 |
Post Office Box 1147
▪
Marblehead, Massachusetts 01945
▪ (781) 639-9709
“Every Tax is a Pay Cut ... A Tax Cut is a Pay Raise”
46 years as “The Voice of Massachusetts Taxpayers”
— and
their Institutional Memory — |
|
CLT UPDATE
Sunday, January 5, 2020
Little new
in a new year for a new decade
Go directly
to CLT's Commentary on the News
|
The
new year on Wednesday marks the start of the second year of
the 2019-2020 General Court, and the beginning of a
seven-month sprint toward the July 31 end of formal
sessions. The Constitution requires the Legislature to gavel
in the start of the second year of the session on the first
Wednesday of the year and lawmakers are expected to meet
their obligation by quickly gaveling in and out on the
Wednesday holiday. The Senate is eyeing action in early 2020
on a climate change bill and the House plans to tackle new
transportation revenues, but legislative leaders have not
outlined their proposals or a timetable for their
debates....
INCOME TAX CUT: More than 19 years after Massachusetts
voters approved a law calling for a 5 percent income tax
rate, that levy rate will hit that level on Wednesday,
falling from 5.05 percent. The reduction in the tax rate was
halted in 2002 by the Legislature, which set up a series of
rate reduction triggers, the last of which has now been
satisfied. The next tax cut under that 2002 law, which also
stems from an approved initiative petition, is scheduled to
take effect in 2021 and will enable taxpayers to deduct
donations made to charities. The tax deduction is expected
to increase giving, the main source of funding for
non-profit organizations, while cutting into state tax
revenues. The income tax cut will pull $185 million from the
state's revenue stream in fiscal 2021, according to the
Department of Revenue, and the charitable deduction's full
fiscal year impact could be around $300 million.
State House News Service
Friday, December 27, 2019
Advances - Week of Dec. 29, 2020
There are 213 days between New Year's Day and July 31, the
final day for formal legislating in 2020. In that time,
Massachusetts lawmakers hope to tackle what's left on their
2019-2020 session to-do lists, in addition to whatever else
crops up unexpectedly as the session wears on.
The
House and Senate took care of some items on the agendas that
Democratic leaders sketched out last winter (Gov. Charlie
Baker, too), but a number of heady issues remain unaddressed
with seven months until the real work ends and campaign
season really picks up.
Seven months from the finish line, here's a look at seven
major issues to watch during the second half of the 191st
General Court, which officially kicks off with light
sessions on New Year's Day morning. Whether or not the
Legislature makes significant progress on these topics, they
will be key factors in the final analysis of the two-year
session's accomplishments:
1)
Transportation Revenue -- All eyes are on the House in the
new year as members prepare to take up a transportation
revenue debate they delayed from the fall. Key lawmakers
have hinted an increase in the state's 24-cents-per-gallon
gasoline tax will likely be a part of the package, but other
proposals from higher fees on ride-hailing services to
expanded roadway tolling may also be included in the
bill....
2)
Climate Change -- Eighty-one state lawmakers rang in 2019 by
resolving to pursue a suite of climate policies, including
moving the state to net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. The
year brought youth climate strikes and clean energy pushes
from municipal and business leaders but not, ultimately,
completed climate legislation. The Senate is eyeing action
in early 2020 on a bill that its Telecommunications,
Utilities and Energy Committee chairman, Sen. Michael
Barrett, has suggested will address clean energy along with
emissions from vehicles and buildings....
6)
Budgeting/Education Bill Implementation -- Gov. Baker has
until Jan. 22 to file his fiscal 2021 budget, a spending
plan that will incorporate a newly lowered income tax rate
of 5 percent. Next year's budget will be the first to
feature the substantial new spending called for under the
new education funding law, and advocates' eyes will be on
how well the governor and lawmakers, especially Ways and
Means chairs Sen. Michael Rodrigues and Rep. Aaron
Michlewitz, can live up to the $1.5 billion, seven-year
commitment without carving up other budget priorities.
State House News Service
Wednesday, January 1, 2020
2020 Outlook: Seven Issues to Watch Over Seven Months
Weighty Issues Dot Map in Session's Second Half
By Colin A. Young, Katie Lannan and Chris Lisinski
Like when you finally listen to the new band you've heard so
much about, there's always the risk that 2020 won't live up
to the hype.
But
we're about to find out.
The
New Year, and the new decade, kicked off this week with
anticipation running high.
The
income tax rate fell to 5 percent, the minimum wage climbed
to $12.75 and a short-term health insurance assessment on
businesses ended. The administration even restarted a rebate
program offering up to $2,500 for the purchase of an
all-electric vehicle in 2020 after the Legislature, flush
with surplus cash from last year, newly made $27 million
available for the shuttered program.
But
no one was in a rush to get back to work. Instead, the new
year started quietly on Beacon Hill, seemingly sapped of any
energy it might have had by the fact that the holiday fell
in the middle of the week....
State House News Service
Friday, January 3, 2020
Weekly Roundup - So This Is The New Year...
By Matt Murphy
Republican Minority Shrinks
Three lawmakers depart the Legislature mid-term next week to
begin new jobs. Rep. Shaunna O'Connell and Sen. Donald
Humason, both Republicans, will be sworn in as mayors of
their respective hometowns of Taunton and Westfield on
Monday....
Vinny deMacedo also recently left the Senate and the
Republican ranks in that 40-seat body will fall to just four
members on Monday, with Democrats currently holding 34
seats.
Without Benson, O'Connell and former Rep. Paul Brodeur (now
the mayor of Melrose), the House will be down to 157 members
- 125 Democrats, 31 Republicans, and one independent....
