 |
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, August 16, 2020
Rep. Dooley calls out
His Royal Eminence Baker
It's about time somebody did!
Jump directly
to CLT's Commentary on the News
|
Most Relevant News Excerpts
(Full news reports follow
Commentary)
|
|
CLICK ABOVE GRAPHIC TO ENLARGE
The state of
Maskachusetts keeps very detailed records of the death
toll from the virus. And they’re all public.
For instance,
on page 11 of what is called the daily coronavirus
dashboard, the state Department of Public Health (DPH)
reports that between July 26 and Aug. 8, 160
Massachusetts residents died of the virus.
But on page 37
of the weekly report, the DPH reports that only 14
Massachusetts residents died in that same fortnight.
So which is it
– 160 or 14?
On the
afternoon of Aug. 6, the DPH recorded that the virus had
killed another 32 MA citizens — which made for big
headlines that evening in the credulous, brain-dead
Boston media.
Now, however,
the DPH reports only 12 people died that day.
Which is it —
32 or 12?
On one page
the DPH reports that the average age of decedents in
this state is 82. On another page, the average age
is listed as 86.
Which is it —
82 or 86?
None of this
makes any sense, unless you’re creating “statistics” to
try to keep the hysteria going — to continue the
lockdowns, crush the economy, keep the schools closed,
etc.
If that’s the
strategy, it’s certainly working, considering that Gov.
Charlie Parker now boasts the highest unemployment rate
in the nation — 17.4%....
Let’s return
to Aug. 6. This was right about the time that the
dithering fool who is governor was wringing his hands
about the “slight upward uptick.” Again, the
original number of deaths reported that afternoon, to
great media fanfare, was 32.
Now on the
daily chart the number of dead on Aug. 6 is listed as
14.
But since the
weekly dashboard now gives the entire July 26-Aug.8
death total as 14, it appears the real number for Aug. 6
was closer to … one. One death.
And so, on the
basis of fraudulent data, we now endure another
tightening of the screws — more idiotic restaurant
policing, outdoor gatherings cut from 100 to 50, more
Karens emboldened to rat out their neighbors on the
governor’s odious snitch lines and so forth....
I got
interested in the DPH’s phony numbers last week, when
they abruptly removed the most revealing chart on their
daily dashboard, “Deaths and Death Rate by Age Group.”
By itself,
that one chart put the lie to Charlie Parker’s daily
doses of panic porn. On the last day it appeared,
the DPH listed the number of deaths of MA residents
under the age of 20 as zero.
I repeat, zero
deaths from the virus in Massachusetts among those under
the age of 20. Massachusetts deaths between the
ages of 20 and 29: 17.
Between the
ages of 30 and 39: 35 deaths.
In all, of the
state’s 8,582 deaths as of Friday, exactly 146 have been
of people under the age of 50....
Still, even
the truncated new chart proves the idiocy of the
shutdown — of the 14 deaths on the new chart, 12 were of
people over the age of 80. And during those two
weeks, there were no deaths — none — of anyone under 40,
or between the ages of 50 and 79.
Those are the
DPH’s own numbers.
I’m going to
keep tweeting out the charts every weekday. But
maybe I’ll concentrate even more on nursing homes — you
know, the facilities whose operators gave Tall Deval
more than $52,000, and in an odd coincidence 5,585 of
the state’s 8,529 deaths have occurred there.
From Wednesday
to Friday, the state recorded another 53 deaths, 51 of
which occurred in Gov. Charlie Parker’s death houses.
It’s all right there on page 15. The chart is
labeled “COVID-19 Cases in Long-Term Care Facilities.”
The Boston
Herald
Saturday, August 15, 2020
Charlie Baker’s panic-porn coronavirus
data doesn’t hold up
By Howie Carr
Rep. Shawn
Dooley (R-Norfolk) — SHNS File Photo - 2017
Well, King
Charles is at it again. A few people dared to disobey
his coronavirus order so he is going to punish all the
rest of us. He now orders outside gatherings to be
dropped from 100 to 50. So if you have a wedding
coming up and planned everything around the guidelines —
too bad. And if you go ahead with it, the Governor
is going to fine you, to boot.
The part that
bothers me the most is the almost gleeful approach to
enforcement — as if our police have nothing better to do
than break up a wedding reception with 75 people that
are there by their own accord. Ugh.
Incidentally,
I’m not attacking Charlie Baker as a person. I’m
frustrated with his tyrannical decrees, the lack of
checks and balances, and the randomness of who is on the
naughty list and who Santa Baker deems to be good little
boys and girls....
Next thing
King Charles will be levying a tax on our tea — and we
will just smile and say he knows best and is doing this
for our own good.
That’s
ridiculous. WE THE PEOPLE should be able to live
free and not be told that if we have the audacity to go
for a bike ride that crosses over an imaginary line we
must surrender that freedom.
If you think
I’m being overly dramatic, consider how the government
overreach has continued to grow. Remember when we
just needed to suck it up for a couple of weeks and be
team players so the hospitals wouldn’t get over run and
then everything would go back to normal? This is
NOT back to normal.
Now, if some
people throw a party with a ton of people not wearing
masks and doing all sorts of other irresponsible things
during this emergency situation – fine, hammer them.
But if you tell me that if I follow all these CDC, Fauci,
DPH, WHO, WEbMD guidelines then I will be fine but King
Charles Duane Baker IV will punish me anyways — then it
isn’t about the guidelines and safety. It is about
power and control.
I’ve had so
many people reach out with 100 other scenarios that are
being affected by this big government power play, and I
am frustrated that I have nothing to say to them except
the King thinks he is smarter than us commoners and he
is saving us from ourselves — freedom be damned.
The New
Boston Post
Monday, August 10, 2020
The Governor Has No Robes On
By [State Rep.] Shawn Dooley
As Gov.
Charlie Baker continues to hammer away at flattening
COVID-19 with measures like reduced gathering sizes and
restrictions on certain out-of-state travelers, a fellow
State House Republican thinks the hammer is being swung
much too hard -- and is planning to support a lawsuit in
the state's highest court challenging the governor's
authority.
Rep. Shawn
Dooley took to
Facebook late Friday night to question the
constitutionality of the quarantine and testing
conditions that Baker recently placed on some people
traveling from Rhode Island into Massachusetts.
"On it's [sic]
face I was ok with it until I started reading into the
specifics and began to think of different scenarios
where he was depriving Massachusetts residents of their
personal liberty by this completely subjunctive edict,"
Dooley wrote in his self-described "bashing the Governor
rant" which was re-published as an op-ed in the
conservative New Boston Post.
"BTW," Dooley
wrote, "I firmly believe this is unconstitutional and
I'm trying to find an attorney to help me file suit in
federal court -- so if you know someone, please let me
know." ...
In response to
a question about Dooley's post, Baker said Tuesday that
by giving options to interstate travelers -- quarantine,
testing before arrival, or testing after arrival -- "we
believe it meets any Constitutional test that would be
associated with that."
"And as I said
last week, Rhode Island -- I mean, the numbers are the
numbers," Baker said. "We had set a travel
advisory based on a certain set of criteria and they
exceeded them. And if they come back down and fall
under them, then we'll change our policy. But as
it stands right now, we're giving people coming from
Rhode Island options with respect to how to meet the
terms of our advisory. ... So I'm not worried about a
challenge on that one."
Dooley said
Wednesday that he would have preferred Baker to urge
caution through a travel warning rather than threaten
$500 fines, adding that it "smacks of 'not America.'"
House
Republican Leader Brad Jones said Wednesday he had not
seen Dooley's post but planned to look for it and reach
out to him.
Jones assessed
that House Republicans are "probably generally"
supportive of Baker's actions in response to COVID-19.
"I think there are specific issues that people have
concerns about. One of the challenges is that
everybody represents different areas with different
experiences, different interactions with COVID," he
said.
