 |
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, February 16, 2020
Virginia
latest to backtrack on TCI commitment
Jump directly
to CLT's Commentary on the News
|
After spending the weekend with other governors in
Washington, D.C., Gov. Charlie Baker said he had a number of
"positive" conversations with other state leaders about the
Transportation Climate Initiative, but offered no assurances
of his ability to keep the fragile coalition of East Coast
states together.
The
cap-and-trade program known as TCI is a centerpiece of
Baker's climate agenda to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
from the transportation sector. A number of other governors
and legislative leaders, both Democrats and Republicans, in
other states, however, have voiced concern about the
program's carbon fees and their projected impact on gas
prices.
"We
had a series of conversations about TCI and I would describe
them as positive, but obviously people are still working
through this issue in their own states as well," Baker said.
State House News Service
Tuesday, February 11, 2020
Baker: Medicaid, TCI, Workforce Grants on Menu in D.C.
Virginia could be joining New Hampshire in its rejection of
the Transportation Climate Initiative, adding to the growing
list of states questioning the associated gas price hikes.
“If
you look at the response to TCI by states projected to be
involved, you can see major rejection and lack of enthusiasm
for TCI,” state Rep. Marc Lombardo told the Herald. “Many
governors have rejected TCI as bad for their residents.”
During recent legislative hearings, Virginia Delegate
Charles Poindexter got two members of Gov. Ralph Northam’s
(D-Va.) cabinet on record promising that the General
Assembly will decide whether the state joins TCI, but likely
not until 2021, according to reports by The Bacon’s
Rebellion. Poindexter and Northam did not respond to
requests for comment.
With a goal of reducing green house gas emissions, the
measure would raise gas prices between 5 to 17 cents per
gallon in the first year, but it remains unclear how high
the gas fees could rise in subsequent years....
Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker has publicly indicated that
he would exercise his executive power to sign onto the
regional compact, despite calls from lawmakers to get
approval from the Legislature.
“Virginia made it clear that any commitment to TCI would be
by way of the legislature,” Lombardo said. “It’s my hope
that before Massachusetts embarks on the disaster of joining
TCI, we would follow the lead of Virginia and ensure the
legislature will have its voices heard on the matter.”
Participating states are expected to sign on to the final
Memorandum of Understanding in the spring of this year,
which would exclude Virginia, bringing a coalition that
began with 12 states and the District of Columbia down to
10. Governors in Maine, Connecticut and Vermont have also
cast a shadow on the Initiative....
Meanwhile, New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu doubled down on
his opposition in his State of the State Address Thursday,
once again denouncing the initiative as a financial
boondoggle.
“When other states tried to shake down our residents for
hundreds of millions of dollars in a gas tax — known as TCI
— a scheme to pay off their failing public transportation
systems, New Hampshire was the first to stand up and say
absolutely not,” Sununu said.
Though critics argue that the agreement is an ostensible tax
for all intents and purposes, Baker’s office maintained that
he opposes raising the gas tax.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, February 13, 2020
Virginia deals setback to TCI, NH Gov. Sununu knocks it
again
Opposition is growing around a regional climate compact
backed by Gov. Charlie Baker — with officials in nearby New
England states knocking the deal as others mull it over.
Governors in New Hampshire, Connecticut and most recently
Vermont have already cast a shadow on the Transportation
Climate Initiative, which would implement a gas fee to
reduce carbon emissions. Officials have estimated the
measure would raise gas prices between 5 to 17 cents per
gallon in the first year.
“If
Vermont and Connecticut follow New Hampshire and withdraw
from TCI, and Massachusetts stays in, is it still TCI or
just a Massachusetts state gas tax?” MassFiscal Alliance
Spokesman Paul Craney told the Herald.
Two
organizations are campaigning against the measure in Maine
and the House Speaker of Rhode Island has publicly indicated
he would not support it....
Meanwhile, Maine Governor Janet Mills is taking a more
centrist approach as she “continues to monitor” the
Initiative and will be “appropriately cautious” when
considering the issues, according to a spokeswoman.
Rhode Island House Speaker Nicholas Mattiello effectively
ruled out any tax increases proposed by fellow Democrat Gov.
Gina Raimondo last month, including the potential gas tax
hike emanating from a regional climate initiative, saying it
“will be looked at very skeptically,” The Providence Journal
reported....
New
Jersey has also not committed to implementing the program at
this point, according to the Department of Environmental
Protection. Officials from New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia
and the District of Columbia did not respond to multiple
requests for comment.
New
Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu called the measure a “financial
boondoggle” and said in mid-December he would not “force
Granite Staters to pay more for their gas just to subsidize
other states’ crumbling infrastructure.”
Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont called the measure a “gas tax”
that will punish drivers earlier this week and Vermont Gov.
Phil Scott said he cannot support proposals that will
increase costs for commuters.
The Boston Herald
Friday, January 10, 2020
Support dwindles for Baker’s Transportation Climate
Initiative
A
group of Republican state reps want to force Gov. Charlie
Baker to get legislative approval before joining multi-state
compacts — like the Transportation Climate Initiative and
its controversial gas fee — in a show of discord within the
party.
House Minority Leader Bradley Jones filed a bill,
cosponsored by 12 other House Republicans, that would
require Baker to go through the Legislature for approval
before entering any compact with more than one state.
Lawmakers would have a 90-day deadline to act on the
proposal, otherwise the governor would be able to use his
executive power. It echoes a similar bill filed by Rep.
David DeCoste, R-Norwell.
Baker has been pushing the 12-state TCI compact as a measure
he could enact — along with its gas fee — on his own
authority.