Republicans in the Legislature continue to lack the ability
to sustain the governor's vetoes and have been unable to
reliably pull Democrats to vote with them. GOP leaders have
only occasionally mounted major efforts to resist the
legislative pushes of the majority party, often passing on
the opportunity to show voters what an alternative
legislative agenda would look like.
State House News Service
Friday, January 3, 2020
Advances - Week of Jan. 5, 2020
The full-time Massachusetts Legislature hit the ground
walking slowly...
House Speaker Robert DeLeo said he's waiting to learn more
about a regional vehicle emission reduction pact before
deciding how it will fit into his plan for transportation.
But
one of his top deputies said it hasn't changed his mind
about increasing the gas tax.
Transportation Committee Co-chair William Straus said in an
interview this week that the House is still targeting
January for a debate over how to raise more money for
transportation, but he sees Gov. Charlie Baker's pursuit of
a multi-state, cap-and-invest program as something separate
from those discussions.
Despite the Transportation Climate Initiative's impacts on
the costs of a gallon of gas, Straus said he doesn't believe
that negates the need for a gas tax increase, or mean he
won't recommend one to his colleagues.
Boston Mayor Marty Walsh also said this week that state
lawmakers should not shy away from raising the gas tax just
because Baker is closing in on a deal with other governors
to join TCI. "We need to be bold when it comes to
transportation," Walsh said.
The
Transportation Climate Initiative, which is under
negotiation between 11 states and the District of Columbia,
could add up to 17 cents to the price of a gallon of gas and
generate as much as $500 million for Massachusetts to
reinvest in cleaner transit and climate change programs....
Straus said he's not opposed to TCI, but doesn't look at it
as a substitute for some of the revenue options he and other
House leaders have been studying since the spring. Meetings
continued this week among top level House members developing
the plan, and Straus said he hasn't yet recommended a gas
tax level.
"TCI, while it may be great for the environment, is not a
transportation financing solution," Straus told the News
Service in an interview this week....
The
speaker's office declined to say whether the speaker thinks
TCI needs legislative approval, and Straus said he didn't
know whether there might be a reason to doubt the
administration's assertion that the governor does not need
the Legislature's approval to join TCI.
Rep. Timothy Whelan, a Brewster Republican, and Rep. Marc
Lombardo, a Billerica Republican, both submitted public
comments to the TCI coalition arguing that the Legislature
should get to vote before Massachusetts joins any
partnership, and Rep. David DeCoste of Norwell filed a bill
on Dec. 20 to give the Legislature final say.
The
Decoste bill would require a vote of the House and Senate
before Massachusetts could participate in any "state,
regional, or national low carbon fuel standards program or
any similar program that requires quotas, caps, or mandates
on any fuels used for transportation, industrial purposes,
or home heating." The bill was co-sponsored by 10
Republicans and two Democrats.
Straus did say it should be "absolutely clear" that the
House and Senate has full control over how TCI proceeds are
spent, and hopes the administration agrees. "On the spending
side, I sense a disagreement with the administration," he
said.
State House News Service
Thursday, January 2, 2020
Straus Weighing TCI, Gas Tax Independently
Baker Opposes Gas Tax Hike, Favors TCI Compact
When the House begins its promised debate on transportation
revenue this month, Republican lawmakers will bring
skepticism about whether the state actually needs funding
beyond existing and already-proposed sources.
Both the party's House leader and its ranking Transportation
Committee member said Thursday they believe the push, led by
Democrats, to bring in additional money from transportation
sources for transportation needs is misguided. Like Gov.
Charlie Baker, they said the state has adequate revenues to
address its needs.
The
contours of the revenue debate remain unclear, even as top
lawmakers involved reiterate their plans to bring a package
to the floor for a vote by the end of January.
Transportation Committee Co-chair Rep. William Straus said
Thursday that the legislation will likely take the form of a
single bill with "a number of components."
But
Minority Leader Brad Jones pointed to the state's more than
$1 billion surplus in fiscal year 2019 — which Democratic
leaders struggled for months to allocate — and progress
toward a surtax on the wealthy as evidence that the state
does not need new revenue streams to address transportation
needs.
"They've already advanced a proposal that they're planning
on being on the ballot next year [2022] for the millionaires
tax," Jones told the News Service. "That's supposedly going
to raise, by their numbers, $1.5 billion to $2 billion every
year. That's supposed to be in part for transportation. So
the question is: how much more than that do they think we
need, especially when we have an economy near record
unemployment levels?" ...
Rep. Steven Howitt, the ranking Republican on the
Transportation Committee, argued that leaders should focus
on how to best deploy the resources they have rather than
how to increase the amount available.
"It's not a revenue issue, it's a spending issue," he said
in an interview. "We have one of the largest budgets we've
ever had, what, $42 billion? That being said, I think the
money is in the budget for some of these infrastructure
improvements. We just have to redirect where the money is
going." ...
[Minority Leader Brad Jones] said Republicans will be "very,
very reticent" to support a broad-based revenue package and
remain "very, very skeptical" about the push, particularly
because he said he has not received any outline from
Democratic leadership about what the legislation will
entail....
Jones pointed to another component of the governor's bond
bill that would reform contract and procurement practices as
an important step for the Legislature to support.
