 |
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
Monday, October 26, 2020
A Busy Week,
Everywhere But On Beacon Hill
Jump directly
to CLT's Commentary on the News
|
Most Relevant News Excerpts
(Full news reports follow
Commentary)
|
|
WCVB TV-5
Monday, October 19, 2020
NH Gov. Chris Sununu suing Massachusetts over taxation
of remote workers during pandemic
Keller at
Large on MASSterList
Thursday, October 22, 2020
Who Needs Dissent?
In the modern-day history of sweeping Massachusetts
policy changes being decided by statewide ballot
questions, 2020 is a down year, to say the least.
Access to mechanical info from cars? Ranked-choice
voting? A big deal to those involved, backed by big
money. But they’re small beer compared with past
initiative petitions on broad-based tax issues,
political reform and education.
On the 40th anniversary of the petition that rocked
our world, the Proposition 2½ property-tax reform,
we wondered: whatever happened to the role of
high-stakes ballot questions in shaping important
policy here?
“One of the things that happened is it got so
difficult to do grassroots petitions,” says Chip
Ford, executive director of Citizens for
Limited Taxation and Government, longtime
advocates of the ballot question process. “We used
to do it all volunteer. Now you have to have a large
fortune to do a petition drive.”
And even if you pull together the signatures and win
your case on election day, “they’re going to beat
you in the end one way or another,” says Ford,
citing multiple examples of successful petitions
(term limits, rolling back the income tax) that were
snuffed out by the Legislature or the courts. “It’s
not even worth trying anymore.”
That’s quite the admission coming from the little
engine that could. And it underscores the wasting
away of significant dissent in Massachusetts
politics. We’re not just a one-party state where the
quote “Republican” governor is more popular among
Democrats than Republicans, but also a
one-governing-philosophy state, where the concepts
of smaller government and staunch resistance to new
taxes are headed for fringe status.
Gov. Charlie Baker still promises a veto of any
broad-based tax hikes. But if the Legislature should
forge ahead with one to help plug the pandemic
deficit chasm, does anyone believe Baker’s veto
would be more than a wink and a nod, or that he
would lift a finger to repeal it or punish pols who
supported it?
For better or worse, Baker is all in on big-ticket
activist government, and the voters love him for it.
Others are taking note. Ford wrote recently that he
was “shocked, stunned and disappointed” to see his
one-time CLT allies and donors from the
Massachusetts High Tech Council endorse “temporary
revenue raising options,” which council President
Chris Anderson noted “could attract significant
support from business leaders.”
“The outcome is getting more and more predetermined
as days go by,” says Ford. “We’ve always felt you’ve
got to resist no matter what happens, because if you
don’t then the powers that be say ‘nobody opposed
it.’”
And in a telling sign of the time, Ford rallies the
meager remnants of the opposition these days from
Kentucky, where he moved two years ago.
Ford says the decision to move came to him in a
“flash out of nowhere.” He swears it was the voice
of CLT icon Barbara Anderson, who died in 2016,
saying “you don’t need to be here.”
But Ford hangs in there, overseeing what he
describes as a “winding down” of CLT. And he stays
motivated by the thought that “of course Charlie
Baker will still try to get me to pay income tax.”
House 150-1,
Senate 36-4, approved different versions of an estimated
$16.9 to $18 billion package authorizing spending on
transportation projects and infrastructure. The package
is a bond bill under which the funding would be borrowed
by the state through the sale of bonds.
The Senate
version of the bill includes a controversial section
that allows cities and towns and regions to raise local
taxes to fund transportation projects outside of
Proposition 2½, which limits property tax increases in
cities and towns. The section is not in the House bill.
. . .
“Audacious
end-runs around Proposition 2½ do not belong in a bond
bill,” Chip Ford, executive director of
Citizens for Limited Taxation told Beacon Hill Roll
Call last week. “If CLT’s property tax limitation, which
celebrates its 40th anniversary in less than two weeks,
is to be assaulted it should be done openly, in the
light of day, not buried in an unrelated must-pass
bill—and certainly not by stealth in a transportation
bond bill.”
Beacon Hill
Roll Call
Volume 45 - Report No. 43
October 19-23, 2020
By Bob Katzen
Critics of a
controversial regional carbon tax designed to limit
greenhouse gas emissions have renewed calls for Gov.
Charlie Baker to stop it, saying it’s unfair to further
burden consumers amid a pandemic that has sent the
economy into freefall.
“Since the
pandemic hit, our state’s economy has declined, and
unemployment reached record highs. The future of the
Massachusetts economic recovery is in jeopardy if
anti-businesses schemes like this are allowed to go into
effect,” said Paul Diego Craney, spokesman for the
Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance.
The
Transportation Climate Initiative is a regional compact
being between 11 Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states that
would implement a gas fee to reduce carbon emissions.
Officials have estimated the measure would raise gas
prices between 5 and 17 cents a gallon in the first year
but it remains unclear how high that cost could rise in
subsequent years....
“Before the
pandemic, Gov. Baker was TCI’s biggest cheerleader,”
Craney said.
Craney, joined
by 18 other conservative organizations, sent a letter to
governors and lawmakers in all 11 TCI states asking they
consider the “substantial economic pain” already facing
residents saying TCI would unfairly burden those already
disproportionately impacted by the pandemic....
Massachusetts
is currently working with other states to move forward
on the initiative. A final memorandum of understanding
on the proposed cap-and-invest system was originally
expected this spring but was put off amid the pandemic.
It is expected to be finalized this fall.
The Boston
Herald
Tuesday, October 20, 2020
Critics renew calls for Charlie Baker to decline TCI
Back on Beacon
Hill, most legislators are nowhere to be found, doing
the work of their district or making sure they get
reelected to stay long enough to see the state through
this pandemic. A group of legislators on the House and
Senate Ways and Means committees, however, are deeply
immersed in budget planning, and dug deeper into the
weeds this week when they hosted a hearing on Baker's
revised budget proposal for fiscal 2021.
Baker last
week downgraded his expectations for tax revenues this
year by $3.6 billion, and offered an updated $45.5
billion spending plan that used a lot of one-time
revenue sources to avoid the harshest of cuts.
Some
legislators said this week they were comfortable with
Baker's proposed $1.35 billion withdrawal from the
state's reserves, which would leave about $2.2 billion
for next year. "That makes you very comfortable because
that's what the rainy day is all about," said Rep. Paul
Donato, a Medford Democrat and assistant majority
leader.
But House and
Senate leaders were definitely not ready to put their
full stamp of approval on Baker's revised budget, or
offer a timeline for when they might offer their own
"The governor proposes, the Legislature disposes," said
Senate Ways and Means Chairman Michael Rodrigues,
repeating what has become a go-to line for him in recent
weeks.
Baker's budget
chief Michael Heffernan said the administration is
focused on stabilizing state services during this
crisis, recognizing that people need government the most
during times of crisis. That means the administration
will not be looking to lay people off or cut back on
eligibility for safety net programs, as long as
something dramatic doesn't wildly change the state's
fortunes, he said.
Baker has
asked for a budget to be done by Thanksgiving, and while
that's technically still possible, though unlikely, the
one thing that's certain is that nothing will be done
before election day on Nov. 3.
State House
News Service
Friday, October 23, 2020
Weekly Roundup - Getting Redder
By Matt Murphy
Apparently
fine with leaving big priorities to be dealt with during
rare lame-duck, holiday season sessions, the Legislature
remains largely in hibernation and many lawmakers next
week will be focused on get-out-the-vote efforts in
state and federal elections.
State House
News Service
Friday, October 23, 2020
Advances - Week of Oct. 25, 2020
The Democratic
Party in Massachusetts is riding high. Heading into the
election just two weeks away, party members control the
entire congressional delegation, are looking to add to
their dominance in the Legislature, and have a lock on
four of the six constitutional offices.
It’s those two
unclaimed constitutional offices for governor and
lieutenant governor that are nagging at party leaders,
and prompting Bob Massie and Mike Lake to challenge Gus
Bickford for the party’s chairmanship in an election
that will take place two weeks after the November 3
national election.
The big
question mark in the race for state party chair is how
to take out Gov. Charlie Baker in 2022 if he runs for
office again, or Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito if the governor
steps aside....
Baker,
meanwhile, gives little indication which way he is
leaning. He still seems to enjoy his job and, amazingly,
seems that rare politician who is hard to define
politically. President Trump calls him a RINO and Boston
Herald columnist Howie Carr calls him Tall Deval, but
liberal Democrats still chafe at his reluctance to raise
taxes and his refusal to extend the eviction moratorium.
Baker has even
navigated the Trump tilt of the state Republican Party
without missing a beat. After Trump partisans seized
control of the party, Baker pulled his fundraising
operation out and coordinated the setup of a super PAC
that has raised more than $1.5 million and spent
$600,000 on a wide assortment of both Democratic and
Republican candidates.
CommonWealth
Magazine
Tuesday, October 20, 2020
Toppling Baker top of mind for Dems
Leaders from
both parties in both branches of the Legislature on
Monday said they thought Gov. Charlie Baker's plan to
use up to $1.35 billion from the state's savings account
to balance a fiscal 2021 budget was appropriate given
the size of the budget gap and circumstances of the
COVID-19 pandemic.
