CLT UPDATE
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Small victories today, larger ones to come
when income tax is repealed
The Boston Foundation’s recent study
of Massachusetts population trends unintentionally revived the myth that
people here dislike our state and its politics....
Massachusetts’ taxes are not the problem. The restrictions of
Proposition 2½, followed by 16 years of tax cuts under Govs. Weld,
Cellucci, Swift and Romney, have brought our tax burden below the
national average.
Measured in per capita terms, total taxes in Greater Seattle are about
the same as in Greater Boston. But incomes here are higher; measured as
a percent of personal income - that is, measured in relation to ability
to pay - taxes amount to 11.4 percent in Seattle and 10.2 percent in
Boston....
High home prices are, of course, a key part of the problem - people
can’t afford to move here.
The Boston Herald
Monday, June 30, 2008
Modest tax bite isn’t causing Mass. exodus
By Edward Moscovitch
Moscovitch uses Seattle for a comparison on how many of its
college-educated adults were born out of state: 77 percent for Seattle, 53
percent for Boston, and blames this differential on the high cost of housing
here. I would note that Washington’s per capita tax burden is 12th, and, it has
no income tax! Maybe our middle class is going to Seattle, using its income tax
savings to buy homes. Maybe we’ll do better if we repeal our income tax in
November.
The Boston Herald
Monday, July 7, 2008
Letter to the Editor
Taxed out of Mass.
By Barbara Anderson
The $1-per-pack increase in the state cigarette tax is
retroactive.
Odd, isn’t it, how a tax cut is never retroactive, only an increase is. But
then, we don’t have tax cuts around here anymore, do we? ...
Smokers must pay more. After all, smokers don’t have any amen chorus at the
State House.
And by the way, you know that extra buck per pack all you smokers are going to
have to pay? It’s really $1.05, because on top of the state excise tax on
cigarettes, you’re going to have to add the 5 percent state sales tax.
A sales tax on an excise tax - how Massachusetts is that? ...
But guess what? The good news this week is that Carla Howell et al. have about
18,000 signatures and should be able to put the income-tax repeal on the
November ballot even if the teachers unions try to challenge their petitions.
Any smoker who votes not to abolish the state income tax in November would have
to be a masochist. Is it too late to make the income-tax abolition retroactive?
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Cigarette tax is nothing but smoke and mirrors
By Howie Carr
A legislative snafu threw the state’s cigarette tax hike into
chaos yesterday, leaving some smokers fuming that they had to pay the extra buck
a pack even before the plan was signed into law.
Revenue-desperate lawmakers planned for the tax bump to go into effect at
midnight Monday, but Gov. Deval Patrick didn’t sign it until late yesterday
afternoon. Some stores quickly started charging the extra fee anyway, leaving
smokers, store owners and lawmakers scratching their heads.
“This is so convulated,” said Sen. Bob Hedlund (R-Weymouth), who opposed the tax
increase. “This is not a way to run any entity. In our haste and lust for
revenues, this is the way the process breaks down.” ...
The lofty new prices were received like a skunk at a garden party across the Hub
yesterday, with many smokers blasting lawmakers for once again exploiting their
habit.
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Smokers: What in tar-nation?
‘Convoluted’ tax hike stokes rage
In the past 24 hours, Gov. Deval Patrick, also known as
“Friend Of The Little Man,” has signed two pieces of legislation that will make
it even harder for low-income locals to remain in the Bay State.
One is the new energy law, which will add at least $100 million to the cost of
electricity in Massachusetts - one more bit of “good news” for low-income
families struggling with $4 a gallon gasoline and $5 heating oil....
The other low blow to low-income residents is the cigarette tax increase that,
in an “only in Massachusetts” moment, took effect 24 hours before it become law,
so as not to miss a single cent of sin tax.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Poor excuse for taxes
Under gov, have-nots must hand it all over
By Michael Graham
A measure to repeal the state income tax vaulted another
hurdle yesterday after the state verified enough signatures to place it on the
ballot.
“In the face of $4.50-a-gallon gasoline, skyrocketing heating oil costs,
exploding home foreclosures and 28 straight years of property tax increases on
Massachusetts homes, ending the income tax will give desperately needed
financial relief to Massachusetts families,” said Carla Howell, chairwoman of
the Committee for Small Government.
The group gathered more than 15,000 signatures so voters could weigh in on the
question on Nov. 4.
Secretary of State William Galvin’s office certified more than 12,000 signatures
yesterday, topping the 11,099 needed to get on the ballot.
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Voters closer to weighing in on income tax
In the $28.2 billion budget approved yesterday by the House
and Senate, there are scores of earmarks to fund pet projects in legislators'
districts in nearly every corner of Massachusetts.
"This budget is a good document," Representative Robert DeLeo, a Winthrop
Democrat and chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means, said yesterday
during debate on the House floor. "I think it's a good document for each and
every member of this House." ...
The earmarks are spread throughout the 266-page budget, making it difficult to
determine the total amount. But it is a small number in the context of a $28.2
billion spending plan that relies heavily on higher taxes and spending from
reserve funds to increase spending on local aid, education, and healthcare.
Republicans immediately pounced on the spending items during a time of rising
healthcare costs and an uncertain financial future.
"Beacon Hill Democrats are addicted to spending, period," said Rob Willington,
executive director of the Massachusetts Republican Party. ". . . This budget,
which is coming three days late already, contains enough pork in it to make BLTs
for the whole Commonwealth." ...
Budget analysts warn that state spending may be too high, given uncertainties
with the Medicaid waiver and the capital gains tax, which may drop in an
economic downturn.
"It's a very risky budget," said Michael J. Widmer, president of the
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a business-funded budget watchdog group.
"This is certainly the time when we should be limiting state spending to the
absolute most essential items. It's one thing to add projects during a boom
time. It's quite another when we're in fiscal peril."