State House News Service
Thursday, January 2, 2020
GOP: Dem Leaders Taking Transpo Talk in Wrong Direction
Top Lawmakers Echo Baker's Take on Revenues
TCI
seeks to affect our transportation choices and behaviors in
the same way the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI)
affected the choices made by northeastern electric utilities
in favor of lower greenhouse gas alternatives. As Governor
Douglas’ commissioner of environmental conservation, I
served as Vermont’s lead negotiator when the RGGI program
was hammered out among the original nine states. And while
we can debate the degree to which RGGI affected those
decisions, there is no question RGGI has raised millions to
support state climate policy initiatives and our regional
GHG emissions per unit of generation is significantly lower
today.
RGGI and TCI are cap-and-trade programs designed to make
high GHG generation (RGGI) and transportation (TCI) more
expensive than cleaner alternatives. Cap-and-trade is a
tool, and like any tool it works best when it is applied to
the task for which it was designed. Unfortunately, very few
legislators understand how it works.
Applying cap-and-trade to the transportation sector is like
using a hammer to turn a screw....
Cap-and-trade requires the creation of an expensive
bureaucracy and assumes the participants will undertake
complex analyses to “game” the system to their advantage.
This is how the program affects decisions that affect GHG
emissions. But the decisions that affect emissions in the
transportation sector are not made by the participating fuel
distributors and gas station owners. They are made by
millions of individual consumers. If customers are willing
to pay five cents more at the pump, the fuel suppliers will
happily pass that cost along and change nothing.
Studies have shown only a major increase in the cost of
motor fuels will generate a noticeable change in consumer
behavior. Is TCI planning to double the cost of gas at the
pump? If so, we can write TCI’s obituary right now. People
will not tolerate such an increase and will, at their first
opportunity, elect representatives who will repeal it as
their first order of business.
Any
“price signal” small enough to be tolerable is too small to
affect consumer behavior. As a result, TCI is nothing more
than an inefficient, bureaucratic, hopelessly complicated
way to increase revenue from transportation fuels. If
raising more money from transportation fuels is the goal,
why not simply add a few cents to the motor fuels tax? Or
create a carbon tax? We can do either without adding a
single new government position, and have everything in place
right now to collect it.
The
obvious answer is it is impossible to increase taxes without
using the word “tax.” TCI can be enacted without that word
appearing in the legislation. Creating TCI with all of its
costs and complexity for the purpose of avoiding the “T”
word would be nothing short of public policy malpractice.
The Rutland (Vermont) Herald
Saturday, January 4, 2020
TCI criticism
By Jeffrey Wennberg
Population in the Northeast region of the United States
dropped in 2019 for the first decline this decade, while
population growth nationally continued to slow and
Massachusetts was among the top states for domestic
migration losses, according to new Census Bureau estimates.
The estimates released Monday tallied the population of
Massachusetts, as of July 1, at 6,892,503 in 2019, up from
an estimated 6,882,635, making it one of the 40 states whose
population grew between 2018 and 2019.
Despite the overall increase, Massachusetts was one of 27
states that lost population through net domestic migration,
the movement of people to other states. The biggest net
domestic migration losses, in order, were in California
(-203,414), New York (-180,649), Illinois (-104,986), New
Jersey (-48,946), Massachusetts (-30,274) and Louisiana
(-26,045). Of those six states, New York, Illinois,
Louisiana and New Jersey lost population overall, while the
domestic migration losses in Massachusetts and California
were offset by other gains.
Domestic migration drove the population decrease in the
Northeast, the Census Bureau said....
The South, meanwhile, experienced the largest regional
population growth from 2018 to 2019, rising by more than 1
million people to 125,580,448, primarily due to natural
increase and domestic migration.
State House News Service
Tuesday, December 31, 2019
Northeast Population Falls for First Time This Decade
Massachusetts Shows Slight Population Growth
|
|
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
It's been a
long and grueling marathon. For the past two or
three weeks I've been working literally around the clock
on getting the new computer system working for the new
year ahead, 16, 18, 20 hours a day stopping only for
short naps when exhaustion caught up and beat me.
Santa didn’t even stop in. He and his reindeer
must have flown the sleigh right over my office's roof when he
saw the lights still on here until 5:30 Christmas
morning, when I collapsed for a nap until 8:00 am.
I spent Christmas Day back in the marathon, straight
through New Year's Eve, New Year's Day and every moment
right up to now wrestling with setting up the new
computer system. I've still got a few more days to
go before all the adjusting and tweaking is close to
done, but the system is up and running enough to get
back to a more normal semblance of life.
I'm again
locked-and-loaded, all systems are go, ready to
rock-'n-roll. The question now is
— are you?
We start the
new year on a great note, the completion of our
successful 2000 income tax rollback ballot question.
Taxpayers of Massachusetts have CLT and its members to
thank for the return of another $185 million of their
money. How many billions have we saved them
over the years and decades? It's amazing that we
struggle on so under-funded, now into Year Forty-Six
since CLT was founded.
The
Legislature is pacing itself as usual, doing little
until unavoidable, gearing up to complete its session in
the traditional cram of legislation in the final hours
late at night. But one thing is certain and is
happening behind the scene: More and more taxes
are being plotted. Will it be the Transportation
Climate Initiative (TCI) with its 17 cents a gallon gas
tax increase to start; will it be a straightforward gas
tax hike — or will it be
both? We know for a fact that
Massachusetts already spends an unconscionable 304% more
than the national average
on maintenance of its roads and bridges.
The State
House News Service noted ("GOP: Dem Leaders Taking
Transpo Talk in Wrong Direction"):
Rep.
Steven Howitt, the ranking Republican on the
Transportation Committee, argued that leaders should
focus on how to best deploy the resources they have
rather than how to increase the amount available.
