CLT UPDATE
Saturday, January 27, 2007
MTF steps in it again as other
states cut taxes big
Gov. Deval Patrick is calling on lawmakers to limit
pork spending, just days after he reinstated millions for a moth worm
study, Victorian street lights, a pricey gazebo and dozens of other
taxpayer-funded pet projects deemed wasteful by his predecessor.
One of Patrick’s first official acts as governor was to restore $384
million in funding slashed by former Gov. Mitt Romney....
Mike Widmer of the nonprofit Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation agreed,
saying, “I thought it was inappropriate for Romney to make the cuts in
the first place. He’s an outgoing governor making arbitrary decisions
about where to cut.”
Widmer acknowledged that the money saved under Romney’s cuts could have
gone back into state coffers, but said the savings would have had little
effect on the looming budget crunch.
“Restoration of (the funding) just brings us back to where we were and
where we should have been in the first place,” he said.
The Boston Herald
Friday, January 19, 2007
Deval’s double message:
Gov restores pet $$, calls for pork cuts
It's becoming more expensive to own a house in these parts.
That's because property tax bills have risen, reflecting the greater degree to
which homeowners are being asked to fund what it costs to run schools, staff
fire and police departments, and pay other municipal salaries and benefits.
Figures released by the state Department of Revenue indicate that property taxes
for the average single-family home in Massachusetts went up to $4,003 in fiscal
year 2007, a 5.3 percent increase over last year.
The Boston Globe
Sunday, January 21, 2007
Taxes vary, but 1 thing is certain
Property bills are up, despite market slump
For weeks, Patrick has been backing away from the property
tax cuts he promised in the campaign. Given the state's tight finances, slowing
the rate of property tax increases is probably more realistic. ... In their
place, he offered up some pretty thin gruel....
Patrick made passing reference to supporting some undefined local option taxes,
which could help some cities and towns, but he didn't say which....
The fact sheet that accompanied Patrick's address to the MMA mentions "updating
the tax structure to better fit the parameters of the modern industry and close
loopholes that shift tax burdens to small businesses, seniors on fixed incomes,
and homeowners."
We don't know what that means, but we hope it's a sign the new governor intends
to come back with more substantive proposals for helping cities and towns than
those he has outlined so far.
A MetroWest Daily News editorial
Thursday, January 18, 2007
Patrick offers little help for cities and towns
A key state lawmaker says he sees “no appetite” for a
proposal being pushed by Gov. Deval Patrick to give cities and towns the power
to tax meals and lodging to help pay for local services.
State Rep. Robert DeLeo, chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means
committee, said opposition to such taxes could ease in a tight budget year, but
he does not foresee a dramatic shift among legislators, who have historically
resisted the idea....
Patrick is pushing to give communities the power to raise taxes on meals and
lodging to reduce reliance on the property tax to pay for police, schools and
other critical services.
If passed, the proposal would help the governor keep a campaign promise to
increase financial assistance to cities and towns despite a looming budget
deficit....
Meanwhile, municipal officials are fiercely lobbying to build support for local
option taxes.
The Boston Herald
Friday, January 19, 2007
House budget chief calls local meal tax hard to swallow
Lobbyists trying to influence legislation on Beacon Hill
raked in a record $64.3 million in 2006, as they plied their trade on issues
ranging from education and insurance to tobacco and cable television, state
Secretary William F. Galvin said.
The millions in fees and salaries collected by the 568 lobbyists registered with
the state reflect a dramatic increase in the amount of money flowing to Beacon
Hill in recent years....
The Commerce Insurance Company of Webster topped the list, spending $464,049 on
lobbyists, followed by the Massachusetts Teachers Association ($449,267) ...
The teacher's association was involved in the gay marriage debate ...
It is unlikely that the level of spending on lobbying would drop dramatically as
Governor Deval Patrick begins to push through his agenda and lawmakers gear up
for a new legislative session.
Associated Press
Monday, January 22, 2007
Record sums spent on lobbying
on Beacon Hill during 2006
House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi said he expected tax revenue
growth between 2 and 3 percent next fiscal year, potentially affecting local aid
levels, and his budget chief warned it would be a “monumental task” to preserve
existing funding levels.
"Basically, don’t get your hopes up for the kind of spending that we were able
to do the last year or two years," DiMasi said he told members during a closed
House caucus on the budget outlook.
Meanwhile, Gov. Deval Patrick vowed to fight for his proposal to authorize
cities and towns to impose so-called local option taxes, despite doubts voiced
by DiMasi and Senate President Robert Travaglini....
Barbara Anderson, president of Citizens for Limited Taxation,
said, “I’m so puzzled. I just don’t get the concept that there’s plenty of money
for this year, but we’re broke next year.” ...
Firmly in line with the leadership message, House Democrats repeated the line
that spending needs to be restrained because of the paucity of revenues. The
rhetoric – steeped in warnings that favored services and programs could face
cuts – matches that used during build-ups to tax hikes.
[House Minority Leader Bradley Jones, R-North Reading] said he also expected,
with a Democrat-controlled Legislature and executive branch, the notion of new
revenue generation efforts. He said, “I’m sure the tax question is going to
start popping up around here.”
State House News Service
Monday, January 22, 2007
House leaders warn future revenues
won't support current services
As talk on Beacon Hill turns to living within a tight budget,
Massachusetts Republicans are proposing a $200 million tax cut to help
middle-income taxpayers live within their means.
The Republican plan, called the Working Families Tax Credit, is a series of tax
deductions that could be worth up to $20,000 per taxpayer. The proposal expands
current deductions, such as the one for child care, and creates new ones, like
one for mortgage interest.
Sen. Bruce Tarr, R-Gloucester, said the tax cuts will make Massachusetts more
affordable to the young, middle-class people leaving the state....
Michael Widmer, president of the nonpartisan Massachusetts
Taxpayers Foundation, said the state would have to cut spending next fiscal year
to make the plan work.
"This package would require cuts in programs of approximately that amount, $200
million," Widmer said....