Second
Assistant Minority Leader Betty Poirier, whose district
abuts Dooley's along the North Attleboro-Plainville
line, told the News Service she respects the governor
but also understands how Dooley feels.
"I think all
of us feel kind of mixed feelings about the whole thing.
I have tremendous empathy with all the business people,
I'm very close with many of them in my district,"
Poirier said. "Fortunately, we live in an area of
the state that has been not as affected as some other
areas, so perhaps we don't feel the same kind of urgency
that other places feel. But I understand how Shawn
feels. You know, there are many people who feel
like he does." ...
Longtime
MassGOP activist Ed Lyons, a computer programmer and
pundit who worked on Baker's 2015 transition team,
expressed admiration for Dooley, calling him "the best
of us" and "a great political player," but said his
commentary was "outrageous" and represents a growing
schism between the state's top elected Republican and
the party apparatus which leans more conservative.
"To attack him
as if he is some sort of uncaring monarch is
unthinkable," Lyons told the News Service. "It
shows that this enduring exercise of massive government
power is wearing out the conservatives who oppose
government power ... and they are bristling under it."
Asked Tuesday
about Dooley's concerns with the Rhode Island
restrictions, Baker did not indicate whether he had read
the
Facebook post in which the Norfolk Republican
referred to the governor variously as "King Charles,"
"Cavalier King Charles Spaniel Baker," and "King Charles
Duane (not the rock) Baker, IV."
"I'm sure he
might disagree, but this isn't done as anything against
Gov. Baker," Dooley said Wednesday. "This isn't
personal, this is something I firmly believe as a
representative of my district. ... Taking away
somebody's liberty should be done very judiciously, and
it should not be a kneejerk thing because some kids in
Providence had a party and caused a little spike."
Dooley said he
had reached out to Baker's office indicating he was
"happy to chat" but had not heard back, though he had
heard from several legislators -- Republicans and
several Democrats -- who thanked him for his article and
said they agreed with his points.
"I truly
believe he's doing what he feels is in the public's best
interest," the Norfolk Republican said. "But my
argument against that is it's a slippery slope. ...
Especially as a Legislature, if we allow the executive
branch to start doing our jobs for us, and not have
oversight and not have debate and not have deliberation,
and randomly declare 'I have to do this because it's an
emergency,' where does it stop?"
State House
News Service
Thursday, August 13, 2020
Norfolk Rep Says Baker Overstepping
Emergency Powers
Poirier: "There Are Many People Who Feel Like He Does"
A Norfolk
state representative says he supports a lawsuit against
what he calls Gov. Charlie Baker’s “overreach” in
response to the coronavirus pandemic.
Rep. Shawn
Dooley, R-Norfolk, said his comments are “not
necessarily attacking the quarantine, the restrictions,
or even the fines,” but rather the way the governor — or
“King Baker” as the representative calls him — has
approached their implementation.
“I was
criticizing the Governor for his overreach of power and
bypassing the legislature and due process with his
orders, fines, and special police force as opposed to
the handling of the crisis in general,” Dooley wrote in
a Tuesday
Facebook post....
After last
week threatening to sue the Baker administration, Dooley
on Wednesday said he no longer plans to file his own
lawsuit and would instead file an amicus brief to an
existing suit scheduled for arguments in September.
That lawsuit,
already weaving its way through the Supreme Judicial
Court, was filed by the New Civil Liberties Alliance in
June and challenges whether Baker had the lawful
authority to execute many of his pandemic-era emergency
orders — including those shuttering businesses and
requiring face coverings.
It argues
Baker overstepped his authority and questions his use of
the Civil Defense Act to declare a state of emergency.
If the suit is
successful, it would invalidate many of the orders Baker
has created to address the coronavirus outbreak, some of
which have triggered a backlash from the hard-hit small
business community....
Reached by
phone on Thursday, Dooley said, “I believe in the rule
of law and I believe we have checks and balances for a
reason.
“I don’t
believe one person should have this level of authority —
especially since it’s not truly an emergency at this
point,” Dooley told the Herald.
In his post,
Dooley said “the road to hell is paved with good
intentions” and called Baker out for bypassing the
Legislature and not following proper government process
to enact new laws.
“I know in my
heart of hearts that once we start surrendering our
basic liberties and allow one man to make law on his own
without due process, testimony, debate, or any other
safeguard that makes our democratic republic so special
— it is a slippery slope,” Dooley wrote.
The Boston
Herald
Thursday, August 13, 2020
Norfolk rep endorses suit against
‘King Baker’ over ‘slippery slope’ of
government overreach during coronavirus pandemic
Claims overreach during pandemic
Ten days into
the extension of formal legislative sessions,
negotiators have not yet reached deals on bills
addressing police reforms, transportation
infrastructure, health care, economic development and
climate change.
The House and
Senate agreed to scrap their traditional July 31
deadline for finishing major legislation this year, amid
the disruptions of the pandemic. The move left four
bills before House-Senate conference committees that are
continuing their private talks, and a fifth conference
was appointed last week to iron out the details of
climate change legislation.
None of the
conferences had filed a report with the House or Senate
clerk's offices as of 9:15 a.m. Monday, and the
traditional August recess, combined with the early Sept.
1 primaries, seems to have sapped conference talks of
any urgency.
The
transportation infrastructure bond bill has been in
conference committee the longest, since July 23,
followed by the policing bill, which has been subject to
talks since July 27. Gov. Charlie Baker, Senate
President Karen Spilka and House Speaker Robert DeLeo
had all said they wanted to see a final version of the
police bill by July 31.
Another
conference committee was named on July 16 to reconcile
competing versions of an information technology bond
bill. That panel reached an accord on July 31, and Baker
signed the $1.8 billion borrowing bill on Friday.
State House
News Service
Monday, August 10, 2020
Campaigns, August Recess Overshadow Conference Talks
By Katie Lannan
The attention
on the campaign trail this week is what August is
usually like in an even-numbered year, even though this
is no usual year and the Legislature extended its
session beyond the traditional July 31 recess date.
Legislative
leaders suggested they would call lawmakers back into
session this month if and when any of the conference
committees negotiating policing, climate change,
telehealth, economic development and transportation
spending bills reached a deal.
So far, that
hasn't happened. . . .
Also this past
week . . . Rep. Shawn Dooley, a Norfolk Republican, used
Facebook as a platform to rail against "King Charles"
and what he sees as the governor's trampling of the
Constitution through executive orders aimed at
controlling COVID-19, namely the conditions placed on
travelers visiting from places like Rhode Island.
State House
News Service
Friday, August 14, 2020
Weekly Roundup - Green Means Go ... Back to School
— Excerpt
—
The Baker
administration said Monday it was weighing whether to
participate in President Donald Trump's scaled back
unemployment assistance program that requires states to
pick up a quarter of the cost of the $400 weekly
enhanced benefit for those out of work, but Gov. Charlie
Baker's office said nothing about Trump accusing
Democrat-run states of wanting a "bailout."
With
Congressional talks hung up and the nation struggling
through the COVID-19 crisis, Trump on Saturday signed
executive orders dealing with protections for renters,
payroll taxes, college loans and enhanced unemployment
benefits that he said would "take care of, pretty much,
this entire situation."
The action
came after days of talks between Democrats and
Republicans in Congress and at the White House over
another round of pandemic relief spending broke down.
But with
Beacon Hill looking to Washington for help in digging
out of a deep financial hole resulting from the
coronavirus pandemic, the prospects for relief seemed to
take a hit....
One order
extended the enhanced unemployment benefits that expired
on July 31 for workers who have lost their jobs during
the pandemic, but the president renewed the benefits at
$400 a month, or two-thirds their original level.
States would
also be required to cover 25 percent of the new benefit
if they choose to participate, and the program would
expire no later than Dec. 6, or when funding runs out.
