will be revamped so that police officers receive fixed bonuses if they earn college degrees rather than percentage increases in salary. And state workers will pay more for their health insurance coverage, just as private-sector employees have been doing for years.
The big news in the budget was no news at all - that state aid to municipalities, mostly for education, was down by 10 to 19 percent, depending on the community. Most towns have prepared for this and layoff notices have been trickling out for weeks. Thousands of state workers could be laid off, or positions not filled when they become vacant.
Even with the cuts, however, the budget is larger than this year's, in actual dollars. And before the fiscal year is out, there will be the traditional supplemental budget to make up for deficits in some programs.
The Legislature managed to get a budget to the governor in time to meet the July 1 deadline for passage; Romney now has 10 days to veto items if he chooses. But to do so, members had just hours to study the details. A request to push the vote from Friday to Monday was rejected. Some regrettable traditions remain.
Return to
top
The Boston Globe
Saturday, June 21, 2003
Romney praises timely passage of budget with no new taxes
But $23.1b plan may face governor's line-item vetoes
By Rick Klein, Globe Staff
Striking a conciliatory tone, Governor Mitt Romney yesterday applauded the Legislature for promptly delivering a budget that avoids new taxes and includes some government reforms he hadn't proposed.
"I am in a mood of saying thank you and congratulations to both houses," Romney told reporters at a State House news conference. "Overall, I'm very pleased that we held the line on taxes. I'm very pleased that the budget was prepared on time."
The $23.14 billion budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1 was approved yesterday by the full House and Senate. Romney said he will use the full 10 days available to him to consider which items to veto.
According to aides, the governor is troubled by some major areas of the budget, such as the Legislature's proposal to expand the role of the Boston Municipal Court and the repeal of the voter-approved Clean Elections Law, and may use his line-item veto powers to reject them.
Generally, however, Romney said he is pleased that his reform proposals received full hearings in the Legislature and is impressed with some of the ideas lawmakers brought forward on their own. Romney said he was particularly intrigued by the Legislature's plan for a State Police forensics lab.
"I'll be one of the first to say, 'Congratulations, we hadn't seen that one,'" Romney said.
The governor's comments suggest that a spirit of cooperation between the executive and legislative branches could occur during the normally contentious budget season.
But the governor's kind words for House and Senate leaders may soon come to an end: Yesterday the Legislature gave final approval to a measure that would hand legislative leaders virtually unchecked power to set the pay of their lieutenants.
Romney will veto that bill, said Shawn Feddeman, the governor's press secretary. It is not yet clear whether legislative leaders have the two-thirds majorities necessary to override the move.
"He urged the Legislature to amend it to satisfy his objections, but they didn't," Feddeman said.
State Representative Byron Rushing, a frequent critic of House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran, said the House was showing disrespect for the public by moving to increase the pay of legislative leaders during a fiscal shortfall. The budget approved yesterday, which was voted on just minutes before the bill affecting legislative pay, will result in the loss of between 2,000 and 3,000 state jobs, according to House leaders.
"This budget has taken away not only salaries but whole jobs from our constituents," said Rushing, a South End Democrat.
On the budget compromise reached by legislative leaders, the House voted 118-37, with Republicans and liberal Democrats voting "no" to demonstrate their opposition to the secretive process used to produce the budget and the policy changes included in it. The Senate approved the budget 32 to 6, with only Republicans voting against the bill.
The budget includes massive cuts in aid to cities and towns, higher education, and services for residents with mental disabilities. While it increases overall state spending by about 1.5 percent, that is mostly because of uncontrollable increases in spending on Medicaid, which alone accounts for one-fourth of the state budget.
Most areas of state spending are reduced under the budget, said House Ways and Means Chairman John H. Rogers, a Norwood Democrat. He warned that the state will face a difficult budget next year as well.
"Times have changed and we must be prepared to change with them," Rogers said. "Every area is cut. Virtually every component of infrastructure in state government as we know it is changed."
Certain budget cuts were denounced by a wide array of interest groups, including teachers' unions, the Conservation Law Foundation, and the Massachusetts Municipal Association. Cities and towns are set to see their first significant reduction in state aid in more than a decade; many communities will see their education aid cut by as much as 20 percent.
"This is just the beginning of a wave of red ink that will flow through our city and town halls," said Geoffrey Beckwith, executive director of the municipal association.