The Boston Globe
Friday, July 4, 2008
Lawmakers feeding pet projects
Bacon comes home
to every corner of the Commonwealth
Outraged Republican lawmakers yesterday blasted the newly
passed $28.2 billion state budget, saying it’s stuffed with “DeLeo Dollars” -
political handouts from a top House lawmaker maneuvering to succeed embattled
House Speaker Sal DiMasi.
The GOP blamed the power struggle between House Ways and Means chairman Robert
DeLeo and Majority Leader John Rogers, saying DeLeo’s powerful committee steered
through tens of millions of dollars for local projects for supporters.
“At a time when the public is being told we have no money and we’re in dire
straits, there’s $100 million in new earmarks on the House side alone,” said
Minority Leader Sen. Richard Tisei (R-Wakefield).
The Boston Herald
Friday, July 4, 2008
GOP slams ‘DeLeo’ budget
The final budget includes a House plan to grant about 250,000
retirees, including teachers and other state workers, cost of living increases
to push their pensions up an average of $120 per year, according to union
estimates. The budget maintains a plan opposed by Treasurer Tim Cahill to push
off by three years the deadline to fully fund the pension system, a prospect the
Pioneer Institute has said could cost an additional $8 billion between now and
2026. Cahill warned that the state bond rating could be jeopardized by extending
the debt repayment schedule out further.
State House News Service
Thursday, July 3, 2008
New taxes, reserve funds fuel
5.2 percent state spending hike
As the Legislature scurried to put the finishing touches on
its $28 billion spending plan for fiscal 2009 last week, a move to cut off state
government’s principal source of revenue, the income tax, was getting under way.
The possibility of the initiative swelling into a full-blown taxpayer revolt is
one lawmakers should not take lightly.
An initiative petition with more than 15,000 certified signatures, modeled on a
similar measure in 2002, would end the state income tax. The signatures,
certified by local city and town officials, were filed with the secretary of
state on Wednesday by Carla Howell, erstwhile Libertarian Party candidate for
governor....
In 2002, an abolish-the-income-tax ballot initiative came within 5 percentage
points of passing....
As in 2002, Massachusetts voters may conclude that speculative reductions in
their tax obligations are not worth the fiscal chaos in state and local
government that would ensue. But taxpayers need concrete evidence that their
representatives at the Statehouse are serious about cutting duplication and
bureaucracy, developing efficient ways to deliver services, ending unsustainable
personnel and pension policies and rooting out waste. In the end, the most
valuable ally of the anti-income-tax group could be the politics-as-usual crowd
on Beacon Hill.
A Telegram & Gazette editorial
Sunday, July 6, 2008
A cutting mood
Income-tax abolition move should be taken seriously
The Legislature finally approved a new state budget Thursday
— three days late and possibly billions of dollars short....
"We are again on the wrong track," Senate Minority Leader Richard Tisei,
R-Wakefield, said of the budget, which represents a 5.2 percent increase over
the budget approved last July....
While Democrats insist the budget is an austere one, the fact is that
legislators were much more willing to increase spending on certain items than
they were to make meaningful reductions. In one of the more irresponsible
actions, House and Senate conferees added a provision granting some 250,000
retirees a cost-of-living increase in their pensions, which means more pain for
cities and towns and requires that the state push back by an additional three
years the date by which it fully funds its obligation to pensioners.
Legislators did, on the other hand, manage to increase the tax on cigarettes by
$1 a pack, and increase the tax burden on businesses by $482 million under the
guise of closing "loopholes" in the state's tax code....
But clearly the priority for both the governor and legislative leadership was to
maximize revenues and refrain to the greatest extent possible from making any
cuts that would anger the unions and other special interests....
But their lack of aggressiveness on the cost side gives plenty of ammunition to
their critics. As Chip Ford of Citizens for Limited Taxation told
his members of the ballot initiative that is now a virtual lock for the ballot
this fall: "That income tax repeal in November is looking better by the day."
A Salem News editorial
Monday, July 7, 2008
Legislature finds it easier to add than subtract
Weymouth school officials spent more than a year hammering
out a contract with local teachers — and now they want to ask taxpayers for help
paying for it....
The questions would raise the average annual residential property tax between
$81 and $199.
Associated Press
Sunday, July 6, 2008
Weymouth seeks override to fund teacher contract
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
Ed Moscovitch [READ
MORE] is joined at the hip with Michael Widmer,
president of the so-called
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. For decades he has
provided cover and support with his alleged "studies" for MTF, which
then runs interference for the tax-borrow-and-spend crowd, always
digging the state deeper into debt.
Moscovitch got a dishonorable mention in the CLT news
release of Jan. 22, 2002 ("So-called
Mass. Taxpayers Foundation: How accurate is it ... this time?")
for his either deceptive or grossly inaccurate testimony in 1989 (State
House News Service, May 11, 1989), which helped totally throw out of
whack the state's revenue projection. That of course led to the
infamous "temporary" income tax increase later in the year which we're
still paying.
In her Salem News column of Oct. 4, 2006 ("Still
waiting for her property taxes to go down"), Barbara wrote:
MTF and Ed Moscovitch are long-time opponents of
Proposition 2½; I have debated them both in defense of it. So join
me in not buying their concern about property taxpayers.
Speaking of Michael Widmer, the Boston Globe reported
his comments on the budget just adopted:
"It's a very risky budget," said Michael J.
Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a
business-funded budget watchdog group. "This is certainly the time
when we should be limiting state spending to the absolute most
essential items. It's one thing to add projects during a boom time.
It's quite another when we're in fiscal peril."
Wouldn't you think he'd tire of the same soft-shoe
shuffle after all these years? This toady ceaselessly wrings his
hands over the Legislature's wasteful spending, yet since becoming
president of MTF he has opposed every tax cut proposal that would
benefit average taxpayers, just as his predecessor opposed Proposition 2½.
He doesn't appear to grasp the connection between the
amount of revenue the Legislature has available and how much legislators
will spend. I can't believe Widmer is actually that naive after so
long on Beacon Hill -- so there has to be another reason for his
shilling for the tax-borrow-and-spend crowd. You don't suppose the
fact that MTF represents some of the biggest banks in the state might
have something to do with his apparently clueless comments leading to
increased state debt and borrowing . . . from who?
