CLT
UPDATE
Wednesday, December 31, 2003
Looking back, looking forward, looks the same, unless ...
Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino's proposal to make businesses pay a higher commercial property tax rate is splintering the state's business community, with real estate heavyweights endorsing the idea and small business owners complaining that they will be disproportionately burdened.
The Greater Boston Real Estate Board, which expressed serious reservations about Menino's measure last month, has now endorsed the compromise the mayor drafted with some of the city's top real estate executives.
But Bill Vernon, state director of the National Federation of Independent Business, said the property tax proposal will hit neighborhood barber shops, pizza parlors, and convenience stores the hardest and lead to a loss of jobs....
City officials frequently note that even if Menino's proposal passes, many business owners whose properties are depreciating in value will pay less in property taxes next year than they did this year, though the mayor's measure would mean their taxes would not fall quite as much. Several of the most prominent commercial owners say they are willing to accept that deal for the good of the city....
But the owners of smaller storefronts will see increases, not decreases, if Menino's measure passes.
The Boston Globe
Tuesday, December 30, 2003
Business owners split over mayor's property tax plans
Even on a temporary basis, as some lawmakers suggest the change would be, such extortionate taxation is unjustifiable.
A Telegram & Gazette editorial
Sunday, December 28, 2003
Sneak-a-tax
Soak-business classification bill still a bad idea
Don't be fooled. We've no doubt that panel members and some of those testifying at today's hearing on a plan to shift even more of the property tax burden to businesses will laud the "compromise" position of supporting a temporary tax rate increase only....
Where have we heard that before? Oh right, it was that temporary increase in the income tax.
But this time the same Legislature (some new members, same old mindset) will - wink, wink, nod, nod - make good on its promise to business....
Anyone buying into a further shift is buying into it in perpetuity.
A Boston Herald editorial
Tuesday, December 30, 2003
Property tax shift 'temporarily' final
Beacon Hill's top leaders and their lieutenants blew off dozens - and in some cases, hundreds - of roll call votes this year, with the worst offenders admitting they took a walk on their main job so they could take off on summer vacations, a Herald review shows.
Of the 20 worst scofflaws among the House's 137 Democrats, 14 serve as high-ranking committee bosses who rake in thousands of dollars in extra leadership pay - including House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran.
"Obviously, if you're not there to cast a vote, you're not representing any viewpoint of the people you're there on behalf of," said House Minority Leader Bradley H. Jones (R-North Reading), who has cast more than 2,600 consecutive roll call votes.
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, December 31, 2003
Top pols snub vote
Halfway through the two-year legislative session, the state's 200 lawmakers have introduced about 7,000 bills.
Only 146 have become law, and most of those measures dealt with minor issues: What to name a bridge, or whether to create a special license plate.
On more far-reaching proposals, such as whether to build casinos in the state or revamp the affordable housing law, lawmakers took a pass. And they completely avoided the politically thorny issue of gay marriage, leaving it to the state's highest court to decide last month.
Lawmakers' single biggest accomplishment this year was to pass a budget that introduced no new taxes, but raised fees and fines by more than $500 million.
Political observers say taxpayers might expect more from what is considered a full-time Legislature - one of just 10 in the nation....
Jeffrey M. Berry, a political science professor at Tufts University, said calling the Massachusetts Legislature full-time is a misnomer since so many of its members have second jobs, some with six-figure salaries....
Job security isn't a problem for the vast majority of Massachusetts legislators. They can usually expect to stay for as many two-year terms as they like....
"Incumbents like to say no one is running against them because they're doing such a great job, and I respectfully beg to differ,"
[Pam Wilmot of Massachusetts Common Cause] said. "Massachusetts has one of the lowest confidence rates in (its) state legislature."
The Patriot Ledger
Friday, December 19, 2003
Your tax dollars at work: Or are they?
At halfway point, current Legislature has little to show for its efforts
Next year's election already is shaping up to be a considerably more competitive one for the Republicans as they attempt to chip away at the Democratic Party's dominance of the State House.
In the wake of Gov. Mitt Romney's decisive victory last year, the Massachusetts Republican Party has mounted an aggressive effort to recruit candidates for the 2004 ballot and support them with a vigorous fund-raising campaign....
