CLT
UPDATE
Monday, April 26, 2004
Here we go again – another tax
hike, retroactive?
The voter-approved income tax rollback of 2000 would be reversed and taxes raised to 1990s levels under a House budget amendment.
Rep. Robert Spellane (D-Worcester) will next week push the longshot effort to ratchet the income tax back up to 5.95 percent.
The Boston Herald
Saturday, April 24, 2004
'No appetite' for bid to up income taxes
They're planning to rob you again at the State House. We just get through tax season, with 99.97 percent of us in Massachusetts opting not to pay higher taxes, which we could do under the tax code. And this is their response to our decision not to throw good money after bad:
If you idiots who work won't pay voluntarily, then we'll just sock you with a mandatory tax increase.
And so, late last week, a stooge of the forked-tongue House speaker filed an amendment to the House budget. In 57 words, it jacks up the state income tax from 5.3 percent to 5.95 percent.
The Boston Herald
Sunday, April 25, 2004
Worcester rep spells robbery 't-a-x h-i-k-e'
By Howie Carr
We don’t really think that you would pass the Spellane amendment to increase the income tax rate to 5.95 percent; but since Rep. Spellane is giving us this opening, we would remind everyone that 59% of the voters mandated that the rate be cut to 5.0% by 2003. The Legislature has not respected the voters’ mandate; here it is, 2004, and the rate is still 5.3 percent....
Legislators who want to hike the income tax are probably just trying to appease their municipal leaders, who would rather you take a tough vote so they won’t have to ask for overrides. You can remind them that voters had a chance to pay a higher state income tax rate with the CLT/Legislative voluntary tax, but only 624 taxpayers, as of April 15th, took advantage of this opportunity. Why not ask tax hike advocates if they paid the 5.85% rate?
CLT Memo to the Legislature/News Release
Monday, April 26, 2004
Re: FY2005 budget
Mini-Winny's Darkest
Hour
– An update of his continuing trials and
tribulations –
Beacon Hill vultures may be circling House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran, but the controversial lawmaker isn't exactly offering himself up as dead - yet.
Despite a federal perjury probe into his sworn testimony regarding the House redistricting process, and despite news reports depicting him as distracted, Finneran's grip on power has not relaxed.
The Boston Herald
Sunday, April 25, 2004
Finneran regroups to keep power grip
For 18 years, Petrolati has been the consummate Massachusetts politician, a devotee of the old school, where personal relationships, loyalty, and delivering for the district trump all. His colleagues rib him for his perfectly slicked hair and Robert DeNiro looks, and have taken note of his close ties to House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran. For that loyalty, Petrolati has been well-rewarded -- with a spot on the speaker's leadership team, pay hikes, and serious pull for his constituents.
But those ties have put the affable Petrolati, who usually shuns the spotlight, in a very prominent hot seat. His allegiance to Finneran won him the chairmanship of the redistricting committee. Now the redistricting plan, along with Finneran's role in it, is the subject of a federal investigation.
Petrolati is one of the few people who can tell prosecutors what they appear to be most interested in: whether Finneran, who said under oath that he had no involvement in the redistricting process, was telling the truth about his role.
The Boston Globe
Sunday, April 25, 2004
US redistricting probe puts close Finneran ally in hot seat
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
Today the House begins debate on its FY2005 budget
and amendments proposed to it. Amendment number 441, sponsored by state
Rep. Robert Spellane (D-Worcester), calls again to increase the
state income tax from its "temporarily frozen" 5.3 percent
back up to 5.95 percent. That's where it was before we put our rollback
on the ballot in 2000 and59 percent of the voters subsequently agreed
that eleven years was long enough for "temporary."
This amendment is retroactive to January,
meaning we'd all owe money next year when we file our tax
returns. As Boston Herald columnist Howie Carr noted in his column
yesterday, "anyone making $50,000 a year would owe the commonwealth an extra
$325."
He also recognized, "Most likely his proposed tax hike is merely a trial balloon, something concocted by Tommy Taxes as he awaits the inevitable arrival of a target letter from the grand jury."
Granted, from early Beacon Hill responses it sounds like a non-starter
-- but we can never be too careful, or too complacent. "Trial
balloons" either get popped early or soon rise out of reach.
