CLT UPDATE
Thursday, April 11, 2013
The tax hike ball's now in the Senate
—
Act Now!
|
While legislative leaders are publicly sticking
to their plan to pass a $500 million tax hike bill, Gov. Deval
Patrick said Tuesday he’s talking to state senators about other
options and sees a way to pass a larger tax increase....
“I think there’s a way to get to a number that is
in middle between where I started and where the House is in their
vote, and at that level, to do something important and long-term and
do lasting good in transportation and education but we still have a
lot of work to get there,” Patrick said told reporters.
State House News Service
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
On heels of House vote, Patrick sees path for larger tax package
Confronting local officials satisfied with the
Legislature’s $500 million tax proposal to fund transportation and
eager to receive local road funding, Patrick administration
officials countered Tuesday that it is not enough for regions
outside the MBTA zone.
State House News Service
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
On transportation, Murray say, "To some extent it's all where you
sit"
A House-approved $500 million tax bill cleared
the Senate Ways and Means Committee 12-2 on Tuesday, with three more
members reserving their rights to cast a yes or no vote on the bill.
The bill quickly faced resistance on the Senate
floor Tuesday, where Sen. Sonia Chang Diaz objected to taking up a
procedural order Senate leaders hoped to pass to set up debate on
the bill later this week. The bill was placed on the Senate’s
calendar for a formal session Wednesday; Senate leaders have
expressed hope for a debate on the measure Thursday....
Twelve mayors sent a letter to House and Senate
lawmakers on Tuesday urging them to support new revenue above the
$500 million mark in the House-approved bill. “We are concerned that
the proposal unveiled last week will not provide sufficient funds to
avoid significant increases in tolls, fares, and fees (especially
after FY2016) and to ensure the repair and construction of important
capital projects we all have in our cities,” wrote the mayors from
Somerville, Springfield, Salem, Fall River, Fitchburg, Everett,
Melrose, Medford, New Bedford, Chelsea, Taunton and Cambridge.
State House News Service
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
Tax bill breezes through Senate W&M, hits snag in Senate
My way or the highway.
That sums up Gov. Deval Patrick's view of
compromise with the state Legislature over his whopping $1.9 billion
tax-increase proposal, a proposal that has been cut down to $500
million.
Either he gets everything he wants, he says, or
he is going to veto whatever his fellow Democrats in the Legislature
send him. That is Patrick's version of compromise.
And if he doesn't get want he wants, the governor
said, people are going to suffer....
Time after time, issue after issue, Patrick, like
President Obama (they share the same political advisers), has
attempted to bypass the Legislature, believing he could take his
case to the people and get them to pressure their individual
lawmakers. This tactic usually serves only to alienate legislators.
Patrick tried it again Friday, just before
Monday's House action on the watered down tax bill, when he sent an
email letter out from his political action committee to supporters
asking them to weigh in on the issue, calling the DeLeo-Murray plan
a "pretend" solution.
Had Patrick spent more time negotiating with
legislators, which a governor is supposed to do, rather than making
a political campaign out of everything, he might fare better at the
Statehouse.
But this is not Patrick's style and never has
been....
When asking legislators to vote for the biggest
tax increase in history, it is a good idea to let them know that you
will be around for a while watching their backs.
That will not be happening, and they know it.
Patrick made this issue his way or the highway.
Wave goodbye to the governor.
The Lowell Sun
Tuesday, April 9, 2012
Patrick tax-hike plan on road to perdition
By Peter Lucas
The state Senate is willing to dedicate more to
roads and bridges than the $500 million in new taxes approved by the
House late Monday night, but still will not come close to the level
of investment Governor Deval Patrick has requested, Senate President
Therese Murray signaled on Tuesday.
The transportation funding bill headed for the
Senate floor endorses the same tax increases approved by the House
Monday, but would boost transportation spending by redirecting money
from other parts of the state budget and imposing a new fee on
utility companies. By fiscal 2018, the Senate draft would spend
about $126 million more on transportation than the House version,
Senate officials said.
This step toward compromise could place Patrick,
who has requested an additional $1.9 billion in tax revenue to pay
for transportation and education, in the position of either
softening his insistence on a tax hike of more than $1 billion (his
veto threat was specifically aimed at the House bill, which would be
rendered obsolete by the Senate bill), or risk losing what could be
his last chance to increase spending on what he calls critical
investments....
The Senate could vote on the bill as early as
Thursday, but liberal senators who agree with Patrick are likely to
force a delay until early next week.
The Boston Globe
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
State Senate may add funds to transportation bill
Bill would still fall far short of Patrick’s request
Our governor is about to suffer a stinging
rebuke. The man most responsible for that?
Deval Laurdine Patrick.
Patrick and his team have over-reached badly on
his big tax-and-spending package. He now faces this choice: Settle
for much less or risk getting nothing at all....
So what happened? ...
Had Patrick focused on working inside the
building, he might have gotten DeLeo on board for a tax plan of $600
million to $700 million. Instead, Patrick seemed to believe he could
generate enough outside-the-building momentum for something much
larger.
It now looks like he’ll be lucky to get $600
million in new revenue.
There’s a lesson to learn from all this, a lesson
about consultation and about the politics of the possible. As
Patrick moves further into lame-duck-dom, the governor and his team
need to take heed.
The Boston Globe
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Lesson for a lame duck
By Scot Lehigh
Senate leaders showed signs of caving to Gov.
Deval Patrick last night, advancing a revamped $805 million
transportation bill that could mean T fare hikes and higher turnpike
tolls on top of new taxes.
“We just sent the governor a package ... which is
a little different, and they have it,” said Senate President Therese
Murray. “I bet you haven’t even seen it.” ...
Earlier in the day, [Senate President Therese
Murray] accused Patrick of leaning on senators to use parliamentary
tactics to stall DeLeo’s $505 million proposal. Patrick, meanwhile,
continued to describe the speaker’s plan as unacceptable.
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Senate bending with $805M bill
Battle expected over transportation taxes
As attention focuses on the merits of the
administration’s $1.9 billion tax plan versus the Legislature’s more
modest package, I am troubled by the dearth of discussion about Gov.
Deval Patrick’s proposed major structural changes to the state tax
code. I have been a CPA specializing in tax for nearly three
decades, so while evaluating this proposal, my frame of reference
goes well beyond my time in the Legislature. In the governor’s quest
to raise nearly $2 billion in revenue while simultaneously
restructuring the tax code, I fear we will be left with a tax code
that is flat as a pancake and devoid of deductions that help those
most in need.
The Salem News
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Tax changes in governor’s plan could hurt, not help
By State Rep. Lori Ehrlich
Few seem happy with the 3-cent gasoline tax
increase passed by state representatives on Monday.
Some lawmakers think it is too much; others have
condemned it as too little. Gasoline dealers think it will hurt
business. Others think the plan to tie further increases to
inflation creates an ever-rising gas tax that will hurt low-income
families the most....
Supporters say it is necessary to cover rising
transportation costs and will not drastically affect consumers. But
Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation
says it isn't enough.
"We keep losing ground in terms of maintaining
roads and bridges when we're essentially reducing spending in
absolute dollars," he said....
Backers of the plan said the average consumer
would pay $12 to $30 more per year in gasoline taxes. But Rep.
Dennis Rosa, D-Leominster, is wary of a tax that increases with
inflation.
"In 20 years, the tax will go up almost 10 cents,
and that increase is a lot bigger than people think," said Rosa.
The Lowell Sun
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
House vote to hike Mass. gas tax leaves few cheering
As the Legislature moves ahead with its own
transportation revenue plans, Gov. Deval Patrick on Wednesday
morning recast his request, indicating receptiveness to a floor of
$750 million in new tax revenues for transportation....
“If the Senate can get to the seven-fifty, eight
hundred number, net of fees, fares and tolls – not including fees,
fares and tolls. We can take care of that, and reforms. We can take
care of that. If they can get in that range, then we will have done
something important for transportation. We still need to deal with
education,” Patrick told the News Service Wednesday morning....
[Rep. William Straus, D-Mattapoisett, co-chairman
of the Transportation Committee] also questioned Patrick’s tactics,
saying the governor had told a group of House lawmakers Monday to
vote against the House plan “because then we can start to
compromise.”
“That’s a curious way to approach any legislative
body, which is to advocate that a bill dies so that you find
yourself, believe that you’ll be in a bargaining position,” Straus
said during a Boston Foundation forum on transportation investments.
“Maybe he’s under the illusion that he has successfully killed the
proposal. I don’t know. We’re going to continue to try to find the
solution here.”
State House News Service
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
As guv talks numbers, lawmakers describe politics of passing taxes
House leaders unveiled a $33.8 billion state
budget proposal for fiscal 2014 on Wednesday, calling for a 3.9
percent increase in state spending that cuts $1 billion off Gov.
Deval Patrick’s proposed budget but dedicates enough new revenue to
UMass to avoid tuition and fee hikes for two years.
The budget approved Wednesday morning by the
House Ways and Means Committee also boosts funding for local aid by
$21.3 million over last year and increases public school aid by $25
per student, or $109.5 million....
The House budget proposal, which will be debated
by the House beginning April 22, would draw $350 million from the
state’s stabilization account, or $50 million less than Patrick’s
proposed spending from the “rainy day” fund. The budget also counts
on $83.1 million in casino licensing revenues new to the budget
process.
State House News Service
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
House $33.8 billion budget taxes, spends less than Patrick
House leaders proposed a $33.8 billion budget
Wednesday for the upcoming fiscal year that would boost funding for
higher education and local aid but would reject Governor Deval
Patrick’s push for universal pre-kindergarten, one of his top
priorities.
The plan represents a second setback for the
governor, after House lawmakers earlier this week scuttled his $1.9
billion tax hike for education and transportation in favor of a $500
million tax increase focused more narrowly on shoring up the MBTA
and regional transit authorities.
Overall, the House budget unveiled Wednesday
would chop $1 billion out of the $34.8 billion budget that Patrick
proposed in January and would increase spending by 3.9 percent,
compared to the 6.9 percent increase Patrick wants. Patrick and the
Legislature must resolve their differences and approve a budget by
July 1, when the new fiscal year begins.
