CITIZENS   FOR  LIMITED  TAXATION
and the
Citizens Economic Research Foundation

CLT UPDATE
Tuesday, October 17, 2006

MTF leads tax-and-spenders' push for gas tax hike


A special state commission is expected to call for a 9-cent-a-gallon increase in the gas tax and reinstatement of tolls that had been eliminated in Western Massachusetts and in West Newton, according to two panel members.

The Transportation Finance Commission, scheduled to act on the proposals Oct. 18, is also likely to lay the groundwork for new tolls on three highways in Western Massachusetts by voting to turn over Interstates 84, 291, and 391 to the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, which has the power to impose tolls, the two members said....

Several panel members said they are likely to back the recommendation, along with Silveira and another GOP member, Kevin J. Sullivan, a former top Cabinet official in the Cellucci and Swift administrations.

Silveira declined Friday to provide details of the panel's recommendations, saying they are still subject to change....

But several members said the commission has concluded the state cannot adequately fund its highways, mass transit system, and other transportation infrastructure without a significant infusion of new revenue.

"With declining federal revenues and the cost of the Central Artery the state must find additional revenue sources to maintain and expand its highways and mass transit," said Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation and a member of the commission who supports a gas tax increase....

The group also scheduled a meeting Oct. 18 to vote on final recommendations.

The Boston Globe
Sunday, October 8, 2006
State panel to call for gas tax hike
Will also seek new road tolls


It’s sad, but true: A political campaign can be the worst time to introduce serious proposals for solving public problems. This week, a panel commissioned to make recommendations on the Commonwealth’s transportation infrastructure will prove that point once again....

Unfortunately, the commission’s recommendations are leaking out, including a call for a 9-cent increase in the gas tax, the return of Mass. Turnpike tolls suspended years ago in Newton and the western part of the Pike and expansion of the Pike’s responsibility for several connecting highways....

However unfortunate the timing, the commission’s research and recommendations deserve a fair hearing and a full discussion. It would be nice if the candidates would join in.

A MetroWest Daily News editorial
Sunday, October 15, 2006
Gas tax hike has merit


Sometime in early 2007, the Massachusetts secretary of transportation will approach the corner office with bad news: The new governor will not have enough money to fulfill all the transit commitments made during his or her campaign. There'll be no rail connection to New Bedford and Fall River, no Green Line extension to Medford, no increase in rail service to Worcester, and not enough money to keep the existing state highway system in repair. At that point, the governor will regret opposing an increase in the state gasoline tax....

The 21-cent gasoline excise tax has not been increased since 1991, and inflation has cut its value by a third. It remains the tax of choice for transportation improvements because it targets users of a product that the state would like to see conserved, to limit wear on the roads, improve the environment, and reduce dependence on foreign producers. The tax needs to be increased just to maintain the existing highway system.

A Boston Globe editorial
Sunday, October 15, 2006
Gas-tax timidity


Former Massachusetts Transportation Secretary Kevin Sullivan is calling on a special state panel established to find ways for the state to pay for road, bridge and transit projects, to reject a proposed 9 cents per gallon gas tax increase.

Sullivan, a member of the Transportation Finance Commission considering the increase, yesterday wrote the 12 other commission members in an effort to convince them to ditch raising the gas tax....

Sullivan said it would be a mistake to send government bureaucrats more money to spend.

"The bureaucracy will see that (money) and it's like food," Sullivan said. "You can't lose weight by putting food in front of someone who likes to eat." ...

However, finance commission member Michael Widmer said a gas tax increase is unavoidable. "I think it a necessary step if we are to maintain our transportation infrastructure," Widmer said.

Widmer, who also is president of the government fiscal watchdog Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, said he supports efforts to rein in costs but said that won't eliminate the need for more money.

"The needs are so great and there is inadequate funding to support the most important expansion projects and maintain our present highways, bridges and mass transit," Widmer said....

Pointing to the $600 million the gas tax already funnels into the state's coffers, Sullivan said Massachusetts can afford to tackle its transportation needs without raising additional funds from drivers.

"There's enough money in the pot for roads and bridges," Sullivan said.

