Help save yourself join CLT today!

CLT introduction  and membership  application

What CLT saves you from the auto excise tax alone


Ask your friends to join too

Visit CLT on Facebook

CLT UPDATE
Monday, March 25, 2013

Tax hikes: Which ones, by how much?


Richard A. Davey, the state’s transportation secretary, has done a lot of traveling in the last few weeks. He’ll tell you that himself, as he did at a Department of Transportation meeting earlier this month.

“North Andover, Woburn, Arlington, Hyannis,” Davey began. “Medford, Worcester, Framingham, Fall River, Wakefield, Burlington, and Plymouth.”

Since Governor Deval Patrick announced in January his plan to use new tax revenue to inject $13 billion into the state’s transportation system over the next decade, Davey has been crisscrossing the state.

His message: There’s something in the governor’s bill for everyone....

Of course, Davey’s campaign to sell the funding plan around the state has had its critics, perhaps none more biting than the Marblehead-based Citizens for Limited Taxation. A recent post on the organization’s website calls the efforts “a dog-and-pony show lining up interests who thrive off government spending.”

Barbara Anderson, the group’s executive director, said Patrick’s and Davey’s efforts to inspire enthusiasm in Massachusetts residents is part of a plan to raise expectations of how much taxes could rise, so a more modest increase would come as a relief.

“If they do something less than that, we’re all supposed to be incredibly grateful,” Anderson said.

Anderson argues the campaign has not convinced voters, and has instead targeted transportation advocacy groups who do not adequately represent the views of most Massachusetts residents.

“They go to every little group, and every little group is added to their long list of supporters who want a tax increase,” Anderson said, “even if some of these groups might be three AARP members in the far corner of the state.”

Promising large-scale products like South Coast Rail and trains from Boston to Springfield, she said, are gifts that may shore up support in communities outside of Boston, but will probably become mired in bureaucracy before they ever become a reality.

“You have a better chance of getting on a train to Hogwarts,” Anderson said, “than getting on a train to Fall River.”

The Boston Globe
Sunday, March 24, 2013
Richard Davey hits road to pitch transportation plan


Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick has an off-putting habit of talking down to the very people he’s trying to talk into forking over more of their hard-earned money.

Whenever the governor is attempting to schmooze Bay State taxpayers into opening their wallets — which is frequently — he casts himself as the smartest guy in the room, the one who gets it and who has been trying ever so patiently to explain things to the rubes who just refuse to understand.

Like when Patrick was stumping in 2009 for a 19-cents-per-gallon hike in the state’s gas tax — which would have made ours the highest in the nation — he told an audience in Haverhill that “grown-ups” understand we “can’t have something for nothing.” At the time, the state budget was something around $28 billion — which is a whole lot of “nothing.”

Patrick rolled out his condescending attitude again in 2011 when he said we need to have “an adult conversation” about raising revenues to fund improvements to the state’s aging transportation infrastructure.

Now Patrick is again trying to con Massachusetts taxpayers out of their money — $1.9 billion this time, which he plans to raise largely by hiking the state income tax rate from 5.25 percent to 6.25 percent while dropping the sales tax to 4 percent. Even as Democratic leaders of the Legislature are scuttling away from Patrick’s revenue proposals like crabs along the tide line, the governor proclaims he thinks the $1.9 billion figure is the “right number” to fund his transportation and education plans.

This time, Patrick isn’t messing around. He’s rolling out the big guns on which Democrats depend when they really need to extract more money from the citizenry — kids, or as they are known in political hack-speak, “utes.”

So much for adult conversations.

Last week, the governor appeared on the Statehouse steps surrounded by 100 teenagers affiliated with a coalition of youth groups and advocates calling itself “Youth of Massachusetts Organizing for a Reformed Economy,” or “YMORE.” Their mission, according to their press release, is “to raise teen voices for fair revenue.” Word to the wise: “Fair” never means “less.”

As they surrounded the governor, the young people held signs, some with one-word slogans such as “compassion,” “equity” and “courage.”

These impressionable young people are trained to parrot whatever their mentors in the advocacy industry tell them. Then they are marched off to serve as props for Democratic politicians trying to sell their latest brand of “progressive” pablum. ...

An Eagle-Tribune editorial
Sunday, March 24, 2013
Patrick loses interest in ‘adult conversation’ as he rolls out the kids


With the economy recovering and state finances stabilizing, many in the business community expected a relatively quiet session on Beacon Hill this year. But those expectations were dashed when Governor Deval Patrick proposed $1.9 billion in tax increases — including about $500 million in new corporate taxes — to help pay for education, transportation, and other state programs.

