CLT
UPDATE
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
Unprecedented Beacon Hill activity
masks latest unscrupulous tax rollback dodge
The House dodged a vote on rolling back the income
tax rate today, opting instead for an amendment requiring the Department
of Revenue to study the impact of such a move. House Republicans said
Democrats weren’t serious about the study and intended only to avoid
voting on the tax rollback, which voters approved in 2000.
State House News Service
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
House dodges tax cut vote
$2 Billion in spending requests pending
At an executive session today, House Ways and Means Chairman
Robert DeLeo (D-Winthrop) said the state ended fiscal 2005 with roughly a $1.2
billion surplus. A mini-spending bill last month deposited $691 million into
state reserve funds, and authorized nearly $200 million in additional spending.
DeLeo said the state is left with roughly $318 million to spend in this
supplemental budget. Amendments and negotiations with the Senate could cause the
price tag to grow by that much.
The state's Stabilization Fund currently has roughly $1.5 billion, DeLeo said.
The Romney administration and the business-backed Massachusetts Taxpayers
Foundation estimate the fund balance at $1.7 billion.
DeLeo said he hopes that total will grow to $3 billion over time....
State House News Service
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
House panel funds Fenway area upgrades,
judicial pay, capital projects
Massachusetts House leaders are considering a tax increase on
cigarettes or alcohol to pay for a major healthcare expansion, proposing to add
147,000 low-income parents and children to Medicaid and to subsidize private
insurance coverage for 200,0000 more people, according to legislative sources.
The Boston Globe
Sunday, October 16, 2005
Mass. House eyes tax hike to broaden healthcare
Alcohol, cigarettes are possible targets
When it comes to fixing the state's health care problems,
there is good news and bad news coming from the direction of Beacon Hill....
The bad news is the House may fall back on a very old idea – a tax increase – to
get it done. Boy, do old habits die hard....
The Boston Globe reported on Sunday that the House is considering a 60-cent
increase in the state cigarette tax, to $2.11 per pack, to help finance their
version of health care reform. The House is also considering a tax on alcohol
sales.
A Boston Herald editorial
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
Another tax hike just isn't healthy
Rep. Kay Khan (D-Newton) told members of the Revenue
Committee that making alcohol subject to the state's 5 percent sales tax would
generate $50 million a year that could be used to help the 100,000 people
admitted here every year to treatment programs.
State House News Service
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
Lawmakers consider property tax relief for seniors,
new tax on alcohol
Claiming "countless" examples of alleged fraud in the
signature campaign to constitutionally ban gay marriage, same-sex marriage
supporters called on state officials Tuesday to increase oversight and penalties
for such crimes....
Kris Mineau, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute, told the committee
today that he knows of no instances of so-called bait and switch occurring,
other than what has been reported in the media. He said he does not condone the
process and would hope anyone involved is prosecuted....
"It is incumbent upon each individual to agree with what they're signing," he
said. "I would never sign my name to something I didn't read." ...
Several interest groups are also opposed to a bill to ban per-signature
payments, including the Massachusetts Public Interest Research Group and
Citizens for Limited Taxation (CLT), who testified against the proposal at a
hearing in June....
Chip Faulkner, associate director of CLT, said there is no reason
for the committee to hold a hearing on such an issue while petitioners are
trying to gather signatures for the 2006 ballot, and believes the committee is
being driven by the pro-gay marriage agenda.
"To me, this is just trying to impede the signature drive and hurt the
initiative petition process," Faulkner said. "I'm here to defend the process."
State House News Service
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
Signature-gathering fraud charges stir call for new laws, oversight
In a testy exchange, [state Sen. Edward M. Augustus, Senate
chairman of the Joint Committee on Election Laws, D-Worcester} criticized Kris
Mineau of Massachusetts Family Institute for refusing to divulge how much money
his group has paid Arno Political Consultants to obtain signatures for the
same-sex marriage ballot question.
Mr. Mineau said he preferred to keep that information private....
Chip Faulkner, of Citizens for Limited Taxation, laid the blame
for fraud on "homosexual activists" who subverted the law by harassing signature
gatherers and members of the public....
Mr. Faulkner, however, said an autumn hearing during a signature-gathering
campaign was both unprecedented and politically motivated. He said anyone who
signs a petition without knowing the cause "has the IQ of an eggplant."