While the governor proposed using his $1.9
billion tax hike to build rail lines across the state and eliminate
the waiting list for pre-kindergarten programs, most of the spending
increases in the House plan would be limited to essentials such as
state debt payments, pension obligations, collective bargaining
agreements, and entitlement programs like Medicare. There are even a
few cuts, including a reduction in funding for youth jobs and civil
legal aid for the poor....
The House budget also seeks to crack down on
welfare fraud following a recent report by the inspector general,
who found that the Patrick administration has been handing out $25
million in welfare benefits annually to recipients who cannot prove
they are eligible.
The House plan responds by creating a $300,000
Bureau of Program Integrity to root out welfare fraud. The budget
also would require photos on Electronic Benefit Transfer cards, to
prevent trafficking of the cards. That idea has been pushed by
Republicans in the Legislature.
The Boston Globe
Thursday, April 11, 2013
House increases college, local aid
Proposal rejects Governor Patrick’s push for early education
expansion
It's 1990 again at the State House, at least in
the minds of many legislators. That was when the beleaguered
outgoing Democratic Governor Michael Dukakis, proclaiming “taxes are
like medicine,” signed a package of expansions of the income, gas,
and sales taxes. As legend has it, that tax hike so enraged the
public that 16 years of Republican governance followed....
For Democrats in the Legislature, going to voters
with a tail-between-the-legs message of government failure followed
inevitably by tax hikes would perpetuate exactly the attitude that
led to those 16 years of Republican rule — the idea that Democrats
aren’t competent or creative enough to make government work on their
own terms. Legislative leaders should be under no illusions here:
They don’t need to rubberstamp Patrick’s proposals. Nor do they need
to go as far as the governor does in raising taxes by $1.9 billion.
But to reject his entire approach would be to invite peril.
Most voters are ready to make a positive step
forward, and are willing to pay for it. What they won’t
tolerate is government inertia and inefficiency.
A Boston Globe editorial
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Tax hikes aren’t always toxic; government inertia is worse
A fed-up House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo —
already in a showdown with Gov. Deval Patrick over taxes — vowed
yesterday to clean up two scandal-ravaged agencies in the
Patrick Administration, telling the Herald the abuses in the
welfare and early education departments must stop....
DeLeo’s EBT card crackdown — coming on the
heels of Herald reports about rampant mismanagement and abuse of
taxpayer-funded welfare and food stamp money within the state’s
Department of Transitional Assistance — is aimed at stopping
fraud before it starts, he said.
He’d require photos on EBT cards and launch a
Bureau of Program Integrity — with a director
appointed by the
Inspector General — to stop
ineligible EBT recipients from
making the welfare rolls.
A task force also would figure out how
different state agencies can share information about recipients
to make sure they’re not lying about their qualifications.
“I’m not trying to punish people,” DeLeo
said. “What we’re trying to do is see that the taxpayers’ money
is not wasted, and that only those who are entitled to receive
these benefits get those benefits.”
DeLeo also wants to fix the state’s
Department of Early Education and Care — rocked by Commissioner
Sherri Killins’ abrupt resignation amid an uproar over her
Connecticut residency and side
superintendent internship,
as
well as a state audit showing child care centers and registered
sex
offenders sharing the same addresses.
Patrick wants to inject early ed with $350
million in extra funding, but DeLeo was clear yesterday — no
extra money until the agency cleans up its act.
“I think we can be prepared in the future to
make that investment, but making an investment in a system that
we’re
uncertain as to whether it’s working properly I think is
foolhardy,” DeLeo said....
But House Minority Leader Brad Jones (R-North
Reading) argued DeLeo’s welfare proposal simply doesn’t go far
enough.
“I think
the speaker’s trying to put shine
on his sneakers here,” Jones said of the welfare proposal. “It’s
a great first step, but it’s not addressing all that needs to be
addressed.”
The Boston Herald
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Robert A. DeLeo vows cleanup
Targets EBT fraud, early-education abuses
House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo remained
determined to advance his $500 million transportation plan
yesterday, suggesting Gov.
Deval Patrick’s $1.9 billion plan
could hurt the state’s financial
reputation.
“Quite frankly, I’m gonna be damned if what
we worked so hard to see an increase in our bond rating, if
we’re going to lose it as a
result of some of the plans out
there. It just can’t happen,” DeLeo told the Herald.
“This isn’t about a question of
personalities. This isn’t about a question of who’s got the
better plan,” he said....
DeLeo said it was premature to know whether
there’s enough support in the House to override a
Patrick-promised veto but
admitted it’s been challenging to
build a consensus.
“We not only have
Republicans on one side,
we have quite a few Democrats also on that side who say, ‘We
don’t want any new revenue,’ and then we have folks on the other
side saying, ‘We can’t get enough revenue,’” DeLeo said.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Speaker: Gov’s $1.9B plan puts rating at risk
A $500 million legislative transportation
financing bill that has cleared the House, but is now under
Senate scrutiny will better establish benchmarks for revenue,
savings and reforms for both the state Department of
Transportation and MBTA compared to Gov. Deval Patrick's $1.9
billion proposal, Senate President Therese Murray said today....
"There is a growing disconnect between state
government and the people," she said. "We need to focus on
regaining the trust of the people of Massachusetts by showing
them how their money is being spent and that each dollar is
going as far as it can."
The Boston Herald
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Senate President Murray touts Legislature's transportation plan
Given the choice between a budget proposal
that jacks up annual state spending by 7 percent and one that
comes in at about half that, well, we can guess where most
taxpayers would stand. The $33.8 billion spending plan for
fiscal 2014 unveiled by House Speaker Robert DeLeo and Ways and
Means Chairman Brian Dempsey (D-Haverhill) yesterday is rooted
far more deeply in reality than the one offered up by Gov. Deval
Patrick.
The budget includes the widely-reported
gasoline and tobacco tax hikes to fund a transportation bailout
— but the “new revenue” stops there. DeLeo and Dempsey stressed
that protecting the middle class by sparing them an income tax
hike was a priority....
We’ll have more on the House budget in
Friday’s Herald, including some of the reforms that accompany
the spending.
But for now, it’s a relief to know there are
folks on Beacon Hill who have a grip on reality.
A Boston Herald editorial
Thursday, April 11, 2013
House lives in real world
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Editorial Cartoon by Jerry Holbert
The Telegram & Gazette
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Editorial Cartoon by David Hitch
|
|
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
There are sure a lot of moving parts whirring on
Bacon Hill these days; keeping up with all the animated pieces in
the short term is almost hopeless.
As I write this, I just heard on WRKO radio that
Gov. Patrick is now "reconsidering" his announcement that he won't
run for re-election again. This is no doubt in response to his
self-imposed status as a lame-duck governor and his derogatory
challenge to legislators to 'show courage' and commit political
suicide for his legacy. He still needs to explain his own
political "courage" when he ran for re-election against Republican
Charlie Baker — stating in fact that he
had no intention of raising broad-based taxes.
Gov. Deval Patrick seems to finally recognize
that he's become pretty much irrelevant in this taxes-and-budget
season. He won't be around to suffer the consequences. I don't
think it's as much that he's a lame-duck governor as it is that he's
trying to govern from some distant, unrealistic planet. As political
consultant David Axelrod's test-tube prototype for the first Obama
for President campaign, he's simply using the ongoing Obama
blueprint.
Apparently his perpetual campaign strategy for
huge tax hikes has sputtered, if not failed:
The Boston Globe wrote on April 6 ("Gridlock
deepens on Mass. transportation bill"):
Lawmakers complain that Patrick stirred
up activists to put them in an awkward position, wiring his
vaunted grass-roots network to apply pressure and pitting
traditional allies against one another....
Patrick aides respond that the pressure came about because
legislators said they were hearing only
antitax arguments and needed
political cover from advocates. They point out that Patrick,
by design, stumped publicly in districts represented by both
Democratic and Republican leaders.
Those "antitax arguments" were coming from you,
from us, and from other taxpayers of the Commonwealth
— actual stakeholders in this
debate — and your arguments obviously
made a difference. They can still make the difference and are
equally necessary, as the Senate is now getting wobbly.
Already the Senate bill has increased spending over the House bill,
if not with more tax increases — yet,
by moving around current/anticipated state funds.
It's now time to contact your state senator,
tell them "Not One Cent More!"
Find and contact your State Representative and State Senator
Who are my
elected officials
In the state Senate, tax-borrow-and-spend
senators are stalling for more, more, more taxes. Patrick
administration officials and the Gimme Lobby have launched a full
arm-twisting assault besieging senators. If you want some balance,
make your voice heard NOW before it's too late.
Next we'll need to deal with the FY2014 state
budget. The House has released its version, subject to amendments
still to be proposed . . .
In the meantime, the best thing we can accomplish
is a large showing at the Tea Party's Tax Day Rally on Boston Common
on Saturday.
We taxpayers don't often have the luxury of time
to show up collectively and "demonstrate" for the media and pols. We
have jobs and more important responsibilities. But one day a year
— on a Saturday weekend day
— it's worth the time and effort.
We hope to see you there, along with as many
other taxpaying patriots who can break away for a few hours. Along
with sending a serious and major statement to the palace at the top
of the hill, we expect it to be a lot of fun!
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State House News Service
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
On heels of House vote, Patrick sees path for larger tax package
By Matt Murphy
While legislative leaders are publicly sticking to their plan to
pass a $500 million tax hike bill, Gov. Deval Patrick said Tuesday
he’s talking to state senators about other options and sees a way to
pass a larger tax increase.
On the heels of the House’s 97-55 vote just before midnight Monday
for a $500 million plan, the debate over taxes and transportation
investments shifted to the state Senate, which plans to take up a
tax bill this week.
Patrick said he was engaging with senators on potential amendments
to the House bill, but has yet to speak to either Speaker Robert
DeLeo or Senate President Therese Murray about a compromise.
“I think there’s a way to get to a number that is in middle between
where I started and where the House is in their vote, and at that
level, to do something important and long-term and do lasting good
in transportation and education but we still have a lot of work to
get there,” Patrick said told reporters.
The House plan would shore up finances at the MBTA and the
Department of Transportation, but Patrick has called it an
inadequate fix for the state’s long-term transportation needs and
has threatened to veto it. There was insufficient support in the
House Monday for a veto override and the bill awaits opposition in
the Senate too.
The governor in January proposed a larger slate of tax reforms to
generate $1.9 billion in new revenue for transportation and
educations, but indicated that privately he has suggested
alternative totals and methods of collecting the new revenue with
legislative leaders.
