CLT
UPDATE
Friday, October 7, 2005
"Don’t
speak when you can nod,
don’t nod when you can wink"
and now, don’t vote when you can dodge
Even voters without a calculator can see the emperor
of "not enough money to go around" is close to being stripped naked.
The state is setting records – bringing in nearly $2 billion in
September, a 14.3 percent rise over last September despite, or should I
say because of, a two-day sales tax holiday in August, which, no
surprise, provided exactly the kind of stimulus that tax cuts tend to
do.
"It's pretty clear, Massachusetts is back and firing on all cylinders,"
Romney said. "We can't keep walking around the building with long faces
like things are terrible. They're not. The economy is back." ...
Contrast that clarity with the verbal runaround Travaglini gave
reporters on the issue of tax cuts.
"We face a period of uncertainty financially and that I think it would
be prudent on our part to wait to entertain what the governor suggests
is in order presently," Travaglini said. "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."
Huh?
The Boston Herald
Thursday, October 6, 2005
Dems reject tax cut at their own peril
By Virginia Buckingham
According to some Democrats on Beacon Hill – unfortunately
the ones who control the purse strings – there will never be a good time to
lower the state income tax rate.
For a few years, the recession and plummeting tax revenues were to blame.
The latest excuse? Rising energy costs, according to House Ways and Means
Chairman Robert DeLeo (D-Winthrop), along with a "temperamental" economy.
Never mind that the state collected $1.94 billion in taxes in September – a 14
percent increase over September 2004 and the second-highest tax take ever,
topped only by the $2 billion collected in April....
Five years have passed since voters demanded a rollback of the income tax from
5.95 to 5 percent. The rate dipped only as low as 5.3 percent and has been stuck
there ever since.
The Romney administration estimates the state has $1.2 billion left over from
fiscal 2005. There is $1.7 billion in reserves. And revenues are obviously way
up. At some point, you'd think legislative leaders would actually be a little
embarrassed by their continued refusal to accommodate the will of the voters....
Lawmakers will revisit the tax cut issue again today as they debate an economic
stimulus bill, which includes tax breaks for corporations and cultural
facilities. We don't have high hopes that it will get through, but if they
really want to stimulate the economy, it should.
A Boston Herald editorial
Thursday, October 6, 2005
Give taxpayers a break
As for the taxpayers who still won't be getting an
income tax cut, the reps told each other, don't sweat 'em. They're all
too exhausted from working three jobs to figure out who picked their
pockets this time....
The vote not to have a vote on the income tax cut was 132-20. If you
guessed that there are 20 GOP House members, you win.
Not one Democrat crossed party lines to vote with the Republicans to
overrule the decision by Speaker Sal "the Animal" DiMasi (D-The Golf
Channel) not to allow a vote to attach a tax-cut amendment to some
pork-filled jobs bill, so-called.
The only concession the leadership made was to come up with yet
another new excuse for why they can't have a vote....
I asked
Barbara Anderson of Citizens for Limited Taxation
what she thought of my scheme. She had an even better idea.
"We could attach the tax cut to a legislative pay raise," she said.
"That way, you know they'll pass it. All of them vote for a pay
raise."
The Boston Herald
Friday, October 7, 2005
Hey, remember the state tax cut? They don't
By Howie Carr
Three years ago the Legislature made a mistake. Now
it is preparing to bill 40,000 taxpayers for that mistake.
Repeat after me: You do not retroactively tax people for income they
realized three years ago. And you especially do not tax people three
years later for a mistake you made. But that is precisely where our
Legislature is headed....
It is simply not in the DNA of most politicians to willingly give back
money to taxpayers.
The governor, Mitt Romney, has pushed from the beginning to swallow
hard and rebate the money. He is dead right on this. Surging tax
revenues -- September was a record month, and the state's rainy day
fund now stands near a record $1.7 billion -- have made his case all
the more compelling.
Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation,
opposes Romney's call for an income tax cut, but agrees with him on
the capital gains issue: "There is broad agreement it is not
appropriate to tax retroactively."
The Boston Globe
Friday, October 7, 2005
Give back the money
By Steve Bailey
Chip Ford's CLT Commentary
It snuck up on us early yesterday morning.
House Republicans were about to introduce an amendment into the
debate on an "economic stimulus package."
