CLT
UPDATE
Wednesday, September 7, 2005
MTF wants to raise your taxes,
again!
A Republican state lawmaker's call to temporarily
waive the state's gasoline tax created a politically sticky situation
yesterday for Governor Mitt Romney, who initially dismissed the idea,
but later said he "would be hard-pressed to veto any tax reduction." ...
"While we understand the urge to act quickly, the problem cannot be
addressed merely through reactionary proposals," said DiMasi's
spokeswoman, Kimberly Haberlin.
The Boston Globe
Friday, September 2, 2005
Lawmaker proposes gas tax waiver
Romney is open to temporary break
With gas prices out of control even before Katrina damaged
our refineries and pipelines and choked the nation's oil supply, it's hard to
tell if it's price-gouging when prices go up 50 cents or more per gallon
overnight....
With prices high and getting higher, Republican state lawmakers are floating a
worthwhile plan to suspend the state's 21 cents-per-gallon gas tax until – we
can only hope – the chaos from Katrina stabilizes.
With a $400 million projected surplus from fiscal 2005, the Bay State can afford
to absorb the $175 million loss in highway funds if the gas tax is lifted
between now and December, as proposed.
A Boston Herald editorial
Friday, September 2, 2005
Katrina fuels call for gas tax relief
But what about the commonwealth of Massachusetts? Talk about
a racket – those hacks took $685 million out of our pockets in 2004 with the
21-cent-a-gallon tax of gasoline and diesel fuel. And on top of that, the state
grabs another 2.5 cents per gallon for some underground-storage tank fee, in
addition to which, the feds impose a gas tax of 18.4 cents.
So stop yelling at the guy who owns the gas station. He's making half what the
state and the feds are each grabbing....
"They try to frame the debate," Jones said. "If it's a bigger number, they say
we can't afford it. If it's a smaller number, it's not worth it."
Yeah, but in this case, they're saying the bigger number is chump change, and
the smaller number is something "we" can't afford to do without in the trough.
The Boston Herald
Friday, September 2, 2005
Tax cut prescription to relieve Bay State gas pains
By Howie Carr
Has Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue gone crazy?
We pose the question because on Thursday, asked if a temporary suspension of the
gas tax in Massachusetts was a crazy idea, Gov. Mitt Romney answered "Yeah."
Now here comes Perdue with an announcement that he is lifting Georgia's gas tax
- 7.5 cents a gallon, compared to the Bay State's whopping 21 cents - through
the end of September.
A Boston Herald editorial
Saturday, September 3, 2005
Look south, Governor
A task force of municipal officials is reportedly ready to
recommend that the state raise the auto excise tax rate from its current $25 per
$1,000 of valuation, giving cash-starved municipalities a needed revenue boost.
But local lawmakers said Massachusetts drivers are already paying record high
gasoline prices and the fifth highest auto insurance premiums of any state, and
that hitting them with an additional tax is not fair....
The Municipal Finance Task Force, composed of local municipal officials and
headed by Sovereign Bank Chairman John Hamill, plans to release a report in
early September that details a set of recommendations for how to help cities and
towns reach financial stability.
In July, the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation released a survey of 32 cities
and towns that showed their health insurance had increased 63 percent since
2001....
Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation and a task
force member, said the excise tax has remained the same since Proposition 2½
was enacted in 1981.
He said it is "hardly a radical notion" to explore the idea of raising the tax
to $35 of valuation, considering the rate was $66 per $1,000 in 1980.
"This is a more progressive tax, and it's not insignificant for cities and
towns," Widmer said. "What's striking is that we're seeing enormous pressure on
the property tax, and communities are going to have to either do more layoffs or
turn to raising the property tax further."
Widmer pointed out the method in which vehicles are taxed in the subsequent
years of ownership do not really reflect the true value.
MediaNews Group, Inc. and Nashoba Publications
Friday, September 2, 2005
Lawmakers oppose idea of raising the auto excise tax
Chip Ford's CLT Commentary
Michael Widmer, president of the so-called
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation (tax the "unwashed masses" more,
more, more so my fat-cat supporters win higher taxes then can loan the
state more), again leads the charge -- giving it alleged
"respectability" while calling as usual for tax hikes.
Some of our representatives in the Legislature are
proposing to reduce the burden on us, Widmer's unwashed masses, in these
trying times by temporarily lowering the gas tax. You can bet if
the Legislature does it'll be truly temporary -- as opposed to
when they raise taxes "temporarily." This is occurring while CLT
fights MTF's soon-to-be-proposed increase in the auto excise tax,
reduced by our Proposition 2½, under the guise
again of the second "Hamill Commission." The so-called Massachusetts
Taxpayers Foundation is now pushing to jack up our cost to drive.