Several Democratic senators told their colleagues that they would have preferred borrowing or new taxes to the level of cuts set in the Legislature's budget. Senator David P. Magnani blamed Romney's no-new-taxes pledge for the cuts, though he voted in favor of the budget in the end.
Senate President Robert E. Travaglini said the Senate would "revisit and evaluate" the need for new revenues later this year, whether in the form of taxes, borrowing, or gambling expansions.
"Obviously we're going to take full advantage of this legislative calendar," Travaglini said. "We're going to measure the depth and severity of these cuts, and we'll see if there's a turn in the economy or if there are still other ways [to raise revenue] that may be pending and may come to a vote."
Representative Ruth B. Balser, a Newton Democrat, blasted legislative leaders for trying to undo the voter-approved Clean Elections Law in a rider to the state budget. She accused top House and Senate members of trying to scuttle the campaign finance measure without a public hearing and without a roll-call vote.
"It's a sad day for democracy," she said. "The way this law is being repealed is the worst part of how we do business in this building."
Return to
top
The Boston Herald
Saturday, June 21, 2003
Battle begins as thin budget, pay hike hit gov
by Elizabeth W. Crowley
Lawmakers sent a $22.3 billion budget to Gov. Mitt Romney yesterday that could shut down rape crisis centers and force thousands of mentally disabled residents into homelessness - and included a pay raise bill for themselves.
Romney immediately vowed to veto the bill which would give House and Senate leaders free reign to dole out hefty bonuses to loyalists.
Opponents of the pay raise bill called it "indefensible" to send it to the governor yesterday along with what many observers called the barest of state budgets in more than 20 years.
"The symbolism of enacting this (legislative bonus pay) bill on the same day we do this budget is just bad. It shows a real disrespect on the part of House leadership toward all the people who are going to be badly hurt by these budget cuts," said Rep. Paul C. Demakis (D-Boston).
Staring down a $3 billion deficit while vowing not to raise taxes, legislators slashed programs across almost all of state government, from cuts of up to 20 percent in local aid, to 18 percent for UMass and hundreds of millions of dollars more from health and other human service programs.
A whopping 70 percent cut in funding for the state's 19 rape crisis centers could force 12 or 13 of them to close, warned Toni K. Troop of Jane Doe Inc., a statewide coalition of sexual assault and domestic violence programs.
"This budget will devastate the rape crisis centers," she said. "We need to work to find some kind of solutions to restore these funds so that no hotline goes unanswered and no woman or child has to go to an emergency room for a rape examination alone."
While advocates for the poor and disabled hailed Senate-led efforts to restore coverage for 36,000 Medicaid patients lopped off the rolls in April, they warned the budget threatens tens of thousands of others.
A $12 million cut to the Department of Mental Retardation, for example, could force some people now living on their own onto the streets.
"Those people may lose the person who comes to check on them," Leo
Sarkissian, director of ARC Massachusetts said. "They could very well end up homeless."
Romney has 10 days to scour the legislative budget plan and wield his veto pen. He would not comment yesterday on items he'll strike out but praised lawmakers for sticking to the no-new-taxes theme.
"Overall I'm very pleased they held the lines on taxes and I'm very pleased the budget was prepared on time," he said.
Legislators expect Romney will try to reverse a House-sponsored plan to expand the scope, budget and reach of Boston Municipal Court - the governor's favorite target for charges of bloated government, patronage and mismanagement.
A spokeswoman said Romney will definitely veto the bonus pay bill sent to him yesterday.
Early on, Romney steered a wide path around the issue, saying each house should be able to organize itself and hand out extra pay as long as it didn't raise costs.
But more recently he has changed course, saying the bill as written would tie the hands of future governors. The switch has particularly infuriated House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran, members said.
"Finneran is ripping mad on this," a House member said. "This is an important initiative to him that has been stymied by Romney's unwillingness to stick to a deal."
Finneran, who critics claim is trying to consolidate his already powerful grip on the House, met with several members of his leadership team Thursday, encouraging them to reach out to wayward members who voted against the measure in April.
Opponents believe they have the votes necessary to sustain Romney's veto but admitted yesterday that the margin is razor thin. House members need a two-thirds majority to override a veto.
Return to
top
The Worcester Telegram & Gazette
Thursday, June 19, 2003
Editorial
The gimme gang
Who's behind latest education lawsuit, anyway
Fact: The Council for Fair School Finance alleges that is far too little and is suing to force the state to pump even more money into the system.
Can they be serious? Public schools have been getting the lions share of state spending increases for a decade, even after the slack economy put the brakes on state revenue growth.