“Leader Jones’ bill is a clear signal to the Governor that
his party does not support TCI and Rep. DeCoste’s bill,
which would do the same thing but is more comprehensive,
actually has Democratic support in addition to Republican
support,” MassFiscal Alliance spokesman Paul Craney said,
referencing another bill filed at the end of 2019. DeCoste
and Jones could not be reached for comment. Baker’s office
declined to comment.
TCI
would raise gas prices as high as 17 cents in the first year
in an attempt to discourage driving and reduce carbon
emissions, while creating a shared pool of revenue for the
member states. It remains unclear how high the gas fees
could rise in subsequent years. New Hampshire and several
other states have balked at the measure, and critics say
that could be economically damaging for Massachusetts to go
ahead if neighboring states don’t....
State Rep. Marc Lombardo argued that Jones’ bill “has a
flaw,” citing the 90-day expiration.
“Anyone who has been around Beacon Hill for any period of
time knows that a 90-day window has proven too short of time
for the legislature to take action on items of importance.
As such, this legislation has no teeth,” Lombardo said. “We
all know that TCI is just a massive gas tax and therefore
should be treated as any other tax increase proposal and
start in the House. Legislators should be given the right to
have their voices heard.”
The Boston Herald
Saturday, February 15, 2020
Republican reps want curb Gov. Charlie Baker’s executive
powers
New bill aimed at controversial gas fee
Gov. Charlie Baker isn't ruling out running for a third
term, and when it comes to a more immediate election -- the
March 3 presidential primary -- he's continuing to keep his
plans to himself.
In
a radio appearance on Thursday, Baker said he hasn't made
the call yet on whether he'll seek re-election, and
characterized his lack of decision as "definitely not a no."
"That is a subject for further discussion between me and my
wife and some of the folks on the team," Baker said during
his "Ask the Governor" interview on WGBH. "I haven't made a
decision about that and frankly, I don't think I need to
make a decision about that now."
The
Swampscott Republican is in the second year of his second
four-year term, which he won with two-thirds of the vote
over Democrat Jay Gonzalez in 2018.
If
Baker has made a decision for how he'll vote on Super
Tuesday, it's not one he's sharing....
It
appears Republican President Donald Trump has not won him
over.
"I
have said many times that I didn't vote for the president
when he was up four years ago," the governor said. "I was
worried about a lot of things with respect to his ability to
do the job. I haven't seen anything since then to change my
mind."
State House News Service
Thursday, February 13, 2020
Baker on Third Term Bid: “Definitely Not a No”
In
a span of two weeks, lobbying efforts around a bill that
would make it possible for undocumented immigrants to
receive standard Massachusetts driver's licenses transformed
from a hunger strike to Hershey's kisses.
A
group of teenagers -- some the children of immigrants and
some immigrants themselves -- marched to the State House
Thursday from the downtown office of the union 32BJ SEIU,
armed with valentines and sweets for lawmakers.
Chocolates and cupcakes were stamped with the messages
"Driver's Licenses Now" and heart-shaped notes came in two
varieties: thank-you cards "returning the love" to
legislators who have already backed the bill, and requests
for others to "Have a heart" and support it....
The
Transportation Committee, on a 14-4 vote last week, endorsed
and advanced a bill (S 2061) that would allow people who are
unable to prove lawful presence in the United States, or who
are ineligible for a Social Security number, to apply for a
license if they meet all other qualifications and provide
satisfactory proof of their identity, date of birth and
Massachusetts residency.
The
vote was held the day of a committee reporting deadline, and
three days after immigrant activists with Movimiento Cosecha
launched a hunger strike calling for the panel to report the
bill favorably....
Sen. Jamie Eldridge, a bill supporter who attended the
event, said personal stories can have an impact on
lawmakers. He said the licensing bill has been filed for at
least 10 years, and some changes in dynamics may have helped
it gain traction this session.
"I
think that a larger percentage of the new legislators over
the past four years support the bill, and that's everything
from more diversity to younger legislators that to them this
is a no-brainer," said Eldridge, an Acton Democrat who
chairs the Senate Progressive Caucus. "I also think however,
though, it's partly that there's a lot more primary
challenges happening now, so I think there's more pressure
on Democratic legislators to actually pass progressive
legislation."
State House News Service
Thursday, February 13, 2020
Grateful Immigrants Arrive on Hill With Sweets
"Returning the Love" for Licensing Bill Vote
Boosted by a favorable ruling, lawmakers mounting another
push to enable the state’s undocumented immigrants to secure
driver’s licenses face a familiar roadblock: Gov. Charlie
Baker.
Baker was asked last week whether he supported the
legislation, which advanced out of the Joint Transportation
Committee.
“We
tend not to comment on legislation that’s currently pending
before the branch because it depends in many respects on
what the details have to say but generally speaking we think
the bar on this one’s pretty high,” Baker said....
The
governor, according to a transcript provided by his office,
said he didn’t support the legislation before the
Transportation Committee. “My problem with giving licenses
to people who are undocumented is just that. There’s no
documentation to back up the fact that they are who they say
they are and a driver’s license is a passport to a lot of
things, and I think our view is the law we passed, which
basically says as long as you have lawful presence dictated
by the federal government, you can get a driver’s license in
Mass., that’s the policy we support.” ...
While making the state’s roads safer for everyone,
supporters also emphasized that it would ease the stress on
our estimated 185,000 undocumented — illegal — immigrants.
We didn’t realize relieving the stress of those living in
this state illegally fell on our state Legislature.
The
Massachusetts Coalition for Immigration Reform said it best
when noting this bill has “nothing to do with safe driving”
and instead is meant as a way “to make it easier for illegal
aliens to live in our state.”
