 |
Post Office Box 1147 ●
Marblehead, Massachusetts 01945 ●
(781) 639-9709
“Every Tax is a Pay Cut ... A Tax Cut is a Pay Raise”
45 years as “The Voice of Massachusetts Taxpayers”
— and
their Institutional Memory — |
|
CLT UPDATE
Thursday, January 31, 2019
Reprise
of driver's
licenses and "sanctuary state" for illegals
|
There is a big change in this year's budget
from Baker in that it raises taxes, something Baker pledged
not to do when first running for election. The plan would
plump up the tax on real estate transactions by 50 percent,
providing $137 million per year for a fund that pays for
climate change preparations.
There's also new revenue set to come into
state coffers from taxes on opioid medications and
e-cigarettes, as well as expected funds from new casinos and
marijuana shops.
(Some) conservatives don't like higher taxes
Conservatives are often hard to find on
Beacon Hill, but there are still some who look out for
taxpayers when it comes to spikes in taxation and spending.
Leading GOP lawmakers in both the House and Senate didn't
have much of anything to say about Baker's plan beyond
calling it a fiscally responsible first step before the
Legislature has its own budget process.
The elected Republican reaction was muted
compared to the outrage expressed by conservative groups. In
a statement made shortly after Baker unveiled his budget,
Citizens for Limited Taxation executive director Chip
Ford called the governor's plans "Baker's next assault
on taxpayers."
"Gov. Baker has an excuse for every
betrayal. He's smooth, he’s slippery, and he’s sliding down
the slope, seemingly a victim of Stockholm syndrome," Ford
wrote. "For a candidate who campaigned on opposition to
raising taxes and fees, Gov. Baker has become — well, a
disappointment."
Likewise, the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance
reacted to Baker's tax hikes by calling for a moratorium on
all tax increases until the costs of programs like
MassHealth can be lowered.
WGBH News
Monday, January 28, 2019
Baker's Budget Is About A Lot More Than Numbers
When Charlie Baker ran for governor in 2014
he pledged not to increase taxes or impose new fees to help
plug the state's chronic revenue shortfalls.
It was a campaign promise Baker mostly kept
throughout most of his first term, political observers say,
by holding the line on broad-based tax increases despite
pressure from special interest groups and Democratic
lawmakers to come up with new sources of revenue to make
investments in infrastructure, transportation, public health
and the environment.
But as the popular Republican embarks on a
second term following a landslide re-election in November,
he is increasingly backing away from the no-tax mantra....
But the move has prompted criticism from tax
watchdogs, some of whom accuse Baker of breaking a key
campaign promise.
"For a candidate who campaigned on
opposition to raising taxes, Gov. Baker has become, well, a
disappointment," said Chip Ford, executive director
of Citizens for Limited Taxation....
Jeffrey Berry, a political science professor
at Tufts University, said the tax proposals suggest Baker is
more concerned about his legacy than seeking a third term,
which he is allowed to do under state law.
"He's been focused very much on making
government run better rather than expanding what government
does," he said. "With this likely being his last term, he's
looking to make his mark by expanding some programs and
innovating in ways that improve life for Massachusetts
residents."
The Gloucester Daily Times
Friday, January 25, 2019
Baker abandons 'no tax' pledge in budget proposal
Now it’s really over between Charlie Baker
and the Republican Party.
It’s one thing to get behind transgender
rights and other social liberalisms. But backing new taxes?
For conservatives, that’s the ultimate red line. Yet Baker
crossed it in a budget that calls for more spending on
education, transportation, and climate change mitigation —
and more taxes to support that agenda....
“Charlie’s too far left to be a viable
Republican presidential candidate who can win primaries.
That’s the bottom line. That’s already where he was. Raising
taxes cements that position,” said Rob Gray, a Republican
strategist and media consultant....
Who knew that meant raising taxes?
Conservatives saw it coming. When Baker was
running for governor in 2014 and refused to sign the
Taxpayer Protection Pledge, anti-tax activist Grover
Norquist warned, “There’s only one reason not to take the
pledge and that’s because you want to raise taxes and if
you’re not going to do it, you put in writing.” ...
All it took was the confidence that comes
with winning 1.7 million votes in last November’s
gubernatorial election — and perhaps an acknowledgment that
there’s absolutely no place for him anyway in today’s GOP.
The party he signed up for is an ideologically rigid corpse,
compliments of Trump and his crew of Republican enablers.
Even in Massachusetts, Jim Lyons, a conservative who lost
his bid for reelection to the Massachusetts House last fall,
beat out Baker’s choice to head the Massachusetts Republican
State Committee....
Baker has not ruled out a third term. As he
starts his second, he seems focused on building a legacy by
trying to do right by Massachusetts.
Too bad his party wants nothing to do with
that.
The Boston Globe
Thursday, January 31, 2019
With taxes, Charlie Baker is a governor without a party to
call home
By Joan Vennochi
Lawmakers are renewing a push to pass
legislation that would allow undocumented immigrants
residing in the state to acquire driver's licenses, despite
the failure of similar legislation in the past and
opposition from Gov. Charlie Baker.