Trump said the
previous $600 enhanced benefit had been a "disincentive"
for people to go back to work, and he suggested states
dip into their allocations from the Coronavirus Relief
Fund to pay their share of the benefit.
"But if they
don't, they don't," Trump said. "That's going to
be their problem. I don't think their people will
be too happy. They have the money. So I
don't think their people will be too happy. But if
they don't, they don't."
Massachusetts
received close to $2.5 billion from the Coronavirus
Relief Fund, and through June had spent close to $944
million, according to documents provided to the News
Service by the administration.
That total
does not include the $202 million the administration
plans to use to support school reopenings in the fall,
or the $700 million in health care provider support that
the administration has supplied, but expects to be
covered eventually through federal sources other than
the Coronavirus Relief Fund.
"The
administration is reviewing the Executive Order related
to unemployment benefits," said a spokesman for Labor
Secretary Rosalin Acosta. The administration said the
Department of Unemployment Assistance had received a
memo outlining the program.
If
Massachusetts were to participate, it's unclear how much
it would cost. Massachusetts has had one of the
highest unemployment rates in the country, and as of the
last week of July had 502,471 continuing claims for
unemployment assistance and 19,179 initial claims for
regular UI benefits for the week.
State House
News Service
Monday, August 10, 2020
Trump Orders Shake Up Debate Over
Stimulus
Baker Mum as President Insists States Seeking "Bailouts"
Gov. Charlie
Baker on Thursday voiced concern with President Trump's
plan for funding a scaled-down version of the nation's
enhanced unemployment benefit and said it's important
for Congress to reach agreement on a fourth stimulus
bill to support states and the health care system.
"There are
very real issues that states and municipal governments
have associated with almost everything associated with
COVID, and that's no longer just a Northeast issue,"
Baker said during a Tuesday press conference....
Baker said he
supports the idea of the federal government "doing
something about an enhanced unemployment benefit" but
believes "it needs to be done through a separate
appropriation, not by taking money from FEMA, which is
how we, the states, are planning to get reimbursed."
A $1.1 billion
COVID-19 spending bill Baker signed on July 24 relies on
FEMA reimbursement and other federal funding to reach an
expected net state cost of zero dollars. The
allocations in that bill included $350 million for
personal protective equipment, $44 million for the
contact tracing collaborative, and $85 million for field
hospitals and shelters.
Massachusetts
is now on its second temporary budget of the 2021 fiscal
year, and lawmakers have yet to produce a full annual
spending plan that takes into account the economic
disruptions of the COVID-19 crisis. Legislative
leaders have said they want a better picture of what
level of aid might become available to them through
another federal stimulus.
Massachusetts
in July took in $4.456 billion in tax collections,
approximately $2.293 billion of which came from income
taxes that would have been due in fiscal 2020 if the
filing deadline had not been pushed back from April to
July. The remaining $2.163 billion will be
recorded for fiscal 2021.
After
adjusting for deferred taxes, the revenue collected for
July 2020 was about $88 million more than what was
collected in July 2019, according to the Department of
Revenue.
State House
News Service
Tuesday, August 11, 2020
Baker: Trump Jobless Benefit Plan May
Create Funds Flow Woes
Guv Cites National Need for Fourth Stimulus Bill
|
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
As I've told you before,
there is little as disappointing as spending all the
time required to daily search all news sources for
information impacting taxpayers and finding so little
but knowing it's there. That was pretty much the
story this week. Nothing much is going on up on
Beacon Hill. The Legislature has extended its
session through the end of the year but legislators
instead are spending their taxpayer-funded time campaigning for
re-election. Shouldn't that qualify as an "in-kind
contribution" and need to be reported to the Office of
Campaign and Political Finance?
The biggest news
— the bombshell shot across His Royal Eminence Charles
Baker's bow — was State Rep. Shawn Dooley's
Facebook post (on August 7 @11:08 PM) that quickly went viral.
The Norfolk Republican's acerbic critique of Baker's totalitarian
actions over the past six months was quickly picked up by The New
Boston Post and published with permission of the author as an op-ed
column, then picked up and reported on by the State House News
Service and The Boston Herald. Here's an excerpt from The New
Boston Post column, "The Governor Has No Robes On" (full column can
be read below, along with New Service and Boston Herald reports):
Well, King Charles
is at it again. A few people dared to disobey his
coronavirus order so he is going to punish all the rest of us.
He now orders outside gatherings to be dropped from 100 to 50.
So if you have a wedding coming up and planned everything around
the guidelines — too bad. And if you go ahead with it, the
Governor is going to fine you, to boot.
The part
that bothers me the most is the almost gleeful approach to
enforcement — as if our police have nothing better to do
than break up a wedding reception with 75 people that are
there by their own accord. Ugh.
Incidentally,
I’m not attacking Charlie Baker as a person. I’m
frustrated with his tyrannical decrees, the lack of checks and
balances, and the randomness of who is on the naughty list and
who Santa Baker deems to be good little boys and girls....
Next thing
King Charles will be levying a tax on our tea — and we will just
smile and say he knows best and is doing this for our own good.
That’s
ridiculous. WE THE PEOPLE should be able to live free and
not be told that if we have the audacity to go for a bike ride
that crosses over an imaginary line we must surrender that
freedom.
If you think
I’m being overly dramatic, consider how the government overreach
has continued to grow. Remember when we just needed to
suck it up for a couple of weeks and be team players so the
hospitals wouldn’t get over run and then everything would go
back to normal? This is NOT back to normal.
Now, if some
people throw a party with a ton of people not wearing masks and
doing all sorts of other irresponsible things during this
emergency situation – fine, hammer them. But if you tell
me that if I follow all these CDC, Fauci, DPH, WHO, WEbMD
guidelines then I will be fine but King Charles Duane Baker IV
will punish me anyways — then it isn’t about the guidelines and
safety. It is about power and control.
I’ve had so
many people reach out with 100 other scenarios that are being
affected by this big government power play, and I am frustrated
that I have nothing to say to them except the King thinks he is
smarter than us commoners and he is saving us from ourselves —
freedom be damned.
I'd say it is amazing for a
governor to be attacked by a member of his own party
— but Charlie Baker has no
allegiance to or interest in any party or anyone but his
omnipotent self.
Rep. Shawn Dooley is one of the few
real-deals in the Legislature, even among Republicans. I can
count all of them on one hand. I
worked with him
last year on his
estate tax reform bill (H-2446) and have had an eye on him
since. I'm not shocked by his opinion, maybe surprised a bit
that he took it so direct and public.
It's about time somebody called out to
Saint Charles the Emperor that he has no clothes. I'm most surprised that
it's taken this long.
But like the old one-two punch, Boston
Herald columnist Howie Carr swung from the floor yesterday and
exposed the shell-and-pea flim-flam numbers game Gov. Baker and his
administration has been playing on the citizens to keep them afraid
and his tyrannical lockdown in place. In his column yesterday
("Charlie Baker’s panic-porn coronavirus data doesn’t hold up")
Howie Carr revealed the bait-and-switch scam The Emperor is
utilizing to baffle the public. Here are a few excerpts (Howie's
full column and a chart can be found further down):
The state of Maskachusetts keeps
very detailed records of the death toll from the virus.
And they’re all public.
For instance, on page 11 of what is
called the daily coronavirus dashboard, the state
Department of Public Health (DPH) reports that between
July 26 and Aug. 8, 160 Massachusetts residents died of
the virus.
But on page 37 of the weekly
report, the DPH reports that only 14 Massachusetts
residents died in that same fortnight.
So which is it – 160 or 14?
On the afternoon of Aug. 6, the DPH
recorded that the virus had killed another 32 MA
citizens — which made for big headlines that evening in
the credulous, brain-dead Boston media.
Now, however, the DPH reports only
12 people died that day.
Which is it — 32 or 12?
On one page the DPH reports that
the average age of decedents in this state is 82.