Those proposed increases — which have particular implications for the high tech, real estate, and retail industries — top the policy agenda for business advocacy groups. But they are far from the only issues that could have far-reaching effects on the Massachusetts business climate and economy.

Lawmakers will also decide how much to spend on the state’s aging transportation system and how to finance it; how to reconcile the state’s universal health care law with a similar federal law without boosting costs for thousands of small businesses here; and whether to overhaul the state’s unemployment insurance system.

The Boston Globe
Sunday, March 24, 2013
Proposed tax increases a concern for Mass. businesses


Governor Patrick deserves credit for producing a budget proposal that not only lays out the choices, but is flexible enough to serve as a template for reasoned compromise. The governor released his plan about four months before the budget was due to be finished, and invited all citizens, not merely the usual actors on Beacon Hill, to participate in the debate.

The governor’s plan includes four components: A sizable funding increase for transportation; a guarantee of early-childhood education for low-income toddlers; a sizable increase in Mass. grant funding for income-eligible college students; and a dramatic reordering of state income-tax deductions to make it more progressive — that is, less burdensome to low-income people and more so to those earning above $62,000.

Not all of these plans are equally necessary.

A Boston Globe editorial
Sunday, March 24, 2013
Patrick’s ambitious tax plan offers basis for compromise


Gov. Deval Patrick’s latest education plan is all about new spending — much of it with no strings attached. But administration officials, as they rush from one staged rally with their tax hike boosters to another, don’t particularly like it when critics point that out.

Just ask the Massachusetts Business Alliance for Education, which has raised a legitimate concern — that Patrick’s plan to spend $1 billion more on education over the next four years, fueled
 by a massive increase in taxes, lacks sufficient accountability measures and isn’t the ironclad guarantee of success the administration is painting it to be....

A Boston Herald editorial
Sunday, March 24, 2013
Test of a tax plan


Almost a decade after the Big Dig’s completion, the toxic legacy of the bloated highway project still haunts the state. Debt from Central Artery-related projects gnaws away at the MBTA’s budget, forcing fare hikes and service cuts; residual public distrust over the mishandling of the project undercuts efforts to build political support for roads and bridges.

It is time, though, to move on. The state is making progress at reform....

As the Legislature weighs the transportation plan against the education components of Patrick’s plan, the need to catch up on overdue transportation investments should be the most urgent....

Lawmakers can’t let the ghost of the Big Dig continue to thwart the state’s needs forever....

Raiding the capital budget for salaries was merely a symptom of the profligate Big Dig culture. Lawmakers should certainly never forget the lessons of that debacle. But nor can they let its ghost continue to thwart the state’s needs forever.

A Boston Globe editorial
Monday, March 25, 2013
Transportation needs are clear; reforms help justify funding hike


Every time we turn over the rock that is Gov. Deval Patrick’s $2 billion tax hike plan, another foul smell emerges.

This time we have the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation to thank for analyzing what the governor’s plan calls a tax on “custom modifications to software and other computer services,” expected to bring in $265 million in new revenue a year. Currently software is taxable but computer services are not. But, the governor’s office insists, “with the migration of software first to the ‘web’ and now to the ‘cloud,’ the line” between the two is becoming “untenable.” And so, in the spirit of “fairness” he wants to tax the beejesus out of both.

A Boston Herald editorial
Monday, March 25, 2013
Taxing even the cloud


The Telegram & Gazette
Editorial cartoon by David Hitch

Sunday, March 17, 2013

IF IMAGE ISN'T AVAILABLE CLICK ON BOX


The Boston Herald
Editorial cartoon by Jerry Holbert

Sunday, March 24, 2013

IF IMAGE ISN'T AVAILABLE CLICK ON BOX


Chip Ford's CLT Commentary

Gov. Patrick's administration road show to promote his huge $1.9 Billion tax hike hasn't been noticed by only us (as referenced in yesterday's Boston Globe report ("Richard Davey hits road to pitch transportation plan"). It's becoming actually a laughingstock across the state; a blatant political campaign right down to staged rallies and using "the children" as his human shields.

In our Memo to the Legislature (Mar. 12 "The Tax Hike Circus Comes to Town") we wrote:

"Taking the lead from President Barack Obama, our governor is running his own permanent political campaign, a dog-and-pony show lining up interests who thrive off government spending entirely funded by taxpayers.

"He has spent weeks now campaigning among his constituency: Those who live off and benefit most from the largess of Massachusetts taxpayers. His efforts are intended to encourage them to rally for more from productive taxpayers to support their self-interests.

"Meanwhile, we productive taxpayers who pay already too much of what we earn to support their comforts are too engaged in working and surviving to attend rallies, public circuses for the entertainment of those at the State House – even in defense of our own survival interests...."

