Tax-hike crowd's vow:
"In the end we will be victorious"
"Taxpayers
shouldn't be lulled into a false sense of
complacency just because the House passed a budget
with no new taxes. The reality is that some
legislators are intent on pursuing every available
avenue to raise taxes."
— State Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr,
R-Gloucester
"It is time for us to think
about what this state stands for ... we have the
money in this state. I urge you to send it to the
House floor with a favorable ruling."
— State Rep. Ellen Story, D-Amherst
"If we care about children
and we care about education then we have to care
about revenue." — State Senator
Sonia Chang-Diaz, D-Boston
“It may be a fight, but in
the end we will be victorious. We will get this bill
passed.”
— State Rep. James O’Day, D-Worcester, the
bill's House sponsor
When they joined forces three years
ago to lobby for an override in their community, a small
group of Northampton residents vowed that the fight
would not stop at their borders.
They were true to their word Thursday
when more than 50 members of Yes!Northampton and another
grassroots organization, PHENOM, which lobbies to
increase funding for public higher education, converged
on Beacon Hill. They turned out to testify for tax
reform legislation that, they say, asks the rich to pay
their fair share....
The proposal's chances of passing
seemed so remote a few months ago that the region's
legislators made efforts to temper expectations of
locals who see the idea as a "no brainer" way to raise
revenue and avoid
deep cuts to education, local aid and
numerous social services.
The mood was much different Thursday
following a Joint Committee on Revenue hearing at which
many
local leaders testified in support of the bill amid
the backdrop of some 500 supporters - most waving yellow
sheets of paper that read "Invest In Our Communities" in
lieu of applause.
"It's always no until it's yes," Max
Page, a professor of architecture and history at the
University of Massachusetts Amherst, told
a group of local supporters headed
to Boston on one of two buses paid for by the
Massachusetts Teachers Association....
Thursday's testimony primarily
featured advocates who crowded Gardner Auditorium to
lobby for creation of the tax system that asks the
wealthy to pay more of their income for the greater good
of the state....
As for the much-bigger statewide tax
reform debate, Schwartz urged the committee to "make the
right choice" and send the proposal to the full House
and Senate with a positive recommendation. "You can do
this," she said. "I urge you to adopt this legislation."
...
"I was told that I should be positive
in my comments, upbeat, and encouraging," [Page] said.
"I am none of that. I am furious that my representatives
can only solve our budgetary problems by attacking
collective bargaining, slashing social programs, and
getting passionate about only one thing: there will be
no increase in taxes."
Thursday's testimony also drew
senators and representatives who spoke in favor and said
now is the time to have the discussion....
Changing the tax system so that
everyone pays a fair share of the tax burden is a must,
he said. "It's time to reform our tax policy," said
[Rep. Peter Kocot, D-Northampton]....
[Rep. Ellen Story, D-Amherst] laments
that the recent House budget cuts programs that she said
should never be cut. "It is time for us to think about
what this state stands for ... we have the money in this
state," she said. "I urge you to send it to the House
floor with a favorable ruling."
Though few who testified Thursday
opposed the legislation, its detractors are out there. A
separate bill up for discussion calls for a rollback of
the income tax from 5.3 percent to 5.0 percent, and many
other bills before the committee would create tax
deductions for everything from school fees to tax breaks
for commuters and first-time homebuyers.
Chip Faulkner, associate
director of Citizens for Limited Taxation, told
the Gloucester Times it is outrageous to take money out
of people's pockets when many are unemployed and gas is
$4 a gallon. He said the ease with which supporters of
the bill asserted that the wealthiest could afford to
pay more "reeks of class warfare."
Yes!Northampton member Sara
Weinberger said she was not surprised the measure faced
little opposition. "I feel more strongly than ever about
it," she said. "There are few arguments against doing
this." ...
Fellow Yes!Northampton member Marty
Nathan, a community health physician in Springfield,
called the issue "life and death, literally," for many
of her patients that rely on state funding. She said
it's reasonable to take a little bit more from people
who have options. Thursday, she said, was a step in the
right direction toward addressing some equity.
"Taxes are no longer a non-starter,"
[Yes!Northampton member Marty Nathan] said. "I was very
proud to be here today."
UMass economics professor Gerald
Friedman testified in support of the measure for many of
the same reasons, although he added that raising taxes
will create jobs compared to cuts in state spending that
only hurts those most in need. "Tax cuts and spending
cuts transfer the costs to the needy," he said.