Baker last
week lowered his administration's expectations for tax
revenues in the current fiscal year by $3.6 billion, and
put forward a revised spending plan that used more than
one-third of the state's $3.5 billion "rainy day" fund
and $1.8 billion in federal relief money to cover
spending.
"That makes
you very comfortable because that's what the rainy day
is all about," said Rep. Paul Donato, a Medford Democrat
and assistant majority leader.
With fiscal
year 2022 also promising to be a challenging budget year
because of the coronavirus, Baker's plan would leave
about $2.2 billion in reserve, but would not make any
further deposits this year.
Senate
Minority Leader Bruce Tarr called Baker's reliance on
stabilization fund money "modest."
State House
News Service
Tuesday, October 20, 2020
Some Lawmakers “Comfortable” With Stabilization Fund Use
Gov. Charlie Baker on Wednesday filed a new temporary
budget to keep state government running through the end
of November, a plan that landed as lawmakers were
reviewing his revised $45.5 billion annual spending
plan.
The $5.4
billion bill would be the state's third interim budget
for the fiscal year that started in July, and its
passage will give lawmakers a few more weeks to put
together a budget for the remainder of fiscal 2021....
The current
temporary budget runs through the end of October. Baker
had originally proposed a one-month, $5.15 billion bill
that would run through the end of August, but lawmakers,
hoping to see another stimulus package from Washington
D.C. that still has not materialized, extended it to run
for three months and $16.5 billion.
State House
News Service
Wednesday, October 21, 2020
Baker Files Interim Budget to Cover
Spending Through November |
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
Greetings CLT members
— and former-members
still lapsed:
Last Monday I was
interviewed by Mary Salandra of WCVB TV-5, who was doing
a report on New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu suing
Massachusetts before the U.S. Supreme Court over Charlie
Baker's taxing NH residents on income they earn while
working remotely from home, instead of commuting to
Massachusetts during the Chinese Pandemic. (Read
more about it in last week's CLT Update
— "Sununu:
Tax on remote workers a ‘direct attack’ on N.H.")
CLICK ON ABOVE GRAPHIC TO WATCH
WCVB TV-5
Monday, October 19, 2020
NH Gov. Chris Sununu suing Massachusetts over taxation of remote
workers during pandemic
It was a busy week for interviews here.
Jon Keller, political analyst for the
CBS Boston affiliate WBZ-TV4 and WBZ radio interviewed me on
Thursday for his Keller At Large report "Who Needs Dissent?" which
was posted later that day (below). You can click on the
graphic below to listen to it, and I've provided the full transcript
of this important interview.
Keller at Large on
MASSterList
Who Needs Dissent?
Thursday, October 22, 2020
In the modern-day history of sweeping
Massachusetts policy changes being decided by
statewide ballot questions, 2020 is a down year,
to say the least.
Access to mechanical info from cars?
Ranked-choice voting? A big deal to those
involved, backed by big money. But they’re small
beer compared with past initiative petitions on
broad-based tax issues, political reform and
education.
On the 40th anniversary of the petition that
rocked our world, the Proposition 2½
property-tax reform, we wondered: whatever
happened to the role of high-stakes ballot
questions in shaping important policy here?
“One of the things that happened is it got so
difficult to do grassroots petitions,” says
Chip Ford, executive director of Citizens
for Limited Taxation and Government,
longtime advocates of the ballot question
process. “We used to do it all volunteer. Now
you have to have a large fortune to do a
petition drive.”
And even if you pull together the signatures and
win your case on election day, “they’re going to
beat you in the end one way or another,” says
Ford, citing multiple examples of successful
petitions (term limits, rolling back the income
tax) that were snuffed out by the Legislature or
the courts. “It’s not even worth trying
anymore.”
That’s quite the admission coming from the
little engine that could. And it underscores the
wasting away of significant dissent in
Massachusetts politics. We’re not just a
one-party state where the quote “Republican”
governor is more popular among Democrats than
Republicans, but also a one-governing-philosophy
state, where the concepts of smaller government
and staunch resistance to new taxes are headed
for fringe status.
Gov. Charlie Baker still promises a veto of any
broad-based tax hikes. But if the Legislature
should forge ahead with one to help plug the
pandemic deficit chasm, does anyone believe
Baker’s veto would be more than a wink and a
nod, or that he would lift a finger to repeal it
or punish pols who supported it?
For better or worse, Baker is all in on
big-ticket activist government, and the voters
love him for it. Others are taking note. Ford
wrote recently that he was “shocked, stunned and
disappointed” to see his one-time CLT allies and
donors from the Massachusetts High Tech Council
endorse “temporary revenue raising options,”
which council President Chris Anderson noted
“could attract significant support from business
leaders.”
“The outcome is getting more and more
predetermined as days go by,” says Ford. “We’ve
always felt you’ve got to resist no matter what
happens, because if you don’t then the powers
that be say ‘nobody opposed it.’”
And in a telling sign of the time, Ford rallies
the meager remnants of the opposition these days
from Kentucky, where he moved two years ago.
Ford says the decision to move came to him in a
“flash out of nowhere.” He swears it was the
voice of CLT icon Barbara Anderson, who died in
2016, saying “you don’t need to be here.”
But Ford hangs in there, overseeing what he
describes as a “winding down” of CLT. And he
stays motivated by the thought that “of course
Charlie Baker will still try to get me to pay
income tax.”
The New York Times
interviewed me a recently for its report published on
October 16, "In
Fights Over Face Masks, Echoes of the American Seatbelt
Wars". It's not directly CLT/taxpayers
related, but it's how I got my start in political
activism back in 1985, my baptism by fire working
alongside Jerry Williams at WRKO. You might find
it interesting.
Beacon Hill Roll Call asked
me about the stalled bills in conference committee,
especially the Transportation Bond Committee and the
stealth attack on Proposition 2½.
The full report is below with the full news reports, but
here's an excerpt from BHRC (Volume 45 - Report No. 43,
October 19-23, 2020):
House 150-1, Senate 36-4, approved different
versions of an estimated $16.9 to $18 billion
package authorizing spending on transportation
projects and infrastructure. The package is a bond
bill under which the funding would be borrowed by
the state through the sale of bonds.
The Senate version of the bill includes a
controversial section that allows cities and towns
and regions to raise local taxes to fund
transportation projects outside of Proposition 2½,
which limits property tax increases in cities and
towns. The section is not in the House bill. . . .
“Audacious end-runs around Proposition 2½ do not
belong in a bond bill,” Chip Ford, executive
director of Citizens for Limited Taxation
told Beacon Hill Roll Call last week. “If CLT’s
property tax limitation, which celebrates its 40th
anniversary in less than two weeks, is to be
assaulted it should be done openly, in the light of
day, not buried in an unrelated must-pass bill—and
certainly not by stealth in a transportation bond
bill.”
Publisher Bob Katzen
asked me to pass on to CLT members an invitation to listen to his
new radio program, so here's his information:
LISTEN TO BOB’S SHOW:
Beacon Hill Roll Call’s publisher, Bob Katzen,
hosts “The Bob Katzen Baby Boomer and Gen X Fun
and Nostalgia Show” every Sunday night from 6
p.m. to 8 p.m. Jump into Bob’s DeLorean time
machine and tune in for a trip back to the
simpler and happier days of the 1950s, 1960s and
1970s. Recent guests include Tony Dow who played
Wally on “Leave it to Beaver.”
There are many ways you can
listen to the show from anywhere in the world:
If you have a smart
speaker, simply say, “Play WMEX on RADIO.COM”
Download the free RADIO.COM
app on your phone or tablet
Listen online at:
www.radio.com/1510wmex/listen
Tune into 1510 AM if you
still have an AM radio
The Boston Herald on
Tuesday reported on the release of our multi-state
anti-TCI coalition's
opposition statement in the dozen affected states.
A few excerpts from the Herald's "Critics renew calls
for Charlie Baker to decline TCI" follow:
Critics of a controversial regional carbon tax
designed to limit greenhouse gas emissions have
renewed calls for Gov. Charlie Baker to stop it,
saying it’s unfair to further burden consumers amid
a pandemic that has sent the economy into freefall.
“Since the pandemic hit, our state’s economy has
declined, and unemployment reached record highs. The
future of the Massachusetts economic recovery is in
jeopardy if anti-businesses schemes like this are
allowed to go into effect,” said Paul Diego Craney,
spokesman for the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance.
The Transportation Climate Initiative is a regional
compact being between 11 Northeast and Mid-Atlantic
states that would implement a gas fee to reduce
carbon emissions. Officials have estimated the
measure would raise gas prices between 5 and 17
cents a gallon in the first year but it remains
unclear how high that cost could rise in subsequent
years....
“Before the pandemic, Gov. Baker was TCI’s biggest
cheerleader,” Craney said.
Craney, joined by 18 other conservative
organizations, sent
a letter to governors and lawmakers in all 11
TCI states asking they consider the “substantial
economic pain” already facing residents saying TCI
would unfairly burden those already
disproportionately impacted by the pandemic....
Massachusetts is currently working with other states
to move forward on the initiative. A final
memorandum of understanding on the proposed
cap-and-invest system was originally expected this
spring but was put off amid the pandemic. It is
expected to be finalized this fall.
