CLT
UPDATE
Thursday, October 6, 2005
The Fat Cats can't decide . . . but
we can!
Leaders in the State House and Senate said they were
cautiously optimistic about the revenue figures, but rejected Romney's
argument that Massachusetts is hale enough financially to pass a tax cut
that would drain $600 million a year in revenue. They cited the fiscal
uncertainty of rising oil and natural gas prices and healthcare costs
and the threat of steep cuts in federal Medicaid money.
"Before those variables take on a value, I'm not willing to make any
determination on a tax rollback, and it would be unwise to do so," said
Senate President Robert E. Travaglini, an East Boston Democrat.
House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi, a North End Democrat, said the public
has faith in the Legislature to put any surplus revenue to good use in
coming months. On the agenda, he said, is a $296 million "economic
stimulus" package to help spur job growth, an $80 million energy plan to
mitigate the impact of higher heating costs, and a yet-to-be-priced
effort to reduce the number of residents living without health
insurance....
But other areas of the economy show signs of continued weakness, said
Michael Widmer, who heads the business-backed Massachusetts Taxpayers
Foundation....
"If the leadership is considering a tax cut, it should be directed to
provide property tax relief through increased aid to cities and towns,"
Widmer said.
The Boston Globe
Tuesday, October 4, 2005
State revenues up $317 million; Romney calls for tax rollback
According to the bureau's report set for release today, the
cost of collective bargaining, pensions and health insurance for employees and
retirees in the city of Boston is gobbling up what little revenue growth the
city takes in – a whopping 86 percent of it this year....
At some point, lawmakers, local officials and the unions have to realize some
simple math: No one can afford to spend twice what they take in on personnel
costs. They must take action soon.
A Boston Herald editorial
Wednesday, October 5, 2005
Busting local budgets
"Over my dead body," said Boston Police Patrolmen's
Association president Thomas J. Nee, whose union settled a contract on the eve
of the [DNC] convention that gave members 14.5 percent in raises over four
years. Tyler "wants to make us all indentured servants," Nee said.
Jim Durkin -- spokesman for the American Federation of State, County, and
Municipal Employees -- said his union would also fight any move to change state
labor laws. "AFSCME would strenuously oppose any effort to infringe on our
collective bargaining rights and would aggressively fight any effort to weaken
collective bargaining laws." ...
Menino said he is instead pushing bills to increase the city's revenue ...
The report also said that city health insurance costs are soaring, to $211.5
million this fiscal year, an 11.2 percent jump from last year....
But such a change would also meet resistance from the city's unions, which have
fought more modest changes, such as the city's elimination of one HMO plan last
year. Three unions filed grievances, which are pending.
Pension costs are making up an increasing portion of the city budget, the report
said. That's in part because city officials have provided extra benefits that
count toward employee pensions....
According to the report, the average pension for a teacher who retired in 2003
was $50,337. For a police officer, the average was $53,142 and for a
firefighter, $49,164.
The Boston Globe
Wednesday, October 5, 2005
Report blasts city union pay raises
Calls for changes in bargaining law
Every 10 years, states are required to redraw legislative and congressional
district lines to reflect new population data. In most states like
Massachusetts, lawmakers are the ones drawing the maps. Convenient, no?
But all you have to do is take a look at a map of U.S. Rep. Barney Frank's
district to realize that lawmakers aren't exactly relying on natural boundaries
when they come up with these plans.
Former Chelmsford rep Carol Cleven was forced to retire when her House district
was eliminated by the Democrat-dominated Legislature in 2001. Guess which party
she represented....
Voters' rights groups have drawn up a plan that would give the power to redraw
legislative maps to an independent commission. The seven-member panel would
include legal and government experts but no elected officials, and meetings
would be open to the public instead of conducted in secrecy at the State House.
Imagine that.
A Boston Herald editorial
Wednesday, October 5, 2005
Mapping the way to a better system
Chip Ford's CLT Commentary
Each morning I arise before dawn (which is getting
easier by the day with the the summer gone and the progression of
autumn) and scour newspapers around the state looking for news that's
relevant to us taxpayers and which needs to be collected and passed on
to increase our collective wisdom and understanding. My next step in
writing these commentaries is an effort to find the common link
throughout them: there is usually a cause-and-effect thread in
everything political. This generally becomes my theme, and today is no
different.