That idea is one of many reasons
Tobias Baskin is supporting the legislation. The UMass
professor of biology said every penny of the tax
increase will go towards jobs and help pay the salaries
of people who today are in danger of losing employment.
He said the legislation is a much fairer way to get the
money.
"I think it was immensely positive
for the movement," [UMass professor of biology Tobias
Baskin] said. "If you have a responsible plan, a good
plan, people will support it."
Those heady days of reform before
revenue, still ostensibly the unwritten law of the land,
slowly started to recede this week as overtures for
fairer, i.e. higher, taxes competed for oxygen with the
official kick-start to the gaming debate....
Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz and Rep. James
O’Day brought their proposal to raise the income tax to
5.95 percent before the Revenue Committee, packing the
Gardner Auditorium with supporters who testified that
they’d be happy to pay more if the money got reinvested
in services.
“It may be a fight, but in the end we
will be victorious. We will get this bill passed,” O’Day
said, his bill amounting to a clever way – no
constitutional amendment required – of shifting some of
the tax burden off the lower and middle class to the
more-wealthy while retaining a flat tax....
While Chang-Diaz and O’Day are the
team co-captains, the rest of the “adult” line-up
waiting to testify included Sen. Jamie Eldridge, Rep.
Carl Sciortino, Rep. Peter Kocot, Rep. Denise Provost,
Sen. Daniel Wolf, and Sen. Kenneth Donnelly....
The call for a debate over tax
changes with the potential net $1.37 billion in
additional revenue coincided with a report from the
Department of Revenue that showed that based on existing
tax rates, April tax collections shattered benchmarks
for the month by $587 million, and represented a 43
percent uptick from a year ago.
State House News Service
Friday, May 6, 2011
Weekly Roundup Trying Time
A group of lawmakers is pushing to
increase the Massachusetts income tax, even as Beacon
Hill leaders are vowing not to raise taxes this year....
State Sen. Jamie Eldridge, D-Acton,
argues that raising the income tax is the fairest way to
balance the budget. He said it will protect critical
services that help society's most vulnerable members by
asking the state's wealthier residents to pay more.
"It's clearly the fairest and most
progressive way to continue these investments," said
Eldridge, one of the bill's sponsors. "It raises
revenue, for the most part, on those who are wealthy.
And it protects the programs that people care most
about."
The proposal is aimed at restoring
cuts to social services....
The income tax has been a hot topic
on Beacon Hill in recent weeks.
Last month, a Republican-backed
effort to cut the state income tax to 5 percent over
three years failed. The House's 31 Republicans were
joined by three Democrats -- including Jim Arciero,
D-Westford, and Colleen Garry, D-Dracut -- in support of
the measure.
In 2000, voters approved a ballot
question to roll back the state income tax from 5.75
percent to 5 percent, but the Legislature put the brakes
on, freezing the income tax at 5.3 percent in 2002.
Under the Republican plan, the income
tax would have been rolled back to 5.2 percent on July
1, 2012; 5.1 percent on July 1, 2013; and 5 percent on
July 1, 2014.
Social-services advocates from across
the state gathered at the Statehouse yesterday to urge
lawmakers to raise the income tax in order to preserve
government-funded services. They waved yellow signs
reading, "Invest In Our Communities."
A coalition of state Democratic
lawmakers and advocates Thursday launched a push for an
income tax and capital gains tax increase to avoid the
risk of deep cuts to education and social services even
as the economy shows signs of rebounding.
The legislation, spearheaded by Sen.
Sonia Chang-Diaz, D-Boston, Rep. James O'Day,
D-Worcester, and 19 co-sponsors from both the House and
Senate, would generate $1.37 billion in additional
revenue, supporters said, by shifting the tax burden
from the middle class to wealthier residents.
But while Gov. Deval Patrick and
leaders in the House and Senate have pledged not to
increase taxes this budget cycle, supporters vowed
victory on Thursday, and the chairman of the Revenue
Committee — Rep. Jay Kaufman, D-Lexington — said it was
"time to have this conversation." ...
State Sen. Minority Leader Bruce Tarr,
R-Gloucester, said the debate Thursday highlighted the
philosophical differences between some Democrats and the
GOP caucus.