On Friday in its Weekly
Roundup the State House News Service reported:
Back on Beacon Hill, most legislators are nowhere to
be found, doing the work of their district or making
sure they get reelected to stay long enough to see
the state through this pandemic. A group of
legislators on the House and Senate Ways and Means
committees, however, are deeply immersed in budget
planning, and dug deeper into the weeds this week
when they hosted a hearing on Baker's revised budget
proposal for fiscal 2021.
Baker last week downgraded his expectations for tax
revenues this year by $3.6 billion, and offered an
updated $45.5 billion spending plan that used a lot
of one-time revenue sources to avoid the harshest of
cuts.
Some legislators said this week they were
comfortable with Baker's proposed $1.35 billion
withdrawal from the state's reserves, which would
leave about $2.2 billion for next year. "That makes
you very comfortable because that's what the rainy
day is all about," said Rep. Paul Donato, a Medford
Democrat and assistant majority leader.
But House and Senate leaders were definitely not
ready to put their full stamp of approval on Baker's
revised budget, or offer a timeline for when they
might offer their own "The governor proposes, the
Legislature disposes," said Senate Ways and Means
Chairman Michael Rodrigues, repeating what has
become a go-to line for him in recent weeks.
Baker's budget chief Michael Heffernan said the
administration is focused on stabilizing state
services during this crisis, recognizing that people
need government the most during times of crisis.
That means the administration will not be looking to
lay people off or cut back on eligibility for safety
net programs, as long as something dramatic doesn't
wildly change the state's fortunes, he said.
Baker has asked for a budget to be done by
Thanksgiving, and while that's technically still
possible, though unlikely, the one thing that's
certain is that nothing will be done before election
day on Nov. 3.
In its Advances for the
coming week the News Service further noted:
Apparently fine
with leaving big priorities to be dealt with during rare
lame-duck, holiday season session, the Legislature remains
largely in hibernation and many lawmakers next week will be
focused on get-out-the-vote efforts in state and federal
elections.
Everyone has come to
recognize what a meaningless exercise in futility and
hubris it was for the Legislature to overturn its July
31 deadline rule and extend its session into January.
On Tuesday CommonWealth
Magazine reported ("Toppling Baker top of mind for Dems"):
The Democratic
Party in Massachusetts is riding high. Heading into the election
just two weeks away, party members control the entire
congressional delegation, are looking to add to their dominance
in the Legislature, and have a lock on four of the six
constitutional offices.
It’s those two
unclaimed constitutional offices for governor and lieutenant
governor that are nagging at party leaders, and prompting Bob
Massie and Mike Lake to challenge Gus Bickford for the party’s
chairmanship in an election that will take place two weeks after
the November 3 national election.
The big question
mark in the race for state party chair is how to take out Gov.
Charlie Baker in 2022 if he runs for office again, or Lt. Gov.
Karyn Polito if the governor steps aside....
Baker, meanwhile,
gives little indication which way he is leaning. He still seems
to enjoy his job and, amazingly, seems that rare politician who
is hard to define politically. President Trump calls him a RINO
and Boston Herald columnist Howie Carr calls him Tall Deval, but
liberal Democrats still chafe at his reluctance to raise taxes
and his refusal to extend the eviction moratorium.
The question that baffles
me is why would Democrats bother opposing him, try to
defeat him? Wouldn't their efforts be better spent
just getting Charlie Baker to come clean and change his
party affiliation to theirs?
On Tuesday the State House
News Service reported ("Some Lawmakers 'Comfortable'
With Stabilization Fund Use"):
Leaders from both
parties in both branches of the Legislature on Monday said they
thought Gov. Charlie Baker's plan to use up to $1.35 billion
from the state's savings account to balance a fiscal 2021 budget
was appropriate given the size of the budget gap and
circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Baker last week
lowered his administration's expectations for tax revenues in
the current fiscal year by $3.6 billion, and put forward a
revised spending plan that used more than one-third of the
state's $3.5 billion "rainy day" fund and $1.8 billion in
federal relief money to cover spending.
"That makes you
very comfortable because that's what the rainy day is all
about," said Rep. Paul Donato, a Medford Democrat and assistant
majority leader.
With fiscal year
2022 also promising to be a challenging budget year because of
the coronavirus, Baker's plan would leave about $2.2 billion in
reserve, but would not make any further deposits this year.
Senate Minority
Leader Bruce Tarr called Baker's reliance on stabilization fund
money "modest."
On Wednesday the News
Service reported ("Baker Files Interim Budget to Cover
Spending Through November"):
Gov. Charlie Baker on Wednesday filed a new
temporary budget to keep state government running
through the end of November, a plan that landed as
lawmakers were reviewing his revised $45.5 billion
annual spending plan.
The $5.4 billion bill would be the state's third
interim budget for the fiscal year that started in
July, and its passage will give lawmakers a few more
weeks to put together a budget for the remainder of
fiscal 2021....
The current temporary budget runs through the end of
October. Baker had originally proposed a one-month,
$5.15 billion bill that would run through the end of
August, but lawmakers, hoping to see another
stimulus package from Washington D.C. that still has
not materialized, extended it to run for three
months and $16.5 billion.
Will this become the Beacon
Hill Post-Chinese Pandemic "New Normal"
— budgeting state spending
one month at a time? Many states, like Kentucky,
pass two-year budgets and don't need to suffer through
this interminable process every year
— or as it now turns out,
every month.
It doesn't need to be The
Massachusetts Way: The Kentucky legislature [the General
Assembly] convenes in regular session on the first Tuesday after the
first Monday in January for 60 legislative days in even-numbered
years, and for 30 legislative days in odd-numbered years. The
Kentucky Constitution mandates that a regular session be completed,
prorogue sine die, no later than April 15 in even-numbered
years and March 30 in odd-numbered years —
then all legislators go home for the remainder of the year.
The legislature gets that extra 30 days in even-numbered years to
produce and pass a two-year state budget. The legislature
convenes in special sessions if necessary only at the call of the
governor.
Some members have asked me
to explain the two questions on the ballot, "Ranked
Choice" and "Right To Repair". I've included the
best information I could find in the full news reports
below. My take on them is:
Ranked Choice would create a nightmare,
making Massachusetts even more unrepresentative and easily
controlled by the least electable. The top vote-getter
wouldn't automatically be elected unless he or she received 50% of
the vote. If not, the gyrations and convolutions would begin.
The winner could become the candidate with the least number of votes
in the first round, the least popular, after a string of
eliminations. I subscribe to the philosophy that "If it ain't
broke don't fix it." Elections have worked for centuries, even
if the results don't please everyone. Whoever get the most
support, the most votes, wins. Pretty simple actually.
I'd vote No on Question 2, Ranked Choice.
Right To Repair seems to make complete
sense. You own your vehicle, you pay all its costs and
expenses, taxes and fees. You should be able to take it
anywhere you want for repairs — not be
forced by the auto manufacturers industry into its dealerships with
its monopoly of proprietary tools (software).
It reminds me of my fight against
mandatory seat belt laws (see the
New York Times report,
referenced above.) Back in the early-80s then-U.S. Secretary of
Transportation, Elizabeth "Liddy" Dole (wife of then-U.S. Sen. Bob Dole)
told the auto industry that if states with two-thirds of the U.S.
population didn't adopt mandatory seat belt laws by 1990 then the
manufacturers would be required to install air-bags in all the
vehicles they built. The auto industry charged forward to
lobby for mandatory seat belt laws in every state, to avoid the
air-bag mandate. In the end we got mandatory seat belt laws
— and, despite Big Auto's best efforts
— air-bags as well.
I'd vote Yes on Question 1, Right To
Repair.
But that's just me.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
Full News Reports Follow
(excerpted above) |
|
WCVB TV-5
Monday, October 19, 2020
NH Gov. Chris Sununu suing Massachusetts over taxation of remote
workers during pandemic
Keller at Large on MASSterList
Thursday, October 22, 2020
Who Needs Dissent?
In the modern-day history of
sweeping Massachusetts policy changes being decided by statewide
ballot questions, 2020 is a down year, to say the least.
Access to mechanical info from
cars? Ranked-choice voting? A big deal to those involved, backed
by big money. But they’re small beer compared with past
initiative petitions on broad-based tax issues, political reform
and education.
On the 40th anniversary of the
petition that rocked our world, the Proposition 2½ property-tax
reform, we wondered: whatever happened to the role of
high-stakes ballot questions in shaping important policy here?
“One of the things that happened is
it got so difficult to do grassroots petitions,” says Chip
Ford, executive director of Citizens for Limited Taxation
and Government, longtime advocates of the ballot question
process. “We used to do it all volunteer. Now you have to have a
large fortune to do a petition drive.”
And even if you pull together the
signatures and win your case on election day, “they’re going to
beat you in the end one way or another,” says Ford, citing
multiple examples of successful petitions (term limits, rolling
back the income tax) that were snuffed out by the Legislature or
the courts. “It’s not even worth trying anymore.”
That’s quite the admission coming
from the little engine that could. And it underscores the
wasting away of significant dissent in Massachusetts politics.