Pamela Wilmot of Common Cause Massachusetts said Romney's effort to revitalize the GOP is only part of the reason for the apparent surge in Republicans announcing their candidacy....
"Every time there's a budget crisis, there's a big jump in competition," she said. "We had record competition in 1990 because the budget was in a state of crisis. There was even more anger then than there is now." ...
The Senate voted last month to hold the special election for Jacques' seat on the same day as the March 2 presidential primary, a move the Republicans are challenging in court. Because a disproportionate number of Democrats are expected to vote on March 2, Romney and the GOP have accused the Senate's Democratic leaders of trying to rig the election.
The MetroWest Daily News
Monday, December 29, 2003
The year ahead in politics
State election officials have determined that holding a special Senate election on the day of the Massachusetts presidential primary would save taxpayers just over $51,700, far less than the $150,000 to $200,000 that Senate Democratic leaders cited to justify using the March 2 date to fill a vacancy....
The findings prompted state Republican Party officials to charge that Senator Robert E. Travaglini had misled his Democratic colleagues in setting an election date on the primary, a day when Democrats are expected to far outnumber Republicans at the polls.
The Boston Globe
Wednesday, December 31, 2003
Savings on combined election, primary lower than estimated
The state's highest court on Tuesday upheld that the state Legislature was within its rights to adjourn last year without voting on a constitutional amendment that would have outlawed gay marriage in Massachusetts....
In its ruling Tuesday, the high court reiterated a ruling it made in another case in 1992, when it said the state Constitution does not give the judiciary any power to order the state Legislature to act.
Associated Press
Wednesday, December 31, 2003
State's high court upholds ruling on gay marriage ballot question
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
Reviewing these recent news reports unavoidably
brings to mind a message I received recently from a longtime CLT member.
He wrote that much if not most of the news and commentary presented here
is so very negative, almost defeatist, and suggested that I become more
upbeat.
I wish I could, but that's not my job. I'm not a
rah-rah cheerleader trying to paint a false blush on a dying rose; my
purpose is to help you become more aware of what we're up against,
provide you with a spectrum of facts and my most honest assessment of
our situation. You deserve no less.
Anyone looking for good news all the time needs only
to pick up any number of self-congratulatory news releases pumped out by
our elected "public officials" to go on a "feel
good" binge over our circumstances. But most of us know
better than that.
What more can I say about year-end reviews of
"The Best Legislature Money Can Buy"? We taxpayers are being
hosed by these "full-time" scam artists who for way too long
have been picking our pockets clean at every turn and filling their own.
We know this; there's nothing new under the sun to add to it. This is
Massachusetts, isn't it? Feather-bedding is a way of life here like
nowhere else, but that doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye to such
abuse.
2004, after all, is an election year -- and the
upcoming election just might be different. Well-entrenched incumbents
just might have credible opposition this time!
We too are actively seeking out opponents, and can
only hope that the somnambulant electorate finally stirs and decides
it's had enough. "You can't beat somebody with nobody," the
old saying goes. In 2004 it looks like at least many of us might have
somebody else we can vote for. There's expected to be more
candidates, who have better support and resources behind their
campaigns, in the run-up to the November elections. Who knows, we might
even restore a two-party system to the People's Republic in the
not-too-distant future.
And let's not forget the Governor's Councillors, eight
generally unknown individuals elected every two years from districts statewide.
They make the ultimate decision on a governor's appointment to the state
Supreme Judicial Kangaroo Court. Change them, change the direction of
the high court.
Hey, that's pretty positive, isn't it?
*
*
*
"Where have we heard that before? Oh right, it was that temporary increase in the income
tax," the Boston Herald editorialized.
It recognized the age-old scam and that's a good
start. Another "temporary" tax increase and Lucy gets to hold
the football again for Charlie Brown to kick. Just how stupid do the
politicians think the public is? How many times do they think they can
pull that dusty old ploy off the shelf and sell it again, with their
zero-credibility? Don't they realize it's become a joke, that there's an
innate appreciation among their constituents that they never keep a
promise and can't be trusted?