Paving the way for illegal immigrants to acquire driver’s
licenses simply provides another vehicle to promote their
legitimacy, an all too common — and erroneous — perception.
Illegal immigrants in this state shouldn’t be awarded an
inalienable right to a driver’s license. That’s a privilege
they don’t deserve.
A
Boston Herald editorial
Thursday, February 13, 2020
Hit the brakes on drivers licenses for illegal immigrants
Local officials and advocates are condemning the Trump
administration’s decision to send federal border patrol
agents to Boston and other so-called sanctuary cities in
coming weeks to support immigration enforcement, calling the
move an intimidation tactic that could harm public
safety....
The
Department of Homeland Security said on Friday that border
agents will be deployed to Boston from February through May.
That confirmation followed The New York Times report that
cities targeted under the administration’s plan include New
York, Chicago, Boston, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Atlanta,
Houston, New Orleans, Detroit and Newark, N.J....
Acting Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director Matthew
T. Albence said his agency is using Customs and Border
Protection “to supplement enforcement activity in response
to the resource challenges stemming from sanctuary city
policies.”
There’s no official definition of a sanctuary city, but such
municipalities generally do not allow their police
departments to help ICE deport immigrants.
In
his statement, Albence did not detail how the border patrol
agents would be used in Boston, and ICE said it does not
“discuss planned operations or specific resource
allocation.”
The Boston Globe
Friday, February 14, 2020
Border patrol agents to have presence in Boston
for immigration enforcement in coming weeks
|
|
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
During the
weekly conference call among the Anti-TCI coalition we
learned on Monday from an ally at the Thomas Jefferson
Institute for Public Policy in Virginia that his state
will not be signing on to the Transportation Climate
Initiative sooner than 2021, and even then not without a
vote of its legislators in the Virginia General
Assembly. That's another speed bump for "Baker's
Boondoggle" to add to the others.
The
TCI memo of understanding is supposed to be approved
by all signatory states this spring and, even if Gov.
Nordham of Virginia wants to sign onto it, TCI first
must be passed by the Virginia General Assembly.
Even if its legislature agrees, that won't happen until
a year later, sometime in 2021 at the earliest if at
all.
As in
Kentucky, the Virginia state constitution directs that
"the General Assembly shall meet annually, and its
regular session is a maximum of 60 days long in
even-numbered years and 30 days long in odd-numbered
years." (Massachusetts is one of only ten states
with some version of the rare
"full-time" state legislature.)
Beacon Hill
House Republicans are now pushing back on Gov. Baker's
executive order audacity, according to a Boston Herald
report:
A group of Republican state
reps want to force Gov. Charlie Baker to get
legislative approval before joining multi-state
compacts — like the Transportation Climate
Initiative and its controversial gas fee — in a show
of discord within the party.
House Minority Leader Bradley Jones filed a bill,
cosponsored by 12 other House Republicans, that
would require Baker to go through the Legislature
for approval before entering any compact with more
than one state. Lawmakers would have a 90-day
deadline to act on the proposal, otherwise the
governor would be able to use his executive power.
It echoes a similar bill filed by Rep. David DeCoste,
R-Norwell.
Baker has been pushing the 12-state TCI compact as a
measure he could enact — along with its gas fee — on
his own authority.
DeCoste’s bill, which also has
the support of 12 other legislators, would prohibit
the Commonwealth from taking part in any “state,
regional, or national low carbon fuel standards
program” without prior legislative approval.
So where do we
stand now with TCI? According to The Boston
Herald:
"Governors in New Hampshire, Connecticut and most
recently Vermont have already cast a shadow on the
Transportation Climate Initiative."
"New
Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu doubled down on his
opposition in his State of the State Address
Thursday, once again denouncing the initiative as a
financial boondoggle.
“'When
other states tried to shake down our residents for
hundreds of millions of dollars in a gas tax — known
as TCI — a scheme to pay off their failing public
transportation systems, New Hampshire was the first
to stand up and say absolutely not,' Sununu said."
"Maine
Governor Janet Mills is taking a more centrist
approach as she 'continues to monitor' the
Initiative and will be 'appropriately cautious' when
considering the issues."
"Rhode
Island House Speaker Nicholas Mattiello effectively
ruled out any tax increases proposed by fellow
Democrat Gov. Gina Raimondo last month, including
the potential gas tax hike emanating from a regional
climate initiative."
"New
Jersey has also not committed to implementing the
program at this point, according to the Department
of Environmental Protection. Officials from New
York, Pennsylvania, Virginia and the District of
Columbia did not respond to multiple requests for
comment."
We in
Massachusetts must keep the pressure on Gov. Baker, Lt.
Gov. Polito, Secretary of Transportation Pollack, and
Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs Kathleen
Theoharides.
Please contact
these officials and/or their aides listed below and tell
them you don't want TCI imposed on you and other
beleaguered Massachusetts citizens. It could be
something simple like:
I
do not support Governor Baker's plan to impose a
stealth gas tax hike by his executive order
through the Transportation Climate Initiative.
We Bay Staters do not want a faceless
bureaucracy in some distant state imposing at
will what unelected bureaucrats alone deem is
appropriate. Massachusetts has one of the
highest cost-of-living standards in the nation,
along with already some of the highest energy
costs. Please reject TCI. Don't make
Massachusetts even less affordable, especially
for such little gain.
Gov.