We’re not just a one-party state where the quote “Republican”
governor is more popular among Democrats than Republicans, but
also a one-governing-philosophy state, where the concepts of
smaller government and staunch resistance to new taxes are
headed for fringe status.
Gov. Charlie Baker still promises a
veto of any broad-based tax hikes. But if the Legislature should
forge ahead with one to help plug the pandemic deficit chasm,
does anyone believe Baker’s veto would be more than a wink and a
nod, or that he would lift a finger to repeal it or punish pols
who supported it?
For better or worse, Baker is all
in on big-ticket activist government, and the voters love him
for it. Others are taking note. Ford wrote recently that he was
“shocked, stunned and disappointed” to see his one-time CLT
allies and donors from the Massachusetts High Tech Council
endorse “temporary revenue raising options,” which council
President Chris Anderson noted “could attract significant
support from business leaders.”
“The outcome is getting more and
more predetermined as days go by,” says Ford. “We’ve always felt
you’ve got to resist no matter what happens, because if you
don’t then the powers that be say ‘nobody opposed it.’”
And in a telling sign of the time,
Ford rallies the meager remnants of the opposition these days
from Kentucky, where he moved two years ago.
Ford says the decision to move came
to him in a “flash out of nowhere.” He swears it was the voice
of CLT icon Barbara Anderson, who died in 2016, saying “you
don’t need to be here.”
But Ford hangs in there, overseeing
what he describes as a “winding down” of CLT. And he stays
motivated by the thought that “of course Charlie Baker will
still try to get me to pay income tax.”
Beacon Hill
Roll Call
Volume 45 - Report No. 43
October 19-23, 2020
By Bob Katzen
LISTEN TO BOB’S SHOW: Beacon Hill Roll Call’s publisher, Bob
Katzen, hosts “The Bob Katzen Baby Boomer and Gen X Fun and
Nostalgia Show” every Sunday night from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Jump into Bob’s DeLorean time machine and tune in for a trip
back to the simpler and happier days of the 1950s, 1960s and
1970s. Recent guests include Tony Dow who played Wally on
“Leave it to Beaver.”
There are many ways you can listen to the show from anywhere
in the world:
If you have a smart speaker, simply say, “Play WMEX on
RADIO.COM”
Download the free RADIO.COM app on your phone or tablet
Listen online at:
www.radio.com/1510wmex/listen
Tune into 1510 AM if you still have an AM radio
THE HOUSE AND SENATE: There were no roll calls in the House
or Senate last week.
FIVE CONFERENCE COMMITTEES HAVE YET TO COME UP WITH
COMPROMISE LEGISLATION – This week Beacon Hill Roll Call
reports on five conference committees that have been charged
by the Legislature to hammer out compromise versions of
different versions of five major bills approved by the House
and Senate. The committees were appointed In July and August
by House Speaker Bob DeLeo (D-Winthrop) and Senate President
Karen Spilka (D-Ashland) who each appoint three members to
each conference committee—two Democrats and one Republican.
The five bills deal with climate change, economic
development, transportation, policing and health care.
According to House and Senate rules, all meetings of
conference committees must be open to the public, unless a
majority of the committee votes to close the meetings. All
five conference committees have voted to bar the public and
the media from their meetings.
The 26 members of the conference committees include:
Reps. Thomas Golden (D-Lowell), Patricia Haddad
(D-Somerset); Brad Jones (R-North Reading); Ann-Margaret
Ferrante (D-Gloucester); Donald Wong (R-Saugus); Claire
Cronin (D-Easton), Carlos Gonzalez (D-Springfield), Tim
Whelan (R-Brewster), William Straus (D-Mattapoisett), Mark
Cusack (D-Braintree), Norman Orrall (R-Lakeville), Ron
Mariano (D-Quincy), John Mahoney (D-Worcester) and Randy
Hunt (R-Sandwich).
Sens. Michael Barrett (D-Lexington), Cindy Creem (D-Newton),
Patrick O'Connor (R-Weymouth), Eric Lesser (D-Longmeadow),
Michael Rodrigues (D-Westport), Will Brownsberger
(D-Belmont), Sonia Chang-Diaz (D-Boston), Bruce Tarr
(R-Gloucester), Joseph Boncore (D-Winthrop), Dean Tran
(R-Fitchburg), Cindy Friedman (D- Arlington) and Julian Cyr
(D-Truro).
Despite repeated attempts by Beacon Hill Roll Call asking
all 26 legislators on the five committees if they would
provide us with a list of how many meetings the committee
has held and the length of each meeting, only one
responded—Sen. Dean Tran (R-Fitchburg), a member of two of
the conference committees.
On the conference committee on a bill sponsors say will
increase access to health care, protect patients and enhance
quality care: “I am anxiously awaiting for the chairs of the
Health Care Financing conference committee to convene a
meeting of the members for this important legislation," said
Tran. "I’m looking forward to discussing the similarities
and differences of the bills and hopefully assist with the
passage of the legislation.”
On the conference committee on a bill sponsors say will
allow the state to borrow an estimated $16.9 to $18 billion
to spend on transportation projects and infrastructure: “I
and members of the Transportation Conference Committee
members met in July and the meeting ended in executive
session,” said Tran. “I very much look forward to continuing
the conversation in passing a compromise bill to address the
infrastructure needs of our transportation system.”
Beacon Hill Roll Call also made repeated attempts asking
each member of the conference committees for information on
how the talks were going, what are the major differences
between the House and Senate version of the bills, why a
compromise hasn’t yet been reached and whether they think
there will be one before the end of the 2020 session.
Only three legislators responded and none of those answered
the questions. The others did not respond.
“[Rep. Cronin] cannot comment on the bills or the
negotiations while the bills are in conference committee,”
said Cronin’s staff director Stephanie Leone. “The committee
is working diligently.”
“No comment,” said Sen. Brownsberger (D-Belmont).
“We can’t talk about that,” said Rep. Golden (D-Lowell).
Here are the details about the five committees and the
issues:
CLIMATE BILL (H 4933 and S 2500) - IN CONFERENCE COMMITTEE
SINCE AUGUST 6, 2020
HOUSE CONFEREES: Co-chair Thomas Golden (D-Lowell), Patricia
Haddad (D-Somerset) and Brad Jones (R-North Reading).
SENATE CONFEREES: Co-chair Michael Barrett (D-Lexington),
Cindy Creem (D-Newton) and Patrick O'Connor (R-Weymouth).
House 142-17, Senate 36-2, approved different versions of a
climate change bill. Both bills include a key section that
makes the state’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction goal
net zero by 2050.
“The science is clear: to avoid the devastation of climate
change, greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced to net zero
by 2050,” said Rep. Joan Meschino (D-Hull) following passage
of the House version of the bill on July 31. “This goal will
only be met by a comprehensive planning process, which locks
in key milestones now to get us there in 30 years.”
Some think the bill goes too far. “Both bills are equally as
bad, it’s only a question to what degree of bad are they,”
Paul Craney, Executive Director of the Massachusetts Fiscal
Alliance told Beacon Hill Roll Call last week. “They both
will result in negligible environmental benefit and very
high costs. At the end of the day, this debate is not about
improving the environment, but instead about imposing a
carbon tax, which is a new way of taxing Massachusetts
residents on a wide variety of everyday activities.”
“If lawmakers wanted to get serious about improving the
environment, they would begin discussions on nuclear energy,
cleaning water sources including the heavily polluted
Merrimac River, and banning the use of clear-cutting forests
for solar fields,” Craney concluded.
ECONOMY (H 4887 and S 2874) - IN CONFERENCE COMMITTEE SINCE
JULY 30, 2020
HOUSE CONFEREES: Co-chair Aaron Michlewitz (D-Boston),
Ann-Margaret Ferrante (D-Gloucester) and Donald Wong
(R-Saugus).
SENATE CONFEREES: Co-chair Eric Lesser (D-Longmeadow),
Michael Rodrigues (D-Westport) and Patrick O'Connor
(R-Weymouth).
House 156-3, Senate 40-0, approved different versions of an
economic development package. One of the major differences
is that only the House version legalizes sports betting.
The packages include $20 million for financial and capital
assistance grants to restaurants impacted by the 2019 novel
coronavirus; $10 million for grants to promote marketing and
advertising for in-state cultural and tourist activities
during the reopening process; $40 million to redevelop
blighted buildings; $50 million for local economic
development projects; $10 million for climate-resilient
affordable housing developments; and $15 million for
community college high-demand workforce grants.
POLICING (H 4866 and S 2820) IN CONFERENCE COMMITTEE SINCE
JULY 27, 2020
HOUSE CONFEREES: Co-chair Claire Cronin (D-Easton), Carlos
Gonzalez (D-Springfield) and Tim Whelan (R-Brewster).
SENATE CONFEREES: Co-chair Will Brownsberger (D-Belmont),
Sonia Chang-Diaz (D-Boston) and Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester).
House 93-66, Senate 30-7, approved different versions of a
bill making major changes in the state’s policing system.
