CLT UPDATE
Monday, February 2, 2009
Not one cent more for taxes!
Governor Deval Patrick announced a
series of far-reaching proposals yesterday to address the worst economic
crisis to hit the state in decades, calling for a range of new taxes on
such items as alcohol and soft drinks and higher fees at the Registry of
Motor Vehicles, combined with deep cuts in local aid, education, and
healthcare that will probably trigger layoffs across the state.
In producing his emergency measures to balance this year's budget and in
his budget proposal for the next fiscal year, the governor wants to
generate $587 million in new taxes, fees, and other revenue and has
proposed draining a total of $913 million from the state's rapidly
shrinking rainy day fund....
The governor also wants to allow local communities to raise meals and
hotel taxes by an additional percentage point and eliminate a tax
exemption for telecommunications companies, which combined could
generate $200 million.
"This is an opening salvo," said Christopher Anderson, president of the
Massachusetts High Technology Council. "I've been around for 25 years,
and every time there's a downturn, we make permanent tax changes to
solve temporary budget problems."
The Boston Globe
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Patrick proposes broad cuts, taxes
A deepening recession is threatening Massachusetts families,
putting their jobs at risk, eroding the value of their homes, eating away at
their retirement savings and putting their futures in doubt.
Yet to Gov. Deval Patrick and those who advise him, the best response to this
crisis is to whack those struggling families with a host of new taxes — taxes
that will surely make their lives more difficult, not better.
That's because to Patrick — and those in the Legislature who support him — the
struggles of families are irrelevant. What matters is the ability of state
government to continue to spend like there's no tomorrow....
All told, the new taxes and fees will raise $587 million. That's $587 million
the residents of Massachusetts won't be able to spend on food, clothing,
mortgages or rent, gas, heat, bills, college tuition and all the other
necessities they are struggling to provide.
How exactly is this helping us out of a crisis, governor? ...
Eventually, the economy will recover and state finances will stabilize. But the
expanded taxes and fees Patrick proposed this week will never go away. They will
become the new baseline upon which even more taxes and fees will be added the
next time the economy tanks.
An Eagle Tribune editorial
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Tax and spend and tax again
Taxing and taking are the bywords of Gov. Deval Patrick’s
plans to patch the state’s revenue shortfall with new fees and surcharges as
services to communities are slashed.
This fiscal year alone, Patrick seeks to close a $1.1 billion shortfall with $68
million in new taxes or fees - including a portion raised through taxes on
sweets and booze and Registry motor vehicle charges.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, January 29, 2009
$68M in taxes, fees and $191M in cuts on agenda
Craving new revenues, Gov. Deval Patrick is on a
kid-in-a-candy-store spree to tax everything from bon bons to booze - angering
businesses, amusing lawmakers and leaving consumers stuck with the bill.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Businesses sick over Deval Patrick’s tax binge
Candy, juice are targets
Anti-tax czarina Barbara Anderson spent a cheerful
afternoon yesterday watching the federal stimulus package debate on C-Span.
“Everything’s falling apart. I could see it coming. Somehow I thought it’d
happen after I was dead.” ...
But no matter how desperate things get, one constant remains here in
Massachusetts. Politicians won’t do real reforms because that would tick off
public employee unions. Instead , they cut teachers and slash services.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, January 29, 2009
State pulling oldest scam in the book
By Margery Eagan
Despite today’s expected announcement of devastating state
budget cuts and probable layoffs, Gov. Deval Patrick’s administration has told
department heads they can give some union employees 4 percent pay hikes over the
next two years, according to an internal memo obtained by the Herald....
Patrick finance spokeswoman Cyndi Roy pointed out that wages already have been
frozen for this year.
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Deval Patrick OKs 4% raises in 2010
The good news is that Deval Patrick has been declared
“America’s Best Governor” by the state’s taxpayers and small business owners.
The bad news? That state is New Hampshire....
No wonder Patrick wants tolls at the New Hampshire border. He wants to get his
$2 from us on our weekly “smokes and six-packs” run.
It’s all part of what Patrick ominously calls his “Emergency Recovery Plan.”
What he hopes to “recover,” I cannot say. And all he’s stimulating with these
tax hikes is more northbound traffic....
Since 2003, state government has outpaced the real (private-sector) economy in
revenue, spending and work force. Now that the economy is tanking, shouldn’t it
be shedding jobs faster than the rest of us, too?
The Boston Herald
Thursday, January 29, 2009
For Granite State biz, Patrick’s bedrock
By Michael Graham
Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick is fond of saying he opposes
broad-based tax increases, but he's showing no such reluctance toward smaller,
more targeted ones.
And add up enough of them, it can be quite a tab - or at least more than the
growth of most paychecks these days....
Asked this week if the state was beginning to nickle-and-dime people to death,
Patrick had a stern retort.
"If we don't, at the same time, deal with some of these other strategies around
revenue," he said, "then the impact on services will be even greater."
Patrick also said voters knew what kind of financial philosophy they were
getting when they hired him to be governor.
"This is about keeping a commitment to a vision of state government which is
about all of us, involves all of us and all of us contributing to it," he
said....
Anti-tax crusader Barbara Anderson was atypically restrained when asked
about the governor's budget plans.
She praised plans for increasing the number of charter schools in the state and
for reserving a share of the state's capital gains tax collections to replenish
the rainy day fund.