When will the media finally see through
Michael Widmer, former Dukakis administration spokesman, and his Trojan
Horse organization and reveal what he and it honestly are and who they
truly represent?
The barbarians are inside the gate. They have
been there for too long.
|
|
|
Chip Ford |
The Boston Globe
Friday, September 2, 2005
Lawmaker proposes gas tax waiver
Romney is open to temporary break
By Scott S. Greenberger, Globe Staff
A Republican state lawmaker's call to temporarily waive the state's
gasoline tax created a politically sticky situation yesterday for
Governor Mitt Romney, who initially dismissed the idea, but later said
he "would be hard-pressed to veto any tax reduction."
Asked by a reporter at a morning news conference whether giving
motorists a "holiday" from the state's 21 cents-per-gallon gasoline tax
was "crazy," Romney said it was. The governor called the idea "an
additional incentive to use gasoline and energy."
Later, however, Romney called a Globe reporter to clarify his comment,
saying he meant that the proposal made no sense as a long-term solution.
The House minority leader, Bradley H. Jones Jr., a Republican, would
waive the tax only until Dec. 31.
The episode played out as politicians on Beacon Hill began responding to
the spike in gasoline prices: The average price of regular unleaded gas
in the Bay State rose to $2.79 yesterday, up 17 cents since Monday,
according to the American Automobile Association of Southern New
England. Romney said his administration is working on proposals to
encourage energy efficiency. Leading Democrats said they were readying
their own energy proposals, though a spokeswoman for House Speaker
Salvatore F. DiMasi cautioned against sudden changes in policy.
"While we understand the urge to act quickly, the problem cannot be
addressed merely through reactionary proposals," said DiMasi's
spokeswoman, Kimberly Haberlin.
Jones said he knows his proposal won't provide long-term relief to
Massachusetts motorists, but he contends that it would help them
gradually adjust their spending habits to reflect an unfortunate new
reality. Jones said waiving the gas tax would cost the state $175
million. Under his plan, the state would plug that hole with other
money.
"Drive by a gas station and look at the board and see what the price is,
and drive by a day later and see what the price is, and that's your
argument for it," Jones said. "It's something we can do to take the edge
off as people try to acclimate to the idea that we are probably facing a
permanently higher price for gas."
Jones said his gas-tax break is one of several energy proposals he will
put forward once the Legislature returns to work after Labor Day. He
also will propose the elimination of the excise tax on clean-fuel or
hybrid vehicles, a tax credit on the purchase of clean-fuel vehicles,
and a sales-tax holiday for energy-efficient appliances.
Gas prices and energy policy were hot topics at the State House
yesterday. After introducing the new commissioner of the Department of
Conservation and Recreation, Romney launched into a wide-ranging
discourse on the nation's energy challenges. Romney joked about a
cardigan-clad President Carter exhorting Americans to turn down their
thermostats during the energy crisis of the 1970s. But then Romney
issued his own call for conservation, saying "we're going to have to
rethink how we use energy in our society."
"We as individual families and as citizens need to find ways to conserve
energy, to utilize it more efficiently," he said. "It's an amazing fact.
You've seen that almost everything in America has gotten more efficient
over the decade -- except the fuel economy of the vehicles we drive,
that's become more inefficient."
Romney, whose auto-executive father invented the term "compact car,"
appeared to be departing from the conservative Republican position that
the best way to reduce the price of oil is to find more of it. But later
in the day, the possible presidential candidate emphasized that he did
not necessarily support tougher fuel-efficiency standards.
Romney declined to comment on the Bush administration's plan, unveiled
earlier this month, to stiffen those standards. Democrats and
environmental groups have criticized the proposed changes as
insufficient.
Instead, Romney predicted that simple economics will curb the popularity
of sport utility vehicles and other gas-guzzlers.
"I actually believe that by virtue of the rise in gasoline prices, which
I believe is a long-term phenomenon, that you will see a reversal of
that trend," he said.
Romney and his wife own a 1985 BMW, a 2002 Chevrolet Silverado pickup, a
2005 Cadillac SRX, and a new Ford Mustang. The governor said that he
doesn't plan to trade in any of those vehicles right away but that
"there's no question that the next time I purchase an automobile for Ann
and me, fuel efficiency will weigh more heavily than it did last time."
