CLT
UPDATE
Thursday, January 27, 2005
Gov's bigger budget: "Still not
enough"
Gov. Mitt Romney is again pushing for an income tax cut and leading lawmakers, questioning whether the state can afford it, are pushing back.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, January 27, 2005
Romney budget includes cut in state income tax
Governor Mitt Romney yesterday presented a $23.2 billion state budget proposal for the coming year that relies on rising revenues, healthcare savings, and the closing of corporate tax loopholes to increase overall spending by about 2.4 percent while cutting income taxes at the same time.
When off-budget items such as pensions and the state's school building program are factored in, overall state spending would be about $25.5 billion in the next fiscal year under Romney's plan, up from about $24.7 billion this year....
The Legislature will probably reject many of Romney's priorities; over the last two years, lawmakers have added money for social services programs and rejected his repeated calls to cut the state income tax....
Actual spending for fiscal 2005, which ends in June, is expected to be nearly 8 percent more than it was in fiscal 2004. Lawmakers, at times with Romney's approval, increased some spending as the improving economy boosted state revenues later in the year....
Romney's call for an income tax cut is not new. For months, he has been urging the Legislature to reduce the state income tax to 5 percent. In 2000, voters approved a gradual lowering of the income tax rate, which was 5.85 percent at the time, to 5 percent. But in the depths of the state's fiscal crisis in 2002, the Legislature froze the rate at 5.3 percent. Now that the state's economy is rumbling back to life, Romney says, it's time to follow through.
Barbara Anderson of Citizens for Limited Taxation praised the governor for a budget that "responds to the will of the voters." ...
Michael J. Widmer of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a business-funded nonprofit that studies taxes and government spending,
said the tax cut is a bad idea, especially because Romney is planning on pushing major education and healthcare initiatives that will probably add costs.
"We don't have the resources to afford both the expansion proposals the governor is going to present and the tax cut," Widmer said. "We're going to have enough trouble affording one of them, let alone both." ...
Meanwhile, business groups are wary of Romney's proposal to close nearly a dozen tax loopholes.
The Boston Globe
Thursday, January 27, 2005
Romney offers $23.2b budget
Relies on recovery to fund increase
Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Association, said health care is the key to the budget. How well the state is able to control growth in Medicaid will dictate how much money is available to spend on other programs, he said....
Widmer said it's premature to move forward with a permanent tax cut, which Romney said would cost the state $225 million, while many state programs are still reeling from years of drastic budget cuts. Some have less money now than they did in 2001.
"The additional money that would go to a tax cut could be used to restore major spending cuts since 2001 in higher education, housing, or public health, or to pay for the governor's upcoming initiatives in education, health care or economic stimulus," Widmer said....
But Barbara Anderson, of Citizens for Limited Taxation, said the state is obligated to fund the tax rollback. Voters approved the measure in 2000, although it was frozen by the Legislature when the economy turned sour. Lawmakers say it will automatically kick in once the state reaches certain economic milestones.
"The Legislature has made it pretty clear it's not going to do it but we certainly applaud the governor for not giving up and we're not giving up," she said. "We think it's important to continually remind the Legislature that this was a temporary tax and it would be part of the public discussion."
Anderson said the state can't afford to break its promise.
"It creates a climate in which people don't trust the government and feel disenfranchised," she said. "The first thing you have to do is to keep your promises and listen to the voters and proceed from there."
The Lowell Sun
Thursday, January 27, 2005
Romney plan offers modest increases, cuts tax rate
In the education budget he unveiled yesterday, Governor Mitt Romney avoided what many observers call the most critical question confronting Massachusetts schools: a looming court decision over whether the state is providing enough money to educate children in the state's poorest school systems.
Romney's budget added nearly $100 million for public schools, a 2.7 percent increase that mainly covers schools' basic needs, such as cost-of-living increases for teacher salaries.
But the governor did not address a state judge's report last spring that found the state is shortchanging its poorest students and cited schools that lacked textbooks, adequate science labs, and extra help for students. The Supreme Judicial Court is expected to rule on the matter soon, perhaps this month. A ruling in favor of the plaintiffs in the legal case could cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars....