Much of that widespread awareness is a direct result
of our 1997-2000 "A Promise to Keep" campaign to roll back the
"temporary" income tax hike of 1989. Today the overwhelming
response to any pol's promise of "temporary" anything is a
belly laugh.
*
*
*
To end the year 2003 on an unfortunate but necessary
dark note, yesterday the state Supreme Judicial Kangaroo Court decided
that it has no power over the Legislature when the "Great and
General Court" decides to trample all over constitutional mandates
-- such as taking the required vote on a proposed constitutional
amendment proposed by the people. A constitutionally renegade high
court, combined with a similarly renegade legislature does not bode well
for us subjects of the commonwealth in the days ahead.
Perhaps all those who've suggested to us that we
should strive to get signatures for this of that constitutional
amendment can now better appreciate why such an effort in The People's
Republic is an utterly futile waste of effort and limited resources. In
Massachusetts, the only way remaining to amend the constitution is if
the Legislature proposes the amendment, which usually makes it a bad
idea (remember their last one, a permanent and automatic legislative pay
raise). The constitutional power of the people to propose amendments
through the initiative process has been strangled, by the Legislature
and now by the high court. In reality, today it no longer exists.
Not a happy recognition, but the truth.
*
*
*
Let's not let them get to us today. Happy
New Year one and all!
|
|
|
Chip
Ford |
The Boston Globe
Tuesday, December 30, 2003
Business owners split over mayor's property tax plans
By Scott S. Greenberger, Globe Staff
Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino's proposal to make businesses pay a higher commercial property tax rate is splintering the state's business community, with real estate heavyweights endorsing the idea and small business owners complaining that they will be disproportionately burdened.
The Greater Boston Real Estate Board, which expressed serious reservations about Menino's measure last month, has now endorsed the compromise the mayor drafted with some of the city's top real estate executives.
But Bill Vernon, state director of the National Federation of Independent Business, said the property tax proposal will hit neighborhood barber shops, pizza parlors, and convenience stores the hardest and lead to a loss of jobs.
"You can't increase property taxes on 30,000 to 40,000 businesses in the state of Massachusetts -- it won't work," said Vernon, whose group represents smaller enterprises.
The unusual split in the business community will be evident today when a commission holds its first and only legislative hearing on Menino's proposal, which would shield homeowners from an average tax increase of 40 percent for single-family houses next year.
The Legislature ordered the five-member commission to draft a bill by Jan. 12 that will allow communities to raise commercial tax rates beyond the current limits and phase out the increase in four years.
Menino's proposal would change the Classification Law, a 1978 amendment to the state constitution that allows cities and towns to set different tax rates for residential and commercial property. The idea is that business owners are better able to handle tax increases than homeowners, who may be on fixed incomes. Under the law, the residential rate cannot be less than 50 percent of what it would be if the city did not distinguish between residential and commercial properties, and the commercial rate cannot be higher than 175 percent of what the rate would be without classification.
An ususual divergence between rapidly rising residential property values and stagnant commercial ones has created a problem: Boston and nearly 50 other cities are reaching the 175 percent limit. Menino and other mayors want it raised to 200 percent.
City officials frequently note that even if Menino's proposal passes, many business owners whose properties are depreciating in value will pay less in property taxes next year than they did this year, though the mayor's measure would mean their taxes would not fall quite as much. Several of the most prominent commercial owners say they are willing to accept that deal for the good of the city.
"For us to have a 15 to 20 percent drop with residential properties going up 40 percent is just the wrong message at the wrong time," said Robert L. Beal of the Beal Companies, which owns residential and commercial properties in Greater Boston. Beal lives on Beacon Hill.
But the owners of smaller storefronts will see increases, not decreases, if Menino's measure passes.
While downtown towers such as 75 State Street, Exchange Place, and the Financial Center declined in value during the recent economic downturn, the property values in neighborhood business areas have remained relatively stable, according to Ronald W.
Rakow, the city's tax assessor. As a result, he said, they will "essentially ride with the rate" if Menino's bill passes and the city is allowed to raise the commercial tax rate from $31.49 to $32.90.