It doesn't appear to be helping his cause very much in fact may have backfired as it becomes a bigger and bigger joke among legislators and the public at large.

Note that both the House and Senate leadership have been keeping a safe distance from his toxic stew; a smorgasbord of tax and fee hikes accompanied by an abundant side order of the elimination of popular tax deductions. It's becoming clear that Gov. Patrick reached for too much too soon with nothing at risk to himself but "his legacy." Legislators have a two-year shelf life; they must run for re-election in a mere twenty months. They recognize who will bear the blame when voters are feeling the pain of even more lost income. In its Weekly Roundup on Friday, the State House News Service reported:

"[House Speaker Robert] DeLeo, by those around him, is said to be deeply conflicted, not just on how much revenue he can ask taxpayers to shoulder and from where it should come, but also what those votes will mean for his membership come election time next year." ... "It’s usually at this point that Senate President Therese Murray tends to get antsy, and orders her Ways and Means chairman to advance something, anything, that senators can vote up or down – okay, up.... That’s not the case, yet."

The Globe is applauded by the “progressive” liberal choir, but we hope not reaching other readers. The statewide ridicule of the Governor’s plan should cause its demise, but we fear that less dramatic tax hikes are still in the works in the House and Senate: they’re trying to decide which ones, how much they can take from us and still get re-elected.

Chip Ford


 

The Boston Globe
Sunday, March 24, 2013

Richard Davey hits road to pitch transportation plan
By Martine Powers


Richard A. Davey, the state’s transportation secretary, has done a lot of traveling in the last few weeks. He’ll tell you that himself, as he did at a Department of Transportation meeting earlier this month.

“North Andover, Woburn, Arlington, Hyannis,” Davey began. “Medford, Worcester, Framingham, Fall River, Wakefield, Burlington, and Plymouth.”

Since Governor Deval Patrick announced in January his plan to use new tax revenue to inject $13 billion into the state’s transportation system over the next decade, Davey has been crisscrossing the state.

His message: There’s something in the governor’s bill for everyone.

Patrick’s plan and a critical mass of political will has presented an opportunity to put the state’s roads, bridges, and public transit systems on solid footing for generations to come, proponents say.

While it appears the Legislature will fund some, but not all, of Patrick’s proposed projects, what ends up on the cutting-room floor may be a direct product of how well Davey and other transportation officials are able to deliver their message. Their aggressive outreach efforts have reached the feverish tone of an all-out election campaign, and has a Twitter hashtag: #Choose­Growth.

“It’s really unprecedented,” said Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, on Davey’s crusade. “In all my years, I don’t recall such a single-minded campaign by a nonelected state official.”

Some critics view the campaigning as a political ploy meant to convince residents with far-fetched transportation promises.

But others, like Marc Draisen, believe Davey’s strategy makes sense.

Draisen, executive director of the Metropolitan Area Planning Council, an organization focused on city planning and transportation, said taxpayers need to be convinced that their tax dollars will translate into meaningful improvements — especially in a state still stinging from the legacy of the Big Dig and mistrustful of massive, costly transportation projects.

“They’ll go anywhere to talk about this subject,” Draisen said. “We’ve heard their basic line over and over: We can’t afford the transportation system we have, much less the transportation system we want.”

Davey must boil down an elaborate, 63-page report into simple selling points, tailor-made for each community he visits.

In Northampton: Want better regional bus service? Tell your representative you want tax increases.

In Stockbridge: Want a train running from the Berkshires to New York City? Ask your legislators for tax increases.

And in late January, at a transportation forum for the Metro-West region, Davey came prepared with numbers on how each town could tackle more bread-and-butter road repairs and pothole fixes.

A Wayland selectman in the audience raised his hand, asking how his town would benefit.

“I happen to have a Wayland statistic in front of me — how about that?” Davey said, prompting chuckles. Wayland’s funding for road projects, he said, would more than double to $700,000 per year.

And when Southborough’s economic development officer asked what his town stands to gain, Davey had an answer for him, too. Last year, Davey said, the town got $231,000 for road and bridge projects.

With Patrick’s plan, he said, the town would receive $650,000 per year.

“This is not just transportation dollars that are going to evaporate into the air,” Davey said. “These are specific projects and specific resources that we are going to deliver.”

Other transportation officials have also worked to deliver the message. After a frayed cable caused a large span of the Green Line to shut down on one of the coldest mornings of the year, Beverly A. Scott, MBTA general manager, asked technicians to save a portion of the frayed wire.

“I am going to take it on the road with me,” she said.

Sure enough, she appeared on TV a few days later, the corroded, mangled cable in hand.

“Literally, when you have something as old as this . . . the old girl just gave out,” Scott told Fox 25’s Doug “VB” Goudie . “You can’t sit up and have 5 or 6 billion dollars in terms of deferral of maintenance and infrastructure, and just have the expectation that these systems are going to operate with no additional investment.”