"It's
not a revenue issue, it's a spending issue," he said
in an interview. "We have one of the largest budgets
we've ever had, what, $42 billion? That being said,
I think the money is in the budget for some of these
infrastructure improvements. We just have to
redirect where the money is going." . . .
[Minority Leader Brad Jones] said Republicans will be "very,
very reticent" to support a broad-based revenue package and
remain "very, very skeptical" about the push, particularly
because he said he has not received any outline from
Democratic leadership about what the legislation will
entail....
Jones pointed to another component of the governor's
bond bill that would reform contract and procurement
practices as an important step for the Legislature
to support.
It's difficult to think that GOP
resistance will matter, as Republicans in the 40-seat
Senate fell to just four members, and in the 160-member
House the GOP is now down to just 31 Republicans.
That's a total of 35 among two hundred legislators, an
endangered species in decline. As the State House
News Service noted:
GOP leaders have only occasionally mounted major
efforts to resist the legislative pushes of the
majority party, often passing on the opportunity to
show voters what an alternative legislative agenda
would look like.
And then there is Gov. Charlie Baker,
architect of a whopping stealth TCI gas tax hike.
On Monday I'll be on a conference call
with our multi-state
TCI opposition coalition, continuing to brainstorm
and organize how we can collectively stop this
abomination. One of our allies, from Vermont's
Ethan Allen Institute, alerted us to Saturday's
op-ed column in the Rutland (Vermont) Herald, "TCI
criticism," by the Jeffrey Wennberg. He is
commissioner of public works in the City of Rutland,
previously served as commissioner of environmental
conservation under former Vermont Gov. Jim Douglas, and
as a consultant with the Center for Climate Strategies
in Washington. D.C., where he managed numerous state,
regional and national studies of cap-and-trade policy
proposals. Wennberg has also served as chair of a
presidential-level advisory committee for U.S. EPA under
presidents G.W. Bush, Obama, and Trump. He wrote:
Studies
have shown only a major increase in the cost of
motor fuels will generate a noticeable change in
consumer behavior. Is TCI planning to double the
cost of gas at the pump? If so, we can write TCI’s
obituary right now. People will not tolerate such an
increase and will, at their first opportunity, elect
representatives who will repeal it as their first
order of business.
Any
“price signal” small enough to be tolerable is too
small to affect consumer behavior. As a result, TCI
is nothing more than an inefficient, bureaucratic,
hopelessly complicated way to increase revenue from
transportation fuels. If raising more money from
transportation fuels is the goal, why not simply add
a few cents to the motor fuels tax? Or create a
carbon tax? We can do either without adding a single
new government position, and have everything in
place right now to collect it.
The
obvious answer is it is impossible to increase taxes
without using the word “tax.” TCI can be enacted
without that word appearing in the legislation.
Creating TCI with all of its costs and complexity
for the purpose of avoiding the “T” word would be
nothing short of public policy malpractice.
That pretty much sums up this scam.
New Hampshire's Republican Gov. Chris
Sununu has offhandedly rejected the scam, calling it "a
financial boondoggle." Vermont Gov. Phil Scott,
also a Republican, seems reluctant to jump onboard The
Boondoggle Express. Even Connecticut Democrat Gov.
Ned Lamont is holding his cards.
Too bad instead of a Republican governor,
we have Charlie Baker —
whatever he is.
Kathleen Theoharide, the Baker
administration's
Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs,
and the chair of the coalition of
Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states pushing TCI, admitted
that a "critical mass" of participation from the 12
original states and District of Columbia will be
necessary to make TCI successful.
If enough of those states decline to
participate it could doom Baker's Boondoggle. We
in the Anti-TCI coalition are striving toward that goal.
Massachusetts
continues to lose its productive taxpayer population
according to a recently released U.S. Census Bureau
report. The Bay State Diaspora continues.
"Despite the
overall increase, Massachusetts was one of 27 states
that lost population through net domestic migration, the
movement of people to other states," the State House
News Service reported last week. "Domestic migration
drove the population decrease in the Northeast, the
Census Bureau said.... The South, meanwhile,
experienced the largest regional population growth from
2018 to 2019, rising by more than 1 million people to
125,580,448, primarily due to natural increase and
domestic migration."
Just a year
ago, on December 19, 2019, the State House News Service
reported ("Bay
State population growth tops in New England"):
Population growth in
Massachusetts is outpacing that of other New England
states, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, and
Secretary of State William Galvin is now predicting
that the state should be able to hold on to all nine
seats in Congress with an accurate head count in
2020.
New data released on Wednesday
showed that the population in Massachusetts grew by
38,903 people to 6.9 million between July 1, 2017
and July 1, 2018. The 0.6 percent growth rate
equaled the population growth in the country, and
ranked Massachusetts 22nd among all other states and
first in New England.
Galvin said that while the
state continues to lose residents to other states,
those loses 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.
After the 2010 Census,
Massachusetts lost one seat in Congress. Galvin said
the state should be able to avoid a repeat of that
with an accurate population count.
"The population numbers make it
clear that Massachusetts should retain all of our
congressional representation, as long as we have a
fair and accurate count," Galvin said. "I will
continue to pursue all legal options to prevent the
current administration from inserting questions
about citizenship status into the 2020 Census, in
their effort to shortchange states like ours by
dissuading our immigrant population from being
counted."
The
Associated Press added:
Galvin said that according to
the new numbers, the driving factor behind
Massachusetts' population growth appears to be
international immigration.
He said while Massachusetts
continues to lose population by residents moving to
other states, the loss is offset by twice that
number of people moving to the state from other
countries.
In
my commentary for that CLT Update I wrote:
Secretary of State William
Galvin is giddy. "He said while Massachusetts
continues to lose population by residents moving to
other states, the loss is offset by twice that
number of people moving to the state from other
countries."
