|
Help save yourself
— join CLT
today! |
CLT introduction and membership application |
What CLT saves you from the auto excise tax alone |
Make a contribution to support
CLT's work by clicking the button above
Ask your friends to join too |
Visit CLT on Facebook |
Barbara Anderson's Great Moments |
Follow CLT on Twitter |
CLT UPDATE
Monday, February 6, 2017
Follow-up on Legislature's obscene
pay grab
|
Members of the 30-day-old 190th General Court have voted
themselves historic pay raises, but the Legislature has
little else to show as far as work product heading into
February. Elected to their top posts on Jan. 4, House
Speaker Robert DeLeo and Senate President Stanley Rosenberg
now have unilateral power to decide which of their
colleagues will receive the largest raises and which will
continue to toil at the $62,547 base pay rate. The enhanced
powers to dictate how much their colleagues earn add to the
already significant powers held by DeLeo and Rosenberg....
State House News Service
Friday, February 3, 2017
Advances — Week of Feb. 5, 2017
A Democratic strategist who worked under
former Gov. Deval Patrick said the state legislature's
recently passed pay raise package comes at the "wrong time"
and is "the wrong way to do this."
“I think it was the wrong time to do this
and the wrong way to do this and there may be repercussions
for the Massachusetts state legislature that they weren’t
anticipating down the road,” said Doug Rubin, Patrick's
former chief of staff and the founding partner of Northwind
Strategies....
“This was moved very quickly in three weeks
and they included a little known exemption to include
judiciary pay increases so it would be harder for citizens
to repeal it on the ballot in 2018,” Rubin said on Boston
Herald Radio's "Morning Meeting" show.
Rubin suggested that the pay increase may
even be an impediment to implementing the millionaire’s tax
down the line.
“With something like this, I think it makes
it a lot harder to happen.”
The Boston Herald
Friday, February 3, 2017
Rubin: Pay raise package done the wrong way
The choice for Republicans seemed to be an
easy one. All 41 House and Senate members of the Grand Old
Party voted against pay raises for themselves, their
governor and other constitutional officers and judges.
But now that the pay raise package has
become law, what they should do with the money is not as cut
and dried.
Gov. Charlie Baker, who watched Thursday as
his veto was easily overridden by Democrats in the
Legislature, said he and Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito will turn
down the pay hikes for themselves, but the top Republicans
in the Legislature were not so quick to turn their back on a
raise.
"I think I'm probably inclined to. Why not?"
House Minority Leader Brad Jones told the News Service after
the override vote when asked whether he would take the
money.
Jones stands to receive an extra $37,500 in
his paycheck this year raising his annual salary to over
$122,547, not counting the $15,000 he will receive for
"office expenses" in his check.
State House News Service
Friday, February 3, 2017
GOP lawmakers must decide whether to accept raise they
rejected
Attorney General Maura Healey and Treasurer
Deborah Goldberg, two of the statewide elected officials due
significant pay raises under a bill that became law
Thursday, announced shortly after lawmakers overrode Gov.
Charlie Baker's veto that they both would be turning down
the money for at least the next two years.
“The Attorney General’s salary is set by the
Legislature and the AG respects their authority. However,
she was opposed to this increase when it was first proposed
two years ago, and will not accept the increase for the
remainder of her term,” Healey spokeswoman Jillian Fennimore
said in a statement.
An aide to Goldberg similarly emailed
minutes after the final vote to say the treasurer would not
be accepting the pay raise, which would bring her salary
from about $136,000 to $175,000 a year.
State House News Service
Friday, February 3, 2017
Healey and Goldberg say they will turn down raises
Secretary of State William F. Galvin said he
plans to take at least some of the $29,000 raise included
for him in a controversial pay hike bill, but lamented that
the package — and its staggering $18 million price tag — has
created a slew of unexpected “budget issues.”
The bill, jammed into law Thursday by
lawmakers overriding Gov. Charlie Baker’s veto, was based in
part on a 2014 commission’s recommendations to raise the pay
of the state’s top elected officials, at a cost of about $1
million.
But lawmakers ultimately layered in far
more, including padded stipends for dozens of legislators
and $25,000 pay raises for judges. And given several public
officials’ salaries are also tied to judiciary pay, Galvin
fears there will be a trickle-down through a number of
departments, including those he oversees.
“The idea of the commission was to
unscramble this and create some order in this whole public
salary issue,” said the Brighton Democrat, whose pay jumps
from $136,000 to $165,000 under the new law.
“But we’re going to have budget issues going
forward, and even though I don’t have a problem with the
($165,000), I don’t think I can accept it at this time until
the budget situation is clarified,” he said.
Galvin said he intends to take a “portion”
of his raise but didn’t say how much.