Stephanie Pollack, associate director at Northeastern University’s Dukakis Center for Urban and Regional Policy, said the campaign efforts could be criticized for focusing too heavily on grandiose new projects — expensive investments like the South Coast Rail — rather than the roughly 80 percent of the plan that will go toward bridge and road repair, paying off debts, and much-needed transit maintenance.

“In transportation, there is a long history of attracting support for new revenue by promising shiny new things and ribbon-cuttings,” Pollack said. “There probably was a bit of an emphasis on what [transportation officials] perceived would make people excited.”

Davey said he believes people are willing to pay more for better transportation opportunities — and according to research, he might be right.

A poll released March 14 by MassINC , a nonpartisan research group, estimated that just more than 60 percent of voters would be willing to pay $50 per year to fund long-term fixes for roads and public transportation, based on polls and focus groups over the past six months.

Of course, Davey’s campaign to sell the funding plan around the state has had its critics, perhaps none more biting than the Marblehead-based Citizens for Limited Taxation. A recent post on the organization’s website calls the efforts “a dog-and-pony show lining up interests who thrive off government spending.”

Barbara Anderson, the group’s executive director, said Patrick’s and Davey’s efforts to inspire enthusiasm in Massachusetts residents is part of a plan to raise expectations of how much taxes could rise, so a more modest increase would come as a relief.

“If they do something less than that, we’re all supposed to be incredibly grateful,” Anderson said.

Anderson argues the campaign has not convinced voters, and has instead targeted transportation advocacy groups who do not adequately represent the views of most Massachusetts residents.

“They go to every little group, and every little group is added to their long list of supporters who want a tax increase,” Anderson said, “even if some of these groups might be three AARP members in the far corner of the state.”

Promising large-scale products like South Coast Rail and trains from Boston to Springfield, she said, are gifts that may shore up support in communities outside of Boston, but will probably become mired in bureaucracy before they ever become a reality.

“You have a better chance of getting on a train to Hogwarts,” Anderson said, “than getting on a train to Fall River.”


The Eagle-Tribune
Sunday, March 24, 2013

An Eagle-Tribune editorial
Patrick loses interest in ‘adult conversation’ as he rolls out the kids


Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick has an off-putting habit of talking down to the very people he’s trying to talk into forking over more of their hard-earned money.

Whenever the governor is attempting to schmooze Bay State taxpayers into opening their wallets — which is frequently — he casts himself as the smartest guy in the room, the one who gets it and who has been trying ever so patiently to explain things to the rubes who just refuse to understand.

Like when Patrick was stumping in 2009 for a 19-cents-per-gallon hike in the state’s gas tax — which would have made ours the highest in the nation — he told an audience in Haverhill that “grown-ups” understand we “can’t have something for nothing.” At the time, the state budget was something around $28 billion — which is a whole lot of “nothing.”

Patrick rolled out his condescending attitude again in 2011 when he said we need to have “an adult conversation” about raising revenues to fund improvements to the state’s aging transportation infrastructure.

Now Patrick is again trying to con Massachusetts taxpayers out of their money — $1.9 billion this time, which he plans to raise largely by hiking the state income tax rate from 5.25 percent to 6.25 percent while dropping the sales tax to 4 percent. Even as Democratic leaders of the Legislature are scuttling away from Patrick’s revenue proposals like crabs along the tide line, the governor proclaims he thinks the $1.9 billion figure is the “right number” to fund his transportation and education plans.

This time, Patrick isn’t messing around. He’s rolling out the big guns on which Democrats depend when they really need to extract more money from the citizenry — kids, or as they are known in political hack-speak, “utes.”

So much for adult conversations.

Last week, the governor appeared on the Statehouse steps surrounded by 100 teenagers affiliated with a coalition of youth groups and advocates calling itself “Youth of Massachusetts Organizing for a Reformed Economy,” or “YMORE.” Their mission, according to their press release, is “to raise teen voices for fair revenue.” Word to the wise: “Fair” never means “less.”

As they surrounded the governor, the young people held signs, some with one-word slogans such as “compassion,” “equity” and “courage.”

These impressionable young people are trained to parrot whatever their mentors in the advocacy industry tell them. Then they are marched off to serve as props for Democratic politicians trying to sell their latest brand of “progressive” pablum.

It’s a pity no one has the “courage” to tell these young people the truth: The politicians they so willingly serve are bankrupting their futures. There is no free lunch. Someone, someday will have to pay for all the marvelous programs and initiatives purchased today with borrowed or squandered money. Guess who, kids!