He thinks this will help the
Bay State hang onto its nine U.S. Congressional
seats despite the mass exodus of former-taxpayers,
replaced by immigrants legal and otherwise. "I
will continue to pursue all legal options to prevent
the current administration from inserting questions
about citizenship status into the 2020 Census, in
their effort to shortchange states like ours by
dissuading our immigrant population from being
counted," he vowed.
A net increase in warm bodies
does not equate with a net increase
—
or even a balance —
in revenue coming into the state's coffers.
Just-defeated for re-election
Rep. Jim Lyons (R-Andover)
managed to pry from the Patrick administration's
clutching hands its accounting records that showed
Massachusetts taxpayers were spending "at least $93
million a year" on free health care for illegal
aliens. (CLT Update; Nov. 2, 2011, "$93M
for illegals' health care — 'the tip of the iceberg'")
Subsequent reports indicate that total taxpayer
spending on illegal aliens is actually over $2
billion a year.
Nothing has
improved over the past year —
the exodus of taxpaying citizens continues.
There's no need to wonder why "revenue" needs to be
continually increased on those who remain.
Somebody has to make up for the transfer of
wealth shortfall
— and that somebody is
you and other productive taxpayers.
2019 was a
crazy and very busy year for CLT's mission of protecting
taxpayers like you. 2020 promises to be just as
hectic if not more so. Defending taxpayers doesn't seem to get any
easier.
See:
CLT's Year in Review:
2019
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
|
|
State House
News Service
Friday, January 3, 2020
Advances - Week of Jan. 5, 2020
The full-time Massachusetts Legislature hit the
ground walking slowly...
The full-time Massachusetts Legislature hit
the ground walking slowly, if present at all,
during this first week of the second year of the
2019-2020 session. Activity will pick up this
month, but legislative leaders -- as is their
usual practice -- have not outlined their
workflow plans for the year, or even the winter.
The Senate plans to tackle a climate bill in
early 2020 and the House plans to roll out a
bill calling for new revenues to make
transportation investments. A key question for
House leaders is how big do they want to go with
their proposal, given that the price tags on
everything in the transportation world, be it
maintenance or new initiatives, are high, and
the electorate's appetite for absorbing new
costs is not infinite.
With the Iowa presidential caucuses one month
away and most joint legislative committees
facing a biennial bill reporting deadline on
Feb. 5, the interest levels are growing over
both national politics and decision-making on
Beacon Hill.
New Mayors / Republican Minority Shrinks
Three lawmakers depart the Legislature mid-term
next week to begin new jobs. Rep. Shaunna
O'Connell and Sen. Donald Humason, both
Republicans, will be sworn in as mayors of their
respective hometowns of Taunton and Westfield on
Monday.
Democratic Rep. Jennifer Benson of Lunenburg
resigns effective Wednesday to become president
of the Alliance for Business Leadership.
Vinny deMacedo also recently left the Senate and
the Republican ranks in that 40-seat body will
fall to just four members on Monday, with
Democrats currently holding 34 seats.
Without Benson, O'Connell and former Rep. Paul
Brodeur (now the mayor of Melrose), the House
will be down to 157 members - 125 Democrats, 31
Republicans, and one independent.
House Speaker Robert DeLeo needs to zero in on a
replacement for Benson as co-chair of the Health
Care Financing Committee, and that pick could
have domino effects on other leadership posts.
Republicans in the Legislature continue to lack
the ability to sustain the governor's vetoes and
have been unable to reliably pull Democrats to
vote with them. GOP leaders have only
occasionally mounted major efforts to resist the
legislative pushes of the majority party, often
passing on the opportunity to show voters what
an alternative legislative agenda would look
like.
State House
News Service
Thursday, January 2, 2020
Straus Weighing TCI, Gas Tax Independently
Baker Opposes Gas Tax Hike, Favors TCI Compact
By Matt Murphy
House Speaker Robert DeLeo said he's waiting to
learn more about a regional vehicle emission
reduction pact before deciding how it will fit
into his plan for transportation.
But one of his top deputies said it hasn't
changed his mind about increasing the gas tax.
Transportation Committee Co-chair William Straus
said in an interview this week that the House is
still targeting January for a debate over how to
raise more money for transportation, but he sees
Gov. Charlie Baker's pursuit of a multi-state,
cap-and-invest program as something separate
from those discussions.
Despite the Transportation Climate Initiative's
impacts on the costs of a gallon of gas, Straus
said he doesn't believe that negates the need
for a gas tax increase, or mean he won't
recommend one to his colleagues.
Boston Mayor Marty Walsh also said this week
that state lawmakers should not shy away from
raising the gas tax just because Baker is
closing in on a deal with other governors to
join TCI. "We need to be bold when it comes to
transportation," Walsh said.
The Transportation Climate Initiative, which is
under negotiation between 11 states and the
District of Columbia, could add up to 17 cents
to the price of a gallon of gas and generate as
much as $500 million for Massachusetts to
reinvest in cleaner transit and climate change
programs.
Critics, including the Massachusetts Fiscal
Alliance and some Republican legislators, have
panned the initiative as the equivalent of a gas
tax hike, though supporters have rebutted that
characterization. Baker has said he opposes an
increase in the gas tax, but supports TCI as a
market-based regional solution to reduce carbon
emissions and generate money to invest in
programs that will help the state meet its
climate goals.
Straus said he's not opposed to TCI, but doesn't
look at it as a substitute for some of the
revenue options he and other House leaders have
been studying since the spring. Meetings
continued this week among top level House
members developing the plan, and Straus said he
hasn't yet recommended a gas tax level.