Just what is this Council for Fair School Finance anyway?
The group dates to 1975 after the U.S. Supreme Court delegated the school funding decisions to state courts. The council sued to end Massachusetts heavy reliance on local property taxes to pay for public schools.
Massachusetts responded with the Education Reform Act of 1993, which mandates minimum spending levels for all communities. Roughly 40 percent of school costs now are state funded.
But the council complains that still is not constitutionally sufficient, alleging that schools need even more money to start early education programs, buy computers, boost staff pay, hire permanent substitutes and support personnel, and more.
Some items on the wish list would be plausible funding goals in flush times. But the attempt to enlist the courts to grab an even bigger share of the states limited revenue smacks of greed.
Just who is behind this "fair finance" litigation?
The legal action is spearheaded by the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts. Other members, not surprisingly, include groups that stand to benefit financially: the Massachusetts Association of School Committees, the Massachusetts Association of School Superintendents, the Massachusetts Federation of Teachers and, of course, the Massachusetts Teachers Association, whose top priority currently seems to be to drum up support for higher taxes.
Massachusetts has been very generous to its public schools, and properly so even when some of the groups now taking taxpayers to court took education reform money but balked at achievement standards and accountability. Many communities, including Worcester, also have supported schools with permanent tax hikes via Proposition
2½ overrides.
For the beneficiaries of that largess to go to court for more, in the midst of a state revenue slump, is a slap in the face of all who have supported them.
Return to
top
Massachusetts Teachers Association
NEWS RELEASE
June 19, 2003
Budget called "a disaster" for higher education and public schools
"This is a dark day for many of the students and educators in our public schools, colleges and the University of Massachusetts," said Massachusetts Teachers Association President Catherine A. Boudreau, in response to the House-Senate conference committee budget released today. "These higher education cuts are a fiscal assault on students' access to our community colleges, state colleges and the University and will result in skyrocketing tuitions and less access for Massachusetts residents."
State spending on public higher education is cut sharply for the third year in a row. In addition, higher education faculty and staff will be required to pay substantially more for health insurance even though over 8,000 of them have not received a raise in two years and won't receive a raise for the third year under this budget. The cuts in higher education will mean higher tuition and fees for students, reduced course offerings and the further loss of full-time faculty.
For the first time in a decade, the Commonwealth will be cutting direct education aid (Chapter 70) to cities and towns - and this at a time when many municipalities have their own fiscal crises stemming from the weak economy and rising costs. The budget also cuts non-Chapter 70 local aid - up to half of which is spent on education - and reduces or eliminates many education grant programs, including early literacy and class size reduction programs. In anticipation of cuts in education spending, hundreds of teachers across the state were sent lay-off notices in recent weeks and districts are expecting larger class sizes and fewer educational services next fall.
Boudreau said the MTA will continue to urge lawmakers to increase revenues in order to undo the damage done by this budget, that was created in an anti-tax climate fueled in part by Gov. Mitt Romney's staunch opposition to raising revenues.
"State lawmakers cut taxes deeply during the boom times of the 1990s," Boudreau said. "Well, those boom times are over. It is time for a serious debate about raising revenues to protect education and other core services."
Return to
top
The Patriot Ledger
Saturday, June 21, 2003
A lineup of items Romney should veto
By David A. Mittel Jr.
One reform that candidate Mitt Romney promised seems poised to come to pass: For the first time in years the Legislature may produce a budget on time. Legally, the fiscal 2004 budget is due by the end of June.
No calamity occurs when the Legislature dithers with the budget until Thanksgiving, as it has done in several recent years. In the private sector, the reps and senators would all be fired. But in the public sector the House and Senate have only to agree on a one-month spending plan, then another and another. When this happens, the affront to the taxpayer isn't that the state goes out of business, it's the effrontery itself - the implication that the ruling class doesn't have to bother with petty things like punctuality or legal deadlines.
Since, as Gov. Romney is discovering, he doesn't run the Legislature, he took a risk in promising an on-time budget. Unlike some governors, however, he filed his own proposals in a timely manner and the Legislature responded expeditiously. All parties to the anticipated minor miracle are to be praised.
But that isn't necessarily to praise what the Legislature will have done. As House-Senate conferences work out differences between the repetitive bodies' budget proposals, a number of items look to be ripe for well stroked gubernatorial vetoes. With the help of Citizens for Limited Taxation and Common Cause - advocacy groups that by no means agree on all of them - here are a few candidates for extinction.