"Commercial property is valued on the income -- if you have an office tower and 25 percent of the space is vacant, your valuation will go down," said Eileen McAnneny of Associated Industries of Massachusetts, which has lobbied heavily against Menino's measure. "That isn't true for the gas station on the corner, or some of the other commercial properties in neighborhoods."
Jeff Ciuffreda, vice president of the Affiliated Chambers of Commerce of Greater Springfield, said his group is "sympathetic to the situation that Boston and a few of the other cities find themselves in." But Ciuffreda said he doubts the proposal will solve the broader problem of diverging residential and commercial values.
Return to
top
The Worcester Telegram & Gazette
Sunday, December 28, 2003
A Telegram & Gazette editorial
Sneak-a-tax
Soak-business classification bill still a bad idea
There's plenty to dislike about the tax classification bill before the Legislature, the latest being the cynical timing of the public hearing on the measure between Christmas and New Year's Day - a tactic guaranteed to keep public participation to a minimum while maximizing the effectiveness of Boston lobbyists.
On the special commission's hearing agenda on Tuesday is a proposal that would allow cities and towns to shift an even higher percentage of property taxes from homeowners to businesses.
The commission was established last month, in part to slow Mayor Thomas M. Menino's soak-business steamroller. Unfortunately, it is a temporary respite.
The commission has been charged with writing a bill that would allow communities that already tax commercial/industrial property at a higher rate than residences to tax business even more. Boston and a few other municipalities are itching to raise the statutory cap - already a whopping 175 percent of the single rate - to 200 percent.
Even on a temporary basis, as some lawmakers suggest the change would be, such extortionate taxation is unjustifiable.
With the extraordinary demand for real estate in Boston, the 200 percent differential would provide a windfall for Menino & Co. without seriously hurting the Hub's economy in the short run. However, other communities that succumb to the temptation of a tax windfall would retard or reverse the growth essential to provide jobs and stimulate economic activity in the long run.
Lawmakers should reject this counterproductive tax grab.
Return to
top
The Boston Herald
Tuesday, December 30, 2003
A Boston Herald editorial
Property tax shift 'temporarily' final
Don't be fooled. We've no doubt that panel members and some of those testifying at today's hearing on a plan to shift even more of the property tax burden to businesses will laud the "compromise" position of supporting a temporary tax rate increase only.
That ruse has already won the support of our erstwhile pro-business governor and big downtown developers.
Grudgingly, they'll go along with Mayor Tom Menino's plea to ease the tax hit on residential property owners by raising the business tax rate from 175 percent of full and fair market value to 200 percent if the increase is rolled back to its current level in "no less than four subsequent years."
Where have we heard that before? Oh right, it was that temporary increase in the income tax.
But this time the same Legislature (some new members, same old mindset) will - wink, wink, nod, nod - make good on its promise to business.
Aside from this obvious weakness, the timing of the plan should be enough to kill it. Just as the Massachusetts economy is beginning to show signs of life is the worst time to burden employers with additional costs, especially on top of that gargantuan unemployment tax increase headed to their desks in 2004.
This isn't just a Boston issue either, as evidenced by the vigorous opposition of local chambers of commerce. Statewide - excluding Boston - businesses assume $527 million more in property taxes than they would if 101 other communities applied a uniform tax rate. In Boston, the shift is some $300 million.
Anyone buying into a further shift is buying into it in perpetuity.
Return to
top
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, December 31, 2003
Top pols snub vote
By Elisabeth J. Beardsley
Beacon Hill's top leaders and their lieutenants blew off dozens - and in some cases, hundreds - of roll call votes this year, with the worst offenders admitting they took a walk on their main job so they could take off on summer vacations, a Herald review shows.
Of the 20 worst scofflaws among the House's 137 Democrats, 14 serve as high-ranking committee bosses who rake in thousands of dollars in extra leadership pay - including House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran.
"Obviously, if you're not there to cast a vote, you're not representing any viewpoint of the people you're there on behalf of," said House Minority Leader Bradley H. Jones (R-North Reading), who has cast more than 2,600 consecutive roll call votes.
Finneran ranked 129th among House Democrats for voting attendance, after skipping 47 of the 476 House roll call votes in 2003, according to an analysis of lawmakers' voting patterns.