A spokesman for DeLeo could not immediately say whether the House
received offers of compromise from Patrick, but the governor hinted
that he could be looking for new revenue in the neighborhood of $1.2
billion.
“I think there’s a number between where they are and where I am, and
I mean really, exactly between where they are and where I started
where we can make some really meaningful improvement in our
transportation system and take some first meaningful steps on the
education side as well,” Patrick said.
Patrick said he has not spoken to DeLeo or Murray since they rolled
out their revenue proposal last Tuesday. “I have reached out. I have
not spoken to them,” Patrick said.
Murray issued a statement on Tuesday morning supporting DeLeo and
the vote taken by the House.
“The House took a very difficult and important vote yesterday in
passing our joint transportation financing bill. The Senate is next.
It is good, responsible legislation that will solve current problems
in our transportation system without hurting our recovery and
putting unnecessary burdens on working families who are still trying
to make it,” Murray said in her statement.
“Our plan requires transportation agencies to contribute a fair
share of their budget and follow through on unmet reforms. It also
sets the table for future investments in transportation as the
Commonwealth comes back into economic strength and stability. I will
continue to support this plan, and I stand with the Speaker as we go
through this process,” she said.
The lack of communication between the three Democrats has not
softened Patrick’s insistence that compromise is still possible, and
the governor, noting legislative leaders have committed to a
transportation funding solution, seemed to suggest that House Ways
and Means Chairman Brian Dempsey may have been bluffing last week
when he said House leaders were prepared to “move on” to other
issues should the $500 million tax proposal fail.
If the Legislature fails to direct new funding to the MBTA this
year, transit officials have already said 19 percent fare increases
and service cuts would be necessary to close the roughly $118
million budget gap at the agency.
“I don’t think that is likely to happen,” Patrick said, when asked
if he was prepared to accept an outcome of no new revenue for
transportation.
Kirsten Hughes, chairwoman of the MassGOP, predicted that voters
will hold Democrats accountable for raising taxes during next year’s
election.
"While I respectfully disagree with Governor Patrick on his reasons,
I agree he should veto the $500 million tax increase passed by the
Democrats in the House. It is surely frustrating to hardworking
families to see the Governor and his fellow Democrats in the
Legislature reflexively turn to tax increases when they have failed
to truly reform state government,” Hughes said in a statement.
The Senate plans to take up the transportation financing bill on
Thursday, and the Senate Ways and Means Committee is working on a
redraft of the legislation that Chairman Sen. Stephen Brewer said
would not deviate markedly from the framework of the House bill.
"I suspect that the main structure will be similar,” Brewer told the
News Service Tuesday morning, declining to offer any details about
the Senate's plans for the bill, saying only that it was the subject
of ongoing conversations.
As it did in the House, the tax bill will likely face opposition in
the Senate from Republicans who disapprove of tax hikes and from a
core of liberal Democrats who like Patrick want a larger tax
package.
“I’m not sure that the framework of this bill is a winning
framework,” Patrick said.
Unlike the House, the Senate features internal rules that enable any
member to unilaterally delay action on legislation by making a
motion to "lay on the table" any legislation.
The motion came into play, for example, during the heated debate
over legislation authorizing casinos, when opponents of that bill
deployed the rule to extend debate.
The Senate has also scheduled a formal session for Wednesday and
held its session open Tuesday in what appears to be an attempt to
pass an order laying out an amendment deadline on Wednesday for
Thursday’s debate. There could be an objection to that order from
liberal Senate Democrats who want to slow down the process long
enough and learn more about spending associated with new taxes in
the House budget due out on Wednesday.
Michael Norton contributed reporting
State House News Service
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
On transportation, Murray say, "To some extent it's all where you
sit"
By Andy Metzger
Confronting local officials satisfied with the Legislature’s $500
million tax proposal to fund transportation and eager to receive
local road funding, Patrick administration officials countered
Tuesday that it is not enough for regions outside the MBTA zone.
“I have had the opportunity to read through the House plan. I think
it’s a pretty solid plan. I think it builds a solid foundation,”
Braintree Mayor Joe Sullivan, a former House Democrat, at a meeting
of the Local Government Advisory Council Tuesday. “And I’m pragmatic
enough to know that I don’t see them revisiting this issue after
taking a vote yesterday. That’s my sense.”
“If I sat in Braintree I would probably have the same view that you
do. You’ve got the Greenbush Line, Red Line; you hope to get your
Chapter 90.” Lt. Gov. Tim Murray replied, going on to name mayors in
Fall River, Taunton and New Bedford who he said would be “not
pleased.”
“To some extent it’s all where you sit,” said the former mayor of
Worcester who has been lieutenant governor since 2007. He said, “I
think we’re trying to push it a little bit, see if we can find a
little better solution.”
For the local officials gathered in the governor’s suite, the
meeting was a chance to push for acceptance of the Legislature’s
plan and urge progress on passing the $300 million in local road
funding, known as Chapter 90 money. Those funds have once again
become hung up in larger policy and tax deliberations.
Transportation Secretary Richard Davey said he was “anxious” to see
upcoming versions of the bill, and said the bill approved by the
House appeared unable to provide the funding for the total local
roads package this year. Members of a Senate committee were voting
Tuesday on a bill that may include changes but, according to top
senators, is likely to be similar to the plan that passed the House
97-55.
“Without more revenues, the only capital bandwidth that’s created in
fiscal 2014, as near as we can tell, is moving some of our
employees, some of our highway employees off of the capital bond
program and onto our operating budget,” Davey said. “That will leave
the Chapter 90 program as proposed about $60 million short.”
Davey said if that situation persists, the administration could
either cut other capital projects or fund local roads lower than
$300 million. The current $200 million program is a record level of
Chapter 90 funding, but local officials say repair needs far outpace
available funding.
“The Chapter 90 program is really basic, basic building blocks,”
said Sherborn Selectman Paul DeRensis. “So as you consider different
alternatives, I urge you to remember that Chapter 90 benefits
everyone across the state and takes care of almost 90 percent of the
roads in the state.”
Davey said the town of Mount Washington, which borders New York,
receives about $7,000 in Chapter 90 funding, and there is a needed
bridge replacement in town that would cost $1.4 million.
“That’s where my team needs to step up and help,” Davey said.
While skeptics of the proposed commuter rail extension from Boston
to the South Coast have raised concerns about its $1.8 billion cost
and permitting challenges, Murray told the News Service recently
that some in the Boston media and business circles “think South
Coast rail is an extra, but it is not."
The state’s southeastern region the only area without rail service,
a slight that has hindered economic investment and job creation,
Murray said. "To me, it is an economic imperative; it is an
environmental imperative, it is a moral imperative to expand and
enhance their transportation options to rail," he said.
In his comments, Sullivan made brief mention of the acrimony that
has grown between the Patrick administration and the legislative
leaders who Gov. Deval Patrick accused of playing a “fiscal shell
game” and advancing a bill that proposes a “pretend fix” to
transportation system problems.
“There’s some rancor that’s developed,” Sullivan said.
Asked afterward whether the lawmakers he has spoken to have made
mention of the “shell game” comment, or Patrick’s other rhetoric
lambasting the Legislature’s plan, Murray said such considerations
were beside the point.
“Put the egos aside. Focus on results for the people of
Massachusetts, and that’s the way we get stuff done,” Murray told
the News Service. He said it didn’t do any good to “get overly
sensitive.”
Sullivan did not respond to Murray at the meeting, and afterwards
the Braintree mayor said he interpreted the lieutenant governor’s
comments to reference his work in the Legislature, when he was House
chairman of the Transportation Committee during the years before the
Greenbush line was built.
“I think what the governor was pointing out was the value of
Greenbush and the importance of it to the South Shore region, but I
was in a position to influence it, and I did. I don’t make any
apology for that,” Sullivan told the News Service. Noting that he
himself had proposed a gas tax, Sullivan said, “I was actively
engaged in getting that project accomplished.”
During his time at the helm of the Transportation Committee,
Sullivan also worked on the “forward funding” model for the MBTA,
passed in 1999, which lawmakers are now seeking to address.
“When we put funding for the MBTA onto the sales tax, a penny on the
sales tax of existing sales tax, at that time the estimation was the
economy would grow,” Sullivan told the News Service. “Okay, 9/11
came and that threw us all into an economic calamity that lasted
three years.”
Sullivan said that the state took on more than it had expected in
costs for the Big Dig project around that time as well, because
federal funding began to drop.
“The management of the project was in disarray. And so the feds
walked away,” Sullivan said. “Those of us in the Legislature had to
still keep our commitment in terms of funding the project despite
the fact the feds walked away.”
State House News Service
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
State Capitol Briefs
Tax bill breezes through Senate W&M, hits snag in Senate
By Michael Norton and Matt Murphy
A House-approved $500 million tax bill cleared the Senate Ways and
Means Committee 12-2 on Tuesday, with three more members reserving
their rights to cast a yes or no vote on the bill.
The bill quickly faced resistance on the Senate floor Tuesday, where
Sen. Sonia Chang Diaz objected to taking up a procedural order
Senate leaders hoped to pass to set up debate on the bill later this
week. The bill was placed on the Senate’s calendar for a formal
session Wednesday; Senate leaders have expressed hope for a debate
on the measure Thursday.
Taunton Sen. Marc Pacheco, who has rapped the bill for not including
South Coast rail expansion funding, and Somerville Democrat Sen.
Patricia Jehlen voted against the bill. Pittsfield Democrat Sen.
Benjamin Downing and Republican Sens. Michael Knapik of Westfield
and Richard Ross of Wrentham reserved their rights.
According to a summary of the bill, it includes the tobacco,
business and gas tax increases that were featured in the House bill
that passed before midnight Monday on a 97-55 vote. The Senate bill
also establishes goals for transportation agencies, calling on the
highway division to reduce fatalities, accident rates and commuting
times by 10 percent and for the transit division to reduce the age
of its bus fleets by 10 percent and increase the share of operating
costs covered by fares by 10 percent.
The bill summary also says the legislation requires the MBTA to
"expend funds on capital investment projects, including the green
line extension project and the south coast rail project." Another
provision of the bill requires utilities with infrastructure on
state highway rights-of-way to enter into agreements with the state
to reimburse agencies for the fair market value of the use of those
rights-of-way.