The Eagle-Tribune
Friday, October 13, 2006
Commission urged to reject gas tax increase;
Former transportation chief says there's enough money


Recently leaked reports indicate the Commonwealth’s Transportation Finance Commission will recommend a 9 cent hike in the state’s gas tax, which is used to finance road and bridge projects, to 30 cents per gallon. Both major-party gubernatorial candidates have insisted that they would not raise gas taxes. The report released today makes clear that better transportation planning should precede any search for new revenues.

"How can we commit to a 50 percent increase in the gas tax when we don't know what the funding gap is?" asks Pioneer's Executive Director, Jim Stergios. "And we don't know the funding gap because no one has done the hard work of defining transportation system needs or priorities."

Pioneer Institute
October 15, 2006
Enough About the Gas Tax,
Says New Pioneer Transportation Policy Report


Chip Ford's CLT Commentary

In its "Advances" for this week, The State House News Service reported that tomorrow the "Transportation Finance Commission" will meet at the Park Plaza Hotel for a "continuation of discussions" of the state transit system.  "It’s not what was reported in the papers," commission chairman Stephen Silveira reportedly said, "referring to press reports that the panel will vote to recommend a 9-cent increase in the gas tax and an increase in tolls."

The Boston Globe reported on Oct. 8 that this commission would meet again Oct. 18, tomorrow, and "act on the proposals."

The State House News further reported on Friday that Silveira, "a transportation expert with ML Strategies consulting firm," added:  "there was no planned vote on the tolls, but admitted the possibility of the subject coming up, since commission members aren’t limited to discussing certain topics."

As soon as we heard about a proposed 9-cents-a-gallon gas tax hike, CLT fired off a news release on Oct. 9, "Gas tax increase? Somebody has to be kidding!"

Whether or not the Transportation Finance Commission votes tomorrow to increase the gas tax by 9-cents-a-gallon and increase tolls, the usual editorial elites' led the charge over the weekend; the usual suspects supporting more, more, more revenue.  The $600 million the state now pulls in annually from the gas tax still isn't enough: They want $270 million more every year, which would bring the total state grab to closing in on a billion dollars.

"The tax needs to be increased just to maintain the existing highway system," the Boston Globe editorial predictably concluded on cue.

As if there are only two choices -- higher taxes or crumbling bridges -- the MetroWest Daily News demanded to know:  "Members of the commission and voters should demand honest answers from the candidates. If they oppose new taxes, do they favor crumbling bridges, inadequate highways, limited commuter rail and potholes ever bigger and more numerous?"

Somebody (we would guess MTF) leaked the gas tax hike proposal, apparently implying that the commission was on board – note that the Boston Globe was happy to refer to a Republican, a former Massachusetts Transportation Secretary and former mayor of Lawrence, Kevin Sullivan, as a supporter of the idea.  Kevin Sullivan e-mailed us last week, thanking Barbara for her column against the gas tax (which appeared in the Eagle-Tribune), and making it clear that he is not on board as a supporter.

"The bureaucracy will see that (money) and it's like food," Sullivan said, according to the Eagle-Tribune. "You can't lose weight by putting food in front of someone who likes to eat ... There's enough money in the pot for roads and bridges."

The Boston Globe apparently had it wrong when it reported on Oct. 8, "Several panel members said they are likely to back the recommendation, along with Silveira and another GOP member, Kevin J. Sullivan."


The Globe was on target though when it came to identifying the lead advocate for higher taxes and tolls -- the always-dependable tax-and-spender, Michael J. Widmer, president of the fat-cat big-business funded so-called Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.  The sole purpose of MTF and Widmer is to provide the cover of false legitimacy, so the state can take more from our pockets.

"I think it a necessary step if we are to maintain our transportation infrastructure," Widmer told the Eagle-Tribune, which reported that he added: "he supports efforts to rein in costs but said that won't eliminate the need for more money."  Widmer warned, "The needs are so great and there is inadequate funding to support the most important expansion projects and maintain our present highways, bridges and mass transit."