On another page, the average age is listed as 86.
Which is it — 82 or 86?
None of this makes any sense,
unless you’re creating “statistics” to try to keep the
hysteria going — to continue the lockdowns, crush the
economy, keep the schools closed, etc.
If that’s the strategy, it’s
certainly working, considering that Gov. Charlie Parker
now boasts the highest unemployment rate in the nation —
17.4%....
Let’s return to Aug. 6. This
was right about the time that the dithering fool who is
governor was wringing his hands about the “slight upward
uptick.” Again, the original number of deaths
reported that afternoon, to great media fanfare, was 32.
Now on the daily chart the number
of dead on Aug. 6 is listed as 14.
But since the weekly dashboard now
gives the entire July 26-Aug.8 death total as 14, it
appears the real number for Aug. 6 was closer to … one.
One death.
And so, on the basis of fraudulent
data, we now endure another tightening of the screws —
more idiotic restaurant policing, outdoor gatherings cut
from 100 to 50, more Karens emboldened to rat out their
neighbors on the governor’s odious snitch lines and so
forth....
I got interested in the DPH’s phony
numbers last week, when they abruptly removed the most
revealing chart on their daily dashboard, “Deaths and
Death Rate by Age Group.”
By itself, that one chart put the
lie to Charlie Parker’s daily doses of panic porn.
On the last day it appeared, the DPH listed the number
of deaths of MA residents under the age of 20 as zero.
I repeat, zero deaths from the
virus in Massachusetts among those under the age of 20.
Massachusetts deaths between the ages of 20 and 29: 17.
Between the ages of 30 and 39: 35
deaths.
In all, of the state’s 8,582 deaths
as of Friday, exactly 146 have been of people under the
age of 50....
Still, even the truncated new chart
proves the idiocy of the shutdown — of the 14 deaths on
the new chart, 12 were of people over the age of 80.
And during those two weeks, there were no deaths — none
— of anyone under 40, or between the ages of 50 and 79.
Those are the DPH’s own numbers.
I’m going to keep tweeting out the
charts every weekday. But maybe I’ll concentrate
even more on nursing homes — you know, the facilities
whose operators gave Tall Deval more than $52,000, and
in an odd coincidence 5,585 of the state’s 8,529 deaths
have occurred there.
From Wednesday to Friday, the state
recorded another 53 deaths, 51 of which occurred in Gov.
Charlie Parker’s death houses. It’s all right
there on page 15. The chart is labeled “COVID-19
Cases in Long-Term Care Facilities.”
The State House News Service
reported on Monday ("Campaigns, August Recess Overshadow
Conference Talks"):
Ten days into the
extension of formal legislative sessions, negotiators have not
yet reached deals on bills addressing police reforms,
transportation infrastructure, health care, economic development
and climate change.
The House
and Senate agreed to scrap their traditional July 31
deadline for finishing major legislation this year, amid the
disruptions of the pandemic. The move left four bills before
House-Senate conference committees that are continuing their
private talks, and a fifth conference was appointed last
week to iron out the details of climate change legislation.
None of the
conferences had filed a report with the House or Senate clerk's
offices as of 9:15 a.m. Monday, and the traditional August
recess, combined with the early Sept. 1 primaries, seems to have
sapped conference talks of any urgency.
The
transportation infrastructure bond bill has been in conference
committee the longest, since July 23, followed by the policing
bill, which has been subject to talks since July 27. Gov.
Charlie Baker, Senate President Karen Spilka and House Speaker
Robert DeLeo had all said they wanted to see a final version of
the police bill by July 31.
Another
conference committee was named on July 16 to reconcile competing
versions of an information technology bond bill. That panel
reached an accord on July 31, and Baker signed the $1.8 billion
borrowing bill on Friday.
In its Weekly Roundup on Friday
the News Service noted:
The attention on
the campaign trail this week is what August is usually like in
an even-numbered year, even though this is no usual year and the
Legislature extended its session beyond the traditional July 31
recess date.
Legislative leaders suggested they would call lawmakers back
into session this month if and when any of the conference
committees negotiating policing, climate change, telehealth,
economic development and transportation spending bills
reached a deal.
So far, that
hasn't happened. . . .
Also this past
week . . . Rep. Shawn Dooley, a Norfolk Republican, used
Facebook as a platform to rail against "King Charles" and what
he sees as the governor's trampling of the Constitution through
executive orders aimed at controlling COVID-19, namely the
conditions placed on travelers visiting from places like Rhode
Island.
There's nothing like a deadline
to focus attention, and there's nothing like extending a
deadline to feed procrastination. Remember a month ago
when everything on Beacon Hill was about getting so much
accomplished before the July 31 recess deadline? Now
that they've agreed to ignore their own rule and remain in
session interminably the pressure is off the pols; it's back
to business-as-usual. Nothing has come out of any of
the numerous conference committees, and nothing likely will
until the next deadline, after they are safely re-elected.
Thank you to those who contacted the
Transportation Bond Conference Committee, asked the six members to
strike out Section 5
—
"Local and Regional Transportation Initiatives" that would transform
and weaken Proposition 2½. And
thanks to those who sent a copy of their communications to me.
Remember — CLT isn't a single entity that accomplishes magic for
taxpayers on its own. CLT is its members.
If you haven't
taken part in your own survival, made the effort yet, please do it
quickly. You can find all the arguments and information you
need here.
Here is the contact information for
each member of the committee:
We all
hope you'll contact each of them and plead for their
consideration, and mercy.
On Monday the State House News
Service reported ("Trump Orders Shake Up Debate Over
Stimulus; Baker Mum as President Insists States Seeking
'Bailouts'"):
The
Baker administration said Monday it was weighing whether
to participate in President Donald Trump's scaled back
unemployment assistance program that requires states to
pick up a quarter of the cost of the $400 weekly
enhanced benefit for those out of work, but Gov. Charlie
Baker's office said nothing about Trump accusing
Democrat-run states of wanting a "bailout."
With
Congressional talks hung up and the nation struggling
through the COVID-19 crisis, Trump on Saturday signed
executive orders dealing with protections for renters,
payroll taxes, college loans and enhanced unemployment
benefits that he said would "take care of, pretty much,
this entire situation."
The
action came after days of talks between Democrats and
Republicans in Congress and at the White House over
another round of pandemic relief spending broke down.
But
with Beacon Hill looking to Washington for help in
digging out of a deep financial hole resulting from the
coronavirus pandemic, the prospects for relief seemed to
take a hit....
One
order extended the enhanced unemployment benefits that
expired on July 31 for workers who have lost their jobs
during the pandemic, but the president renewed the
benefits at $400 a month, or two-thirds their original
level.
States
would also be required to cover 25 percent of the new
benefit if they choose to participate, and the program
would expire no later than Dec. 6, or when funding runs
out.
Trump
said the previous $600 enhanced benefit had been a
"disincentive" for people to go back to work, and he
suggested states dip into their allocations from the
Coronavirus Relief Fund to pay their share of the
benefit.
"But
if they don't, they don't," Trump said. "That's going to
be their problem. I don't think their people will be too
happy. They have the money. So I don't think their
people will be too happy. But if they don't, they
don't."
Massachusetts received close to $2.5 billion from the
Coronavirus Relief Fund, and through June had spent
close to $944 million, according to documents provided
to the News Service by the administration.
That
total does not include the $202 million the
administration plans to use to support school reopenings
in the fall, or the $700 million in health care provider
support that the administration has supplied, but
expects to be covered eventually through federal sources
other than the Coronavirus Relief Fund.
"The
administration is reviewing the Executive Order related
to unemployment benefits," said a spokesman for Labor
Secretary Rosalin Acosta. The administration said the
Department of Unemployment Assistance had received a
memo outlining the program.