The bill, according to the summary, makes $448 million available in
fiscal 2014 and $600 million in new revenue by fiscal 2018.
Somerville Mayor Joseph Curtatone called the incremental progress on
finding additional revenue in the Senate bill a “good sign.”
“What we’re hoping and arguing for is that we work together to come
up with a plan that works. The governor certainly signaled that he’s
more than willing to negotiate and there’s a comprise that can be
made. We’re elected to get results and I think we all want a
transportation system we need and deserve to give the Commonwealth a
21st century transportation system and make it competitive in the
21st century global economy,” Curtatone said.
Twelve mayors sent a letter to House and Senate lawmakers on Tuesday
urging them to support new revenue above the $500 million mark in
the House-approved bill. “We are concerned that the proposal
unveiled last week will not provide sufficient funds to avoid
significant increases in tolls, fares, and fees (especially after
FY2016) and to ensure the repair and construction of important
capital projects we all have in our cities,” wrote the mayors from
Somerville, Springfield, Salem, Fall River, Fitchburg, Everett,
Melrose, Medford, New Bedford, Chelsea, Taunton and Cambridge.
“If we’re going to raise taxes, we certainly should solve the
problem and deliver results, and we have to fix the problem. We
cannot afford to kick the issue down the road any further,”
Curtatone said.
The Lowell Sun
Tuesday, April 9, 2012
Patrick tax-hike plan on road to perdition
By Peter Lucas
My way or the highway.
That sums up Gov. Deval Patrick's view of compromise with the state
Legislature over his whopping $1.9 billion tax-increase proposal, a
proposal that has been cut down to $500 million.
Either he gets everything he wants, he says, or he is going to veto
whatever his fellow Democrats in the Legislature send him. That is
Patrick's version of compromise.
And if he doesn't get want he wants, the governor said, people are
going to suffer.
Bridges are going to fall down, overpasses are going to collapse,
huge unattended potholes are going to swallow up trucks and cars,
and people riding the MBTA are not only are going to be forced to
pay more but are going to fall out of open doors.
Transportation spending is suddenly a Patrick emergency even though
he has been governor for seven years. Why didn't he fix the roads
and bridges before? Perhaps he was too busy making money by writing
books, or traveling the country making speeches, or looking for a
job.
Patrick, in his doomsday scenario, should have mentioned the
possibility that there may not even be enough money around to build
fallout shelters in preparation for the rockets North Korean head
case Kim Jong Un is promising to rain down on us. So panic will
ensue.
People may get so depressed over this and Patrick's end-time
predictions that they will be tempted to hurl themselves off the
Tobin Memorial Bridge. This may prove difficult, however, because of
the scores of workers who might get in the way. They are repainting
the 60-year-old bridge in an ongoing $35 million maintenance
contract that apparently slipped by the governor.
Basically at issue is this: Patrick, a Democrat, wants to hike
taxes, including the income tax, to raise $1.9 billion to pay for
expansion of mass transportation and the MBTA , as well as for
"investments" in education.
The Legislature, controlled by Democrats, has reduced this tax
package down to $500 million. The Legislature's plan, put forward by
House Speaker Robert DeLeo and Senate President Therese Murray, both
Democrats, would leave the income tax untouched, but raise taxes on
gasoline, tobacco and business.
Rather than countering with a compromise, which past governors would
have done in a give and take with the Legislature, Patrick called
the DeLeo-Murray plan "a shell game" and promised to veto it, which
would mean that he would end up with nothing.
This may appeal to Patrick, who is more comfortable talking about
solutions to problems than he is in solving them, much more at home
in doing a talk show than in talking with legislators.
"He thinks we work for him," one legislative leader who has attended
tax meetings with the governor, scoffed. "Well we don't, and he is
finding that out."
Time after time, issue after issue, Patrick, like President Obama
(they share the same political advisers), has attempted to bypass
the Legislature, believing he could take his case to the people and
get them to pressure their individual lawmakers. This tactic usually
serves only to alienate legislators.
Patrick tried it again Friday, just before Monday's House action on
the watered down tax bill, when he sent an email letter out from his
political action committee to supporters asking them to weigh in on
the issue, calling the DeLeo-Murray plan a "pretend" solution.
Had Patrick spent more time negotiating with legislators, which a
governor is supposed to do, rather than making a political campaign
out of everything, he might fare better at the Statehouse.
But this is not Patrick's style and never has been.
Add to this the fact that Patrick, for some unknown reason,
announced early on that he would not seek re-election in 2014,
thereby making himself a lame-duck governor whose political power
diminishes daily. In addition, his former potential heir apparent,
Lt. Gov. Tim Murray, is also a lame duck who announced he too is
following Patrick out the door and will not run for governor.
When asking legislators to vote for the biggest tax increase in
history, it is a good idea to let them know that you will be around
for a while watching their backs.
That will not be happening, and they know it.
Patrick made this issue his way or the highway. Wave goodbye to the
governor.
The Boston Globe
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
State Senate may add funds to transportation bill
Bill would still fall far short of Patrick’s request
By Jim O’Sullivan
The state Senate is willing to dedicate more to roads and bridges
than the $500 million in new taxes approved by the House late Monday
night, but still will not come close to the level of investment
Governor Deval Patrick has requested, Senate President Therese
Murray signaled on Tuesday.
The transportation funding bill headed for the Senate floor endorses
the same tax increases approved by the House Monday, but would boost
transportation spending by redirecting money from other parts of the
state budget and imposing a new fee on utility companies. By fiscal
2018, the Senate draft would spend about $126 million more on
transportation than the House version, Senate officials said.
This step toward compromise could place Patrick, who has requested
an additional $1.9 billion in tax revenue to pay for transportation
and education, in the position of either softening his insistence on
a tax hike of more than $1 billion (his veto threat was specifically
aimed at the House bill, which would be rendered obsolete by the
Senate bill), or risk losing what could be his last chance to
increase spending on what he calls critical investments.
How the Legislature and the governor resolve the tense debate will
determine whether MBTA fares and highway tolls increase
dramatically, which roads and bridges can get fixed, as well as how
much more money Massachusetts taxpayers will have to shell out in
taxes each year.
The Senate draft would levy $40 million in new charges on utility
companies by requiring them to pay for infrastructure, such as light
poles, on state highway right-of-ways. The bill would also divert
roughly $80 million in excess funds from an underground storage tank
cleanup program, which now flow into the state’s general fund, into
the transportation accounts. Like the House, the measure would boost
taxes on gas, tobacco, and businesses.
The Senate could vote on the bill as early as Thursday, but liberal
senators who agree with Patrick are likely to force a delay until
early next week.
The Legislature and governor have been engaged in something of a
cold war since House and Senate leaders announced that their tax
plan would come nowhere close to the $1.9 billion Patrick requested
earlier this year. By offering Patrick a higher transportation
spending figure than the House version, which he has promised to
veto, the Senate could allow both Patrick and the House to save
face.
“If that bill doesn’t go forward, then the T rates will go up, tolls
will go up, and I don’t think anybody wants that to happen,” Murray
said Tuesday before the Senate draft was released.
The two sides still seem far apart. Asked Tuesday what he would
consider acceptable, Patrick replied that “there’s a number between
where they are and where I am — and I mean really, exactly, between
where they are and where I started — where we can make some
meaningful improvements in our transportation system and take some
first meaningful steps on the education side.”
House Ways and Means chairman Brian Dempsey, a Haverhill Democrat,
told reporters last week that it was “highly unlikely” the House
would revisit transportation financing this year if its $500 million
preference did not become law. But House officials said Tuesday that
a Senate increase of a modest size would probably win favor in the
lower chamber.
First, though, Murray must muscle the legislation through the
Senate, whose membership has changed significantly in the last
several years, growing noticeably more liberal. Several of those
senators side with Patrick on tax and transportation policy and are
strongly critical of the House transportation bill, which eschews
Patrick’s income tax hike and sales tax reduction for a range of
taxes on gas, tobacco and businesses.
Senator James Eldridge, an Acton Democrat, called the House bill
regressive. “I think we need a much stronger revenue package,” he
said.
A fellow liberal, Senator Sonia Chang-Diaz, Democrat of Boston,
blocked a procedural vote Tuesday that would have teed up a Thursday
vote.
The Senate planned to take up the House bill Thursday, but the
administration has been lobbying for a delay as it seeks to muster
the votes needed to sustain the veto.
Murray said Tuesday that the Senate would work through any efforts
mounted by Patrick supporters to put off the vote.
“I understand the governor’s asked them to delay the bill as long as
they can, but we’ll keep at it until we get to actually taking it up
and hopefully pass it,” she said.
Despite leadership efforts, the House vote was eight votes shy of
the number needed to override the governor’s threatened veto. The
opposition to the bill came from Republicans, whose opposition is
rooted in its tax component, as well as liberal Democrats who
believe the state should spend more on transportation.
Murray declined to say whether the bill would get the votes needed
to override a veto.
While a higher price tag would probably fetch votes from liberal
lawmakers, Murray questioned the feasibility of a package in the
neighborhood of $1.2 billion, which Patrick had suggested as a
halfway figure. “Where does it come from?” she asked of the funding
needed to reach that level.
Murray said that the bill Senate leaders will send to the floor will
have enough support to pass.
Deep divisions on transportation financing are nothing new on Beacon
Hill, which has for decades grappled with how to pay for the Big Dig
and the hole it blew in the state’s wallet. Nor is it unusual for
feelings among high-level figures to grow personal and hostile.
Lawmakers mocked Governor Mitt Romney in 2006 for proposing to tear
down the tollbooths on the Massachusetts Turnpike, deriding it as a
political ploy intended to aid Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey’s
gubernatorial campaign. In 2009, Patrick’s transportation chief,
James Aloisi, incurred Murray’s ire by mocking her “reform before
revenue” mantra as a “meaningless slogan.”
This time through the debate, though, dynamics have shifted. Patrick
has ruled out a run for a third term, meaning he will not ask the
state’s voters again for control of the Beacon Hill purse.
Lawmakers, however, will be on the ballot again in 2014 and have
watched colleagues lose their seats after voting for higher taxes.
Several lawmakers said Patrick’s request that they show “political
courage” rings hollow in light of his own campaign trail language in
2010. That year, Patrick said he did not intend to pursue a
broad-based tax increase.