The speaker was recovering at home yesterday from hip surgery - which did not require him to miss any votes - but his chief legal counsel John Stefanini downplayed the spotty voting record.
"Legislators' busy schedules frequently force them to choose between meetings with the executive, committee hearings or constituent demands, and chamber activity," Stefanini said.
But other House leaders admitted play time trumped legislative duties, especially during July - when vacations beckoned even as lawmakers overturned Gov. Mitt Romney's budget vetoes in droves.
The dubious distinction of biggest voting delinquent in the House - who lacked an excuse such as military service or illness - goes to House Post Audit Chairman James H. Fagan, who missed 195 votes this year.
Fagan admitted he sneaked away to Florida during the crucial budget week of July 5, for a long-planned family trip to Florida.
"If people want to know who I'm most afraid of in the world, it's clearly my wife," Fagan (D-Taunton) said. "It was really not call-off-able."
It was a similar story from House Ethics Committee Chairman Arthur J.
Broadhurst, who missed 110 roll calls - mostly on a single day in July when the House overrode more than 100 of Romney's vetoes to the patronage-laden Boston Municipal Court.
Broadhurst said he took his family on a pleasure trip to New Hampshire, and didn't get a message from House leaders about the BMC overrides because he was in an area without cell phone service.
"My vote wasn't going to impact the overrides, and I wouldn't have come back anyway," Broadhurst (D-Methuen) said. "My daughters would have killed me. You can't tell a 5-year-old and a 3-year-old they can't go to Storyland when you're halfway there."
Some lawmakers freely admitted they placed political opportunities before constituent representation.
House Government Regulations Chairman Daniel E. Bosley said he missed 44 votes partly because of a three-week bout with pneumonia, but mostly because his duties as national chairman of the Council of State Governments required him to travel extensively.
"Hey, it was a once-in-a-career opportunity to lead a national governmental group," Bosley (D-North Adams) said. "It wasn't because I was on vacation or from lack of trying."
Others expressed regrets - like House Criminal Justice Chairman James
Vallee, who missed 183 votes after being called into military duty early this year and taking a week off in July for his honeymoon.
"I hate missing votes - it physically pains me," Vallee (D-Franklin) said. "I'm very diligent about my duties."
Senate President Robert E. Travaglini skipped 266 of the Senate's 416 roll call votes this year - taking a pass on critical budget votes on bilingual education, school breakfasts, open space and domestic violence prevention.
But the East Boston Democrat leaped to action when it came to sending Romney a back-off message - casting 45 votes in a row on July 17 to protect the
BMC, and on 79 other veto overrides the same day.
Travaglini spokeswoman Ann Dufresne denied any political motives and noted the Senate president traditionally doesn't cast many votes.
Return to
top
The Patriot Ledger
Friday, December 19, 2003
Your tax dollars at work: Or are they?
At halfway point, current Legislature has little to show for its efforts
By Tom Benner, State House Bureau
Halfway through the two-year legislative session, the state's 200 lawmakers have introduced about 7,000 bills.
Only 146 have become law, and most of those measures dealt with minor issues: What to name a bridge, or whether to create a special license plate.
On more far-reaching proposals, such as whether to build casinos in the state or revamp the affordable housing law, lawmakers took a pass. And they completely avoided the politically thorny issue of gay marriage, leaving it to the state's highest court to decide last month.
Lawmakers' single biggest accomplishment this year was to pass a budget that introduced no new taxes, but raised fees and fines by more than $500 million.
Political observers say taxpayers might expect more from what is considered a full-time Legislature - one of just 10 in the nation.
"There are not many (accomplishments) that leap to mind," said Robert
Keough, editor of CommonWealth magazine. "Getting through the budget was a Herculean feat. But on the government reform front that Gov. (Mitt) Romney was pushing, he ended up pretty much with a stalemate."
Lawmakers spent much of 2003 responding to the first-year governor's agenda. They gave in to Romney on some issues, such as passing a no-new-taxes budget and eliminating the patronage-laden Metropolitan District Commission.
But they refused to budge on other Romney proposals, including, removing University of Massachusetts President William
Bulger, who eventually resigned on his own, or merging the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority and state Highway Department, a proposal Romney is expected to revive when he rolls out his new budget plan.