The governor said he does not believe that money alone is the answer to the state's education problems.
"Just paying the same people more money to do the same thing will not yield a different result," Romney said during a press conference yesterday....
Fred Clark, the executive officer for the state colleges' Council of Presidents, said campus leaders were pleased to see a budget increase, but will continue to lobby for the 9.5 percent increase requested by the Board of Higher Education.
"The governor's moving in the right direction, but not far enough to help the colleges help the state," he said. "We hope to make that argument loudly in the Legislature this coming session."
The Boston Globe
Thursday, January 27, 2005
Court order could change everything
Romney restated his call for the rollback of the income tax from 5.3 to 5 percent. With local aid and education underfunded and health care up in the air, it would be irresponsible for the Legislature to consider tax cuts. If the state embarks on major initiatives, it will need every cent the income tax now raises, and probably more.
A Boston Globe editorial
Thursday, January 27, 2005
A wait-and-see budget
Moving with unusual speed, the Legislature unanimously passed a reorganization bill yesterday that will shuffle committees and double the bonus pay of certain leadership positions....
Yesterday the proposal passed the House, 149-0, and the Senate by voice vote, moving at a pace that few pieces of legislation ever achieve at the State House.
The key to its swift passage may lie in the bill's calling for several new positions to receive double their current pay.
For example, the pay for chairing what was previously known as the Committee on Longterm Debt, a position now held in the Senate by Democrat Mark C. Montigny of New Bedford, rises from $7,500 to $15,000.
The Boston Globe
Thursday, January 27, 2005
House, Senate speed pay plan
Committees altered, leaders get raises
Gov. Mitt Romney yesterday put a balanced, responsible budget on the table, cognizant that the dark underbelly of fiscal improvement may be his biggest challenge this year. Maintaining spending discipline is a far easier task in a crisis than in a recovery....
And the governor has now fervently taken up the cause of rolling back the income tax to 5 percent. The economy will benefit, as Romney notes, but, as important, taking revenue off the table will help restrain the growth of state spending.
A Boston Herald editorial
Thursday, January 27, 2005
No easy street in budget outlook
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
Governor Romney released his proposed budget for
FY2006 and he again included the rollback of the state income tax rate
finally. Immediately our usual opponents leaped out of the shadows, both
legislators and special interests led by Michael Widmer, president of
the so-called Massachusetts
Taxpayers Foundation, again running cover for the tax-and-spend
crowd.
"We don't have the resources to afford both the expansion proposals the governor is going to present and the tax
cut. We're going to have enough trouble affording one of them, let alone
both," Widmer declared, adding: "The additional money that would go to a tax cut could be used to restore major spending cuts since 2001 in higher education, housing, or public health, or to pay for the governor's upcoming initiatives in education, health care or economic
stimulus."
Widmer and his association of Big-Business Fat-Cats
have been fighting against the tax rollback for average taxpayers for
over a decade. But I got the biggest kick out of their outrage over the
governor's plan to "close tax loopholes" on Big Business. In
one report quoting Widmer's opposition to the tax rollback, the
Boston Globe noted: "Meanwhile, business groups are wary of Romney's proposal to close nearly a dozen tax loopholes."
No money to keep promises, but plenty to continue
Fat-Cat tax loopholes ... with still enough left over for more pay hikes
for legislators!
The Boston Globe reported:
Moving with unusual speed, the Legislature unanimously passed a reorganization bill yesterday that will shuffle committees and double the bonus pay of certain leadership positions.
The bill, which Senate President Robert E. Travaglini and House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi filed just a day earlier, creates paid leadership positions called speaker pro tempore and president pro tempore that will entitle the holders to $15,000 annual bonus stipends.
Overall, the proposal, which requires the signature of Governor Mitt Romney, will add about $120,000 a year to the Legislature's salary load.
Just this year every legislator received an automatic
pay raise of another $2,188 a year (See: CLT Update, Dec. 7, 2004, On Bacon Hill it's called "income equity"),
but still it's not enough.
