 |
and the
Citizens Economic Research Foundation
Post Office Box 1147 ●
Marblehead, Massachusetts 01945 ●
(781) 990-1251
“Every Tax is a Pay Cut ... A Tax Cut is a Pay Raise”
44 years as “The Voice of Massachusetts Taxpayers”
— and
their Institutional Memory — |
|
CLT UPDATE
Saturday, August 25, 2018
Mandatory seat belt law "primary enforcement" threat is back
|
Legislation that would make the seat belt
law a "primary enforcement" one, allowing police officers to
stop and issue $25 tickets to drivers and passengers solely
for not wearing their seat belts has been filed in the Bay
State annually for many years. It never makes it all
the way through the legislative process.
Current law is a "secondary enforcement" one
that prohibits drivers from being stopped solely for not
wearing a seat belt and allows an officer to issue a ticket
only if the driver is stopped for another motor vehicle
violation or some other offense.
"We warned in both of our ballot campaigns
to repeal the state's mandatory seat belt law that creeping
incrementalism would inevitably impose primary enforcement,”
said Chip Ford, Executive Director of Citizens for
Limited Taxation. Ford was the leader of The
Committee to Repeal the Mandatory Seat Belt Law, the group
that succeeded in a ballot campaign that repealed the
original seat belt law passed in 1985 and then reimposed in
1994. “The law's advocates of course vehemently denied
any such intent. Most surprising is that it hasn't
been imposed yet, but despite assurances to the contrary,
sooner or later it will be. Incrementalism demands
it.”
Beacon Hill Roll Call
By Bob Katzen
Week of August 20-24, 2018
Seat Belt Use Increases In Bay State
Massachusetts drivers are buckling up more,
a trend that will save lives, officials and advocates said,
but Massachusetts still remains one of the worst states in
the nation at clicking in....
In the last year, seat belt use in
Massachusetts rose by 8 percent, from 73.7 to 81.6 percent,
according to a study by the University of Massachusetts
Traffic Safety Research Program. That is the largest
increase the state has ever seen, officials said.
Jeff Larason, director of the Highway Safety
Division, said the state has been targeting public service
ads at demographics that are known to be less-frequent seat
belt wearers. That includes young men and pickup truck
drivers, he said....
Larason said there is no clear reason why
Massachusetts ranks low, but said part of the reason is the
state’s weak seat belt law. Massachusetts has what is called
a secondary law, which means police cannot pull drivers over
for simply not wearing a seat belt. If they are pulled over
for another reason, the officer can write another $25 ticket
for the seat belt.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, August 23, 2018
Mass. drivers increase rate of buckling up
State still near back of the pack in nationwide seat belt
use
Massachusetts drivers are buckling up more —
let’s have the trend continue without any new laws....
The trend is moving in the right direction
and though we agree that seat belts save lives, we do not
want to see more seat belt laws putting law enforcement
inside of our vehicles. There are already myriad laws and
regulations regarding seat belts, child safety seats and the
like.
Drivers want to live and will buckle up on
their own. We must be wary of government compromising our
freedoms for what it has deemed our best interests.
A Boston Herald editorial
Friday, August 24, 2018
More seat belt laws unnecessary
Gov. Baker earlier this summer filed a
spending bill to close out unsettled accounts and spend
fiscal 2018 surplus funds. But after becoming the last state
to deliver a fiscal 2019 budget, Massachusetts lawmakers are
poised to again miss a deadline to settle spending for the
fiscal year that ended nearly two months ago.
According to Comptroller Thomas Shack's
office, a troubling pattern has emerged over the years in
which lawmakers have stopped wrapping up closeout budgets by
Aug. 31. Instead, lawmakers are leaving fiscal loose ends
for months, including last year when the so-called closeout
supp was not enacted until November.
State House News Service
Friday, August 24, 2018
Budget Deadline
|
|
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
"Instead, lawmakers are leaving fiscal
loose ends for months, including last year when the
so-called closeout supp was not enacted until November."
Hey, State House News Service, stop
picking on our poor "fulltime" legislators
― "The Best Legislature
Money Can Buy" is in "recess," home on paid vacation
until January. They can't be bothered with that
governing stuff. They did all the governing they
could handle over a few days and nights early this
month. They need a rest, a long one.
Here's some history on the seat belt law
topic you may not know, and my lessons learned early:
In 1985 I was living comfortably with my
sign-painting and boat-lettering business that I'd
established over the past seven or eight years. I
would listen to talk-radio as I worked, and first
learned about a proposed then adopted mandatory seat
belt law while listening to The Jerry Williams Show on
WRKO. I always used a seat belt, learned to while
living for a few years down in the Florida Keys, where
the multitude of bridges along the Overseas Highway were
so narrow there was nowhere to go if an oncoming car
crossed the center line. All one could do before
the head-on collision was stomp on the brakes and hope
you'd remembered to buckle up!