The real watchdogs are still watching the MTF Trojan
Horse. To paraphrase Barbara in her column -- join me in not
buying the Mike and Ed Bobbsey Twins' weak excuses for the
Massachusetts Diaspora either.
CLT has spent well over a decade exposing MTF for
what it is -- focused like a laser to correct its false public image as
"the highly-respected nonpartisan fiscal watchdog," as most in the media
had usually labeled it. Finally, most reporters now point to it as
"business-funded" or "business-backed." A small victory but one
nonetheless.
Another small victory appeared Sunday, reported by
the Associated Press in its headline: "Weymouth seeks override to
fund teacher contract." Most Proposition 2½
overrides are due to spiraling public employee contract costs --
especially union teachers -- just as the preponderance of override
revenue is needed just to maintain municipal school systems, to wit:
Teacher salaries and benefits -- and more teachers thus more union
members. CLT has been
hammering that
home for years as well -- and after a decade this reality too is
beginning to sink in and stick.
The final FY 2009 budget signed
by the governor increases spending by 5.2 percent -- and gave away an
additional cost of living adjustment of $120 year to public employee
retirees and teachers atop what they already get. "It's $10
a damn month; that's all it is," Ralph White, president of the Retired
State, County and Municipal Employees Association of Massachusetts
(the once-publicly employed retirees union) said. "The $2
billion [estimate by the Mass. Municipal Association] is a bogus number,
it will cost at most $1 billion. It's a very small increase."
The Pioneer Institute estimates it will cost taxpayers an
additional $8 billion between now and 2026.
The Napa Valley (CA) Register reported on June 29 ("Grand
jury report critical of city, county post-employee benefits packages"):
The city and county of Napa could risk bankruptcy
if they do not reduce their generous pensions and post-employment
benefits, according to a report by the Napa County Grand Jury....
"Surveys disclose that on average, the
governmental agencies pay more in wages and salaries than the
private sector but have not correspondingly reduced their pensions
and other benefits," the grand jury wrote.
It's time to convene a grand jury here in
Taxachusetts as well, to look after the taxpayers' interests and protect
them from criminal enterprises like this ceaseless collusion.
My birthday falls on November 4th. It's usually
been observed, since 1985 when I first became politically active, with
either working flat out running petition drives or campaigning for their
success on the ballot. That first ballot question election of my
life -- repeal of the state's first mandatory seat belt law -- fell on
my birthday. Against all odds and being overwhelmingly outspent by
the seat belt law zealots -- still we won the campaign. Let's
hope, with my birthday falling on the upcoming election day, that again
voters celebrate by this time repealing the income tax!
It's the only way we taxpayers can save legislators
from themselves and the consequences of their spendaholic habits.
It's the only way remaining that we can protect ourselves from them.
 |
|
Chip Ford |
The Boston Herald
Monday, June 30, 2008
Modest tax bite isn’t causing Mass. exodus
By Edward Moscovitch
The Boston Foundation’s recent study of Massachusetts population trends
unintentionally revived the myth that people here dislike our state and
its politics.
Both the Herald and the Globe ran columns based on the study’s finding
that Massachusetts has a large population loss - and citing that loss as
proof that Massachusetts residents generally share the writers’ dislike
of the state’s politics.
Yes, it’s true, Massachusetts has a net population loss - more people
are moving away than are moving in. But it’s important to look at the
gross migration flows in and out.
As part of an upcoming study for the Massachusetts Housing Partnership,
I’ve done just that, concentrating on working age adults with college
degrees. The 2000 census found just under 900,000 Massachusetts-born
college-educated adults between the ages of 30 and 55. Of these, just
over half - 53 percent - were still living here.
Superficially, then, the data appears to back up the critics’ case.
Almost half of the college-educated people born here move away. But,
across the country as a whole, only 43 percent of college-educated
adults are still living in their birth state.
Massachusetts actually is more successful than most states at holding
onto native-born college grads; apparently our people like
Massachusetts! Indeed, we rank ninth in the country (behind only Texas,
California, North Carolina, Georgia, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Washington
and Michigan).
Half the educated adults across the country live in their birth state.
Where the other half chooses to live has a lot to do with successful
economic growth. Cities that enjoy rapid economic growth in turn have
been successful in attracting large numbers of mobile college graduates.
For example, 53 percent of all college-educated adults living in greater
Boston were born out of state. The corresponding percentages for Atlanta
and Seattle were 77 percent and 71 percent. In order to get enough
educated workers to build a dynamic, high-tech economy, these cities had
to attract large numbers of college graduates born elsewhere, while
Greater Boston’s growth is held back by our inability to attract such
workers in large numbers.
Massachusetts’ taxes are not the problem. The restrictions of
Proposition 2½, followed by 16 years of tax cuts under Govs. Weld,
Cellucci, Swift and Romney, have brought our tax burden below the
national average.
Measured in per capita terms, total taxes in Greater Seattle are about
the same as in Greater Boston. But incomes here are higher; measured as
a percent of personal income - that is, measured in relation to ability
to pay - taxes amount to 11.4 percent in Seattle and 10.2 percent in
Boston.
Indeed, the fact that Greater Boston has about the lowest tax burden of
any large city in the country - and also the slowest employment growth -
calls into question the mythology that lower taxes mean higher growth.
High home prices are, of course, a key part of the problem - people
can’t afford to move here. However, home prices are also high in some of
the rapidly growing cities out west. A lot has to do with housing
choices and availability.
Consider my son’s new home. He lives in Seattle, which is building a lot
of new townhouses and apartments in neighborhoods close to downtown. His
new townhouse - 1,400 square feet plus a garage - in West Seattle is
only a 15-minute bus ride from downtown, is near Puget Sound and is
within easy walking distance of some very nice restaurants, bakeries and
shops.