The Boston Herald
Saturday, February 4, 2017
William F. Galvin says hikes raise budget questions
President Donald Trump's fledgling
administration and legislative Democrats on Beacon Hill may
have one thing in common - a willingness to test the
boundaries of what the electorate might be willing to
stomach before there are political consequences.
One difference, however, is that Trump told
voters essentially what he planned to do before the November
election. State lawmakers? Not exactly....
Back under the Dome, House Speaker Robert
DeLeo and Senate President Stanley Rosenberg used the cover
of the Trump chaos and the New England Patriots run-up to
Super Bowl LI as an opportune time to finalize an $18
million package of pay raises for themselves and others by
overriding the governor's veto.
For pay raise proponents, the override went
about as smoothly as could be expected given the volume of
phone calls and public opposition to the idea. Not one
Democrat besides the 12 already on record in opposition
defected in the week between the bill's passage and the
vote. The 116-43 vote in the House and 31-9 vote in the
Senate comfortably eclipsed the two-thirds margin needed in
each branch to reverse the governor's veto.
In other words, no one who voted for the
raise was swayed by either the governor's case against the
bill or the public outcry....
Calls from upset voters have reportedly
poured in to some elected officials, including Gov. Charlie
Baker. But as MassINC pollster Steve Koczela noted on
Twitter: "Unless MA voting patterns change, the House could
vote to ban apple pie and baseball without worrying too
much." ...
STORY OF THE WEEK: You get what you voted for. And also what
you pay for?
State House News Service
Friday, February 3, 2017
Weekly Roundup — Raise Up Coalition
The Game is on.
Not the Patriots and Falcons. We’re talking
2018: Baker vs. Healey.
Republican Gov. Charlie Baker is already
gearing up his re-election campaign and it’s looking more
and more like his Democratic opponent will be Attorney
General Maura Healey.
Healey says she’s not running for governor
but all the signs say yes. Look at what she’s doing, not
what she’s saying.
Raising lots of money. Churning out legal
challenges to President Trump. And now the clearest sign
she’s running: Healey finally announced, after a lengthy
delay, that she won’t keep a nearly $45,000 pay hike
approved by the Legislature this week.
That’s because she knows the issue will be
front and center in Baker’s re-election playbook.
Baker should thank God every day for the
Democratic-controlled Legislature. By hastily shoving the
$18 million pay hike down the throats of taxpayers, greedy
lawmakers once again showed why Massachusetts needs a
Republican governor.
Baker’s veto was overridden but that’s even
better for him. He can now say he valiantly fought against
the Democrats’ excess but couldn’t overcome the one-party
rule in the Legislature. A perfect argument to try and elect
more Republican legislators....
And the political price of accepting the
raise is just too high. It got approved with the usual
thoughtfulness and public input we’ve come to expect on
Beacon Hill — which is to say zero. Most bills take months
if not years to even earn a vote; this one magically
surfaced and slid through in about a week. Lawmakers waited
until right after they got elected, and while the nation was
riveted on Trump.
But what a gift for Baker. He’s been under
siege lately — hammered by liberals for not attending the
march for women and not standing up enough to Trump, and
hammered by conservatives for being too cozy with the Dems.
Then along come Democratic lawmakers to save
the day.
A huge pay raise for themselves. In the
middle of a state budget crisis. Perfect. Exactly the kind
of thing that got Baker elected and why Democrats are now
contributing to his re-election.
The Boston Herald
Saturday, February 4, 2017
Finally hitting paydirt in race for governor
AG money move looks like ticket to The Game
Gov.
Charlie Baker speaks at a January 30,
2017 a fund raising event for Sen.
Michael Rodrigues at the Bittersweet
Farm in Westport, MA. In attendance
where Senate President Stanley
Rosenberg, second from left front row,
Sen. Michael Rodrigues and the Governor.
(Boston Herald courtesy photo)
This is a picture that’s worth a thousand
words.
It’s GOP Gov. Charlie “Tall Deval” Baker, in
Westport Monday night, at a Democrat fundraiser addressing a
crowd of his fellow Beacon Hill hacks.
Standing behind him is Senate President
Stanley Rosenberg.
Tall Deval had just vetoed the bill that
increases the pay of Rosenberg, a career hack, from $97,500
to $142,500, as “irresponsible.”
After which, Tall Deval was driven down to
Westport to party with his alleged foe at a $100-a-head time
for Sen. Mike Rodrigues, the guy in the middle between
Rosenberg and the governor.
How stupid does Tall Deval think the voters
are?
He’s a Republican, or claims to be. With a
wink and a nod, he vetoes the pay raises, then goes off to
party with the tax-fattened hyenas he’s publicly denouncing.