More Is Never Enough (MINE) and never will be. Just
ask Fred Clark, the executive officer for the state colleges' Council of
Presidents. Though the governor's budget includes an on-average increase
of two percent for the nine Massachusetts state colleges and 15 community
colleges -- a total increase of $804,616,762 -- Fred Clark called
it merely "moving in the right direction, but not far enough."
Today's Boston Herald editorial recognized:
And the governor has now fervently taken up the cause of rolling back the income tax to 5 percent. The economy will benefit, as Romney notes, but, as important, taking revenue off the table will help restrain the growth of state spending.
But naturally the Boston Globe editorial saw it
entirely different:
With local aid and education underfunded and health care up in the air, it would be irresponsible for the Legislature to consider tax cuts. If the state embarks on major initiatives, it will need every cent the income tax now raises, and probably more.
So long as our money is in their hands,
it will be spent or put in their pockets. We warned of this throughout
the booming '90s, when the state was running annual billion-dollar
budget surpluses but still couldn't keep a promise and roll back the
income tax to its traditional 5 percent. Instead, we were ignored, the
Legislature doubled the state budget, spent those surplus billions of
our dollars year after year, and created the most recent unsustainable
spending "fiscal crisis."
Obviously they're hell-bent on doing it to us all
over again.
|
|
|
Chip Ford |
The Boston Herald
Thursday, January 27, 2005
Romney budget includes cut in state income tax
By Kimberly Atkins
Gov. Mitt Romney is again pushing for an income tax cut and leading lawmakers, questioning whether the state can afford it, are pushing back.
Rolling out a budget plan yesterday that boosts spending by 2.4 percent, the governor at the same time called for a cut in the income tax rate from 5.3 percent to 5 percent.
With the help of a multi-million dollar windfall resulting from past Medicaid over-budgeting, Romney vowed his $23.2 billion budget would be balanced.
The proposed tax cut will save a married couple with a $60,000 income $146, a single making $50,000 $133, and a family of four making $80,000 about $180.
But Sen. Therese Murray, chairwoman of the Senate Ways and Means Committee, said an income tax rollback, which would cost the state more than $400 million annually, is far from a certainly.
"We don't even know if that is doable right now," said Murray (D-Plymouth), adding the uncertainty created from the pending Hancock education funding decision and other factors. "From what we see now, no."
The plan is based on a projected $17.3 billion in state revenue, which is higher than the $17.1 billion lawmakers are predicting.
"We have a concern that the budget may be spending at least 200 million more than we'll have," said Rep. John Rogers (D-Norwood), chairman of the House Ways and Means committee.
Romney's plan includes an additional $9.3 million for the Department of Youth Services in response to a Herald report on suicides of teens under the department's care. "The funds are going to be used to boost the salaries of direct aid workers who are underpaid," Romney said.
There are some cutbacks. State employees would contribute 25 percent toward health insurance.
Only $3.7 million in tobacco settlement funds would go to smoking cessation while $250 million is funneled into the general fund.
Return to top
The Boston Globe
Thursday, January 27, 2005
Romney offers $23.2b budget
Relies on recovery to fund increase
By Scott S. Greenberger, Globe Staff
Governor Mitt Romney yesterday presented a $23.2 billion state budget proposal for the coming year that relies on rising revenues, healthcare savings, and the closing of corporate tax loopholes to increase overall spending by about 2.4 percent while cutting income taxes at the same time.
When off-budget items such as pensions and the state's school building program are factored in, overall state spending would be about $25.5 billion in the next fiscal year under Romney's plan, up from about $24.7 billion this year.
Romney wants to raise state spending on schools and local government services such as police protection and public works by $180 million, a 4.2 percent increase over this year's total and the largest boost since Massachusetts plunged into fiscal crisis four years ago. His blueprint also includes a 22.8 percent increase for child-care services, a 5.4 percent hike for State Police, and a roughly 3.5 percent increase for mental health.
The key to the governor's budget is a predicted slowdown in the growth of Medicaid, the healthcare program for the poor. Between 2001 and the current year, Medicaid spending grew by an average of roughly 10 percent a year. But the administration is estimating that this fiscal year such spending will grow by only 5 percent, and so the administration is projecting a similar rate of growth next year. That would give the state between $300 million and $350 million more to spend.