— Dagger in the corpse of Clean Elections. This one goes back to 1998, when the people voted for a form of public campaign financing. The powers that be (meaning, especially, House Speaker Tom Finneran) didn't like it, and in 2002, refused to fund it. This led to the spectacle of the court-ordered auction of state property to raise funds for candidates who had qualified for public money. Now the Legislature wants to kill public financing dead, along with the people's will. On the issue I agree with Finneran, but the matter of the people's will, as Milton Berle used to say, "is bigger than both of us."
— Dagger in the newborn baby of English immersion. Here again the people have spoken, just last year. Bilingual education, which had effectively tracked Spanish-speaking students into low-wage futures, is to be replaced by intensive English instruction. As a Texas parent said, "My nino and nina are in bilingual education, so they can be a porter and a chambermaid. I pay to send them to English classes after school so they can be a lawyer and a doctor!"
Under the guise of preserving so-called "two-way" classes in which English-speaking and non-English-speaking students attend bilingual classes together, the Senate wants to weaken last year's mandate even before it goes into full effect.
¡Hola! No Way!
— More power for "Big Foot" Finneran. First as chairman of House Ways and Means, then as speaker, Finneran might have been remembered as the voice of fiscal restraint for more than a dozen years. As it is, he is likely to be remembered as one more self-infatuated
pol. His pettiness in punishing legislators who dare to talk back is well known to the many lemmings who don't (that's his pettiness's point).
The most recent example of one who did dare is Rep. Harriet Stanley of West Newbury, who tried to sound an alarm about runaway Medicaid spending. For her effort she was stripped of her committee chairmanship and the bonus pay that goes with it. Now, Big Foot - who is a case study in the argument for term limits - wants the power to make and unmake new chairmanships at will. If Romney doesn't step on Big Foot's toes now, no one ever will.
— "Local option" taxes. Mayor Menino of Boston, who spent the good times buying good public relations for himself, has already raised tax assessments and water rates. Now he wants to raise the 5 percent statewide meals tax to 8 percent within the city. Such a surtax would be paid by the restaurant industry in lost business, and by waiters and waitresses in lost tips. Gov. Romney has stated that on principle he opposes local tax increases unless they have been approved by voter referendum. He should stick to his principles on this or make a U-turn for Utah!
— Proposition 2½ "overlay exclusion." Since it was approved in 1980, Proposition 2½ has capped the growth in property taxes at 2½ percent a year, with allowances for increases in the tax base and for voter overrides. The law is a major reason for the increase in the value of real estate. The proposed "technical accounting change" would exclude money communities have to set aside for tax abatements from the 2½ percent limitation. According to Citizens for Limited Taxation, this would effectively let local officials raise taxes by as much as 4.37 percent without getting an override vote. If this last item gets to the governor, he should veto it before all the rest, for it is an assault on a precursor of Massachusetts' economic success for 20 years.
David A. Mittell Jr.'s column appears regularly in Weekend editions of The Patriot Ledger.
Return to
top
The Boston Herald
Saturday, June 21, 2003
Milton voters nix Prop 2½ tax override
by Jules Crittenden
Milton voters shot down a $1.5 million Proposition 2½ tax override aimed mainly at preventing school budget cuts.
School officials now say the quality of education in Milton will drop, while override opponents doubt that, saying it's a story they've heard before. "I'm extremely saddened by it," said School Committee chairwoman Susan Kiernan of Thursday's vote. "The schools have been very hard hit. It's going to mean larger classrooms. We will have to eliminate afterschool activities."
Kiernan said an undetermined number of layoffs are expected on top of 30 positions cut last year.
But Selectman Chairman James Mullen said he doesn't believe the cuts will hurt education in Milton.
"We've been listening to that story for a long time," Mullen said. He said the timing of the measure was bad - a special election that cost $25,000 less than two months after the regular election. He said Milton voters who have approved a series of overrides in the past 15 years have had enough. To an average tax bill of about $4,800, it would have added $172 a year.
Janet Allison of the New England Association of Schools and Colleges said it is unclear whether the override's failure will lead to a loss of accreditation or an expansion of the probation on Milton's high school. She said she is waiting to receive a report on Milton school cuts.
There have been a total of 161 override votes in Massachusetts cities and towns this year, more than double the normal number of recent years. Voters have approved 89, or about 55 percent of them.
Return to
top
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17
U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or
payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this
information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For
more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
|