Tarr warned not cutting taxes could force more people to leave Massachusetts and
have long-term consequences.
The Salem News
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
GOP pushes new tax write-offs
If you're searching for the next big thing in American
politics, it's wise to keep an eye on the states. Here's one possibility: the
abolition of state income taxes.
In Georgia, Missouri and South Carolina, Governors and state legislatures are
drafting serious proposals to repeal their income taxes to promote economic
development. St. Louis, one of America's most distressed cities, may overturn
its wage/income tax as a way to spur urban revival. And in Michigan, the
legislature is in the last stages of phasing out its hated business income tax
-- the most onerous in the land. "States are now in a ferocious competition to
attract jobs and businesses," says economist Arthur Laffer, who is advising
several Governors and legislators on the issue, "and one of the best ways to win
this race is to abolish the state income tax." ...
The idea of financing state services without an income tax is hardly radical.
Nine states today -- Alaska, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, South Dakota,
Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming -- manage well without one. With a few
exceptions, the non-income tax states are America's most prosperous. Meanwhile,
the high income tax states, which tend to be congregated in the Northeast, keep
surrendering jobs, people, and voters to the South and West.
The Wall Street Journal
Thursday, January 25, 2007
REVIEW & OUTLOOK
Rich States, Poor States
Echoing the comments of the Democratic leadership,
North-of-Boston Republican lawmakers told Eagle-Tribune editors this week they
do not sense much of an appetite for new or higher taxes. The only exception,
they added, might be a hike in the gasoline tax -- favored by the Massachusetts
Taxpayers Association, among others ...
The Salem News
Friday, January 26, 2007
Betting on a tax hike
By Nelson Benton
In the 1960s, we entered a period of innovation and
experimentation in the schools. Since then, we have seen a decline of
values, and watched experimental curricula turn public schools into a
facade masquerading as education....
In the midst of it all, parents were chastised, disrespected and
diminished by some educators except when it came to footing the bills.
Over the years, it has become worse....
All the while, school budgets have been escalating at enormous rates.
Currently we are spending an average of $9,000 per year to educate one
child.
Other factors certainly contribute to that cost; particularly fringe
benefits for educators. Health-care benefits, pensions, teacher tenure
and sick time negotiated by teachers' unions are helping to destroy an
educational system already gone bad....
Here in Beverly, we are on the verge of building a new high school with
state-of-the-art everything. Constructing a new, expensive edifice at a
time citizens are paying exorbitant taxes for city, state and federal
services is unconscionable....
We need to focus on what takes place in the classroom, rather than the
building itself. The best equipment in the world is no substitute for
quality instruction.
As taxpayers, many of us will be hard-pressed to finance this high-tech
edifice that carries no guarantee of improving what and how students
learn.
We pay for excellence in the classroom now, isn't it about time to
demand results?
The Salem News
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
New buildings won't right
what's wrong with our schools
By Gail Burke
Chip Ford's CLT Commentary
There he goes again. Michael Widmer, president
of the so-called Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation and now an advisor to the Patrick
administration, can talk out of both sides of his mouth with the best of
them. When giving his usual cover and concealment against tax cuts
to the unwashed masses -- those not of his corporate Boston Fat-Cat
elite who bankroll his operation and pay his healthy salary -- the state
can't afford it, not one cent. And when proposing new taxes, e.g.,
increasing the sales or gas taxes, the state needs more of our money
more than we need it.
Let's get this straight from the horse's mouth, as
they say.
On Jan. 19 -- when Gov. Patrick restored $384 million
for "a moth worm study, Victorian street lights, a pricey gazebo and
dozens of other taxpayer-funded pet projects deemed wasteful" by Gov.
Romney when he vetoed them, according to the Boston Herald Widmer said:
“Restoration of (the funding) just brings us back
to where we were and where we should have been in the first place.”
Ka-ching -- Patrick's squandering of $384 million is
just fine with Widmer and MTF.
But a mere four days later -- now opposing new
tax deductions for the unwashed masses -- according to the Salem News:
"Michael Widmer, president of the nonpartisan
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, said the state would have to cut
spending next fiscal year to make the plan work. 'This package would
require cuts in programs of approximately that amount, $200
million.'"
Had the $384 million not been wasted on pet projects
and pork -- with Widmer's blessing -- the tax deductions would still
leave $184 million in the state coffers to squander elsewhere.
How does this shallow man and his deceptive
organization maintain any credibility whatsoever after so many
blatant and public hypocrisies?
Between Widmer's phony "taxpayers" foundation and the
state teachers union, the Big Bucks guns are pointed at both sides of us
taxpayers' heads with itchy fingers on the triggers.
On Dec. 25, 2006, the Boston Herald
reported:
$2.5 million - The amount of money the
Massachusetts Teachers Association spent to support Deval Patrick’s
campaign for governor, according to the state Office of Campaign and
Political Finance. The union’s expenditures, comprised mostly of a
single $2.2 million media buy to support Patrick, accounted for 62
percent of spending by independent groups and individuals to support
or oppose candidates in this year’s elections. Almost all the money
spent by such groups went to support Patrick.
Now add to that another $449,267 it spent lobbying
legislators on Beacon Hill and the state teachers union spent almost $3
million just last year alone trying to have its way with taxpayers'
money.
And just what are taxpayers getting in return from
the teachers union? As Salem News op-ed writer Gail Burke noted in
her column, "New buildings won't right what's wrong with our schools,"
very little but new Taj Mahal school "edifices" with little or no
educational improvement.
Oh yes, and as the Boston Globe reported, higher
property taxes "reflecting the greater degree to which homeowners are
being asked to fund what it costs to run schools . . . and pay other
municipal salaries and benefits
More taxes in the pipeline, no Patrick-promised
property tax relief on the horizon if ever, no voter-mandated income tax
rollback to 5 percent, a likely reduction in our personal deduction this
year, and more the-sky-is-falling whining -- usually a prelude to tax
hikes. The usual story of Taxachusetts goes on undaunted.