The Telegram & Gazette
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
Signature fraud hearings get testy
Both sides allege dirty tricks
Chip Ford's CLT Commentary
A hearing on expanded gambling, standing room only in
Gardner Auditorium for a hearing on charter schools, the Revenue
Committee hearing on an alcohol tax increase, a State House press
conference and hearing on an expanded bottle bill, a hearing on auto
insurance coverage, another Election Laws Committee hearing to again
attack the initiative petition process -- while House members scurried
back and forth to the supplemental budget debate and our income tax
rollback amendment.
Unprecedented at the State House for a day in
October, this is the result of a Legislature which spent the months
leading up to yesterday diddling time away, taking a summer off to
vacation after accomplishing little but a constitutionally-mandated
budget for this fiscal year just before its deadline.
Don't think this is serendipity: they "recess,"
go home again on November 16th, just a day after the Joint Committee on
Revenue finally gets around to holding an unprecedented late hearing on
our tax rollback bill -- which will go no further, as this will be the
end of their business "schedule" for the year. No, they won't
prorogue -- actually end the legislative session officially. Of
course they won't, not "The Best Legislature Money Can Buy." There
are still those "per diems" to stuff into their pockets for each day the
Legislature remains officially in session.
But in the chaos of the last few days, nobody will
know what's in the final passage of bills passed into law until
legislators are long gone, disappeared back "in the district."
Then the newspaper exposés of all the boondoggles
will gradually bubble up, when we've all had time to examine and
evaluate. Right in the middle of the holiday season, when nobody is
paying attention.
Today's lack of reporting of the
House again dodging the income tax rollback is but a precursor of the
full-blown strategy.
Not a word of yesterday's
treachery, of sending the tax rollback off for yet another "study," just
as the
House did on April 25. How transparent, how despicably arrogant
Democrat legislators have become. They simply don't care any more:
they make the rules, and the rules are what they decree them to be at
any given moment: thus there are none. Absolute tyranny finally
reigns on Beacon Hill. Citizens are perceived as mere hosts for
Democrats in the Legislature to feed off through ever-increasing
revenue: we exist only to provide for them.
But we may have found a
loophole, created by their lazy certitude of absolute power. There will
be more to come in the days ahead, but for now call it our "secret plan
to end the 'temporary' tax."
Mark your calendars: You
do not want to miss the Revenue Committee hearing on
our bill (S-1645) on November 15th, believe me! If there
are no longer any rules, then none of us need to play by any.
Today marks the 375th
anniversary of the Massachusetts Legislature. Look how far we've
come, wouldn't John Adams be proud! I wonder if anyone but the
pols on Beacon Hill is celebrating.
CLT activist John Natale sent us
the following response from his state representative, Paul Casey
(D-Winchester), who apparently is ignorant of, or being duplicitous
about, the true current level of the "rainy day" fund and state surplus:
"Thank you for your email
concerning the Income Tax Rollback to 5%. I always value the views and
opinions of my constituents.
"As you know, the Legislature froze the income tax rollback in 2003 to
help save vital state programs and services during the recession.
While actual revenue collections and FY'06 projections are on the
rise, it is important to note that the Commonwealth still faces a $2
billion structural deficit in the budget. In reality, there is no
surplus, as is popularly reported.
"Furthermore, our reserves in the "Rainy Day Fund" (which kept the
state from a true economic catastrophe during the past few years) have
been substantially depleted. To rollback the income tax at this point
would cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars in the first year
alone, with a higher price tag in the years that follow. Accordingly,
during debate on the House supplemental budget yesterday, my
colleagues and I ordered an "impact study" of the proposed tax
rollback, to explore the fiscal implications of such a change to our
tax code at this time."
"House Ways and Means Chairman Robert DeLeo
(D-Winthrop) said the state ended fiscal 2005 with roughly a $1.2
billion surplus. A mini-spending bill last month deposited $691 million
into state reserve funds, and authorized nearly $200 million in
additional spending.... The Romney administration and the
business-backed Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation estimate the ["rainy
day"] fund balance at $1.7 billion."
Is Casey intentionally lying to his constituent, of
simply another Beacon Hill pol with "the IQ of an eggplant"?