Senate Republicans including Tarr
have filed bills to create a commuter tax deduction, a
mortgage insurance tax deduction for first-time
homebuyers and a rollback of the income tax from its
current 5.3 percent to 5.0.
"Taxpayers shouldn't be lulled into a
false sense of complacency just because the House passed
a budget with no new taxes," [State Sen. Minority Leader
Bruce Tarr, R-Gloucester] said in a prepared statement.
"The reality is that some legislators are intent on
pursuing every available avenue to raise taxes." ...
"If we care about children and we
care about education then we have to care about
revenue," Chang-Diaz said at a press conference held
before she and seven other lawmakers offered testimony
before the Joint Committee on Revenue.
In contrast to Tarr's and the GOP's
Senate measure, the Chang-Diaz bill would raise the
state's income tax rate to 5.95 percent....
"I think it's outrageous that in this
climate when people are unemployed, when gas is four
bucks a gallon, there is a proposal on the table to take
more money out of their pockets," said Chip Faulkner,
associate director of Citizens for Limited Taxation.
Faulkner called Massachusetts a
"heavily taxed state" that has led to slow population
growth, and identified the tax climate as the reason
Massachusetts is losing a congressional seat.
Faulkner also attacked the ease with
which supporters of the bill asserted that the
wealthiest could afford to pay more, and suggested the
legislation was an end-run around voters who have
rejected a progressive income tax five times at the
ballot box.
"Let's get the rich. Let's get the
people who have more money. Well, this reeks of class
warfare," Faulkner said.
CLT will be delivering a
memo to the Joint
Committee on Revenue this afternoon (copies to the media statewide,
the full Legislature, and to you) concerning its next hearing this
Thursday on other tax proposals, e.g., an online/Internet sales tax,
the sales tax rollback to 5 percent, etc. Our memo opens with:
"Citizens for Limited Taxation won’t be
there. Not after last week’s hearing on the income tax hike,
when we were first to sign the signup sheet and got to speak
three hours later only after liberal legislators, liberal
activists, liberal groups, liberal panels, and liberal dreamers
who think they can get a graduated income tax one way or the
other, and only after Chip Faulkner, the only attendee in
opposition, interrupted with a point of order."
The full memo will be sent soon, but in the
meantime below is a further report from Chip Faulkner, who attended
last week's dog-and-pony-show-hearing as the only representative and
voice of taxpayers.
Further Observations
from Thursday's Revenue Committee hearing
by Chip Faulkner
I arrived at 9:30 for the 10:30 hearing. The
staffers for the Revenue Committee showed up around 9:45. I
grabbed a sign-up sheet as did an organizer for the masses of
people showing up for the hearing. As I found out later from a
staffer, while I signed up just for myself, the organizer
proceeded to list all the panels that intended to testify that
day on his sheet.
The Committee took his sheet to work with
from the start. The next two hours saw a few legislators and
several panels totaling about 20-25 people testifying before the
Committee. When I hadn’t been called by 12:30, I stood up and
shouted out “Point of Order, Madame Chairwoman.”
I told them I was the first to sign up and
why were all these panels were going before me? I also added
they were all taking the same position and why was no opposition
allowed to testify?
A staffer immediately escorted me to the
lobby and explained that they were working from the “panels”
signup sheet. He seemed to be very embarrassed about the whole
situation and told me they would get me on as soon as possible.
When I went back to my seat, seven legislators had just come
forward as a panel.
The one bright spot in this hearing was the
time management by Senate Chairwoman Candaras. She announced at
the beginning that testimony would be limited to three minutes
per individual. She more or less adhered to it, with just a
couple going 5 or 10 minutes. At various points the staff member
to her right would hold up a sign saying “One Minute” or “Wrap
Up Comments.” Thank God for those signs or we’d still be there.
When the seven Legislators started she gave
the first two the allotted time, then told the other five they
had one minute each. After they spoke, Rep. Peisch showed up
with two people. Sen. Candaras asked the two if they had signed
the sign-up sheet (the first time she asked that question of
anyone). When they said “no,” she said we have to take people
ahead of you who had signed. That's when I made my
triumphal appearance – around 1:15. After my testimony, I sat
around for another 15 minutes then left to catch the train home.
I can understand not attending this week’s
hearing as a protest against last week’s fiasco. However I don’t
think we should imply that CLT intends to boycott all
future Revenue Committee hearings. For example, we may need to
make an appearance if a serious threat to Prop. 2½ surfaces.