If the Legislature sends Patrick a bill with a bottom line similar
to the Senate’s, said one longtime budget observer, Patrick will
have achieved “a major victory,” persuading lawmakers to go along
with a massive tax increase and taking a stride toward closing the
transportation funding gap.
“This would be, in my view, a great success for the governor,” said
Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.
“Now, he has put on the table a larger package, but this is still an
important piece. It’s not as if he doesn’t care about it. So I would
hope he would sign it.”
The Boston Globe
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Lesson for a lame duck
By Scot Lehigh
Our governor is about to suffer a stinging rebuke. The man most
responsible for that?
Deval Laurdine Patrick.
Patrick and his team have over-reached badly on his big
tax-and-spending package. He now faces this choice: Settle for much
less or risk getting nothing at all.
Instead of the $1.9 billion tax-and-spending hike Patrick wants, the
House has passed a $500 million plan. The Senate appears likely to
land in a similar place on new revenues, though somewhat higher on
spending.
Patrick has denounced any plan of the size the House favors as
inadequate and has vowed a veto, a threat he reiterated on Tuesday.
When asked about the minimum he would accept, the governor said he
would be willing to meet the Legislature halfway, which would mean a
package of about $1.2 billion. But even that the figure is
considerably higher than either chamber is willing to go.
That means a game of chicken may well loom. In response to Patrick’s
veto threat, House Ways and Means Chairman Brian Dempsey has warned
that if the Legislature can’t overrride Patrick’s veto, it’s
unlikely the House will consider another tax package.
That would mean no new taxes at all — and no infusion of cash for
the MBTA.
It’s a strange state of affairs for Beacon Hill to have arrived at.
So what happened?
In simple terms, Patrick overestimated his persuasiveness and
overplayed his hand. Everyone knew state policymakers would have to
address transportation, and particularly the MBTA, this year. One
legislative source says that late last year, when Patrick mentioned
the possibility of an income-tax hike, Speaker Robert DeLeo told him
there just wasn’t support for that in the House, but that he likely
could rally members for a gas tax increase. DeLeo is also said to
have counseled the governor to stay focused on fixing
transportation.
Patrick ignored that counsel. In his plan, he pushed well beyond
anything lawmakers had contemplated. His transportation scheme
itself wandered miles across the border that separates necessity
from wish list. Add in hundreds of millions in new education
spending, and the pricetag grew beyond what the political market
would bear.
Funding all that required a large tax hike. The administration was
intent on keeping its tax plan a secret leading up to his Jan. 16
State of the State speech. When reporters questioned DeLeo and
Senate President Therese Murray about Patrick’s revenue proposal
after the speech, both said they had only learned of it when
reporters had.
In other words, in his efforts to preserve the news for his
prime-time speech, Patrick had kept the two other most important
players in the legislative process in the dark.
Why does that matter? For starters, no one likes big surprises,
particularly surprises that put them on the spot. Secondly, DeLeo
and Murray could have told him that his package was much too large
to fly.
Then there was the incredible complexity of the governor’s revenue
proposal, which calls for lowering the sales tax while raising the
income tax and broadening the base to which that tax applies. Having
taken the heat for hiking the sales tax back in 2009, lawmakers
couldn’t see the wisdom in retreating on that front if doing so
meant a large income-tax increase. And even some liberal legislators
worried that a plan that had so many moving parts would include some
that could blow up on them later.
Finally, some lawmakers resented Patrick’s tone. In 2010, when he
himself was up for reelection, Patrick said he had no plans for a
broad-based tax increase. He won’t have to answer at the ballot for
this one, of course, which has made his habit of urging legislators
to show some “political courage” rankle.
Had Patrick focused on working inside the building, he might have
gotten DeLeo on board for a tax plan of $600 million to $700
million. Instead, Patrick seemed to believe he could generate enough
outside-the-building momentum for something much larger.
It now looks like he’ll be lucky to get $600 million in new revenue.
There’s a lesson to learn from all this, a lesson about consultation
and about the politics of the possible. As Patrick moves further
into lame-duck-dom, the governor and his team need to take heed.
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Senate bending with $805M bill
Battle expected over transportation taxes
By Chris Cassidy
Senate leaders showed signs of caving to Gov. Deval Patrick last
night, advancing a revamped $805 million transportation bill that
could mean T fare hikes and higher turnpike tolls on top of new
taxes.
“We just sent the governor a package ... which is a little
different, and they have it,” said Senate President Therese Murray.
“I bet you haven’t even seen it.”
Asked what the best part of the new bill was, Murray responded: “All
of it.”
Murray’s bill would sharply increase transportation spending to $805
million by 2018, up from the $504 million House Speaker Robert A.
DeLeo is proposing — but still a far cry from the $1.9 billion plan
the governor wants.
The Senate bill would still raise the gas tax by 3 cents and tack
another $1 on a pack of cigarettes. It would also require the MBTA
and MassDOT to kick in a combined $229 million from their own
budgets in fiscal 2018 — that’s where the T fare hikes and higher
Turnpike tolls would likely come in.
Murray’s proposal also would redirect another $120 million to
transportation — including $80 million from an existing 2.5 cent gas
tax surcharge spent on underground storage tanks and $40 million
from MassDOT leasing rights of way, according to a Senate Ways and
Means official.
Senators could take up the bill as early as tomorrow but delays
could push it back to early next week. Either way, a fierce fight is
expected.
“I think there’s going to be a very genuine, robust discussion,”
said state Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz, who is still pushing for more
education spending. “There’s a multiplicity of viewpoints about what
people would like to see in this package.”
Earlier in the day, Murray accused Patrick of leaning on senators to
use parliamentary tactics to stall DeLeo’s $505 million proposal.
Patrick, meanwhile, continued to describe the speaker’s plan as
unacceptable.
“I’m not willing to ask the people of the commonwealth to pay more
and get less,” said Patrick. “This is not about tax hikes versus no
tax hikes.”
The Salem News
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Tax changes in governor’s plan could hurt, not help
By State Rep. Lori Ehrlich
As attention focuses on the merits of the administration’s $1.9
billion tax plan versus the Legislature’s more modest package, I am
troubled by the dearth of discussion about Gov. Deval Patrick’s
proposed major structural changes to the state tax code. I have been
a CPA specializing in tax for nearly three decades, so while
evaluating this proposal, my frame of reference goes well beyond my
time in the Legislature. In the governor’s quest to raise nearly $2
billion in revenue while simultaneously restructuring the tax code,
I fear we will be left with a tax code that is flat as a pancake and
devoid of deductions that help those most in need.
Some specifics:
Deductions and exemptions
The governor’s proposal eliminates a long list of deductions that
families rely upon. Not only do these deductions lend a level of
progressivity (in both the tax and political sense) to the tax code,
but they also encourage people to do important things that improve
the lives of so many in the commonwealth. Modest deductions for
those who adopt children, become foster families, use day care in
order to work, go to college and send children to college, have
children under 12 — are all being eliminated. The list of 44
deductions is quite comprehensive and also includes lead paint
removal, septic systems, commuters, renewable energy, many
employer-provided benefits, scholarships and fellowships. In
addition to incentivizing important activities, these deductions
also provide a small measure of assistance to those who need it
most. Why discard this long list of good ideas?
The personal residence deduction
As the beleaguered real estate market is showing signs of recovery,
now is not the time to eliminate the partial exemption on the profit
from the sale of personal residences that matches the federal
exemption. Removing this deduction will hit retirees particularly
hard, since gains in the real estate market tend to be with those
who have held on to their houses for a very long time.
Increasing the income tax
The governor’s plan includes a 19 percent increase in the income tax
rate. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, we
already have the third-highest income tax per capita in the nation.
Increasing this tax a full percentage point would result in us
eclipsing New York and Connecticut on our way to the country’s
highest per capita income tax.
Doubling personal exemptions
The personal exemption for single, head of household and joint
filers would double, raising it to $8,800, $13,600 and $17,600,
respectively. This idea will cost the state well over a billion
dollars. A reasonable case could be made to index this number to
inflation, but doubling is extraordinary. It also creates a very
regressive cliff from non-participation to full participation at a
substantially higher tax rate. For some measure of relativity, the
federal personal exemption for 2013 is $3,900, up $100 from 2012.
Rolling back the sales tax
Though sales taxes tend to be regressive, in Massachusetts, our
sales tax is actually more progressive than most states because
food, clothing and medicine are exempt. In terms of revenue raised
as a percentage of personal income, our sales tax is currently
ranked a low 42nd among the states. Since revenue targets are
driving the governor’s proposal, if this rate is reduced, $1.4
billion in revenue will need to be made up elsewhere.
Transportation
The Legislature’s more modest plan reforms the transportation system
by moving employees off the capital budget over three years while
providing forward funding to allow for a capital plan. This closes
existing gaps while still allowing for substantial, long-term
improvements in our infrastructure, such as a Green Line expansion
and new cars on the Red and Orange lines. The governor’s plan, on
the other hand, implements a major expansion of the transportation
system, delivering many projects to districts all over the state
without first addressing current unsound fiscal practices.
As you can see, many of these large, structural changes to the tax
code leave the governor’s plan with a revenue deficit and nowhere to
turn but the income tax to make up that loss and generate $1.9
billion more. The Legislature’s transportation plan, on the other
hand, utilizes a moderate, dedicated revenue stream consisting of a
3-cent increase in the gas tax while indexing the future gas tax to
inflation. Estimates are that the average driver will pay between
$12 and $30 more per year. Compared to such a large increase in the
income tax along with structural changes to flatten the tax, for the
average taxpayer, the choice is clear.
Over and over, I hear from people that they are worried about paying
their bills. To overburden people with taxes to pay for “new wants”
beyond necessary “needs” would be poor leadership. Heeding signs of
alarm from the state’s bond-rating agencies, the Legislature’s
approach is sensitive to the economic needs of the middle class and
small-business owners, rather than raising their taxes. This plan
will not interrupt what is still a fragile economic recovery. It is
moderate and provides a dedicated revenue stream without completely
upending the tax code and increasing the income tax.
Democratic state Rep. Lori Ehrlich, a certified public
accountant, represents Marblehead, Swampscott and part of Lynn.
The Lowell Sun
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
House vote to hike Mass. gas tax leaves few cheering
By Allison Thomasseau
Few seem happy with the 3-cent gasoline tax increase passed by state
representatives on Monday.