Sen. Brendan Crighton of Lynn, Rep.
Christine Barber of Somerville and Rep. Tricia Farley-Bouvier
of Pittsfield, flanked by dozens of advocates, unveiled
their bill Wednesday morning outside the House chamber. They
argued that the measure would ensure every driver on the
road has undergone proper training and vision testing and
that it would relieve stress on undocumented families
already in the state.
"This is a very straightforward issue with a
common-sense solution," Crighton said. "There is simply no
rational argument for prohibiting undocumented immigrants
from earning their driver's licenses. These are our
neighbors, these are our students, this is our workforce,
our family, our friends, and these are the constituents we
all represent."
The newest proposal, referred to as the Work
and Family Mobility Act, was filed last week in both the
House and Senate. If approved, it would permit all qualified
residents, regardless of immigration status, to receive a
standard license under the state's now-two-tiered system.
The legislation would not affect federal Real ID-compliant
licenses, which require proof of citizenship or lawful
residence as well as a Social Security number.
The bill also includes privacy protection
measures. It proposes that an individual's documents could
only be released by subpoena or court order and that
licenses could not be the basis for prosecution.
State House News Service
Wednesday, January 23, 2019
Lawmakers push bill making undocumented immigrants
eligible for driver's licenses
Gov. Charlie Baker says he’ll “certainly
veto” a bill that would let illegal immigrants in
Massachusetts get driver’s licenses — a proposal critics say
would make the Bay State a magnet for fraud.
“I would certainly veto legislation that
gets beyond what we actually worked with the Legislature on
a bipartisan basis to put in place,” Baker said Thursday. “I
mean, the law that we signed basically said if you have
lawful presence in Massachusetts you can get a driver’s
license for the period in time of which you have lawful
presence. I think that’s the right answer.”
The policy stance came a day after state
Sen. Brendan P. Crighton (D-Lynn) and Reps. Tricia Farley-Bouvier
(D-Pittsfield) and Christine Barber (D-Somerville)
introduced the Work and Family Mobility Act, which would
strip the portion of the current law that says people
illegally in the country cannot get Massachusetts licenses.
When told of the governor’s position,
Crighton told the Herald, “I hope he would let it go through
the process and take a look at the merits of the bill.” ...
The legislators behind the bill said it
would make the roads safer because people would be held to
the same standards, having to pass tests and get insurance.
They also said the state has the moral responsibility not to
overburden the 210,000 illegal immigrants estimated to live
in Massachusetts....
But Jessica Vaughan of the
anti-illegal-immigration Center for Immigration studies said
people in the country illegally will flock to the Bay State
with false papers in an attempt to get legitimate ones.
“It opens up the opportunity for fraud — it
may end up with non-citizens getting on the voter rolls,”
Vaughan said. “It sends the signal that there’s nothing
wrong with being here illegally. We should not be endorsing
this.”
The Boston Herald
Saturday, January 26, 2019
Charlie Baker vows to veto bill giving driver’s licenses
to illegal immigrants
Gov. Charlie Baker must take a stand in the
name of the law-abiding citizens of Massachusetts and ensure
that illegal immigrants do not get driver’s licenses....
Distributing licenses to illegal immigrants
will open the floodgates for many kinds of fraud. A
driver’s license would give full and equal legitimacy to a
group of people who’ve not earned it lawfully. Among other
things, it would mean access to rental housing, cars, bank
accounts, guns, commercial aircraft flights and security
checkpoints.
No to licenses for illegal immigrants.
A Boston Herald editorial
Saturday, January 26, 2019
Illegal immigrants must be denied driver’s licenses
"According to the latest U.S. Census Bureau
report state population is growing, even while we're losing
citizens to out-migration," said Chip Ford, executive
director of Citizens for Limited Taxation. "Secretary
of State Galvin noted that those losses are more than offset
by international immigration. 'These numbers show how
important it is that we ensure every person in Massachusetts
is counted in the 2020 Census, whether or not they are
United States citizens,' Galvin said." Ford added, "Driver's
licensing is the logical next step toward voter
registration."
Beacon Hill Roll Call
Comment on Driver's License Bill
Thursday, January 24, 2019
Immigrant advocacy groups assembled at the
State House on Wednesday to begin to lobby House and Senate
lawmakers in support of the newest version of the Safe
Communities Act, a controversial piece of legislation that
would bar local police and court officials from helping to
enforce federal immigration law.
The Senate passed a version of the bill last
session as part of its budget, but the issue died in the
House where Democrat leadership refused to allow it to come
forward for a vote and Gov. Charlie Baker threatened to veto
the proposal if it reached his desk.
A new freshman class of lawmakers and
another year of President Donald Trump, however, have
activists feeling rejuvenated and hopeful about the chances
for a breakthrough this session.
"I think there's a greater realization from
the Legislature in general that we need to be stronger in
our opposition to Donald Trump," said Sen. Jamie Eldridge,
of Acton, who has once again filed the Safe Communities
Act....