To get a new townhouse in Greater Boston for the same $400,000 he paid,
you’d have to live 20 or 25 miles away from downtown, with no easy
access to the urban lifestyle appealing to young professionals.
So, let’s drop the ideologically driven myths about Massachusetts and
turn our attention to solving the very real problems that keep us from
attracting the educated workers we need to grow a world-class economy.
The Boston Herald
Monday, July 7, 2008
Letter to the Editor
Taxed out of Mass.
Edward Moscovitch assures us that “Modest tax bite isn’t causing Mass.
exodus” (June 30) because our tax burden relative to personal income is
lower than the national average. This may keep higher-income residents
here, but the middle class could be more interested in the fact that our
per capita tax burden is the nation’s fourth highest.
Moscovitch uses Seattle for a comparison on how many of its
college-educated adults were born out of state: 77 percent for Seattle,
53 percent for Boston, and blames this differential on the high cost of
housing here. I would note that Washington’s per capita tax burden is
12th, and, it has no income tax! Maybe our middle class is going to
Seattle, using its income tax savings to buy homes. Maybe we’ll do
better if we repeal our income tax in November.
Barbara Anderson
Citizens for Limited Taxation
Marblehead
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Cigarette tax is nothing but smoke and mirrors
By Howie Carr
The $1-per-pack increase in the state cigarette tax is retroactive.
Odd, isn’t it, how a tax cut is never retroactive, only an increase is.
But then, we don’t have tax cuts around here anymore, do we? This is how
it works now in the bluest state: The Legislature needed an extra day to
decide which corporate loopholes to close, mainly because so many
lobbyists were buzzing around, shouting, “Another round over here!”
But there was one thing that all the solons could agree on:
Smokers must pay more. After all, smokers don’t have any amen chorus at
the State House.
And by the way, you know that extra buck per pack all you smokers are
going to have to pay? It’s really $1.05, because on top of the state
excise tax on cigarettes, you’re going to have to add the 5 percent
state sales tax.
A sales tax on an excise tax - how Massachusetts is that?
The tax increase applies to, as Sen. Cynthia Creem of (where else?)
Newton put it, “the existing stock of cigarettes in inventory at the
time (the increase) takes place.”
Wait a second. Isn’t this the same Legislature that held a meaningless
hearing a couple of weeks ago to determine whether Big Oil was doing
exactly the same thing with its stock of gasoline when the price of
crude oil on the futures market goes up?
When Big Oil does it - if they do it - they call it price-gouging or
windfall profits. When Big Government does the same thing - and there’s
absolutely no question they are, because they admit it - they
rationalize by saying it’s for the children.
The story they’re all sticking to is that this cigarette tax increase
will go to pay for the state’s new health program. You know, the one
that was supposed to be so wonderful because everyone would at last have
to pay for their own health care (wink wink, nudge nudge). So now it
turns out the hacks need the extra smokers’ dough - $680,000 a day -
because the usual layabouts have no intention of paying for their own
health care, or anything else for that matter.
But you can feel good because that extra buck a pack is earmarked for
Commonwealth Care. That means the hacks can’t use it for anything else,
and if you believe that one, I’ll tell you the one about the Social
Security trust fund. And did you hear the one about how the tolls on the
Mass Pike are sunsetted, and the all the booths will be torn down once
the bonds are paid off in 1985?
Coming soon to a wallet near you: an increase in the sales tax, to pay
for education. And a hike in the gas tax, to pay for roads and bridges.
So now the tax-crazed hyenas are stealing another $174 million. Think of
all the in-state tuition for illegal aliens that’ll buy. Or even more
six-figure pensions for state hacks. Or new $200 million high schools in
the tony suburbs. Or Deval’s next junket to China. Or another billion in
handouts for biotech bandidos.
The other problem is that it’s going to hurt businesses along the New
Hampshire border. This raises Massachusetts cigarette taxes from 17th in
the nation to fifth. Altogether now: Yes, we can! New Hampshire raised
its cigarette taxes a quarter per pack yesterday, and they still look
like good guys.
The more we raise taxes on anything, the more money New Hampshire makes.
Once again, Massachusetts shoppers will vote with their feet.
“It’s like Prohibition,” Rep. Bob Hargreaves said Monday. “They’re going
to go over the border. It’s not going to stop cancer.
“Now that I’ve said my piece, thank you. No one is going to listen.”
Well, at least a few did. The 19 dispirited Republicans in the House
were joined by 33 Democrats. The vote was 93-52. If there was still a
Republican in the Corner Office, they could have sustained a veto and
stopped this in its tracks.
But guess what? The good news this week is that Carla Howell et al. have
about 18,000 signatures and should be able to put the income-tax repeal
on the November ballot even if the teachers unions try to challenge
their petitions.
Any smoker who votes not to abolish the state income tax in November
would have to be a masochist. Is it too late to make the income-tax
abolition retroactive?
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Smokers: What in tar-nation?
‘Convoluted’ tax hike stokes rage
By Dave Wedge and Katy Jordan
A legislative snafu threw the state’s cigarette tax hike into chaos
yesterday, leaving some smokers fuming that they had to pay the extra
buck a pack even before the plan was signed into law.
Revenue-desperate lawmakers planned for the tax bump to go into effect
at midnight Monday, but Gov. Deval Patrick didn’t sign it until late
yesterday afternoon. Some stores quickly started charging the extra fee
anyway, leaving smokers, store owners and lawmakers scratching their
heads.
“This is so convulated,” said Sen. Bob Hedlund (R-Weymouth), who opposed
the tax increase. “This is not a way to run any entity. In our haste and
lust for revenues, this is the way the process breaks down.”
Louis Alves, a 70-year-old Hyde Park smoker, angrily refused to buy
smokes at a Tedeschi’s store on Truman Highway, which was charging the
new fee. The hike pushed the price of cigarettes to nearly $7 a pack in
some spots.
“I know about the new tax, but it doesn’t go into effect until the bill
is signed, and he’s been charging the extra dollar since 5 a.m.,” Alves
grumbled. “I walked out and went to the next store where the price
hadn’t changed.”