Some lawmakers think it is too much; others have condemned it as too
little. Gasoline dealers think it will hurt business. Others think
the plan to tie further increases to inflation creates an
ever-rising gas tax that will hurt low-income families the most.
"This is just like Toy Story's Buzz Lightyear: a gas tax to infinity
and beyond," said Rep. Marc Lombardo, R-Billerica.
The 3-cent gasoline tax hike, part of the legislative leadership's
$500 million transportation budget passed by the House, raises the
gas tax from 21 cents to 24 cents per gallon.
New Hampshire, which recently voted to raise its gasoline tax by 15
cents over the next four years, is the only New England state with a
gas tax lower than Massachusetts. Nationally, the average state gas
tax is the same as Massachusetts.
According to the plan, the tax hike will raise $95 million next
year. When indexed to inflation, it is expected to rise slightly
each year, raising an estimated additional $15 million annually.
According to the state Department of Revenue, gasoline-tax revenue
was $582.9 million in fiscal 2012, up from $578.3 million in 2010.
However, revenues remain below 2004 levels when the tax raised
$601.6 million.
Supporters say it is necessary to cover rising transportation costs
and will not drastically affect consumers. But Michael Widmer,
president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation says it isn't
enough.
"We keep losing ground in terms of maintaining roads and bridges
when we're essentially reducing spending in absolute dollars," he
said.
Sen. Jamie Eldridge, D-Acton, supports a gas tax, but also thinks
the gas-tax revenues would not sufficiently fix Massachusetts'
transportation problems.
"What I've been focused on with the budget is a progressive income
tax and closing corporate tax loopholes," said Eldridge, who has not
decided whether to support tying the gas tax to inflation.
Opponents, however, say the gas tax will squeeze the middle class.
Backers of the plan said the average consumer would pay $12 to $30
more per year in gasoline taxes. But Rep. Dennis Rosa, D-Leominster,
is wary of a tax that increases with inflation.
"In 20 years, the tax will go up almost 10 cents, and that increase
is a lot bigger than people think," said Rosa.
John Howell, executive director of the Billerica-based New England
Service Station and Repair Association, said the organization is
more concerned with the $1 cigarette tax hike that was included in
the House plan, but considers the gasoline tax a problem.
"Any tax is going to affect our businesses, and the last few years
have been difficult to do business in general," he said.
Michael Turk, an economics professor at Fitchburg State University,
acknowledged the gas tax will hit low-and-middle-income families
more, but said the effects will be minimal.
"Almost all of us are keenly aware of minor movements in gas prices,
but 3 cents probably would be imperceptible," said Turk. "Prices go
up more than that in a week."
Andrew Bagley, director of research and development at the
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation said tying the gasoline tax to
inflation would help sustain the buying power of tax revenues, which
was not done the last time the gasoline tax was raised in 1991.
"If we had indexed the gas tax in 1991 and let it rise, as with
virtually all other expenses, we would not have to raise the tax
now, and we wouldn't have to raise any other revenues," Bagley said.
A recent report from the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center
estimated that if the gasoline tax had been indexed to inflation in
1991, it would be 36 cents per gallon today.
Florida is the only state that indexes its gasoline tax to
inflation. Thirteen other states, including Connecticut and New
York, tax gasoline as a percent of the gasoline price, so taxes rise
and fall with gasoline prices.
Noah Berger, president of the policy center, said this type of
gasoline tax keeps up with inflation, because tax revenues increase
when gasoline prices go up.
Although it would seem all motorists would be affected in the same
way under an inflation-indexed tax, some economists point out that
not all workers see their wages keep pace with inflation.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, inflation has
fluctuated between 2 percent and 3 percent over the last decade.
According to U.S. Census data, Massachusetts median family income
has kept up with inflation, although it went down slightly in 2009.
Luis Rosero, an assistant professor of economics at Fitchburg State
University, said real wages for skilled labor have increased more
than the real minimum wage has.
"The growing disparity between blue collar and white collar has
become more clear in the last recovery," Rosero said.
State House News Service
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
As guv talks numbers, lawmakers describe politics of passing taxes
By Andy Metzger and Michael Norton
As the Legislature moves ahead with its own transportation revenue
plans, Gov. Deval Patrick on Wednesday morning recast his request,
indicating receptiveness to a floor of $750 million in new tax
revenues for transportation.
The Democratic legislative leadership’s plans would raise $500
million in new revenue in fiscal year 2015. By 2015, Patrick plans
to raise $1.9 billion in new tax revenue for transportation and
education, eventually spending about $1.1 billion on transportation
through taxes and fees.
“If the Senate can get to the seven-fifty, eight hundred number, net
of fees, fares and tolls – not including fees, fares and tolls. We
can take care of that, and reforms. We can take care of that. If
they can get in that range, then we will have done something
important for transportation. We still need to deal with education,”
Patrick told the News Service Wednesday morning.
In a State House beset by brinksmanship – with Patrick saying he
would veto the House’s $500 million proposal and top lawmakers
saying a veto might end any chance of new revenues for
transportation – Patrick’s comments Wednesday could signal the start
of more amicable public negotiations between the legislative and
executive branches. Patrick’s public railing against the legislative
proposal, which he has described as a “pretend fix” and “not
serious,” has riled some lawmakers.
Rep. William Straus (D-Mattapoisett), co-chairman of the
Transportation Committee, said Patrick had suggested Wednesday on
the radio in his district the House plan was “meaningless.”
“I think he’s wrong. That’s an incredible vote for anybody to raise
taxes,” Straus said. “I have no problem discussing whether it’s a
sufficient number, whether it’s the right number, whether it’s
targeted correctly, but to go around and suggest that the House did
something evil by trying to raise taxes and direct it to
transportation I don’t think has helped the discussion. I really
don’t.”
Straus also questioned Patrick’s tactics, saying the governor had
told a group of House lawmakers Monday to vote against the House
plan “because then we can start to compromise.”
“That’s a curious way to approach any legislative body, which is to
advocate that a bill dies so that you find yourself, believe that
you’ll be in a bargaining position,” Straus said during a Boston
Foundation forum on transportation investments. “Maybe he’s under
the illusion that he has successfully killed the proposal. I don’t
know. We’re going to continue to try to find the solution here.”
Senate Transportation Committee Chairman Thomas McGee (D-Lynn) said
Wednesday he’s constantly asked which taxes will be raised and how
much revenue will be created for transportation. The answer he
provided at the Boston Foundation forum focused as much on politics
as policy or system needs.
“It’s what we can build 81 members in the House and 21 members in
the Senate to approve and get to the governor and hopefully get
passed,” he said. “So we’re dealing with a number that is, I
believe, is real. But we’re also dealing with an ability to move the
agenda forward.”
The $750 million that Patrick said would be “a good step and
important step for transportation” is 50 percent higher than the
$500 million tax bill favored by legislative leaders. And a fiscal
2014 budget backed by a House committee Wednesday also proposes
significant increases in education spending. In both cases, the
spending increases fall short of Patrick’s requests.
“If the intent of the Legislature is to take one tax vote, which I
think it has been, then we’re still not quite there until we talk
about what we do with education, and I think there’s a number that
is short of what I originally proposed but would still enable us to
make a meaningful step in the direction of early education and
college affordability,” Patrick said.
Patrick said he is “still trying to sort out what the real number
is” in the Senate bill (S 1766), which Senate President Therese
Murray said Wednesday is now planned for debate on Saturday.
Adding to the tobacco, gas and corporate taxes the House included,
the Senate bill dedicates excess funds from the underground storage
tank cleanup program to transportation and new revenues from
utilities.
The Senate transportation finance bill makes $448 million available
in fiscal 2014 and $600 million in new revenue by fiscal 2018, the
News Service reported Tuesday.
“I haven’t seen that,” Senate President Therese Murray said when
asked about Patrick’s comments Wednesday afternoon. She said, “I
don’t know what that means.”
While the liberal wing of the upper chamber has approached the
Senate version with caution, Murray said the bill is different than
the framework Patrick threatened to veto.
Asked about Patrick’s veto threat, Murray said, “That would be up to
him. I think he has to wait and see what we pass.” In between the
Senate floor and her office Tuesday evening, Murray said, “We just
sent the governor a package that Ways and Means just polled out,
which is a little different. And they have it.”
A spreadsheet provided by the Senate shows that including $229
million in projected MassDOT and MBTA revenue, with the source of
those funds left undefined, the transportation system would have
$805 million more to spend by fiscal year 2018. The Patrick
administration’s transportation financing plan includes $150 million
in fares, fees and tolls in fiscal 2018.
In total fiscal 2018 transportation revenue, the Senate would
include $394 million in non-tax sources, while Patrick’s plan would
include $275 million in non-tax sources.
Senators have been asked to file amendments to the tax bill by 5
p.m. Friday, ahead of Saturday’s session. The Senate had planned to
debate the bill Thursday, but Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz on Tuesday
objected to the consideration of an order that would have cemented
plans for a Thursday debate.
“We are elected as legislators to participate in what’s coming
through this chamber, and that’s what we were here to do today,”
Chang-Diaz told reporters after Tuesday’s session. About the bill
itself, Chang-Diaz said, “I would like to see it encompass more of
the state’s needs.”
Murray said she was not disappointed the Senate would not debate the
bill Thursday, as originally planned. “No, in my tenure here I have
allowed the members to use whatever procedures they have in front of
them, parliamentary procedures. I’ve never pushed anything, or gone
to a second legislative day, which every single Senate president
before me has done. I want to give them their time to do this, and
debate it,” she said.
Senate leadership gave Senate Ways and Means members a one-hour
window to vote on the legislation Tuesday. "I bet you haven't even
seen it," Murray told reporters Tuesday evening.
At the Boston Foundation forum, Straus said the income tax hike that
Patrick made the cornerstone of his nearly $2 billion transportation
and education financing plan is the wrong strategy because it
targets workers who live in Massachusetts. He said Massachusetts
should look to capture revenue from transportation system users and
tourists.
“Two billion dollars is just not what the people of Massachusetts
will accept. It’s not what they want,” Straus said. “I happen to
have a philosophical view that the income tax is about the worst
place that you could think to look to to fund transportation . . .
It takes money as a taxing method from people who do live here as
residents.”