We're hoping that our complaint/boycott memo to
the Committee will encourage it to run a fair hearing in the future.
If that happens, other interests may find a better climate if they
do attend Thursday's hearing in opposition to the Internet sales
tax.
As with the income tax hike, we are not concerned about new taxes as
long as the House leadership stands by its "no new taxes" plan. But
we'll be prepared to fight should the Senate disagree with the
House, and liberals start to make "progress" on either the income
tax or the Internet sales tax.
Hampshire County residents take their appeal for tax reform to
Beacon Hill
By Chad Cain
BOSTON - When they joined forces three years ago to lobby for an
override in their community, a small group of Northampton residents
vowed that the fight would not stop at their borders.
They were true to their word Thursday when more than 50 members of
Yes!Northampton and another grassroots organization, PHENOM, which
lobbies to increase funding for public higher education, converged
on Beacon Hill. They turned out to testify for tax reform
legislation that, they say, asks the rich to pay their fair share.
Supporters say the legislation, filed by Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz,
D-Boston, Rep. James O'Day, D-Worcester, and 19 co-sponsors
including Rep. Ellen Story, D-Amherst, would generate $1.37 billion
in additional revenue each year by shifting the tax burden from the
middle class to wealthier residents.
The bill would increase the state's income tax rate and the
long-term capital gains tax while at the same time upping the
personal tax exemption so that most middle- and low-income residents
would pay the same or slightly less in taxes than they do now.
The proposal's chances of passing seemed so remote a
few months ago that the region's legislators made efforts to temper
expectations of locals who see the idea as a "no brainer" way to raise
revenue and avoid deep cuts to education, local aid and numerous social
services.
PHOTO BY GORDON DANIELS
– Dan Clawson of Northampton,
center, and Jackie Stein of Pelham applaud after Northampton
City Councilor Pamela Schwartz addressed the Legislature’s
Joint Committee on Revenue in Boston on Thursday.
The mood was much different Thursday following a
Joint Committee on Revenue hearing at which many local leaders testified
in support of the bill amid the backdrop of some 500 supporters - most
waving yellow sheets of paper that read "Invest In Our Communities" in
lieu of applause.
"It's always no until it's yes," Max Page, a professor of architecture
and history at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, told a group of
local supporters headed to Boston on one of two buses paid for by the
Massachusetts Teachers Association.
Page is the vice president of PHENOM, or the Public Higher Education
Network of Massachusetts. He organized the bus trip in support of "An
Act to Invest in Our Communities" with Northampton City Councilor Pamela
C. Schwartz, one of the founders of Yes!Northampton.
"This is one in a stream of salvos, but it was an important one,"
Schwartz said to cheers from locals buoyed by the showing of support for
what is likely to be a controversial tax fight.
Local officials weigh in
Thursday's testimony primarily featured advocates who crowded Gardner
Auditorium to lobby for creation of the tax system that asks the wealthy
to pay more of their income for the greater good of the state.
During her testimony, Schwartz drew parallels between this upcoming
statewide fight and one that took place in Northampton three years ago
when residents approved a $2 million override, defying the message that
people would never pay more property taxes to save services and jobs.
"The people of Northampton looked hard and fast at the facts ... and
they voted yes by a 60-40 margin," Schwartz said.
As for the much-bigger statewide tax reform debate, Schwartz urged the
committee to "make the right choice" and send the proposal to the full
House and Senate with a positive recommendation. "You can do this," she
said. "I urge you to adopt this legislation."
PHOTO BY GORDON DANIELS
– Ward 4 Northampton City
Councilor Pamela Schwartz, center, and at-large Easthampton
City Councilor Andrea Burns, right, address a legislative
panel Thursday in Boston appealing for tax reform.
Like other city officials who testified, Easthampton
At-Large City Councilor Andrea Burns said budget woes have forced her
community to reduce services, leave city positions unfilled and ask
workers to make tough sacrifices. "We feel that it is unfair to continue
to ask our middle class to pay more to have our services be
compromised," she said. "Put Massachusetts in the strong position that
it needs to be. Give us the ability to do that."
Other officials who attended but did not speak were Northampton City
Councilors David J. Narkewicz and Marianne L. LaBarge, as well as former
councilor Michael Bardsley. Narkewicz and Bardsley will square off this
fall to be the city's next mayor.