She also said she wasn't torn up about the alcohol, candy and drink tax and fee
hikes, because they can be avoided through personal restraint or behavior
modification.
One such modification is heading to tax-free New Hampshire to shop, she said.
That will be especially dangerous to businesses in Massachusetts border
communities.
"There's something satisfying about the taxes you can avoid, because you can
have fun doing it and feel like you're winning the battle," she said. "But that
hurts businesses along the way, and when will they realize that?"
Associated Press
Friday, January 30, 2009
Nickel here, dime there add up for Mass. residents
It’s not just about reaching into the pockets of the state’s
already hard-pressed taxpayers and taking out another $121.5 million - of course
it isn’t. It’s about helping each of us make “healthy choices.”
Isn’t that special!
There is a certain disingenuousness here - no, really. Because even as Gov.
Deval Patrick plays nanny in chief, he is also counting on us all to continue
our wicked, wicked ways. If we don’t continue buying those candy bars, that can
of Red Bull, that bottle of cabernet, the state is going to be in a $121.5
million hole in the next fiscal year (and close to half that amount for the
current year).
So for all the high-sounding motives (“Evidence-supported data has shown that
each of these products serve more as a detriment than a benefit on the health
and wellbeing of an individual”) this is quite simply a money grab with some
nanny-state window-dressing....
Yes, it would all be amusing, if it weren’t so dreadfully serious. When people
are hurting you don’t tax them more - even if it’s “good for them.”
A Boston Herald editorial
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Let them eat tofu
Despite the cuts being proposed by the governor in the plan
unveiled this week, there's too much emphasis on what the politicians like to
call "revenue enhancement," which we know as taxes, and too little on reform.
And that's because neither Patrick nor his fellow Democrats who control things
in the House and Senate are willing to take on the beast represented by the
widening gap between the expectations of those working in the public sector and
the reality for those whose wages and benefits are not funded by the taxpayers.
There are money-making schemes galore in the Patrick plan, but one has to look
hard for the kinds of reform that would make a real difference in the cost of
government.
Over the years an accumulation of liberal laws, policies and practices have
added significantly to the cost of government in the Bay State....
Such excesses were ignored when times were good. No longer, which is one of the
reasons the proposed cutbacks in local aid are not drawing the expected howls of
protest. Most people are well aware of the generous salaries and benefits
teachers, cops and firefighters have negotiated for themselves, and want those
addressed as well.
A Salem News editorial
Friday, January 30, 2009
More taxes won't fix broken system
So Gov. Deval Patrick wants to tax booze, soda, meals, gas,
hotels and candy, hike registry fees and even slap a tariff on oxygen.
OK, that last one isn’t true.
But the governor is proposing a slew of quick-fix revenue enhancers that, as
usual, will smack the working class at a time when the term “disposable income”
is becoming an anachronism. This in mind, here are a few money-saving ideas
Patrick should consider before taxing us back to England ...
Of course, none of this will be addressed. Why would it be, when the ins can
slap a tax on clothing or bump the cigarette tax again to keep those raises
coming?
The Boston Herald
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Junk food for thought for Governor Deval Patrick
By Dave Wedge / Pols & Politics
The only way to balance the budget and stabilize the state is
through a combination of new revenues, budget cuts, and reliance on the state's
rainy day funds. The Patrick administration wisely recommends raising $587
million in new taxes and fees in ways that minimize the pain for most
Massachusetts residents....
By embracing these modest and necessary tax hikes, state lawmakers can match the
courage of the administration.
A Boston Globe editorial
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Patrick's bad-news budget
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
Here we go again, taxpayers
-- another cyclical economic downturn, another round of permanent tax
hikes. It's obvious by now that Bacon Hill pols will never learn
that downturns are inevitable and plan for them, instead of spending
every cent during the good times, even borrowing more than the surpluses
to spend on expanding government (recall Gov. Patrick's $1B handout just
last year to the biotech industry alone) and fattening "public
servants" feeding at the trough.
While the governor has
proposed taxing us more at every turn, as usual, public employees will
be taken care of by him with a 4 percent pay raise over the next two
years -- after all, his spokeswoman noted, their salaries have been
temporarily frozen this year. Note how differently the term
"temporary" functions when applied to entitled public employees instead
of beleaguered taxpayers! Has your employer promised you a pay
raise next year? Do you still even have an employer?
Last year the governor and
Legislature increased taxes by $392 million (corporate
"loopholes" and cigarettes), but that wasn't enough. More
never is, so this year he's proposed increasing them by another $587
million. That'd be almost a billion dollars more taken out of the
economy, filling the state coffers over just two years. It's
still "not enough," never will be.
In his commentary, "Nickel
here, dime there add up for Mass. residents," Glen Johnson of the AP
noted:
And none of that gets
into a proposed hike in the state's gasoline tax that would be
necessary to stave off a proposed doubling of some Turnpike tolls
within Route 128. There is talk of more than doubling [my
italics] the current 23.5 cents-per-gallon levy.
Worse yet, as the Eagle
Tribune editorial ("Tax and spend and tax again") recognized:
Eventually, the economy
will recover and state finances will stabilize. But the expanded
taxes and fees Patrick proposed this week will never go away. They
will become the new baseline upon which even more taxes and fees
will be added the next time the economy tanks.
Chris Anderson, of the
Massachusetts High Technology Council, got it right when he told the
Boston Globe ("Patrick proposes broad cuts, taxes"):
"This is an opening
salvo. I've been around for 25 years, and every time there's a
downturn, we make permanent tax changes to solve temporary budget
problems."