In the new year they also will take another crack at other key issues such as casino gambling.
While the majority of the Legislature's time is spent wrangling over the state budget, lawmakers also introduce bills of their own, most of which go nowhere. While they may have little chance of passing, bills reflect an individual legislator's pet causes:
Teahan's bill is one of the few that may actually reach a floor vote this session, riding a wave of state and federal anti-abortion legislation. The other bills will most likely die in committee, again.
Jeffrey M. Berry, a political science professor at Tufts University, said calling the Massachusetts Legislature full-time is a misnomer since so many of its members have second jobs, some with six-figure salaries.
Morrissey, the Quincy senator, and House Speaker Thomas Finneran, D-Mattapan, whose district includes Milton, annually report hefty incomes from their law practices. And since legislators write their own rules, they only have to report the first $100,000 of outside income earned in a single year.
Most legislators are also attorneys. Only a handful hail from more blue-collar vocations, including Rep. Vinny
deMacedo, R-Plymouth, a gas station owner, and Rep. Robert Nyman, D-Hanover, a funeral home employee.
Job security isn't a problem for the vast majority of Massachusetts legislators. They can usually expect to stay for as many two-year terms as they like.
In the last four elections, no incumbent in the 40-member state Senate has been unseated by a challenger. In the 160-member House, generally only three to four incumbents lose to a challenger each election cycle, said Pam Wilmot of Massachusetts Common Cause. And only about half the incumbents face a challenger each election.
Massachusetts has an incumbent reelection rate of about 98 percent, the highest in the nation over the past 20 years, Wilmot said.
"Incumbents like to say no one is running against them because they're doing such a great job, and I respectfully beg to differ," she said. "Massachusetts has one of the lowest confidence rates in (its) state legislature."
Legislative critics say incumbents benefit from their ability to raise money from lobbyists and other special interests and amass huge campaign funds. They can then spend that campaign money on individual constituents and on contributions to constituent groups.
It's difficult for taxpayers to know if they're getting their money's worth, said CommonWealth magazine's
Keough.
"This is not a government that sets goals and then tries to achieve them," he said. "You get an initiative here, there, and the other place, but as a body they don't do that. It becomes very difficult to hold lawmakers accountable for productivity or success, it's a fairly ephemeral exercise."
Return to
top
The MetroWest Daily News
Monday, December 29, 2003
The year ahead in politics
By Michael Kunzelman, Staff Writer
In the 2002 election, it was almost easier to find a third-party candidate on the ballot than a Republican.
A mere 87 Republicans ran for seats in the state Legislature last year, compared with 31 Green Party, Libertarian or unenrolled candidates and 252 Democrats, according to the Common Cause government watchdog group.
"Those numbers, honestly, are pathetic," conceded Dominick Ianno, executive director of the Massachusetts Republican Party. "If I knew the answer (why), I'd probably be a rich guy."
Don't expect a similarly apathetic performance from the GOP in 2004, however.
Next year's election already is shaping up to be a considerably more competitive one for the Republicans as they attempt to chip away at the Democratic Party's dominance of the State House.
In the wake of Gov. Mitt Romney's decisive victory last year, the Massachusetts Republican Party has mounted an aggressive effort to recruit candidates for the 2004 ballot and support them with a vigorous fund-raising campaign.
Ianno said the party has raised $1.9 million this year and already has recruited more candidates to run in 2004 than the 87 who qualified for the 2002 ballot.
The trend also seems to apply to MetroWest, where a growing number of Republicans are lining up to challenge Democratic incumbents in the House of Representatives and Senate.
"The governor has set a clear agenda, which is making government about public service, not self-service," Ianno said.
Pamela Wilmot of Common Cause Massachusetts said Romney's effort to revitalize the GOP is only part of the reason for the apparent surge in Republicans announcing their candidacy.
The state's budget crisis -- and the painful cuts it required -- also is driving many political newcomers to run, according to Wilmot.
"Every time there's a budget crisis, there's a big jump in competition," she said. "We had record competition in 1990 because the budget was in a state of crisis. There was even more anger then than there is now."