So off went CLT's memo to the Legislature, "The
economy of numbers": Chip Faulkner blasted into Boston to
carry it by hand to each member, followed up by e-mailed copies to every
member of the Legislature -- House and Senate -- before the debate, and
it then it went out to the media across the state too.
And what do you know, the amendment was "ruled by the
chair" to be inadmissible -- just as it was
in the Senate back in May --
on a
132-20 vote.
Out went CLT's next news release: "House
again dodges vote on Republicans’ income tax rollback amendment," in
which we stated: "Append the Beacon Hill Rule: 'Don’t speak when you can
nod, don’t nod when you can wink' – with, don’t vote when you can
dodge."
Our news release concluded: "The income tax rollback
will not go away. CLT and taxpayers will haunt them through October, we
will haunt them on the November anniversary of the popular vote to
rollback the rate, we will be at the November 15th hearing on CLT’s
rollback bill. They can hide but they can’t run."
In Boston Globe columnist Steve Bailey's column,
there's Michael Widmer of the so-called
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, again opposing a tax cut for all
-- but supporting tax relief for his Fat-Cat members.
That retroactive capital gains tax would also be
unfair to a lot of taxpayers who are not Widmer's Fat-Cats, which is why
CLT has passionately fought against this or any retroactive tax.
Remember when the media used to always describe MTF
as "highly respected" instead of "business-backed"? Progress, a
step at a time.
|
 |
|
Chip Ford |
The Boston Herald
Thursday, October 6, 2005
Dems reject tax cut at their own peril
By Virginia Buckingham
How badly do Democrats want the corner office back? We'll know the
answer today when Republicans offer the key to victory in the form of a
vote to roll back the income tax to 5 percent as an amendment to an
economic stimulus bill.
If the tax cut is rejected outright, House Speaker Sal DiMasi and Senate
President Robert Travaglini will be signaling they like the balance of
power just fine the way it is. After all, their power would be
diminished within the party and the State House if a Democrat becomes
governor in 2006. Plus they'll have to make some pretense of delivering
on that Democratic governor's agenda, instead of doing whatever they
darn please or, as often, simply the opposite of what Gov. Mitt Romney
wants just for sport.
This is, however, a watershed moment for Democratic hopes to break the
GOP's 16-year streak of gubernatorial wins. It's not that tax cuts are
the only issue voters care about; it's that with the income tax rollback
still suspended by Democrats on Beacon Hill, taxes will be all voters
hear about during the coming election.
And if the 2006 election is fought on the ground of higher taxes,
Democrats lose.
That's why Attorney General Tom Reilly ought to be publicly and
privately demanding legislative leaders work the rank and file and get
the income tax cut done. With that issue off the table, he can focus the
debate on Democratic strengths like health care and education.
Even voters without a calculator can see the emperor of "not enough
money to go around" is close to being stripped naked.
The state is setting records – bringing in nearly $2 billion in
September, a 14.3 percent rise over last September despite, or should I
say because of, a two-day sales tax holiday in August, which, no
surprise, provided exactly the kind of stimulus that tax cuts tend to
do.
"It's pretty clear, Massachusetts is back and firing on all cylinders,"
Romney said. "We can't keep walking around the building with long faces
like things are terrible. They're not. The economy is back."
He'd be better off tying the income tax cut to efforts to improve
Massachusetts' competitive position, missing the point that Democratic
legislators need to have a better argument than "it's the taxpayers'
money" to toss back at enraged advocacy groups. But his point that the
state can afford it is well taken.
Contrast that clarity with the verbal runaround Travaglini gave
reporters on the issue of tax cuts.
"We face a period of uncertainty financially and that I think it would
be prudent on our part to wait to entertain what the governor suggests
is in order presently," Travaglini said. "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."
Huh?
The reluctance of Travaglini and DiMasi to hand Romney any big
legislative win on which he can base a run for the White House is
another dynamic batted about by the pundit class. I don't put much stock
in it. Romney's conservative resume would be helped by having a good
record on taxes for sure, but if Democratic lawmakers didn't care how
the debate on same-sex marriage was going to impact the presumptive
Democratic nominee from their own state, John Kerry, last year, they're
not going to waste energy strategizing about the longshot candidacy of
Mitt Romney.