Boston Herald columnist
Margery Eagan got it right too in her aptly titled "State pulling oldest
scam in the book," when she observed:
But no matter how
desperate things get, one constant remains here in Massachusetts.
Politicians won’t do real reforms because that would tick off public
employee unions. Instead , they cut teachers and slash services.
Right on cue, there go the
Boston Globe elitists again, Johnny-One-Notes: "Tax, tax, tax
more!" How predictable to see them leading the charge for
"these modest and necessary tax hikes," anointing tax-hiking
sage Deval Patrick a
profile in courage!
What more can I add? On Jon
Keller's weekly WBZ-TV4 public affairs program, yesterday
newly-installed House Speaker Robert DeLeo admitted that usually a
governor's budget is pretty well dead on arrival, but that the
Legislature would give Patrick's a fair hearing. He predicted that
much of what the governor has proposed would be included in the House's
FY 2010 budget, but what came out of the House would also reflect
differences in priorities. I don't know if that'll be good or bad
in the end, but it's a start.
We must stop this tax hike
craziness quickly in the state House of Representatives.
Call and tell your state
representative you're already paying more than enough to support the
state -- way too much. You need what little remains in your
pocket to support your family and yourself! "Not one cent more for
taxes -- we're still waiting for that 20-year old 'temporary' income tax
hike to be rolled back to the promised and historic 5 percent!"
 |
|
Chip Ford |
|
The Boston Globe
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Patrick proposes broad cuts, taxes
Plan could spur widespread layoffs
By Matt Viser
Governor Deval Patrick announced a series of far-reaching proposals
yesterday to address the worst economic crisis to hit the state in
decades, calling for a range of new taxes on such items as alcohol and
soft drinks and higher fees at the Registry of Motor Vehicles, combined
with deep cuts in local aid, education, and healthcare that will
probably trigger layoffs across the state.
In producing his emergency measures to balance this year's budget and in
his budget proposal for the next fiscal year, the governor wants to
generate $587 million in new taxes, fees, and other revenue and has
proposed draining a total of $913 million from the state's rapidly
shrinking rainy day fund.
Even with those dramatic moves, Patrick's budget is still relying on
Congress and President Obama to come to the rescue with at least $1.2
billion for Massachusetts as part of the federal government's overall
economic stimulus package.
The pain will flow down to local communities. Patrick said yesterday he
would freeze the local school aid distribution, which would withhold
$300 million that otherwise would have been sent to schools across the
state. That measure is expected to trigger teacher layoffs, school
closings, and larger class sizes.
He also proposed cutting judiciary spending and Medicaid and slicing
state subsidies to public colleges and university budgets by more than
$100 million. Libraries that serve the blind in Worcester and Watertown
would see cuts, and funding for the mentally and physically disabled
would be reduced.
"Taken together, these measures are right and necessary steps to get us
through these difficult times," Patrick said at a State House press
conference.
Patrick's belt-tightening plans are even more severe than those
developed in 2003 by Governor Mitt Romney, who sought cuts to local aid
and higher fees on everything from commercial licenses to fees at state
golf courses.
The release of his midyear plan for fiscal 2009 and his proposed budget
for fiscal 2010, which begins July 1, are the starting point for debates
that will feature aggressive lobbying by alcohol retailers, restaurant
and hotel trade groups, and unions. The budgets are already drawing fire
from some who say deeper cuts are required.
In all, the governor would extract new taxes, fees, and other payments
from Massachusetts residents and businesses of more than $500 million.
The governor also wants to allow local communities to raise meals and
hotel taxes by an additional percentage point and eliminate a tax
exemption for telecommunications companies, which combined could
generate $200 million.
"This is an opening salvo," said Christopher Anderson, president of the
Massachusetts High Technology Council. "I've been around for 25 years,
and every time there's a downturn, we make permanent tax changes to
solve temporary budget problems."
Patrick would raise $75 million, for example, by increasing charges at
the Registry of Motor Vehicles, including hikes of $25 for getting a
title for a car and $2 to renew a license. Eliminating an exemption on
the state's 5 percent sales tax on alcohol, candy, soft drinks, and
juice drinks would raise $150 million and be placed in a special health
fund. (Administration officials have defined a juice drink as one that
is less than 50 percent natural). Patrick would also expand the 5 cent
deposit charge on carbonated sodas, beer, and malt beverages to include
beverages such as water and juice drinks.
The governor said he recognized that increasing taxes and fees is
difficult, but he said the alternative is worse. "I have looked at what
the impact would be if we went deeper in terms of cutting services,"
Patrick said.
The proposal for the fiscal 2010 budget will be subject to multiple
hearings and closed-door meetings, first in the House and then in the
Senate, before it takes effect July 1. House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo and
Senate President Therese Murray, who stood together yesterday after
DeLeo was elected as the new House leader, both deflected questions from
reporters.
Several groups, angry over the plan, are already laying the groundwork
for protests and will begin lobbying legislators to make changes.
"We think it's outrageous for them to single us out when our industry is
reeling," said Peter Christie, president of the Massachusetts Restaurant
Association.
Patrick's $28 billion budget proposal for the next fiscal year is about
$200 million less than the budget lawmakers approved this year, the
first year-to-year decline since the early 1990s.