Straus also deconstructed the House effort to round up votes for the
$500 million tax package. He said 30 House Republicans and 10 to 15
House Democrats were against voting for any tax increases, leaving
between 115 and 120 House Democrats who he said were “at least
persuadable.” While 97 voted for the tax plan Monday, five reps
missed the vote and Straus put the level of support for the plan
higher than 97.
“We got 101 members out of that group of 115, 120 persuadables who
considered voting for taxes who said, ‘Yeah, I’ll stand up and vote
for half a billion in taxes.”
With all eligible members voting, the House still would not have
enough votes to override Patrick’s veto if members stuck to the
votes they cast earlier this week.
And he took offense at the portrayal of those who disagree with
Patrick’s call for a larger tax package.
“A couple of days ago the House took what used to be viewed as quite
an effort in approving increased taxes of a half a billion dollars,”
Straus said. “Clearly there are some who think that that’s cheap and
that somehow people who are willing to stand up to do that lack
courage.”
State House News Service
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
House $33.8 billion budget taxes, spends less than Patrick
By Matt Murphy
House leaders unveiled a $33.8 billion state budget proposal for
fiscal 2014 on Wednesday, calling for a 3.9 percent increase in
state spending that cuts $1 billion off Gov. Deval Patrick’s
proposed budget but dedicates enough new revenue to UMass to avoid
tuition and fee hikes for two years.
The budget approved Wednesday morning by the House Ways and Means
Committee also boosts funding for local aid by $21.3 million over
last year and increases public school aid by $25 per student, or
$109.5 million.
Patrick and legislative leaders are embroiled in a tense debate over
how high to raise taxes and competing proposals to generate between
$500 million and $1.9 billion in new revenue for transportation and
education. The budget from House Ways and Means counts on $500
million in new revenue from higher taxes on cigarettes, gas and
businesses. The House approved those tax hikes Monday and the Senate
is gearing up to consider them.
Ways and Means Committee Chairman Rep. Brian Dempsey said the House
plan directs $265 million of the new tax revenue to transportation,
and uses the balance to invest in local aid, Chapter 70 education
aid and higher education. Asked if the new tax revenue was part of
the solution to freezing UMass college tuition and fees, Dempsey
said, “We wanted to make sure it was a priority.”
The Ways and Means Committee unanimously recommended the budget
proposal on a voice vote Wednesday morning. Dempsey is scheduled to
brief House Democrats on the bill in a caucus at noon, and House
leaders plan a 1 p.m. press conference to discuss the details. At a
meeting where the committee voted on the budget, Republican
committee members declined comment, saying they wanted to spend some
time reading the spending plan.
The House budget proposal, which will be debated by the House
beginning April 22, would draw $350 million from the state’s
stabilization account, or $50 million less than Patrick’s proposed
spending from the “rainy day” fund. The budget also counts on $83.1
million in casino licensing revenues new to the budget process.
The House budget relies on $719.5 million in one-time revenues. Of
the $838 million in estimated tax collection growth next fiscal
year, the committee’s budget reports that $308 million will be
consumed by increased costs of human and social services and $188
million in collective bargaining costs, leaving $530 million for
other spending.
Dempsey’s budget level funds the special education circuit breaker
and regional school transportation at $235.5 million and $45.5
million respectively.
The Ways and Means budget proposes reforms and initiatives in the
areas of health and human services oversight, higher education and
early education and care, including a requirement that the
Department of Transitional Assistance issue photo ID cards for
electronic benefit transfer card recipients intended to weed out EBT
fraud.
The budget plan dedicates $39 million in increased funding to the
University of Massachusetts as part of strategy to achieve a 50
percent balance between state and university funding over the next
two years that UMass officials have said previously would be
sufficient to freeze tuition and fee rates for two years.
State universities and community colleges will also see a bump, in
part because of new gaming money earmarked for the community
colleges.
The budget proposes a 10-member commission to review the financing
model for higher education in Massachusetts and determine
appropriate funding levels moving forward. The Ways and Means
proposal calls for the same type of commission to review early
education services and needs.
In the area of reforms to the Sex Offender Registry, the budget
requires the Department of Early Education and Care to perform
address matches of licensed care facilities and the registry in the
wake of a report from Auditor Suzanne Bump raising concerns about a
lack of oversight.
Level II sex offenders, whose identities are only available now upon
request at local police stations, would be posted online, under a
provision in the budget.
In response to another crisis over evidence tampering at state drug
evidence laboratories, the Ways and Means budget proposes $3 million
to hire 43 short-term employees and $846,000 to build out the
headquarters of the State Police drug lab in Maynard to address a
backlog of testing samples.
The Boston Globe
Thursday, April 11, 2013
House increases college, local aid
Proposal rejects Governor Patrick’s push for early education
expansion
By Michael Levenson
House leaders proposed a $33.8 billion budget Wednesday for the
upcoming fiscal year that would boost funding for higher education
and local aid but would reject Governor Deval Patrick’s push for
universal pre-kindergarten, one of his top priorities.
The plan represents a second setback for the governor, after House
lawmakers earlier this week scuttled his $1.9 billion tax hike for
education and transportation in favor of a $500 million tax increase
focused more narrowly on shoring up the MBTA and regional transit
authorities.
Overall, the House budget unveiled Wednesday would chop $1 billion
out of the $34.8 billion budget that Patrick proposed in January and
would increase spending by 3.9 percent, compared to the 6.9 percent
increase Patrick wants. Patrick and the Legislature must resolve
their differences and approve a budget by July 1, when the new
fiscal year begins.
While the governor proposed using his $1.9 billion tax hike to build
rail lines across the state and eliminate the waiting list for
pre-kindergarten programs, most of the spending increases in the
House plan would be limited to essentials such as state debt
payments, pension obligations, collective bargaining agreements, and
entitlement programs like Medicare. There are even a few cuts,
including a reduction in funding for youth jobs and civil legal aid
for the poor.
“While very pleased to see that the House has shown their strong
support for higher education, I am concerned about this budget’s
failure to invest in a number of vital programs like youth violence
prevention and early education that the governor believes are
critical to the future of our state,” said Glen Shor, Patrick’s
budget chief.
Liberal groups were also disappointed. “It’s a missed opportunity,”
said Noah Berger, president of the Massachusetts Budget and Policy
Center, a left-leaning think tank. “The governor had proposed a
forward-looking effort to invest significantly in education.
Obviously, that took revenue to pay for. In not doing that new
revenue, it became impossible to make those investments.”
The House budget chief, Representative Brian Dempsey of Haverhill,
said House leaders were concerned that the governor’s budget went
too far in pushing higher taxes and spending, since “families across
the Commonwealth continue to struggle in this economy.”
“We needed to deal with issues like transportation, but do it in a
way that was wellbalanced and mindful of the current economic
climate that we’re in,” he said.
While the fight between Patrick and legislative leaders over taxes
and transportation funding has drawn most of the attention on Beacon
Hill, the House budget made clear the extent to which the governor
and the House are sharply at odds over pre-kindergarten programs, as
well.
Patrick has been pushing for an additional $131 million for
subsidized day care for children from birth to age 5, arguing those
programs build the foundation for learning later in life.
Patrick’s budget would have eliminated the list of 30,000 children
waiting for programs and funded higher salaries, professional
development, and grants for programs that want to expand.
But Speaker Robert A. DeLeo said the House budget would not provide
any increase for early education, because he is concerned that the
state agency that oversees the system is not managing its money and
caseload efficiently.
DeLeo questioned how the Department of Early Education and Care’s
waiting list had jumped from 30,000 to 50,000 over the last few
months and why, if there is a waiting list for services, the agency
has ended the last two years with a surplus. Sherri Killins, the
agency’s commissioner, also resigned last month amid criticism that
she was neglecting her official duties to take part in a
superintendent training program in Central Massachusetts.
DeLeo said his budget would order state Auditor Suzanne Bump to
review the department’s finances and waiting list and create a
$200,000 “compliance office” to scrutinize the thousands of
child-care providers that the department licenses.
“Before we make any further investments, we want to make sure their
house is in order,” DeLeo said.
Thomas L. Weber, acting Commissioner of the Department of Early
Education and Care, said DeLeo is conflating two waiting lists — one
for pre-K programs that has 30,000 children and one for after-school
programs that has 20,000. Weber also said the agency has had small
surpluses because it wants to avoid running a deficit at the end of
the year, which could force it to remove children from day-care
programs.
Weber said the House budget, by not providing any additional money
for early education, would increase the waiting list for pre-K
programs to 42,000 children by July 2014.
The House budget also seeks to crack down on welfare fraud following
a recent report by the inspector general, who found that the Patrick
administration has been handing out $25 million in welfare benefits
annually to recipients who cannot prove they are eligible.
The House plan responds by creating a $300,000 Bureau of Program
Integrity to root out welfare fraud. The budget also would require
photos on Electronic Benefit Transfer cards, to prevent trafficking
of the cards. That idea has been pushed by Republicans in the
Legislature.
Higher education is one area where DeLeo and Patrick agree.
The House budget, like the governor’s budget, seeks an increase of
$110 million for higher education, including an additional $39
million for the University of Massachusetts and $30 million for
community colleges. If approved, the increases would allow the UMass
system to freeze tuitions and fees at their current level, DeLeo
said.
“We’re pleased with it,” said Martin T. Meehan, chancellor of UMass
Lowell. “It’s a modest increase that would only bring us to where we
were under Mitt Romney but, nonetheless, it’s welcome news and a
reversal of a trend” of cuts over the last five years.
Local aid would see an increase of $21 million in the House budget,
less than the $31 million Patrick proposed. But Geoff Beckwith,
executive director of the Masssachusetts Municipal Association,
praised the budget because it would give the money to cities and
towns without strings.
The Boston Globe
Thursday, April 11, 2013
A Boston Globe editorial
Tax hikes aren’t always toxic; government inertia is worse
It's 1990 again at the State House, at least in the minds of many
legislators. That was when the beleaguered outgoing Democratic
Governor Michael Dukakis, proclaiming “taxes are like medicine,”
signed a package of expansions of the income, gas, and sales taxes.
As legend has it, that tax hike so enraged the public that 16 years
of Republican governance followed.