Asked about his position on the bill and
whether he had moderated his stance from last session or if
he remained skeptical about the level of support among House
Democrats, DeLeo, in a statement, said, "The House will
review the proposals." ...
"Obviously we still need to convince
Governor Baker to be supportive of this, but I'm hoping as
allegedly he's becoming more bold that maybe he'll be more
open to support all communities and all residents of
Massachusetts," Eldridge told reporters after the event.
"Until his reelection he opposed taxes and
now he's proposing, including his budget, a number of taxes
so I remain optimistic we can convince him to support this
very modest common sense reform that many police chiefs
support," he said.
Baker, however, said earlier in the day that
his position "hasn't changed at all." ...
Eldridge called it an "embarrassing
argument" for Baker to make that local communities were
better equipped to make the decision after arguing that the
regulation of things like Airbnb rentals or Uber rides must
be done in a uniform, statewide manner.
State House News Service
Wednesday, January 30, 2019
Politics changing around immigration bill, supporters say
|
|
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
Gov. Charlie Baker's evolving affinity
for new revenue, his newfound willingness to increase
taxes, is surprising more than just us. Some see this as
a signal that this will be his final term. Others
perceive it as Baker, with nowhere else to go,
positioning himself for a third term as governor.
Either option is not a good situation for
taxpayers.
If the latter are correct, then Charlie
Baker has decided he doesn't need Republicans,
conservatives, or taxpayers on his side anymore.
If the former are correct, it would
establish a
self-made lame duck governor, also a peril for taxpayers.
Without at least the perceived threat of a governor's veto
– or his will to use it
– there is little if anything
standing in the way of unlimited new and increased taxes. When we've had avowed Democrat
tax-and-spenders as
governors the minority Republican legislators could act
as the "loyal opposition," at least create a speed bump in the way of
tax increases. How many of the already few will stand
against Baker tax hikes, even go through the motions?
To be fair, Baker had no political
coattails in the last election; the MassGOP lost
three seats in the Legislature. Republican state
representatives and senators will be running for
re-election in 2020, regardless of what Charlie Baker
does, so each must consider self-preservation, the
strongest primal instinct.
Boston Globe columnist Joan Venocchi,
cheering on the governor's apparent epiphany, noted:
"The
party he signed up for is an ideologically rigid
corpse, compliments of Trump and his crew of
Republican enablers. Even in Massachusetts, Jim
Lyons, a conservative who lost his bid for
reelection to the Massachusetts House last fall,
beat out Baker’s choice to head the Massachusetts
Republican State Committee."
Jim Lyons could always be counted on to
stand up for taxpayers while he was a state
representative, but unfortunately he was defeated for
re-election. Let's hope that as the newly-elected
chairman of the state Republican Party he's still
breathing fire.
Jim Lyons will be sorely missed in the
Legislature during the upcoming, renewed debate over granting Massachusetts driver's licenses
to illegal aliens, and adopting the "Safe Communities
Act" making Massachusetts a defacto sanctuary state. It was then-Rep. Lyons who
pried the information from the Patrick administration
which revealed that almost two billion state taxpayers'
dollars was being spent annually to support illegal
aliens. With "international immigrants"
– as Secretary of State
Galvin
terms them – more
than replacing productive, taxpaying citizens who have
joined the diaspora that's exiting the commonwealth, one can only assume the two billion
taxpayer dollars of spending years ago has continued to increase.
Already Democrat legislators are
wielding the governor's reversal of his past opposition
to taxes against him, turning it on him. This is
what often happens when principles are malleable,
negotiable, and weakness is perceived.
Governor Charlie Baker has again asserted that he will veto
any bill granting illegals Massachusetts driver's
licenses, as well as an expanded "Safe Communities Act"
sanctuary state bill. Let us hope he means it, and
that his principles won't further evolve and erode as he
searches for himself.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
|
|
WGBH News
Monday, January 28, 2019
Baker's Budget Is About A Lot More Than Numbers
By Mike Deehan
Lawmakers and advocates have had the better part
of a week to pour over Gov. Charlie Baker's
budget proposal for the coming fiscal year.
Baker's plan is a doozy, packet with policy
initiatives large and small and calling for
increases to some taxes to help cover efforts to
better finance schools and prepare for climate
change.
Most of your money still pays for health care
The biggest items of the $42.7 billion budget
are the same as always: health care dominates
state spending, with education in a close second
place and everything else trailing behind. The
plan will raise spending by around 1.5 percent,
well within the bounds of revenue that's
expected to come into state coffers this year.
Nearly $300 million dollar will go into the
state's "rainy day" stabilization fund to bulk
up savings before the next recession hits.
MassHealth, the health insurance program for the
poor, is far and away the biggest line-item,
roughly 40 percent of the entire budget. The
next biggest bucket is the $9 billion, about 20
percent, for education. The remaining fifth of
spending goes to things like environmental and
recreation costs, human services programs,
economic development, public safety and local
aid back to the cities and towns.