"TCI, while it may be great for the environment,
is not a transportation financing solution,"
Straus told the News Service in an interview
this week.
Straus said that unlike the gas tax he does not
believe that Massachusetts will be able to
borrow against future TCI revenue to finance
long-term infrastructure projects.
"I don't believe you can go to Wall Street and
say you're offering up as security a revenue
stream that will be determined by market forces
and will diminish over the next 30 years based
on how successful we are," Straus said.
He also said that policymakers would be missing
the urgency of the moment if they relied on TCI
funding that won't start to flow until 2022 at
the earliest.
"It's not now and it's not known or
predictable," Straus said. "If the priority is
transportation financing that generates revenue
into a continual restricted trust fund, I think
this would benefit from more candor with the
public."
The coalition of states developing TCI
anticipate that the details of the program will
be finalized by the spring when participating
states will be asked to sign on. Gov. Chris
Sununu of New Hampshire has already pulled his
state out of the talks because of the cost it
will add at the pump.
Baker has requested in legislation the authority
to allocate half of all TCI proceeds toward
public transit, while the rest would likely be
spent on projects like sidewalks, bike lanes and
other programs to reduce people's reliance on
cars to move around.
Straus noted that the administration has said it
could try to spend some of the money on
broadband infrastructure to make it easier for
rural, western Massachusetts workers to
telecommute.
"We're still going to need roads and bridges and
we'll be relying even more on public transit so
no part of this debate should suggest to people
that there's a painless way coming along --
either politically painless or pocketbook
painless to pay for keeping our transportation
in working order," Straus said.
DeLeo met with Baker and Senate President Karen
Spilka just before Christmas where the impact of
TCI on gas prices was one of the subjects
discussed, according to the speaker.
"I think we're going to need a little more
review and I know the governor's going to be
providing us with some information relative to
TCI, anywhere from government approval to the
cost and whatnot," DeLeo told reporters.
"As many topics when you're talking about
transportation and you're talking about climate
change and the environment and the like, I think
TCI, just like a number of other things, is
going to be on the table for us to discuss," he
said.
The speaker's office declined to say whether the
speaker thinks TCI needs legislative approval,
and Straus said he didn't know whether there
might be a reason to doubt the administration's
assertion that the governor does not need the
Legislature's approval to join TCI.
Rep. Timothy Whelan, a Brewster Republican, and
Rep. Marc Lombardo, a Billerica Republican, both
submitted public comments to the TCI coalition
arguing that the Legislature should get to vote
before Massachusetts joins any partnership, and
Rep. David DeCoste of Norwell filed a bill on
Dec. 20 to give the Legislature final say.
The Decoste bill would require a vote of the
House and Senate before Massachusetts could
participate in any "state, regional, or national
low carbon fuel standards program or any similar
program that requires quotas, caps, or mandates
on any fuels used for transportation, industrial
purposes, or home heating." The bill was
co-sponsored by 10 Republicans and two
Democrats.
Straus did say it should be "absolutely clear"
that the House and Senate has full control over
how TCI proceeds are spent, and hopes the
administration agrees. "On the spending side, I
sense a disagreement with the administration,"
he said.
Energy Secretary Kathleen Theoharides has said
several times in public hearings that the
Legislature will have a role to play in deciding
how to spend the proceeds from TCI, but Straus
said he was looking for more clarity on how that
would work.
With his city reliant on the MBTA, Walsh has a
lot riding on the outcome of the revenue debate
on Beacon Hill and how TCI money gets spent.
At a press conference ahead of First Night
festivities on Monday, Walsh may have previewed
his upcoming State of the City address when he
listed transportation -- along with housing and
education -- as one of the "big three" most
important issues facing the city of Boston as
the new year begins.
He pointed to how Los Angeles County used the
sales tax to generate millions for
transportation, and how cities in Arizona --
Phoenix, Mesa and Tempe -- were investing in
light rail.
The mayor was among a group of municipal leaders
who came out last year in support of a 15-cent
increase to the state's 24-cent gas tax, which
is lower than in many neighboring states.
"I think they'll understand if they have to pay
a little but they have to see what the result of
that increase is, and if they see what the
result could be and will be, then you'll see, I
think, a lot of support for it," Walsh said of
commuters.
Walsh also said cities and towns should not have
to seek Beacon Hill's approval to raise revenues
for local priorities like transportation through
mechanism like a real estate transfer tax, and
urged the Legislature to amend the home-rule
petition process.
State House News
Service
Thursday, January 2, 2020
GOP: Dem Leaders Taking Transpo Talk in Wrong
Direction
Top Lawmakers Echo Baker's Take on Revenues
By Chris Lisinski
When the House begins its promised debate on
transportation revenue this month, Republican
lawmakers will bring skepticism about whether
the state actually needs funding beyond existing
and already-proposed sources.
Both the party's House leader and its ranking
Transportation Committee member said Thursday
they believe the push, led by Democrats, to
bring in additional money from transportation
sources for transportation needs is misguided.
Like Gov. Charlie Baker, they said the state has
adequate revenues to address its needs.
The contours of the revenue debate remain
unclear, even as top lawmakers involved
reiterate their plans to bring a package to the
floor for a vote by the end of January.
Transportation Committee Co-chair Rep. William
Straus said Thursday that the legislation will
likely take the form of a single bill with "a
number of components."
But Minority Leader Brad Jones pointed to the
state's more than $1 billion surplus in fiscal
year 2019 — which Democratic leaders struggled
for months to allocate — and progress toward a
surtax on the wealthy as evidence that the state
does not need new revenue streams to address
transportation needs.