Massachusetts is losing population in droves, second
only to New York in the scope of citizens' exodus. Secretary of
State William Galvin is now pursuing a scheme to count illegal aliens as
residents, concerned that the loss of legal population will soon lead to
a loss of a U.S. Congressman or two after the next census and our
delegation's clout in bringing home the federal bacon from Washington,
DC.
The Beacon Hill pols and tax-and-spenders blame the
race over the border on the cost of living and "affordable housing" --
even as homes sales plummet, home values drop, but property taxes
continue to skyrocket.
Meanwhile other states all around the nation are
racing to lower their taxes -- some to even eliminate their income taxes
entirely -- to attract economic activity and advantage. Somehow
they get it, and are eating our lunch, both with growing business and
increasing population.
I wonder why "The Best Legislature Money Can Buy" is
incapable of connecting the dots, recognizing simple cause and effect?
 |
|
Chip Ford |
The Boston Herald
Friday, January 19, 2007
Deval’s double message:
Gov restores pet $$, calls for pork cuts
By Dave Wedge
Gov. Deval Patrick is calling on lawmakers to limit pork spending, just
days after he reinstated millions for a moth worm study, Victorian
street lights, a pricey gazebo and dozens of other taxpayer-funded pet
projects deemed wasteful by his predecessor.
One of Patrick’s first official acts as governor was to restore $384
million in funding slashed by former Gov. Mitt Romney. Romney was
assailed because some of the cuts were crippling to essential social
services, but a large chunk of the spending was for questionable
projects such as a $150,000 moth worm study, $200,000 for Victorian
lights in Melrose, $100,000 for a Braintree gazebo and $250,000 to
repair a New Bedford schooner.
Patrick, who is now calling for a limit to legislative earmarks and for
his department heads to trim up to 10 percent from their budgets,
summarily reinstated all of the pork spending, angering some
Republicans.
“My biggest disappointment is he showed an inability to prioritize
spending,” said House minority leader Rep. Bradley H. Jones (R-North
Reading). “By restoring them all, he said they’re all of equal value. I
don’t necessarily think that’s the case.”
But Patrick aides defended the restored spending, saying it’s unrelated
to the governor’s new calls for belt-tightening in the cash-strapped
state.
“It really wasn’t up to the current governor to pick and choose what
should be restored,” Patrick spokeswoman Cyndi Roy said. “If he was
going to restore some (of the cuts), he was going to restore them all.”
Mike Widmer of the nonprofit Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation agreed,
saying, “I thought it was inappropriate for Romney to make the cuts in
the first place. He’s an outgoing governor making arbitrary decisions
about where to cut.”
Widmer acknowledged that the money saved under Romney’s cuts could have
gone back into state coffers, but said the savings would have had little
effect on the looming budget crunch.
“Restoration of (the funding) just brings us back to where we were and
where we should have been in the first place,” he said.
The Boston Herald
Friday, January 19, 2007
Pet Projects
By Herald staff
Among the lawmakers’ pet projects funded by $384 million in spending
reinstated by Gov. Deval Patrick in his first days in office are:
$150,000 for a study on the winter moth worm
$500,000 for a new bath house on Constitution Beach in East Boston
$250,000 to restore a New Bedford schooner
$50,000 to restore a stagecoach in Barre
$40,000 for Seine Boat replicas in Gloucester
$100,000 for a lakeside gazebo in Braintree
$50,000 for a carriage museum in Amesbury
$435,000 for boat ramps in Truro, Falmouth and Methuen
$200,000 for Victorian lighting in downtown Melrose
$155,000 for a bike path signal in Neponset
The Boston Globe
Sunday, January 21, 2007
Taxes vary, but 1 thing is certain
Property bills are up, despite market slump
By Alexander Reid, Globe Staff
It's becoming more expensive to own a house in these parts.
That's because property tax bills have risen, reflecting the greater
degree to which homeowners are being asked to fund what it costs to run
schools, staff fire and police departments, and pay other municipal
salaries and benefits.
Figures released by the state Department of Revenue indicate that
property taxes for the average single-family home in Massachusetts went
up to $4,003 in fiscal year 2007, a 5.3 percent increase over last year.
In the communities northwest of Boston, the increases in tax bills
varied greatly, with many going up more than the state average.
The region's highest percentage increase was in Lawrence, where the bill
for 2007 was $2,133 , a hike of 9.8 percent. Lowell registered the
second-highest increase, with an average bill of $2,858 , 8.5 percent
higher. And North Reading's 2007 bill of $5,544 , was up 8.3 percent,
the third highest increase.
In one community, however, the average tax bill remained virtually
unchanged. Tyngsborough's bill is $4,275 , only $1 more than last year.
Town officials were quick to point out that doesn't mean that no one in
town saw a change in property taxes.
"It's just an average figure," said Karen Puleo, chairwoman of the
Tyngsborough Board of Selectmen. "It doesn't reflect the fact that some
bills went down. Some went up considerably."
Overall, the regionwide statistics show a number of communities where
tax bills rose beyond the limits set by Proposition 2½. The law, which
was approved in 1980, restricts most cities and towns from raising the
overall tax levy by more than 2½ percent. But it also allows a community
to increase its tax levy to pay for Proposition 2½ overrides or debt
exclusions.
In Lawrence, City Councilman Joseph Parolisi, chairman of the Budget and
Finance Committee, said the city increased taxes to raise about $39
million to meet budgetary needs. He said the city has the authority to
hike taxes that much without an override because, unlike most
communities, Lawrence has not reached its property tax levy limit under
state law.
Parolisi said the tax increase on single-family homes was necessary
because city officials were required under state law to shift more of
the property tax burden from commercial taxpayers to homeowners .
In Lowell, City Manager Bernard Lynch said tax increases were necessary
to close a gap in the fiscal 2007 budget.
"We had a revenue gap where expenditures from the 2006 budget were
rolled into the 2007 budget, which amounted to $2 million," Lynch said.