Massachusetts is struggling to claw its way out of a recession. The state’s tax-supported debt is among the highest in the nation. Its pension system is woefully underfunded. Yet Patrick wants to raise taxes on every wage-earner in the state not to reduce debt or meet prior commitments but so he can spend $1.9 billion per year more.

By all means, let’s have an adult conversation. Let’s send the kids home and talk about the wisdom and propriety of a state spending away its future and making promises it can never keep.


The Boston Globe
Sunday, March 24, 2013

Proposed tax increases a concern for Mass. businesses
By Jay Fitzgerald


For much of the past several months, local businesses have had their eyes on Washington, as Congress and the Obama administration faced off in one showdown after another. But as federal officials lurch from fiscal cliffs to sequesters to debt ceilings, big issues with big stakes for Massachusetts businesses are being debated in the Legislature.

With the economy recovering and state finances stabilizing, many in the business community expected a relatively quiet session on Beacon Hill this year. But those expectations were dashed when Governor Deval Patrick proposed $1.9 billion in tax increases — including about $500 million in new corporate taxes — to help pay for education, transportation, and other state programs.

Those proposed increases — which have particular implications for the high tech, real estate, and retail industries — top the policy agenda for business advocacy groups. But they are far from the only issues that could have far-reaching effects on the Massachusetts business climate and economy.

Lawmakers will also decide how much to spend on the state’s aging transportation system and how to finance it; how to reconcile the state’s universal health care law with a similar federal law without boosting costs for thousands of small businesses here; and whether to overhaul the state’s unemployment insurance system.

Here are some of the issues that businesses groups are closely monitoring this session:

High tech tax blues. Of the governor’s proposed $500 million in new corporate taxes, more than half would come from applying the state sales tax to customized software and computer and data processing services, which are now exempt.

Tech firms say the tax would make their products less competitive at a time when global competition is fiercer than ever. They also say such a tax couldn’t come at worse time. Many firms do work for the Defense Department and other federal agencies, and their contracts could be cut or eliminated as automatic federal budget reductions know as the sequester go into effect.

“It’s a really bad idea,” said Chris Anderson, president of the Massachusetts High Technology Council, an industry group in Waltham. “This is not a good time to destabilize the [tech] business climate.”

Anderson added that taxing computer services could open the door to broaden the sales tax to a wide range of business and professional services, from accounting to consulting.

Home-sale capital gains taxes. Under state law, homeowners don’t have to pay taxes on the first $500,000 in capital gains that they realize from the sale of primary residences. The governor wants to eliminate that exemption to raise up to $285 million in new revenues, according to estimates by the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a business financed research group in Boston.

Rob Authier, chief executive of the Massachusetts Association of Realtors, said raising the capital gains taxes could discourage many people from putting their homes on the market, undermining the housing market when it has only recently begun to rebound from the collapse of the housing bubble several years ago.

There’s already a shortage of homes on the market, which is holding back the housing recovery, analysts say. “This proposal came as a real shocker to us,” said Authier.

The governor’s other proposals to eliminate a septic system repair credit (up to $15 million) and lead-paint removal credit ($3 million) could also add costs to buying a home and slow sales, Authier said.

Candy, soda, and tobacco. Patrick has proposed offsetting an increase in the state income tax to 6.25 percent from 5.25 percent by cutting the state sales tax to 4.5 percent from 6.25 percent. But Patrick would also apply the sales tax to sodas and candy, and raise taxes on tobacco products.

Those proposals have retailers divided.

Jon Hurst, president of the Retailers Association of Massachusetts, said larger retailers – such as electronics, appliance, and furniture stores — welcome an overall cut in the tax, which they say would make their products more competitive with retailers in nearby states.

But he noted that proposals could harm small grocers in border communities who must also compete against nearby retailers in other states, particularly New Hampshire.

“We have such a broad, diverse membership that different members have different attitudes toward the governor’s plans,” said Hurst.

Unemployment insurance overhaul. Massachusetts provides some of the most generous unemployment benefits in the country and businesses pay some of the highest unemployment insurance premiums.

For years, the business community has called for the Legislature to reduce some of those benefits to lower costs and make businesses here more competitive. And for years, lawmakers have resisted such changes, amid vehement opposition from organized labor.

House Speaker Robert DeLeo recently signaled that he’s open to some change in order to reduce costs to employers, although he didn’t provide details.

Business groups have subsequently proposed a number of changes, including reducing the number of weeks unemployed workers can collect benefits to 26 weeks from 30, which would bring Massachusetts’ rules in line with most other states. That and other changes could save employers, who now pay an average $745 a year per worker for unemployment insurance, as much as $260 million in one-time and annual savings, according to Associated Industries of Massachusetts, the state’s largest employers’ group.