Page questioned why legislators are more willing to make "relentless"
cuts without asking the wealthiest in the state to pay "a bit more in
taxes" in order to protect the most vulnerable citizens and reinvest in
the education of young people.
"I was told that I should be positive in my comments, upbeat, and
encouraging," he said. "I am none of that. I am furious that my
representatives can only solve our budgetary problems by attacking
collective bargaining, slashing social programs, and getting passionate
about only one thing: there will be no increase in taxes."
Thursday's testimony also drew senators and representatives who spoke in
favor and said now is the time to have the discussion. That support
buoyed the feeling among many locals, who acknowledge that getting such
tax reform approved remains an uphill climb. Gov. Deval Patrick and
leaders in the House and Senate have all pledged not to increase taxes
this budget cycle.
"I'm so proud that we were well represented by elected officials and our
citizens," said Jane Fleishman, a member of Yes!Northampton. "This is a
long-term fight. We're not expecting to win it in one year ... but this
has some hope."
Rep. Peter Kocot, D-Northampton, who earlier said the political climate
would likely stymie reform efforts, whole-heartedly supported the idea
as a way to relieve the burden on the middle class. He recounted stories
of middle-class families who for years made contributions to the
Northampton Survival Center but are now forced to use its services,
while other working class individuals are losing their homes.
Changing the tax system so that everyone pays a fair share of the tax
burden is a must, he said. "It's time to reform our tax policy," said
Kocot.
In brief testimony, Story sought to debunk the premise that
Massachusetts is a place of high taxes. She said the local and state tax
burdens actually rank in the middle of the pack nationwide, while the
state's per capita income is the third highest in the nation.
"People say that we are 'Taxachusetts,'" she said. "That is old
information. It is incorrect."
Story laments that the recent House budget cuts programs that she said
should never be cut. "It is time for us to think about what this state
stands for ... we have the money in this state," she said. "I urge you
to send it to the House floor with a favorable ruling."
Though few who testified Thursday opposed the legislation, its
detractors are out there. A separate bill up for discussion calls for a
rollback of the income tax from 5.3 percent to 5.0 percent, and many
other bills before the committee would create tax deductions for
everything from school fees to tax breaks for commuters and first-time
homebuyers.
Chip Faulkner, associate director of Citizens for Limited
Taxation, told the Gloucester Times it is outrageous to take money
out of people's pockets when many are unemployed and gas is $4 a gallon.
He said the ease with which supporters of the bill asserted that the
wealthiest could afford to pay more "reeks of class warfare."
Yes!Northampton member Sara Weinberger said she was not surprised the
measure faced little opposition. "I feel more strongly than ever about
it," she said. "There are few arguments against doing this."
Fellow Yes!Northampton member Marty Nathan, a community health physician
in Springfield, called the issue "life and death, literally," for many
of her patients that rely on state funding. She said it's reasonable to
take a little bit more from people who have options. Thursday, she said,
was a step in the right direction toward addressing some equity.
"Taxes are no longer a non-starter," she said. "I was very proud to be
here today."
UMass economics professor Gerald Friedman testified in support of the
measure for many of the same reasons, although he added that raising
taxes will create jobs compared to cuts in state spending that only
hurts those most in need. "Tax cuts and spending cuts transfer the costs
to the needy," he said.
That idea is one of many reasons Tobias Baskin is supporting the
legislation. The UMass professor of biology said every penny of the tax
increase will go towards jobs and help pay the salaries of people who
today are in danger of losing employment. He said the legislation is a
much fairer way to get the money.
"I think it was immensely positive for the movement," he said. "If you
have a responsible plan, a good plan, people will support it."
Weekly Roundup [excerpt]
Trying Time
By Matt Murphy
Those heady days of reform before revenue, still ostensibly the
unwritten law of the land, slowly started to recede this week as
overtures for fairer, i.e. higher, taxes competed for oxygen with the
official kick-start to the gaming debate....
Patrick was off to the hills of the Berkshires for some clean-energy
events and a Cabinet meeting in Pittsfield.
His absence also meant he could avoid being asked about raising taxes,
an idea many of his supporters pushed on Thursday. Despite supporting
the concept of a graduated income tax, a change that would require
amending the Constitution, Patrick has said he has no appetite for that
debate – now.