CLT Associate Director Chip
Faulkner testified yesterday before the Committee on Elections Laws in
defense again of the initiative and referendum process -- under attack
these days from all quarters. The opportunistic scorched earth strategy
of gay activists is only feeding and fueling our longstanding opponents
such as state Sen. Stanley Rosenberg (D-Amherst) and his obsessive drive
to kill the
process outright. "Chipster's" report follows.
|
 |
|
Chip Ford |
Chip Faulkner's Report
Yesterday I testified at the Election Laws Committee
hearing at the State House, on a panel with three pro-family marriage
amendment supporters. This hearing was called in response to complaints
that marriage amendment petitioners were allegedly using "bait and
switch" tactics to get people to sign their petitions.
However, in my testimony I charged that the real violations were being
perpetrated by gay activists who were harassing and shouting down
petitioners trying to lawfully collect signatures for the amendment. I
likened it to one experience in 1987 while I was collecting signatures
for the repeal of the prevailing wage law.
"Two union thugs showed up in Medfield center, stood beside me and TOLD
people not to sign: the same type of thing is happening in this
campaign."
The Elections Laws Committee Senate chairman, Edward
Augustus (D-Worcester), objected to my use of the phrase "union thugs,"
so I gave him something else to object to when I took issue with
the ten individuals who testified before the committee that they were
duped into signing.
"All you have to do is read the summary to make sure you're signing the
right petition. This is not rocket science; all you need is an IQ above
eggplant."
I also asked why the committee was holding this hearing right now, if at
all, mentioning that in 25 years of lobbying at the State House I'd
never heard of a committee staging a hearing in the middle of a petition
drive. Then I cut to the chase by charging that the committee was a "lap
dog" for the agenda of Arline Isaacson (co-chair of the Massachusetts
Gay & Lesbian Political Caucus).
"What a dog and pony show! Don't you understand you're being manipulated
by these people?" I asked committee chairman Sen. Augustus.
Then I turned to Isaacson, seated two rows behind me, and sarcastically
commended her for having the power to make a legislative committee call
a hearing on her behalf.
I had made it clear at the outset that I wasn't there to support or
oppose the marriage amendment. In fact, CLT takes no position on this
amendment. I was there to protect the initiative & referendum process,
which is being further threatened now by gay activists and their
cohorts.
And by the way, I don't recall ever using the term "homosexual
activists," as one newspaper reported; it's just not a common term in my
vocabulary.
State House News Service
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
House panel funds Fenway area upgrades,
judicial pay, capital projects
By Amy Lambiaso
House budget writers on Friday advanced a $300 million mid-year spending
bill that will allow 8,000 more residents to receive Medicaid coverage,
spend $12.5 million to improve the area near Fenway Park, and give
judges a 15 percent pay raise on Jan. 1, 2006.
The fiscal 2006 supplemental budget, approved by the Ways and Means
Committee today, also provides $55 million for local road and bridge
repair, $100 million for improvements to state colleges and
universities, and $25 million to help preserve parks and other
historical sites.
The $12.5 million appropriation is designated for "critical roadway and
streetscape improvements" near Fenway Park at the Sears Rotary, Ipswich
Street, Maitland Street, and Yawkey Way in Boston. Boston Red Sox
officials announced this year they intend to keep the team playing at
Fenway Park and expressed an interest in seeing improvements to the area
around the historic ballpark.
The bill also features 59 outside sections, the majority of which
earmark local spending initiatives, such as $100,000 for animal upkeep
of the mounted horse unit at Blue Hills Reservation, $100,000 for the
Horizon Housing Program in Mattapan, and $150,000 for pilot substance
abuse programs in Revere and Winthrop and Berkshire County.
The House plans to debate the spending bill on Tuesday afternoon, and
lawmakers may file amendments until noon of that day. Under an order
adopted by the House last week, lawmakers cannot offer amendments to
expand the state's gaming laws.
At an executive session today, House Ways and Means Chairman Robert
DeLeo (D-Winthrop) said the state ended fiscal 2005 with roughly a $1.2
billion surplus. A mini-spending bill last month deposited $691 million
into state reserve funds, and authorized nearly $200 million in
additional spending.
DeLeo said the state is left with roughly $318 million to spend in this
supplemental budget. Amendments and negotiations with the Senate could
cause the price tag to grow by that much.