About 73 percent of State House incumbents had a challenger in 1990. Last year, in contrast, only 33 incumbents had an opponent.
"Just having a name on the ballot isn't enough," Wilmot said. "You can't just have a paper candidate and expect to win. If you're not backing the candidates financially, you're not going to be credible."
Jane Lane, spokeswoman for the Massachusetts Democratic Party, claims most of the incumbents Mitt Romney has targeted are women, including state
Sens. Pamela Resor, D-Acton, and Susan Fargo, D-Lincoln.
"I find it very troubling when you look at that pattern," she said.
Lane said the Democratic Party will redouble efforts to protect its incumbents.
"We're going to be playing offense, too, and finding Democrats to challenge the Republican incumbents," she said. "There aren't a tremendous number of them, but that's what we'll do."
In a prelude to the fall election, the race to succeed state Sen. Cheryl Jacques, D-Needham, should provide some early clues about the GOP's hopes in November.
Hoping to reclaim a seat the Republicans held before Jacques took office, Romney and party officials have thrown their support behind state Rep. Scott Brown of Wrentham.
Meanwhile, no fewer than eight Democrats are vying to succeed Jacques, who is leaving the Senate to serve as head of the nation's largest gay rights political organization.
The Senate voted last month to hold the special election for Jacques' seat on the same day as the March 2 presidential primary, a move the Republicans are challenging in court. Because a disproportionate number of Democrats are expected to vote on March 2, Romney and the GOP have accused the Senate's Democratic leaders of trying to rig the election.
Even if the Republicans succeed in relaxing the Democrats' powerful grip on the Legislature, it probably won't rate as the biggest story of the year in state politics. Gay marriage is bound to earn that distinction.
The nation's eyes turned to Massachusetts last month when the state's highest court ruled that a ban on gay marriage would violate the state constitution.
The Supreme Judicial Court gave lawmakers 180 days to respond to its ruling. If the Legislature takes no action at all, same-sex couples could begin tying knot in mid-May.
In the meantime, some legislators are rallying support for a bill that calls for legalizing Vermont-style civil unions instead of gay marriage.
A second option also has emerged: In February, the House and Senate are scheduled to debate a proposed constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage. But the measure couldn't reach the ballot until November 2005, at the earliest -- too late to block same-sex couples from walking down the aisle.
Here are some of the other events and issues that will grab headlines in 2004:
-
Although the Legislature and governor have closed one budget gap, the cutting is far from over.
Lawmakers and administration officials haven't agreed on the size of the problem, but the hole in next year's budget could approach $2 billion. Another round of harsh budget cuts is almost certain, despite some forecasts that the state's economy is rebounding.
The Powers That Be on Beacon Hill managed to balance the budget without raising taxes this year, but it remains to be seen if their restraint will survive another brutal budget crunch.
Now that Bulger has resigned as president of the University of Massachusetts, Massachusetts Turnpike Authority Chairman Matthew Amorello could replace him as Romney's favorite whipping boy.
Amorello cost himself some allies on Beacon Hill when he planned to mark the last major milestone of $14.6 billion Central Artery/Tunnel Project with a lavish underground celebration, punctuated by a Boston Pops concert.
Amorello scrapped the party, which would have cost taxpayers more than $100,000, after Romney and other State House leaders complained.
Although Romney is pressing a plan to merge the Pike with the state Highway Department, he said he isn't seeking to oust
Amorello.
But the former state senator from Grafton could be a tempting target for Romney as the year wears on.
Return to
top
The Boston Globe
Wednesday, December 31, 2003
Savings on combined election, primary lower than estimated
By Frank Phillips, Globe Staff
State election officials have determined that holding a special Senate election on the day of the Massachusetts presidential primary would save taxpayers just over $51,700, far less than the $150,000 to $200,000 that Senate Democratic leaders cited to justify using the March 2 date to fill a vacancy.
The state's official cost estimates emerged in a court affidavit as part of a Republican suit to block Democrats from using the heavily Democratic presidential primary to select a replacement for Senator Cheryl Jacques, the Needham Democrat vacating the seat.
The new figures come from the state election division's chief counsel, Michelle
Tassinari, who conducted a town-by-town survey of local officials in the district, seeking estimates of the cost of holding a special election on a date other than March 2.