But I did not like the idea of
government forcing me or anyone else to buckle a seat
belt around themselves or face a police stop, a fine,
and an insurance surcharge for years to come.
Whether or not I wear a seat belt was my personal
life-or-death decision, one that would not harm others
or put anyone else at risk. I saw it as a
dangerous first step in government intrusion and control
that would open the door for much more if it were
supinely accepted. For the first time in my life I
had to act politically; I joined in to help collect
signatures to put its repeal on the ballot. I'd
never heard of the petition process, but it sounded like
a good plan to me.
The signatures were collected over the
winter, delivered to the secretary of state in the early
spring ― then nothing
happened for a few months. Growing concerned but
knowing nothing of how the process worked, I called
Jerry Williams (off the air ―
you wouldn't get me to call in and talk publicly
on the radio!) and asked what was going on. He
invited me to come in to the WRKO studio and meet with
him and a few others. Oh my God, I was going to
meet the famous Jerry Williams!
Ralph Sherman, a Boston University law
student, and I arrived, met Jerry in his office, and he
talked us into filing a ballot committee (whatever that
was!) with me as its chairman and Ralph as its
treasurer. It was "just a formality" Jerry told
us, that somebody had to do to get the campaign
off and running. He assured me that I would never
have to do any public speaking ―
my greatest fear. He'd handle all of that he
promised. Before I could get out of the station I
was cornered by Saturday morning talk-show host Moe
Lauzier and dragooned into coming in for his show a
couple days later! My first talk-radio experience,
opposite a Head Injury Foundation representative,
actually went well, was sort of fun for someone who'd
never done anything like that before! Who knew I
could debate the experts and hold my own?
The following months found me driving
all over the state doing talk-radio shows from Boston to
Worcester, New Bedford to Springfield, and beyond.
Back then you had to arrive and appear in person at
every station ― none of
today's short phoned-in interviews. Then came the
newspaper editorial board meetings and interviews
― and debating the campaign
professionals the auto and insurance industries hired
and flew in to defend their law.
I was a volunteer
― no pay, something I'd confront often in
the months and years to come. I
had to give up my sign-painting business, that ballot
campaign was my first 24/7 nonstop work-for-nothing
experience since the Army, but at least when I was a
"grunt" Uncle Sam paid me $98/month plus room-and-board!
I quickly learned what living hand-to-mouth is ― I would
have lost my apartment when I couldn't come up with the
rent one month if a couple of charitable supporters and
friends hadn't come to my rescue.
On election day in
November ― falling on my birthday no less ― we won the
ballot campaign 54-46 percent, despite being outspent
$665,000 to $3,800. That was the best birthday
present I ever received, and maybe was the worst thing
that ever happened to me. If we had lost I've have
been done with political activism, gone back to my
sign-painting business that I loved and made some money. Discovering
that in fact one could fight city hall ― and win
― I decided to keep fighting. By then, I was sure
the defeated zealots would be back. And they were.
Every spring after
that I trudged into the State House and testified before
the Joint Committee on Public Safety against another
mandatory seat belt law, always sponsored by Rep.
Barbara Gray (D-Framingham) and/or Sen. Lois Pines
(D-Newton). We opponents fended it off year after
year ― until 1994 when another was voted into law.
We had to do it all over again ― collect the signatures
over the winter and run another ballot campaign for the
rest of that year.
The second time
around we lost at the polls under a bizarre circumstance
that's never been repeated. The multitude of
questions on the 1994 ballot had no summaries, no explanations
― just the ballot question numbers and their titles with
check boxes for a yes or no vote! Then-outgoing
Secretary of State Michael J. Connolly decided there
were too many questions and not enough space on the
ballot, so he simply eliminated the summaries, the explanations!
(You might remember Barbara Anderson's "voting aid" for
that ballot back then, her "Cha Cha" mantra
that she repeated
over and over on "The Governors Show" with Jerry
Williams and Howie Carr: "Vote No, No, Yes, Yes,
Yes, No, No, Yes, Yes!")
I knew we were in
trouble when on election day our supporters of repeal
began calling into Jerry Williams's show telling him "I
voted with you, Jerry ― I voted Yes on Question 2!"
Repealing the law required a "NO" vote! So
the confused voters "decided" to keep the mandatory seat
belt law and it's been with us ever since.
In the meantime,
starting with our 1986 victory, I became the national
mandatory seat belt law (MSBL) opposition spokesman.