Tedeschi’s president Charlie Fitzgibbons said the Rockland-based company
made a corporate decision to begin charging the higher tax at midnight
based on advice from lawyers and information from the state.
“We were told that it was effective this morning,” Fitzgibbons said. “We
were told that it doesn’t matter if (Patrick) signs it next week; the
law is July 1. We did what we were told.”
Patrick administration officials said stores that charged the extra
dollar yesterday will have to turn it over to the Department of Revenue,
but stores that did not charge the new fee will not be penalized.
The increase was originally included in the budget, but when talks
stalled on Beacon Hill this week, the Legislature passed the hike as a
separate item to pump some much-needed cash into state coffers. The new
law, which raises the cigarette tax to $2.51 per pack, is expected to
raise as much as $700,000 a day in new revenue for the state. Pols say
they need the cash to pay down growing health care costs.
The lofty new prices were received like a skunk at a garden party across
the Hub yesterday, with many smokers blasting lawmakers for once again
exploiting their habit.
“This is ridiculous. I mean, enough is enough,” said Cindy Grant, 47, of
South Boston, who smokes two packs a day. Grant said she buys her
cigarettes in Florida to avoid taxes.
Geraldine Dumont, 44, of South Boston called the hike “outrageous.”
But, with a pricey pack-and-a-half-a-day habit, she admitted: “Maybe
it’ll make it easier for us to quit.”
The Boston Herald
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Poor excuse for taxes
Under gov, have-nots must hand it all over
By Michael Graham
To paraphrase F. Scott Fitzgerald, the rich are different from you and
me. They can afford to live in Massachusetts.
In the past 24 hours, Gov. Deval Patrick, also known as “Friend Of The
Little Man,” has signed two pieces of legislation that will make it even
harder for low-income locals to remain in the Bay State.
One is the new energy law, which will add at least $100 million to the
cost of electricity in Massachusetts - one more bit of “good news” for
low-income families struggling with $4 a gallon gasoline and $5 heating
oil.
Not to mention the 174 blue-collar employees of the Haverhill Paperboard
Corp., who found out yesterday their factory’s shutting down due to high
energy costs here.
The other low blow to low-income residents is the cigarette tax increase
that, in an “only in Massachusetts” moment, took effect 24 hours before
it become law, so as not to miss a single cent of sin tax.
And make no mistake about it, the cigarette tax is a tax on sin: the sin
of being poor in Massachusetts.
Who’s going to pay Patrick his projected $700,000 a day in new cigarette
taxes? The people with the least money.
Only 12 percent of Americans live in poverty. But 40 percent of all
smokers are poor, according to the Centers for Disease Control. And
according to the American Heart Association, people with fewer than 12
years of schooling are three times more likely to smoke than college
graduates. And black men are more likely to smoke than their white
counterparts.
Poor people. High school dropouts. Minorities. If a mortgage company
marketed subprime loans the way Deval Patrick targets for taxes,
Attorney General Martha Coakley would bust them for predatory lending
practices.
These are also the same people who play the Lottery, and how interesting
that Patrick’s first grand initiative was to expand gambling in the
commonwealth. If you want to move money from low-income, black
neighborhoods to affluent white ones, state-sanctioned gambling is just
the ticket.
I thought Patrick promised a “different kind of politics.” What happened
to empowering the powerless and giving voice to the voiceless?
Now it’s what? “Taking cash from the cashless?”
Six months after raising tolls on the Mass Pike, the Patrick
administration is already talking about another $100 million hike. This
means nothing to Deville Deval rolling back home in that gas guzzler
from the Berkshires. But it’s real money to working moms and dads
skipping lunch to pay for a tank of gas.
The same effect is at play on the issue of illegal immigration. Wealthy
Bay Staters don’t worry about it, because they don’t care who’s mowing
their grass as long as they can save a few bucks. But as George Borjas
of Harvard (among others) has shown, illegal immigration drives down
wages for low-income legal residents. The illegals take jobs from
legitimate workers, and the jobs they don’t take still pay less.
And yet, Patrick continues to push for additional tax-funded benefits
for lawbreakers.
Imagine a GOP governor enacting Patrick policies: taxing the poor,
jacking up costs on the “Lexus Lane” roadways and flooding the labor
market with low-wage workers. That Republican would be denounced by The
Boston Globe-Democrat as heartless, cruel or - horrors - “Reaganesque!”
But Patrick milks every dime from our most desperate citizens, and
nobody bats an eye.
I am a self-confessed, small government, “pay your own way” heartless
conservative bastard. Shaking down suckers without regard for race,
creed or income is part of my fundamental political philosophy.
Gov. Patrick, what’s your excuse?
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Voters closer to weighing in on income tax
By Hillary Chabot
A measure to repeal the state income tax vaulted another hurdle
yesterday after the state verified enough signatures to place it on the
ballot.
“In the face of $4.50-a-gallon gasoline, skyrocketing heating oil costs,
exploding home foreclosures and 28 straight years of property tax
increases on Massachusetts homes, ending the income tax will give
desperately needed financial relief to Massachusetts families,” said
Carla Howell, chairwoman of the Committee for Small Government.
The group gathered more than 15,000 signatures so voters could weigh in
on the question on Nov. 4.
Secretary of State William Galvin’s office certified more than 12,000
signatures yesterday, topping the 11,099 needed to get on the ballot.
Howell said the group will turn in more signatures tomorrow. According
to Howell, the measure would save the average taxpayer $3,600 a year.
Voters nearly passed a similar measure six years ago, and they succeeded
in passing a ballot question in 2000 to gradually roll back the income
tax. The measure up for vote is meant to prevent lawmakers from stopping
the repeal like they halted the rollback in 2002.
The Boston Globe
Friday, July 4, 2008
Lawmakers feeding pet projects
Bacon comes home to every corner of the Commonwealth
By Matt Viser
One item calls for $200,000 to be disbursed to the Boston Symphony
Orchestra so the renowned group can renovate and repair Tanglewood.