The state's Stabilization Fund currently has roughly $1.5 billion, DeLeo
said. The Romney administration and the business-backed Massachusetts
Taxpayers Foundation estimate the fund balance at $1.7 billion.
DeLeo said he hopes that total will grow to $3 billion over time. In a
report Thursday, the taxpayers foundation recommended the state achieve
a $2.7 billion balance, or 10 percent of current spending.
"I think it's our goal, it's always been the goal to reach some $3
billion probably, eventually, over a period of time," DeLeo told
reporters. "I think we're making every attempt to work toward that."
A major provision in the bills is a $7 million appropriation to provide
a 15 percent salary hike for judges on the Supreme Judicial Court, the
appeals court, and trial court. Judges have for years asked lawmakers to
bring their pay in line with judges in other states. Margaret Marshall,
state Supreme Judicial Court chief justice, told lawmakers in February
that judges here currently have the 46th lowest salaries in the nation
and have not had pay increase since 1998.
DeLeo said there was "a lot of discussion" between Senate President
Robert Travaglini, House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi and Senate Ways and
Means Chairwoman Therese Murray as whether to deliver the raise in one
lump sum or phase it in over several years. The bill recommends a lump
sum raise.
"Everything was on the board is what I'm saying," DeLeo said. "Basically
we felt that what we could afford to do and what was the probably most
fair and equitable way to compensate judges was the method that we all
agreed on."
Under this budget proposal, the chief justice of the SJC will earn
$151,239 a year, with each of the six associate justices earning
$145,984. In addition, the chief justice of the appeals court will earn
$140,358 annually, with associate justices pulling in a salary of
$135,087.
The bill also spends $25 million more on MassHealth Essential, the
state's health insurance program for the long-term unemployed. The
additional funding will clear the waiting list of 8,000 residents and
grow enrollment to 54,000, according to House aides.
House lawmakers also fund approved pay raises for attorneys who
represent indigent defendants and are reimbursed by the state. Those
raises were approved in July, and the $25 million included in this
spending bill will fund those raises through the remainder of the fiscal
year.
The bill also increases the state's distribution to local housing
authorities by $7.2 million, and includes $480,000 for capital projects
in Boston, Natick, Winthrop, Lenox, and Mashpee, $1 million for capital
improvements at Revere Beach, and $12,000 to provide interpreter
services for deaf and hard of hearing attendees at State House public
hearings.
In an effort to provide "immediate relief," the House Ways and Means
bill provides a one-time $20 million increase in the Low Income Home
Energy Assistance program to help offset anticipated hikes in energy
costs this winter. Under the proposal, the state will spend $5 million
initially on assistance for income-eligible senior citizens and
families, and reserve $15 million until "after federal funds available
for such purpose have been expended for said purpose."
DeLeo said the fuel assistance money is separate from a proposal filed
on Thursday by Travaglini and DiMasi to offer tax credits and assistance
to eligible homeowners this winter. "Obviously we know this is an area
of concern we're going to have to address in the not-so-distant future,"
he said.
The $100 million offered in the bill for capital improvements to state
college and university campuses will be spent based on the priorities of
the Romney administration, DeLeo said. The governor this spring proposed
that the state spend $400 million on capital improvements on higher
education campuses. His proposal is being heard by the Bonding, Capital
Expenditures and State Assets Committee on Monday.
"For those items that have to be done immediately, let's take care of
those," DeLeo said. "And for those items that maybe could wait a little
while, let's do that in the capital bonding piece."
Additional spending items in the bill include:
-
$1.25 million in workforce training programs;
-
$1.5 million for a grant program to reconstruct
municipal pools;
-
$250,000 for improvements to Rockwood Field at
Worcester State College;
-
$1.5 million for the Massachusetts League of
Community Health Centers to implement electronic medical records; and
-
$1.25 million for the new Wireless Initiative at
the New Boston Pilot Middle School.
Return to top
The Boston Globe
Sunday, October 16, 2005
Mass. House eyes tax hike to broaden healthcare
Alcohol, cigarettes are possible targets
By Scott S. Greenberger and Scott Helman, Globe Staff
Massachusetts House leaders are considering a tax increase on cigarettes
or alcohol to pay for a major healthcare expansion, proposing to add
147,000 low-income parents and children to Medicaid and to subsidize
private insurance coverage for 200,0000 more people, according to
legislative sources.