It’s a foolish, simplistic analysis, and it’s leading today’s
legislators in the wrong direction. Dukakis’s tax hike came in the
midst of a nearly unprecedented free fall in state revenue, as the
bubble burst on the so-called Massachusetts Miracle. The state was
in for a recession that turned out to be deeper and more costly than
even the 2008 meltdown, which devastated the nation but had
comparatively less effect here than in some other places. Now,
Massachusetts is on the rebound. The situation couldn’t be more
different.
In times of economic turmoil, voters may indeed look for legislative
scapegoats. Dukakis’s tax hike didn’t cause the recession in the
early ’90s, but it became the focus of public dismay over it.
Likewise, in the aftermath of the 2008 recession, the TARP
legislation that saved the economy became a target of voter anger.
So a more reasonable lesson for today’s legislators, fearful of the
political ramifications of a tax vote, is that a tax hike can be
toxic if it becomes a symbol of failure and frustration.
That’s even more apparent when voters feel like they’re getting
nothing for their extra payments. The Dukakis hike only covered part
of a yawning hole in the state budget. Services actually declined
sharply, even while citizens were ponying up more in taxes.
If these lessons apply at all to Governor Patrick’s request for tax
increases to expand transportation, transform early-childhood
education, and provide more help to higher-ed students, the takeaway
should be that tax hikes, uncoupled with service increases, breed
cynicism about government. They make voters feel that they, the
taxpayers, are cleaning up messes left by incompetent legislators.
And yet the House and Senate leadership in Massachusetts clearly
feel more comfortable going to voters with a significant gas-tax
increase (the least popular option, according to polls) on the
grounds that the state absolutely, positively needs the cash to
compensate for Big Dig debts and a sad history of patchwork fixes on
the T. Forget about any increased services: Citizens would be paying
more at the pump to make up for the deferred maintenance of the
past. While true enough, that argument makes for a far less
attractive political message than what Patrick is offering: A
tradeoff of carefully targeted tax increases for tangible benefits,
from the Green Line extension to South Coast rail to public
education. Each of those investments should provide a long-term
economic boost for the state.
For Democrats in the Legislature, going to voters with a
tail-between-the-legs message of government failure followed
inevitably by tax hikes would perpetuate exactly the attitude that
led to those 16 years of Republican rule — the idea that Democrats
aren’t competent or creative enough to make government work on their
own terms. Legislative leaders should be under no illusions here:
They don’t need to rubberstamp Patrick’s proposals. Nor do they need
to go as far as the governor does in raising taxes by $1.9 billion.
But to reject his entire approach would be to invite peril.
Most voters are ready to make a positive step
forward, and are willing to pay for it. What they won’t
tolerate is government inertia and inefficiency.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Robert A. DeLeo vows cleanup
Targets EBT fraud, early-education abuses
By Chris Cassidy
A fed-up House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo — already in a showdown with
Gov. Deval Patrick over taxes — vowed yesterday to clean up two
scandal-ravaged agencies in the Patrick Administration, telling the
Herald the abuses in the welfare and early education departments
must stop.
“This isn’t a system where, like the Red Sox, we can wait until the
end of the year to change managers,” DeLeo told the Herald during a
45-minute sit-down interview inside his State House office. “We have
to get it straightened out now.”
DeLeo’s EBT card crackdown — coming on the heels of Herald reports
about rampant mismanagement and abuse of taxpayer-funded welfare and
food stamp money within the state’s Department of Transitional
Assistance — is aimed at stopping fraud before it starts, he said.
He’d require photos on EBT cards and launch a Bureau of Program
Integrity — with a director
appointed by the Inspector General — to
stop
ineligible EBT recipients from making the welfare rolls.
A task force also would figure out how different state agencies can
share information about recipients to make sure they’re not lying
about their qualifications.
“I’m not trying to punish people,” DeLeo said. “What we’re trying to
do is see that the taxpayers’ money is not wasted, and that only
those who are entitled to receive these benefits get those
benefits.”
DeLeo also wants to fix the state’s Department of Early Education
and Care — rocked by Commissioner Sherri Killins’ abrupt resignation
amid an uproar over her Connecticut residency and side
superintendent internship,
as well as a state audit showing child
care centers and registered sex
offenders sharing the same
addresses.
Patrick wants to inject early ed with $350 million in extra funding,
but DeLeo was clear yesterday — no extra money until the agency
cleans up its act.
“I think we can be prepared in the future to make that investment,
but making an investment in a system that we’re
uncertain as to
whether it’s working properly I think is foolhardy,” DeLeo said.
DeLeo wants the state auditor to conduct a financial audit of the
troubled agency. His plan would also create a compliance office to
make sure EEC is overseeing licensed day cares and require the
agency to check the addresses of licensed facilities against those
in the sex offender registry.
DeLeo’s budget proposal also would put the names of Level 2 sex
offenders online.
“It’s the right thing to do,” DeLeo said. “Let’s do it and get it
done.”
But House Minority Leader Brad Jones (R-North Reading) argued
DeLeo’s welfare proposal simply doesn’t go far enough.
“I think
the speaker’s trying to put shine on his sneakers here,”
Jones said of the welfare proposal. “It’s a great first step, but
it’s not addressing all that needs to be addressed.”
The Boston Herald
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Speaker: Gov’s $1.9B plan puts rating at risk
By Chris Cassidy
House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo remained determined to advance his
$500 million transportation plan yesterday, suggesting Gov.
Deval
Patrick’s $1.9 billion plan could hurt the state’s financial
reputation.
“Quite frankly, I’m gonna be damned if what we worked so hard to see
an increase in our bond rating, if we’re going to lose it as a
result of some of the plans out there. It just can’t happen,” DeLeo
told the Herald.
“This isn’t about a question of personalities. This isn’t about a
question of who’s got the better plan,” he said.
DeLeo left the door open to compromise with Patrick but said the
House already has made a “good-faith effort” and the debate is now a
question of “how much additional funds we’re going to ask of
taxpayers.”
The Senate is slated to soon take up its own transportation plan
worth $805 million
by fiscal 2018 — something DeLeo
said was more
in line
with what the House
passed earlier this week.
DeLeo said it was premature to know whether there’s enough support
in the House to override a Patrick-promised veto but
admitted it’s
been challenging to build a consensus.
“We not only have
Republicans on one side, we have quite a few
Democrats also on that side who say, ‘We don’t want any new
revenue,’ and then we have folks on the other side saying, ‘We can’t
get enough revenue,’” DeLeo said.
“So you can imagine the speaker trying to coalesce to come up with
it,” he said.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Senate President Murray touts Legislature's transportation plan
By Ira Kantor
A $500 million legislative transportation financing bill that has
cleared the House, but is now under Senate scrutiny will better
establish benchmarks for revenue, savings and reforms for both the
state Department of Transportation and MBTA compared to Gov. Deval
Patrick's $1.9 billion proposal, Senate President Therese Murray
said today.
Murray, addressing the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce, added the
Legislature's plan requires MassDOT to stop paying workers with
borrowed money by shifting employees from the capital program over a
span of three years, a change poised to free up $233 million in
capital spending capabilities for the agency.
"(The bill) is not a blank check for the Department of
Transportation or MBTA," Murray said. "Instead, it holds the two
agencies accountable for delivering savings or revenue and working
toward contributing the same share of their budget that they are
doing now."
The proposal, backed by Murray and House Speaker Robert DeLeo, also
closes the operating gap in the state's aging transportation system
over a five-year period, she said, adding the Senate bill redirects
the current 2.5 cents per gallon charged at the pump for underground
storage tanks to transportation, starting in Fiscal Year 2015.
The bill also requires MassDOT to enter into agreements with
occupants of their rights-of-way that will provide at least $40
million annually, starting in Fiscal Year 2016, Murray said.
Patrick's plan, which has failed to win the backing of business
leaders, raises the state income tax and lowers the sales tax, while
also eliminating 44 tax exemptions "that will have deep and biting
effects on people in every community across the Commonwealth,"
Murray said.
"There is a growing disconnect between state government and the
people," she said. "We need to focus on regaining the trust of the
people of Massachusetts by showing them how their money is being
spent and that each dollar is going as far as it can."
Murray added that reforms outlined in major transportation
legislation passed in 2009, including a reworking of the Capital
Project Information System, need to be implemented to ensure the
future success of the state's transportation system. Murray also
cited recent payroll tax increases and federal budget cuts as
reasons why the Legislature's bill would make sure middle-class
families statewide weren't hit harder economically.
"We need to be talking about what transportation projects and
policies will help advance the Commonwealth's economic development
today, tomorrow and every year," she said. "It's important for this
discussion to start now since we know that our transportation system
will have more revenue."
While she lauded several state accomplishments, including a lower
unemployment rate than the national average and a robust
manufacturing industry, Murray also pushed for reformation of the
state's welfare system and a "serious conversation" about what a
living wage is for residents living in the Commonwealth.
Citing Maine and New York as examples of states that have adopted
statewide wage increases, Murray said an adult earning minimum wage
in Massachusetts earns $16,704 annually, compared to the federal
poverty level of $19,090.
"By identifying what a living wage is in Massachusetts, we can have
a positive impact on families, and especially single parents who are
trying to improve the lives of their children," she said. "We will
support our growing economy, give our residents more to spend and
this change will serve as a big step forward in helping our
residents lead successful and self-sustaining lives in the
Commonwealth."
The Boston Herald
Thursday, April 11, 2013
A Boston Herald editorial
House lives in real world
Given the choice between a budget proposal that jacks up annual state
spending by 7 percent and one that comes in at about half that, well, we
can guess where most taxpayers would stand. The $33.8 billion spending
plan for fiscal 2014 unveiled by House Speaker Robert DeLeo and Ways and
Means Chairman Brian Dempsey (D-Haverhill) yesterday is rooted far more
deeply in reality than the one offered up by Gov. Deval Patrick.
The budget includes the widely-reported gasoline and tobacco tax hikes
to fund a transportation bailout — but the “new revenue” stops there.
DeLeo and Dempsey stressed that protecting the middle class by sparing
them an income tax hike was a priority.
The House budget dips into reserves, draining $350 million from the
rainy day fund ($50 million less than Patrick). but it wisely eschews
the deficit spending scheme that Patrick offered up. That plan to borrow
$400 million against future revenues was the height of fiscal
irresponsibility.
We’ll have more on the House budget in Friday’s Herald, including some
of the reforms that accompany the spending.
But for now, it’s a relief
to know there are folks on Beacon Hill who have a grip on reality. |
| |
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
|