"They've already advanced a proposal that
they're planning on being on the ballot next
year [2022] for the millionaires tax," Jones
told the News Service. "That's supposedly going
to raise, by their numbers, $1.5 billion to $2
billion every year. That's supposed to be in
part for transportation. So the question is: how
much more than that do they think we need,
especially when we have an economy near record
unemployment levels?"
The House and Senate voted 147-48 in June to
advance a constitutional amendment (H 86) that
would impose a 4 percent surtax on household
income above $1 million. A Constitutional
Convention will need to approve the amendment
again during the 2021-2022 session for it to go
before voters on the November 2022 ballot.
Revenue generated by the higher rate, which
supporters say could reach $2 billion annually,
would be directed specifically toward education
— a field where lawmakers in November agreed to
spend an additional $1.5 billion over the next
seven years — and transportation.
Separate from that, House Speaker Robert DeLeo
began pushing last year to boost the state's
coffers with money sourced from transportation
for transportation needs. The effort appears to
have drawn some momentum from service
disruptions on the MBTA and a Baker
administration study confirming that worsening
traffic carries economic and environmental
consequences.
Senate President Karen Spilka has not indicated
if or when she plans to take up the topic,
should a bill pass the House.
Voters appear to support the general idea to
raise new transportation revenue, but are
divided on many of the strategies lawmakers are
considering, according to a November MassINC
poll.
Rep. Steven Howitt, the ranking Republican on
the Transportation Committee, argued that
leaders should focus on how to best deploy the
resources they have rather than how to increase
the amount available.
"It's not a revenue issue, it's a spending
issue," he said in an interview. "We have one of
the largest budgets we've ever had, what, $42
billion? That being said, I think the money is
in the budget for some of these infrastructure
improvements. We just have to redirect where the
money is going."
Straus, who has been working with DeLeo, Revenue
Committee Chair Mark Cusack and other top
Democrats to craft the legislation, declined to
say Thursday what will be included in the
package, though he did rule out a public transit
fare hike.
He and Cusack have previously hinted an increase
to the 24-cents-per-gallon gas tax Massachusetts
last raised in 2013 is likely to be a component.
"There will be a number of different options
that will affect different parts of the
transportation system," Straus said in an
interview, adding that it is "hard to predict"
the final terms because new ideas could arise
before the bill is released.
Jones said Republicans will be "very, very
reticent" to support a broad-based revenue
package and remain "very, very skeptical" about
the push, particularly because he said he has
not received any outline from Democratic
leadership about what the legislation will
entail.
Republican Gov. Charlie Baker has said he will
wait to see what emerges from the House debate,
but he has made clear that he opposes a
congestion pricing pilot that would alter
roadway tolls to encourage off-peak travel or
any gas tax hike.
His administration has been developing a
multi-state cap-and-invest program on greenhouse
gas emissions from the transportation sector,
known as the Transportation and Climate
Initiative, that is projected to increase the
price of gas by 5 to 17 cents per gallon and
also generate more than $500 million in revenue
for Massachusetts to spend.
Howitt said that TCI "doesn't seem to be the
right approach" and, referring to himself and
other Republican members, said an overall
increase in the gas tax "just is not something
that we would be in favor of."
In his $18 billion transportation bond bill,
which has not moved in the Legislature since it
was the subject of a committee hearing in
October, Baker proposed directing half of the
TCI revenue toward public transit.
Jones pointed to another component of the
governor's bond bill that would reform contract
and procurement practices as an important step
for the Legislature to support.
"I think (transportation) has to have more
focused resources, but again, a lot of the
conversations I've had are about having the
ability to get the projects out and have
contractors bid and do the projects in a timely
fashion," Jones said.
The
Rutland
(Vermont) Herald
Saturday, January 4, 2020
TCI criticism
By Jeffrey Wennberg
Jeffrey Wennberg is
commissioner of public works in the City of
Rutland and previously served as
commissioner of environmental conservation
under Gov. Jim Douglas, and as a consultant
with the Center for Climate Strategies in
Washington. D.C., for whom he managed
numerous state, regional and national
studies of cap-and-trade policy proposals.
Wennberg has also served as chair of a
presidential-level advisory committee for
U.S. EPA under presidents G.W. Bush, Obama,
and Trump.
John McClaughry
has challenged the proposed Transportation and
Climate Initiative (TCI) as unnecessary and
harmful. I do not share Mr. McClaughry’s views
on climate change and have worked for years
under former Governor Douglas and as a
consultant to promote adoption of sound climate
policies across the United States. That being
said, I believe Mr. McClaughry has understated
his criticism of TCI.
TCI seeks to affect our transportation choices
and behaviors in the same way the Regional
Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) affected the
choices made by northeastern electric utilities
in favor of lower greenhouse gas alternatives.
As Governor Douglas’ commissioner of
environmental conservation, I served as
Vermont’s lead negotiator when the RGGI program
was hammered out among the original nine states.
And while we can debate the degree to which RGGI
affected those decisions, there is no question
RGGI has raised millions to support state
climate policy initiatives and our regional GHG
emissions per unit of generation is
significantly lower today.
RGGI and TCI are cap-and-trade programs designed
to make high GHG generation (RGGI) and
transportation (TCI) more expensive than cleaner
alternatives. Cap-and-trade is a tool, and like
any tool it works best when it is applied to the
task for which it was designed. Unfortunately,
very few legislators understand how it works.
Applying cap-and-trade to the transportation
sector is like using a hammer to turn a screw.