Baker wants to raise (some) taxes
There is a big change in this year's budget from
Baker in that it raises taxes, something Baker
pledged not to do when first running for
election. The plan would plump up the tax on
real estate transactions by 50 percent,
providing $137 million per year for a fund that
pays for climate change preparations.
There's also new revenue set to come into state
coffers from taxes on opioid medications and
e-cigarettes, as well as expected funds from new
casinos and marijuana shops.
(Some) conservatives don't like higher taxes
Conservatives are often hard to find on Beacon
Hill, but there are still some who look out for
taxpayers when it comes to spikes in taxation
and spending. Leading GOP lawmakers in both the
House and Senate didn't have much of anything to
say about Baker's plan beyond calling it a
fiscally responsible first step before the
Legislature has its own budget process.
The elected Republican reaction was muted
compared to the outrage expressed by
conservative groups. In a statement made shortly
after Baker unveiled his budget, Citizens for
Limited Taxation executive director Chip
Ford called the governor's plans "Baker's
next assault on taxpayers."
"Gov. Baker has an excuse for every betrayal.
He's smooth, he’s slippery, and he’s sliding
down the slope, seemingly a victim of Stockholm
syndrome," Ford wrote. "For a candidate who
campaigned on opposition to raising taxes and
fees, Gov. Baker has become — well, a
disappointment."
Likewise, the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance
reacted to Baker's tax hikes by calling for a
moratorium on all tax increases until the costs
of programs like MassHealth can be lowered.
Education will dominate this year
Perhaps the most significant part of Baker's
budget is his proposal to increase school
funding by $1.1 billion over seven years, his
attempt at addressing the cries from local and
educational leaders that state funding for
schools are not keeping up with costs. This is
Baker's initial salvo into the debate that is
likely to dominate Beacon Hill for the better
part of 2019.
Democrats have the advantage on the "Cap on
Kids"
Another major shift in Baker's budget is the
elimination of the so-called "cap on kids," the
1990's-era policy meant to disincentive having
children while on welfare.
"It was based on this really foul assumption
that people who were elected were going to teach
women in poverty a lesson about having
children," said Rep. Marjorie Decker
(D-Cambridge.)
Democrats moved to eliminate the cap last year,
but were foiled by Baker when he vetoed the
measure near the end of the legislative session,
and then foiled by themselves when lawmakers
"ran out of time" to override the veto and Baker
simply killed the measure. Now, Baker wants to
do away with the family welfare cap, but at the
same time he's attempting to also limit some
benefits that go to handicapped people he says
are out of step with federal standards.
"What is just really truly a disgrace, and
baffling that he's gotten away with it, is that
we have a governor who has continued to try to
figure out how to reduce benefits for the
poorest amongst us while in the same breath
saying he doesn't oppose the lifting of the cap.
Well, he does oppose lifting the cap. He's done
it twice," Decker said.
DeLeo supports removing the cap, meaning
Democrats should be able to easily override any
objection from Baker over a clean elimination of
the limit, regardless of his attempts to tie the
move to the handicap benefits.
There are still no Legislative budget writers
Next up in the annual budgeting process is the
House. Speaker Robert DeLeo has to fill the two
top slots on his Ways and Means Committee,
appointments he's said he'll make in the coming
weeks. After former chairman Jeffrey Sanchez was
defeated in September and vice chairman Steve
Kulik retired, there will be new blood in some
of the House's most powerful positions.
After the House passes their budget in April,
the Senate, which also lacks a permanent Ways
and Means Chair, will ready theirs for May. A
final budget is supposed to get back to Baker by
the end of June, but recent years have seen that
deadline blown in the name of politics and
horse-trading.
The Gloucester Daily Times
Friday, January 25, 2019
Baker abandons 'no tax' pledge in budget
proposal
By Christian M. Wade, Statehouse Reporter
When Charlie Baker ran for governor in 2014 he
pledged not to increase taxes or impose new fees
to help plug the state's chronic revenue
shortfalls.
It was a campaign promise Baker mostly kept
throughout most of his first term, political
observers say, by holding the line on
broad-based tax increases despite pressure from
special interest groups and Democratic lawmakers
to come up with new sources of revenue to make
investments in infrastructure, transportation,
public health and the environment.
But as the popular Republican embarks on a
second term following a landslide re-election in
November, he is increasingly backing away from
the no-tax mantra.
Baker's $43 billion budget proposal for the next
fiscal year, unveiled on Wednesday, is loaded up
with new taxes and fees, including a proposal to
extend sales tax to third-party sales through
online retailers, a tax on opioid sales to pay
for state-run drug treatment programs, and
expanding the cigarette excise tax to include
nicotine vaping products.
He's also proposed to hike the real estate
transfer tax to pay for climate change
resiliency and adaptation programs, which is
expected to generate more than $137 million a
year.
Baker defends the tax proposals, saying they are
targeted toward specific programs and
initiatives that will benefit the state's
taxpayers.
"Bottom line is, from the beginning we said if
we’re leveling the playing field or we’re
creating new services that we believe on a
targeted basis are important, then we’re going
to propose those," he told reporters this week.