There is $25,000 in state taxpayer money to pay for the town of Halifax
to have its 275th anniversary next July Fourth. There's enough to cover
a merry-go-round in Holyoke, a ballfield in Fitchburg, and new seats at
a theater in Medford.
In the $28.2 billion budget approved yesterday by the House and Senate,
there are scores of earmarks to fund pet projects in legislators'
districts in nearly every corner of Massachusetts.
"This budget is a good document," Representative Robert DeLeo, a
Winthrop Democrat and chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means,
said yesterday during debate on the House floor. "I think it's a good
document for each and every member of this House."
Many of the requests submitted by lawmakers to bring projects home to
their districts were taken care of, giving legislators fuel for
reelection campaigns this November.
"You're there to deliver for your district," said Representative James
R. Miceli, a Wilmington Democrat who secured several earmarks, including
$200,000 for the Wilmington Historical Commission to rehabilitate an
historic farm. "Show me a legislator who can't, and I'll show you
someone who will not be there very long."
The earmarks are spread throughout the 266-page budget, making it
difficult to determine the total amount. But it is a small number in the
context of a $28.2 billion spending plan that relies heavily on higher
taxes and spending from reserve funds to increase spending on local aid,
education, and healthcare.
Republicans immediately pounced on the spending items during a time of
rising healthcare costs and an uncertain financial future.
"Beacon Hill Democrats are addicted to spending, period," said Rob
Willington, executive director of the Massachusetts Republican Party. ".
. . This budget, which is coming three days late already, contains
enough pork in it to make BLTs for the whole Commonwealth."
Meanwhile, Governor Deval Patrick signed into law a major corporate tax
reform package yesterday that will prevent corporations from declaring
some of their profits in states with more favorable tax rates.
Since taking office, Patrick has been seeking the changes, which will
raise $285 million in new state revenue next year, but his proposals had
been rebuffed by House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi. "I want to thank my
partners in the Legislature for their work in passing this important
legislation," Patrick said yesterday.
The budget relies on a $1-per-pack increase in the state's cigarette
tax, which will bring in $174 million, and uses more than $500 million
in reserve funds.
The budget also includes a provision to lease Ponkapoag Golf Course in
Canton, a storied state-owned course that has fallen into disrepair
while under management of the Department of Conservation and Recreation.
Under the plan, the state would lease the course to an outside manager.
Town officials in Canton will first be given at least 180 days to decide
whether they want to take the course over.
It is still uncertain whether additional adjustments to the budget will
be needed. The state has been negotiating with federal officials over
extending a Medicaid waiver that helps subsidize coverage for low-income
residents. The waiver was set to expire June 30, but federal officials
have allowed for a two- to four-week extension for more negotiations.
The state budget assumes those will come out in the state's favor; if
they do not, it could create a budget gap of hundreds of millions of
dollars.
Budget analysts warn that state spending may be too high, given
uncertainties with the Medicaid waiver and the capital gains tax, which
may drop in an economic downturn.
"It's a very risky budget," said Michael J. Widmer, president of the
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a business-funded budget watchdog
group. "This is certainly the time when we should be limiting state
spending to the absolute most essential items. It's one thing to add
projects during a boom time. It's quite another when we're in fiscal
peril."
The budget was approved three days after the start of the fiscal year on
July 1, which required Patrick to approve a $1 billion temporary budget
last week that allowed the state to continue paying its bills for two
weeks into July. The governor now has 10 days to review the budget
before offering any vetoes, which will probably include some of the
earmarks stuck in by the Legislature.
Other set-asides approved yesterday included $50,000 for the Jacob's
Pillow Dance Festival in Beckett. The Berkshire Museum in Pittsfield,
the Merrimack Repertory Theatre in Lowell, and the Bing Theatre in
Springfield are all beneficiaries. The Basketball Hall of Fame in
Springfield, which charges $16.99 for admission, is getting $300,000 of
taxpayer money, which a legislative aide said would go toward securing a
Division II college basketball tournament.
Legislators argue that the earmarks are necessary to pump money into the
local and regional economies and that controlling the flow of taxpayer
money is one of the most crucial duties of their office.
Patrick has made an effort to eliminate the legislative earmarks from
state spending, arguing that they amount to micromanagement of local
spending.
Republican governors had long sought to eliminate legislative earmarks
through vetoes, but the Democratic-run Legislature often overrode the
governors' decisions.
The Boston Herald
Friday, July 4, 2008
GOP slams ‘DeLeo’ budget
By Hillary Chabot
Outraged Republican lawmakers yesterday blasted the newly passed $28.2
billion state budget, saying it’s stuffed with “DeLeo Dollars” -
political handouts from a top House lawmaker maneuvering to succeed
embattled House Speaker Sal DiMasi.
The GOP blamed the power struggle between House Ways and Means chairman
Robert DeLeo and Majority Leader John Rogers, saying DeLeo’s powerful
committee steered through tens of millions of dollars for local projects
for supporters.
“At a time when the public is being told we have no money and we’re in
dire straits, there’s $100 million in new earmarks on the House side
alone,” said Minority Leader Sen. Richard Tisei (R-Wakefield).
Pet projects funded with so-called “DeLeo Dollars” included $100,000 for
a field complex in Milford for Rep. James O’Day (D-West Boylston) and
$200,000 for symphony hall in Springfield for Rep. Thomas Petrolati
(D-Ludlow), to name two.
DeLeo brushed off accusations he stuffed the budget with pork for his
allies.
“That’s ridiculous. I don’t think anyone feels there was one rep favored
over another in terms of requests,” DeLeo said.
But one Democrat suggested otherwise.
“They’re some people who benefited far more than others, but that’s the
nature of the beast,” said Rep. Paul Kujawski (D-Webster).
DeLeo also denied charges he had retaliated against a Rogers supporter
by failing to fund one of her local projects.