This is MTF's standard gimmick:  Widmer and MTF for years, decades, have mentioned in passing a need to eliminate government waste, "rein in costs," but only as a distraction, as cover.  Then MTF abandons any thought of savings in pursuit of ever more of our hard-earned money for the state to squander.

MTF has been using this transparent ploy for decades -- but when has Widmer or his "highly-respected" fat-cat organization ever achieved any meaningful state savings or prevented legislative boondoggles?  But why should MTF bother, when it's the big bankers that benefit from more state borrowing?  And who makes up much of its membership? Does it surprise you that they would be the biggest banking institutions in Massachusetts?

Chip Ford


The Boston Globe
Sunday, October 8, 2006

State panel to call for gas tax hike
Will also seek new road tolls
By Andrea Estes and Frank Phillips, Globe Staff

A special state commission is expected to call for a 9-cent-a-gallon increase in the gas tax and reinstatement of tolls that had been eliminated in Western Massachusetts and in West Newton, according to two panel members.

The Transportation Finance Commission, scheduled to act on the proposals Oct. 18, is also likely to lay the groundwork for new tolls on three highways in Western Massachusetts by voting to turn over Interstates 84, 291, and 391 to the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, which has the power to impose tolls, the two members said.

The commission is expected to recommend that the Turnpike Authority, which was supposed to be eliminated in 2017, be extended indefinitely, according to the two members, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the head of the commission is supposed to speak for the panel.

The commission, created by the Legislature more than two years ago, is made up of specialists in transportation and business.

Its task is to provide a comprehensive and apolitical evaluation of Massachusetts transportation over the next three decades, from highways and bridges to proposed expansions of the commuter rail system.

The panel's call for a gas tax increase comes during a heated gubernatorial campaign in which Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey, the GOP nominee, has urged suspension of the current 21-cent-a-gallon state gas tax.

She has also charged that her Democratic opponent, Deval L. Patrick, would raise taxes if elected.

Though the proposals would have to be approved by the Legislature, the panel's recommendations could nonetheless force the candidates to take a position on the gas tax, injecting a new issue into a campaign that has been focused on crime, immigration, and Healey's call to lower the state income tax rate.

Healey faces the awkward political reality that the 13-member commission is chaired by a Republican and that another member, Boston lawyer Harold Hestnes, a longtime Republican civic leader, is the driving force behind the gas tax hike proposal, according to the two members.

The panel's chairman, Stephen J. Silveira, was appointed by Governor Mitt Romney.

Several panel members said they are likely to back the recommendation, along with Silveira and another GOP member, Kevin J. Sullivan, a former top Cabinet official in the Cellucci and Swift administrations.

Silveira declined Friday to provide details of the panel's recommendations, saying they are still subject to change.

"The situation is still very fluid," he said. "We're talking about a lot of different options. It's important to wait until the end of the day to see how they all hang together. "It's inaccurate to talk about each item in isolation."

But several members said the commission has concluded the state cannot adequately fund its highways, mass transit system, and other transportation infrastructure without a significant infusion of new revenue.

"With declining federal revenues and the cost of the Central Artery the state must find additional revenue sources to maintain and expand its highways and mass transit," said Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation and a member of the commission who supports a gas tax increase.

A nine-cent increase would generate up to $270 million a year, members said. The state gas tax was last increased in 1990. Under the proposal considered by the commission, the increase would be phased in over five years.

The commission had planned to have its report out by late last year, then that deadline was pushed back to the spring. The commission triggered controversy in April when the Globe reported that Silveira suggested its recommendations not be issued until after the November election.

But other members rejected that timetable, saying they believed it was important that the recommendations and related questions raised by the panel be part of the campaign debate.

Commission members met last Thursday to narrow their list of recommendations and ask its staff for a cost analysis of the various proposals before them.

The group also scheduled a meeting Oct. 18 to vote on final recommendations.

The commission is still analyzing how much the new tolls would bring in. The proposed amount of individual tolls has not been decided.

The recommendations, especially the call for a gas tax increase, are expected to meet strong resistance from legislators, who will be reluctant to approve legislation that will cost drivers -- both at the pump and at the toll booth.