But the move has prompted criticism from tax
watchdogs, some of whom accuse Baker of breaking
a key campaign promise.
"For a candidate who campaigned on opposition to
raising taxes, Gov. Baker has become, well, a
disappointment," said Chip Ford,
executive director of Citizens for Limited
Taxation.
Paul Craney, spokesman for the Massachusetts
Fiscal Alliance, called Baker's real estate
transfer tax "particularly egregious" given the
high cost of housing in the Bay State.
"These are the types of short-sighted mistakes
we saw our neighbor to the south, Connecticut,
make all through the last decade," he said. "The
end result was disastrous for their economy, as
residents and businesses fled the oppressive
cost of living and doing businesses in the
state."
Craney's group, backed by Republicans, is
calling on Baker and other state leaders to put
a moratorium on new taxes and focus on health
care reforms and lowering the state debt.
"This isn’t a revenue problem, it’s a spending
problem," Craney said, a reference to one of
Baker's 2014 campaign slogans. "We need more
reforms, not more revenue."
Reaction from Democrats
House Speaker Robert DeLeo, a Winthrop Democrat
who has also largely rejected broad-based tax
hikes, said he has poked fun at the governor
over his embrace of new revenue streams.
But he's not ruling out Baker's proposals.
"I would say that when you take a look in terms
of where that money would be going towards, in
terms of climate change or housing or whatever,
again I think it's something for us to take a
close look at," DeLeo told reporters Thursday,
when asked about the governor's tax proposals.
Senate President Karen Spilka, D-Ashland, said
she welcomes the governor's willingness to tap
new sources of revenue to support state programs
and initiatives.
"It's an acknowledgment that our shared
priorities might need some revenue to implement
them," she said in an interview. "These are
things that are important for all of us."
Some groups, including the left-leaning
Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center, say the
money generated from expanding sales and use
taxes under Baker's plan won't be enough to
support essential programs.
Marie-Frances Rivera, the group's interim
director, said while Baker's budget proposal
"acknowledges the need for additional resources,
it will be difficult for state lawmakers to make
important investments without significant new
revenue."
To be sure, Baker pushed through several
revenue-raising measures during his first term,
including a fee for employers that don’t provide
health care coverage for a majority of their
workers, an $800 million increase in payroll
taxes as part of the "Grand Bargain" agreement
to pay for family and medical leave, and a tax
on short-term rentals.
Making his mark?
Jeffrey Berry, a political science professor at
Tufts University, said the tax proposals suggest
Baker is more concerned about his legacy than
seeking a third term, which he is allowed to do
under state law.
"He's been focused very much on making
government run better rather than expanding what
government does," he said. "With this likely
being his last term, he's looking to make his
mark by expanding some programs and innovating
in ways that improve life for Massachusetts
residents."
Baker has been coy about the possibility of
running again in 2020, saying he's focused on
the next four years. There are no term limits
for Massachusetts governors, though most only
serve two terms.
Maurice Cunningham, a political science
professor at the University of Massachusetts at
Boston, said Baker's willingness to increase
some taxes is typical for a second-term governor
"free of the shackles" of running for
re-election. But he points out that Baker
doesn't fall into categories of an anti-tax
ideologue or a free-wheeling tax-and-spend
politician.
"He's not the type who's going to slap a tax on
a galloping horse just to do it," he said. "He's
a problem solver and the fact is some of these
problems require money to help fix."
Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts
Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s
newspapers and websites.
The Boston Globe
Thursday, January 31, 2019
With taxes, Charlie Baker is a governor without
a party to call home
By Joan Vennochi
Now it’s really over between Charlie Baker
and the Republican Party.
It’s one thing to get behind transgender rights
and other social liberalisms. But backing new
taxes? For conservatives, that’s the ultimate
red line. Yet Baker crossed it in a budget that
calls for more spending on education,
transportation, and climate change mitigation —
and more taxes to support that agenda.
So much for 2020. With President Trump looking a
little more vulnerable, moderates like Maryland
Governor Larry Hogan — another Republican
running a blue state — are gaining some
presidential altitude. But after last spring’s
shout-out from Never-Trumper Bill Kristol, Baker
is MIA from the current mention list. The most
popular governor in America is essentially a man
without a party to call home. He’s way too
liberal for Republican primary voters, yet still
much too conservative to get anywhere as a
Democrat.
“Charlie’s too far left to be a viable
Republican presidential candidate who can win
primaries. That’s the bottom line. That’s
already where he was. Raising taxes cements that
position,” said Rob Gray, a Republican
strategist and media consultant.
It also cements the chance to be something more
than a tall governor with high approval ratings.
With this proposal, Baker gets to be a governor
of biggish ideas, some of which will make him a
little less popular, but a lot more interesting.
And lucky for him, he seems unafflicted by
Potomac Fever: “I have always been pretty clear
that my interests with respect to elective
office have been focused on Massachusetts,” he
said via e-mail — which is pretty much what he
always says. Trying to wheedle some deeper
thoughts out of him, I asked about the Hogan
headlines and what they mean for the next
election cycle. “Should be a pretty wild 22
months,” he offered up.