Rising tax revenues will add $800 million to the state's coffers, according to the administration. Closing the tax loopholes would raise an additional $170 million. And forcing all active state employees and all retired employees without disabilities who are younger than 65 to cover 25 percent of their health insurance premiums, instead of 20 percent, will generate another $59 million.
"I'm beginning to enjoy these press conferences a little more, now that the figures are getting better," the governor said yesterday, as he unveiled his blueprint at the State House.
But Democrats who control the Legislature and the various advocates for programs that Romney would squeeze were skeptical yesterday. They said he was overly optimistic in predicting that Medicaid spending would slow down, for example.
The Legislature will probably reject many of Romney's priorities; over the last two years, lawmakers have added money for social services programs and rejected his repeated calls to cut the state income tax.
Romney's plan also would cut spending on some agencies and programs or give them the same amount they are getting this year, forcing them to find savings to deal with inflation and other rising costs. For example, both the Department of Environmental Protection and the Department of Public Health would receive roughly the same amount next year as they are getting now. Programs within those agencies, such as a river-monitoring program and a prostate cancer screening program, could see cuts.
Furthermore, in many areas of the budget, spending has not returned to the levels of fiscal 2001, before the recession and the resulting loss in revenues forced Beacon Hill to cut about $3 billion from programs and services and raise taxes by about $1.2 billion.
"It takes a nick this time, instead of a full-fledged cut," James R. Gomes of the Environmental League of Massachusetts said of the Department of Environmental Protection. "But it's been bleeding pretty heavily for the past few years, and this doesn't do anything to help that."
Geoff Wilkinson of the Massachusetts Public Health Association said the Department of Public Health is in a similar situation.
"Leaving public health [at its present level] amounts to a cut, given the inflationary pressures and the fact that public health has already been so badly devastated," Wilkinson said, pointing to immunizations and the State Laboratory Institute as examples. "It's like a
P.T. Barnum budget here. The governor is a good showman, and he's taking us for suckers."
Wilkinson did praise the governor for increasing spending by 19 percent on family health services and for seeking a 137 percent increase in a program for specially trained nurses who examine sexual assault victims.
This year's overall spending increase of 2.4 percent is less than the 5 percent boost that Romney proposed last January for the current fiscal year. Actual spending for fiscal 2005, which ends in June, is expected to be nearly 8 percent more than it was in fiscal 2004. Lawmakers, at times with Romney's approval, increased some spending as the improving economy boosted state revenues later in the year.
Last month, legislative leaders and outside budget analysts were predicting a budget gap of about $600 million for the coming fiscal year. But Romney would close that gap with the Medicaid savings, the elimination of the tax loopholes, and the increase in healthcare contributions from state workers.
Romney's call for an income tax cut is not new. For months, he has been urging the Legislature to reduce the state income tax to 5 percent. In 2000, voters approved a gradual lowering of the income tax rate, which was 5.85 percent at the time, to 5 percent. But in the depths of the state's fiscal crisis in 2002, the Legislature froze the rate at 5.3 percent. Now that the state's economy is rumbling back to life, Romney says, it's time to follow through.
Barbara Anderson of Citizens for Limited Taxation praised the governor for a budget that "responds to the will of the voters."
Romney's proposed income tax cut would cost $225 million this year. He comes close to covering that total with a revenue prediction for fiscal 2006, $17.3 billion, which is $200 million higher than Democratic leaders predict.
But the tax cut would cost twice that much in fiscal 2007, when it would be in effect for the entire calendar year. In a full year, the cut will be worth about $146 to a married couple earning $60,000 a year and $133 to a single person earning $50,000.
Michael J. Widmer of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a business-funded nonprofit that studies taxes and government spending, said the tax cut is a bad idea, especially because Romney is planning on pushing major education and healthcare initiatives that will probably add costs.
"We don't have the resources to afford both the expansion proposals the governor is going to present and the tax cut," Widmer said. "We're going to have enough trouble affording one of them, let alone both."
Democratic budget-writers on Beacon Hill tend to agree. Senator Therese Murray of Plymouth, chairwoman of the Senate Ways and Means Committee, said Romney's plan is "a little too ambitious" in its predictions of Medicaid savings and revenue growth.