As revenue again piles up in state
coffers we're hearing the old refrain we heard during the
Roaring '90s, when the Democrat-controlled Legislature insisted it take
a wait-and-see stance against rolling back the "temporary"
income tax hike while it spent additional billions and doubled the
budget. And again,
legislators are lining up the spending programs that will create more
unsustainable growth when the next cyclical economic downturn inevitably
rears its head. Their excuse then for not finally rolling back the
income tax increase will again become -- "we can't afford it during
this 'fiscal crisis'." Been there,
done that -- and we're now watching it happen all over again.
Leading the charge to trample average
taxpayers is Michael Widmer, president of the so-called Massachusetts
Taxpayers Foundation: "If the leadership is considering a tax cut,
it should be directed to provide property tax relief through increased
aid to cities and towns."
Meanwhile, another "business-backed" group, the
Boston Municipal Research Bureau, issued a report yesterday, "the latest
proof that personnel costs are croaking municipal budgets," according to
The Boston Herald editorial.
"'Collective bargaining is broken,' the report said.
As labor costs soar, along with healthcare and pension costs, the city
will be unable to deliver anything but the most basic services, such as
police and fire protection, according to the report."
The Boston Globe
report added:
"City officials should resist any efforts to modify
collective bargaining contracts that would expand benefits that would
add to employee compensation and be considered pension eligible," said
the report. The city's pension benefit is "very generous . . . in this
economy, and there is no need to enrich it further at taxpayers'
expense," the report said.
I wonder if the same businessmen are backing these two
conflicting "business-backed" conclusions, or if they ever
talk to each other?
I hope they didn't pay too much to fund these
"studies," because there's certainly been plenty of information available
at no cost, some right here.
In the CLT Update of Apr. 24 ("The
secret ticking time bomb: "public service" pensions, health insurance
giveaways"), I wrote:
As if the impending crash of Social Security and
Medicare isn't overwhelming enough for taxpayers, now comes news of
perhaps an even bigger threat to our financial survival -- and
especially that of younger workers and taxpayers and those not yet
born. The "public service" gravy train is soon to utterly bury us,
especially the younger generations coming up who'll have to pay the
staggering bill for government first and foremost taking care of
itself as usual.
This begins to explain why one of the largest line items in the state
budget has recently been taken "off-budget" where it's less visible.
This "whistling-past-the-graveyard" tactic makes it no less a bill
payable down the road, and we know who's going to do the paying -- and
who'll be doing the getting.
A month earlier on Mar. 8 ("Taxpayers'
employees, a class of their own"), I wrote:
Only government employment is immune from the
vicissitudes of economic cycles, and now we learn that it is exempt
from forced participation in the doomed Social Security system as
well. It's good enough for us taxpayers, but they've got a better
deal: their own private pension plans!
And earlier yet, on Jan. 25 ("Property
taxes skyrocket while Public Employees swim in salaries") I wrote:
Property tax increases have been growing in leaps
and bounds, driving some lifelong residents out of their homes. The
most specific cause for these double-digit tax increases increases is
becoming all too clear. Public employee unions such as the teachers
unions are reaping the benefits at everyone else's expense and misery.
Charles Chieppo's column in yesterday's Boston Herald reveals the
extent of this problem, just how out-of-touch Massachusetts payroll
patriots are with the rest of the nation and with the economy in
general:
"About 90 percent of Massachusetts state employees are unionized,
compared to 35 percent of state employees across the country.
Approximately one of 10 private sector employees in the commonwealth
belongs to a union. Of the 20 political action committees that gave
the most to candidates for Massachusetts state and county offices
during the 2002 election cycle, 16 were unions or other labor
organizations.
"From 2000, the last year before the most recent recession, to 2003,
total private sector wages in Massachusetts actually decreased. But
state and local government employees had a very different experience.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that their wages grew by nearly
12 percent, and a 2003 BLS report found that public employee wages in
eastern Massachusetts were also 12 percent higher than those of
private employees doing comparable jobs...."