"Addressing the kind of transportation problems the state faces will be very difficult politically," said Widmer. "There are no easy solutions."

Removing the tolls was accomplished with great fanfare in the 1990s, under the administration of Governor William F. Weld.

The Massachusetts Turnpike tolls from Exit 1 in West Stockbridge to Exit 6 at I-291 just outside of Springfield were eliminated shortly after Weld took control of the Turnpike Authority in 1996.

That year, Weld removed the tollbooth at Route 16 in West Newton, eliminating the toll between Weston and Allston-Brighton.

Locked in a fierce battle to unseat US Senator John F. Kerry, Weld led television cameras and a demolition crew to the toll plaza and told the workers, "You men ready? Let it rip."

But tolls and taxes are not the only recommendations likely to stir controversy.

The commission is also expected to recommend sweeping changes in pension and medical benefits for MBTA employees and retirees, according to two commission members.

The panel is looking to revamp the current system, which allows MBTA workers to retire with a full pension sooner than other state employees.

Early retirees also receive better health insurance benefits than other state workers, two commission members said.

Other states are also having problems maintaining their transportation systems; 16 are considering toll increases and seven are considering implementing tolls for the first time, according to transportation specialists.

"The interstate system needs major overhauls across the country and the federal government isn't keeping pace with the need," said Widmer.

"With hybrid vehicles and cars with better gas mileage, over the long term Massachusetts, like other states, will need to depend on tolls to replace the gas tax as a major funding source," he said.

Return to top


The MetroWest Daily News
Sunday, October 15, 2006

A MetroWest Daily News editorial
Gas tax hike has merit


It’s sad, but true: A political campaign can be the worst time to introduce serious proposals for solving public problems. This week, a panel commissioned to make recommendations on the Commonwealth’s transportation infrastructure will prove that point once again.

The commission, created by the Legislature more than two years ago, includes Republicans and Democrats appointed by the governor and legislative leaders, chosen for their expertise in transportation and business.

Its task was to prepare a comprehensive evaluation of the state’s railroads, highways and bridges and a plan for maintaining and expanding them over the next three decades. The commission initially intended to release its report late last year, a deadline that was pushed back to last spring, then to this fall. It is scheduled to vote on its final recommendations Wednesday.

Unfortunately, the commission’s recommendations are leaking out, including a call for a 9-cent increase in the gas tax, the return of Mass. Turnpike tolls suspended years ago in Newton and the western part of the Pike and expansion of the Pike’s responsibility for several connecting highways.

Because its report is coming out just three weeks before an election, candidates are already rejecting it. Republican Kerry Healey, who has proposed suspending collection of the current 21-cent a gallon gas tax, vows to hold to her no-new-taxes pledge. Independent Christy Mihos, who has made removal of Pike tolls a signature issue, is denouncing any move to bring them back. Democrat Deval Patrick said he wouldn’t approve a gas tax increase and tried to blame the "Romney-Healey administration" for the report.

Such positions, necessitated by political calculation, may render the commission’s report impotent before it is even issued. But they do nothing to address the problem at hand.

Members of the commission and voters should demand honest answers from the candidates. If they oppose new taxes, do they favor crumbling bridges, inadequate highways, limited commuter rail and potholes ever bigger and more numerous? If not, how do they propose to pay for maintaining the states transportation infrastructure?

We have our own issues with the recommendations we’ve heard so far, beginning with the inequity of making MetroWest commuters, who are most dependent on the Turnpike, pay to maintain roads others use for free. That includes the Central Artery, now depressed at huge expense to the Commonwealth but a free ride for thousands of commuters south of Boston. We also question the efficiency of tolls as a revenue source. Collecting tolls can cost up to 70 percent of what they bring in, while it costs next to nothing to collect gasoline taxes.

However unfortunate the timing, the commission’s research and recommendations deserve a fair hearing and a full discussion. It would be nice if the candidates would join in.