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Friday, September 2, 2005
A Boston Herald editorial
Katrina fuels call for gas tax relief
With gas prices out of control even before Katrina damaged our
refineries and pipelines and choked the nation's oil supply, it's hard
to tell if it's price-gouging when prices go up 50 cents or more per
gallon overnight.
Attorney General Tom Reilly's office is monitoring complaints about
profiteering, but for now it appears the price of gas here reflects
current market conditions – dismal as they might be.
With prices high and getting higher, Republican state lawmakers are
floating a worthwhile plan to suspend the state's 21 cents-per-gallon
gas tax until – we can only hope – the chaos from Katrina stabilizes.
With a $400 million projected surplus from fiscal 2005, the Bay State
can afford to absorb the $175 million loss in highway funds if the gas
tax is lifted between now and December, as proposed.
In the meantime, the tax break will have provided critical relief to
school bus companies, delivery businesses and all of us who rely on a
car to get around.
A good-faith effort to conserve gas couldn't hurt either (hey, the MBTA
could use the business).
And when December comes, we'll still be dealing with high gas prices
given the pre-Katrina forces already driving them skyward.
But this is an innovative proposal that deserved consideration long
before Katrina hit – and even more so now.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Friday, September 2, 2005
Tax cut prescription to relieve Bay State gas pains
By Howie Carr
What do you call it in these post-Katrina days when the price of gas
goes up 20 cents a gallon overnight?
You call it a good day.
OK, the oil companies are "gouging" us. They're reaping "windfall
profits."
But what about the commonwealth of Massachusetts? Talk about a racket –
those hacks took $685 million out of our pockets in 2004 with the
21-cent-a-gallon tax of gasoline and diesel fuel. And on top of that,
the state grabs another 2.5 cents per gallon for some
underground-storage tank fee, in addition to which, the feds impose a
gas tax of 18.4 cents.
So stop yelling at the guy who owns the gas station. He's making half
what the state and the feds are each grabbing. The guy on the corner is
only getting 9 or 10 cents a gallon, and don't forget the credit card
companies grab 3 percent of anything that's charged, which these days is
most everything.
Say what you will about Big Oil, at least they give you a gallon of gas
for the $3.50. (Correction: That was last night. It's $3.85 this
morning.)
What exactly does the state provide for its 21 cents – and if you want
to answer "the roads," please address your remarks to my shock
absorbers, or what's left of them. Also, let me show you my canceled
checks for the auto excise tax I pay, which the solons want to raise,
and don't even get me started on the tolls.
So why don't we suspend the state gasoline tax?
"It's almost usurious that we're still grabbing this money," said Rep.
Brad Jones, the Republican leader of the House. "The majority party is
going to keep the capital-gains tax, and they say we can't 'afford' to
cut the income tax back to 5 percent. We ran a surplus in the last
fiscal year. Revenue in July was ahead of projections. So let's do
something for the average guy."
Yeah, right. They didn't go into politics to give money back.
"Even mentioning giving money back around here," Jones said, "is like
touching the third rail."
I have only one problem with Jones' proposal. Forget the "sunset"
provision. Let's abolish the gas tax permanently. But the so-called
advocates will soon be out – after the long weekend, of course –
bleating about how we can't afford it. When you ask the hacks to cut the
state income tax back to the 5 percent level they promised in 1989, they
always say, "Well, if you make $50,000, cutting the tax rate from 5.3
percent to 5 percent would 'only' mean $150 a year."
But if you use, say, 40 gallons a week, a three-month hit by the gas tax
costs $104.
And that's way, way too much. What about those who fall through the
safety net? What about ... the children?
"They try to frame the debate," Jones said. "If it's a bigger number,
they say we can't afford it. If it's a smaller number, it's not worth
it."
Yeah, but in this case, they're saying the bigger number is chump
change, and the smaller number is something "we" can't afford to do
without in the trough.
So Mitt Romney says last night that a gas-tax reduction "is not going to
resolve the problem."
No kidding, Mitt. But if it saves me $6 when I fill up my SUV, that's a
pizza. A cheese pizza, but hey, we all have to tighten our belts.
"If it crosses my desk," Mitt said, "I'm surely not going to veto a tax
cut."
But of course, what are the odds it'll ever reach his desk?
A guy told me last night, "I'm a courier. I drive 250, 300 miles a day.
One-third of my income is going to gas right now. Gets much higher, I'll
be doing better on unemployment than working."
I filled up Wednesday night at a Mobil station in Newton. Regular cost
2.79 a gallon. Twelve hours later, I drove by the same station. Regular
was 2.99. It was a good day.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Saturday, September 3, 2005
A Boston Herald editorial
Look south, Governor
Has Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue gone crazy?