Notice how Senators Rosenberg and Rodrigues
are holding their hands. Are the solons praying ... or
preying?
The hacks, up to and including Baker, jammed
this obscene heist through because they figured they had
cover — President Trump and the Super Bowl. Nobody was
paying attention, or so they thought....
One final point: This memorable Bristol
County time took place at a swank, upscale venue known as
Bitter Sweet Farm.
No joke — Bitter Sweet Farm. Sweet, very
sweet for the hacks. Bitter for the taxpayers, who once
again are left holding the bag.
The Boston Herald
Sunday, February 5, 2017
Governor parties with fattened hacks
By Howie Carr
|
|
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
Yesterday was my first day off since we discovered the legislative leadership's
stealth announcement on the evening of January 17, for an abrupt hearing in two
days on the dusted-off report by a "Special Commission" on compensation for
public officials. That report became the fig leaf for an obscene pay grab
almost twenty times larger than even the "Special Commission" of political
insiders recommended. Since that evening three weeks ago I've been working
flat-out 18-20 hours a day, seven days a week. I was finally able to take
my first time off and away from my desk yesterday. I wish I could say it
was all worth it, but the Beacon Hill cabal steamrolled right over their
constituents like we don't exist. As I said a week or two back, "If they
want something badly enough — they just take it."
But we did make them face the consequences by making it public and
turning up the heat. The publicity CLT triggered was devastating.
The obscene pay grab was universally recognized for what it is. We did not
go silently into the night. Their covert plan of stealth was exposed and
shredded.
Thanks for all your phone calls and efforts. We revealed the pigs at the
trough and made them work for their plunder. The consequences are now
ahead for them.
As part of CLT's opposition effort, communications director Chip Faulkner drove
up from Attleboro to speak to a group of activist in Stoneham last weekend.
I'll let him take it from here; I need a break. His report follows.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
A
Grassroots Conference Worth the Effort
What would I be doing on a Saturday morning in January? Why
nothing other than attending the 5th Middlesex “We The People”
Grassroots Conference held at the Sons of Italy in Winchester.
It was sponsored by two members of the Republican State
Committee: Robert Aufiero and Caroline Colarusso.
They were hoping to attract activists to talk about issues
affecting the state and communities throughout the Commonwealth.
Attract them, they did! Caroline told me she had about 60 RSVP,
but more than double that number showed up. The meeting started
about a half an hour late so the overflow of attendees could be
registered and seating provided.
Four speakers were asked to address the gathering:
First up was state Rep. Geoff Diehl (R-Whitman) who concentrated
on the pay hike grab the Legislature was in the process of
giving themselves. Two things about the Whitman legislator have
separated him from your average Beacon Hill pol. He was the
co-chair of the campaign to repeal the gas tax hike and took a
leading role in convincing voters to repeal the increase. Since
it was voted down by a relatively close vote ― just under 53%
yes ― he made the difference. He was also the chairman of the
Trump for President committee in Massachusetts and took a lot of
slings and arrows from the media and fellow politicians for
holding this post.
Citizens for Limited Taxation spoke next as I centered on three
topics: Proposition 2½, the legislative pay hike and the looming
Graduated Income Tax, which will almost certainly be on the 2018
ballot. Reminiscing over CLT’s Proposition 2½ battle in 1980, I
pointed out a feature of the ballot question most people have
forgotten or don’t know about: the cut in the auto excise from
$66 per thousand of assessed value to $25. If not for CLT, every
car owner sitting in that Sons of Italy hall would be paying
almost triple the amount of their auto excise bill every year.
The outrageous way the Legislature has gone about giving
themselves a fat pay raise was decried. I pointed out that when
the Joint Ways and Means Committee held the first ― and only ―
hearing concerning a rumored pay hike on January 19th, CLT was
the only group there testifying in opposition. (To learn
much more, go to the
CLT website for CLT’s several press releases on the subject)
Expanding on my last topic, I told the crowd that a graduated
income tax would be a fiscal disaster for Massachusetts. This
so-called “Millionaires Tax” will drive these very people out of
the state. In addition, the extra revenue proponents say will go
to transportation and education will do no such thing. Instead
it will go into the black hole known as the General Fund,
because state Constitution prohibits appropriating money on a
ballot question.
Two other speakers were Holly Robichaud of Tuesday Associates
and Chanel Prunier from the Renew MA Coalition. I have
worked with both these women on countless candidate campaigns
for election to the state Legislature. I’ve admired their hard
work, resourcefulness and above all tenacity in trying to elect
fiscal conservatives in one of the bluest states. I’d estimate
that these two alone can take credit for electing half the
legislators who have high taxpayer ratings with Citizens for
Limited Taxation.