Yesterday we prepared a memo to the Legislature which
is being hand-delivered this morning to each member of the House and
Senate, and issued statewide as a news release. The time to pop this
balloon is now.
*
*
*
Mini-Winny's
Darkest Hour, House Speaker Tom Finneran's ongoing trials and
tribulations at the hands of an unappreciative mob, will be a regular
part of these updates as more news becomes available.
"We shall fight on the
beaches. We shall fight on the landing grounds. We shall fight in
the fields, and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills. We
shall never surrender!"
-- Winston Churchill
The Great Winny
|
|
|
Chip
Ford |
The Boston Herald
Saturday, April 24, 2004
'No appetite' for bid to up income taxes
By Elisabeth J. Beardsley
The voter-approved income tax rollback of 2000 would be reversed and taxes raised to 1990s levels under a House budget amendment.
Rep. Robert Spellane (D-Worcester) will next week push the longshot effort to ratchet the income tax back up to 5.95 percent.
Democratic leaders and Republicans immediately labeled the plan dead on arrival but Spellane insisted he's doing it for children, after his local school committees directed him to raise taxes and earmark $800 million a year for education.
A tax increase is better than "hidden taxes" like the huge fee hikes Gov. Mitt Romney [related, bio] and lawmakers have imposed, Spellane argued.
"It's a much more honest approach," Spellane said, adding that broad-based levies are preferable to skyrocketing property taxes.
Democrats rejected the plan, with House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran's spokesman saying there's "not an appetite" for tax hikes beyond the $1.2 billion package Finneran arranged in 2002.
Republicans also predicted failure, saying economic recovery and election-year politics are at stake.
"It's never going to happen," said House GOP Leader Brad H. Jones (R-North Reading).
Return to
top
The Boston Herald
Sunday, April 25, 2004
Worcester rep spells robbery 't-a-x h-i-k-e'
By Howie Carr
They're planning to rob you again at the State House. We just get through tax season, with 99.97 percent of us in Massachusetts opting not to pay higher taxes, which we could do under the tax code. And this is their response to our decision not to throw good money after bad:
If you idiots who work won't pay voluntarily, then we'll just sock you with a mandatory tax increase.
And so, late last week, a stooge of the forked-tongue House speaker filed an amendment to the House budget. In 57 words, it jacks up the state income tax from 5.3 percent to 5.95 percent.
It was a busy week for Rep. Robert Spellane (D-Worcester). First he files a bill to allow out-of-state sodomites to come here and get "married" even if it's against the law where they live.
Now he proposes a tax hike, and in true Clintonian fashion, wants to make it retroactive to Jan. 1. But this is how you make a mark in the General Court, and
Spellane, at 34, lists his profession as "legislator." Before he got elected to the Legislature, he was, ahem, working for the Central Massachusetts Housing Allowance.
I know this because last year I got a call from his wife, Susan, telling me how hard he works. She informed me her family once missed a trip to Storyland because of her hubby's long hours during the budget, which is when the solons get loaded on lobbyists' booze and chant "Toga! Toga!"
Now Spellane files amendment 441. If it were approved, anyone making $50,000 a year would owe the commonwealth an extra $325.
Which is more than enough for a family day trip to Storyland.
Calls were placed to Spellane's office and home Friday, and they were not returned. Has Storyland opened for the season yet? Or is he practicing his Toga chants? But then, Fridays are a big day for
Spellane. His master, the House speaker, Tommy Finneran, loves to gather his sycophants every Friday for a round of golf.
Spellane is Tommy Taxes' caddy, in more ways than one.
This nonentity first came to public attention last year when it was his turn to host a round on the links, at
Tatnuck, a nice little private course. That Friday foursome included Tommy Taxes,
Spellane, the mob mouthpiece majority leader Sal DiMasi, and Steve Tobin, of the Quincy hack family of
Tobins.
Most likely his proposed tax hike is merely a trial balloon, something concocted by Tommy Taxes as he awaits the inevitable arrival of a target letter from the grand jury.
But what's extra sneaky is that if Spellane's stick-up does reach the floor of the House, it won't be debated until after this week's filing deadline for legislative candidates. If the Democrats find out they're unopposed, as Spellane was in 2002, they pretty much can do whatever they damn well please, and what pleases them is stealing more of your money.