In addition to announcing his budget proposal for next fiscal year,
Patrick also put forward his plan for addressing a $1.1 billion midyear
shortfall in the current fiscal year.
His immediate, emergency budget plan would eliminate $63 million from
state government spending and cut $128 million from local aid, which
would force local officials to close public schools, curtail library
hours, and lay off teachers, police, and firefighters.
The cut to local aid will expand to $220 million in the next fiscal year
if the Legislature approves the meals and hotel taxes, according to
Patrick's plan. If those taxes are not approved, then the cut next year
will be $375 million, Patrick has said.
The Eagle Tribune
Thursday, January 29, 2009
An Eagle Tribune editorial
Tax and spend and tax again
A deepening recession is threatening Massachusetts families, putting
their jobs at risk, eroding the value of their homes, eating away at
their retirement savings and putting their futures in doubt.
Yet to Gov. Deval Patrick and those who advise him, the best response to
this crisis is to whack those struggling families with a host of new
taxes — taxes that will surely make their lives more difficult, not
better.
That's because to Patrick — and those in the Legislature who support him
— the struggles of families are irrelevant. What matters is the ability
of state government to continue to spend like there's no tomorrow.
Gov. Patrick has put forth his proposed budget for fiscal year 2010,
which begins in July. The budget calls for the state to spend about $28
billion. This is actually a rare thing in Massachusetts — the proposed
budget for next year is about $200 million less than the current year's
spending.
But before you start applauding the governor's fiscal conservatism,
consider that a reduction of $200 million in a $28 billion-plus budget
is a cut of only seven-tenths of 1 percent. That's hardly a sacrifice at
all.
Yet the taxpayers of Massachusetts will be asked to sacrifice — plenty.
Although the budget is declining, state revenues are falling faster. So
to support his spending plan, Patrick has proposed a host of tax hikes.
Among these are increases in the meals tax, the hotel tax and fees paid
at the Registry of Motor Vehicles. Patrick would institute new taxes on
sales of alcohol, soda and candy. There will even be an expansion of
bottle deposits to include water and noncarbonated beverages.
All told, the new taxes and fees will raise $587 million. That's $587
million the residents of Massachusetts won't be able to spend on food,
clothing, mortgages or rent, gas, heat, bills, college tuition and all
the other necessities they are struggling to provide.
How exactly is this helping us out of a crisis, governor?
Note that the hikes include some taxes and fees that were once meant to
support specific societal goals. Unclaimed bottle deposits were
initially intended to support anti-litter and recycling efforts. Now,
they are merely general revenue enhancements.
Eventually, the economy will recover and state finances will stabilize.
But the expanded taxes and fees Patrick proposed this week will never go
away. They will become the new baseline upon which even more taxes and
fees will be added the next time the economy tanks.
Massachusetts families have pared back their own spending to the bone in
their struggle to survive this economic downturn. For our governor to
propose a state budget with a paltry 0.7 percent reduction in spending
while slapping an additional $587 million in taxes on the public to
support it is an insult.
Patrick's campaign promised reform under the banner "Together We Can."
It's plain to see now there is no substance behind those words. There is
no "together" or "reform" here. There is only the same open checkbook
Massachusetts government has always enjoyed, while the bill is handed
off to the state's unfortunate taxpayers.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, January 29, 2009
$68M in taxes, fees and $191M in cuts on agenda
By Hillary Chabot
Taxing and taking are the bywords of Gov. Deval Patrick’s plans to patch
the state’s revenue shortfall with new fees and surcharges as services
to communities are slashed.
This fiscal year alone, Patrick seeks to close a $1.1 billion shortfall
with $68 million in new taxes or fees - including a portion raised
through taxes on sweets and booze and Registry motor vehicle charges.
At the same time, he is calling for $191 million in budget cuts
including $128 million from local aid to cities and towns, $327 million
out of the state’s reserve account and $533 million from expected
federal stimulus money.
“Taken together, these measures are right and necessary steps to get us
all through these difficult times,” Patrick said yesterday.
He also filed a $27.97 billion budget for 2010, about $200 million below
last year’s budget. That budget will cut $375 million in local aid and
will trigger school cuts despite Patrick’s vow to protect education.
Patrick’s 2010 budget fixes also include another $711 million from the
federal stimulus package and $586 million from the rainy day account.
Tucked into the $1.6 billion in savings is a plan to release terminally
ill prison inmates, which will save the state nearly $1 million.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Businesses sick over Deval Patrick’s tax binge
Candy, juice are targets
By Hillary Chabot
Craving new revenues, Gov. Deval Patrick is on a kid-in-a-candy-store
spree to tax everything from bon bons to booze - angering businesses,
amusing lawmakers and leaving consumers stuck with the bill.
The governor wants to rake in $121.5 million by eliminating a 5 percent
sales tax exemption on all candy, soda, sweetened beverages, liquor, and
even fruit cocktails with less than 50 percent fruit juice.
“That’s ridiculous. So if I buy a juice I have to pay taxes, but if I
buy a cookie I don’t?” asked an outraged Tom First, co-creator of
Nantucket Nectars juices.
The governor’s tax binge will not affect doughnuts, cake and cookies.
But even flavored water sold with a hint of sugar or artificial
sweetener will be taxed, according to the legislation filed by Patrick
yesterday.
“I’m going to be stocking up on my Sky Bars,” quipped Senate President
Therese Murray.
The move comes weeks after the Patrick administration announced a plan
to force fast-food restaurants to print their calorie counts and schools
to calculate student body mass indexes.