Charlie Baker
Webform |
|
Kristen
Lepore |
Gov's Chief
of Staff |
617-727-2040 |
E-Mail |
|
Tim Buckley |
Senior
Advisor to the Gov. |
617-727-2040 |
E-Mail |
|
Lily
Zarrella |
Gov's
Deputy Chief of Staff |
617-727-2040 |
E-Mail |
|
Lt. Governor
Karyn Polito
Webform |
|
Dan Gates |
Special
Asst. to Lt. Governor |
(617)
725-4000 |
E-Mail |
|
Executive
Office
of
Energy and Environmental Affairs
Secretary
Kathleen A. Theoharides
E-Mail |
|
Executive
Office of
Transportation (MassDOT)
Secretary
Stephanie Pollack
No Contact
Information
Available |
|
Jacquelyn
Goddard |
MassDOT
Dir. of Communications |
857-368-8500 |
E-Mail |
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
|
|
State House News Service
Tuesday, February 11, 2020
Baker: Medicaid, TCI, Workforce Grants on Menu
in D.C.
By Matt Murphy
After spending the weekend with
other governors in Washington, D.C., Gov.
Charlie Baker said he had a number of "positive"
conversations with other state leaders about the
Transportation Climate Initiative, but offered
no assurances of his ability to keep the fragile
coalition of East Coast states together.
The cap-and-trade program known as TCI is a
centerpiece of Baker's climate agenda to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation
sector. A number of other governors and
legislative leaders, both Democrats and
Republicans, in other states, however, have
voiced concern about the program's carbon fees
and their projected impact on gas prices.
"We had a series of conversations about TCI and
I would describe them as positive, but obviously
people are still working through this issue in
their own states as well," Baker said.
Baker attended National Governors Association
meetings where governors heard from Vice
President Mike Pence and Speaker Nancy Pelosi
and had the chance to meet with other governors
and officials in the Trump administration. The
governors spent a lot of time talking with the
administration about the expiration of Workforce
Innovation and Opportunity Act funds in October,
and how states would like to see the program
adjusted, Baker said.
"The feds appear to willing to give us a little
more flexibility to basically build training
programs around modules that we think in our
states are the most likely to produce
employment," Baker said.
Baker said he also participated in talks about
the future of the Medicaid program and
flexibility for states around drug pricing, and
heard a substantial presentation on U.S.
response to the Chinese coronavirus outbreak.
Baker and other governors have objected to a
proposed accountability rule that the governors
say will reduce funding under the state-federal
Medicaid partnership and reduce access to care
for people who rely on the massive program.
The
Boston Herald
Thursday, February 13, 2020
Virginia deals setback to TCI, NH Gov. Sununu
knocks it again
By Mary Markos
Virginia could be joining New Hampshire in its
rejection of the Transportation Climate
Initiative, adding to the growing list of states
questioning the associated gas price hikes.
“If you look at the response to TCI by states
projected to be involved, you can see major
rejection and lack of enthusiasm for TCI,” state
Rep. Marc Lombardo told the Herald. “Many
governors have rejected TCI as bad for their
residents.”
During recent legislative hearings, Virginia
Delegate Charles Poindexter got two members of
Gov. Ralph Northam’s (D-Va.) cabinet on record
promising that the General Assembly will decide
whether the state joins TCI, but likely not
until 2021, according to reports by The Bacon’s
Rebellion. Poindexter and Northam did not
respond to requests for comment.
With a goal of reducing green house gas
emissions, the measure would raise gas prices
between 5 to 17 cents per gallon in the first
year, but it remains unclear how high the gas
fees could rise in subsequent years.
Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker has publicly
indicated that he would exercise his executive
power to sign onto the regional compact, despite
calls from lawmakers to get approval from the
Legislature.
“Virginia made it clear that any commitment to
TCI would be by way of the legislature,”
Lombardo said. “It’s my hope that before
Massachusetts embarks on the disaster of joining
TCI, we would follow the lead of Virginia and
ensure the legislature will have its voices
heard on the matter.”
Participating states are expected to sign on to
the final Memorandum of Understanding in the
spring of this year, which would exclude
Virginia, bringing a coalition that began with
12 states and the District of Columbia down to
10. Governors in Maine, Connecticut and Vermont
have also cast a shadow on the Initiative. [See
below report]
“Virginia is currently the southernmost state to
consider TCI and as they put on the brakes, the
pool of remaining states continues to shrink,”
Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance spokesman Paul
Craney said.
Meanwhile, New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu
doubled down on his opposition in his State of
the State Address Thursday, once again
denouncing the initiative as a financial
boondoggle.
“When other states tried to shake down our
residents for hundreds of millions of dollars in
a gas tax — known as TCI — a scheme to pay off
their failing public transportation systems, New
Hampshire was the first to stand up and say
absolutely not,” Sununu said.
Though critics argue that the agreement is an
ostensible tax for all intents and purposes,
Baker’s office maintained that he opposes
raising the gas tax.
The Boston Herald
Friday, January 10,
2020
Support dwindles for Baker’s Transportation
Climate Initiative
By Mary Markos
Opposition is growing around a
regional climate compact backed by Gov. Charlie
Baker — with officials in nearby New England
states knocking the deal as others mull it over.
Governors in New Hampshire, Connecticut and most
recently Vermont have already cast a shadow on
the Transportation Climate Initiative, which
would implement a gas fee to reduce carbon
emissions. Officials have estimated the measure
would raise gas prices between 5 to 17 cents per
gallon in the first year.
“If Vermont and Connecticut follow New Hampshire
and withdraw from TCI, and Massachusetts stays
in, is it still TCI or just a Massachusetts
state gas tax?” MassFiscal Alliance Spokesman
Paul Craney told the Herald.
Two organizations are campaigning against the
measure in Maine and the House Speaker of Rhode
Island has publicly indicated he would not
support it.