Cap-and-trade only makes sense when: 1) the
participants in the program make the key
decisions affecting GHG emissions; 2) the
participants in the program are few in number;
and 3) the participants in the program are
sophisticated players with significant
technical, legal and financial resources. All of
these are true for the electric- generation
sector and none are true for the transportation
sector.
Cap-and-trade requires the creation of an
expensive bureaucracy and assumes the
participants will undertake complex analyses to
“game” the system to their advantage. This is
how the program affects decisions that affect
GHG emissions. But the decisions that affect
emissions in the transportation sector are not
made by the participating fuel distributors and
gas station owners. They are made by millions of
individual consumers. If customers are willing
to pay five cents more at the pump, the fuel
suppliers will happily pass that cost along and
change nothing.
Studies have shown only a major increase in the
cost of motor fuels will generate a noticeable
change in consumer behavior. Is TCI planning to
double the cost of gas at the pump? If so, we
can write TCI’s obituary right now. People will
not tolerate such an increase and will, at their
first opportunity, elect representatives who
will repeal it as their first order of business.
Any “price signal” small enough to be tolerable
is too small to affect consumer behavior. As a
result, TCI is nothing more than an inefficient,
bureaucratic, hopelessly complicated way to
increase revenue from transportation fuels. If
raising more money from transportation fuels is
the goal, why not simply add a few cents to the
motor fuels tax? Or create a carbon tax? We can
do either without adding a single new government
position, and have everything in place right now
to collect it.
The obvious answer is it is impossible to
increase taxes without using the word “tax.” TCI
can be enacted without that word appearing in
the legislation. Creating TCI with all of its
costs and complexity for the purpose of avoiding
the “T” word would be nothing short of public
policy malpractice.
John McClaughry and I might disagree over
whether raising taxes to promote climate action
is justified. But I suspect we agree TCI would
be the worst imaginable way to achieve it.
State House
News Service
Tuesday, December 31, 2019
Northeast Population Falls for First Time This
Decade
Massachusetts Shows Slight Population Growth
By Katie Lannan
Population in the Northeast region of the United
States dropped in 2019 for the first decline
this decade, while population growth nationally
continued to slow and Massachusetts was among
the top states for domestic migration losses,
according to new Census Bureau estimates.
The estimates released Monday tallied the
population of Massachusetts, as of July 1, at
6,892,503 in 2019, up from an estimated
6,882,635, making it one of the 40 states whose
population grew between 2018 and 2019.
Despite the overall increase, Massachusetts was
one of 27 states that lost population through
net domestic migration, the movement of people
to other states. The biggest net domestic
migration losses, in order, were in California
(-203,414), New York (-180,649), Illinois
(-104,986), New Jersey (-48,946), Massachusetts
(-30,274) and Louisiana (-26,045). Of those six
states, New York, Illinois, Louisiana and New
Jersey lost population overall, while the
domestic migration losses in Massachusetts and
California were offset by other gains.
Domestic migration drove the population decrease
in the Northeast, the Census Bureau said.
The region's population declined by 63,817
people -- about a tenth of a percent -- to
55,982,803. Net domestic migration accounted for
a loss of 294,331 people, more than were added
to the population from natural increase, or
births minus deaths, of 97,152, and by net
international migration of 134,145.
The South, meanwhile, experienced the largest
regional population growth from 2018 to 2019,
rising by more than 1 million people to
125,580,448, primarily due to natural increase
and domestic migration.
Nationally, net international migration has been
declining since reaching a high for the decade
in 2016.
The country's population grew by half a percent,
or more than 1.5 million people, to 328,239,523
in 2019. Annual growth peaked for the decade at
0.73 percent, between 2014 and 2015, the Census
Bureau said.
"While natural increase is the biggest
contributor to the U.S. population increase, it
has been slowing over the last five years,"
Sandra Johnson, a demographer and statistician
in the bureau's population division, said in a
statement. "Natural increase, or when the number
of births is greater than the number of deaths,
dropped below 1 million in 2019 for the first
time in decades."
Forty-two states, including Massachusetts, had
fewer births in 2019 than in 2018. The eight
states with more births in 2019 were Washington,
Utah, Nevada, Arizona, Idaho, Montana, Vermont
and Colorado.
The Census Bureau plans to release 2019
population estimates for counties and
municipalities, as well as national and
state-level breakdowns by age, sex and race, in
2020. The 2019 estimates are the last official
series to be released prior to the 2020 Census.
Secretary of State William Galvin is the Census
liaison for Massachusetts, and Galvin's office
and advocacy groups have been stressing the
importance of an accurate count in 2020. Census
population figures are used to determine
Congressional representation and the allocation
of federal funding.
In recent months, Galvin has highlighted
challenges facing the Cape and Islands region
and western Massachusetts.
Galvin, statewide Complete Count Committee Chair
Eva Millona and lawmakers held a strategy
session in Barnstable in November, focusing on
challenges associated with counting Cape Cod
residents who are out-of-state in the winter,
those who do not receive mail at home, a rising
homeless population and foreign-born workers who
maybe unaware or fearful of being counted.
In September, Galvin visited the Big E Festival
to encourage western Massachusetts residents to
make sure they are counted, citing Springfield
as an area of "particular concern."
"During the last census, Springfield was on the
cusp of losing millions in federal dollars if
the official population of the city dipped below
150,000," Galvin said in a Sept. 19 statement.
"Our estimates indicate that the city's
population is hovering just above that number,
and I want to make sure everyone gets counted
and Western Massachusetts is not shortchanged by
the federal government."
|
| |
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
|