It's odd too that this latest attempt by Beacon Hill to rob the working classes comes so soon after April 15. This was the second year that everyone had a chance to personally raise their state income taxes, from 5.3 percent to 5.85. As of April 15, 2.1 million Massachusetts income tax returns had been filed. Exactly 624 taxpayers voted to pay higher taxes. That's not just a landslide, it's as close to unanimous as it ever gets.
As for you, Rep. Spellane, since you probably don't know anybody who has a real job, let me tell you how a lot of people who do work will be spending their extra money this summer.
They'll be taking the kids to Storyland one last time, because if you get your way, next year only parasites like you will be able to afford the trip.
Howie Carr's radio show can be heard every weekday afternoon on
WRKO-AM 680, WHYN-AM 560, WGAN-AM 560, WEIM-AM 1280 and WXTK-FM 95.1.
Return to
top
Mini-Winny's
Darkest Hour
– An update of his continuing trials and tribulations –
The Boston Herald
Sunday, April 25, 2004
Finneran regroups to keep power grip
By Steve Marantz
Beacon Hill vultures may be circling House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran, but the controversial lawmaker isn't exactly offering himself up as dead - yet.
Despite a federal perjury probe into his sworn testimony regarding the House redistricting process, and despite news reports depicting him as distracted, Finneran's grip on power has not relaxed.
The release of the House budget two weeks ago, accompanied by unusually stringent rules limiting debate and amendments, signaled to veteran lawmakers that Finneran has regrouped from what some called a weak performance in the gay-marriage debate.
"Leadership has taken firm control of the institutional (budget) process - that's not what a guy who is drifting does," said Rep. James Marzilli (D-Arlington), who routinely votes against Finneran.
Still, speculation is rampant regarding Finneran's future.
The 54-year-old lawyer has said he intends to run for re-election in November and seek a sixth term as speaker.
"Nothing I've seen indicates he will do anything different, but then, he tends to hold his cards close to the vest," said Rep. Joseph Wagner (D-Chicopee).
However, some lawmakers suspect Finneran is plotting an exit strategy.
They believe he will resign in mid-term, possibly this summer or shortly after being re-elected as speaker in January.
Under that scenario, Finneran's top lieutenants, Rep. Sal DiMasi (D-North End) and Rep. John Rogers (D-Norwood), appear to have an edge in garnering support to succeed him.
"If Finneran were to leave at the end of his term, the succession process would be more open and orderly - he would have less control," said Rep. Byron Rushing (D-South End), a longtime Finneran opponent.
Another reason for an early departure is that Gov. Mitt Romney and the GOP are likely to exploit Finneran's scrutiny by the U.S. Attorney's office in the November legislative elections.
Return to
top
The Boston Globe
Sunday, April 25, 2004
US redistricting probe puts close Finneran ally in hot seat
By Yvonne Abraham, Globe Staff
Questioned in the court challenge to a controversial 2001 legislative redistricting plan, Thomas M. Petrolati had hardly a hayseed's command of the state's eastern geography.
He said that he had never been to Chelsea, that he didn't know where Charlestown was in relation to Chelsea, that he didn't know what river is spanned by the Tobin Bridge, and that he did not know that Suffolk County has a large Hispanic population.
"I'm very parochial in my approach to government," said the Ludlow Democrat, who commutes to Boston three or four times a week.
That might be normal for a legislator whose hometown is 80 miles from downtown. But Petrolati also happened to be chairman of the House redistricting committee -- the lawmaker put in charge of redrawing the state's electoral boundaries.
For 18 years, Petrolati has been the consummate Massachusetts politician, a devotee of the old school, where personal relationships, loyalty, and delivering for the district trump all. His colleagues rib him for his perfectly slicked hair and Robert DeNiro looks, and have taken note of his close ties to House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran. For that loyalty, Petrolati has been well-rewarded -- with a spot on the speaker's leadership team, pay hikes, and serious pull for his constituents.
But those ties have put the affable Petrolati, who usually shuns the spotlight, in a very prominent hot seat. His allegiance to Finneran won him the chairmanship of the redistricting committee. Now the redistricting plan, along with Finneran's role in it, is the subject of a federal investigation.