The governor, who wants to see the measure go into effect by April 1,
rebuffed suggestions that the tax intruded on personal choice.
“I think dedicating those funds to nutrition and wellness services is a
wise decision,” Patrick said, adding other states have passed the tax.
Both New Jersey and New York have a 6 to 7.5 percent sales tax on candy
and soda.
He also wants to raise $20 million by tacking on a refundable 5-cent
deposit for fruit juice and water bottles, and another $75 million in
Registry of Motor Vehicle fee hikes for license renewals and new car
registrations.
Business groups say the tax will hurt the Bay State economy.
“We think it’s a totally unfair thing to do and it hurts companies like
NECCO,” said Larry Graham, president of the National Confectioners
Association.
The famous NECCO wafers and Sky Bars are made in Cambridge.
“These are overwhelmingly small family companies,” Graham said.
The proposal reminded some lawmakers of a recent push to ban
Fluffernutter sandwiches that was laughed out of the Legislature.
“I guess we’ll call this the fat tax,” said Sen. Michael W. Morrissey
(D-Quincy).
Alcohol package stores already lose customers to New Hampshire because
the state-run liquor stores there offer steep discounts.
“We’ve found in the past with taxes of this kind that what happens is
sales are lost. Either we turn people away from the product or we send
them to another location,” said Frank Anzalotti, executive director of
the Massachusetts Package Store Association.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, January 29, 2009
State pulling oldest scam in the book
By Margery Eagan
Anti-tax czarina Barbara Anderson spent a cheerful afternoon
yesterday watching the federal stimulus package debate on C-Span.
“Everything’s falling apart. I could see it coming. Somehow I thought
it’d happen after I was dead.”
Tax watchdog Michael Widmer termed the mess we’re in “a global economic
bloodbath.”
But no matter how desperate things get, one constant remains here in
Massachusetts. Politicians won’t do real reforms because that would tick
off public employee unions. Instead , they cut teachers and slash
services.
Old people who fall and can’t get up? They won’t be getting up.
Now, Gov. Patrick wants higher taxes on Snickers and certain fruit
juices, which is why you should get to Shaw’s immediately. Gatorade’s on
sale, 10 for $10. It could be your last chance!
But here’s the problem. Local public employee health-care costs will
still be our No. 1 budget-buster even if Snickers get taxed at $5 a
chew.
Have we fixed the problem? No.
To push more towns into the state’s less expensive health plan, Patrick
said he’d penalize those that don’t join by cutting their local aid.
What he should do is allow towns to do as the state and take health care
out of collective bargaining, period, and save $2.5 billion over 10
years!
Next, pension reform. Patrick said Treasurer Tim Cahill would have a
plan by January. It’s almost February. What’s taking so long?
Some changes are obvious:
No more douple-dipping or buying back sick and vacation time, a policy
that allowed Boston educator Michael Contompasis - a great guy, I know -
to “retire” with a $270,000 salary, plus a $147,967 sick-and-vacation
time buyback, plus a $139,782 pension, plus a double-dipping add-on of
$65,000 when he went back to work for Mayor Menino.
No more collecting a state pension before you’re 60 or 65. That means
state cops could not get a 60 percent pension after 20 years or 75
percent after 25 years. It means Jim Rooney - another great guy, I know
- could not make $369,292 from the Massachusetts Convention Center
Authority while simultaneously collecting a $70,00 pension from the MBTA.
Amend the prevailing wage law to exclude civilian flaggers so
less-costly flaggers - not detail cops - can direct traffic in cities
and towns, which are broke.
Our choice? Fire everybody, or ditch scams.
Call your legislator: 617-722-2000.
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Deval Patrick OKs 4% raises in 2010
By Hillary Chabot
Despite today’s expected announcement of devastating state budget cuts
and probable layoffs, Gov. Deval Patrick’s administration has told
department heads they can give some union employees 4 percent pay hikes
over the next two years, according to an internal memo obtained by the
Herald.
One fiscal watchdog blasted the pay-hike memo, saying any raise during
the state’s fiscal meltdown could prove disastrous.
“We really can’t afford any salary increases over the next few years,”
said Mike Widmer, executive director of the Massachusetts Taxpayers
Foundation. “The next few years are going to be brutal, because we’re
going to use up all our reserves and federal money this year.”
In the memo, department heads are told they can raise salaries by a
minimum of 1 percent in next years’ budget, and by 3 percent in fiscal
year 2011. If revenues exceed $20.3 billion, the memo says, they can add
another 1 percent.
Patrick finance spokeswoman Cyndi Roy pointed out that wages already
have been frozen for this year.
“Given the economic conditions we face right now, the wages have been
frozen this year at a zero percent increase,” Roy said.
The suggested raises were reduced from a 6 percent raise over the next
three years and include all new costs, including cost-of-living
adjustments or any step raises.
The memo, sent out earlier this month, highlights higher education
employees but was also sent to other state departments. Roy didn’t know
how many state union employees were covered in the collective bargaining
memo.
Roughly 90 percent of the state workers in the executive branch are
unionized, according to the state’s human resources Web site.
Widmer predicted extreme cuts in the fiscal 2010 budget because revenues
aren’t expected to top $19.5 billion - and that number may be an
overestimate by as much as $1 billion, he said.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, January 29, 2009
For Granite State biz, Patrick’s bedrock
By Michael Graham
The good news is that Deval Patrick has been declared “America’s Best
Governor” by the state’s taxpayers and small business owners.