A spokesman for the AFL-CIO of Massachusetts, the state’s largest labor organization, declined comment until specific proposals are unveiled by lawmakers.

Obamacare mandates. Federal regulators have served notice that they intend to implement new health insurance rules under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare.

But some of those rules clash with current state laws, including how insurers set premiums for small businesses and their workers, via rating factors such as the age of covered employees. Lora Pellegrini, president of the Massachusetts Association of Health Plans, said the net effect of the federal changes could be unspecified premium increases for many small business owners and the 640,000 employees their plans cover.

If federal regulators refuse to budge, there’s technically nothing that Massachusetts lawmakers can do to overrule those specific decisions. But if premiums rise as a result of Obamacare, political pressure could build on state lawmakers to eliminate some mandated services to lower costs.

Transportation improvements. There’s widespread consensus that the state needs to come up with more money to address operating deficits at the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority and pay for highway and other projects elsewhere in the state.

The Patrick administration has pegged the number at nearly $1 billion per year and proposed financing the work with the income tax increase.

But business groups and many lawmakers say if higher taxes are needed, the state should increase the gas tax, which is dedicated for transportation. The state’s gas tax, now 23.5 cents per gallon, hasn’t been raised since 1991.

The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation has proposed a 9-cent increase in the gas tax and an average $10 increase in various vehicle registration fees to raise $800 million per year for transportation projects by 2018.

John Regan, executive vice president at Associated Industries of Massachusetts, said his and other business groups tentatively support a gas tax increase. “But it can’t be a blank check,” he said. “We have to know where the money is going.”


The Boston Globe
Sunday, March 24, 2013

A Boston Globe editorial
Patrick’s ambitious tax plan offers basis for compromise


Far too often in public life important choices get reduced to sound bites, tradeoffs between interest groups, or ideological reflexes. Only rarely do political leaders challenge the community to look at the full picture, to engage in a rigorous discussion about the connection between today’s choices and tomorrow’s results — to think bigger, but also pay closer attention to the details: How the bills will be paid, which outcomes are desired, how progress can be measured.

Governor Patrick deserves credit for producing a budget proposal that not only lays out the choices, but is flexible enough to serve as a template for reasoned compromise. The governor released his plan about four months before the budget was due to be finished, and invited all citizens, not merely the usual actors on Beacon Hill, to participate in the debate.

The governor’s plan includes four components: A sizable funding increase for transportation; a guarantee of early-childhood education for low-income toddlers; a sizable increase in Mass. grant funding for income-eligible college students; and a dramatic reordering of state income-tax deductions to make it more progressive — that is, less burdensome to low-income people and more so to those earning above $62,000.

Not all of these plans are equally necessary. Some of Patrick’s tax proposals place a heavier burden on the middle class in order to help those one rung lower on the income ladder. But there should be no question that Patrick has his priorities in order: Even those investments that might appear to be discretionary — items that can be put off for a better day — are closely tied to the state’s economic future. This isn’t a politician’s wish list.

The plan shouldn’t be viewed as an up-or-down, all-or-nothing proposition. The Legislature, sensibly, has begun a rigorous review, leaving nothing off the table. But there is still time for many more voices to be heard, and the final product will, by necessity, be born of a spirit of compromise. Over each of the next four days, we will address a key aspect of Patrick’s proposal on its own merits, to provide a frame for the debate. Hopefully, the state’s leaders can then find agreement on a spending plan that addresses at least the most urgent of Patrick’s priorities — transportation — and his most transformative — the guarantee of early education for low-income children.

The plan shouldn’t be viewed as an up-or-down, all-or-nothing proposition.

While the state’s transportation agencies have been combined in a dramatic restructuring, and efforts have been made to cut costs by removing redundancies, there have been fewer like-minded reforms in public higher education. The state’s community colleges and universities have had their state aid cut severely in recent years. But their request for more taxpayer support would be more acceptable if they had already exhausted the alternatives — such as limiting aid for students who stay beyond four years, and finally centralizing the administrative functions of the nation’s most decentralized university system.

These cost-cutting measures could bring down costs for most students without the hundreds of millions of dollars in additional funding that Patrick proposes.

By contrast, there is no viable alternative for the T’s debt-laden operating budget, or to fund long-planned priorities such as the Green Line extension into Somerville. And there are no dollars available to take advantage of new technologies to enable self-propelled, diesel-powered railcars to run on commuter-rail tracks, thereby providing more convenient service at a lower cost.

There is no similar breakdown or looming threat to require an expansion of early-childhood education. That’s why some people on Beacon Hill are simply willing to put it off for another day. That would relieve a little pressure on today’s budget, but at the cost of a generation of toddlers who are already falling behind their peers. Studies show that learning gaps are apparent as early as 24 months, meaning that when disadvantaged children finally get to school, many lack the skills to succeed. Then, teachers end up spending more time on students who are unprepared than on those who are ready to learn.