Rep. Jennifer Callahan (D-Sutton) confronted a DeLeo aide on the House
floor yesterday about missing funding meant to clean up the grounds of
an elderly housing project in Bellingham. But DeLeo said Callahan failed
to include the money in the original House budget.
Callahan, a Rogers backer, became embroiled in a high-profile
controversy after alleging in May she was threatened by another
lawmaker, who said he could, “really hurt” her.
Callahan never named the lawmaker involved, but sources said the
accusation came after a conversation with Rep. James Vallee, a DeLeo
supporter.
The budget uses $459 million in new taxes from a recently passed
$1-a-pack cigarette tax hike and closing corporate tax loopholes. It
also depends on federal funding for Medicaid that is something pols say
is far from secure.
State House News Service
Thursday, July 3, 2008
New taxes, reserve funds fuel 5.2 percent state spending hike
By Michael Norton and Jim O'Sullivan
The House voted 133-19 at 12:29 pm and the Senate 29-5 eight minutes
later to approve a $28.22 billion state budget that assumes federal
approval of $600 million in state health care requests, spends hundreds
of millions of dollars from planned tax increases and the state's rainy
day stabilization fund, and boosts scores of budget accounts that
lawmakers described as critical priorities.
As the Legislature was putting finishing touches on the spending bill,
Gov. Deval Patrick announced, with a holiday-eve press release, that he
had signed a corporate tax bill that authors say will pull in $482
million in new tax revenues next year, while committing the state to
corporate rate relief that could benefit as many as 20,000 companies.
Patrick said the law closed "unintended" tax code gaps exploited by
mostly large, out-of-state firms.
The spending plan arrived three days into fiscal 2009 and Patrick will
have 10 days to review and sign it, while sending back any of his vetoes
or amendments. Lawmakers fled Beacon Hill after the early afternoon
votes
The bottom line represents a 5.2 percent increase over the $26.8 billion
budget approved last July for fiscal 2008. It comes amidst a tide of
dire news about the future of the state, national and global economies
and represents the latest in a long string of state budgets balanced
only with considerable one-time revenue fixes.
House Republicans called the spending increase "unsustainable" and
speculated further tax increases may be pushed in the coming year to
support spending and that spending levels might spur voters to abolish
the income tax at the ballot in November. They urged Patrick to strongly
consider line item vetoes to curb spending plans
Budget writers described the major investment areas as local aid,
education, public safety and health care and said the state must make
investments in its people and programs despite the soft economic
climate. "What some of us may characterize as expenses," said Rep. Marie
St. Fleur (D-Dorchester), "many of the people of the Commonwealth have
told us that they are worthy investments."
House budget chief Robert DeLeo announced that the budget was based on a
tax revenue forecast that has already been exceeded by this fiscal
year's tax collections, a development that reflects the conservative
nature of revenue estimating in state government, but one buffered by a
consistent flow of mid-year spending bills.
The budget proposal was released late Wednesday night and depends on
hundreds of millions of dollars from cigarette tax increases that
Patrick signed into law Tuesday and the corporate tax increases he
agreed to on Thursday. It also spends $157 million in under new,
proposed "revenue collection" laws, DeLeo said.
The budget is also balanced with $508 million in rainy day-related
revenues, including a $310 million withdrawal from the state
stabilization fund, $107 million that will be spent instead of being
transferred into the fund, and $91 million in fund interest that will be
spent this fiscal year.
Republicans cautioned midyear spending cuts could result if revenues
slow, based on the spending levels prescribed in the budget. A
tremendous uncertainty in the spending column is the result of Medicaid
assistance negotiations with the federal government. If the Bush
administration and state cannot agree on a figure and Washington pulls
funding support, a "tsunami" could ensue, said Senate Ways and Means
vice chair Stephen Brewer.
Senate Assistant Minority Leader Richard Tisei called for the Upper
Chamber to reject the conference report and send negotiators back into
deliberations to reduce the bottom line. Recalling the budget disaster
of the late 1980s, when spending outpaced revenues so significantly that
then-Gov. Michael Dukakis had to make drastic midyear cuts, Tisei said,
"We are again on the wrong track."
Along with the $26.8 million in operating budget spending, the state has
added another $353 million in direct supplemental appropriations to
fiscal 2008 outlays, according to administration officials. Legislators
have already announced another fiscal 2008 spending bill will be
introduced, even though that fiscal year ended Monday.
In a statement emailed by Patrick's press office, Administration and
Finance Secretary Leslie Kirwan said, "I commend the budget conference
committee for their hard work in finalizing the fiscal 2009 budget.
After an initial review, the budget includes many shared priorities
between Governor Patrick and the legislature, including increased
funding for public safety, education and health care."
Conferees agreed to a Senate amendment changing the name of the
Department of Mental Retardation to the Department of Developmental
Services, with sponsors calling the current name pejorative.
The final budget includes a House plan to grant about 250,000 retirees,
including teachers and other state workers, cost of living increases to
push their pensions up an average of $120 per year, according to union
estimates. The budget maintains a plan opposed by Treasurer Tim Cahill
to push off by three years the deadline to fully fund the pension
system, a prospect the Pioneer Institute has said could cost an
additional $8 billion between now and 2026. Cahill warned that the state
bond rating could be jeopardized by extending the debt repayment
schedule out further.
The budget also retains aircraft industry tax exemptions that had been
targeted for repeal. It level fund, at $12.75 million, the state's
tobacco control program, disappointing the advocacy group Tobacco Free
Mass, which said the appropriation fell "extremely short" of federal
Centers for Disease Control recommendations - $90 million.
The accord, called a conference committee report, was not subject to
amendment. With the Fourth of July holiday closing in, the branches
gaveled in early Thursday to take up the budget, a hefty document that
lawmakers had just hours to flip and click through. House Republicans
protested the push to suspend rules to take up the budget on short
notice. Once the bill surfaced, House Minority Leader Brad Jones said it
was "unfair" and "unacceptable" that the full budget conference
committee met only once and that its GOP member was largely frozen out
of the talks.