The findings prompted state Republican Party officials to charge that Senator Robert E. Travaglini had misled his Democratic colleagues in setting an election date on the primary, a day when Democrats are expected to far outnumber Republicans at the polls.
"They used false and misleading cost savings to sell this plan to their members," said Dominick
Ianno, the GOP's executive director.
Ianno particularly took to task the Democrats' contentions that they had made their own survey of the district's local election officials and had come up with a figure of $150,000 to $200,000.
"They clearly hadn't checked with local officials as they said they did," Ianno said. "If they did, they would have gotten the real numbers."
Ann Dufresne, Travaglini's spokeswoman, said the number the Senate president had used to argue for using the March 2 date were "preliminary estimates."
"What the affidavit says is that there is substantial savings, and that was always our primary goal," Dufresne said. She said Travaglini wanted to move quickly to fill the seat so that district communities -- Plainville, Norfolk, Needham, Millis, and parts of Franklin, Wellesley, Wrentham, North
Attleborough, Natick, Sherborn, Wayland, and Attleboro -- are represented in the Senate.
The Republicans have charged that Travaglini and the Democrats are playing partisan politics by using the presidential primary election to fill the seat and ignoring "legitimate public objectives."
"Lack of fairness is at the heart of what is impermissible here," the Republicans said in their petition earlier this month to the Supreme Judicial Court.
But the legal issue in the GOP court case centers on whether the Massachusetts Constitution allows the Senate to set an election schedule to fill a vacancy before the incumbent had officially resigned. Jacques submitted a letter to the Senate clerk last month, saying she would resign Jan. 4. The Senate then began to set the election schedule. If the Senate had to wait until Jan. 4, the regulations governing the timetable preclude the special election from being held March 2.
The Republicans say a vacancy must exist in order to set a special election. But Attorney General Thomas F. Reilly's office, which is defending the Senate, said in court filings yesterday that the constitution "leaves substantial discretion in deciding whether and when to issue an order for a special election and what date to set."
Reilly, a Democrat, also argues in the brief that any Democratic advantage in using the March 2 presidential primary "would result only from Republicans' and other voters' choice not to vote." Secretary of State William F. Galvin, a Democrat who is the state's chief election officer, said yesterday that it is important to hold the election on a day when there is voter interest in getting to the polls. He noted that turnout in special state Senate races held on presidential primary dates is well over 50 percent higher than in elections held on days when there are no other contests. GOP leaders are calling for the primary for the special election to be held March 2 and that the final election be held March 30.
Return to
top
Associated Press
Wednesday, December 31, 2003
State's high court upholds ruling on gay marriage ballot question
The state's highest court on Tuesday upheld that the state Legislature was within its rights to adjourn last year without voting on a constitutional amendment that would have outlawed gay marriage in Massachusetts.
The lawsuit filed by Massachusetts Citizens for Marriage claimed that the Legislature violated the state Constitution by failing to vote on the initiative, which sought to put the question of gay marriage to voters in a ballot referendum.
A single justice of the state Supreme Judicial Court dismissed the complaint in February.
Massachusetts Citizens for Marriage appealed that decision to the full court, which heard arguments in May.
In its ruling Tuesday, the high court reiterated a ruling it made in another case in 1992, when it said the state Constitution does not give the judiciary any power to order the state Legislature to act.
In its lawsuit, the group argued that the inaction of the Legislature in 2002 should be treated as a tacit approval of the proposed amendment, so the Massachusetts Secretary of State should be required to send the proposal on to this year's Legislature for a second vote.
In order to go on the ballot, the amendment would have to be approved by 25 percent of the 200 state lawmakers during two consecutive legislative sessions.
But the high court ruled Tuesday that the Secretary of State's only duty is to transmit the amendment the first time, and later, if it is approved by two successive Legislatures, he must put it on the ballot.
In November, the state's highest court became the first in the country to rule that its state constitution guarantees gays and lesbians the right to marry, and gave the Legislature six months to change state laws to make it happen.
Although courts in other states have issued similar rulings, the court in Massachusetts went further -- by definitively ruling a ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.
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
|