The Maine Heritage Policy Center opposes the TCI
because it’s a “bad deal for Maine,” according
to spokesman Jacob Posik. At 17 cents per
gallon, the TCI would cost the average family
$225 per year, according to Posik.
“Mainers should not be penalized for driving
their children to school, going to work or
running errands,” Posik said.
Spokeswoman Julie Rabinowitz of Maine People
Before Politics argued that that the status quo
regulatory and market environment will reduce
emissions by 19 percent without any additional
incentives, and under the “most aggressive”
scenario within the TCI, emissions would be
reduced by an additional 6 percent.
“The whole goal of this scheme is to make gas
more expensive for consumers so they will drive
less or buy an electric car,” Rabinowitz said.
“It is outrageous to burden the working poor and
people of rural Maine with a huge increase in
costs for only a 6 percent change over the
status quo.”
Meanwhile, Maine Governor Janet Mills is taking
a more centrist approach as she “continues to
monitor” the Initiative and will be
“appropriately cautious” when considering the
issues, according to a spokeswoman.
Rhode Island House Speaker Nicholas Mattiello
effectively ruled out any tax increases proposed
by fellow Democrat Gov. Gina Raimondo last
month, including the potential gas tax hike
emanating from a regional climate initiative,
saying it “will be looked at very skeptically,”
The Providence Journal reported. Mattiello
declined further comment.
Raimondo is “fully committed” to the initiative,
however, and “believes we need an aggressive
approach to lowering carbon emissions in the
transportation sector,” according to a
spokeswoman. “The specific statutory and
regulatory changes needed to meet those goals
will be the source of public discussion and
input over the coming year.”
Maryland Environment Secretary Ben Grumbles said
the state “remains very engaged in the
Transportation and Climate Initiative. We will
continue to seek and review comments from
citizens and stakeholders to determine potential
next steps.”
New Jersey has also not committed to
implementing the program at this point,
according to the Department of Environmental
Protection. Officials from New York,
Pennsylvania, Virginia and the District of
Columbia did not respond to multiple requests
for comment.
New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu called the
measure a “financial boondoggle” and said in
mid-December he would not “force Granite Staters
to pay more for their gas just to subsidize
other states’ crumbling infrastructure.”
Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont called the measure a
“gas tax” that will punish drivers earlier this
week and Vermont Gov. Phil Scott said he cannot
support proposals that will increase costs for
commuters.
Baker has indicated that he would exercise his
executive power to implement the TCI compact,
but he did say he would give the Legislature
more information about the pact.
“The Administration is pleased by the robust
participation by Northeast and Mid-Atlantic
states throughout the program’s ongoing
development process and by the broad coalition
of support from members of both the business and
environmental communities,” EEA Spokeswoman
Katie Gronendyke said.
The Boston Herald
Saturday, February 15, 2020
Republican reps want curb Gov. Charlie Baker’s
executive powers
New bill aimed at controversial gas fee
By Mary Markos
A group of Republican state reps
want to force Gov. Charlie Baker to get
legislative approval before joining multi-state
compacts — like the Transportation Climate
Initiative and its controversial gas fee — in a
show of discord within the party.
House Minority Leader Bradley Jones filed a
bill, cosponsored by 12 other House Republicans,
that would require Baker to go through the
Legislature for approval before entering any
compact with more than one state. Lawmakers
would have a 90-day deadline to act on the
proposal, otherwise the governor would be able
to use his executive power. It echoes a similar
bill filed by Rep. David DeCoste, R-Norwell.
Baker has been pushing the 12-state TCI compact
as a measure he could enact — along with its gas
fee — on his own authority.
“Leader Jones’ bill is a clear signal to the
Governor that his party does not support TCI and
Rep. DeCoste’s bill, which would do the same
thing but is more comprehensive, actually has
Democratic support in addition to Republican
support,” MassFiscal Alliance spokesman Paul
Craney said, referencing another bill filed at
the end of 2019. DeCoste and Jones could not be
reached for comment. Baker’s office declined to
comment.
TCI would raise gas prices as high as 17 cents
in the first year in an attempt to discourage
driving and reduce carbon emissions, while
creating a shared pool of revenue for the member
states. It remains unclear how high the gas fees
could rise in subsequent years. New Hampshire
and several other states have balked at the
measure, and critics say that could be
economically damaging for Massachusetts to go
ahead if neighboring states don’t.
“Beacon Hill does not seem to have an appetite
for TCI. If lawmakers were to choose between TCI
and a separate state gas tax, I think they would
pick a straight state gas tax because at least
the state would keep 100 percent of the tax,”
Craney said. “Under TCI, money collected from
Massachusetts taxpayers would be shared with
other states and be required to fund a new
bureaucracy to manager TCI.”
DeCoste’s bill, which also has the support of 12
other legislators, would prohibit the
Commonwealth from taking part in any “state,
regional, or national low carbon fuel standards
program” without prior legislative approval.
State Rep. Marc Lombardo argued that Jones’ bill
“has a flaw,” citing the 90-day expiration.
“Anyone who has been around Beacon Hill for any
period of time knows that a 90-day window has
proven too short of time for the legislature to
take action on items of importance. As such,
this legislation has no teeth,” Lombardo said.
“We all know that TCI is just a massive gas tax
and therefore should be treated as any other tax
increase proposal and start in the House.
Legislators should be given the right to have
their voices heard.”
Rep. F. Jay Barrows, a cosponsor of both bills,
opposes TCI, according to spokesman Matthew
Hannon, who said Barrows sees it as effectively
a gas tax that should go to a vote in the
Legislature.