If
Massachusetts were to participate, it's unclear how much
it would cost. Massachusetts has had one of the highest
unemployment rates in the country, and as of the last
week of July had 502,471 continuing claims for
unemployment assistance and 19,179 initial claims for
regular UI benefits for the week.
The
battle lines have been drawn in Washington. House
Speaker Nancy Pelosi is demanding a $3.4 Trillion "Covid 19
aid package." Remember, all the aid packages passed so
far since April combined total about that amount, so this
would bring the total for Wuhan Chinese Pandemic recovery
for the states to around $7 Trillion of further debt for the
nation's taxpayers since May. Republican Senate
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has drawn the line a $1
Trillion maximum. Let's hope the Republicans don't
blink first and cave in.
What the Democrats are really holding
out for is creating hundreds of billions of taxpayers' debt to hand
over as unrestricted aid to the states —
especially deep blue liberal strongholds which have mismanaged and
squandered revenue for decades. The Democrats are intent
on bailing out liberal state bastions, relieving them of their
massive unfunded pension liabilities accumulated over decades and
keep the cronyism gravy train rolling along without a bump.
President Trump and Congressional
Republicans seek to reduce the federal government's additional $600
per week in unemployment benefits (on top of the states' payments),
create more of an incentive for employees to return to their jobs
instead of making more money by remaining unemployed. Dropping
that $600 per week to $300 from the federal government, $100 from
the state government, also incentivizes those states obsessed with
lockdowns to lighten up their death grips on businesses.
Meanwhile both sides have quit
negotiations — the U.S. House and
Senate have recessed and went home until after Labor Day.
The most critical parts, which Congress
has failed to accomplish, President Trump has implemented
by executive orders. Of course like everything he does, it
is expected to be challenged in court.
Liberal Democrat governors and Charlie
Baker are praying for a huge federal bail-out, a hundreds of
billions of dollars windfall tol wipe away decades of self-inflicted
malfeasance.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
Full News Reports Follow
(excerpted above) |
|
CLICK ABOVE GRAPHIC TO ENLARGE
The Boston
Herald
Saturday, August 15, 2020
Charlie Baker’s panic-porn coronavirus data doesn’t hold up
By Howie Carr
The state of Maskachusetts keeps very detailed records of the
death toll from the virus. And they’re all public.
For instance, on page 11 of what is called the daily coronavirus
dashboard, the state Department of Public Health (DPH) reports
that between July 26 and Aug. 8, 160 Massachusetts residents
died of the virus.
But on page 37 of the weekly report, the DPH reports that only
14 Massachusetts residents died in that same fortnight.
So which is it – 160 or 14?
On the afternoon of Aug. 6, the DPH recorded that the virus had
killed another 32 MA citizens — which made for big headlines
that evening in the credulous, brain-dead Boston media.
Now, however, the DPH reports only 12 people died that day.
Which is it — 32 or 12?
On one page the DPH reports that the average age of decedents in
this state is 82. On another page, the average age is listed as
86.
Which is it — 82 or 86?
None of this makes any sense, unless you’re creating
“statistics” to try to keep the hysteria going — to continue the
lockdowns, crush the economy, keep the schools closed, etc.
If that’s the strategy, it’s certainly working, considering that
Gov. Charlie Parker now boasts the highest unemployment rate in
the nation — 17.4%.
I asked the state to explain all these contradictory numbers
that are, in fact, “hot garbage,” as one of my readers put it.
I got back a response “on background.” That means it’s not their
official response, and normally I wouldn’t quote “background”
directly. But it’s hard to paraphrase something that I cannot
decipher (and neither, I suspect, can they):
“The death numbers on an individual day in the daily dashboard
represent the deaths reported to DPH on that day. The weekly
dashboard looks at cases that have been diagnosed during a
two-week time period and the deaths that are reported in the
weekly report are associated with those cases. I hope this
helps.”
It does, but only in the sense that it proves how little about
this panic is on the level.
Let’s return to Aug. 6. This was right about the time that the
dithering fool who is governor was wringing his hands about the
“slight upward uptick.” Again, the original number of deaths
reported that afternoon, to great media fanfare, was 32.
Now on the daily chart the number of dead on Aug. 6 is listed as
14.
But since the weekly dashboard now gives the entire July
26-Aug.8 death total as 14, it appears the real number for Aug.
6 was closer to … one. One death.
And so, on the basis of fraudulent data, we now endure another
tightening of the screws — more idiotic restaurant policing,
outdoor gatherings cut from 100 to 50, more Karens emboldened to
rat out their neighbors on the governor’s odious snitch lines
and so forth.
I know, what can you expect from the DPH? This is the same state
agency that falsified at least 38,000 drug tests in criminal
cases, wrongfully sending thousands of people to prison.
But now we’re supposed to accept the DPH’s analysis as gospel,
because they’re as ethical and trustworthy as, say, the RMV or
the State Police.
I got interested in the DPH’s phony numbers last week, when they
abruptly removed the most revealing chart on their daily
dashboard, “Deaths and Death Rate by Age Group.”
By itself, that one chart put the lie to Charlie Parker’s daily
doses of panic porn. On the last day it appeared, the DPH listed
the number of deaths of MA residents under the age of 20 as
zero.
I repeat, zero deaths from the virus in Massachusetts among
those under the age of 20. Massachusetts deaths between the ages
of 20 and 29: 17.
Between the ages of 30 and 39: 35 deaths.
In all, of the state’s 8,582 deaths as of Friday, exactly 146
have been of people under the age of 50.
That chart was closely monitored by those of us who are, shall
we say, skeptical, of the Fake News-Big Government narrative. I
used to tweet the chart out almost every day.
But now it’s gone, although the DPH says it was just
“streamlining,” and that a variation can now be viewed on the
weekly chart. But the new chart, in addition to being buried (on
page 35), is not nearly as revealing, and it only comes out once
a week. How convenient for the purveyors of panic porn.
Still, even the truncated new chart proves the idiocy of the
shutdown — of the 14 deaths on the new chart, 12 were of people
over the age of 80. And during those two weeks, there were no
deaths — none — of anyone under 40, or between the ages of 50
and 79.
Those are the DPH’s own numbers.
I’m going to keep tweeting out the charts every weekday. But
maybe I’ll concentrate even more on nursing homes — you know,
the facilities whose operators gave Tall Deval more than
$52,000, and in an odd coincidence 5,585 of the state’s 8,529
deaths have occurred there.
From Wednesday to Friday, the state recorded another 53 deaths,
51 of which occurred in Gov. Charlie Parker’s death houses. It’s
all right there on page 15. The chart is labeled “COVID-19 Cases
in Long-Term Care Facilities.”
Check it out quickly, though. Those numbers are so devastating
that I suspect that’s the next chart Tall Deval will
“streamline” into oblivion.
I hope this helps.
Rep. Shawn
Dooley (R-Norfolk) — SHNS File Photo - 2017
The New Boston
Post
Monday, August 10, 2020
The Governor Has No Robes On
By [Rep.] Shawn Dooley
Well, King Charles is at it again. A few people dared to
disobey his coronavirus order so he is going to punish all
the rest of us. He now orders outside gatherings to be
dropped from 100 to 50. So if you have a wedding coming up
and planned everything around the guidelines — too bad. And
if you go ahead with it, the Governor is going to fine you,
to boot.
The part that bothers me the most is the almost gleeful
approach to enforcement — as if our police have nothing
better to do than break up a wedding reception with 75
people that are there by their own accord. Ugh.
Incidentally, I’m not attacking Charlie Baker as a person.
I’m frustrated with his tyrannical decrees, the lack of
checks and balances, and the randomness of who is on the
naughty list and who Santa Baker deems to be good little
boys and girls.
Here’s an example: A few days ago Cavalier King Charles
Spaniel Baker (that’s one of those uber-fancy little dogs)
decided to decree that Massachusetts residents couldn’t go
to Rhode Island for anything but official business.