In July, the newly created non-partisan Center for State
Policy Analysis at Tufts University released a report
outlining the framework for understanding key differences
between the two bills and highlighting the choices and
trade-offs involved in achieving common ground. A copy of
the analysis can be found at: https://tischcollege.tufts.edu/sites/default/files/cSPA_police_reform.pdf
TRANSPORTATION (H 4547 and S 2813)
IN CONFERENCE COMMITTEE SINCE JULY 27, 2020
HOUSE CONFEREES: Co-chair William Straus (D-Mattapoisett),
Mark Cusack (D-Braintree) and Norman Orrall (R-Lakeville).
SENATE CONFEREES: Co-chair Joseph Boncore (D-Winthrop),
Michael Rodrigues (D-Westport) and Dean Tran (R-Fitchburg).
House 150-1, Senate 36-4, approved different versions of an
estimated $16.9 to $18 billion package authorizing spending
on transportation projects and infrastructure. The package
is a bond bill under which the funding would be borrowed by
the state through the sale of bonds.
The Senate version of the bill includes a controversial
section that allows cities and towns and regions to raise
local taxes to fund transportation projects outside of
Proposition 2½, which limits property tax increases in
cities and towns. The section is not in the House bill.
“It’s clear that more and better public transit is needed
across the state, and it is important to give local
communities and regions the ability to raise funds when they
identify particular needs,” said Sen. Cindy Creem (D-Newton)
when the bill was approved on March 5. “Improving access to
business districts that are not currently accessible by
public transit is good for workers, small businesses and the
overall economy. We are giving communities this option if
the voters choose to use it.”
“Audacious end-runs around Proposition 2½ do not belong in a
bond bill,” Chip Ford, executive director of
Citizens for Limited Taxation told Beacon Hill Roll Call
last week. “If CLT’s property tax limitation, which
celebrates its 40th anniversary in less than two weeks, is
to be assaulted it should be done openly, in the light of
day, not buried in an unrelated must-pass bill—and certainly
not by stealth in a transportation bond bill.”
The House version includes an estimated $522 million to $600
million tax hike to fund improvements to the state’s
transportation system. None of the hikes are included in the
Senate version. Hikes include a 5 cents-per-gallon increase
in the motor vehicle gas excise tax; a 9 cents-per-gallon
increase in the diesel fuel tax; an increase in the aviation
fuel tax from 5 percent of the average price per gallon to
7.5 percent of the average price per gallon; elimination of
the sales tax exemption on vehicle purchases for traditional
rental car companies; replacing the current flat $456
minimum corporate excise tax with a nine-tiered sliding
scale ranging from $456 if the corporation’s total sales are
less than $1 million to $150,000 if the corporation’s sales
total $1 billion; and increasing the 20 cents-per-trip flat
fee to $1.20 for each non-shared Uber and Lyft ride and
$2.20 for every luxury ride. The bill includes language
aimed at preventing Uber and Lyft from passing those hikes
directly onto riders.
Both package also includes earmarks for hundreds of millions
of dollars for hundreds of projects in legislators’
districts across the state—many of which will never be
funded. The Baker administration is required to adhere to
the state’s annual bond borrowing cap and ultimately decides
which projects are affordable and actually get funded.
Sometimes a legislator will immediately tout the inclusion
of local projects in these types of bond bills, especially
in an election year to show he or she “brought home the
bacon.” But be warned that none of the projects in this
package have yet been funded and most will end up never
being funded because of the borrowing cap and the power of
the governor’s office to pick which projects actually get
the green light.
HEALTH CARE (H 4916 and S 2769) IN CONFERENCE COMMITTEE
SINCE JULY 31, 2020
HOUSE CONFEREES: Co-chair Ron Mariano (D-Quincy), John
Mahoney (D-Worcester) and Randy Hunt (R-Sandwich).
SENATE CONFEREES: Co-chair Cindy Friedman (D- Arlington),
Julian Cyr (D-Truro) and Dean Tran (R-Fitchburg).
House 158-0, Senate 38-0, approved different versions of a
bill that sponsors say will increase access to health care,
protect patients and enhance quality care. The measure
requires insurance carriers, including MassHealth, to cover
telehealth services in any case where the same in-person
service would be covered and requires reimbursement rates to
match in-person services over the next two years. It also
eliminates “surprise billing,” the much-criticized practice
of charging unsuspecting patients who received health care
services outside of their insurance plan’s network for costs
that insurers refuse to pay.
Other provisions would allow registered nurse practitioners,
nurse anesthetists and psychiatric nurse mental health
specialists who meet specific education and training
standards to practice independently; recognize pharmacists
as health care providers, enabling them to integrate more
fully into coordinated care teams; and create a new
professional license for “dental therapists,” who will be
authorized to provide dental hygiene and other oral health
services. Supporters note that this will help expand access
to dental care in underserved communities.
ALSO UP ON BEACON HILL
LAURA’S LAW: EMERGENCY ROOM ENTRANCES AND SIGNS LEADING TO
THE ER DEPARTMENT MUST BE CLEARLY MARKED (S 2931) – The
Senate approved and sent to the House a bill that would
require all hospitals to meet minimum criteria and standards
that ensure safe, timely and accessible patient access to
hospital emergency departments and rooms. The regulations
which would be crafted by the Department of Public Health
would include legible indoor and outdoor signage and
lighting including wayfinding signage that is designed to
help a person find their way to the emergency room without
lengthy explanations or complicated maps; monitoring of all
emergency department access points; requiring proper
security monitoring of any prominent hospital door or
entrance that is locked at night and through which a patient
might try to enter; and any other safety feature that the
department deems necessary to ensure daytime or nighttime
entry to an emergency room or department.
“When people are in need of emergency services, every minute
counts and the dim lights and unclear signage took minutes
from Laura that cost her life,” said the bill’s sponsor Sen.
Patricia Jehlen (D-Somerville). “We simply do not want this
to happen to anyone again, and we believe this legislation
is one step toward saving lives with clear signage,
lighting, wayfinding and better security monitoring of
emergency department entrances.”
The measure is called “Laura’s Law,” in memory of Laura
Levis, a 34-year-old woman who on September 16, 2016 went to
CHA Somerville Hospital while suffering an asthma attack.
Peter DeMarco, Levis’ husband has led the campaign for
passage of the legislation. He is a journalist who wrote
about Laura's death almost two years ago for the “Boston
Globe” in a story called “Losing Laura.” According to
DeMarco’s story, “Laura chose a locked door to try to access
the emergency room because the correct door was not properly
marked. Though Laura was on surveillance video, the hospital
security desk was left unattended all night, so no one saw
her. When a nurse from the emergency department eventually
looked out the door for Laura, she did not see her, as the
spot where Laura collapsed was in near darkness.”
Laura had called 911 but by the time first responders found
her, she had collapsed in cardiac arrest and died a few days
later on September 22.
“I don’t think there's any way anyone can question the need
for Laura's Law after learning about all the safety failures
that lead to Laura's death,” said DeMarco following the
Senate vote last week. “But with the uncertainty of the
pandemic there was a real chance all the efforts we've put
into getting this bill this far would have been for nothing.
Happy, of course, is not the right word for me on this day.
But I am grateful that the Senate has passed this bill, and
I very much hope the House of Representatives doesn't take
too much more time to do the same.”
“She was so full of energy and joy, and always could make me
smile with just a little twist of her nose or a raised
eyebrow,” continued DeMarco. “She was passionately devoted
to her friends and family, including our six nephews and
nieces. Her mom, Georgia, who passed away from cancer in
2018 following Laura's death, was her best friend. They
laughed together about something every single time they
talked. She was so strong—she pumped iron at Harvard’s gym
just about every lunch hour and competed in a few
powerlifting competitions—and just so healthy, caring about
diet and exercise and macronutrients and meditation and you
name it. All this in spite of having asthma.”
DeMarco has started a foundation in Laura’s name to fund
personal gym training sessions for underprivileged and
abused women. You can find out more information and donate
at www.lift4laura.org
BILLS – WILL THEY BE REFILED? – Beacon Hill Roll Call looks
at several bills that were shipped off to a study committee
and are dead for the 2020 session. We asked the sponsors
whether they will be refiling the measure for consideration
in the 2021-2022 session which begins in January 2021.
MUST SHOW DIVERSITY (S 1612) – Sen. Nick Collins (D-Boston)
told Beacon Hill Roll Call he intends in 2021 to refile his
bill that would require any person, group or business
applying for any tax credits from the state to submit a plan
for diversity and inclusion, including representation of
women, veterans, and persons of color in their ownership,
financing, development, administration and contracting. The
plan would be submitted to the Supplier Diversity Office and
the Office of Access and Opportunity and must be considered
in determining eligibility if the tax credits are given.
“This bill is an important step toward helping promote
economic justice in the commonwealth and usher in an
equitable economic recovery,” Collins told Beacon Hill Roll
Call. “We are committed to these principles and plan to
refile this bill or something similar next session.”
Collins explains that the state allocates hundreds of
millions of dollars in commercial tax credits annually to
attract new business, create local jobs and grow our
economy. “While I fully support those efforts, my
understanding is that there is no formal requirement for
businesses receiving those tax credits to meet certain
minimum standards of civil rights, employee rights or
discrimination. This [bill] will ensure that those tax
subsidies are reaching every community in the commonwealth,
rather than simply increasing profitability for
well-financed businesses who often come from out of state. I
firmly believe that Massachusetts tax credits should benefit
all residents … regardless of background, race, gender,
creed or color.”