Finally, Caroline recognized a least a dozen attendees who are
running for local offices this spring. They were, for the most
part, in Winchester, Stoneham, Melrose, Wakefield, and Reading.
Several young Republicans were introduced, a few of them still
in high school.
This event was well worth attending. I got to see some old
friends, including a few who reminded me that they were with us
as far back as the 1980 campaign for Proposition 2½. The crowd
was energized and primed for more political action. I brought
CLT donor cards and envelopes to pass out and hopefully receive
donations. Four attendees gave me checks on the spot and about
20 more took the cards and envelopes as they left. My wish is
that they join the largest taxpayer’s organization in the state
to help us continue efforts on behalf of the taxpayers.
Many thanks go to Robert Aufiero and Caroline Colarusso for
organizing this event.
BTW: Caroline Colarusso has run for state representative twice
and once came within 511 votes of winning out of over 18,000
cast. Run again, Caroline!
 |
 |
|
Chip Faulkner
Director of Communications |
|
|
|
|
State House News Service
Friday, February 3, 2017
Advances — Week of Feb. 5, 2017
Members of the 30-day-old 190th General Court
have voted themselves historic pay raises, but
the Legislature has little else to show as far
as work product heading into February. Elected
to their top posts on Jan. 4, House Speaker
Robert DeLeo and Senate President Stanley
Rosenberg now have unilateral power to decide
which of their colleagues will receive the
largest raises and which will continue to toil
at the $62,547 base pay rate. The enhanced
powers to dictate how much their colleagues earn
add to the already significant powers held by
DeLeo and Rosenberg.
In addition to cementing pay raises, the House
and Senate on Thursday also agreed to permanent
legislative rules for the two-year session. With
raises and rules out of the way, the near-term
to-do list for the Legislature includes
assigning members to serve in leadership posts
and on committees, hosting public hearings on
Gov. Charlie Baker's $40.5 billion budget, and
drafting promised changes to the ballot law
legalizing marijuana.
Legislative leaders may also revisit other
spending desires. In December they expressed
interest in restoring funding for programs
slashed by Baker and January revenue collections
will contribute to their thinking on which
programs and services might be salvaged. January
receipts of $2.703 billion were $1 million shy
of benchmark and collections and fiscal
year-to-date revenue are 0.2 percent, or $33
million, shy of benchmark. January receipts were
up 4.4 percent, or $114 million, with sales
taxes up $30 million, or 5.2 percent over
January 2016. Tax collections are up 2.7 percent
over the first seven months of fiscal 2017.
Once committees are stocked with members, the
panels hold organizational meetings and adopt
internal rules before receiving bills assigned
by clerks and then assembling schedules of
hearings on bills that usually stretch out over
months. House and Senate leaders usually don't
give much advance notice of leadership and
committee assignments, but watch out for
caucuses, since the appointments must be
ratified at such gatherings. The Senate has only
informal sessions scheduled next week and has
not scheduled its next caucus. The House also
has informal sessions on its agenda, with a
caucus planned for Wednesday to discuss the
Trump administration. It's a closed meeting but
that ought to be an interesting exchange....
The Boston Herald
Friday, February 3, 2017
Rubin: Pay raise package done the wrong way
By Genevieve DiNatale
A Democratic strategist who worked under former
Gov. Deval Patrick said the state legislature's
recently passed pay raise package comes at the
"wrong time" and is "the wrong way to do this."
“I think it was the wrong time to do this and
the wrong way to do this and there may be
repercussions for the Massachusetts state
legislature that they weren’t anticipating down
the road,” said Doug Rubin, Patrick's former
chief of staff and the founding partner of
Northwind Strategies.
The state legislature quickly overrode
Republican Gov. Charlie Baker’s veto yesterday
passing the pay package, which is expected to
cost the state a total of $18 million dollars in
the first year as it increases the salary of
some of the state’s top legislative leaders by
as much as 50 percent.
Rubin also questioned the speed at which the
bill was passed, despite the governor’s veto and
an added exemption that was included into the
legislation that would make its repeal nearly
impossible.
“This was moved very quickly in three weeks and
they included a little known exemption to
include judiciary pay increases so it would be
harder for citizens to repeal it on the ballot
in 2018,” Rubin said on Boston Herald Radio's
"Morning Meeting" show.
Rubin suggested that the pay increase may even
be an impediment to implementing the
millionaire’s tax down the line.
“With something like this, I think it makes it a
lot harder to happen.”
State House News Service
Friday, February 3, 2017
GOP lawmakers must decide whether to accept
raise they rejected
By Matt Murphy
The choice for Republicans seemed to be an easy
one. All 41 House and Senate members of the
Grand Old Party voted against pay raises for
themselves, their governor and other
constitutional officers and judges.