The bad news? That state is New Hampshire.
If you own a convenience store, restaurant or packie north of
Massachusetts, you’ve got to have a man crush on Patrick. Just months
after packing your store with Bay State smokers saving $20 a carton on
cigs, Patrick wants higher state taxes on beer, booze, candy bars and
soda, too. Not to mention meals and hotel rooms.
No wonder Patrick wants tolls at the New Hampshire border. He wants to
get his $2 from us on our weekly “smokes and six-packs” run.
It’s all part of what Patrick ominously calls his “Emergency Recovery
Plan.” What he hopes to “recover,” I cannot say. And all he’s
stimulating with these tax hikes is more northbound traffic.
As for the “emergency” part, emergencies usually involve circumstances
so extreme that unusual, or even radical, action is required.
But there’s nothing radical or unusual about Patrick proposing $587
million in new taxes. He just signed a $500 million business tax hike
last summer. If he really wanted to do something radical, Patrick could
try actually keeping a campaign promise, like cutting property taxes.
Instead, he’s cutting local aid by $128 million - which will lead to
property tax increases. Meanwhile Patrick also supports pay increases of
up to 4 percent for unionized state employees over the next two years.
(Not to mention the $3,200 pay hike for Beacon Hill pols.)
The lapdog liberals of the local media point to Patrick’s “deep spending
cuts” as a sign of leadership. Not to confuse the Ivy Leaguers on
Morrissey Boulevard, but let’s review the basic math.
Patrick’s proposed “emergency recovery” budget: About $28 billion. The
previous budget: $28.2 billion.
The net “emergency, super-extreme, worst-since-the-Great Depression”
spending cut: A whopping 0.7 percent.
Stand back, folks, he’s a wild man!
It’s hard to take a 0.7 percent cut seriously when state spending is up
almost 18 percent over just the past three years. When, in the midst of
a “crisis,” we still have police details at 90 percent of our pothole
repairs; when Patrick’s biotech friends still get their $100
million-a-year tax breaks; and when, as the Pioneer Institute shows, we
still have more state employees than we did four years ago.
An “emergency?”
If you want to see a real Massachusetts crisis, watch shell-shocked
employees leaving places like Bose, Fidelity or EMC with their
belongings in boxes. Compare Patrick’s one-year wage freeze to
businesses forced to close for good, their workers thrown out of work.
Since 2003, state government has outpaced the real (private-sector)
economy in revenue, spending and work force. Now that the economy is
tanking, shouldn’t it be shedding jobs faster than the rest of us, too?
I’ll know Massachusetts is in a real crisis when I see Beacon Hill do
something surprising like cutting taxes on businesses instead of raising
them, or letting productive citizens keep more of their own money,
instead of confiscating it one beer and candy bar at a time.
It’s enough to drive a taxpayer to drink.
Or, to be more accurate, get us to drive to New Hampshire for one.
Michael Graham hosts a talk show on 96.9 WTKK.
Associated Press
Friday, January 30, 2009
Nickel here, dime there add up for Mass. residents
By Glen Johnson
Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick is fond of saying he opposes
broad-based tax increases, but he's showing no such reluctance toward
smaller, more targeted ones.
And add up enough of them, it can be quite a tab - or at least more than
the growth of most paychecks these days.
The Democratic governor has proudly eschewed his Republican
predecessors' "no-new-taxes" vows and proposed closing a 2009 budget
deficit and financing his fiscal 2010 budget with a raft of new taxes
and fees. When Republicans like Mitt Romney jacked up fees, Democrats
charged it was a backdoor tax hike.
Patrick's plan would extend the 5-percent sales tax to alcohol sold in
package stores, as well as candy and sweetened beverages like soda.
And extend the nickle-per-container bottle bill to virtually all other
drinks, including plain and flavored water, coffee-based drinks, juices
and sports drinks.
And make a 20-percent hike in the state's meals tax, from 5 percent to 6
percent.
And make a 17-percent hike in the state's hotel/motel occupancy tax,
from 5.75 percent to 6.75 percent.
And allow cities and towns to create their own 1-percent meals and
occupancy taxes.
And hike Registry of Motor fees both this spring and later this year.
Registrar Rachel Kaprelian says the first round will increase the
average driver's bill by $6 per year. Patrick says the second round of
hikes, still being formulated, will cost taxpayers $75 million.
On top of all that, the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority recently voted
to institute a $6 yearly fee for using Fast Lane transponders to pay
tolls electronically. The agency is ending the $25.95 fee for a new or
replacement transponder, but there is no service fee exemption for
people who already have one.
The Turnpike also recently started charging Fast Lane users $2 a month
($5 if they are commercial operators) if they use mailed statements
instead of e-mailed.
And none of that gets into a proposed hike in the state's gasoline tax
that would be necessary to stave off a proposed doubling of some
Turnpike tolls within Route 128. There is talk of more than doubling the
current 23.5 cents-per-gallon levy.
Asked this week if the state was beginning to nickle-and-dime people to
death, Patrick had a stern retort.
"If we don't, at the same time, deal with some of these other strategies
around revenue," he said, "then the impact on services will be even
greater."
Patrick also said voters knew what kind of financial philosophy they
were getting when they hired him to be governor.
"This is about keeping a commitment to a vision of state government
which is about all of us, involves all of us and all of us contributing
to it," he said.