And now one part of the "business community" is surprised
-- and the other part wants to give cities and towns even more to squander
the same way. How do they ever manage to keep their businesses afloat?
But so long as the Legislature calls the shots and
with impunity gets away with thumbing its collective nose at its
constituents, the voters and taxpayers, more of our money will continue
passing from the state government's greedy hands down to the greedy hands of municipal
government officials, then to the greedy unions which control both in
the end. Those are the political
machines that keep getting our "representatives" on the state level
re-elected, and when that money trickles down to the local level, what
keeps selectmen and councilors dumb, fat, happy, and re-elected as well.
Then, once each decade, the Legislature gets to carve
out their preferred districts, just to be sure they have every edge
and advantage going for themselves to secure their positions. That's why the
Common Cause petition that's now being circulated for signatures is so
important: to help break up this incestuous cycle of arrogance. If
you want to help gather signatures to insure it reaches the 2006 ballot
or just want to sign one yourself, see the CLT Update for Sep. 12 ("It's
petition season again") or the contact information below.
Fair Districts Initiative Campaign
www.massfairdistricts.org
Common Cause Massachusetts
59 Temple Place, Suite 600
Boston, MA 02111
Phone: 617-426-9600
Fax: 617-426-6855
E-mail: ccma@commoncause.org
www.commoncause.org/ma
|
 |
|
Chip Ford |
The Boston Globe
Tuesday, October 4, 2005
State revenues up $317 million; Romney calls for tax rollback
By Raphael Lewis, Globe Staff
State revenues shot up $317 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2006
compared with the same period last year, prompting Governor Mitt Romney
yesterday to call on legislative Democrats to cut the personal income
tax rate to 5 percent as voters demanded five years ago.
"It's pretty clear that Massachusetts is back and firing on all
cylinders," Romney said at a State House press conference. "The numbers
we're looking at from a revenue standpoint are just mind-numbing....
It's time to return to the taxpayers the tax rate they asked for and
voted for."
Leaders in the State House and Senate said they were cautiously
optimistic about the revenue figures, but rejected Romney's argument
that Massachusetts is hale enough financially to pass a tax cut that
would drain $600 million a year in revenue. They cited the fiscal
uncertainty of rising oil and natural gas prices and healthcare costs
and the threat of steep cuts in federal Medicaid money.
"Before those variables take on a value, I'm not willing to make any
determination on a tax rollback, and it would be unwise to do so," said
Senate President Robert E. Travaglini, an East Boston Democrat.
House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi, a North End Democrat, said the public
has faith in the Legislature to put any surplus revenue to good use in
coming months. On the agenda, he said, is a $296 million "economic
stimulus" package to help spur job growth, an $80 million energy plan to
mitigate the impact of higher heating costs, and a yet-to-be-priced
effort to reduce the number of residents living without health
insurance.
"I think people have confidence in what we're doing -- balancing our
budget and putting our revenues where we think they can be beneficial,"
DiMasi said.
The higher revenue collections were largely fueled by a record
September, the state Department of Revenue announced yesterday. All
told, September tax revenues reached about $1.94 billion, an increase of
14.3 percent over last September.
It was the second-highest monthly revenue haul in state history, after
the $2.02 billion reaped in April, DOR said.
Tax collections appear stronger across the board. Income tax collections
are up 7 percent over last year at this time, withholding taxes are up
5.1 percent, and corporate and business tax collection are up an
eye-popping 34.3 percent, or roughly $128 million.
But other areas of the economy show signs of continued weakness, said
Michael Widmer, who heads the business-backed Massachusetts Taxpayers
Foundation. Of the roughly 205,000 jobs shed by Massachusetts in the
three-year period beginning in 2001, the state has recaptured only
45,000, he said.
Those cuts have forced cities and towns to either override Proposition 2½
and hike property taxes or slash services.
"If the leadership is considering a tax cut, it should be directed to
provide property tax relief through increased aid to cities and towns,"
Widmer said.
Geoffrey Beckwith, executive director of the Massachusetts Municipal
Association, agreed, saying cities and towns are now relying on property
taxes more heavily than they have in the past quarter-century. The
average municipality, he said, now needs property tax money to fund 53
percent of spending, up from less than 50 percent in 2000.