The city manager said the tax hike also covered increases in operating
budget expenses. Lowell, like Lawrence, has not reached its tax levy
limit because officials have been reluctant to raise taxes, Lynch said.
North Reading Town Administrator Greg Balukonis attributed much of that
town's increase to higher debt service costs stemming from two capital
projects: renovations at Batchelder Elementary School and a police
station.
"We have undertaken some ambitious capital projects, and the costs for
them are hitting the books," said Balukonis. " They were badly needed,
so taxpayers saw the reasoning behind the increases."
Another factor affecting taxes across the board is increased property
values. Even with home values declining, property taxes can still go up
because they trail the market a bit. This year's taxes are based on
assess ed valuations as of Jan. 1, 2006.
Average single-family tax bills in Littleton increased 8.2 percent over
last year to $5,035 . Town Assessor Kenneth P. Mildren said property
taxes were raised to the 2½ percent levy limit. But the total increase
also included costs related to a $1.2 million debt exclusion approved by
Town Meeting last May. Mildren also noted that the tax levy was
calculated to take into account the rise in value of an average
single-family home from $375,000 to $415,750.
"People read newspaper stories about values being down and think their
taxes should be lower, and they don't understand how their taxes can be
higher," said Mildren. "But they're looking at the current picture, when
what we're using in our analysis is historical data that's more than a
year old."
According to tax specialists, the trend toward higher taxes is likely to
continue in the coming years, even in a declining market . Property
taxes and state aid are a community's two major funding sources. A
report by the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation found that property
taxes represented 53 percent of local revenues, the highest level since
1982.
Michael J. Widmer, president of the foundation, said many communities
are just starting to see local aid restored to levels that existed prior
to 2002, when aid was cut across the state.
"But when you adjust for inflation, they're still receiving less than in
2002," said Widmer. "Meanwhile, costs are going up. Then there's
pressure to raise property taxes."
Communities have responded not only by raising taxes, but also by
scaling back municipal services to moderate the tax increases.
The average tax bill on a single-family home in Stoneham rose 2.5
percent to $4,198 in 2007. But even with the increase, the town left
unfilled two vacant positions on the police force and one in the fire
department. The library cut one position and the senior center laid off
its van driver.
Tyngsborough also has had to endure cuts to stay within the Prop. 2½
limit.
Town Administrator Rosemary Cashman said the town has left several
important positions unfilled, including assistant town administrator and
planner. The police chief's job will not be filled when the current
chief retires next month. Stipends for elected officials were
eliminated, and town employees were required to take a 10 percent
reduction in work hours. Several teaching positions were dropped.
"It's a struggle to stay within the confines of Prop. 2½, " said Cashman,
adding that voters rejected two overrides last May.
"The message we get is that we should live within our budget. We can't
do that without cuts."
Matt Carroll of the Globe staff contributed to this report.
The MetroWest Daily News
Thursday, January 18, 2007
A MetroWest Daily News editorial
Patrick offers little help for cities and towns
Gov. Deval Patrick this week promised "an active, collaborative, engaged
partnership with every city and town in this Commonwealth." But his
first speech proved to be heavier on rhetoric than reform.
For weeks, Patrick has been backing away from the
property tax cuts he promised in the campaign. Given the state's tight
finances, slowing the rate of property tax increases is probably more
realistic. He's also retreating from the most specific campaign promise
he made, to put 1,000 new police officers on the street. These goodies
had been mostly taken off the table by the time Patrick addressed the
Massachusetts Municipal Association on Saturday. In their place, he
offered up some pretty thin gruel.
Patrick's new partnership includes such window dressing as offering to
review home rule petitions submitted to the Legislature, attaching
"municipal impact statements" to legislation, leveraging group buying
power and "re-engaging the Local Government Advisory Commission."
The most concrete offer he made was to support legislation allowing
cities and towns to participate in the Group Insurance Commission, which
manages health insurance for state workers. Employee health cost
increases are busting municipal budgets, and the GIC has a better record
of controlling costs.
It's a good idea, but it's no panacea. Local officials will still have
to negotiate the employee contributions to health insurance with their
unions. Still there is money to be saved, and the proposal was greeted
enthusiastically be municipal finance experts. While opposition from
public employee unions is likely, the GIC proposal is, for Patrick,
low-hanging fruit: a way to reduce the pressure on property taxes, if
only by a little, without having to spend any state money.
Patrick made passing reference to supporting some undefined local option
taxes, which could help some cities and towns, but he didn't say which.
He also moved closer to reversing his earlier opposition to casinos and
slot machines, saying he was ready to "begin a discussion with local
officials and business leaders about the introduction of gaming in
Massachusetts."
The revenue and economic benefits of expanded gambling are almost always
overstated, and their costs played down. While this page supports the
right of citizens to gamble, it is no way to pay for essential
government services. The state need not go into business with the
merchants of addiction.
A governor who was elected as an agent of change ought to be able to
offer something more substantive than the budget Band-Aid of expanded
gambling. What the cities and towns really need is tax reform that takes
the pressure off the inefficient and unfair property tax. They need an
education aid formula that is simpler and more equitable. And they need
a commitment to local aid that includes getting "cherry sheet" numbers
to municipalities early in the budget process and that earmarks a fixed
percentage of state revenue to local aid.
The fact sheet that accompanied Patrick's address to the MMA mentions
"updating the tax structure to better fit the parameters of the modern
industry and close loopholes that shift tax burdens to small businesses,
seniors on fixed incomes, and homeowners."
We don't know what that means, but we hope it's a sign the new governor
intends to come back with more substantive proposals for helping cities
and towns than those he has outlined so far.
The Boston Herald
Friday, January 19, 2007
House budget chief calls local meal tax hard to swallow
By Casey Ross
A key state lawmaker says he sees “no appetite” for a proposal being
pushed by Gov. Deval Patrick to give cities and towns the power to tax
meals and lodging to help pay for local services.