Transportation Secretary James Aloisi talked similarly when he was
challenged on the changes to the Fast Lane program.
Turnpike board member Mary Connaughton, a Republican appointee,
suggested the agency was merely creating a transponder installment plan
by trading the upfront cost for the monthly service charge. She also
complained that those who already owned transponders would be charged a
second time through the service fee plan.
Aloisi was nonplussed.
"I had lunch today. I had a turkey sandwich with a little side of pasta
salad," Aloisi said. "It cost more than six bucks. A lunch costs more
than $6. I think 50 cents a month, $6 a year, it's just, you've got to
keep it in perspective."
The secretary argued the changes would expand usage of electronic
tolling, which can speed the firing of more expensive toll-takers, while
removing a cost barrier to joining the program.
The alcohol, meals and bottle bill hikes triggered predictable
disagreement from package store owners, restaurateurs and small grocers,
who said they would discourage business by jacking up a bill's bottom
line.
Peter Christie, president of the Massachusetts Restaurant Association,
also enunciated a concern that could apply to all the tax and fee hikes:
What starts as a small thing - say a 1 percent local-option meals tax -
can easily be increased.
"It's the beginning of a slippery slope we don't want to go down," said
Christie.
Anti-tax crusader Barbara Anderson was atypically restrained when
asked about the governor's budget plans.
She praised plans for increasing the number of charter schools in the
state and for reserving a share of the state's capital gains tax
collections to replenish the rainy day fund.
She also said she wasn't torn up about the alcohol, candy and drink tax
and fee hikes, because they can be avoided through personal restraint or
behavior modification.
One such modification is heading to tax-free New Hampshire to shop, she
said. That will be especially dangerous to businesses in Massachusetts
border communities.
"There's something satisfying about the taxes you can avoid, because you
can have fun doing it and feel like you're winning the battle," she
said. "But that hurts businesses along the way, and when will they
realize that?"
The Boston Herald
Thursday, January 29, 2009
A Boston Herald editorial
Let them eat tofu
It’s not just about reaching into the pockets of the state’s already
hard-pressed taxpayers and taking out another $121.5 million - of course
it isn’t. It’s about helping each of us make “healthy choices.”
Isn’t that special!
There is a certain disingenuousness here - no, really. Because even as
Gov. Deval Patrick plays nanny in chief, he is also counting on us all
to continue our wicked, wicked ways. If we don’t continue buying those
candy bars, that can of Red Bull, that bottle of cabernet, the state is
going to be in a $121.5 million hole in the next fiscal year (and close
to half that amount for the current year).
So for all the high-sounding motives (“Evidence-supported data has shown
that each of these products serve more as a detriment than a benefit on
the health and wellbeing of an individual”) this is quite simply a money
grab with some nanny-state window-dressing.
Oh, and it’s not a tax hike. No, it’s “removing the tax exemption” for
alcohol, candy, soda, juice and sports drinks (and because we’re such
slobs too, the governor now wants us to pay a 5 cent deposit on juice,
sports and coffee drinks and water).
Well, that sales tax “exemption” for alcohol exists because alcohol is
already subject to an excise tax, which brings in about $70 million a
year. That’s already built into every bottle of beer, wine or booze you
buy. A sales tax is double taxation.
And frankly we can’t wait to see how state tax collectors will define
“candy.” Is a granola bar OK? Well, what if it’s a chocolate covered
granola bar?
Noting that a third of students and more than half the state’s adults
are overweight, the governor’s budget message insists taxing candy and
soft drinks “would encourage consumption of healthier alternatives.”
Like what? A big juicy burger?
Oh wait, isn’t red meat bad for you too? How did the governor miss
“removing the sales tax exemption” for that. Of course, have that burger
out and if the governor has his way you’ll be paying a 7 percent tax on
that instead of the current 5 percent.
Yes, it would all be amusing, if it weren’t so dreadfully serious. When
people are hurting you don’t tax them more - even if it’s “good for
them.”
The Salem News
Friday, January 30, 2009
A Salem News editorial
More taxes won't fix broken system
Gov. Deval Patrick took the microphone Wednesday to announce that yes,
he feels our pain, and would like to administer a little more.
"The national recession is inflicting serious pain ... from household
budgets to the state's balance sheets, and like many residents
throughout the commonwealth, we have to make do with less," Patrick
declared at a press conference Wednesday.
No kidding! Except unlike his constituents, many of whom have suffered
wage freezes and wage cuts, and some of whom have seen their wages
disappear altogether, the state can always raise more money through new
and increased taxes and new and increased fees. Which is exactly what
Patrick proposes in order to limit the cuts he says are necessary in
state spending this fiscal year and next.
But how does having to spend an extra 5 percent to purchase a candy bar
or soft drink help the person standing for hours in an unemployment
line? How will it help the average family that finds an extra 1 or 2
percent added to the bill on those increasingly rare occasions they go
out to dinner? How will higher Registry of Motor Vehicles fees — and
pennies more on the gas tax, another idea being floated — help the
motorist who's struggling to keep up with his or her car payments?
Despite the cuts being proposed by the governor in the plan unveiled
this week, there's too much emphasis on what the politicians like to
call "revenue enhancement," which we know as taxes, and too little on
reform.
And that's because neither Patrick nor his fellow Democrats who control
things in the House and Senate are willing to take on the beast
represented by the widening gap between the expectations of those
working in the public sector and the reality for those whose wages and
benefits are not funded by the taxpayers.