Her House counterpart, Representative John Rogers of Norwood, said, "We're concerned, without being critical, that the governor is spending too much."
Both said they need more time to examine the proposal.
Meanwhile, business groups are wary of Romney's proposal to close nearly a dozen tax loopholes. Among other things, he wants to make sure companies pay sales taxes on software they download, and seeks to prevent them from writing off losses on both their federal and state tax returns. Since taking office in 2003, the former venture capitalist has cost the business sector more than $300 million with tax code changes.
"There's really no acknowledgement on the part of public officials that businesses are paying significantly more in taxes than they were a few years ago," said Eileen McAnenny of Associated Industries of Massachusetts. "There's a lot of talk going on by the governor and the Legislature for an economic stimulus package. In our opinion, a stable and predictable tax code would go a lot toward job creation."
Globe correspondent Janette Neuwahl contributed to this report.
Return to top
The Lowell Sun
Thursday, January 27, 2005
Romney plan offers modest increases, cuts tax rate
By Jennifer Fenn, Sun Statehouse Bureau
Gov. Mitt Romney unveiled a $23.2 billion spending plan for fiscal 2006 that proposes modest increases in local aid, education and health care while rolling back the income-tax rate to 5 percent.
The governor's budget represents a 2.4 percent increase over anticipated spending for the current year.
Romney said his budget is balanced, without using money from reserve accounts or one-time revenues.
"Our unemployment rate is low, jobs are being created and the economy is getting stronger," Romney said in announcing the budget at a press conference yesterday. "Massachusetts state government is in a position to increase spending in vital programs and still keep our promise to the voters by lowering the income tax."
Education spending would go up by $100 million, including $77 million toward direct education aid known as Chapter 70. The Republican governor also proposes $8 million in additional funding for adult education; $1 million for the Gifted and Talented program; $2 million for extra help for failing schools; and $4 million for new tools to track student performance.
Romney also proposed a 4.2 percent hike in local-aid funding, including an extra $180 million increase for cities and towns.
Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey said the budget also seeks to protect the state's most vulnerable citizens by providing additional money for the homeless and victims of domestic and sexual assault.
Romney said the state is able to make modest increases in some programs because of reforms to Medicaid, which have resulted in smaller than expected growth.
After years of double-digit spending increases in the government health-care program for the poor and disabled, Romney said the state anticipates only 5 percent growth this year. He said the state implemented measures to better track eligibility and has received significant federal aid.
Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Association, said health care is the key to the budget. How well the state is able to control growth in Medicaid will dictate how much money is available to spend on other programs, he said.
"Overall, it's clearly a very tight budget," he said. "The key to the budget is holding down spending in health care and it's too early to say whether it's realistic to do that."
Romney's call for a reduction in the income tax rate from 5.3 percent to 5 percent will not likely be well received in the Legislature while the state is still recovering from the recent recession.
Sen. Therese Murray, D-Plymouth, the Senate's chief budget writer, said a tax cut is not realistic given current economic conditions.
"Until we see improved revenues, I don't see how we can do that," she said.
Widmer said it's premature to move forward with a permanent tax cut, which Romney said would cost the state $225 million, while many state programs are still reeling from years of drastic budget cuts. Some have less money now than they did in 2001.
"The additional money that would go to a tax cut could be used to restore major spending cuts since 2001 in higher education, housing, or public health, or to pay for the governor's upcoming initiatives in education, health care or economic stimulus," Widmer said.
Romney is working on the Education Reform Act of 2005, a plan to expand health-care coverage to the uninsured and an economic-stimulus plan, none of which are funded in his proposed budget for 2006. Given the pressure to fund those programs, Widmer said it's unrealistic to lower the tax rate.
But Barbara Anderson, of Citizens for Limited Taxation, said the state is obligated to fund the tax rollback. Voters approved the measure in 2000, although it was frozen by the Legislature when the economy turned sour. Lawmakers say it will automatically kick in once the state reaches certain economic milestones.
"The Legislature has made it pretty clear it's not going to do it but we certainly applaud the governor for not giving up and we're not giving up," she said. "We think it's important to continually remind the Legislature that this was a temporary tax and it would be part of the public discussion."