State Rep. Robert DeLeo, chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means
committee, said opposition to such taxes could ease in a tight budget
year, but he does not foresee a dramatic shift among legislators, who
have historically resisted the idea.
“I haven’t heard of an appetite for taxes in general, nor have I heard
of an appetite for local option taxes,” said DeLeo (D-Winthrop). “Maybe
I’ll get pressure for a debate, but right now I’m not seeing it.”
Patrick is pushing to give communities the power to raise taxes on meals
and lodging to reduce reliance on the property tax to pay for police,
schools and other critical services.
If passed, the proposal would help the governor keep a campaign promise
to increase financial assistance to cities and towns despite a looming
budget deficit. Patrick yesterday directed executive branch agencies to
identify cuts of 5 to 10 percent in their budgets to help ease a
projected $1 billion shortfall.
Meanwhile, municipal officials are fiercely lobbying to build support
for local option taxes.
“Cities and towns are desperately in need of revenue options to ease
over-reliance on the property tax,” said Geoff Beckwith, executive
director of the Massachusetts Municipal Association. “Most communities
across the country have local taxing authority beyond the property tax.”
DeLeo said the desire to assist local communities is conflicting with
the Legislature’s opposition to raising taxes in the budget year that
begins in July.
“We’ve already taken off the table any talk of increasing (income and
sales) taxes,” DeLeo said.“The only other alternative is to level-fund
or cut spending.”
Associated Press
Monday, January 22, 2007
Record sums spent on lobbying on Beacon Hill during 2006
By Steve LeBlanc
Lobbyists trying to influence legislation on Beacon Hill raked in a
record $64.3 million in 2006, as they plied their trade on issues
ranging from education and insurance to tobacco and cable television,
state Secretary William F. Galvin said.
The millions in fees and salaries collected by the 568 lobbyists
registered with the state reflect a dramatic increase in the amount of
money flowing to Beacon Hill in recent years.
Last year, lobbyists collected $60.3 million. Just six years ago,
lobbyists collected $47.7 million, an 11 percent jump from $43 million
in 1999.
By 2002 that number had grown to $53.7 million, putting Massachusetts
third in the nation behind much larger states California and New York in
the amount of money spent on lobbying.
"It is a stunning statistic when you consider how little gets done,"
Galvin said yesterday in an interview. "Obviously there's a great amount
of money being spent."
The Commerce Insurance Company of Webster topped the list, spending
$464,049 on lobbyists, followed by the Massachusetts Teachers
Association ($449,267), the Life Insurance Association of Massachusetts
($309,730), Comcast Cable Corporation ($309,500), and Washington-based
Altria Corporate Services ($295,748), the parent corporation of tobacco
giant Philip Morris USA.
The amount spent on lobbying was less a result of last year's closely
watched gubernatorial election and more a reflection of the types of
legislation being considered by lawmakers, Galvin said.
Insurers took a keen interest in activities at the State House,
including former governor Mitt Romney's failed push for auto insurance
deregulation, and the passing of the state's landmark health care bill.
The teacher's association was involved in the gay marriage debate, and
Comcast's is a heavily regulated industry. Cigarettes and other
tobacco-related issues have been a target of legislation and regulation
for years.
The top lobbying firms in 2006 were Kearney, Donovan & McGee, which
received $1,303,630 in fees and salary, followed by Holland and Knight
($1,243,038), Donoghue, Barrett and Signal ($1,152,300), the Brennan
Group ($1,152,264), and O'Neill and Associates ($1,121,944).
Galvin said the reported numbers are "just the tip of the iceberg" of
the actual lobbying that goes on at the State House. As secretary of
state, Galvin registers lobbyists, but he says he has little authority
to affect where the money goes.
"The laws the way they currently exist limit my ability to question what
the money is being spent on," Galvin said.
It is unlikely that the level of spending on lobbying would drop
dramatically as Governor Deval Patrick begins to push through his agenda
and lawmakers gear up for a new legislative session.
Patrick has already said he will comprehensively review the state auto
insurance system. The acting insurance commissioner on Friday suspended
rule changes made in the system during the final weeks of the Romney
administration.
State House News Service
Monday, January 22, 2007
House leaders warn future revenues
won't support current services
By Jim O’Sullivan and Michael Norton
House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi said he expected tax revenue growth
between 2 and 3 percent next fiscal year, potentially affecting local
aid levels, and his budget chief warned it would be a “monumental task”
to preserve existing funding levels.
"Basically, don’t get your hopes up for the kind of spending that we
were able to do the last year or two years," DiMasi said he told members
during a closed House caucus on the budget outlook.
Meanwhile, Gov. Deval Patrick vowed to fight for his proposal to
authorize cities and towns to impose so-called local option taxes,
despite doubts voiced by DiMasi and Senate President Robert Travaglini.
State spending this year rose 7.5 percent. And the House budget panel
predicts capital gains tax collections, which it says provides almost 10
percent of the tax base, will fall off $300 million over the next two
years, making it difficult for the state to keep up with a host of new
spending commitments.
Emerging from the caucus today, DiMasi relayed the message he'd given
members about slower revenue growth. DiMasi said, "That means there
shouldn't be any expectations of great increases in either local aid,
Chapter 70, or spending and programs, etc. To maintain any of the
spending that we've had last year in the fiscal year's budget probably
would require more money than the 3 percent."
In a letter to his colleagues, House Ways and Means Chairman Robert
DeLeo said the state should prepare for a Fiscal Year 2008 “structural
deficit of nearly $800 million before any discussion of new
initiatives,” admonishing them to gird for sparse new spending. He
wrote, “[T]he challenges we face this year significantly exceed those we
have dealt with in recent history. It will be a monumental task to
simply maintain those commitments we have already made, to say nothing
of expanding on those commitments. Yet we must proceed with the
understanding that imprudence in the short term will only serve to
increase our difficulties in the future and will in the end do far more
harm than good for our constituents.”