But now that the pay raise package has become
law, what they should do with the money is not
as cut and dried.
Gov. Charlie Baker, who watched Thursday as his
veto was easily overridden by Democrats in the
Legislature, said he and Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito
will turn down the pay hikes for themselves, but
the top Republicans in the Legislature were not
so quick to turn their back on a raise.
"I think I'm probably inclined to. Why not?"
House Minority Leader Brad Jones told the News
Service after the override vote when asked
whether he would take the money.
Jones stands to receive an extra $37,500 in his
paycheck this year raising his annual salary to
over $122,547, not counting the $15,000 he will
receive for "office expenses" in his check.
"It seems to me that you're sending a variety of
messages, one is somehow now this is going to be
the law so I'm going to go devalue what I do
vis-a-vis my counterparts in the rest of the
body? Next of all, if you don't like the thing
that you passed now I'm going to leave the money
under the care, control custody and discretion
of the same people who passed this bill in the
first place? I don't think it's fair for me to
now go to my family and say, 'I'm not worth
that,' even though I'm going to work just as
hard or harder," Jones said.
Of the $18 million in annual salary increases
approved by lawmakers, members of the 200-person
Legislature stand to receive $2.8 million. The
share for Republicans who voted unanimously
against the money comes out to at least
$647,300, including $327,500 in increased
stipends for leaders in the minority caucus and
$319,800 in increased office expenses for all
members.
After the override vote, Massachusetts
Republican Party Chairwoman Kirsten Hughes
accused Democrats of "ignoring public outcry
about fiscally irresponsible behavior."
"I voted against it three times," Jones
reminded. "I voted to reduce it, and I voted to
delay it, but at the end of the day there's a
lot of laws that get through here that I vote
against. I'm subject to all of those too."
The North Reading Republican is not alone.
Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr has also not
ruled out taking the same increased stipend that
Jones will receive.
"I'm trying to figure out right now what I'm
going to do," Tarr said, reiterating the fact
that he still thinks the raises are
"inappropriate."
Neither Jones nor Tarr have spoken with members
of their caucuses about what they plan to do
with the money, and both said it wasn't their
place to advise other lawmakers what to do. Last
week, Sen. Anne Gobi did not have a problem
recommending what her colleagues who voted
against the raises should do with the money.
Gobi, of Spencer, was one of three Democrats in
the Senate and nine in the House to join with
Republicans in opposition to the bill and in
support of Baker's override. "You can't be
hypocritical. If you vote no, you shouldn't take
the dough, so I won't take the money," Gobi
said.
Rep. Kimberly Ferguson, a Holden Republican,
said, "I have not made any decision on that
yet."
Rep. Lenny Mirra, of West Newbury, said he had
been discussing the issue with colleagues, and
there was some concern that the money, if
rejected, would not be returned to the state's
General Fund, but instead to the House budget
account from which legislative salaries are
paid.
Essentially, Mirra said if he doesn't take the
money it will be returned to House Speaker
Robert DeLeo to spend as the Democratic leader
sees fit, and not to the General Fund where it
could be spent to benefit taxpayers through
programming or local aid.
For rank-and-file members like Ferguson and
Mirra who have not held leadership positions in
their caucus and are unlikely to see an
increased stipend added to their paycheck, the
raise will come in the form of a $7,800 boost to
their office expenses account. Lawmakers living
within a 50-mile radius of the State House will
receive $15,000 for office expenses in their
checks, up for $7,200, while lawmakers who live
further away will receive $20,000.
"I think the better thing might be to spend it
on a charity in the district," Mirra said.
State House News Service
Friday, February 3, 2017
Healey and Goldberg say they will turn down
raises
By Matt Murphy
Attorney General Maura Healey and Treasurer
Deborah Goldberg, two of the statewide elected
officials due significant pay raises under a
bill that became law Thursday, announced shortly
after lawmakers overrode Gov. Charlie Baker's
veto that they both would be turning down the
money for at least the next two years.
“The Attorney General’s salary is set by the
Legislature and the AG respects their authority.
However, she was opposed to this increase when
it was first proposed two years ago, and will
not accept the increase for the remainder of her
term,” Healey spokeswoman Jillian Fennimore said
in a statement.
An aide to Goldberg similarly emailed minutes
after the final vote to say the treasurer would
not be accepting the pay raise, which would
bring her salary from about $136,000 to $175,000
a year.
Both Healey and Goldberg have been silent for
the past two weeks on whether they would accept
the pay raise, deflecting questions and
criticism from the Massachusetts Republican
Party by saying they would make a decision if
and when the bill written by top House and
Senate Democrats became law.