Anderson said the state can't afford to break its promise.
"It creates a climate in which people don't trust the government and feel disenfranchised," she said. "The first thing you have to do is to keep your promises and listen to the voters and proceed from there."
By reducing the income tax to 5 percent, Romney said it will save a married couple earning $60,000 a year $146; a single person earning $50,000, $133; and a family earning $80,000 with two children, $179.
Romney's proposal is the first step in a six-month process of finalizing a spending plan for fiscal 2006, which begins July 1. The House will release its version of the budget in the spring.
Return to top
The Boston Globe
Thursday, January 27, 2005
Court order could change everything
By Maria Sacchetti, Globe Staff
In the education budget he unveiled yesterday, Governor Mitt Romney avoided what many observers call the most critical question confronting Massachusetts schools: a looming court decision over whether the state is providing enough money to educate children in the state's poorest school systems.
Romney's budget added nearly $100 million for public schools, a 2.7 percent increase that mainly covers schools' basic needs, such as cost-of-living increases for teacher salaries.
But the governor did not address a state judge's report last spring that found the state is shortchanging its poorest students and cited schools that lacked textbooks, adequate science labs, and extra help for students. The Supreme Judicial Court is expected to rule on the matter soon, perhaps this month. A ruling in favor of the plaintiffs in the legal case could cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars.
Lawmakers and teachers said the governor missed an opportunity to confront the problems before the court hands down its decision. But the governor said he would tackle additional school funding issues and his own initiatives, such as merit pay for teachers, in separate legislation to be filed later in the year. That scenario would be similar to early 1993, when lawmakers passed the Education Reform Act that increased state funding and led to widespread MCAS testing in schools.
The governor said he does not believe that money alone is the answer to the state's education problems.
"Just paying the same people more money to do the same thing will not yield a different result," Romney said during a press conference yesterday.
It's not surprising that Romney, and others, might be reluctant to tackle the issue of school funding raised by the legal case until the court forces them to. The question of state aid to local schools and how to distribute it among poor schools and more affluent ones is among the most contentious subjects confronting states around the country.
Romney's budget is just the start of what will be a long, arduous debate in the Legislature, and lawmakers will put forth their own, probably very different, spending blueprint.
The leaders of the Senate Education Committee, the Massachusetts Association of School Committees, and the Massachusetts Teachers Association said yesterday they already saw room for changes. They are anxiously awaiting the Supreme Judicial Court's decision in the school funding lawsuit and say that some of the inequities in schools could be addressed now.
In a report last spring, Superior Court Judge Margot Botsford said gains had been made since the 1993 measure, which pumped billions into education and required MCAS testing to hold schools accountable for student achievement. But she said those gains were not enough and recommended changes, such as free preschool for 3- and 4-year-olds in poor families and a review of how much more money is needed for special education. But she also took aim at the administration of some of the poor districts, saying they need to be better managed.
Because of budget cuts in recent years, Lynn public schools, one of the districts mentioned in the case known as Hancock v. the Commissioner of Education, have had to sharply reduce preschool and extra help for students who fail the
MCAS. Mayor Chip Clancy, also chairman of the School Committee, said the state budget plan released yesterday represents a minimal increase for schools.
"If Hancock were to come down favorably, it would explode those numbers," Clancy said.
Statewide, for instance, money to help struggling students pass the MCAS has plunged from $50 million a few years ago to a proposed $20 million next year, when the governor is pushing the state Board of Education to add science to the 10th grade math and English MCAS tests that students must pass to graduate from high school.
Senator Robert A. Antonioni, chairman of the Legislature's joint Education Committee, proposed spending $150 million to $175 million each year for seven years, partly to address the inequities outlined in the Hancock case. He said he was disappointed in the governor's budget.
"It pretty much represents something of a holding pattern," Antonioni said. "There was a big opportunity there for the governor to do something, and I didn't see that."
Others said it was premature for Romney to budget money before the court rules.
"We don't have a Hancock decision yet; we don't know what it's going to cost," said Mark Roosevelt, managing director of the Massachusetts Business Alliance for Education.