Support for early-childhood education crosses the usual political boundaries. Many conservatives embrace the idea that early intervention is far cheaper and more effective than the huge amounts spent on special-ed programs in later grades; if receiving earlier enrichment enabled even a small percentage of students to bypass special ed, the state would, on balance, save money. Patrick’s proposal also would require preschools to adopt rigorous new standards, essentially transforming daycare centers into learning centers, which would benefit almost every child in the Commonwealth. The Legislature should strive to maintain the ambition of the proposal, while cutting back modestly on its price tag to limit the tax bite.

Any such bite will feel sharp, especially to families who’ve yet to feel the benefits of a rebounding economy, but are already feeling the effects of the end of the federal payroll-tax cut. Patrick’s plan attempts to shield the most vulnerable families by adding deductions that benefit those with lower incomes while removing loopholes that are valuable to those with higher incomes. He calls for a big increase in the income tax — a full 1 percent, from the current 5.25 to 6.25 — coupled with a big cut in the sales tax, from the current 6.25 to 4.5 percent.

But Massachusetts’s sales tax carries so many exemptions that it is already quite low — 42d out of the 46 states with a sales tax, in terms of sales-tax revenue as a percentage of income. With food, clothing, and other necessities exempted, the sales-tax burden falls more on those buying new cars and luxury consumer goods than on struggling parents tending to their kids. Without the sales-tax cut, the Legislature could fund the state’s priorities with a far lower hike in the income tax while preserving those deductions that are most important to the middle class. Adding to the gas tax — a favored alternative for some state representatives — would impose an immediate burden on lower-income families with long commutes; but indexing the current tax to inflation — which would mean adding a penny per gallon every three years or so — would obviate the need for future tax hikes for transportation funding.

Good government requires a mix of pragmatism and idealism, of rigid cost management and responsiveness to new opportunities. Patrick has put forward an impressive agenda; the Legislature now must turn it into a blueprint. The state government has shown itself to be capable of major initiatives. Its willingness to rise to the occasion and take on big challenges — such as education reform and health care coverage — have made it a model for other states. This is another opportunity to demonstrate Massachusetts’s capacity for leadership, to build the physical and programmatic infrastructure necessary to compete for the next generation of jobs. From the options that Patrick has spelled out, the Legislature should strive to find an equitable mix of revenue sources to enact policies that will put the state on stronger footing for the future.

TOMORROW: A look at the state’s transportation needs


The Boston Herald
Sunday, March 24, 2013

A Boston Herald editorial
Test of a tax plan


Gov. Deval Patrick’s latest education plan is all about new spending — much of it with no strings attached. But administration officials, as they rush from one staged rally with their tax hike boosters to another, don’t particularly like it when critics point that out.

Just ask the Massachusetts Business Alliance for Education, which has raised a legitimate concern — that Patrick’s plan to spend $1 billion more on education over the next four years, fueled
 by a massive increase in taxes, lacks sufficient accountability measures and isn’t the ironclad guarantee of success the administration is painting it to be.

The MBAE’s concerns have been dismissed by both Patrick and Education Secretary Matthew Malone, who told the State House News Service “they’re wrong, and they need to get their facts straight.” The “investments,” he noted, are indeed “targeted.”

Oh, well in that case ...

Malone also suggested the group is linked to charter school support — as if that makes their concerns about the plan any less credible. Malone, a charter school opponent who was superintendent in Brockton until late last year, clearly hasn’t gotten the memo that this administration claims to support expanding access to charter schools.

But back to Patrick’s big education plan.

The governor says he needs $350 million over four years to eliminate the waiting list for low-income families for pre-school and day care. He is of course asking families who may be struggling to pay their own pre-school and day care bills to pay higher taxes to achieve that end. We suspect those taxpayers might also have a few reservations about the $60 million they’d have to pay to send pre-school teachers back to school.

Patrick’s plan also increases state education aid to cities and towns by $226 million — a straight increase in the current funding formula, which is where the business group centers most of its concern since the funds are unrestricted.

The plan also calls for millions to allow for longer school days, and earmarks much of the new funding for 24 “gateway cities” where the achievement gap is the highest. Sounds great, until you realize this is the same administration that has refused to support a wholesale lifting of the cap on public charter schools, many of which offer expanded learning time for students. That’s free of charge, Gov.

We agree with the governor that education is the key to opportunity and economic success. What we don’t want is a return to the days when just throwing more money at the system passed for real “reform.”