State House News Service
Thursday, February 13, 2020
Baker on Third Term Bid: “Definitely Not a No”
Radio Caller Prods Guv on Prez Race Significance
By Katie Lannan
Gov. Charlie Baker isn't ruling
out running for a third term, and when it comes
to a more immediate election -- the March 3
presidential primary -- he's continuing to keep
his plans to himself.
In a radio appearance on Thursday, Baker said he
hasn't made the call yet on whether he'll seek
re-election, and characterized his lack of
decision as "definitely not a no."
"That is a subject for further discussion
between me and my wife and some of the folks on
the team," Baker said during his "Ask the
Governor" interview on WGBH. "I haven't made a
decision about that and frankly, I don't think I
need to make a decision about that now."
The Swampscott Republican is in the second year
of his second four-year term, which he won with
two-thirds of the vote over Democrat Jay
Gonzalez in 2018.
If Baker has made a decision for how he'll vote
on Super Tuesday, it's not one he's sharing.
A caller named Nicole from Boston asked Baker
which presidential candidate he will vote for,
quoting a remark Baker made in 2016 when he
endorsed New Jersey Republican Chris Christie.
"I don't ever want to be in a position where
people say you didn't have a position on
something of significance and importance," Baker
said four years ago.
The caller said she considered the presidential
election "very significant."
Baker reiterated comments he made Tuesday,
saying he plans to vote but not to get involved
in presidential politics.
"I've said many times that I don't want to get
into presidential politics because that's not my
job, and it's not what I get paid to do," Baker
said. "I get paid to worry about what's going on
here in the commonwealth of Mass., working on
many of the things that we've been talking about
today."
It appears Republican President Donald Trump has
not won him over.
"I have said many times that I didn't vote for
the president when he was up four years ago,"
the governor said. "I was worried about a lot of
things with respect to his ability to do the
job. I haven't seen anything since then to
change my mind."
Asked by co-host Jim Braude if that meant he
wouldn't vote for Trump this year, Baker said,
"I think my statement kind of speaks for itself,
Jim." He didn't answer when Braude asked if he'd
vote instead for his one-time boss, former Gov.
Bill Weld, who is running against Trump in the
Republican primary.
"I said I'm not going to engage in presidential
politics and I meant it," Baker said.
As Braude thanked the caller for her question,
Baker continued: "And by the way, no one asks me
about this when I'm out and about. No one."
"They want to talk about housing and
transportation and health care and climate and
all those things, and that's really what they
expect me to focus on and worry about," he said.
State House News Service
Thursday, February 13, 2020
Grateful Immigrants Arrive on Hill With Sweets
"Returning the Love" for Licensing Bill Vote
By Katie Lannan
In a span of two weeks, lobbying
efforts around a bill that would make it
possible for undocumented immigrants to receive
standard Massachusetts driver's licenses
transformed from a hunger strike to Hershey's
kisses.
A group of teenagers -- some the children of
immigrants and some immigrants themselves --
marched to the State House Thursday from the
downtown office of the union 32BJ SEIU, armed
with valentines and sweets for lawmakers.
Chocolates and cupcakes were stamped with the
messages "Driver's Licenses Now" and
heart-shaped notes came in two varieties:
thank-you cards "returning the love" to
legislators who have already backed the bill,
and requests for others to "Have a heart" and
support it.
Some of the young advocates made the trek from
Martha's Vineyard to Boston for the lobby day,
getting up at 5 a.m. to catch a morning ferry.
Melissa Lacerda said she and her parents,
Brazilian immigrants, are "lucky enough to be
citizens," but see how stressful it is for
others they know to rely on relatives and the
island's limited bus service to get around.
She said she wanted to ask lawmakers to remember
how excited they were when they got their own
driver's license and make that experience
possible for immigrant families across the
state. Lacerda, 18, has a driver's license and
said for her, "it means liberty."
"It means freedom," she told the News Service.
"It's everything that this country stands for."
The Transportation Committee, on a 14-4 vote
last week, endorsed and advanced a bill (S 2061)
that would allow people who are unable to prove
lawful presence in the United States, or who are
ineligible for a Social Security number, to
apply for a license if they meet all other
qualifications and provide satisfactory proof of
their identity, date of birth and Massachusetts
residency.
The vote was held the day of a committee
reporting deadline, and three days after
immigrant activists with Movimiento Cosecha
launched a hunger strike calling for the panel
to report the bill favorably.
Before the lobby day participants eaded to State
House Thursday, several told stories they
planned to share in meetings with legislators
and staff, including tales of undocumented
parents who fear getting deported when they
drive illegally to work, skipped hospital and
shopping trips, and the challenges of taking
infrequent public transit to jobs and volunteer
positions.
"We cannot wait another year for this," said
Aracelis Flores, an Everett High School freshman
whose parents have temporary protected status.
Sen. Jamie Eldridge, a bill supporter who
attended the event, said personal stories can
have an impact on lawmakers. He said the
licensing bill has been filed for at least 10
years, and some changes in dynamics may have
helped it gain traction this session.
"I think that a larger percentage of the new
legislators over the past four years support the
bill, and that's everything from more diversity
to younger legislators that to them this is a
no-brainer," said Eldridge, an Acton Democrat
who chairs the Senate Progressive Caucus. "I
also think however, though, it's partly that
there's a lot more primary challenges happening
now, so I think there's more pressure on
Democratic legislators to actually pass
progressive legislation."
Republican Gov. Charlie Baker opposes the bill.
Senate President Karen Spilka, an Ashland
Democrat, has voiced support for it -- Eldridge
said Spilka's backing has "helped move it along
and [is] probably why the bill was sent to the
Senate."