To arrive at the $800 million gap figure, DeLeo assumed a tax revenue
growth rate of 3 percent, on the low end of the projections from last
week’s revenue hearing. Legislative budgeteers and Gov. Deval Patrick
have been criticized for re-inserting $384 million in spending, much of
it in local line items, to the current year’s budget while fretting
about a shortfall next year that Patrick says will exceed $1 billion.
Barbara Anderson, president of Citizens for Limited Taxation,
said, “I’m so puzzled. I just don’t get the concept that there’s plenty
of money for this year, but we’re broke next year.”
With the state only a few years out of a fiscal crisis that saw drastic
cuts in services, narrowing or closing the projected gap, which may
involve raising revenues or reducing state services, is the top problem
facing state leaders in the opening weeks of the Patrick administration
and a new legislative session.
Noting that Senate President Robert Travaglini earlier this month called
tax hikes “off the table,” DiMasi said, “We’re not going to be looking
at anything the Senate or the governor aren’t going to agree to.” At the
same time, he added his to the chorus of voices warning that
Massachusetts won’t see a continuation of the trend of rapidly
accelerating revenues.
DiMasi threw up a yellow light to Patrick’s proposal to allow
municipalities to levy taxes on lodgings and meals. Recalling that a
local-option tax proposal had been “resoundingly defeated by the House”
in its last appearance, DiMasi said, “Obviously, we don’t know whether
there’s any change yet … Nobody should have any expectations that that’s
going to be part of the equation.”
Addressing the media after the Monday meeting with DiMasi and Travaglini,
Patrick said, “First of all, this would not be a vote by this
legislature to increase anybody’s tax. It’s a vote to give local
authorities the room to make a judgment together with their neighbors on
what is in their best interests. I’ve heard from so many municipal
leaders and local advocates about wanting to have this authority shared
with them that I’m not prepared to give up on it. We’ll just have to try
to work it.”
And, despite their public pronouncements against taxes, Patrick said of
the two legislative leaders, “Their minds are open. They want to see
exactly the details of the proposal we bring forward. It’s not a simple
question by any means, politically, but I do think it’s important for
municipalities to have more than one revenue stream so that they can
manage through the peaks and valleys.”
Meanwhile, the chairman of the Legislature’s Revenue Committee said he’d
actively oppose a proposal to raise the gas tax, one of the
recommendations expected to come forth from a transportation financing
panel in the next several weeks. Revenue Committee Chairman John
Binienda, Democrat of Worcester, told the News Service, “I don’t think
it’s going to happen, because any raise in any tax has to go through
this committee, and I have no appetite to do it.”
Firmly in line with the leadership message, House Democrats repeated the
line that spending needs to be restrained because of the paucity of
revenues. The rhetoric – steeped in warnings that favored services and
programs could face cuts – matches that used during build-ups to tax
hikes.
“We have to give the facts out to people, so they know that it’s not a
time when we can expand our services,” said Rep. Frank Smizik, whose
Brookline district is one of the state’s most liberal, as he emerged
from the caucus. House Dean David Flynn (D-Bridgewater) chimed in, “You
can’t expect this year what they did last year.” Walking out of the same
meeting, Rep. Gloria Fox (D-Roxbury) sang the O’Jays 1970s hit “For the
Love of Money.”
House Minority Leader Bradley Jones (R-North Reading) said DeLeo’s memo
contained an implicit critique of recent budget practices by warning
against reliance on capital gains intakes. “Are we basically criticizing
ourselves for what we’ve done in the past? Or is it just that it’s only
a problem now?”
Jones said he also expected, with a Democrat-controlled Legislature and
executive branch, the notion of new revenue generation efforts. He said,
“I’m sure the tax question is going to start popping up around here.”
But Democrats are taking pains to avoid giving the impression that they
plan to solve the budget problem by raising taxes. No revenue-side
solutions were discussed in the caucus, members said.
Recalling a one-year 15 percent drop in tax collections that left Gov.
Mitt Romney with a huge budget problem when he took office in 2003, Rep.
Joseph Wagner ticked off a list of spending commitments that, combined
with the slowdown in revenue growth, leave the state with a budget
problem.
“The challenges are as great as they were four years ago,” said Wagner
(D-Chicopee), noting state revenues grew by about $1.6 billion between
fiscal 2005 and 2006 but may grow by only $600 million from fiscal 2007
to 2008. He said spending commitments are straining the budget in the
following areas: pension, debt service, school construction, the MBTA,
health care, and local aid.
Wagner, who co-chairs the Transportation Committee, said the finances of
the MBTA are “imploding” and said the financial needs of the state’s
universal health insurance law are unclear and “not well determined or
defined.”
Patrick, whose budget proposal is due the end of next month, has warned
that much of the revenue growth the state has enjoyed in the past
several years has been based on volatile capital gains tax collections.
According to data DeLeo handed out Monday, capital gains accounts for 10
percent of the tax base. The same set of data predicted a $300 million
slide next year between the $1.8 billion high point in this tax year and
tax year 2008.
Patrick last week instructed department heads to identify up to 10
percent of their budgets for potential paring. On Monday, he said he
preferred that targeted technique over what he called the “ham-fisted”
alternative of lopping a set percentage off the top of state spending.
“We’ve got 16 years of one set of rules and patterns and practices,”
Patrick said, referring to the GOP hold on the Corner Office that he
ended. “And what I have asked is that we consider afresh whether we have
the right practices and the right rules, and what if any savings that
yields us.”
The Salem News
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
GOP pushes new tax write-offs
By Edward Mason, staff writer
As talk on Beacon Hill turns to living within a tight budget,
Massachusetts Republicans are proposing a $200 million tax cut to help
middle-income taxpayers live within their means.
The Republican plan, called the Working Families Tax Credit, is a series
of tax deductions that could be worth up to $20,000 per taxpayer. The
proposal expands current deductions, such as the one for child care, and
creates new ones, like one for mortgage interest.
Sen. Bruce Tarr, R-Gloucester, said the tax cuts will make Massachusetts
more affordable to the young, middle-class people leaving the state.
