 |
Post Office Box 1147
▪
Marblehead, Massachusetts 01945
▪ (781) 639-9709
“Every Tax is a Pay Cut ... A Tax Cut is a Pay Raise”
47 years as “The Voice of Massachusetts Taxpayers”
— and
their Institutional Memory — |
|
CLT UPDATE
Sunday, February 7, 2021
"We have to break
your will . . . I can’t even say that publicly.”
Jump directly
to CLT's Commentary on the News
|
Most Relevant News Excerpts
(Full news reports follow Commentary)
|
|
The state’s
$130,000-a-year undersecretary for climate change is being
blasted by a fiscal watchdog for saying the administration
needs to “break” the will of taxpayers when it comes to
heating homes and driving cars.
The video
shows David Ismay, Gov. Charlie Baker’s Under Secretary
for Climate Change, telling Vermont climate advocates
that it’s time to go after homeowners and motorists to
help reduce emissions.
At the end of
the clip, he adds: “I can’t even say that publicly.” ...
In the video
posted by MassFiscal Alliance, Ismay says the state
needs to “break their will” and “turn the screws on”
ordinary people to force changes in their consumption of
heating fuels and gasoline. Ismay described the ordinary
people as the “person across the street” and the “senior
on fixed income.” ...
Paul Diego
Craney, spokesman for MassFiscal, said the video clip
provides a “sneak peek into the minds of regulators”
with Ismay’s choice of words.
Ismay’s direct
quote is: “So let me say that again, 60% of our
emissions that need to be reduced come from you, the
person across the street, the senior on fixed income,
right… there is no bad guy left, at least in
Massachusetts to point the finger at, to turn the screws
on, and you know, to break their will, so they stop
emitting. That’s you. We have to break your will. Right,
I can’t even say that publicly.”
The remarks
were made on January 25, 2021 at the Vermont Climate
Council meeting.
Craney added
it’s “frightening to think an official so high up in the
Baker administration is bragging to an out of state
group about the economic pain he wants to inflict on the
very people who he’s supposed to work for.”
The Boston
Herald
Friday, February 5, 2021
Charlie Baker
climate official blasted for comments to ‘break your
will’ over emissions
During the
Zoom call, Ismay said, “So let me say that again, 60
percent of our emissions that need to be reduced come
from you, the person across the street, the senior on
fixed income, right … there is no bad guy left, at least
in Massachusetts to point the finger at, to turn the
screws on, and you know, to break their will, so they
stop emitting. That’s you. We have to break your will.
Right, I can’t even say that publicly.”
The New
Boston Post
Friday, February 5, 2021
Charlie Baker Climate
Undersecretary:
State Must Break People’s Will To Reduce Climate
Emissions
MassFiscal
sharply criticized Ismay's remarks, and when Baker was
asked during a Friday press conference about the topic
he said he and Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito watched the video
in the morning and spoke to Energy and Environmental
Affairs Secretary Kathleen Theoharides about it.
Baker also
pointed to his veto last month of a wide-ranging climate
change response bill the Legislature sent him and the
concerns he raised about the costs it would create.
"First of all,
no one who works in our administration should ever say
or think anything like that," Baker said. "Secondly,
Secretary Theoharides is going to have a conversation
with him about that. And third, one of the main reasons
we didn't sign the climate bill when it got to our desk
was because we were specifically concerned about the
impact it was going to have on people's ability to pay
for many of the pieces that were in it, which means it
also doesn't represent administration policy or
position."
State House
News Service
Friday, February 5, 2021
Video Captures Climate
Official Commenting on Need to “Break” Consumers
Until now, did
you even know that the state had a $130,000-a-year
“undersecretary of climate change?”
Or that his
job description includes, in the bragging coat holder’s
own words, “breaking the will” of the working classes of
Massachusetts by raising the cost of fuel so high that
they can no longer afford to either heat their homes or
drive their cars?
Can somebody
say Transportation Climate Initiative?
Meet David
Ismay, a 49-year-old blow-in drifter and bust-out lawyer
from California who is now living the high life in a
mansion in Chestnut Hill.
Here is how
Ismay described his dream job, at a conference last
month with a bunch of similarly entitled, trust-funded
ersatz hippies from Vermont:
“Sixty percent
of our emissions that need to be reduced come from you,
the person across the street, the senior on fixed
income, right? There is no bad guy left in Massachusetts
to point the finger at, to turn the screws on and, you
know, break their will so they stop emitting.
“That’s you.
We have to break your will. Right? I can’t even say that
publicly.”
I offered
Ismay a chance to come on my radio show Friday to
discuss his stated goals of “breaking the will” of and
“turning the screws on” people who actually work for a
living....
For the last
year, Parker himself has done little else except try to
“break the will” of those who elected him, with his
hysterical overreactions to a seasonal virus that other
governors have managed to handle without decimating
their state’s economies.
This is why
Ismay still has a job today. Asked Friday about Ismay’s
dark, fascistic musings, his boss shrugged them off.