Baker discussed his stance during a WGBH Radio
interview Thursday.
"I've said for a very long time that I have a
problem with issuing licenses to people who are
by definition undocumented," Baker said. "And
I've also said that I don't think ICE should be
in the business of worrying about people who are
working and paying their bills -- and, by the
way, paying taxes in many cases as well -- that
they should be focused on the very bad actors
that I think everybody could agree, if they
commit a terrible crime and they get convicted
of that crime, they should go back to the
country where they came from."
He continued, "No one's ever been able to
convince me that you can run a program like this
without worrying about the issues associated
with security."
The Boston Herald
Thursday, February 13, 2020
A Boston Herald editorial
Hit the brakes on drivers licenses for illegal
immigrants
Boosted by a favorable ruling,
lawmakers mounting another push to enable the
state’s undocumented immigrants to secure
driver’s licenses face a familiar roadblock:
Gov. Charlie Baker.
Baker was asked last week whether he supported
the legislation, which advanced out of the Joint
Transportation Committee.
“We tend not to comment on legislation that’s
currently pending before the branch because it
depends in many respects on what the details
have to say but generally speaking we think the
bar on this one’s pretty high,” Baker said.
That’s been Baker’s long-held position on
similar legislation, most notably expressed
during his 2014 campaign for governor. During a
WGBH-Boston Globe debate with Democratic
gubernatorial nominee Martha Coakley. Baker
said, “I don’t support driver’s licenses for
people who are undocumented. And the main reason
for that is no one’s ever been able to explain
to me how you can actually document and verify
someone who is undocumented.”
Baker subsequently reiterated his position last
September, after supporters of a bill that would
make driver’s licenses available to undocumented
immigrants packed the Statehouse’s largest
hearing room. That legislation (H 3012/S 2061) —
filed by Reps. Tricia Farley-Bouvier of
Pittsfield, Christine Barber of Somerville, and
Sen. Brendan Crighton of Lynn — would permit all
qualified residents, regardless of immigration
status, to apply for and receive a standard
state license under the state’s now-two-tiered
system. The bill would not affect federal Real
ID-compliant licenses, which require proof of
citizenship or lawful residence as well as a
Social Security number.
The governor, according to a transcript provided
by his office, said he didn’t support the
legislation before the Transportation Committee.
“My problem with giving licenses to people who
are undocumented is just that. There’s no
documentation to back up the fact that they are
who they say they are and a driver’s license is
a passport to a lot of things, and I think our
view is the law we passed, which basically says
as long as you have lawful presence dictated by
the federal government, you can get a driver’s
license in Mass., that’s the policy we support.”
In an effort to assuage the governor’s
documentation concerns, Sen. Joseph Boncore, the
Senate chair of the Transportation Committee,
told the State House News Service that new
language in the bill attempts to address that
issue.
The bill’s backers want to portray this as a
public-safety priority. “The passage of this
bill will mean that all drivers in the
commonwealth will be trained, will be licensed
and will be insured,” Farley-Bouvier previously
said.
While making the state’s roads safer for
everyone, supporters also emphasized that it
would ease the stress on our estimated 185,000
undocumented — illegal — immigrants. We didn’t
realize relieving the stress of those living in
this state illegally fell on our state
Legislature.
The Massachusetts Coalition for Immigration
Reform said it best when noting this bill has
“nothing to do with safe driving” and instead is
meant as a way “to make it easier for illegal
aliens to live in our state.”
Paving the way for illegal immigrants to acquire
driver’s licenses simply provides another
vehicle to promote their legitimacy, an all too
common — and erroneous — perception.
Illegal immigrants in this state shouldn’t be
awarded an inalienable right to a driver’s
license. That’s a privilege they don’t deserve.
The Boston Globe
Friday, February 14, 2020
Border patrol agents to have presence in Boston
for immigration enforcement in coming weeks
By Danny McDonald, Travis Andersen and John
Hilliard
Local officials and advocates are
condemning the Trump administration’s decision
to send federal border patrol agents to Boston
and other so-called sanctuary cities in coming
weeks to support immigration enforcement,
calling the move an intimidation tactic that
could harm public safety.
“None of this makes us safer,” said Suffolk
District Attorney Rachael Rollins.
The initiative, she said, aims “to strike fear
and terror throughout our immigrant
communities."
Representative Ayanna Pressley, a Boston
Democrat, said the decision to bring border
patrol agents to the city “serves only to
further the Trump administration’s agenda to
intimidate and retaliate against cities that
uphold the dignity and humanity of our immigrant
neighbors.”
Pressley said, “We will not stand for this.
Where this administration chooses cruelty, the
City of Boston will choose compassion.”
And Boston Mayor Martin J. Walsh said that
“Policies aimed at sowing division and fear are
ultimately counterproductive and harmful not
merely to the families and individuals who are
targeted but to the broader community of which
we are all a part.”
The threat is seen as an act of retaliation
against cities that protect undocumented
immigrants, said Matthew Segal, the legal
director of the American Civil Liberties Union
of Massachusetts.
“It’s a very transparent retaliation against
local governments for refusing to do the Trump
administration’s bidding,” Segal said.
“What we need — and have needed for a long time
— is a sound, rational national immigration
policy rooted in both compassion and common
sense,” he said.
The Department of Homeland Security said on
Friday that border agents will be deployed to
Boston from February through May. That
confirmation followed The New York Times report
that cities targeted under the administration’s
plan include New York, Chicago, Boston, San
Francisco, Los Angeles, Atlanta, Houston, New
Orleans, Detroit and Newark, N.J.