"The local aid cuts that they have suffered make it far too premature to
talk about cutting income taxes," Beckwith said.
But Romney sees things differently. Massachusetts now boasts a $1.71
billion "rainy day" reserve fund balance, which is almost a record high.
"We can't keep on walking around the building with long faces," Romney
said.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, October 5, 2005
A Boston Herald editorial
Busting local budgets
From the Boston Municipal Research Bureau comes the latest proof that
personnel costs are croaking municipal budgets.
According to the bureau's report set for release today, the cost of
collective bargaining, pensions and health insurance for employees and
retirees in the city of Boston is gobbling up what little revenue growth
the city takes in – a whopping 86 percent of it this year. With the rest
going to schools, police, fire and public works, there sure isn't much
left to keep those city parks fixed up.
Meanwhile, the chickens are coming home to roost after city contracts
were negotiated in the pressure-packed days before the Democratic
National Convention, the report notes. The cost to keep union members
quiet last July will amount to a total of $200 million by 2006, with
nothing to guarantee improved service delivery.
With the exception of the "DNC factor," these problems aren't unique to
Boston. Before he left, Gov. Mitt Romney's former budget aide said
excessive contracts and soaring health care costs have put cities and
towns in their worst fiscal shape ever. And the Mass. Taxpayers
Foundation has said cities and towns desperately need more flexibility
to administer health benefits.
So what to do? Among other recommendations, the report wisely suggests
overhauling the state's collective bargaining laws to give management
more authority over such areas as staffing levels and overtime, and to
ensure more timely decision-making. As it is, management is sometimes
forced to wait years to bargain important changes.
And the report echoes the findings of the governor and MTF that health
benefits should be removed from collective bargaining. The governor's
plan is to create municipal group insurance commissions to negotiate for
multiple unions, while Senate President Robert Travaglini would make
premium and co-payment levels subject to Town Meeting or city council
approval. A combination of the two would lead to savings, the report
says, though a more comprehensive solution is needed.
At some point, lawmakers, local officials and the unions have to realize
some simple math: No one can afford to spend twice what they take in on
personnel costs. They must take action soon.
Return to top
The Boston Globe
Wednesday, October 5, 2005
Report blasts city union pay raises
Calls for changes in bargaining law
By Andrea Estes, Globe Staff
The generous pay raises and benefits handed out to labor unions in
recent years could jeopardize the city's ability to deliver services to
its residents, a new report warned yesterday.
The report, from the business-backed Boston Municipal Research Bureau,
called for changes that would allow Boston to settle contracts more
quickly and make key management changes without negotiating them with
city unions.
"Collective bargaining is broken," the report said. As labor costs soar,
along with healthcare and pension costs, the city will be unable to
deliver anything but the most basic services, such as police and fire
protection, according to the report.
"You'll have fewer dollars for services like libraries and parks," said
bureau president Samuel R. Tyler. "You have outdated laws and practices
that need to be changed."
In a scramble to settle union contracts before last year's Democratic
National Convention, the Menino administration agreed to $200 million in
raises over four years, but gained little in return, Tyler said.
He proposed that the state law controlling public employee bargaining be
changed so that municipalities can unilaterally assign and promote
workers, subcontract, offer overtime, and hire part-timers, all steps
that are now subject to negotiation.
In addition, Tyler wants legislation to encourage unions to settle
contracts faster, by limiting retroactive pay raises to one year and
forcing police and fire unions that delay bargaining with the city into
binding arbitration sooner.
Leaders of city employee unions reacted swiftly to the report's
recommendations, saying they would oppose any effort to undermine their
bargaining power.
"Over my dead body," said Boston Police Patrolmen's Association
president Thomas J. Nee, whose union settled a contract on the eve of
the convention that gave members 14.5 percent in raises over four years.
Tyler "wants to make us all indentured servants," Nee said.
Jim Durkin -- spokesman for the American Federation of State, County,
and Municipal Employees -- said his union would also fight any move to
change state labor laws. "AFSCME would strenuously oppose any effort to
infringe on our collective bargaining rights and would aggressively
fight any effort to weaken collective bargaining laws."
Mayor Thomas M. Menino said he supports the proposed labor law changes
but believes that the Legislature is unlikely to approve them, given the
political strength of unions on Beacon Hill.