There are money-making schemes galore in the Patrick plan, but one has
to look hard for the kinds of reform that would make a real difference
in the cost of government.
Over the years an accumulation of liberal laws, policies and practices
have added significantly to the cost of government in the Bay State.
We're talking about things like a prevailing wage law that inflates the
cost of every public construction project in the state by a factor of
two or more; and a pension system that is more about letting state, city
and town employees retire early and make a lot, than providing a safety
net for when they're no longer able to work at all. We're talking about
a system that rewards those who don't cheat on their sick time instead
of punishing those who do. We're talking about a state where
public-safety personnel feel entitled to demand they be paid for
training and to submit to drug-testing; and can't imagine being told
those things are a condition of their continued employment.
Such excesses were ignored when times were good. No longer, which is one
of the reasons the proposed cutbacks in local aid are not drawing the
expected howls of protest. Most people are well aware of the generous
salaries and benefits teachers, cops and firefighters have negotiated
for themselves, and want those addressed as well.
Yet here's what Patrick proposes in the way of "reform":
Reintroducing a plan to change the state health insurance system from
one based on date of hire to one in which benefits would be based on
salary and "affordability."
Filing a second version of the "Municipal Partnership Act" that would
encourage the regionalization of services at the local level and
encourage communities to offer health insurance through the less costly
state Group Insurance Commission (GIC).
Where are the penalties for those who refuse to regionalize or rewards
for those who do?
As for the effort to move more cities and towns into the GIC, Patrick's
idea of "reform" is to make it slightly more difficult for workers to
veto such a measure. If they really want to help beleaguered cities and
towns, Patrick and the Legislature would give them the same authority
the state has to design their health insurance plans without any union
interference at all.
Patrick says these recessionary times will require sacrifice by all. But
does he really mean it?
The Boston Herald
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Junk food for thought for Governor Deval Patrick
By Dave Wedge / Pols & Politics
So Gov. Deval Patrick wants to tax booze, soda, meals, gas, hotels and
candy, hike registry fees and even slap a tariff on oxygen.
OK, that last one isn’t true.
But the governor is proposing a slew of quick-fix revenue enhancers
that, as usual, will smack the working class at a time when the term
“disposable income” is becoming an anachronism. This in mind, here are a
few money-saving ideas Patrick should consider before taxing us back to
England:
It’s time for a part-time Legislature, as other states have. The
majority only work part-time anyway, yet they’re paid more than
teachers, social workers, prison guards and firefighters.
Double-dipping should be banned. Any public employee - this means you,
congressmen - should be banned from receiving a pension while collecting
another government paycheck.
How about an across-the-board wage freeze for every government employee?
Private-sector workers are going years without raises and getting pay
cuts, yet taxpayer-funded workers receive guaranteed raises.
Of course, none of this will be addressed. Why would it be, when the ins
can slap a tax on clothing or bump the cigarette tax again to keep those
raises coming?
The Boston Globe
Thursday, January 29, 2009
A Boston Globe editorial
Patrick's bad-news budget
Governor Patrick unveiled what he calls his emergency recovery plan
yesterday. But it would be better described more modestly - as only a
survival plan, and one with an uncertain outcome.
The state budget resembles an unstable glacier riddled with dangerous
crevices. In just five months, the administration has confronted a $6
billion shortfall for fiscal years 2009 and 2010. To fill that gap,
Patrick mostly relies on budget cuts. No one skates away freely,
including human service agencies and municipal governments that depend
on the state to support police, fire, and library services.
The only way to balance the budget and stabilize the state is through a
combination of new revenues, budget cuts, and reliance on the state's
rainy day funds. The Patrick administration wisely recommends raising
$587 million in new taxes and fees in ways that minimize the pain for
most Massachusetts residents.
One solid proposal would raise $150 million by eliminating a tax
exemption on sales of alcohol, soda, and candy. Beer, wine, and
cocktails imbibed in restaurants are assessed a 5 percent tax. But
Massachusetts is one of the few states to allow exemptions for package
store sales.
Patrick is also proposing to raise the statewide meals and hotel tax
each by 1 percent, which could bring nearly $150 million in new revenue
to the state to help offset cuts in local aid. It's a sound idea,
provided the Legislature also supports Patrick's plan to give cities and
towns the local option to keep an additional 1 percent. Cities with many
restaurants, such as Boston, shouldn't have to subsidize communities
with fewer amenities without getting more flexibility themselves.
By embracing these modest and necessary tax hikes, state lawmakers can
match the courage of the administration. But Patrick must also stiffen
his spine. There are tens of millions of dollars in savings available
for cities and towns if only they had the same freedom enjoyed by the
state to make changes in public employee health plans, such as setting
higher co-payments. But Patrick stubbornly insists on giving municipal
unions veto power over the proposal. From 2001 to 2006, municipal health
insurance costs rose by almost 92 percent, about double the rate of the
increase in health insurance costs for state employees. What more does
Patrick need to know?
Patrick's plan to balance the $28 billion budget in 2010 depends heavily
on fairly optimistic revenue forecasts, the swift arrival of federal
stimulus funds, and big hits on the state's rainy day fund. But the
nonprofit Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation warns that Patrick's $19.5
billion revenue forecast is too rosy by about $1 billion. If so, 2011
could make 2010 look like the glory days.
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
|