In 1987 I founded the organization "Freedom First" to
oppose the relentless and well-financed push (by the
auto and insurance industries). In every state
they invaded, as they did here they named their
"grassroots" organizations "Traffic Safety Now." I
called our group "Freedom First" to counter their name
messaging: "You can push Traffic Safety Now, but
we the people want our Freedom First!"
Soon I had
chartered Freedom First chapters in twenty-two states,
and I travelled to many of them to testify before their
state legislatures and run around with my new friends to
all their states' radio and TV stations and other media
outlets. (Activists within each Freedom First
state chapter paid for my airfare to and from their
state and put me up in their homes.) New Mexico,
Colorado, Nebraska, Iowa, and on it went.
In 1989, and again
in 1993, I was the only MSBL opponent invited to
testify before a U.S. Senate committee in Washington
against a national mandatory seat belt law (S.1007) ―
which ultimately was defeated.
Thirty-three years
later the mandatory seat belt law remains an unpopular
and controversial law ― and in fact proved my instincts
accurate, that it was just the camel's nose under
liberty's tent flap, and that advocates of expanded
government control never give up until they have what
they want, all of it.
The "temporary"
income tax hike of 1989 is a similar example. CLT
has fought that for twenty-nine years, put it on the
ballot, won, and began rolling it back in 2000. Down
from 5.85% then, it still has a way to go to knock it
down from its current 5.1% and back to 5 percent.
My Freedom First
group worked frequently over many years with Citizens
for Limited Taxation: Term limits twice,
legislative pay raise repeal twice, challenging the
Dukakis fees increases in court and winning, defeating the
graduated income tax, etc. Ultimately my Freedom
First merged with Barbara's Citizens for Limited
Taxation in 1996. For a short while our
organization became Citizens for Limited Taxation &
Government (CLTG) to reflect both of our focuses, but
eventually we went back to just CLT for simplicity.
Primary enforcement of the mandatory
seat belt law has been like the seat belt law itself.
Advocates of expanded government just keep coming back
for what they want over and over, again and again until
they get it. All that has prevented it each time
in the past is the fear by some of "racial profiling"
and "selective enforcement." That too will fail to
deter one day in the future. Incrementalism
― just the nose under the tent,
for now ― once accepted always expands and
consumes all.
"Eternal vigilance is the price of
freedom."
“Just because
you do not take an interest in politics doesn't mean
politics won't take an interest in you.”
―Pericles (c. 495 – 429 BC)
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
|
Beacon Hill Roll Call
By Bob Katzen
Week of August 20-24, 2018
Seat Belt Use Increases In Bay State
The Baker Administration announced today that
seat belt use in Massachusetts rose by nearly 8
percent (from 73.7 percent to 81.6 percent) from
2017 to 2018. The study was conducted by the
University of Massachusetts Traffic Safety
Research Program. The survey estimates 115 lives
were saved by seat belts in Massachusetts in
2016, but 45 additional lives would have saved
at a use rate of 100 percent.
“Our enforcement and education efforts are
clearly paying off, but we need to do even
better,” said Jennifer Queally, Undersecretary
for Law Enforcement at the Executive Office of
Public Safety and Security. “Increasing seat
belt use saves lives. Research shows that your
chance of surviving a crash rises significantly
if you’re buckled up.”
“Troopers enforce the seatbelt law whenever
possible,” Colonel Kerry A. Gilpin,
Superintendent of the Massachusetts State
Police, said. “But there is much more at stake
for motorists than an extra fine. The five
seconds it takes to buckle up could end up being
the most important five seconds of your life or
the life of someone you love.”
Legislation that would make the seat belt law a
"primary enforcement" one, allowing police
officers to stop and issue $25 tickets to
drivers and passengers solely for not wearing
their seat belts has been filed in the Bay State
annually for many years. It never makes it all
the way through the legislative process.
Current law is a "secondary enforcement" one
that prohibits drivers from being stopped solely
for not wearing a seat belt and allows an
officer to issue a ticket only if the driver is
stopped for another motor vehicle violation or
some other offense.
"We warned in both of our ballot campaigns to
repeal the state's mandatory seat belt law that
creeping incrementalism would inevitably impose
primary enforcement,” said Chip Ford,
Executive Director of Citizens for Limited
Taxation. Ford was the leader of The
Committee to Repeal the Mandatory Seat Belt Law,
the group that succeeded in a ballot campaign
that repealed the original seat belt law passed
in 1985 and then reimposed in 1994. “The law's
advocates of course vehemently denied any such
intent. Most surprising is that it hasn't been
imposed yet, but despite assurances to the
contrary, sooner or later it will be.
Incrementalism demands it.”
The Boston Herald
Thursday, August 23, 2018
Mass. drivers increase rate of buckling up
State still near back of the pack in nationwide
seat belt use
By Jordan Graham
Massachusetts drivers are buckling up more, a
trend that will save lives, officials and
advocates said, but Massachusetts still remains
one of the worst states in the nation at
clicking in.