The attorney general's salary under the bill
will climb from $136,053 to $175,000, but Healey
will forego the pay bump until at least after
2018 when she is up for re-election. Healey's
domestic partner, Appeals Court Justice
Gabrielle Wolohojian, also stands to receive a
$25,000 raise earmarked in the bill for all
judges boosting her pay from $165,087 to
$190,087.
Gov. Charlie Baker and Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito
also plan to turn down raises authorized by the
bill, while Auditor Suzanne Bump has said she
will accept the increase from $140,607 to
$165,000 a year, and Secretary of State William
Galvin said the size of his raise - a $28,598
bump to $165,000 - "doesn't trouble me."
The Boston Herald
Saturday, February 4, 2017
William F. Galvin says hikes raise budget
questions
By Matt Stout
Secretary of State William F. Galvin said he
plans to take at least some of the $29,000 raise
included for him in a controversial pay hike
bill, but lamented that the package — and its
staggering $18 million price tag — has created a
slew of unexpected “budget issues.”
The bill, jammed into law Thursday by lawmakers
overriding Gov. Charlie Baker’s veto, was based
in part on a 2014 commission’s recommendations
to raise the pay of the state’s top elected
officials, at a cost of about $1 million.
But lawmakers ultimately layered in far more,
including padded stipends for dozens of
legislators and $25,000 pay raises for judges.
And given several public officials’ salaries are
also tied to judiciary pay, Galvin fears there
will be a trickle-down through a number of
departments, including those he oversees.
“The idea of the commission was to unscramble
this and create some order in this whole public
salary issue,” said the Brighton Democrat, whose
pay jumps from $136,000 to $165,000 under the
new law.
“But we’re going to have budget issues going
forward, and even though I don’t have a problem
with the ($165,000), I don’t think I can accept
it at this time until the budget situation is
clarified,” he said.
Galvin said he intends to take a “portion” of
his raise but didn’t say how much. He said he
believes he should at least make more than
others, and pointed in particular to county
sheriffs, who make roughly $150,000 while
overseeing one or two jail facilities.
“I run 13 registry of deeds,” Galvin said. “I’m
looking at that for some guidance.”
Most of the state’s constitutional officers said
they aren’t taking the various raises afforded
to them, including Baker, Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito,
Attorney General Maura Healey and Treasurer Deb
Golberg. Only state Auditor Suzanne Bump, who
will now make $165,000, has said she’ll take it.
Some Republican lawmakers who voted against the
pay hikes but stand to take home handsome hikes
have also yet to say what they’ll do. Minority
leaders Sen. Bruce Tarr and Rep. Brad Jones are
both due a $37,500 pay raise but neither
responded to requests for comment yesterday.
State House News Service
Friday, February 3, 2017
Weekly Roundup — Raise Up Coalition
Recap and analysis of the week in state
government
By Matt Murphy
President Donald Trump's fledgling
administration and legislative Democrats on
Beacon Hill may have one thing in common - a
willingness to test the boundaries of what the
electorate might be willing to stomach before
there are political consequences.
One difference, however, is that Trump told
voters essentially what he planned to do before
the November election. State lawmakers? Not
exactly.
Trump crossed the line for many Massachusetts
residents and elected leaders late last week
when he signed an executive order halting
refugee resettlement in the United States and
restricting travel for immigrants and visitors
from seven majority-Muslim countries.
While the White House insisted this was not the
Muslim ban that Trump talked about during the
campaign, many immigration advocates viewed it
as just that and those in the state's higher
education and technology worlds warned that it
would cut off access to talent that helps drive
the state economy.
The action sparked virulent protests throughout
the weekend and led to Attorney General Maura
Healey filing suit in federal court this week on
behalf of the state and the University of
Massachusetts seeking to overturn the order on
constitutional grounds.
Back under the Dome, House Speaker Robert DeLeo
and Senate President Stanley Rosenberg used the
cover of the Trump chaos and the New England
Patriots run-up to Super Bowl LI as an opportune
time to finalize an $18 million package of pay
raises for themselves and others by overriding
the governor's veto.
For pay raise proponents, the override went
about as smoothly as could be expected given the
volume of phone calls and public opposition to
the idea. Not one Democrat besides the 12
already on record in opposition defected in the
week between the bill's passage and the vote.
The 116-43 vote in the House and 31-9 vote in
the Senate comfortably eclipsed the two-thirds
margin needed in each branch to reverse the
governor's veto.
In other words, no one who voted for the raise
was swayed by either the governor's case against
the bill or the public outcry.
Knowing they had the votes, leaders largely
dispensed with the idea of speaking out to
defend the move, but when they did they pointed
again to the decades that have elapsed since
salaries were seriously adjusted.