Petrolati is one of the few people who can tell prosecutors what they appear to be most interested in: whether Finneran, who said under oath that he had no involvement in the redistricting process, was telling the truth about his role.
Finneran's critics suggest the speaker really ran the process, and Petrolati was just a figurehead. The speaker's defenders say Petrolati was engaged and responsible for the plan that emerged.
The panel of three judges who presided over the redistricting case suggest Finneran had not been truthful about his involvement.
"If Petrolati is subpoenaed by the grand jury, his testimony will be crucial," said George Pillsbury, policy director for Boston VOTE, one of the groups that sued over the redistricting plan. "He is the chair, the one who should know the details of who drew the plan. He's the only elected official who would know."
But at least in his public statements so far, Petrolati, 47, has revealed little. In response to the suit brought by activists who said the redistricting plan diluted the strength of minority voters, Petrolati has been vague on details of the redistricting plan. When he was asked about the federal probe earlier this month, he denied any knowledge of it.
"That's news to me," he told the Globe, though, in early March, it was Petrolati's office to which the federal subpoenas had been delivered. And within days, his office had turned over the records federal prosecutors requested.
On the advice of his lawyer, Petrolati declined to be interviewed for this story, his chief of staff said.
But a friend and colleague, Representative Peter J. Larkin, said Petrolati is "personally hurt" by the probe, which he has described as "baseless."
"It's an assault on his personal integrity, and, you know, Tommy cares a lot about his role here in the Legislature, and he cares about his effectiveness," said Larkin, a Pittsfield Democrat who is also a Finneran ally.
The son of a hardware store owner he calls "The Pope," Petrolati has been in politics all his adult life, working as a Senate aide after graduating from Western New England College, then as a Ludlow selectman in the mid-1980s.
He plays golf -- badly, said friend and former Springfield mayor Michael Albano -- and is devoted to his two daughters.
He is friendly and popular in the State House, his friends and critics agree, adept at forging strong relationships and at using his connections to move along his constituents' interests.
"I can't tell you how many times Tommy set up meetings with key legislative players to move the process along," said
Albano. When a Springfield Civic Center project slowed, "Tommy Petrolati was there to get me in to see the speaker. He does it in a quiet way, he did not look for media exposure. He's low-key, but he delivers."
He is more driven by politics and loyalty than by issues, some of his colleagues said.
His friends could not name policy questions on which Petrolati had taken a lead, and his chief of staff did not return a call seeking examples of bills Petrolati has moved through the Legislature.
His strength is in his relationships, they said. And his strong relationship with the speaker made him an obvious choice for redistricting chairman.
The nuts-and-bolts work of redistricting on the House side was done by attorney Lawrence
DiCara, an electoral specialist and Finneran friend, and by John
Stefanini, the speaker's counsel at the time.
They, too, could be questioned as part of the federal probe. But the committee's announcements appeared above Petrolati's signature.
In his deposition, Petrolati initially admitted that he did not fully understand the content of some of the letters he had signed to lawmakers explaining how their districts had changed.
But he did meet with all of the legislators to discuss the committee's work.
Several times before the redistricting plan came out, he assured Carol A. Donovan, a Woburn Democrat, that the bulk of her district would be intact after the new plan was proposed. But when the plan was released, she had lost part of Woburn.
"He repeatedly said it would be absolutely fine, and then when they released the bill, the plan had taken four precincts out of Woburn," Donovan said.
"He told me there was nothing he could do."
But Donovan did not blame Petrolati, she said, because she did not think he was responsible.
"I'm not naive enough to think he had anything at all to do with redistricting," said Donovan, who will not seek reelection this year. "In my opinion, he just stepped back, he got the prestige of saying he was the chair of the redistricting committee, and I really don't think he had much say in anything at all. I think it was Finneran, and Stefanini and Larry
DiCara. I think Petrolati was a figurehead."
Despite Petrolati's testimony, his Senate counterpart disagreed with Donovan's assessment of the Ludlow legislator's role.
"He was very engaged through the entire process," said Stanley C. Rosenberg, who was the Senate chairman of the redistricting committee. "He was very knowledgeable."
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
|