Undeterred, Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz and Rep. James O’Day brought their
proposal to raise the income tax to 5.95 percent before the Revenue
Committee, packing the Gardner Auditorium with supporters who testified
that they’d be happy to pay more if the money got reinvested in
services.
“It may be a fight, but in the end we will be victorious. We will get
this bill passed,” O’Day said, his bill amounting to a clever way – no
constitutional amendment required – of shifting some of the tax burden
off the lower and middle class to the more-wealthy while retaining a
flat tax.
Proposing offsets for the middle class by increasing the personal tax
exemption, O’Day said it was time for the Legislature to have “an adult
conversation” about taxes, an implicit indictment of the way some talk
about tax policy.
While Chang-Diaz and O’Day are the team co-captains, the rest of the
“adult” line-up waiting to testify included Sen. Jamie Eldridge, Rep.
Carl Sciortino, Rep. Peter Kocot, Rep. Denise Provost, Sen. Daniel Wolf,
and Sen. Kenneth Donnelly.
One supporter paused in the aisle to take a picture, momentarily
blocking traffic: “Excuse me,” she apologized, “I just want to get a
picture of murderer’s row.”
The call for a debate over tax changes with the potential net $1.37
billion in additional revenue coincided with a report from the
Department of Revenue that showed that based on existing tax rates,
April tax collections shattered benchmarks for the month by $587
million, and represented a 43 percent uptick from a year ago.
Embedded in those details, however, were mixed signs for the economy as
sales taxes – an indicator of taxpayers’ willingness to spend and pump
money back into the economy – fell $6 million, or 1.6 percent from 2010.
Mass. bill would raise income tax on top earners
By Chris Camire
A group of lawmakers is pushing to increase the Massachusetts income
tax, even as Beacon Hill leaders are vowing not to raise taxes this
year.
The legislation may have little chance of passing, but some teachers,
health-care workers and small-business owners, as well as more than a
dozen state representatives and senators, say the move is needed to
raise $1.37 billion and restore services in the state budget.
The measure, which is co-sponsored by 19 members of the House and
Senate, would increase the income-tax rate from 5.3 percent to 5.95
percent. It would increase the personal tax exemption from $4,400 to
$7,900 to shift more of the burden on top earners.
The bill also increases the long-term capital-gains tax from 5.3 percent
to 8.95 percent. Seniors who earn less than $40,000 per year would be
granted a tax exemption on the capital-gains tax.
State Sen. Jamie Eldridge, D-Acton, argues that raising the income tax
is the fairest way to balance the budget. He said it will protect
critical services that help society's most vulnerable members by asking
the state's wealthier residents to pay more.
"It's clearly the fairest and most progressive way to continue these
investments," said Eldridge, one of the bill's sponsors. "It raises
revenue, for the most part, on those who are wealthy. And it protects
the programs that people care most about."
The proposal is aimed at restoring cuts to social services.
The House's $1.25 billion budget cuts funding for summer jobs for
teenagers, state Medicaid programs, women struggling to get out of
abusive situations, state parks, environmental protection, public health
and other human services. The Senate will submit a budget in the coming
weeks that will also have to make cuts without raising taxes.
Gov. Deval Patrick and legislative leaders have both said they won't
raise taxes.
Critics of the proposed tax hike say it is unwise to raise taxes when 8
percent of the state's workers are unemployed and gas costs $4 per
gallon.
Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation,
said April's impressive tax collections are largely the result of taxes
on investment earnings, and not an indication that the economy is on the
rebound.
"This is an anemic economic recovery, and lots of people are hurting
still," said Widmer. "It's the worst recession since the Depression. I
think there is wide recognition that if an income-tax increase is
needed, this is not the year to do it."
The income tax has been a hot topic on Beacon Hill in recent weeks.
Last month, a Republican-backed effort to cut the state income tax to 5
percent over three years failed. The House's 31 Republicans were joined
by three Democrats -- including Jim Arciero, D-Westford, and Colleen
Garry, D-Dracut -- in support of the measure.
In 2000, voters approved a ballot question to roll back the state income
tax from 5.75 percent to 5 percent, but the Legislature put the brakes
on, freezing the income tax at 5.3 percent in 2002.
Under the Republican plan, the income tax would have been rolled back to
5.2 percent on July 1, 2012; 5.1 percent on July 1, 2013; and 5 percent
on July 1, 2014.