Hmmm, maybe since he killed our economy he is now is trying
to spread the love? So — no out to dinner, no shopping, no
beach.
Initially I thought I might be O.K. with it – until I
started reading the specifics and began thinking of various
scenarios where he is attempting to deprive Massachusetts
residents of their personal liberty.
Now, I have said for some time that we build a wall on our
southern border — Rhode Island not Mexico. They talk funny,
steal our jobs, can’t drive worth poop, and add to the
congestion on our highways. But that was just in jest.
This pronouncement from the governor, however, is supposed
to be for real. While the governor on Friday, August 7
dialed back his poorly-thought-out order, graciously
allowing activities like grocery shopping, he still kept in
place other restrictions, including what he called
“recreation.”
So, let’s look at his highness’s royal proclamation: if I’m
a Rhode Island resident and happen to work in Massachusetts,
I have no restrictions at all. I can go to the beach, party,
lick shopping carts in the grocery store, whatever, and
still come to Massachusetts every day to work, mingle, go
out to lunch. I can live in an apartment building in Rhode
Island that has Covid-19 running rampant and I’m still good
to come to the Bay State. It’s O.K. for me to work in
Massachusetts restaurants handling the food and breathing on
patrons.
Or worse: What if this rabid Rhode Islander is working in a
nursing home? The king of Massachusetts has proclaimed that
this rogue state is such a high risk that it is verboten for
our citizens to enjoy, but we will let those people come
here and deal with our most vulnerable?
Hmmm. You can’t have it both ways, Governor — it’s either
truly a hotbed of pestilence jeopardizing our safety and you
should send the national guard to the border to protect us
from the zombie apocalypse … or it’s a political stunt meant
to further control your subjects as you continue to chip
away at our freedoms.
Don’t answer that one right away. Instead, ask yourself why
the Massachusetts resident that pays taxes that keep our
state running is treated like a pariah by our own government
that we fund.
Let’s say I go to Newport to visit my daughter the Marine
before she ships out to her next duty station. According to
these rules, even though I’m not going in public and am just
visiting with her and then coming right back home, I
theoretically either have to quarantine for 14 days or get a
test (and quarantine till the results come back in). If I
don’t, then Baker’s Stasi could come and round me up,
levying a $500-a-day fine for daring to ignore his order.
By the way, this isn’t just bad public policy. I firmly
believe this is unconstitutional, and I’m trying to find an
attorney to help me file suit in federal court — so if you
know someone, please let me know.
But let’s talk about other real world situations. I have a
friend who has a boat at a slip in Rhode Island, because it
is the closest marina to his home in Massachusetts. He
typically goes down, drives to the pier, walks down to his
boat, and goes fishing with his kids. Usually never sees
another person — and certainly never comes closer than 6
feet to one. If one of his neighbors would rat him out to
the Governor, all of a sudden he could be found to have
committed some sort of a high crime — think about it, 10
days at $500 a day = $5,000. You can throw a Molotov
cocktail at a cop in Boston and burn out his cruiser and
your punishment isn’t nearly as harsh.
What about the family that is fortunate enough to have a
second home at the beach? Through no fault of their own, and
despite their doing everything right — wearing masks, social
distancing, no parties, lots of hand washing and sanitizer —
Charlie can just randomly take their property rights away?
How is this right or fair? And how is this America, that one
man has this much power?
If President Donald Trump tweeted such a thing in the middle
of the night, we’d be hearing about how it was the rise of
the Fourth Reich — but here we just let it happen?
Next thing King Charles will be levying a tax on our tea —
and we will just smile and say he knows best and is doing
this for our own good.
That’s ridiculous. WE THE PEOPLE should be able to live free
and not be told that if we have the audacity to go for a
bike ride that crosses over an imaginary line we must
surrender that freedom.
If you think I’m being overly dramatic, consider how the
government overreach has continued to grow. Remember when we
just needed to suck it up for a couple of weeks and be team
players so the hospitals wouldn’t get over run and then
everything would go back to normal? This is NOT back to
normal.
Now, if some people throw a party with a ton of people not
wearing masks and doing all sorts of other irresponsible
things during this emergency situation – fine, hammer them.
But if you tell me that if I follow all these CDC, Fauci,
DPH, WHO, WEbMD guidelines then I will be fine but King
Charles Duane Baker IV will punish me anyways — then it
isn’t about the guidelines and safety. It is about power and
control.
I’ve had so many people reach out with 100 other scenarios
that are being affected by this big government power play,
and I am frustrated that I have nothing to say to them
except the King thinks he is smarter than us commoners and
he is saving us from ourselves — freedom be damned.
— Shawn Dooley is a
Massachusetts state representative who lives in Norfolk. A
Republican, he represents the Ninth Norfolk District, which
includes the towns of Norfolk, Wrentham, and Plainville, and
portions of Medfield, Millis, and Walpole. This article is
adapted from a commentary he posted on
his Facebook page. It is published here with permission.
State House
News Service
Thursday, August 13, 2020
Norfolk Rep Says Baker Overstepping Emergency Powers
Poirier: "There Are Many People Who Feel Like He Does"
By Sam Doran
As Gov. Charlie Baker continues to hammer away at flattening
COVID-19 with measures like reduced gathering sizes and
restrictions on certain out-of-state travelers, a fellow
State House Republican thinks the hammer is being swung much
too hard -- and is planning to support a lawsuit in the
state's highest court challenging the governor's authority.
Rep. Shawn Dooley took to
Facebook late Friday night to question the
constitutionality of the quarantine and testing conditions
that Baker recently placed on some people traveling from
Rhode Island into Massachusetts.
"On it's [sic] face I was ok with it until I started reading
into the specifics and began to think of different scenarios
where he was depriving Massachusetts residents of their
personal liberty by this completely subjunctive edict,"
Dooley wrote in his self-described "bashing the Governor
rant" which was re-published as an op-ed in the conservative
New Boston Post.
"BTW," Dooley wrote, "I firmly believe this is
unconstitutional and I'm trying to find an attorney to help
me file suit in federal court - so if you know someone,
please let me know."
In taking issue with Baker's executive actions, the post
referred to him as "King Charles." Dooley told the News
Service Wednesday that the nickname was tongue-in-cheek but
identified his issue with the governor's orders: "That it
was just one person being in charge and making these rules
unilaterally, which is the problem I have. I have less
problem per-se with the rules than I do with the
methodology."
The Norfolk Republican said Wednesday he no longer planned
to file his own lawsuit, but that he would be filing an
amicus brief to an existing suit scheduled for arguments in
September before the Supreme Judicial Court that challenges
Baker's authority to issue his numerous COVID-19 executive
orders.
Baker clarified at a Friday news conference that travel
between the two states was alright for errands like grocery
shopping or banking, but Dooley cited "other real world
situations" like a friend who keeps a boat in Rhode Island
and motors out on fishing excursions in the Ocean State
without coming into contact with other people.
"He typically goes down, drives to the pier, walks down to
his boat, and goes fishing with his kids. Never sees another
person - and certainly not closer than 6 feet," Dooley
wrote. "If one of his neighbor's would rat him out to the
Governor - this would be a high crime - think about it, 10
days = $5,000."
In response to a question about Dooley's post, Baker said
Tuesday that by giving options to interstate travelers --
quarantine, testing before arrival, or testing after arrival
-- "we believe it meets any Constitutional test that would
be associated with that."
"And as I said last week, Rhode Island -- I mean, the
numbers are the numbers," Baker said. "We had set a travel
advisory based on a certain set of criteria and they
exceeded them. And if they come back down and fall under
them, then we'll change our policy. But as it stands right
now, we're giving people coming from Rhode Island options
with respect to how to meet the terms of our advisory. ...
So I'm not worried about a challenge on that one."
Dooley said Wednesday that he would have preferred Baker to
urge caution through a travel warning rather than threaten
$500 fines, adding that it "smacks of 'not America.'"