“The best proven tool we have to prevent roadway
deaths is the seat belt,” said Mary Maguire of
AAA New England. “This substantial hike in usage
will save lives, and enforcement and public
outreach is clearly making a difference. But we
still have much work to do when it comes to
reducing fatalities and increasing seat belt use
in the commonwealth.”
In the last year, seat belt use in Massachusetts
rose by 8 percent, from 73.7 to 81.6 percent,
according to a study by the University of
Massachusetts Traffic Safety Research Program.
That is the largest increase the state has ever
seen, officials said.
Jeff Larason, director of the Highway Safety
Division, said the state has been targeting
public service ads at demographics that are
known to be less-frequent seat belt wearers.
That includes young men and pickup truck
drivers, he said.
“It was a pretty precise effort, and I think, I
hope, the numbers bear that out,” he said.
The state said an additional 45 lives would be
saved every year if everyone wore their seat
belts. An estimated 115 lives were saved because
of seat belt use, the state said.
“That’s really an important factor in whether a
person survives or suffers a significant injury
or passes,” Larason said. “The crash might have
happened because of high speed or someone
drinking or being on drugs, but the injury or
fatality happened because they weren’t wearing
their seat belt.”
Still, Massachusetts has consistently been one
of the worst in the nation at wearing seat
belts, and even a significant increase is not
likely to change that, Larason said.
“Even though we had this increase, it’s still
very low,” he said. “We’re probably still going
to be pretty low, around the 40s.”
A nationwide study of seat belt use conducted by
the National Highway Traffic and Safety
Administration found Massachusetts ranked 45th
in seat belt use in 2016, the most recent data
available. The NHTSA’s survey said 78 percent of
Bay State drivers used a seat belt.
Larason said there is no clear reason why
Massachusetts ranks low, but said part of the
reason is the state’s weak seat belt law.
Massachusetts has what is called a secondary
law, which means police cannot pull drivers over
for simply not wearing a seat belt. If they are
pulled over for another reason, the officer can
write another $25 ticket for the seat belt.
Georgia drivers used seat belts the most, at
more than 97 percent, according to the NHTSA,
while New Hampshire drivers belted the least, at
just 70 percent. The NHTSA said 19 states saw
usage above 90 percent.
The Boston Herald
Friday, August 24, 2018
A Boston Herald editorial
More seat belt laws unnecessary
Massachusetts drivers are buckling up more —
let’s have the trend continue without any new
laws.
As the Herald’s Jordan Graham reported, in the
past year, seat belt use in Massachusetts rose
by 8 percent, from 73.7 to 81.6 percent,
according to a study by the University of
Massachusetts Traffic Safety Research Program.
That is the largest increase the state has ever
seen, officials said.
National Highway Traffic and Safety
Administration found Massachusetts ranked 45th
in seat belt use in 2016.
The trend is moving in the right direction and
though we agree that seat belts save lives, we
do not want to see more seat belt laws putting
law enforcement inside of our vehicles. There
are already myriad laws and regulations
regarding seat belts, child safety seats and the
like.
Drivers want to live and will buckle up on their
own. We must be wary of government compromising
our freedoms for what it has deemed our best
interests.
State House News Service
Friday, August 24, 2018
Advances - Week of Aug. 26, 2018 Budget
Deadline
Gov. Baker earlier this summer filed a spending
bill to close out unsettled accounts and spend
fiscal 2018 surplus funds. But after becoming
the last state to deliver a fiscal 2019 budget,
Massachusetts lawmakers are poised to again miss
a deadline to settle spending for the fiscal
year that ended nearly two months ago.
According to Comptroller Thomas Shack's office,
a troubling pattern has emerged over the years
in which lawmakers have stopped wrapping up
closeout budgets by Aug. 31. Instead, lawmakers
are leaving fiscal loose ends for months,
including last year when the so-called closeout
supp was not enacted until November.
Passing the final supplemental budget by Aug.
31, or two months after the June 30 fiscal year
close, is considered a "best practice,"
according to Shack, whose compliance with legal
financial reporting deadlines is influenced by
the timing of the last supplemental budget. The
Statutory Basis Financial Report must be filed
by the comptroller with the legislature and the
governor by Oct. 31.
Legislators have given no indication that
they'll act on the supplemental budget soon.
They so far appear unfazed by Shack's warnings.
The comptroller's office the past two years has
been able to receive financial reporting
excellence awards, perhaps undercutting the
office's argument that Beacon Hill is impeding
fiscal operations. |
| |
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
▪ (781) 990-1251
BACK TO CLT
HOMEPAGE
|