LOCAL ALCOHOL TAX (S 1617) – A bill filed by Sen. Cindy
Creem (D-Newton) would allow cities and towns to impose up
to a 2 percent tax on the sales of alcohol in restaurants
bars and stores. The bill would require cities or towns that
impose the tax to establish and put all the revenue in a
Municipal Substance Abuse Prevention and Public Health Fund
and use the money for substance abuse prevention and
protecting the public health.
“I originally filed this bill to provide another revenue
source for cities and towns to address increasing public
health and substance abuse concerns,” said Creem. “I will
continue to look at ways to help municipalities deal with
these ever-increasing costs.”
“The bill was filed before the COVID-19 pandemic and we will
be reconsidering [whether to refile it] it in light of the
economic impact the pandemic has had on the restaurant
industry,” Creem’s chief of staff Richard Powell told Beacon
Hill Roll Call.
PAY FINE FOR NOT VOTING (H 653) – This proposal would
require eligible voters to cast a ballot in any November
General Election or face a fine of $15 that would be added
to the non-voter’s state tax liability for each election
missed. The measure also clarifies that the voter does not
have to actually vote for anyone and is allowed to leave the
ballot blank.
“There are two schools of thought when filing legislation,”
said the bill’s sponsor Rep. Dylan Fernandes (D-Falmouth)
who intends to refile the proposal. “One is filing a bill
that is rigorously vetted, that has been combed line by line
and that you hope only receives marginal edits through the
committee process. The other is filing an idea that you
believe is worthy of a robust public debate that will
reshape the bill. Although it won’t pass this session and
may never pass at all, I believe mandatory voting is an idea
worth debate and consideration at the Statehouse and by
thoughtful citizens across the state because it drives at
questions fundamental to our society, which is whether civic
participation in democracy is a duty or a right. I filed
this bill to spark that debate.”
“I am in full support of compulsory voting,” said Cheryl
Clyburn Crawford, the executive director of MassVOTE. “I
just want to make sure it does not disproportionately affect
communities of color, low income and new citizens. Maybe
consider a sliding scale.”
“It’s totally ridiculous and just as radical,” said Paul
Craney, executive director of the Massachusetts Fiscal
Alliance. “If politicians can ‘fine’ voters for not voting,
they will feel empowered to penalize voters for not voting
for their preferred candidate. This legislation should be
rejected at every step of the way.”
EXEMPT FISHERMEN FROM LOCAL PROPERTY TAXES (S 1732) - Sen.
Patrick O’Connor (R-Weymouth) intends to refile his
legislation that would allow cities and towns to exempt
licensed commercial fishermen, lobstermen, oyster farmers,
and other type of fish farmers from up to 100 percent of the
municipality’s property tax.
“Our commercial fishing industry supports tens of thousands
of jobs across our commonwealth and adds billions of dollars
in tax revenue each year,” said O’Connor. “It’s clear that
they are a critical part of our economy and this bill would
continue to support the hardworking men and women in this
industry.”
HOW LONG WAS LAST WEEK'S SESSION? Beacon Hill Roll Call
tracks the length of time that the House and Senate were in
session each week. Many legislators say that legislative
sessions are only one aspect of the Legislature's job and
that a lot of important work is done outside of the House
and Senate chambers. They note that their jobs also involve
committee work, research, constituent work and other matters
that are important to their districts. Critics say that the
Legislature does not meet regularly or long enough to debate
and vote in public view on the thousands of pieces of
legislation that have been filed. They note that the
infrequency and brief length of sessions are misguided and
lead to irresponsible late-night sessions and a mad rush to
act on dozens of bills in the days immediately preceding the
end of an annual session.
During the week of October 19-23, the House met for a total
of 29 minutes while the Senate met for a total of 34
minutes.
Mon. Oct. 19
House 11:00 a.m. to 11:22 a.m.
Senate 11:08 a.m. to 11:19 a.m.
Tues. Oct. 20
No House session.
No Senate session
Wed. Oct. 21
No House session.
No Senate session
Thurs. Oct. 22
House 11:03 a.m. to 11:10 a.m.
Senate 11:08 a.m. to 11:31 a.m.
Fri. Oct. 23
No House session
No Senate session
The Boston
Herald
Tuesday, October 20, 2020
Critics renew calls for Charlie Baker to decline TCI
By Erin Tiernan
Critics of a controversial regional carbon tax designed to
limit greenhouse gas emissions have renewed calls for Gov.
Charlie Baker to stop it, saying it’s unfair to further
burden consumers amid a pandemic that has sent the economy
into freefall.
“Since the pandemic hit, our state’s economy has declined,
and unemployment reached record highs. The future of the
Massachusetts economic recovery is in jeopardy if
anti-businesses schemes like this are allowed to go into
effect,” said Paul Diego Craney, spokesman for the
Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance.
The Transportation Climate Initiative is a regional compact
being between 11 Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states that
would implement a gas fee to reduce carbon emissions.
Officials have estimated the measure would raise gas prices
between 5 and 17 cents a gallon in the first year but it
remains unclear how high that cost could rise in subsequent
years.
Governors in New Hampshire, Connecticut and Vermont have
already cast a shadow on the plan that critics describe as a
regressive gasoline and diesel tax. Proponents say the TCI
would build a regional program that would cap and reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and invest the proceeds in a
cleaner, more resilient and more equitable low-carbon
transportation system.
Baker has promised no new taxes in the current fiscal year
as the state works to dig itself out of the financial hole
created by the pandemic. His plan to balance this year’s
$45.5 billion state budget amid a $3.6 billion revenue
shortfall heavily relies on one-time funding from federal
reimbursements and the state’s rainy day fund.
At a briefing last week, the Republican governor did not
withdraw his support for the TCI tax. Legislators, who will
ultimately decide the measure, meet on Wednesday to discuss
the governor’s proposed budget.
“Before the pandemic, Gov. Baker was TCI’s biggest
cheerleader,” Craney said.
Craney, joined by 18 other conservative organizations, sent
a
letter to governors and lawmakers in all 11 TCI states
asking they consider the “substantial economic pain” already
facing residents saying TCI would unfairly burden those
already disproportionately impacted by the pandemic.
“This is not the right time for costly, feel-good measures
that deliver negligible environmental benefits,” Craney
said.
Massachusetts is currently working with other states to move
forward on the initiative. A final memorandum of
understanding on the proposed cap-and-invest system was
originally expected this spring but was put off amid the
pandemic. It is expected to be finalized this fall. At that
point, each state will make a decision about signing on to
the regional program and would require the approval of the
Legislature.
State House
News Service
Friday, October 23, 2020
Weekly Roundup - Getting Redder
Recap and analysis of the week in state government
By Matt Murphy
Put down the pencils. Hang the costumes in the closet. And
put the blade covers back on the skates. Lest anyone forget,
the cororavirus is giving Massachusetts a not so gentle
reminder that it never really left.
Boston Mayor Marty Walsh pulled back on in-person learning
this week, taking Boston Public Schools completely remote as
transmission of the coronavirus continues to increase in the
city.
The decision was made just two weeks after Walsh said the
negative impacts for some high-needs students of not
returning to the classroom could not be "mitigated" the way
the risk of spreading the virus could.
The exit from the classroom in Boston earned the city a
mention on the presidential debate stage Thursday night
where President Donald Trump continued to insist the country
had turned a corner in its fight against the virus. Gov.
Charlie Baker hasn't gone that far, and doesn't agree with
the president on much these days, but on the issue of
schools the two Republicans seem to be reading from the same
page.
Baker said he wouldn't "Monday morning quarterback" Walsh's
decision for Boston, but said again that it's not schools
where the virus is spreading. Instead, the governor
continued to blame social gatherings, primarily of 19- to
39-year-olds, where masks are not being worn and distancing
not observed.
In Massachusetts, the daily new case count almost reached
1,000 on Thursday and the seven-day weighted average
positive test rate ticked up to 1.5 percent as 77 cities and
towns are now in the state's highest-risk "red" category.
And his own Department of Public Health on Thursday night
decided to shut down ice skating rinks due to clusters of
infections the state has observed linked to hockey games,
practices and tournaments.
The state, however, is far from being in retreat.
In fact, Baker this week called attention to what his
administration described as an ongoing $775 million economic
stimulus program that included $115 million in just
available funding, the highlight of which was a new $50.8
million grant program for hard hit small businesses.
"To be clear, there's no substitute for the size and scope
that a federal aid package could deliver. But that doesn't
seem to be in the offing and we certainly don't believe that
we can wait," Baker said
While Baker continued to beat the "buy, shop and dine
locally" drum, on the North Shore, Salem was looking for the
opposite of a jolt to its economy. At least until after this
month is over.
With Baker back for the second time in two weeks, Salem
Mayor Kim Driscoll pleaded with tourists to stay away,
concerned that the ghosts, ghouls and goblins flocking to
the Witch City to celebrate All Hallows' Eve were creating a
petri dish for COVID-19. Billboards have even been added to
state highways announcing the city as closed on October
weekends.
"This is not the year to come to Salem, this is not the year
to visit," Driscoll said.