Rep. Jonathan Hecht of Watertown was one of the
Democrats who joined with Republicans in
opposition, and he got up to warn his colleagues
that the lucrative stipends they were about to
approve would only serve to make the House "more
unequal, more hierarchical and less
representative."
Hecht cautioned that lawmakers could become more
concerned with appeasing their bosses who
control the purse strings than the people they
represent.
Calls from upset voters have reportedly poured
in to some elected officials, including Gov.
Charlie Baker. But as MassINC pollster Steve
Koczela noted on Twitter: "Unless MA voting
patterns change, the House could vote to ban
apple pie and baseball without worrying too
much."
In doing what they thought was right, or at
least in their best political interests, Baker
and Healey were actually brought closer together
by the political tumult around them.
Baker bucked his party's president in backing
Healey's legal challenge to Trump's executive
order on immigration, and Healey waited ... and
waited ... and waited until the Legislature
finally overrode Baker's pay raise veto, but
ultimately sided with him in deciding, like him,
to reject a $39,000 pay raise.
While Republican lawmakers fretted over whether
they absolutely had to turn down the money since
they voted against it, Treasurer Deborah
Goldberg also said she would forego a raise and
Secretary of State William Galvin said he would
take enough of it to make sure he got paid more
than his subordinates, but probably not the
whole amount.
The pay raise issue may have been a no-brainer
for Baker, though conservatives may have liked
to see a stronger effort from their governor to
sustain his veto. Trump is another matter
altogether....
STORY OF THE WEEK: You get what you voted for.
And also what you pay for?
The Boston Herald
Saturday, February 4, 2017
Finally hitting paydirt in race for governor
AG money move looks like ticket to The Game
By Joe Battenfeld
The Game is on.
Not the Patriots and Falcons. We’re talking
2018: Baker vs. Healey.
Republican Gov. Charlie Baker is already gearing
up his re-election campaign and it’s looking
more and more like his Democratic opponent will
be Attorney General Maura Healey.
Healey says she’s not running for governor but
all the signs say yes. Look at what she’s doing,
not what she’s saying.
Raising lots of money. Churning out legal
challenges to President Trump. And now the
clearest sign she’s running: Healey finally
announced, after a lengthy delay, that she won’t
keep a nearly $45,000 pay hike approved by the
Legislature this week.
That’s because she knows the issue will be front
and center in Baker’s re-election playbook.
Baker should thank God every day for the
Democratic-controlled Legislature. By hastily
shoving the $18 million pay hike down the
throats of taxpayers, greedy lawmakers once
again showed why Massachusetts needs a
Republican governor.
Baker’s veto was overridden but that’s even
better for him. He can now say he valiantly
fought against the Democrats’ excess but
couldn’t overcome the one-party rule in the
Legislature. A perfect argument to try and elect
more Republican legislators.
It must have been agonizing for Healey to
decline a 25 percent pay boost, but she can
afford it. She still makes $130,000 and her
partner, an appeals court judge, is in line for
a $25,000 boost in pay thanks to the
Legislature.
And the political price of accepting the raise
is just too high. It got approved with the usual
thoughtfulness and public input we’ve come to
expect on Beacon Hill — which is to say zero.
Most bills take months if not years to even earn
a vote; this one magically surfaced and slid
through in about a week. Lawmakers waited until
right after they got elected, and while the
nation was riveted on Trump.
But what a gift for Baker. He’s been under siege
lately — hammered by liberals for not attending
the march for women and not standing up enough
to Trump, and hammered by conservatives for
being too cozy with the Dems.
Then along come Democratic lawmakers to save the
day.
A huge pay raise for themselves. In the middle
of a state budget crisis. Perfect. Exactly the
kind of thing that got Baker elected and why
Democrats are now contributing to his
re-election. Even another Democrat who may run
against Baker, Newton Mayor Setti Warren, knew
enough to oppose the money grab.
The pay hike also proved to be an unwanted
diversion for Healey. The attorney general has
been on a roll, challenging Trump’s new
immigration restrictions, and making political
hay out of just about everything else the new
president has done.
She’s now positioned to be the Democrats’ best
chance to beat Baker, and it will be tough to
turn down. Just like that $45,000 raise.
The Boston Herald
Sunday, February 5, 2017
Governor parties with fattened hacks
By Howie Carr
This is a picture that’s worth a thousand words.
It’s GOP Gov. Charlie “Tall Deval” Baker, in Westport Monday night, at a
Democrat fundraiser addressing a crowd of his fellow Beacon Hill hacks.
Standing behind him is Senate President Stanley Rosenberg.
Tall Deval had just vetoed the bill that increases the pay of Rosenberg,
a career hack, from $97,500 to $142,500, as “irresponsible.”