"Is it a possibility? No. It is not realistic," Menino said. "You're
telling me we'll get legislation to reform labor laws? It's not going to
happen."
Menino said he is instead pushing bills to increase the city's revenue,
such as closing loopholes for telecommunications companies, a change
that would put an extra $45 million in the city's coffers each year. He
is also pushing for a city tax on restaurant meals.
The report also said that city health insurance costs are soaring, to
$211.5 million this fiscal year, an 11.2 percent jump from last year.
Tyler recommended that the city push for legislation to set up a group
insurance commission, similar to the one used by the state to contain
healthcare costs. While the city's medical costs have increased 73
percent over five years, the state's have risen only 57 percent, Tyler
said.
A group insurance commission would have the power to negotiate with
insurance companies, design plans, and determine coverage, copayments,
and deductibles unilaterally, without union input. "If you can't control
health plan design, you can't control health insurance costs," Tyler
said. "It's an unsustainable situation in terms of double-digit
increases in health insurance costs."
But such a change would also meet resistance from the city's unions,
which have fought more modest changes, such as the city's elimination of
one HMO plan last year. Three unions filed grievances, which are
pending.
Pension costs are making up an increasing portion of the city budget,
the report said. That's in part because city officials have provided
extra benefits that count toward employee pensions.
The Quinn bill, which pays thousands of dollars extra to police officers
who earn college degrees, has swelled the city's pension liability, as
have recent labor contracts allowing employees to buy back vacation time
and count the extra time toward their pension, the report said.
In addition, weak investment performance, an early retirement incentive
offered in 2002, and the benefit structure combined to require a payment
of $186.3 million this fiscal year, a 27.1 percent increase over last
year, Tyler said.
According to the report, the average pension for a teacher who retired
in 2003 was $50,337. For a police officer, the average was $53,142 and
for a firefighter, $49,164.
"City officials should resist any efforts to modify collective
bargaining contracts that would expand benefits that would add to
employee compensation and be considered pension eligible," said the
report. The city's pension benefit is "very generous . . . in this
economy, and there is no need to enrich it further at taxpayers'
expense," the report said.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, October 5, 2005
A Boston Herald editorial
Mapping the way to a better system
Gerrymandering has long been a political fact of life. Massachusetts
politicians may not have invented the practice of rigging district maps
to protect incumbents, but it got its name here.
And if you think there is too little competition in the Bay State, look
just about anywhere else. According to the Center for Voting &
Democracy, the last two elections were the least competitive in U.S.
history. In 2004, the average margin of victory in the House was a
whopping 40 percent.
Several states, including Florida, Ohio and California, are pushing hard
to reform the redistricting process that allows incumbents to keep a
vise-like grip on their seats. It's an idea worth exploring in
Massachusetts, too.
Every 10 years, states are required to redraw legislative and
congressional district lines to reflect new population data. In most
states like Massachusetts, lawmakers are the ones drawing the maps.
Convenient, no?
But all you have to do is take a look at a map of U.S. Rep. Barney
Frank's district to realize that lawmakers aren't exactly relying on
natural boundaries when they come up with these plans.
Former Chelmsford rep Carol Cleven was forced to retire when her House
district was eliminated by the Democrat-dominated Legislature in 2001.
Guess which party she represented.
And remember folks, at the heart of the lawsuit that tripped up former
House Speaker Thomas Finneran was a claim that the Legislature used its
redistricting power to protect incumbents. A court said that's exactly
what happened.
Voters' rights groups have drawn up a plan that would give the power to
redraw legislative maps to an independent commission. The seven-member
panel would include legal and government experts but no elected
officials, and meetings would be open to the public instead of conducted
in secrecy at the State House. Imagine that.
The push is on to qualify for the 2008 ballot, and talk about your
strange bedfellows. The state GOP has signed on along with liberal
groups like MassVote and Common Cause. Seems the only ones not on board
are legislative leaders. Imagine that.
Naturally, the out-of-power GOP is hoping to spark competition in at
least a few races. But as long as the Democrats have exclusive access to
the redistricting software, that's impossible. It's time to consider a
change.
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
|