Stores are being asked to lock up early the next two
weekends, parking lots ordered to close and MBTA trains will
bypass the city on Fridays and Saturdays before November.
"I really feel like the fun police here, right? It's the
cats-are-biting-the-dogs sorts of scenarios," Driscoll said.
Back on Beacon Hill, most legislators are nowhere to be
found, doing the work of their district or making sure they
get reelected to stay long enough to see the state through
this pandemic. A group of legislators on the House and
Senate Ways and Means committees, however, are deeply
immersed in budget planning, and dug deeper into the weeds
this week when they hosted a hearing on Baker's revised
budget proposal for fiscal 2021.
Baker last week downgraded his expectations for tax revenues
this year by $3.6 billion, and offered an updated $45.5
billion spending plan that used a lot of one-time revenue
sources to avoid the harshest of cuts.
Some legislators said this week they were comfortable with
Baker's proposed $1.35 billion withdrawal from the state's
reserves, which would leave about $2.2 billion for next
year. "That makes you very comfortable because that's what
the rainy day is all about," said Rep. Paul Donato, a
Medford Democrat and assistant majority leader.
But House and Senate leaders were definitely not ready to
put their full stamp of approval on Baker's revised budget,
or offer a timeline for when they might offer their own "The
governor proposes, the Legislature disposes," said Senate
Ways and Means Chairman Michael Rodrigues, repeating what
has become a go-to line for him in recent weeks.
Baker's budget chief Michael Heffernan said the
administration is focused on stabilizing state services
during this crisis, recognizing that people need government
the most during times of crisis. That means the
administration will not be looking to lay people off or cut
back on eligibility for safety net programs, as long as
something dramatic doesn't wildly change the state's
fortunes, he said.
Baker has asked for a budget to be done by Thanksgiving, and
while that's technically still possible, though unlikely,
the one thing that's certain is that nothing will be done
before election day on Nov. 3.
With less than two weeks until voting ends in Massachusetts,
more than a quarter of the state's 4.6 million registered
voters have already cast their ballots. Of the 1.3 million
votes cast, almost 890,000 have been by mail, with the rest
of the voters turning up in person since early voting opened
on Oct. 17.
So for a good chunk of the electorate, Baker was too late
when he made his endorsement this week of Republican Kevin
O'Connor in the Dover attorney's long shot race against U.S.
Sen. Edward Markey. In a hand-held cellphone video, Baker
said O'Connor would bring "feet-on-the-ground"
representation to Washington.
But Baker's endorsement of O'Connor was perhaps more notable
for the fact that he chose to back another Republican for
Senate, along with Susan Collins of Maine. If O'Connor were
to win, the odds of the GOP retaining control of the U.S.
Senate would increase greatly, and it can't be assumed
that's what Baker wants, even if he is trying to shore up
his right flank.
Baker has been frustrated with both parties in Washington,
and particularly his own. He has criticized Congress's
inability to get a stimulus deal done, and disagrees with
the decision of his party to press forward with the
confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.
He is also not voting for President Donald Trump for
reelection.
Asked about the final debate between Trump and Democratic
nominee Joe Biden on Thursday night, Baker said he would be
on Zoom calls into the evening, but if he finished in time
he would turn it on. It turned out that Zoom call was
planned with Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan to whip up support
for Vermont Gov. Phil Scott, a Republican running for
reelection to the north, according to VTDigger.
The governors reportedly discussed managing the COVID-19
crisis and government as Republicans in blue states.
"If you look around America, you'll discover that most of
the governors who seem to do well with their electorate tend
to be people who can work with everybody and who focus more
on the work and a little less on the noise," Baker said,
according to VTDigger. "And I don't think that's a
coincidence."
STORY OF THE WEEK: As COVID cases climb, state government
eyes small business lifeline
State House
News Service
Friday, October 23, 2020
Advances - Week of Oct. 25, 2020
Apparently fine with leaving big priorities to be dealt with
during rare lame-duck, holiday season sessions, the
Legislature remains largely in hibernation and many
lawmakers next week will be focused on get-out-the-vote
efforts in state and federal elections.
A lot of votes have already been cast either through mail-in
or early voting, but there are still many more votes to be
had. Early voting runs through Friday, Oct. 30, and as of
Friday, 30.8 percent of all registered voters had already
voted, with ballots cast equal to nearly 42.6 percent of all
ballots cast in the 2016 election. Nearly 966,000 ballots
have been returned by mail and voters have cast nearly
473,000 ballots in person.
Appeals to voters are primarily occurring electronically or
at a safe social distance, as confirmed COVID-19 cases are
climbing and threatening to surpass the 1,000 per day mark.
In just over seven months, Massachusetts is nearing the grim
milestone of 10,000 deaths - the state announced its first
COVID-19 death, a man in his 80s, on March 20.
More communities are being classified as high-risk for virus
spread, which also puts the state's economic recovery at
risk. Outside of the rising virus concerns, hopes for a
federal stimulus deal before the election are fading and the
nation appears locked into a path of getting through Nov. 3,
and then sizing up the results and dealing with policy and
budget challenges afterwards.
CommonWealth Magazine
Tuesday, October 20, 2020
Toppling Baker top of mind for Dems
By Bruce Mohl – CommonWealth editor
The Democratic Party in Massachusetts is riding high.
Heading into the election just two weeks away, party members
control the entire congressional delegation, are looking to
add to their dominance in the Legislature, and have a lock
on four of the six constitutional offices.
It’s those two unclaimed constitutional offices for governor
and lieutenant governor that are nagging at party leaders,
and prompting Bob Massie and Mike Lake to challenge Gus
Bickford for the party’s chairmanship in an election that
will take place two weeks after the November 3 national
election.
The big question mark in the race for state party chair is
how to take out Gov. Charlie Baker in 2022 if he runs for
office again, or Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito if the governor steps
aside.
Polito would be the far easier challenge. Baker has brought
her into the public eye during the coronavirus pandemic,
designating her as co-chair of the state’s reopening
committee and giving her a platform where she can interact
regularly with the press. But she still remains in Baker’s
shadow, the understudy waiting for her chance.
Baker, meanwhile, gives little indication which way he is
leaning. He still seems to enjoy his job and, amazingly,
seems that rare politician who is hard to define
politically. President Trump calls him a RINO and Boston
Herald columnist Howie Carr calls him Tall Deval, but
liberal Democrats still chafe at his reluctance to raise
taxes and his refusal to extend the eviction moratorium.
Baker has even navigated the Trump tilt of the state
Republican Party without missing a beat. After Trump
partisans seized control of the party, Baker pulled his
fundraising operation out and coordinated the setup of a
super PAC that has raised more than $1.5 million and spent
$600,000 on a wide assortment of both Democratic and
Republican candidates.
Bickford, who came into office in 2016 promising to oust
Baker, hasn’t had much success. He has tried just about
everything, slamming him for privatizing services at the
MBTA, for failing to criticize Trump enough, and, in the
wake of four derailments, for not personally riding the T to
experience what riders are experiencing.
None of the attacks did much damage, although Baker earlier
this year did start riding the T into Boston from his home
in Swampscott. He’s even put his experience on the T to good
use, urging riders to get back on board. “I can’t think of a
less risky activity,” he said.
Neither Massie or Lake have laid out a specific game plan
for taking out Baker if he decides to run again, but it’s
clearly on their minds.
“We have to make sure the next governor is prepared to
rebuild Massachusetts in a way that helps everyone in the
Commonwealth,” Lake, a two-time former statewide candidate
for office who runs the global non-profit Leading Cities,
told State House News.
Massie told Politico that a lot has changed over the last
four years. “It's not the same world, it's not the same
America, it's not the same Massachusetts. And I just don't
think the party is doing enough to bring new people in and
new energy, young people and so forth, but also to meet
those challenges," Massie said. "As long as the party is
still unclear about structures or still battling internal
issues, it's going to be harder to beat [Baker]."
State House
News Service
Tuesday, October 20, 2020
Some Lawmakers “Comfortable” With Stabilization Fund Use
By Matt Murphy and Sam Doran
Leaders from both parties in both branches of the
Legislature on Monday said they thought Gov. Charlie Baker's
plan to use up to $1.35 billion from the state's savings
account to balance a fiscal 2021 budget was appropriate
given the size of the budget gap and circumstances of the
COVID-19 pandemic.
Baker last week lowered his administration's expectations
for tax revenues in the current fiscal year by $3.6 billion,
and put forward a revised spending plan that used more than
one-third of the state's $3.5 billion "rainy day" fund and
$1.8 billion in federal relief money to cover spending.
"That makes you very comfortable because that's what the
rainy day is all about," said Rep. Paul Donato, a Medford
Democrat and assistant majority leader.
With fiscal year 2022 also promising to be a challenging
budget year because of the coronavirus, Baker's plan would
leave about $2.2 billion in reserve, but would not make any
further deposits this year.
Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr called Baker's reliance on
stabilization fund money "modest."
"I think it's very notable that the budget doesn't increase
taxes and that it preserves safety net eligibility for all
the programs that people are depending on. But I also think
that it avoids the temptation to have an over-reliance on a
withdrawal from the stabilization fund. And having that
discipline means using other tools that may not be as common
but are warranted if we're going to be able to weather this
storm for the long term," Tarr said.