"We have to find a way to help people who are finding it too expensive
to live in Massachusetts," Tarr said.
Massachusetts' dwindling population has put the Bay State in line to
lose a congressional seat. House Republican Leader Bradley Jones Jr.,
R-North Reading, said that with federal clout and financial aid at
stake, Massachusetts can't afford not to invest in keeping people here.
"This is a real, real problem," Jones said.
Under the GOP plan, taxpayers would get to choose from a menu of
deductions to a maximum of $20,000:
* Allowing homeowners to deduct up to $6,000 of mortgage interest.
* Boosting the student child-care deduction from $4,800 to $5,520 for
single-child families and from $9,600 to $11,040 for parents of more
than one child.
* Expanding the rental deduction to $4,500 from $3,000.
* Letting residents deduct up to $2,500 in utility costs, including
electricity, home heating oil, natural gas, propane, sewer and water.
* Creating a $500 deduction for insurance for primary homes.
Republicans also would expand eligibility for deducting college tuition
costs. Right now, parents can deduct tuition if it exceeds 25 percent of
their income. The GOP would make it 15 percent.
Republicans have asked the state Department of Revenue to calculate the
cost of their proposal. They peg it at about $200 million.
The Republican tax cut is part of a larger legislative agenda the GOP
rolled out this month. The GOP measures addressed affordable housing,
energy conservation, municipal aid and restoring confidence in
government.
The Republican plan to cut taxes, though, may be a tough sell.
Michael Widmer, president of the nonpartisan Massachusetts Taxpayers
Foundation, said the state would have to cut spending next fiscal year
to make the plan work.
"This package would require cuts in programs of approximately that
amount, $200 million," Widmer said.
Tarr countered that cuts would amount to a fraction of a budget that is
expected to exceed $27 billion.
The Patrick administration and the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation
predict as little as 2 percent revenue growth in the next fiscal year.
House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi, D-Boston, yesterday told his House
colleagues not to get their hopes up for increased spending.
Rep. Brian Dempsey, D-Haverhill, who has proposed making contributions
to state college savings plans tax deductible, said it will be tough to
pass tax cuts.
"It's going to be difficult to embrace any tax cuts in this budget
(cycle)," Dempsey said.
Tarr warned not cutting taxes could force more people to leave
Massachusetts and have long-term consequences.
"There is a greater cost of not doing this than the cost of doing it,"
Tarr said.
The Wall Street Journal
Thursday, January 25, 2007
REVIEW & OUTLOOK
Rich States, Poor States
If you're searching for the next big thing in American politics, it's
wise to keep an eye on the states. Here's one possibility: the abolition
of state income taxes.
In Georgia, Missouri and South Carolina, Governors and state
legislatures are drafting serious proposals to repeal their income taxes
to promote economic development. St. Louis, one of America's most
distressed cities, may overturn its wage/income tax as a way to spur
urban revival. And in Michigan, the legislature is in the last stages of
phasing out its hated business income tax -- the most onerous in the
land. "States are now in a ferocious competition to attract jobs and
businesses," says economist Arthur Laffer, who is advising several
Governors and legislators on the issue, "and one of the best ways to win
this race is to abolish the state income tax."
The timing for fixing state tax codes could hardly be more ideal because
states are swimming in budget surpluses thanks to the booming national
economy. This should be a big year for state tax cuts. Governors in
Arkansas, Florida and West Virginia have already announced major tax
relief plans for 2007. Even New York City has a $1 billion surplus and
Mayor Michael Bloomberg is promising a property tax cut.
But the biggest target is the income tax. Newly re-elected South
Carolina Governor Mark Sanford is talking of reviving his plan to phase
out the income tax over 18 years. Mr. Sanford ran into opposition from
the legislature in his first term, but he tells us that "I still
consider this one of my top priorities and if the legislature wants to
do it, I would be ecstatic."
Georgia may beat Mr. Sanford to the punch. House Republicans in Atlanta
have announced that one of their top priorities is to use the
half-billion-dollar budget surplus as a downpayment to "dismantle the
current tax code." House Republican Majority Leader Jerry Keen tells us
the debate in Atlanta is between a flat-rate income tax and a plan that
would "do away with the personal income tax but broaden the sales tax by
eliminating 107 exemptions. We're committed to a pro-growth tax plan
that announces to the country that Georgia is open for business."
In Missouri the legislature is reviewing a plan by the state think tank,
the Show Me Institute, that would increase the rate of the sales tax to
7.5% and limit spending growth to population plus inflation, in return
for eliminating the state's income tax over 10 years. House Speaker Carl
Bearden says "I would like to see a phasing out of our current tax
structure in Missouri. . . . Eliminating the income tax can have a huge
positive impact on a state's economy."
The idea of financing state services without an income tax is hardly
radical. Nine states today -- Alaska, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire,
South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming -- manage well
without one. With a few exceptions, the non-income tax states are
America's most prosperous. Meanwhile, the high income tax states, which
tend to be congregated in the Northeast, keep surrendering jobs, people,
and voters to the South and West.
State lawmakers also seem to have learned from two of the most recent
states to adopt an income tax: New Jersey and Connecticut. As recently
as 1965 New Jersey had neither an income nor sales tax, but managed to
balance its budget every year. Now it has both taxes -- its income tax
is the 5th highest in the nation -- but the state is facing what
Stateline.org calls a "staggering budget deficit." Allied Van Lines
reports that the Garden State is now one of the leading places for
people to flee.
The latest state to adopt an income tax was Connecticut in 1991, but a
new report by the Yankee Institute reveals that the tax has been a
calamity. The state has ranked last in employment growth since 1991,
losing 240,000 of its native born citizens between 1991-2002. No other
state has since enacted an income tax, and lawmakers in Georgia,
Missouri and South Carolina say Connecticut is now the model for how not
to run a state economy.
Whether these states will be able to eliminate their income taxes in the
next few years is an open question. But what's undeniable is that the
debate in state capitals has swung decisively in the direction of
chopping income tax rates, not raising them.