But they ought to be strategizing about helping Tom Reilly. How serious
they are about that will become much clearer today.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Thursday, October 6, 2005
A Boston Herald editorial
Give taxpayers a break
According to some Democrats on Beacon Hill – unfortunately the ones who
control the purse strings – there will never be a good time to lower the
state income tax rate.
For a few years, the recession and plummeting tax revenues were to
blame.
The latest excuse? Rising energy costs, according to House Ways and
Means Chairman Robert DeLeo (D-Winthrop), along with a "temperamental"
economy.
Never mind that the state collected $1.94 billion in taxes in September
– a 14 percent increase over September 2004 and the second-highest tax
take ever, topped only by the $2 billion collected in April.
(The September figure even reflects the two-day August sales tax
holiday.)
Or the fact that it is precisely because they are going broke at the gas
pump that taxpayers should be afforded the income tax break they
approved at the polls in 2000.
"We can't keep walking around the building with long faces like things
are terrible," Gov. Mitt Romney said. "They're not. The economy is
back."
Not according to DeLeo and other legislative leaders, who still sport
the hangdog look.
Five years have passed since voters demanded a rollback of the income
tax from 5.95 to 5 percent. The rate dipped only as low as 5.3 percent
and has been stuck there ever since.
The Romney administration estimates the state has $1.2 billion left over
from fiscal 2005. There is $1.7 billion in reserves. And revenues are
obviously way up. At some point, you'd think legislative leaders would
actually be a little embarrassed by their continued refusal to
accommodate the will of the voters.
The Senate offered some encouragement in July, by approving a plan to
cut taxes once local aid reaches fiscal 2002 levels. But that measure
has stalled in a conference committee and the latest gloom-and-doom talk
among legislative leaders isn't promising.
Lawmakers will revisit the tax cut issue again today as they debate an
economic stimulus bill, which includes tax breaks for corporations and
cultural facilities. We don't have high hopes that it will get through,
but if they really want to stimulate the economy, it should.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Friday, October 7, 2005
Hey, remember the state tax cut? They don't
By Howie Carr
The Legislature made promises to two groups: the average taxpayer and
the lobbyists for the racetrack owners.
Yesterday, the solons came through big time for one of the groups, and
stiffed the other one. Would you care to guess who took it in the ear,
and who's lapping it up with a spoon this morning?
You would be correct, sir. It was a big day for Joe Timilty, the
lobbyist for Wonderland dog track. But hey, not only is Joe the father
of a state senator (and also a governor's councilor), but he himself is
an ex-state senator, not to mention an ex-con.
Jailbird Joe Timilty is Good People times four.
As for the taxpayers who still won't be getting an income tax cut, the
reps told each other, don't sweat 'em. They're all too exhausted from
working three jobs to figure out who picked their pockets this time.
Granted, Charlie Sarkis et al. are still several steps away from getting
their 2,000 slot machines at each of the state's four tracks. And yes,
the Legislature has been telling the taxpayers what they can do with
their income-tax cuts ever since the Legislature first guaranteed to cut
the rate back in 1989.
Still, there was a certain symmetry to what happened at the State House
yesterday.
Slot machines, si!
Income-tax cuts, no!
Neither vote was even close, but again, no surprise. Slot machines won
in the Senate, 26-9, and in the House, the poor Republicans couldn't
even get a vote.
The vote not to have a vote on the income tax cut was 132-20. If you
guessed that there are 20 GOP House members, you win.
Not one Democrat crossed party lines to vote with the Republicans to
overrule the decision by Speaker Sal "the Animal" DiMasi (D-The Golf
Channel) not to allow a vote to attach a tax-cut amendment to some
pork-filled jobs bill, so-called.
The only concession the leadership made was to come up with yet another
new excuse for why they can't have a vote.
Yesterday, the solons didn't say the state couldn't afford it. (Tax
revenues are running way ahead of projections in the first three months
of the fiscal year, $250 million above estimates for September alone.)
They didn't say the reduction in the rate to 5 percent from 5.3 percent
is "only" $150 a year for someone who makes $50,000. They didn't even
claim the money was needed "for the children."
No, the excuse yesterday was, it's not "the right time."
Rep. Angelo Scaccia, D-State Ethics Commission, said, "We should not be
taking up tax issues in a jobs bill."