The Boston Globe
Monday, March 25, 2013

A Boston Globe editorial
Transportation needs are clear; reforms help justify funding hike


Almost a decade after the Big Dig’s completion, the toxic legacy of the bloated highway project still haunts the state. Debt from Central Artery-related projects gnaws away at the MBTA’s budget, forcing fare hikes and service cuts; residual public distrust over the mishandling of the project undercuts efforts to build political support for roads and bridges.

It is time, though, to move on. The state is making progress at reform. A 2009 law consolidated the transportation agencies, and the organizational culture is changing. In one of the most visible signs of change, the Turnpike is even phasing out costly toll collectors in favor of open-road tolling. There is always room to improve, and the state should never stop seeking savings, but the administration and MassDOT secretary Richard Davey are taking meaningful steps to restore public confidence.

Now, as part of his ambitious budget plan, Governor Deval Patrick has asked the Legislature to approve roughly $1 billion in additional revenue for the Commonwealth’s roads, bridges, and transit systems. It would be the biggest infusion of cash into transportation in years. Most of the funds, though, would just go toward clearing the backlog of pent-up needs: new cars for the Red Line and Orange Line, where equipment is decades old and increasingly unreliable; repairs to roadway bridges across the state; a new highway viaduct in Springfield; and the long-promised extension of the Green Line into Somerville.

These are critical investments that will bolster the state’s competitiveness. A dependable transportation system is key to attracting and retaining workers, opening up new neighborhoods for transit-oriented housing, and creating a more environmentally sound economy. As the Legislature weighs the transportation plan against the education components of Patrick’s plan, the need to catch up on overdue transportation investments should be the most urgent.

Patrick has also asked for money for several expansion projects, with a laudable emphasis on underserved areas. The plan would fund commuter rail to New Bedford and Fall River, which would link a struggling region to Boston’s more vigorous economy. He also wants the state to buy smaller trainsets of self-propelled rail cars called “diesel multiple units,” which would permit more frequent, subway-like service on commuter rail tracks near Boston. These DMUs could improve service on the busy routes through close-in suburbs, but also on the Fairmount Line through some neglected parts of Dorchester. Patrick is also proposing passenger rail service to Springfield and the Berkshires — projects that seem like second-tier priorities but still hold promise, especially if the state can forge a partnership with Connecticut to share the costs of rail expansion.

Lawmakers can’t let the ghost of the Big Dig continue to thwart the state’s needs forever.

Finally, Patrick’s plan would also end one of the more irresponsible fiscal practices inherited from the Big Dig era. Since the 1990s, the state has been paying some transportation employees with borrowed money. MassDOT has already taken steps toward eliminating that practice. Taxpayers won’t notice any difference when the rest of the agency’s employees move off the capital budget, but it will save money in the long run.

Raiding the capital budget for salaries was merely a symptom of the profligate Big Dig culture. Lawmakers should certainly never forget the lessons of that debacle. But nor can they let its ghost continue to thwart the state’s needs forever.

Tomorrow: A look at early childhood education


The Boston Herald
Monday, March 25, 2013

A Boston Herald editorial
Taxing even the cloud


Every time we turn over the rock that is Gov. Deval Patrick’s $2 billion tax hike plan, another foul smell emerges.

This time we have the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation to thank for analyzing what the governor’s plan calls a tax on “custom modifications to software and other computer services,” expected to bring in $265 million in new revenue a year. Currently software is taxable but computer services are not. But, the governor’s office insists, “with the migration of software first to the ‘web’ and now to the ‘cloud,’ the line” between the two is becoming “untenable.” And so, in the spirit of “fairness” he wants to tax the beejesus out of both.

The Taxpayers Foundation called the tax a “Pandora’s Box” that is so “unclear and complex” that it would tax everything from a custom-designed website to cloud computing, data storage, virtually all computer programming and even health care diagnostics (so much for health care cost containment).

The proposed tax “targets industries that drive innovation, productivity and economic growth and makes locating or expanding in Massachusetts that much more expensive and unattractive for all businesses seeking to compete in the 21st century,” the Foundation’s report said.

Associated Industries of Massachusetts noted in a separate statement to legislators, “Targeting taxes on the tools of efficiency will throw sand in the gears of an economy already struggling to build up steam.”

In all, according to AIM, the governor proposes to hit businesses with about $500 million in new taxes. And that is, of course, on top of additional costs related to Obamacare.

In attempting to counter the Taxpayers Foundation’s charges, Alex Zaroulis, spokesperson for the Office of Administration and Finance, only managed to confirm everyone’s worst suspicions.

“The governor’s proposal makes our tax system fairer by making sure that business taxes are paid not just by established or declining industries but by newer, growing ones.”

Precisely. Others would call that “killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.”

 

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