Budget authors have touted this year's spending blueprint as an example
of fiscal austerity. In a release, Brewer celebrated a $10,000 line item
for the Palmer Winter Festival, hoping that the funds can help Palmer
and Monson "secure the proper insurance in time to run the Santa Train,"
which had been a festival tradition but "came to a screeching halt last
year due to a change in ownership of the railroad and without the
necessary funds to purchase liability insurance."
Republican Party officials blasted the spending increase. In a
statement, MassGOP Executive Director Rob Willington said, "Beacon Hill
Democrats are addicted to spending, period. They spend too much and then
they tax and borrow too much, to pay for their wasteful spending. This
budget, which is coming three days late already, contains enough pork in
it to make BLTs for the whole commonwealth."
The Telegram & Gazette
Sunday, July 6, 2008
A Telegram & Gazette editorial
A cutting mood
Income-tax abolition move should be taken seriously
As the Legislature scurried to put the finishing touches on its $28
billion spending plan for fiscal 2009 last week, a move to cut off state
government’s principal source of revenue, the income tax, was getting
under way. The possibility of the initiative swelling into a full-blown
taxpayer revolt is one lawmakers should not take lightly.
An initiative petition with more than 15,000 certified signatures,
modeled on a similar measure in 2002, would end the state income tax.
The signatures, certified by local city and town officials, were filed
with the secretary of state on Wednesday by Carla Howell, erstwhile
Libertarian Party candidate for governor.
The petitioners’ assertion that a “yes” vote on the ballot question
would result in an average annual tax windfall of $3,600 per taxpayer
and create “hundreds of thousands of new jobs” in the next two years may
be pie in the sky, but some taxpayers may find it a tempting dish. In
2002, an abolish-the-income-tax ballot initiative came within 5
percentage points of passing.
If the petition were to succeed, the impact would be felt in virtually
every aspect of state and municipal finances. Because a large proportion
of state spending is for locked-in expenses — debt service, Medicaid
obligations, negotiated salaries and benefits and the like — a variety
of other revenue sources certainly would be tapped. Even Proposition 2½,
which for a generation has kept regressive property taxes in check,
would be at risk.
While some state budget trimming likely would ensue, the first items on
the chopping block would be apt to be state aid on which municipalities
and school districts depend, in some instances, for more than half of
their annual spending.
This year, the feeling of economic uncertainty — prompted by a chaotic
housing market, soaring gasoline and heating fuel costs and steadily
rising municipal tax bills and fees — is if anything more intense today
than it was six years ago. Moreover, the fast-tracked $1 increase in the
cigarette tax hustled through the Legislature last week may be seen by
some taxpayers as another harbinger of many “revenue enhancements” to
come.
As in 2002, Massachusetts voters may conclude that speculative
reductions in their tax obligations are not worth the fiscal chaos in
state and local government that would ensue. But taxpayers need concrete
evidence that their representatives at the Statehouse are serious about
cutting duplication and bureaucracy, developing efficient ways to
deliver services, ending unsustainable personnel and pension policies
and rooting out waste. In the end, the most valuable ally of the
anti-income-tax group could be the politics-as-usual crowd on Beacon
Hill.
The Salem News
Monday, July 7, 2008
A Salem News editorial
Legislature finds it easier to add than subtract
The Legislature finally approved a new state budget Thursday — three
days late and possibly billions of dollars short.
The new, $28.22 billion spending plan for the fiscal year that began
July 1 counts on $600 million in federal Medicaid assistance that is
hardly guaranteed at this point, requires the transfer of some $508
million in funds from the state's rainy day fund, and counts on
significant increases in tax revenues in a time of great economic
uncertainty.
"We are again on the wrong track," Senate Minority Leader Richard Tisei,
R-Wakefield, said of the budget, which represents a 5.2 percent increase
over the budget approved last July. Even Democrat Stephen Brewer, vice
chairman of the Senate Ways and Means Committee, acknowledged that the
Bush administration's failure to come through with the requested
Medicaid assistance could result in a fiscal "tsunami."
While Democrats insist the budget is an austere one, the fact is that
legislators were much more willing to increase spending on certain items
than they were to make meaningful reductions. In one of the more
irresponsible actions, House and Senate conferees added a provision
granting some 250,000 retirees a cost-of-living increase in their
pensions, which means more pain for cities and towns and requires that
the state push back by an additional three years the date by which it
fully funds its obligation to pensioners.
Legislators did, on the other hand, manage to increase the tax on
cigarettes by $1 a pack, and increase the tax burden on businesses by
$482 million under the guise of closing "loopholes" in the state's tax
code. (Although, to be fair, the budget does include a phased decrease
in the corporate tax rate from 9.5 percent to 8 percent due to begin in
2010; and Associated Industries of Massachusetts declared in a release
that it was not unhappy with the changes — in other words, they could
have been worse.)
But clearly the priority for both the governor and legislative
leadership was to maximize revenues and refrain to the greatest extent
possible from making any cuts that would anger the unions and other
special interests. Perhaps they're anticipating a quick economic
turnaround or a more favorable administration in the White House come
next January.
But their lack of aggressiveness on the cost side gives plenty of
ammunition to their critics. As Chip Ford of Citizens for
Limited Taxation told his members of the ballot initiative that is
now a virtual lock for the ballot this fall: "That income tax repeal in
November is looking better by the day."
Associated Press
Sunday, July 6, 2008
Weymouth seeks override to fund teacher contract
Weymouth school officials spent more than a year hammering out a
contract with local teachers — and now they want to ask taxpayers for
help paying for it.
The school committee is asking the Weymouth Town Council to put the
question to voters.
There are actually three questions.
The first option would raise property taxes by $4.6 million to restore
the school budget to the original request made by the committee, while
the second option would raise nearly $3 million to restore budget cuts
made by both the school panel and Mayor Sue Kay.
A third option would raise $1.8 million to cover just the cuts made by
Kay.
The questions would raise the average annual residential property tax
between $81 and $199.
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
|