The House leaders' approach boosts the idea of tax increases in the
healthcare debate that is expected to dominate Beacon Hill over the next
month or more. The approach relies far more heavily on
government-provided Medicaid coverage than alternative proposals
outlined earlier by Governor Mitt Romney and Senate President Robert E.
Travaglini.
According to legislative sources familiar with the House approach, House
Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi and other top House lawmakers have not
decided whether to tax cigarettes or alcohol or both. But the sources
said that House leaders believe they must find up to $170 million a year
in new state money to pay for their plan.
The state cigarette tax is currently $1.51 per pack, and lawmakers have
said that a 60-cent a pack increase in the cigarette tax would raise
about $150 million annually. Alcohol is exempt from the state's retail
sales tax.
More details of the House and Senate approaches are expected to emerge
in the coming days, as lawmakers begin to weigh strategies to cover the
state's uninsured residents. But the prospect of a tax increase
complicates the picture for Romney, who is widely seen as wanting a
healthcare bill that he could boast about if he runs for president in
2008. Romney has ruled out new taxes to finance an expansion of health
coverage.
"I can't imagine a tax that I would support," the governor said last
week.
Travaglini did not include a tax increase in his healthcare proposal,
but a Travaglini spokeswoman would not rule out new taxes late last
week.
One of Travaglini's key lieutenants said he detects more support for a
cigarette tax increase than a tax on alcohol. "That one has potential,"
said Senator Richard T. Moore, an Uxbridge Democrat and cochairman of
the Joint Committee on Health Care Financing.
The Travaglini and Romney plans would not expand Medicaid eligibility.
Under the House plan, the state would add more people to Medicaid by
loosening the income restrictions used to determine eligibility for that
state-federal health program.
The House would make children in households earning 300 percent of the
federal poverty level, or $48,270 for a family of three, eligible for
the coverage. The current standard is 200 percent of the poverty level,
or $32,180 for a family of three.
In addition, the House plan would expand Medicaid to parents making 200
percent of the federal poverty level. Currently, only parents making no
more than 133 percent of the poverty standard are eligible.
The House approach adopts strategies favored by a coalition of religious
leaders and advocacy groups who are collecting signatures to put a
healthcare measure on the 2006 state ballot. That proposal hews closely
to another healthcare bill filed by Moore.
"We think that makes the most sense; that's why that was the approach
that we recommended," said John McDonough of Health Care for All, one of
the groups leading the charge for the ballot initiative. "It's a way to
provide the greatest health security for folks."
Travaglini's plan, which he says would cover about half the uninsured,
would allow insurance companies to offer lower-cost policies with
scaled-back benefits.
His plan does not include an ironclad requirement that employers cover
their workers. But it would force companies that employ 50 or more
people and don't provide healthcare coverage to reimburse the state when
their employees seek treatment from the public free-care pool. The state
and health groups estimate that there are 460,00 to 532,000 uninsured in
Massachusetts, but two months ago the US Census bureau said the number
had increased to 748,000.
Instead of requiring employers to provide insurance to workers, Romney
would require individuals to purchase their own plans. He would alter
state rules to allow insurers to offer stripped-down coverage at a
monthly premium of about $200. People who choose not to obtain health
insurance and refuse to pay for healthcare they receive would face tax
penalties and even the garnishment of their wages. No other state has
such a requirement.
The Joint Committee on Health Care Financing is expected to approve the
House bill on Oct. 31. DiMasi promised last week to put a healthcare
bill on Romney's desk by Nov. 16, when the Legislature is scheduled to
adjourn, and he threatened to recall lawmakers if they miss that
deadline.
In a speech last week, DiMasi did not disclose his position on whether
individuals should be required to buy insurance or whether employers
should be forced to offer it to workers. DiMasi hinted that he might
support both, but in words that left him wiggle room.
"We will ask individuals to take more responsibility for obtaining
health coverage, and we will also try to assist them as they do so," he
said. A few moments later he said: "We want to encourage employers to
maintain their commitment to their employees.... Businesses that
currently do not offer insurance will be encouraged to do so."
The Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts Foundation, which invited
DiMasi to speak at a meeting at the John F. Kennedy Library, has backed
Romney by arguing that any realistic effort to cover all of the state's
uninsured must require individuals to purchase insurance.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
A Boston Herald editorial
Another tax hike just isn't healthy
When it comes to fixing the state's health care problems, there is good
news and bad news coming from the direction of Beacon Hill.
The good news? Lawmakers seem open to new ideas for extending health
coverage to more uninsured residents and reforming MassHealth, growing
at an unsustainable 8 to 10 percent a year.
The bad news is the House may fall back on a very old idea – a tax
increase – to get it done. Boy, do old habits die hard.
The Boston Globe reported on Sunday that the House is considering a
60-cent increase in the state cigarette tax, to $2.11 per pack, to help
finance their version of health care reform. The House is also
considering a tax on alcohol sales.
But if you believe the Romney administration – and in this case, we do –
a tax increase simply isn't necessary to extend health coverage to more
of the state's half-million uninsured residents. (Even if the tax falls
only on smokers and drinkers).
"We take the position ... that you don't need to go out and raise taxes
to go out and reform health care," said Timothy Murphy, secretary of
Health and Human Services.
How right he is. Neither the Romney plan nor one floated by the Senate
calls for an immediate infusion of cash, because let's face it, money
alone won't solve the problem.
While the House plan would expand government-funded insurance to more
people (hence the call for more tax dollars), the other proposals
attempt to put private insurance within reach for those without
coverage.
The governor would require individuals to purchase insurance on their
own if it isn't available through their employer. Insurers would be
allowed to offer more basic, affordable products.
The Senate wants more businesses to cover their employees. As an
incentive, if a worker dips into the free care pool, his company pays.
Now comes the House, with a plan to expand Medicaid by making more
people eligible. It's easy enough to do, of course, especially if you
just slap on another sin tax. But it isn't exactly innovative, and it
doesn't solve the whole problem.
We haven't seen the whole House plan yet, and they may yet go along with
portions of the proposals already in the mix. And the truly good news is
that all three parties to this task are now at the table, so something
is sure to get done, saving $385 million in federal dollars currently at
risk.
We just don't need another tax increase to get there.
Return to top
State House News Service
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
Lawmakers consider property tax relief for seniors,
new tax on alcohol
By Helen Woodman
A Newton lawmaker on Tuesday urged her colleagues to consider new taxes
on alcohol rather than tobacco to help support substance abuse programs
Rep. Kay Khan (D-Newton) told members of the Revenue Committee that
making alcohol subject to the state's 5 percent sales tax would generate
$50 million a year that could be used to help the 100,000 people
admitted here every year to treatment programs.
"We continue to talk about raising the tax on cigarettes to fund health
care programs, Khan said. "But I think we've kind of maxed out on
cigarettes. Mainly now the only people smoking them are mentally ill or
severely addicted."
The sales tax is currently levied on liquor consumed in restaurants and
bars but not on products purchased for off-premises consumption. Alcohol
bought in package stores is, however, subject to a state excise tax but
"that hasn't changed since 1972," Khan said. She suggested that the
excise tax on liquor could be raised to generate another $100 million.
The Massachusetts Medical Society supported Khan's sales tax bill, which
has a dozen co-sponsors in the House and is similar to legislation Sen.
Marian Walsh (D-West Roxbury) has filed in past years. "The time has
come for the commonwealth to support new initiatives to reduce the
incidence of alcohol and substance abuse," the statement read.
"After tobacco use, alcohol is a leading preventable cause of premature
death in the United States," according to the MMS, as it urged the
committee to commit added resources to prevention and treatment programs
similar to those used to combat tobacco use. That approach worked with
tobacco, the MMS wrote legislators. "Massachusetts reduced the incidence
of adult smoking at a rate four times greater than the national average
and has reduced youth smoking despite national trends to the contrary."
The committee took Khan's bill under advisement, among with 24 others
affecting the state's sales tax.
House Chairman John Binienda (D-Worcester) said panel members are now
being polled on two other bills about to be released. One would lower
the threshold of raffle or bazaar-generated income, requiring that
charitable organizations pay a 5 percent tax on the money.
The other is House Minority Leader Bradley Jones' bill establishing a
property tax credit for senior citizens. The Reading Republican's bill
would allow homeowners and renters over age 65 to receive an income tax
credit equal to 10 percent of their income, with a maximum value of
$750.