Return to top


The Boston Globe
Sunday, October 15, 2006

A Boston Globe editorial
Gas-tax timidity


Sometime in early 2007, the Massachusetts secretary of transportation will approach the corner office with bad news: The new governor will not have enough money to fulfill all the transit commitments made during his or her campaign. There'll be no rail connection to New Bedford and Fall River, no Green Line extension to Medford, no increase in rail service to Worcester, and not enough money to keep the existing state highway system in repair. At that point, the governor will regret opposing an increase in the state gasoline tax.

The governor will be forewarned of this shortfall if he or she reads the reports of a special commission, established by the Legislature in 2002. It probably won't finish its work before the election, but the report should be out when the new governor is forming an administration in November and December. A Globe report that the commission might recommend a 9-cent increase in the gasoline tax prompted hasty opposition from all four gubernatorial candidates last week.

The commission will not recommend a single source of new revenue but will lay out a range of choices. These include restoring tolls on the western section of the Massachusetts Turnpike and in West Newton. Maybe a case can be made for such a step, but people in the western part of the state have been shortchanged on transportation spending. Tolls should be restored there only if it is essential to maintain that section of the turnpike.

A decade or two ago, the state could depend on the federal government to pay a substantial share of both highway and transit projects. Massachusetts is in contention for a 60 percent federal contribution to connect the two sections of the Silver Line in Boston, but after that federal aid will flow feebly to the state. Massachusetts is on its own for the next major round of transit expansions.

The 21-cent gasoline excise tax has not been increased since 1991, and inflation has cut its value by a third. It remains the tax of choice for transportation improvements because it targets users of a product that the state would like to see conserved, to limit wear on the roads, improve the environment, and reduce dependence on foreign producers. The tax needs to be increased just to maintain the existing highway system.

Democrat Deval Patrick and independent Christy Mihos want to extend rail service to New Bedford and Fall River. Republican Kerry Healey backs the Romney transportation plan, which includes the Worcester expansion and the Green Line extension. Green-Rainbow candidate Grace Ross wants to improve regional public transit. It's easy to talk of big plans during a campaign. The realities of governance will demand lesser ambitions -- or more money.

Return to top


The Eagle-Tribune
Friday, October 13, 2006

Commission urged to reject gas tax increase;
Former transportation chief says there's enough money
By Edward Mason, Staff writer


Former Massachusetts Transportation Secretary Kevin Sullivan is calling on a special state panel established to find ways for the state to pay for road, bridge and transit projects, to reject a proposed 9 cents per gallon gas tax increase.

Sullivan, a member of the Transportation Finance Commission considering the increase, yesterday wrote the 12 other commission members in an effort to convince them to ditch raising the gas tax.

Sullivan, a former Lawrence mayor who served as transportation secretary in the Cellucci administration, wrote that the state should first look at cutting costs and making the agencies that oversee transportation projects more efficient.

"I'm very opposed to raising the gas tax," Sullivan said in an interview. "Unless you talk about controlling expenses, you'll never get where you're going."

The panel is considering raising the gas tax by 9 cents over five years, eventually taking in about $270 million a year. That is on top of the $600 million the 21 cents per gallon gas tax took in during fiscal year 2006.

Sullivan said it would be a mistake to send government bureaucrats more money to spend.

"The bureaucracy will see that (money) and it's like food," Sullivan said. "You can't lose weight by putting food in front of someone who likes to eat."

The Transportation Finance Commission was established two years ago by the Legislature to assess how the state can afford its ongoing bridge, highway and public transit projects. The commission is expected to issue its recommendations in November.

Stephen Silviera, the commission chairman, said raising the gas tax is but one option the commission has discussed over the past two years. The commission also is considering ways of increasing efficiencies such as transferring responsibility for some western Massachusetts highways to the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority.

The state gas tax has not been increased since 1990. Silviera, a Romney appointee to the commission who is a vice president with Boston lobbying firm MLStrategies, said the 9 cents figure was not arbitrary. It represents what the gas tax would be if adjusted for 16 years of inflation.

It is not clear whether the commission members support boosting the gas tax. Silviera said he hasn't decided whether he supports a gas tax increase, and says he has not gauged the depth of support on the commission. Several other commission members did not return phone calls.

Silviera said a vote on raising the gas tax is not on the panel's agenda for its next meeting on Oct. 18.