We pose the question because on Thursday, asked if a temporary
suspension of the gas tax in Massachusetts was a crazy idea, Gov. Mitt
Romney answered "Yeah."
Now here comes Perdue with an announcement that he is lifting Georgia's
gas tax - 7.5 cents a gallon, compared to the Bay State's whopping 21
cents - through the end of September.
The move, Perdue said, will help drivers cope with skyrocketing gas
prices driven by the damage Hurricane Katrina caused to refineries and
pipelines.
And for good measure, Perdue is suspending the 4 percent sales tax on
gas in Georgia, too.
With gas prices exceeding $3 a gallon, Romney at first focused on
long-term changes in energy policy to help free up supply and bring down
prices. Cutting the gas tax would simply encourage more consumption, he
theorized, a befuddling response from a chief executive who never met a
tax cut he didn't like.
But the Republican governor quickly saw the error of his ways - calling
the Boston Globe later Thursday to insist he would be hard-pressed to
veto any tax cut that landed on his desk. Guess the idea isn't so crazy
after all.
Return to top
MediaNews Group, Inc. and Nashoba Publications
Friday, September 2, 2005
Lawmakers oppose idea of raising the auto excise tax
By Erik Arvidson, Statehouse Bureau
Fitchburg-area lawmakers appear dead-set against a proposal to raise the
excise tax on automobiles to help cities and towns pay for the soaring
cost of employee health insurance.
A task force of municipal officials is reportedly ready to recommend
that the state raise the auto excise tax rate from its current $25 per
$1,000 of valuation, giving cash-starved municipalities a needed revenue
boost.
But local lawmakers said Massachusetts drivers are already paying record
high gasoline prices and the fifth highest auto insurance premiums of
any state, and that hitting them with an additional tax is not fair.
"I think that's a lousy idea," said state Sen. Robert A. Antonioni,
D-Leominster. "It's a regressive tax. There is going to be little or no
appetite in the Legislature to do this, and I don't see it happening.
This is a real hit on people, and it's not based on income, it's based
on the kind of car you have."
Antonioni said he would rather focus on trying to boost state aid to
cities and towns, particularly through removing a limit on how much
state lottery aid is distributed to cities and towns.
State Rep. James Eldridge, D-Acton, questioned whether an increase in
the excise tax will help smaller towns.
State Rep. Jennifer Flanagan, D-Leominster, said she would be interested
to see how the additional excise tax revenue would be spent.
"A lot of people in my district are feeling the crunch from gas prices,"
Flanagan said. "To add another tax would concern me."
Leominster Mayor Dean Mazzarella said, "I don't know how much more
people can afford. People's insurance is going up. I don't know how we
can think we can ask people to pay that. At some point, you're just
forcing trucking companies and individuals to register their vehicles in
New Hampshire."
The Municipal Finance Task Force, composed of local municipal officials
and headed by Sovereign Bank Chairman John Hamill, plans to release a
report in early September that details a set of recommendations for how
to help cities and towns reach financial stability.
In July, the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation released a survey of 32
cities and towns that showed their health insurance had increased 63
percent since 2001.
Among the recommendations the task force will make, according to the
Boston Globe, are that the excise tax rate be increased and that the
"depreciation schedule" -- covers how a vehicle is taxed in each year of
ownership -- be changed.
The task force wants vehicles to be taxed more in line with what their
actual value is, which would give municipalities a significant revenue
boost above the $600 million now collected in excise tax revenue.
Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation and
a task force member, said the excise tax has remained the same since
Proposition 2½ was enacted in 1981.
He said it is "hardly a radical notion" to explore the idea of raising
the tax to $35 of valuation, considering the rate was $66 per $1,000 in
1980.
"This is a more progressive tax, and it's not insignificant for cities
and towns," Widmer said. "What's striking is that we're seeing enormous
pressure on the property tax, and communities are going to have to
either do more layoffs or turn to raising the property tax further."
Widmer pointed out the method in which vehicles are taxed in the
subsequent years of ownership do not really reflect the true value.
If a person purchases a 2005 model vehicle during the 2006 model year,
the vehicle is taxed at a rate that is 50 percent of the manufacturer's
list price.
In year two of ownership, the vehicle is taxed at 60 percent of its
value, then 40 percent in year three, 25 percent in year four and 10
percent in the fifth and succeeding years.
Widmer said legislators "are really feeling the heat, and as a result
more unpopular ideas are going to start to become more palatable."
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
|