The Gloucester Republican was referring to options
recommended by Baker that include accelerating the
collection of sales tax revenue to capture one additional
month of revenue next fiscal year.
"I think in years past oftentimes we have withdrawn too much
from the stabilization fund, and I think we've done it when
it wasn't necessarily appropriate," Tarr said. "I think it's
indisputable that we need to use the stabilization fund now
to mitigate the effects of the pandemic on our economy and
on our tax revenue. So I think this is a moderate withdrawal
from the fund, and again, I think it's one that leaves us
poised to be able to deal with contingencies that might
arise in the future."
State House
News Service
Wednesday, October 21, 2020
Baker Files Interim Budget to Cover Spending Through
November
By Katie Lannan
Gov. Charlie Baker on Wednesday filed a new temporary budget
to keep state government running through the end of
November, a plan that landed as lawmakers were reviewing his
revised $45.5 billion annual spending plan.
The $5.4 billion bill would be the state's third interim
budget for the fiscal year that started in July, and its
passage will give lawmakers a few more weeks to put together
a budget for the remainder of fiscal 2021.
The governor has said he wants the House and Senate to
return a finished budget to him by Thanksgiving.
The current temporary budget runs through the end of
October. Baker had originally proposed a one-month, $5.15
billion bill that would run through the end of August, but
lawmakers, hoping to see another stimulus package from
Washington D.C. that still has not materialized, extended it
to run for three months and $16.5 billion.
The House and Senate Ways and Means committees on Wednesday
are holding a virtual hearing into the revised budget that
Baker filed last week, which proposes to use new federal
money and up to $1.35 billion from the state's reserves to
boost spending even though tax collections are forecast to
decline this fiscal year.
Administration and Finance Secretary Michael Heffernan
described the new budget during the hearing as "a fiscally
responsible plan that makes big investments in our schools,
small businesses and vulnerable communities."
CommonWealth Magazine
Monday, October 19, 2020
The two sides of ranked-choice voting
By Shira Schoenberg – CommonWealth reporter
Massachusetts voters will decide on the November ballot
whether to overhaul the state’s system of voting by
switching to ranked-choice voting for most non-presidential
elections.
Under ranked-choice voting, as envisioned by Question 2,
each voter ranks candidates according to preference. A
candidate who gets more than 50 percent of first-choice
votes wins. If no candidate reaches that threshold, however,
the candidate with the fewest first-choice votes is
eliminated and their ballots are recounted based on the
voter’s second choice. The process repeats until someone
gets a majority.
Evan Falchuk, chair of the YES on 2 campaign and a former
United Independent candidate for governor, and Nick Murray,
a policy analyst with Maine Policy Institute, joined The
Codcast – in separate interviews – to discuss the pros and
cons of ranked-choice voting.
“Ranked-choice voting is a simple upgrade to our democracy
that gives voters a greater voice and more choices,” Falchuk
said. “It makes it so voters never feel their vote is wasted
because they can vote for who they truly like without
worrying that they’ll split their vote or they’re going to
be voting for a spoiler.”
But Murray says ranked-choice voting, which is used in
Maine, actually has a less representative outcome. He
focused on the fact that some ballots are thrown out, or
“exhausted,” because a voter did not rank enough choices to
reach the final rounds of tallying. “How can a voting system
be considered more democratic or more responsive to the
voters if it needs to remove voters from the final tally to
get to its stated goal of a majority?” Murray said. “It
simply is a false majority.”
Falchuk argues that many of the problems with the current
system – negative campaigning, pandering to a small voter
base, the feeling of needing to “pick between two evils” –
will be lessened with ranked-choice voting.
Falchuk said third party candidates will get a boost because
voters will have fewer worries about “spoiler” candidates or
electability, since if a person’s first choice gets
eliminated, their second choice will count. “It levels the
playing field for new voices and new choices,” Falchuk said.
“The math doesn’t end up encouraging strategic voting, you
can just pick who you actually like.”
But Murray said ranked-choice voting ends up
disenfranchising more voters – particularly those who have
less information, speak English as a second language, are
less educated, or older. These voters, he said, are more
likely to mark their ballots incorrectly or rank fewer
choices leading their ballots to be “exhausted” before the
end of the count. Regular elections, he said, typically see
2 to 3 percent of ballots thrown out due to mismarking,
while ranked-choice voting typically has 10 to 11 percent of
ballots that are uncounted in the final tally.
Murray said ranked-choice voting still leads to strategic
voting – for example, voters must decide how important it is
to rank a certain candidate first to avoid another candidate
reaching the 50 percent threshold – but “it makes that
strategizing much more complex.”
Murray said Maine has continued to see negative campaigns
and outside spending even with ranked choice voting. “We
know the nature of politics runs much deeper than the way we
vote,” he said.
The Boston
Herald
Saturday, October 24, 2020
Massachusetts Question 2: Should the Bay State have
ranked-choice voting?
By Sean Philip Cotter
People voting this fall have the option to change how Bay
Staters do so in the future.
A “yes” vote on Question 2 would implement a ranked-choice,
or “instant runoff” voting process for state and
congressional elections here.
Under such a system — which has been adopted by the state of
Maine, as well as numerous cities nationwide — voters would
be able to rank as many candidates as they want in order of
preference. Vote talliers first look at all of the
first-place votes, and, if someone has a majority, the
election stops there and that person wins, as is the case
right now.
But if no candidate garnered more than 50%, the bottom
vote-getter is eliminated, and all of the ballots that went
to them are allocated to the voters’ second-place choices.
If still that gets no one above 50%, the process repeats,
eliminating one candidate per round until there are only two
candidates left, at which point the one with the most votes
wins.
Proponents’ main arguments in favor of Question 2 are that
ranked-choice voting eliminates the possibility of “spoiler”
candidates, encourages more people to run — including more
independents and third-party candidates, and makes for
winners who more broadly represent the will of the
electorate.
“Yes on 2” board chairman Evan Falchuk — a onetime
third-party candidate himself for Massachusetts governor —
also claims that ranked-choice voting makes for more
politically civil races, as candidates who go on the attack
could scare off other people’s supporters from tossing them
a second-choice vote.
“In a ranked-choice election, you can vote third party, and
the vote isn’t wasted,” Falchuk said, adding that he would
expect it to create more competitive elections in
Massachusetts. “Right now, people win with 20%, 25% of the
vote. Maybe that represents what the majority wants, but we
don’t know.”
But opponents say these claims simply aren’t true — that
there’s no rise in third-party candidates, and that this
just sows uncertainty.
“Why would you inject all this confusion for nothing?” said
Anthony Amore, a former candidate for secretary of state.
He said that asking people to rank, say, nine people — like
they could have in the 4th Congressional Democratic primary
this year — is “impractical,” and that it will confuse
low-information voters, resulting in more people not casting
ballots.
“It’s ranked guess voting,” Amore said, pointing to some
cities that have implemented it and then rescinded it. “It’s
terrible and it doesn’t work.”
A poll out Friday from Spectrum News/Ipsos has 45% of
Massachusetts adults saying they support the idea of
ranked-choice voting, with 34% opposed and 21% undecided.
The Boston
Herald
Saturday, October 24, 2020
By Marie Szaniszlo
Massachusetts Question 1: Who gets data that can be used to
repair your car?
Opponents of ballot Question 1 — the so-called
Right-to-Repair law — claim that it could make the public
less safe by expanding the availability of car-repair data,
while proponents say the proposed law would allow consumers
to be the gatekeepers of that information.
A similar law passed in 2012, mandating that manufacturers
give any local repair shops that car owners brought their
vehicles to the same diagnostic and repair information that
auto makers gave to franchise dealers.
But today, up to 90% of new cars have telematics — sensors
that collect that data in real time — something the 2012 law
didn’t foresee, said Tommy Hickey, director of the Right to
Repair Coalition, a group of 1,600 independent repair shops.
“Your car is now a computer on wheels, and we feel you
should get to decide who repairs it and where that data
goes,” Hickey said. “In 2012, voters asked for a level
playing field: Whatever the dealer got, the car repair shop
got. Now, because of telematics, dealers have found a way to
circumvent that.”
But Conor Yunits, a spokesman for the Coalition for Safe and
Secure Data, which represents 16 automakers, claims that
data collected through telematics is not necessary to repair
cars because it’s used for other things, such as
turn-by-turn navigation and emergency crash notification.
“Repair information already is available to independent
repair shops,” Yunits said. “There is no need at all for
Question 1.”
If anything, he said, the proposed law, if passed, would
give hackers the ability to upload code to vehicles and
could lead to malware and ransomware being uploaded to cars.
“It creates an unnecessary cybersecurity risk,” Yunits said.
Hickey dismissed that argument as a scare tactic, adding
that hacking already exists today.
“This can be done in a safe and secure way,” he said. “There
is no GPS information that would be shared. This is about
mechanical information necessary to diagnose and repair your
car. Car manufacturers are already giving this information
to dealerships. Voting no isn’t going to stop the collection
of this data. Voting yes empowers as a car owner to get
direct access to that information through an app on your
phone or on your car dashboard.”
|
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
|