In his budget, Romney provides funding in a number of areas, including: $4 million to track student test scores; $1.5 million for a teacher database that would provide basic information about teachers for the first time, such as how many certified science teachers are working in public schools; and $2 million so the state Department of Education will intervene faster in failing schools.
The budget also calls for lifting the cap on charter schools and provides $750,000 to let private school students take the
MCAS, opening the door for the top scorers to qualify for free tuition at state colleges and universities.
In higher education, the governor's budget included a modest increase, about 2 percent on average, for the nine Massachusetts state colleges and 15 community colleges. Proposed increases varied, under a plan by the state Board of Higher Education to adjust funding to reflect enrollment growth and other differences among campuses. Bridgewater State College would receive $32.6 million, an increase of 3.5 percent, under Romney's plan, while Berkshire Community College in Pittsfield would get $8.05 million, an increase of 1.9 percent.
Fred Clark, the executive officer for the state colleges' Council of Presidents, said campus leaders were pleased to see a budget increase, but will continue to lobby for the 9.5 percent increase requested by the Board of Higher Education.
"The governor's moving in the right direction, but not far enough to help the colleges help the state," he said. "We hope to make that argument loudly in the Legislature this coming session."
Jenna Russell of the Globe staff contributed to this report.
Return to top
The Boston Globe
Thursday, January 27, 2005
A Boston Globe editorial
A wait-and-see budget
The Romney administration employed expansive rhetoric as it unveiled its fiscal year 2006 budget yesterday, but the $23.2 billion proposal was more stand-pat than innovative. On the two major areas of state spending -- education and health care -- Governor Romney leaves the initiative to the Supreme Judicial Court and the Legislature.
Romney seeks a modest increase in local aid for the coming fiscal year, and, though he proposes that education funding rise by $100 million, most of that would keep lower-income communities from dropping below foundation levels mandated by law. Romney is waiting for the Supreme Judicial Court to rule on the Hancock case, in which a state judge found illegal disparities among schools. If the SJC decides the state must spend more, he anticipates increases in 2007.
On health care, the governor announced that the state was spending less than expected on Medicaid this year. He plans to roll that money into next year's account, which would be the sole source of a 5 percent increase. He did not say whether this money would be enough to pay for the 66,000 new enrollees he anticipates in the program. These people are now eligible to join but have not signed up.
Although he did not mention it, the governor was surely heartened by the recent announcement that the federal government will not rescind the Medicaid waiver that funnels $600 million into the state each year. Negotiations on details of the waiver extension were not yet complete as he presented his budget.
The fine print of that agreement will affect legislative consideration of money for the uncompensated care pool, which pays hospital costs of people without health insurance. In his budget Romney proposed a cut of $90 million, but Ronald Preston, secretary of health and human services, said that number was only a placeholder. The Legislature will have the final say on a comprehensive proposal. It needs to satisfy the waiver and keep hospitals solvent, but it should give priority to expanding coverage for the uninsured.
"Government must do everything possible to protect its most vulnerable citizens," Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey said at the budget presentation. Romney did propose $90 million to maintain viability of the state Prescription Advantage program to aid the elderly with drug expenses. This will provide an important adjunct to the federal Medicare drug benefit. Other initiatives involve appropriations of a few million dollars at best. With only a 2.4 percent overall increase, spending is tight throughout the budget.
Romney restated his call for the rollback of the income tax from 5.3 to 5 percent. With local aid and education underfunded and health care up in the air, it would be irresponsible for the Legislature to consider tax cuts. If the state embarks on major initiatives, it will need every cent the income tax now raises, and probably more.
Return to top
The Boston Globe
Thursday, January 27, 2005
House, Senate speed pay plan
Committees altered, leaders get raises
By Raphael Lewis, Globe Staff
Moving with unusual speed, the Legislature unanimously passed a reorganization bill yesterday that will shuffle committees and double the bonus pay of certain leadership positions.
The bill, which Senate President Robert E. Travaglini and House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi filed just a day earlier, creates paid leadership positions called speaker pro tempore and president pro tempore that will entitle the holders to $15,000 annual bonus stipends.