Classic low-key Baker — and a bit of a
disappointment after an elated election night
promise that his second term would be “nonstop,
pedal-to-the-metal, let it rock.”
Who knew that meant raising taxes?
Conservatives saw it coming. When Baker was
running for governor in 2014 and refused to sign
the Taxpayer Protection Pledge, anti-tax
activist Grover Norquist warned, “There’s only
one reason not to take the pledge and that’s
because you want to raise taxes and if you’re
not going to do it, you put in writing.”
Last summer, Baker signed a payroll tax increase
to fund family and medical leave. But it wasn’t
a tax, he said, because it paid for a “new
service” and wasn’t used to balance the budget.
With a budget proposal that would raise real
estate transfer taxes by 50 percent and levy a
new tax on opioid drug manufacturers and
e-cigarettes, Baker’s no longer pretending this
isn’t about revenue-raising. All it took was the
confidence that comes with winning 1.7 million
votes in last November’s gubernatorial election
— and perhaps an acknowledgment that there’s
absolutely no place for him anyway in today’s
GOP. The party he signed up for is an
ideologically rigid corpse, compliments of Trump
and his crew of Republican enablers. Even in
Massachusetts, Jim Lyons, a conservative who
lost his bid for reelection to the Massachusetts
House last fall, beat out Baker’s choice to head
the Massachusetts Republican State Committee.
Still, when Trump’s GOP is finally dead and
buried, someone will have to reinvent the party
he destroyed. Why not someone like Baker? The
country’s politics are already trending away
from Trump’s base. According to a recent report
by the Pew Research Center, young people,
including Republicans, are shifting left on
social issues and on what they believe
government should deliver. That next generation
of voters will redefine both parties, or maybe
decide to create a new one.
In the meantime, Massachusetts is an excellent
laboratory for political experimentation, with
maximum national exposure. Baker has not ruled
out a third term. As he starts his second, he
seems focused on building a legacy by trying to
do right by Massachusetts.
Too bad his party wants nothing to do with that.
State House News
Service
Wednesday, January 23, 2019
Lawmakers push bill making undocumented
immigrants eligible for driver's licenses
By Chris Lisinski
Lawmakers are renewing a push to pass
legislation that would allow undocumented
immigrants residing in the state to acquire
driver's licenses, despite the failure of
similar legislation in the past and opposition
from Gov. Charlie Baker.
Sen. Brendan Crighton of Lynn, Rep. Christine
Barber of Somerville and Rep. Tricia Farley-Bouvier
of Pittsfield, flanked by dozens of advocates,
unveiled their bill Wednesday morning outside
the House chamber. They argued that the measure
would ensure every driver on the road has
undergone proper training and vision testing and
that it would relieve stress on undocumented
families already in the state.
"This is a very straightforward issue with a
common-sense solution," Crighton said. "There is
simply no rational argument for prohibiting
undocumented immigrants from earning their
driver's licenses. These are our neighbors,
these are our students, this is our workforce,
our family, our friends, and these are the
constituents we all represent."
The newest proposal, referred to as the Work and
Family Mobility Act, was filed last week in both
the House and Senate. If approved, it would
permit all qualified residents, regardless of
immigration status, to receive a standard
license under the state's now-two-tiered system.
The legislation would not affect federal Real
ID-compliant licenses, which require proof of
citizenship or lawful residence as well as a
Social Security number.
The bill also includes privacy protection
measures. It proposes that an individual's
documents could only be released by subpoena or
court order and that licenses could not be the
basis for prosecution.
In 2014, a bill on the topic filed by Farley-Bouvier
landed in a dead-end study. A version re-filed
with the House in 2015 had more than 50
co-sponsors and drew public hearings, but by the
end of that legislative session, momentum had
faded and no action was taken.
Farley-Bouvier believes the newest proposal can
succeed because of the split system of licenses
that came into effect with Real ID policies in
2016. The standard license has a lower threshold
of requirements, and Farley-Bouvier said that
makes it more likely to draw support for
expanding those licenses to undocumented
immigrants.
"This bill, at this time, it's much easier to
do," Farley-Bouvier said.
However, supporters may need to change the
Republican governor's mind if they hope to pass
legislation. During the Real ID debate, Baker
filed an amendment explicitly preventing
undocumented immigrants from acquiring either
type of license.
Legislators who unveiled the bill Wednesday
spoke pointedly about immigration enforcement,
criticizing the Trump administration’s
separation of families at the border and the
dangers of anti-immigrant sentiment. But the
legislation, they said, could and should be kept
separate from federal immigration policy.
"Our federal immigration system is very, very
broken," Farley-Bouvier said during the press
conference. "We here in the Commonwealth have to
do everything necessary to keep Massachusetts
safe and to keep it fair while Washington gets
their act together."
As the trio spoke, about two dozen activists
stood behind them, holding signs that read
"Driver's licenses for all!" and "Pass the
Family Mobility Act." The crowd comprised
representatives of 32BJ SEIU, MIRA Coalition,
the Brazilian Workers Center and REACH Beyond
Domestic Violence.