Return to top
State House News Service
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
Signature-gathering fraud charges stir call for new laws, oversight
By Amy Lambiaso
Claiming "countless" examples of alleged fraud in the signature campaign
to constitutionally ban gay marriage, same-sex marriage supporters
called on state officials Tuesday to increase oversight and penalties
for such crimes.
Nearly a dozen people who said they were victims of so-called "bait and
switch" tactics during the last several weeks appeared before lawmakers
today to present signed affidavits and share their stories and call for
legislative intervention. Some argue the state should outlaw groups from
paying signature-collectors on a per-signature basis, an increasingly
common practice.
The testimony backs up news reports several weeks ago that petitioners
for a campaign to outlaw gay marriage tricked residents into signing
their petition by telling them it was a petition to allow the sale of
wine in a grocery store. The Election Laws Committee held today's
hearing in response to those reports.
Recalling events from Oct. 6, Northeastern University freshman
Christopher Kelley told lawmakers he was approached by a signature
collector to sign a petition dealing with the sale of wine. Kelley said
he signed the first page and was then told to sign a second page,
without being told what it was for.
"At no point did the man seeking my signature inform me that he was also
seeking signatures on the constitutional amendment on gay marriage,"
Kelley said. "Rather, I believe that he deliberately attempted to secure
my signature on the second page by falsely implying that it was a
required, second signature for the initiative permitting the sale of
wine at grocery stores."
Kris Mineau, president of the Massachusetts Family Institute, told the
committee today that he knows of no instances of so-called bait and
switch occurring, other than what has been reported in the media. He
said he does not condone the process and would hope anyone involved is
prosecuted.
The anti-gay marriage campaign, voteonmarriage.org, has hired a
signature gathering firm, Mineau said, but emphasized that paying people
on a per-signature basis is not illegal.
"It is incumbent upon each individual to agree with what they're
signing," he said. "I would never sign my name to something I didn't
read."
To date, 17 allegations of fraud have been logged with the Attorney
General's office. And gay marriage supporters say the oversight and
enforcement of the law needs to improve.
"The initiative petition process is supposed to be the people's
process," said Arline Isaacson, co-chairwoman of the Massachusetts Gay
and Lesbian Political Caucus. "But it has been hijacked by paid
signature gathering firms, many of which use illegal, unscrupulous and
unethical techniques to dupe voters into signing these petitions."
Mineau declined a request by committee member Rep. Steven Walsh (D-Lynn)
to use only volunteers for the remainder of the signature drive, saying
hiring an outside firm is the only "feasible" way to collect the more
than 65,000 signatures required under Massachusetts law.
"Rather than falsely accusing circulators of violating a law that does
not exist, citizens troubled by this common practice should ask their
elected representatives and Secretary of State William Galvin - who has
jurisdiction over election laws - to change the law," Mineau said.
Pamela Wilmot, executive director of the government watchdog group
Common Cause Massachusetts, said in an interview that solutions exist
that could relieve the problem without infringing on the process. One
such solution, she said, could be to require a short name of the
campaign be printed on the top of the petition, rather than require a
voter to read a paragraph-long description of the question.
Wilmot said Common Cause has not taken a position on whether to ban
groups from paying signature-gatherers on a per-signature basis, but
does not believe Common Cause will back such a plan, which she described
as a "broad brush approach that limits people's ability to collect
signatures."
Several interest groups are also opposed to a bill to ban per-signature
payments, including the Massachusetts Public Interest Research Group and
Citizens for Limited Taxation (CLT), who testified against the
proposal at a hearing in June.
Similar claims of signature gathering fraud surfaced during another
anti-gay marriage campaign in 2001, but charges were never brought
against the sponsoring groups. In her testimony today, Isaacson called
on Galvin and Attorney General Thomas Reilly to increase oversight and
enforcement of existing laws to uncover and prosecute signature firms
that participate in fraud.
"We brought this matter to their attention in 2001 and are concerned
that we're now seeing a repeat of the same fraud and forgery tactics
employed then by the paid circulators," Isaacson said.
Chip Faulkner, associate director of CLT, said there is no
reason for the committee to hold a hearing on such an issue while
petitioners are trying to gather signatures for the 2006 ballot, and
believes the committee is being driven by the pro-gay marriage agenda.