House Republican Leader Brad Jones said Wednesday he had not
seen
Dooley's post but planned to look for it and reach out
to him.
Jones assessed that House Republicans are "probably
generally" supportive of Baker's actions in response to
COVID-19. "I think there are specific issues that people
have concerns about. One of the challenges is that everybody
represents different areas with different experiences,
different interactions with COVID," he said.
Second Assistant Minority Leader Betty Poirier, whose
district abuts Dooley's along the North Attleboro-Plainville
line, told the News Service she respects the governor but
also understands how Dooley feels.
"I think all of us feel kind of mixed feelings about the
whole thing. I have tremendous empathy with all the business
people, I'm very close with many of them in my district,"
Poirier said. "Fortunately, we live in an area of the state
that has been not as affected as some other areas, so
perhaps we don't feel the same kind of urgency that other
places feel. But I understand how Shawn feels. You know,
there are many people who feel like he does."
Poirier, who is retiring in January after more than 20 years
in the House, said she has "no complaints" about Baker, Lt.
Gov. Karyn Polito, or Health and Human Services Secretary
Marylou Sudders, saying they have "done everything they
possibly could in a situation we have no history in" to
listen to health experts and protect lives.
Longtime MassGOP activist Ed Lyons, a computer programmer
and pundit who worked on Baker's 2015 transition team,
expressed admiration for Dooley, calling him "the best of
us" and "a great political player," but said his commentary
was "outrageous" and represents a growing schism between the
state's top elected Republican and the party apparatus which
leans more conservative.
"To attack him as if he is some sort of uncaring monarch is
unthinkable," Lyons told the News Service. "It shows that
this enduring exercise of massive government power is
wearing out the conservatives who oppose government power
... and they are bristling under it."
Asked Tuesday about Dooley's concerns with the Rhode Island
restrictions, Baker did not indicate whether he had read the
Facebook post in which the Norfolk Republican referred
to the governor variously as "King Charles," "Cavalier King
Charles Spaniel Baker," and "King Charles Duane (not the
rock) Baker, IV."
"I'm sure he might disagree, but this isn't done as anything
against Gov. Baker," Dooley said Wednesday. "This isn't
personal, this is something I firmly believe as a
representative of my district. ... Taking away somebody's
liberty should be done very judiciously, and it should not
be a kneejerk thing because some kids in Providence had a
party and caused a little spike."
Dooley said he had reached out to Baker's office indicating
he was "happy to chat" but had not heard back, though he had
heard from several legislators -- Republicans and several
Democrats -- who thanked him for his article and said they
agreed with his points.
"I truly believe he's doing what he feels is in the public's
best interest," the Norfolk Republican said. "But my
argument against that is it's a slippery slope. ...
Especially as a Legislature, if we allow the executive
branch to start doing our jobs for us, and not have
oversight and not have debate and not have deliberation, and
randomly declare 'I have to do this because it's an
emergency,' where does it stop?"
The Boston
Herald
Thursday, August 13, 2020
Norfolk rep endorses suit against ‘King Baker’ over
‘slippery slope’ of
government overreach during coronavirus pandemic
Claims overreach during pandemic
By Erin Tiernan
A Norfolk state representative says he supports a lawsuit
against what he calls Gov. Charlie Baker’s “overreach” in
response to the coronavirus pandemic.
Rep. Shawn Dooley, R-Norfolk, said his comments are “not
necessarily attacking the quarantine, the restrictions, or
even the fines,” but rather the way the governor — or “King
Baker” as the representative calls him — has approached
their implementation.
“I was criticizing the Governor for his overreach of power
and bypassing the legislature and due process with his
orders, fines, and special police force as opposed to the
handling of the crisis in general,” Dooley wrote in a
Tuesday
Facebook post.
Baker’s office did not immediately respond to a request for
comment on Thursday afternoon, but the governor has
repeatedly said he has the authority to use his executive
authority amid the current public health emergency to
restrict activity.
After last week threatening to sue the Baker administration,
Dooley on Wednesday said he no longer plans to file his own
lawsuit and would instead file an amicus brief to an
existing suit scheduled for arguments in September.
That lawsuit, already weaving its way through the Supreme
Judicial Court, was filed by the New Civil Liberties
Alliance in June and challenges whether Baker had the lawful
authority to execute many of his pandemic-era emergency
orders — including those shuttering businesses and requiring
face coverings.
It argues Baker overstepped his authority and questions his
use of the Civil Defense Act to declare a state of
emergency.
If the suit is successful, it would invalidate many of the
orders Baker has created to address the coronavirus
outbreak, some of which have triggered a backlash from the
hard-hit small business community.
The determination in the suit could serve as precedent for a
number of other cases filed in the days since Baker declared
a state of emergency.
Reached by phone on Thursday, Dooley said, “I believe in the
rule of law and I believe we have checks and balances for a
reason.
“I don’t believe one person should have this level of
authority — especially since it’s not truly an emergency at
this point,” Dooley told the Herald.
In his post, Dooley said “the road to hell is paved with
good intentions” and called Baker out for bypassing the
Legislature and not following proper government process to
enact new laws.
“I know in my heart of hearts that once we start
surrendering our basic liberties and allow one man to make
law on his own without due process, testimony, debate, or
any other safeguard that makes our democratic republic so
special — it is a slippery slope,” Dooley wrote.
— Herald wire services
contributed to this report.
State House
News Service
Monday, August 10, 2020
Trump Orders Shake Up Debate Over Stimulus
Baker Mum as President Insists States Seeking "Bailouts"
By Matt Murphy
The Baker administration said Monday it was weighing whether
to participate in President Donald Trump's scaled back
unemployment assistance program that requires states to pick
up a quarter of the cost of the $400 weekly enhanced benefit
for those out of work, but Gov. Charlie Baker's office said
nothing about Trump accusing Democrat-run states of wanting
a "bailout."
With Congressional talks hung up and the nation struggling
through the COVID-19 crisis, Trump on Saturday signed
executive orders dealing with protections for renters,
payroll taxes, college loans and enhanced unemployment
benefits that he said would "take care of, pretty much, this
entire situation."
The action came after days of talks between Democrats and
Republicans in Congress and at the White House over another
round of pandemic relief spending broke down.
But with Beacon Hill looking to Washington for help in
digging out of a deep financial hole resulting from the
coronavirus pandemic, the prospects for relief seemed to
take a hit.
Trump, at a press briefing from his golf club in Bedminster,
N.J. on Saturday, said he had made clear to Democrats he was
willing to sign expanded unemployment benefits, eviction
protections and additional relief payments for families.
"But what the Democrats primarily want is bailout money. It
has nothing to do with the China virus. It has nothing to do
with anything that we've been talking about over the last
period of time. They want to bailout states that have been
badly managed by Democrats, badly run by Democrats for many
years -- and, in fact, in all cases, many decades. And we're
not willing to do that," Trump said, according to a briefing
transcript.
It's not just states run by Democrats who are hoping to see
additional financial relief coming their way soon.
The bipartisan National Governors Association, under the
leadership of Republican Gov. Larry Hogan of Maryland, had
made $500 billion in unrestricted federal aid to the states
a top priority in its efforts to lobby Congress over relief.
Baker sits on the NGA's executive committee, but the
governor's office did not offer a response when asked about
the president's comments.
"Make no mistake — Massachusetts is one of the wealthiest
states in the nation. We've managed our state finances while
putting away $3.5 billion in our Rainy Day Fund. But with
COVID-19 and the dramatic slowdown of our economy, we are
expecting a drop in revenue of as much as $7 billion for
this fiscal year alone. To get it right, we rely on the
federal government to provide us with assistance so we can
avoid harmful budget cuts and make sure all of our
communities have the resources they need," said
Marie-Frances Rivera, president of the Massachusetts Budget
and Policy Center, in a statement to the News Service.