After which, Tall Deval was driven down to Westport to party with his
alleged foe at a $100-a-head time for Sen. Mike Rodrigues, the guy in
the middle between Rosenberg and the governor.
How stupid does Tall Deval think the voters are?
He’s a Republican, or claims to be. With a wink and a nod, he vetoes the
pay raises, then goes off to party with the tax-fattened hyenas he’s
publicly denouncing.
Notice how Senators Rosenberg and Rodrigues are holding their hands. Are
the solons praying ... or preying?
The hacks, up to and including Baker, jammed this obscene heist through
because they figured they had cover — President Trump and the Super
Bowl. Nobody was paying attention, or so they thought.
Back in the 1980s, the hackerama tried a similar robbery, albeit much
smaller than this one that reduces the great Plymouth mail robbery to a
footnote. The hacks did that one on Halloween. It became known as the
Halloween heist.
This bipartisan thievery needs a name, too.
The Super Bowl robbery, we’ll call it.
All day Friday, I was calling and emailing Baker’s office at the State
House, asking him why he would party with the perpetrators of the
greatest theft in the Commonwealth since the Brinks job.
When the phone didn’t ring, I knew it was Tall Deval.
Basically, this is a pension sweetener for Rosenberg and House Speaker
Bob DeLeo, the unindicted co-conspirator, as he’s described in the
federal indictment. They’re both 67, so this will mean an extra — repeat
EXTRA — $3,000-plus in their monthly kisses in the mail.
But then these parasites realized their grab would be repealed by the
voters, so they threw in pay hikes to the state’s already grossly
overpaid and underworked judiciary. That makes the robbery repeal-proof.
But it gets worse. The wrinkly reprobates also dished out pay raises —
“stipends,” they call them — to all the reps in so-called leadership.
The unindicted co-conspirator has sole discretion on who gets the extra
dough.
What the speaker giveth, he can taketh away.
It was left to a Democrat, Rep. Jonathan Hecht of Watertown, to explain
how pernicious this is. He spoke during the debate on whether to
override the veto Thursday. (It was, of course, overridden.)
In the 1970s, Hecht pointed out, only nine House members got anything
above their base pay. As a string of ethically challenged speakers
realized the ironclad control the extra dough gave them, the number of
payoffs skyrocketed — to 28 by 1980, to 34 by the mid-1990s and until
now, 55.
Now, Hecht said, 80 Democrats — two-thirds of the party’s members in the
House — will get the extra do-re-mi.
If they ever step out of line, the speaker can cut their pay.
Do you think these unemployables will ever vote against Mistah Speakah?
This is democracy?
Here’s an example of the phony-baloney titles they’ve concocted. One of
the hacks at the Tall Deval lovefest in Westport was Rep. Patricia
Haddad of Somerset.
She is the “speaker pro tempore” of the House, whatever that means. She
used to get an additional $15,000 annually. Now she will collect $50,000
extra a year.
For doing exactly nothing.
Like DeLeo and Rosenberg, she’s 67, or will be in May. What a nice boost
for the speaker pro tempore’s pension!
Did I mention that the hacks attached an “emergency preamble” to this
catastrophic bill? That means they don’t have to wait 90 days for the
pay hikes to kick in. Here’s the exact wording on their pay grab:
“It is hereby declared to be an emergency law, necessary for the
immediate preservation of the public convenience.”
Their convenience, certainly not ours.
No wonder Tall Deval didn’t really try to stop this. It was an
emergency, damn it.
Recall the squalid past of the solon Tall Deval was feting — Mike
Rodrigues. Back in 2009, at Small Deval’s behest, the legislature
imposed a sales tax on alcohol. That doesn’t seem terribly outrageous
until you remember that the state already has an excise tax on booze.
In other words, Rodrigues et al. voted to impose a tax on a tax.
Rodrigues thought it was a splendid idea. (It was repealed by the voters
in the next election.)
But Rodrigues is not the sharpest knife in the drawer. A couple of days
after that outrage, he was spotted in New Hampshire, at a state liquor
store, loading the trunk of his car with cases of cheap no-sales-tax
Granite State booze.
He might have gotten away with it, but the statesman had proudly
attached a “Senate” license plate to his vehicle. He was busted.
One final point: This memorable Bristol County time took place at a
swank, upscale venue known as Bitter Sweet Farm.
No joke — Bitter Sweet Farm. Sweet, very sweet for the hacks. Bitter for
the taxpayers, who once again are left holding the bag.
Listen to Howie’s radio show 3-7 p.m. every weekday on WRKO AM 680. |
| |
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
BACK TO CLT
HOMEPAGE
|