"To me, this is just trying to impede the signature drive and hurt the
initiative petition process," Faulkner said. "I'm here to defend the
process."
The Telegram & Gazette
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
Signature fraud hearings get testy
Both sides allege dirty tricks
By Richard Nangle, Staff Writer
After a hearing on fraudulent ballot signature-gathering tactics
yesterday, the Senate chairman of the Joint Committee on Election Laws
called for a ban on per-signature payments and for full disclosure of
referendum campaign spending.
"These firms come in and operate fast and loose, and it’s all about the
bottom line, getting the maximum amount of signatures, getting paid for
it and leaving. It’s not about the integrity of the process," said state
Sen. Edward M. Augustus, D-Worcester. "I think the people of
Massachusetts do not really understand that some of these efforts are
really about who has the most money and who can hire the most firms to
collect signatures, and that it’s then presented as the will of the
people."
In a testy exchange, Mr. Augustus criticized Kris Mineau of
Massachusetts Family Institute for refusing to divulge how much money
his group has paid Arno Political Consultants to obtain signatures for
the same-sex marriage ballot question.
Mr. Mineau said he preferred to keep that information private. Mr.
Augustus said voters, the media and the other side of a referendum
campaign ought to have access to that kind of information.
"That’s part of a transparent democracy," he said.
Yesterday’s hearing provoked emotionally charged exchanges between
supporters and opponents of gay marriage. In the end, one thing was
perfectly clear — both sides believe the signature drive has been marred
by fraud.
Several people testified that they had been the victims of the "bait and
switch" tactics of signature gatherers whose objective was to get them
to sign a petition calling for an anti-gay marriage vote whether or not
they believed in the cause.
In turn, supporters of putting the same-sex marriage question to the
voters said gay activists used intimidation tactics to prevent signature
gatherers from doing their job. They said workers had been spat upon and
had their petitions defaced, invalidating some of the signatures.
Mr. Augustus said he parts company with those who say the government has
no role in assuring that signature gatherers present themselves honestly
to members of the public.
He also took pains to separate the work of paid signature gatherers from
those who work as volunteers for the causes they believe in.
Angela McElroy of Florida, who quit her job gathering anti-gay marriage
petition signatures out of disgust over the tactics of her co-workers,
said the company she worked for, JSM Inc., employed "real scummy
people."
She said she was trained to induce people to sign a beer and wine
petition twice. But the second signature was actually for the anti-gay
marriage petition and constituted a "bait and switch." She said some
signature gatherers presented the gay marriage petition as in favor of
same-sex marriage and that her co-workers would chuckle over their
ability to convince gay people to "sign their rights away."
Many of her co-workers were motivated by the incentive to earn $1 per
signature, and $1.50 per signature if they could obtain 500 in a week.
Ms. McElroy said she received a $1,000 paycheck for one work week.
But Chip Faulkner, of Citizens for Limited Taxation, laid
the blame for fraud on "homosexual activists" who subverted the law by
harassing signature gatherers and members of the public.
Legislators called the hearing in response to allegations that the three
largest companies working in Massachusetts to collect signatures for
petition drives have faced allegations of fraud in other states where
they have worked on referendum campaigns.
Arno Political Consultants, National Petition Management and JSM Inc.,
all involved with Massachusetts referendum signature drives in recent
weeks, are under fire for allegations of fraud that have reached the
attention of state legislators and the offices of both the state
attorney general and secretary of state.
Mr. Faulkner, however, said an autumn hearing during a
signature-gathering campaign was both unprecedented and politically
motivated. He said anyone who signs a petition without knowing the cause
"has the IQ of an eggplant."
Mr. Augustus cried foul at that remark, saying three of the residents
who spoke at the hearing were his constituents and that all of them were
reasonably intelligent people who had been purposely duped by paid
signature gatherers.
"We’ll regroup and see what things can be done in the short term," Mr.
Augustus said, adding that some of the most substantive reforms will
likely have to wait until the current signature gathering effort
concludes.
But he suggested one immediate change — to extend the time the state
Ballot Law Commission has to review complaints from the public.
"They have a tight timeframe and they don’t get to investigate all the
complaints," he said.
"The attorney general said he looked at some of the allegations and that
some things were wrong, but he needed some of the provisions in our bill
to go after it," he said.
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
|