The U.S. House, led by Democrats, passed a more than $3
trillion package that included that funding for states, but
Senate Republicans have been trying to trim total spending
down to about $1 trillion.
Democratic leaders in the Congress are urging Republicans to
meet them in the middle with around $2 trillion in aid, but
it's unclear if talks will resume, or if Trump's action took
some of the urgency out of those negotiations. At the State
House, Democratic leaders extended their session this summer
as they wait to put together a fiscal 2021 budget this fall.
Leadership said it wanted to see if the federal government
would come through with aid, how the economic recovery
progresses and if there will be a second wave of the virus.
With the future of the relief bill in doubt, Trump on
Saturday took executive actions that are widely expected to
be challenged in court, potentially delaying the delivery of
the assistance.
One order extended the enhanced unemployment benefits that
expired on July 31 for workers who have lost their jobs
during the pandemic, but the president renewed the benefits
at $400 a month, or two-thirds their original level.
States would also be required to cover 25 percent of the new
benefit if they choose to participate, and the program would
expire no later than Dec. 6, or when funding runs out.
Trump said the previous $600 enhanced benefit had been a
"disincentive" for people to go back to work, and he
suggested states dip into their allocations from the
Coronavirus Relief Fund to pay their share of the benefit.
"But if they don't, they don't," Trump said. "That's going
to be their problem. I don't think their people will be too
happy. They have the money. So I don't think their people
will be too happy. But if they don't, they don't."
Massachusetts received close to $2.5 billion from the
Coronavirus Relief Fund, and through June had spent close to
$944 million, according to documents provided to the News
Service by the administration.
That total does not include the $202 million the
administration plans to use to support school reopenings in
the fall, or the $700 million in health care provider
support that the administration has supplied, but expects to
be covered eventually through federal sources other than the
Coronavirus Relief Fund.
"The administration is reviewing the Executive Order related
to unemployment benefits," said a spokesman for Labor
Secretary Rosalin Acosta. The administration said the
Department of Unemployment Assistance had received a memo
outlining the program.
If Massachusetts were to participate, it's unclear how much
it would cost. Massachusetts has had one of the highest
unemployment rates in the country, and as of the last week
of July had 502,471 continuing claims for unemployment
assistance and 19,179 initial claims for regular UI benefits
for the week.
Another of Trump's executive orders would allow employers to
defer payroll taxes for workers earning up to $100,000 until
the end of the year, putting more money for the time being
into the checks of working Americans.
Trump said that if he wins in November he planned to forgive
the taxes altogether, and seek a permanent payroll tax cut,
which has been roundly criticized by Democrats as an attack
on Social Security, which is funded by payroll taxes. The
action, critics said, also wouldn't help people who don't
have a job right now.
"Don't let the occupant of the White House distract you. He
just unilaterally cut Social Security and your unemployment
benefits. In the middle of a pandemic," U.S. Rep. Ayanna
Pressley said.
Trump also said he was looking into possible income and
capital gains tax cuts.
In Massachusetts, Baker has extended a statewide moratorium
on evictions and foreclosures through October 17, so it is
less impacted by Trump's actions on housing.
Trump acknowledged the threat that many renters and
homeowners could lose their homes, but he did not extend the
expired federal moratorium on evictions that had been part
of the Cares Act.Instead, the president signed a third order
directing the Department of Housing and Urban Development
and other agencies to explore solutions to make sure renters
and homeowners could stay in their homes.
U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren called Trump's action on housing
"empty words" because the order did not guarantee protection
from eviction, and argued that cutting back on enhanced
unemployment benefits would slow the economic recovery.
"If Donald Trump cared about helping Americans, he would
have demanded @SenateMajLdr McConnell start negotiating as
soon as the House passed the HEROES act almost two months
ago. These legally dubious actions aren't real relief for
states and families -- they're a cruel joke," the senator
wrote on Twitter.
Trump also signed an order extending the policy that
suspended student loan payments and set interest rates on
college loans at zero percent through the end of the year.
State House
News Service
Tuesday, August 11, 2020
Baker: Trump Jobless Benefit Plan May Create Funds Flow Woes
Guv Cites National Need for Fourth Stimulus Bill
By Katie Lannan
Gov. Charlie Baker on Thursday voiced concern with President
Trump's plan for funding a scaled-down version of the
nation's enhanced unemployment benefit and said it's
important for Congress to reach agreement on a fourth
stimulus bill to support states and the health care system.
"There are very real issues that states and municipal
governments have associated with almost everything
associated with COVID, and that's no longer just a Northeast
issue," Baker said during a Tuesday press conference.
"That's an issue if you look at any map of the United
States. People are going to continue to have costs and
expenses associated with this, and a health care community
that's going to remain under significant stress, just,
period. I think it's really important that there be a fourth
package."
The U.S. House in May passed a $3 trillion coronavirus
relief package that, along with many other provisions,
included nearly $1 trillion in aid to state, local,
territorial and tribal governments and an extension of the
$600 weekly federal unemployment payment that expired July
31.
Senate Republicans in late July put forward a plan that did
not involve state and local government aid, and featured a
smaller enhanced unemployment benefit. Their proposal would
direct an extra $200 per week to all recipients through
September, before switching in October to a system in which
state and federal aid combines to cover 70 percent of lost
wages.
Over the weekend, President Donald Trump signed an executive
order extending the enhanced benefits for workers who lost
their jobs during the pandemic, but in a new format.
The president renewed the benefits at $400 a month, with
states required to cover 25 percent of the new benefit if
they choose to participate, and the program set to expire no
later than Dec. 6, or when funding runs out.
Baker said the "biggest concern" he has with the order is
the plan to pay for the benefit through Federal Emergency
Management Agency funds.
"Now, you can make an argument, a credible one, that FEMA
money would be an appropriate resource. It's an emergency
and all the rest," Baker said. "But the problem with that
is, the FEMA money, as far as most states were concerned, is
what's there for us to apply to be reimbursed for all the
costs that we incurred in March, April and May during the
original emergency and to be reimbursed by the feds."
Baker said he supports the idea of the federal government
"doing something about an enhanced unemployment benefit" but
believes "it needs to be done through a separate
appropriation, not by taking money from FEMA, which is how
we, the states, are planning to get reimbursed."
A $1.1 billion COVID-19 spending bill Baker signed on July
24 relies on FEMA reimbursement and other federal funding to
reach an expected net state cost of zero dollars. The
allocations in that bill included $350 million for personal
protective equipment, $44 million for the contact tracing
collaborative, and $85 million for field hospitals and
shelters.
Massachusetts is now on its second temporary budget of the
2021 fiscal year, and lawmakers have yet to produce a full
annual spending plan that takes into account the economic
disruptions of the COVID-19 crisis. Legislative leaders have
said they want a better picture of what level of aid might
become available to them through another federal stimulus.
Massachusetts in July took in $4.456 billion in tax
collections, approximately $2.293 billion of which came from
income taxes that would have been due in fiscal 2020 if the
filing deadline had not been pushed back from April to July.
The remaining $2.163 billion will be recorded for fiscal
2021.
After ajusting for deferred taxes, the revenue collected for
July 2020 was about $88 million more than what was collected
in July 2019, according to the Department of Revenue.
Asked about last month's numbers Tuesday, Baker said July
typically accounts for only a small portion of the revenues
collected throughout the year. He said sales around the
country experienced a "pretty big bounce" after March and
April, and that auto sales "for reasons that I don't fully
appreciate, have also been pretty good."
"If you're asking me if I'm drawing lots of conclusions
about what fiscal '21's going to look like based on July
numbers, the answer to that is no," Baker said. "I think we
were pleasantly surprised by the withholding number and the
sales number, but let's face it, I think we all know that
there's still a lot of real challenges associated with our
economy out there, and it's going to be a tough year with
respect to that."
|
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
|