Social-services advocates from across the state gathered at the
Statehouse yesterday to urge lawmakers to raise the income tax in order
to preserve government-funded services. They waved yellow signs reading,
"Invest In Our Communities."
State Rep. James O'Day, D-Worcester, who authored the income-tax bill
with state Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz, D-Boston, told supporters of the
legislation that lawmakers need to have "an "adult conversation" about
tax policy.
"You people in the commonwealth are not customers, you're citizens, and
we need to treat you like citizens," O'Day said.
State income, gains taxes eyed for increases
From Wire and Staff Reports
A coalition of state Democratic lawmakers and advocates Thursday
launched a push for an income tax and capital gains tax increase to
avoid the risk of deep cuts to education and social services even as
the economy shows signs of rebounding.
The legislation, spearheaded by Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz, D-Boston,
Rep. James O'Day, D-Worcester, and 19 co-sponsors from both the
House and Senate, would generate $1.37 billion in additional
revenue, supporters said, by shifting the tax burden from the middle
class to wealthier residents.
But while Gov. Deval Patrick and leaders in the House and Senate
have pledged not to increase taxes this budget cycle, supporters
vowed victory on Thursday, and the chairman of the Revenue Committee
— Rep. Jay Kaufman, D-Lexington — said it was "time to have this
conversation."
Detractors called it unfathomable that lawmakers would consider a
tax increase at a time when the unemployment remains at 8 percent
and residents are paying significantly higher prices at the gas
pump.
State Sen. Minority Leader Bruce Tarr, R-Gloucester, said the debate
Thursday highlighted the philosophical differences between some
Democrats and the GOP caucus.
Senate Republicans including Tarr have filed bills to create a
commuter tax deduction, a mortgage insurance tax deduction for
first-time homebuyers and a rollback of the income tax from its
current 5.3 percent to 5.0.
"Taxpayers shouldn't be lulled into a false sense of complacency
just because the House passed a budget with no new taxes," Tarr said
in a prepared statement. "The reality is that some legislators are
intent on pursuing every available avenue to raise taxes."
Chang-Diaz, a former school teacher from Boston, disagreed.
"We are jeopardizing the future of our communities if we try to
close this budget gap by cuts alone," she said.
Offering testimony at the State House, advocates said the bill
authored by Chang-Diaz and O'Day would create a more fair and
progressive tax system by asking the wealthy to pay more of their
income while increasing deductions for lower and middle class
families.
"If we care about children and we care about education then we have
to care about revenue," Chang-Diaz said at a press conference held
before she and seven other lawmakers offered testimony before the
Joint Committee on Revenue.
In contrast to Tarr's and the GOP's Senate measure, the Chang-Diaz
bill would raise the state's income tax rate to 5.95 percent. It
would also, however, increase the personal tax exemption from $4,400
to $7,900 to offset the impact of the increase on middle-class
families.
The bill would also increase the long-term capital gains tax from
5.3 percent to 8.95 percent, and set the same rate for less common
short-term capital gains that are currently taxed at 12 percent.
Low-to-middle income seniors would be granted a tax exemption on
capital gains tax if they earn less than $40,000.
Supporters of the legislation, dubbed "An Act to Invest in Our
Communities," crowded Gardner Auditorium Thursday as panel after
panel offered testimony in support raising revenue to pay for
services that faced cuts in the fiscal 2012 budget.
Advocates from Neighbor to Neighbor, the Massachusetts Senior Action
Council and other organizations waved yellow placards that read,
"Invest In Our Communities," as speakers testified in lieu of
applause.
Not all agreed, however.
"I think it's outrageous that in this climate when people are
unemployed, when gas is four bucks a gallon, there is a proposal on
the table to take more money out of their pockets," said Chip
Faulkner, associate director of Citizens for Limited Taxation.
Faulkner called Massachusetts a "heavily taxed state" that has led
to slow population growth, and identified the tax climate as the
reason Massachusetts is losing a congressional seat.
Faulkner also attacked the ease with which supporters of the bill
asserted that the wealthiest could afford to pay more, and suggested
the legislation was an end-run around voters who have rejected a
progressive income tax five times at the ballot box.
"Let's get the rich. Let's get the people who have more money. Well,
this reeks of class warfare," Faulkner said.
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
Citizens for Limited Taxation ▪
PO Box 1147 ▪ Marblehead, MA 01945
▪ 508-915-3665