"We had a great September," he said. "(But) one month does not make a
year."
And if it's a good year, he'll say one good year does not make a good
decade. And if it's a bad year, then let's just ... raise taxes.
Foolish Republicans, thinking Sal the Animal would go along with a tax
cut for working people. If they'd wanted to get, say, the MetroWest
delegation on board, the GOP should have attached the tax cut to
something the chi-chi Democrats out there care about – say, a bill
abolishing the Pledge of Allegiance.
That's the important stuff, that and gay "marriage."
I asked Barbara Anderson of Citizens for Limited Taxation what she
thought of my scheme. She had an even better idea.
"We could attach the tax cut to a legislative pay raise," she said.
"That way, you know they'll pass it. All of them vote for a pay raise."
Yes, but will Charlie Sarkis sign off on it? Somebody call Jailbird Joe
Timilty. This is Massachusetts – racetracks uber Alles.
Howie Carr's radio show can be heard weekday afternoons on WRKO AM
680, WHYN AM 560, WGAN AM 560, WEIM AM 1280, WXTK 95.1 FM and WTPO 107.7
FM.
Return to top
The Boston Globe
Friday, October 7, 2005
Give back the money
By Steve Bailey, Globe Columnist
Three years ago the Legislature made a mistake. Now it is preparing to
bill 40,000 taxpayers for that mistake.
Repeat after me: You do not retroactively tax people for income they
realized three years ago. And you especially do not tax people three
years later for a mistake you made. But that is precisely where our
Legislature is headed.
The quandary the Legislature faces as a result of an expensive court
ruling on capital gains taxes is entirely of its own making. The
Legislature, desperate for revenue in 2002, tried to change the rules in
the middle of the year, raising long-term capital gains taxes to 5.3
percent in place of a stepped system that taxed profits from zero to 5
percent, depending on how long an investor held the asset. The change
was effective May 1, 2002.
Taxpayers sued and the Supreme Judicial Court agreed that the state
could not change the rates in mid-year. The Legislature was left with
two choices: Either make January 2002 the effective date for the new
rates and collect as much as $205 million in unpaid taxes, or move the
start date to January 2003 and refund $250 million already paid by
157,000 taxpayers.
It is simply not in the DNA of most politicians to willingly give back
money to taxpayers.
The governor, Mitt Romney, has pushed from the beginning to swallow hard
and rebate the money. He is dead right on this. Surging tax revenues --
September was a record month, and the state's rainy day fund now stands
near a record $1.7 billion -- have made his case all the more
compelling.
Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation,
opposes Romney's call for an income tax cut, but agrees with him on the
capital gains issue: "There is broad agreement it is not appropriate to
tax retroactively."
The Democratic Legislature has been willing to do everything but the
right thing. One compromise would have made the tax hike retroactive to
January 2002, but grant an amnesty for the first four months of the
year. The court rejected that plan, too. Plan B, now embedded in
legislation in the House and the Senate, would try to ease the pain by
exempting about 80,000 taxpayers who owe less than $100 in taxes. The
plan would also waive any interest and penalties on unpaid taxes.
Imagine: Our legislators are going to let you forgo penalties and
interest on taxes you didn't know you owed!
The state Revenue Department says the average tax owed will be between
$3,725 and $5,000. That $5,000 is just about what Mark Bernardin of
Andover estimates he will owe. The apologists say the rich can afford to
pay; Bernardin, like a lot of us, doesn't feel a bit rich.
Bernardin, a lawyer, has tightened his belt and has been a stay-at-home
dad to two kids, ages 2 and 8, as he works on a book. His wife is a
social worker; he shares a two-family house with his mother. He sold a
pair of two-family homes he owned with his brother in the first half of
2002, and is fuming about the unexpected tax bill he will owe. "We
didn't put it in the mattress," he says. "We spent it on other things."
"I have never heard anyone say the retroactive tax is fair. They are
just saying they want the money," says Bernardin, 41, a lifelong
Democrat. "That is no good way to run the government."
Returning $250 million in taxes will be no easy matter; tight times have
been hard on state and local services. But this is not 2002, either. We
can afford to do the right thing. Romney should make the Legislature
override his veto, if need be.
Repeat after me: You do not retroactively tax people for income they
realized three years ago. And you especially do not tax people three
years later for a mistake you made.
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
|