Overall, the proposal, which requires the signature of Governor Mitt Romney, will add about $120,000 a year to the Legislature's salary load.
In an interview this week, DiMasi and Travaglini, both Boston Democrats, argued that the reorganization is vital to better address emerging issues such as mental health and public health.
And, Travaglini said, the bill also compensates previously unpaid positions with bonuses.
State Senator Stanley Rosenberg, for example, had already held the post of Senate president pro tem, but the Northampton Democrat was not paid extra for that post. The same went for Senator Robert A. Havern of Arlington, the assistant majority whip. Both will now receive an additional $15,000.
DiMasi is said to be considering his friend and ally, state Representative Thomas M. Petrolati of Ludlow, to fill the speaker pro tem position. The House does not have an assistant majority whip, but in the end, the House and Senate will each add about $60,000 in new bonus pay through the bill.
Romney, who goes without the salary he's entitled to, but pays several staff members six-figure salaries, has said in the past that he has no quarrel with the Legislature reorganizing its committees and adjusting pay levels.
Yesterday, a spokeswoman for Romney said he is "not opposed to allowing adjustments to take place," as long as the Legislature does not insist on being able to raise its members' pay unilaterally.
The comment was a reference to a legislative battle that took place last year, when Speaker Thomas M. Finneran championed a bill that would have granted the speaker and Senate president power in perpetuity to grant pay raises to lieutenants without the approval of the governor. Romney vetoed the measure, and Finneran was unable to muster a two-thirds majority to override the veto.
Yesterday the proposal passed the House, 149-0, and the Senate by voice vote, moving at a pace that few pieces of legislation ever achieve at the State House.
The key to its swift passage may lie in the bill's calling for several new positions to receive double their current pay.
For example, the pay for chairing what was previously known as the Committee on Longterm Debt, a position now held in the Senate by Democrat Mark C. Montigny of New Bedford, rises from $7,500 to $15,000.
DiMasi, who became speaker only last fall, has yet to disclose his choices for committee leaders.
Lawmakers say the number of committees in the two bodies combined will actually drop from 39 to 37, and several committees, such as those on taxation and education, will see bonus pay for chairmen cut in half. But other leadership posts are getting additional pay.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Thursday, January 27, 2005
A Boston Herald editorial
No easy street in budget outlook
Gov. Mitt Romney yesterday put a balanced, responsible budget on the table, cognizant that the dark underbelly of fiscal improvement may be his biggest challenge this year. Maintaining spending discipline is a far easier task in a crisis than in a recovery.
The budget price tag is a whopper - some $25.5 billion when so-called "off-budget" spending is included - and it's liberally sprinkled with modest new "investments" in priorities such as education and training.
But there's plenty for fiscal conservatives to smile about, too. Overall spending is held to an increase of just 2.4 percent, meaning much of state government will continue to operate on a tight budget.
And the governor has now fervently taken up the cause of rolling back the income tax to 5 percent. The economy will benefit, as Romney notes, but, as important, taking revenue off the table will help restrain the growth of state spending.
Medicaid spending, too, is reined in, with a projected 5.6 percent growth rate, a big change from the expected - and crippling - double-digit growth of recent years.
And Romney's budget does not rely on one-time revenue sources or reserve funds.
Much of Romney's policy agenda will be filed separately. But tollpayers benefit under the revised Turnpike merger proposal that provides some $150 million in immediate toll relief. And the principles of Romney's tougher welfare plan are included for traditional welfare recipients as well as applied to participants in two other aid programs. Romney's stated aim of giving all on welfare-like programs "the opportunity to achieve independent and fulfilling lives," is both laudable and do-able.
Less worthy of praise is Romney's decision to spend some $24 million of operating revenue on capital projects, rather than subjecting them to the discipline and scrutiny of the $1.2 billion capital spending cap. And Romney's tax increases on business total some $170 million, rendering useless some $625,000 dedicated to marketing the state as a good place to locate a company.
Also of concern is that Romney did not fund the costs of upcoming economic, health care and education proposals. Extending the school day, for instance, won't come cheaply and this bit of fiscal gamesmanship undermines an otherwise responsible plan.
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
|