The commission's final report is expected at the end of November.

If the commission backs a gas tax increase, that doesn't mean it will be implemented. Any tax increase needs to be approved by the Legislature. And it would have to overcome an anticipated gubernatorial veto. Both gubernatorial candidates, Democrat Deval Patrick and Republican Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey, oppose an increase in the gas tax.

However, finance commission member Michael Widmer said a gas tax increase is unavoidable. "I think it a necessary step if we are to maintain our transportation infrastructure," Widmer said.

Widmer, who also is president of the government fiscal watchdog Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, said he supports efforts to rein in costs but said that won't eliminate the need for more money.

"The needs are so great and there is inadequate funding to support the most important expansion projects and maintain our present highways, bridges and mass transit," Widmer said.

Pointing to the $600 million the gas tax already funnels into the state's coffers, Sullivan said Massachusetts can afford to tackle its transportation needs without raising additional funds from drivers.

"There's enough money in the pot for roads and bridges," Sullivan said.

Return to top


Pioneer Institute
October 15, 2006

Enough About the Gas Tax,
Says New Pioneer Transportation Policy Report

Recent Debate on Tax Hike Distracts From Vital
Transportation Planning Needs


BOSTON –A new Pioneer policy brief calls the recent furor over the gas tax a "distraction" from the important work of determining the state’s transportation needs. It calls for any decision to seek new revenues to be driven by an integrated transportation plan that emphasizes maintenance and economic growth.

Recently leaked reports indicate the Commonwealth’s Transportation Finance Commission will recommend a 9 cent hike in the state’s gas tax, which is used to finance road and bridge projects, to 30 cents per gallon. Both major-party gubernatorial candidates have insisted that they would not raise gas taxes. The report released today makes clear that better transportation planning should precede any search for new revenues.

"How can we commit to a 50 percent increase in the gas tax when we don't know what the funding gap is?" asks Pioneer's Executive Director, Jim Stergios. "And we don't know the funding gap because no one has done the hard work of defining transportation system needs or priorities."

The Pioneer report, "Beyond the Gas Tax: Defining Transportation Needs, Emphasizing Economic Growth, and Maintaining Our Assets," by Pioneer Research Director Steve Poftak, urges the Transportation Finance Commission to prioritize projects over the next 20 years based on criteria that stress economic growth and include maintenance costs. The resources needed to build, operate, and maintain projects can only be determined after addressing key questions related to our long-term transportation infrastructure needs.

State transportation planning is currently dominated by various agencies, such as the MBTA, Massport, and the Turnpike Authority. This fragmented process results in planning decisions that take into account only the needs of one mode, rather than the transportation system as a whole. The process also directs resources according to politics and litigation, rather than utilizing transportation to induce economic growth to benefit the entire state.

The report proposes measures that would improve a project’s rating based on pro-growth zoning and permitting decisions. Under the current criteria, a proposal to build an Orange Line station at Assembly Square in Somerville is rated "high priority" for economic and land use impacts not because it would attract 1100 new riders, but because it is in a "state-designated revitalization area."

Similarly, the planned restoration of trolley service to the Arborway branch of the Green Line is close to the front of the current project queue even though it would substitute for an existing bus line, was estimated in 2003 to cost about $72 million to build, and is estimated to add only 200 riders per day.

Poftak also recommends basing cost estimates on a project’s lifecycle, rather than initial construction costs, and assigning higher priority to project maintenance.

To ensure comprehensive, integrated transportation planning – and accountability – the report calls for acceleration of the move, begun with passage of the 2004 Transportation Reform Bill, toward a strong Secretary of Transportation with oversight of almost all state transportation activities.

Steve Poftak is director of research and director of the Shamie Center for Better Government at Pioneer. Previously, he worked in the Commonwealth’s Executive Office for Administration and Finance, where he managed a $1.3 billion capital budget, including transportation spending.

Pioneer Institute is an independent, non-profit public policy research institute. Pioneer generates and markets practical, new, peer-reviewed public policy ideas that advance individual freedom and responsibility, economic opportunity, social mobility, and limited government.

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


Return to CLT Updates page

Return to CLT home page