Among the agents being deployed are members of
an elite tactical unit that acts essentially as
the SWAT team of the border patrol, the Times
reported.
While Customs & Border Protection officers have
a presence at Logan International Airport and in
the Seaport District, Boston is not home to any
border patrol agents. The closest stations for
such agents are in northern New England, along
the Canadian border, according to the Department
of Homeland Security.
Segal said the deployment of a tactical team to
enforce civil immigration law may be
unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment,
which prohibits the use of excessive force by
law enforcement.
That prohibition extends to law enforcement
creating the circumstances where force would
needlessly occur, he said. The use of SWAT-like
tactical teams could lead to unnecessarily
violent encounters in which immigrants are
injured.
“This is a dangerous move that the Trump
administration is playing," Segal said.
Acting Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Director Matthew T. Albence said his agency is
using Customs and Border Protection “to
supplement enforcement activity in response to
the resource challenges stemming from sanctuary
city policies.”
There’s no official definition of a sanctuary
city, but such municipalities generally do not
allow their police departments to help ICE
deport immigrants.
In his statement, Albence did not detail how the
border patrol agents would be used in Boston,
and ICE said it does not “discuss planned
operations or specific resource allocation.”
“As we have noted for years, in jurisdictions
where we are not allowed to assume custody of
aliens from jails, our officers are forced to
make at-large arrests of criminal aliens who
have been released into communities,” Albence
said.
"This effort requires a significant amount of
additional time and resources. When sanctuary
cities release these criminals back to the
street, it increases the occurrence of
preventable crimes, and more importantly,
preventable victims,” he said.
Rollins, who was one of two Massachusetts
district attorneys last year to legally
challenge civil courthouse arrests by
immigration agents, suggested the move could
have a chilling effect on community cooperation
with police.
“It’s challenging enough for any member of our
community to come forward to law enforcement
when they have been a victim or witness to a
crime," she said. " When individuals are too
frightened to speak with police and prosecutors,
to show up in court to provide testimony, to
seek the protection of the law, or to have their
day in court, we are all less safe.”
A spokeswoman for Republican Governor Charlie
Baker was less critical of the decision, but
said his administration "believes federal law
enforcement should focus on taking dangerous
criminals off the streets and has proposed
legislation to allow local and state law
enforcement to work with federal officials to
detain individuals convicted of violent crimes.”
President Trump has often railed against
sanctuary cities and has made combating illegal
immigration a top priority, often through
controversial policies, such as family
separations at the border with Mexico, a push to
build a wall along that border, and restrictions
on foreigners from some countries seeking to
enter the United States.
A spokesman for US Customs & Border Protection
told the Times the agency was deploying 100
officers to work with US Immigration and Customs
Enforcement, which conducts arrests in the
interior of the country, “in order to enhance
the integrity of the immigration system, protect
public safety, and strengthen our national
security.” It was not immediately clear how many
border patrol agents would be sent to Boston.
Eva Millona, the executive director of the
Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy
Coalition, said advocates are worried "about the
collateral damage and the separation of
families. It’s a tactic that doesn’t really help
anyone.”
She called on state lawmakers to pass the Safe
Communities Act.
If passed, that legislation would impose rules
on state and local law enforcement, including
when police can inquire about citizenship
status; when police can send notifications to US
immigration officials; and the prohibition of
agreements allowing local police to serve as
federal immigration agents, according to the
MIRA Coalition website.
“Everyone who resides in the US, regardless of
where they were born, they have rights under the
Constitution,” she said.
Iván Espinoza-Madrigal, executive director of
Lawyers for Civil Rights in Boston, said the
decision to send border patrol agents threatens
to destabilize communities, families, and
children, "and push people deeper into the
shadows.”
“This is a fundamentally racist policy, and yet
another manifestation of the Trump
administration’s improper targeting of
immigrants it deems undesirable,”
Espinoza-Madrigal said.
In Newton, which declared itself a sanctuary
city in 2017, Mayor Ruthanne Fuller said the
federal decision to target immigrants based
solely on their legal status is particularly
disturbing as the US Census begins its count in
six weeks.
“Newton is a safe city, and we are committed to
making all residents, workers and visitors feel
safe regardless of their immigration status,”
Fuller said.
Dispatching border patrol agents to Boston would
represent “an incredible waste of resources,”
said Phil Torrey, director of the Crimmigration
Clinic at Harvard Law School.
The tactical unit, Torrey said, is “designed for
counterterrorism-type operations or large safety
concerns like the Super Bowl.”
It typically hasn’t been used for local
enforcement efforts, he said.
“It’s yet another example of the Trump
administration using scare tactics on
municipalities that don’t abide by detainers,”
Torrey said.
Detainers are requests from federal authorities
for law enforcement to hold an individual in
custody. Boston, Torrey said, has a policy that
states Boston police are not authorized to abide
by a request to hold someone solely for
immigration purposes.
In 2017, the state Supreme Judicial Court ruled
that local law enforcement officials cannot hold
a person who is wanted solely for immigration
violations, which are civil, not criminal
infractions.
Todd M. Lyons, acting field officer director of
ICE’s enforcement and removal operations in
Boston, said the court’s decision “may restrict
law enforcement agencies in the Commonwealth
from honoring immigration detainers, [but] the
law does not limit local agencies from working
with ICE to notify us of the release of criminal
aliens.”
But, according to Torrey, sanctuary city
policies are important to community policing
efforts and if federal government undermines
that dynamic, it could make the job of local law
enforcement officials more difficult.
“It’s clearly a retaliatory measure,” he said.
Material from The Associated Press was
included in this report. |
| |
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
|