"This is an essential issue for our membership
of 19,000 service workers here in the state of
Massachusetts," said Roxana Rivera, vice
president of 32BJ SEIU. "This bill would be an
important step forward at any time for immigrant
families here in the state of Massachusetts, but
in this moment, it is even more important,
because immigrants, working people and people of
color are under attack."
Twelve states, including Connecticut and
Vermont, have laws in place allowing all
residents to acquire some type of license or
permit regardless of immigration status. Similar
measures are being considered in New York and
New Jersey.
"Massachusetts is known as a progressive state,"
said Natalicia Tracy, executive director of the
Brazilian Worker Center. "It's time to show
you're truly progressive and move this bill and
pass it that will allow all immigrants in this
state to drive, everyone to drive."
The Boston Herald
Saturday, January 26, 2019
Charlie Baker vows to veto bill giving driver’s
licenses to illegal immigrants
By Sean Philip Cotter and Mary Markos
Gov. Charlie Baker says he’ll “certainly veto” a
bill that would let illegal immigrants in
Massachusetts get driver’s licenses — a proposal
critics say would make the Bay State a magnet
for fraud.
“I would certainly veto legislation that gets
beyond what we actually worked with the
Legislature on a bipartisan basis to put in
place,” Baker said Thursday. “I mean, the law
that we signed basically said if you have lawful
presence in Massachusetts you can get a driver’s
license for the period in time of which you have
lawful presence. I think that’s the right
answer.”
The policy stance came a day after state Sen.
Brendan P. Crighton (D-Lynn) and Reps. Tricia
Farley-Bouvier (D-Pittsfield) and Christine
Barber (D-Somerville) introduced the Work and
Family Mobility Act, which would strip the
portion of the current law that says people
illegally in the country cannot get
Massachusetts licenses.
When told of the governor’s position, Crighton
told the Herald, “I hope he would let it go
through the process and take a look at the
merits of the bill.”
The legislators behind the bill said it would
make the roads safer because people would be
held to the same standards, having to pass tests
and get insurance. They also said the state has
the moral responsibility not to overburden the
210,000 illegal immigrants estimated to live in
Massachusetts.
“There is no pathway to citizenship for them
because of failures at the federal level,”
Crighton said. “We have to recognize that they
are here, and they’re parts of our community and
the economy.”
Some Massachusetts legislators have tried to get
policies like this passed over the past few
years, but without much success. Baker
introduced an amendment to stop illegal
immigrants from getting licenses in 2016, when
the state passed the Real ID law.
The Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association
said it’s still weighing what position to take
on the current bill and declined further comment
until that decision is made.
Twelves other states, including Vermont,
Connecticut and California, allow illegal
immigrants to get driver’s licenses.
But Jessica Vaughan of the
anti-illegal-immigration Center for Immigration
studies said people in the country illegally
will flock to the Bay State with false papers in
an attempt to get legitimate ones.
“It opens up the opportunity for fraud — it may
end up with non-citizens getting on the voter
rolls,” Vaughan said. “It sends the signal that
there’s nothing wrong with being here illegally.
We should not be endorsing this.”
The Boston Herald
Saturday, January 26, 2019
A Boston Herald editorial
Illegal immigrants must be denied driver’s
licenses
Gov. Charlie Baker must take a stand in the name
of the law-abiding citizens of Massachusetts and
ensure that illegal immigrants do not get
driver’s licenses.
This week, state Sen. Brendan P. Crighton
(D-Lynn) and Reps. Tricia Farley-Bouvier
(D-Pittsfield) and Christine Barber
(D-Somerville) introduced the Work and Family
Mobility Act, which would strip the portion of
the current law that says people illegally in
the country cannot get Massachusetts licenses.
Thankfully, Baker said he’d “certainly veto”
such a bill and we must hope that his resolve
holds.
Distributing licenses to illegal immigrants will
open the floodgates for many kinds of fraud.
A driver’s license would give full and equal
legitimacy to a group of people who’ve not
earned it lawfully. Among other things, it would
mean access to rental housing, cars, bank
accounts, guns, commercial aircraft flights and
security checkpoints.
No to licenses for illegal immigrants.
State House News
Service
Wednesday, January 30, 2019
Politics changing around immigration bill,
supporters say
By Matt Murphy
The concerns over immigration enforcement in
Massachusetts haven't changed, but advocates and
progressive Democrats on Beacon Hill are hoping
that the politics may have.
Immigrant advocacy groups assembled at the State
House on Wednesday to begin to lobby House and
Senate lawmakers in support of the newest
version of the Safe Communities Act, a
controversial piece of legislation that would
bar local police and court officials from
helping to enforce federal immigration law.
The Senate passed a version of the bill last
session as part of its budget, but the issue
died in the House where Democrat leadership
refused to allow it to come forward for a vote
and Gov. Charlie Baker threatened to veto the
proposal if it reached his desk.