The Salem News
Friday, January 26, 2007
Betting on a tax hike
By Nelson Benton, staff writer
If you trust the Republican minority in the Legislature to do the
handicapping, it appears chances are much greater for the legalization
of casino gambling and/or an increase in the gasoline tax under the new,
all-Democratic regime on Beacon Hill than for an increase in the income
tax and/or local-option meals and lodging taxes.
Echoing the comments of the Democratic leadership, North-of-Boston
Republican lawmakers told Eagle-Tribune editors this week they do not
sense much of an appetite for new or higher taxes. The only exception,
they added, might be a hike in the gasoline tax -- favored by the
Massachusetts Taxpayers Association, among others -- to finance
much-needed transportation improvements and perhaps allow the
elimination of some Massachusetts Turnpike tolls.
Of course the idea of a gas tax hike -- it has not gone up here since
1990 and, at 23.5 cents per gallon, is half that in New York, California
and Connecticut -- might have more appeal locally if the legislation
called for the elimination of all tolls including those on the Tobin
Bridge and harbor tunnels.
The GOP legislators -- Sens. Bruce Tarr of Gloucester and Reps. Brad
Jones of North Reading and Brad Hill of Ipswich -- all stressed,
however, that they would prefer to see Gov. Deval Patrick attack the
spending side of the ledger rather than seek creative ways of raising
more revenue.
The Salem News
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
New buildings won't right
what's wrong with our schools
By Gail Burke
We have reached a critical period in our country. Our safety and our
very existence are in peril.
Lunatics in the Middle East, who have no concept of democracy, are a
constant threat, and our government is being maligned both here and
abroad.
But an even more insidious threat is the failure of our public schools
to educate our children. The evidence is apparent in the numbers of
students who have major difficulty with reading and math, and are
uninformed about both U.S. and world history.
Many are destined to fail. There are 45 million illiterate adults in the
U.S. We are all at risk if we cannot provide children with the skills
needed to make rational judgments based on facts instead of political
rhetoric.
These students will someday be our leaders. We need to do more than
provide fun and therapy in the classroom. If educators are unwilling or
unable to acknowledge the mediocrity (at best) that is the norm in
public education, and make significant changes to strengthen the
curriculum, we will all pay the price.
In the 1960s, we entered a period of innovation and experimentation in
the schools. Since then, we have seen a decline of values, and watched
experimental curricula turn public schools into a facade masquerading as
education.
At that time, individualized instruction was considered as the cutting
edge of modern education. Phonics, penmanship and spelling gave way to
"whole word reading," printing was substituted for cursive writing, and
spelling became immaterial.
Children learned multiplication tables at home or not at all, and
teacher-directed learning was replaced with workbooks and games. New
math was in its infancy; parents were unaccustomed to its concepts, and
were unable to help with children's homework. Calculators began to
appear in the classroom, even in elementary grades.
Dress codes were abolished and homework became trivial. The era of
"relevance" was educationese for conducting experiments on children and
unsuspecting parents.
In the midst of it all, parents were chastised, disrespected and
diminished by some educators except when it came to footing the bills.
Over the years, it has become worse.
Many taxpayers now realize that the philosophy of "having fun" and
"feeling good" have been major factors in the lack of rigorous
curriculum in the classroom. Enhancing "self-esteem" has become the
excuse for the deterioration of quality education.
Instead, child-directed mis-education has become standard. Parent
complaints are brushed aside with disingenuous comments from educators
warning us not to "stifle children's creativity."
All the while, school budgets have been escalating at enormous rates.
Currently we are spending an average of $9,000 per year to educate one
child.
Other factors certainly contribute to that cost; particularly fringe
benefits for educators. Health-care benefits, pensions, teacher tenure
and sick time negotiated by teachers' unions are helping to destroy an
educational system already gone bad.
Competition is discouraged in the classroom. Political correctness,
diversity and sex education -- even for very young children -- dominate
the schools. Liberal mentality dictates policy. Discussions in the
classroom are devoid of anything but liberal propaganda.
Recently, Al Gore's movie on the environment was shown to some
elementary schoolchildren. The movie has its critics in the scientific
community who disagree with some of the conclusions drawn, but they
understand the film was only made to foster Mr. Gore's political
ambitions.
Parents were not informed that it would be shown. Indeed, parents are
often not aware of many contentious topics that children are subjected
to in the classroom. Often only one point of view is represented. So
much for diversity.
Open-ended discussions are encouraged, but students are left to draw
their own conclusions. After all, it's [not] politically correct to make
judgments on anything.
Aren't educators supposed to "educate"?
Don't get me wrong. The good ones try, but most of the time they are
working within a system that doesn't allow children to learn in a
structured environment; i.e. teacher-directed classrooms that include
the practices like serious grading, assigning meaningful homework, and,
above all, making sure that students master the basic concepts of
reading, grammar and math.
In today's schools, children are promoted year after year whether or not
they have attained the skills needed to advance.
Here in Beverly, we are on the verge of building a new high school with
state-of-the-art everything. Constructing a new, expensive edifice at a
time citizens are paying exorbitant taxes for city, state and federal
services is unconscionable.
Taxpayers understand that the outer shell of a school is no indication
of what takes place inside. New, expensive equipment using the same,
ineffective teaching methods, is a recipe for disaster -- both for
taxpayers and children.
I believe that academic achievement should be the primary goal of
education.
We need to examine the system before we build new schools. What is
working? What isn't working?
We must scrutinize the costly equipment that the superintendent
envisions in a new school. I haven't heard any concern for the taxpayer
in his speeches.
We need to focus on what takes place in the classroom, rather than the
building itself. The best equipment in the world is no substitute for
quality instruction.
As taxpayers, many of us will be hard-pressed to finance this high-tech
edifice that carries no guarantee of improving what and how students
learn.
We pay for excellence in the classroom now, isn't it about time to
demand results?
Gail Burke of Beverly is a member of the Salem News' reader advisory
board.
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
|