A new freshman class of lawmakers and another
year of President Donald Trump, however, have
activists feeling rejuvenated and hopeful about
the chances for a breakthrough this session.
"I think there's a greater realization from the
Legislature in general that we need to be
stronger in our opposition to Donald Trump,"
said Sen. Jamie Eldridge, of Acton, who has once
again filed the Safe Communities Act.
His co-sponsors in the House this session are
Rep. Ruth Balser of Newton and Rep. Liz Miranda,
a freshman from Boston.
Eldridge, who spoke to a group of more than 70
activists organized by the Massachusetts
Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition and the
Safe Communities Coalition, said he received a
message Wednesday morning from U.S. Rep. Ayanna
Pressley telling him that she was "fully behind"
the effort.
"Obviously our federal delegation is working on
the real solution here, federal immigration
reform, but as everybody here knows there are
things we can do here at the state level and the
local level to not collaborate, to not support
Donald Trump's mass deportation agenda,"
Eldridge said.
In the aftermath of the November elections,
Eldridge also noted that not a single supporter
of the Safe Communities Act lost their campaign
because of that position, and he suggested there
were "more private conversations with the House
leadership to get something done this session"
happening behind the scenes.
Former Ways and Means Chairman Jeff Sanchez, who
was a co-sponsor of the legislation last
session, did lose his re-election campaign in
part because of his inability to push the Safe
Communities Act forward, which he attributed to
a lack of "consensus" among House Democrats.
Asked about his position on the bill and whether
he had moderated his stance from last session or
if he remained skeptical about the level of
support among House Democrats, DeLeo, in a
statement, said, "The House will review the
proposals."
The new version of the bill would bar local
police and court officers from inquiring about
someone's immigration status, and would stop
them from notifying Immigration and Customs
Enforcement about someone's impending release
from custody unless they were finishing a
criminal sentence.
The bill would also require police to inform
immigrants of their right to an attorney before
submitting to questions from an ICE agent while
in local custody, and would bar county sheriff
departments and the Department of Correction
from entering 287g agreements with the federal
government to deputize their employees as
immigration enforcement agents.
The inclusion of court officers in the ban on
inquiring about immigration status is an
expansion of the bill from last session. "I
think that's critical given the presence of ICE
in so many courthouses," said Eldridge, who had
a constituent from Maynard recently detained for
24 days by ICE after being pulled over for an
"out of date license."
The new bill is also silent on the issue of
detention after the Supreme Judicial Court ruled
in 2017 that state and local police cannot
detain someone solely at the request of ICE.
"Obviously we still need to convince Governor
Baker to be supportive of this, but I'm hoping
as allegedly he's becoming more bold that maybe
he'll be more open to support all communities
and all residents of Massachusetts," Eldridge
told reporters after the event.
"Until his reelection he opposed taxes and now
he's proposing, including his budget, a number
of taxes so I remain optimistic we can convince
him to support this very modest common sense
reform that many police chiefs support," he
said.
Baker, however, said earlier in the day that his
position "hasn't changed at all."
"I think my position on Safe Communities is the
right one, which is give local communities the
ability to make the decisions that make the most
sense for them and to be sure that the
Commonwealth in situations that involve
dangerous and violent people has the ability to
work with our colleagues in the federal
government if those folks are here illegally to
have them removed," Baker said.
Eldridge called it an "embarrassing argument"
for Baker to make that local communities were
better equipped to make the decision after
arguing that the regulation of things like
Airbnb rentals or Uber rides must be done in a
uniform, statewide manner.
"I think it's a little disingenuous that he's
picking issues around immigration to say that
local communities should enforce," Eldridge
said.
Brooke Mead, the executive director of the
Berkshire Immigrant Center, said she thought it
was the "right time" to pass immigration
enforcement controls in Massachusetts, and was
among the advocates who went office-to-office
Wednesday to try to convince legislators.
"I really think we're realizing the federal
government is failing us and that they haven't
been able to pass something that is ultimately
going to be able to solve a lot of these
problems, and I think there is a lot more
willingness for people to come over to that
realization so I think we're probably in an even
better position than last year," Mead said.
Sisters Pat Andrews and Betty Cawley, of the
order of St. Joseph in Brighton, were also among
the activists lobbying Wednesday afternoon.
Andrews said she works with immigrants, many of
whom have been in the country for years and
worked hard to become part of the community. She
called the current atmosphere "excluding and
demoralizing."
"I'm a person of faith and I believe very
strongly that this is where we should be when
we're talking about our neighbors," Andrews
said.
Zayda Ortiz, a Malden resident and leader with
Indivisible Mystic Valley, said her parents came
to the United States in the 1970s from Mexico
when they fled the aftermath of a hurricane.
"This country was built on immigrants an it's
very important to me that we keep the door open
so that the next generation and the next wave of
immigrants can become a part of our wonderful
country," Ortiz said. |
| |
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes
only. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Citizens for Limited Taxation ▪
PO Box 1147 ▪ Marblehead, MA 01945
▪ (781) 639-9709
BACK TO CLT
HOMEPAGE
|