“Um,” Charlie
Parker said, “first of all, no one who works in our
administration should be saying or thinking anything
like that – ever.”
So this was
the old D.C. definition of a gaffe — inadvertently
blurting out the truth.
“Secretary
Theoharides is going to have a conversation with, um,
him about that.”
In other
words, Charlie Parker, a supercilious Harvard snot who
lives on a palatial estate in Swampscott and hasn’t lost
a single penny of his $250,000-a-year pay during the
dystopian disaster he’s authored, instructs Climate
Katie, a Dartmouth puke who lives in her own mansion in
chi-chi Arlington and likewise hasn’t given up a penny
of her $170,405.81-a-year salary, to have a chat with
the Rhodes scholar who hasn’t even bothered to change
his old cell phone number from the 510 area code in
radical-chic Berkeley, Calif.
For a year
now, all of them have been relishing this
once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to break the will of
everyone who, unlike them, wasn’t born with a silver
spoon in their mouths.
Ismay’s only
mistake was letting the cat out of the bag to a bunch of
his fellow Bernie Sanders acolytes.
The Boston
Herald
Saturday, February 6, 2021
Massachusetts climate hack fits in well
with Charlie Baker & Co.
By Howie Carr
Greg Sullivan,
the state's former inspector general and the research
director at the conservative-leaning Pioneer Institute,
said the ongoing exodus of wealth from Massachusetts to
low-tax states like Florida and New Hampshire could be
amplified in coming years.
The popularity
of new work arrangements that no longer tether workers,
or their employers, to geographic location could make it
easier for workers to seek housing or lifestyle changes
elsewhere, he said.
The outcome of
a proposed surtax on income over $1 million and a
Supreme Court case in which New Hampshire is challenging
Gov. Charlie Baker's right to tax the income of workers
living in New Hampshire, but working remotely for
Massachusetts companies, could also become factors.
"My concern
has to do with the competitiveness of the state,"
Sullivan said.
Sullivan and
the Pioneer Institute published a report this week that
found between 1993 and 2018 a total of $20.7 billion in
adjusted gross income left Massachusetts, with 46.5
percent of that wealth going to Florida and 26 percent
to New Hampshire.
Both Florida
and New Hampshire have no income taxes, and in Florida
residents do not pay capital gains or estate taxes. The
average taxpayer who left Massachusetts for Florida in
2018 earned $120,325, while those leaving for New
Hampshire earned less, or about $64,992.
The state
Legislature will decide, potentially by the spring,
whether to put a question on the 2022 ballot that would
impose a 4 percent surtax on all income above $1
million. The tax on wealthier residents has been pitched
by proponents as a revenue generator for education and
transportation, worth up to $2 billion a year.
But critics
have long said it could prompt employers to steer clear
of Massachusetts and wealthy residents to move out of
state.
"I think that
there's no question that the post-COVID continued growth
of work from home arrangements creates a real risk for a
state like Massachusetts just because there are so many
reasons why someone would want to move to New
Hampshire," Sullivan said.
"The proposed
surtax could exacerbate that," Sullivan said....
The wealth tax
will need to be advanced again at a Constitutional
Convention in the 2021-2022 session in order to go
before voters on the statewide November ballot in 2022.
While there was some turnover on Beacon Hill this
session, the Legislature easily advanced the proposal
147-48 in June of 2019 and new Speaker Ron Mariano
supported the measure two years ago, after initially
voting against it....
Sullivan said
tax policy alone is not necessarily driving wealth out
of the state. He also cited the high cost of living,
density and weather as contributing factors.
While Florida
has seen more than 70 percent in wealth migration into
the state come from taxpayers earning $200,000 or more,
Pioneer's research found that less than 40 percent of
taxpayers leaving Massachusetts fell in that same income
bracket.
Immigration
has also helped to offset population decline in
Massachusetts, according the Pioneer report, but on
average an immigrant moving to Massachusetts earned
$36,809 in 2018 compared to an average adjusted gross
income of $87,628 for taxpayers who left Massachusetts
for other states.
After Florida
and New Hampshire, the remaining 27 percent of the
income leaving Massachusetts went to a mix of warm or
lower cost-of-living states like California, Maine,
North Carolina and Texas.
State House
News Service
Tuesday, February 2, 2021
Remote Work Growth Adds
Dimension to Tax Debate
Study Examined Income Flows Out of Massachusetts
Wealthy
residents and businesses are leaving the state at a
troubling rate — an exodus that could grow now that
working remotely is gaining widespread acceptance, a new
Pioneer Institute report states.
Massachusetts
has seen a net loss of $20 billion to other states,
especially New Hampshire and Florida where taxes are
much lower, the report warns.
“COVID has
dramatically accelerated working from home and that’s
bad news for the state,” said Pioneer Institute Research
Director Greg Sullivan, who co-authored the report on
“Do the Wealthy Migrate from High-Tax States?”
The Pioneer
report found wealthy residents have been packing up and
moving out of state over the last 25 years, taking with
them much-needed taxable income. The report found that
some $20.7 billion in adjusted gross income left
Massachusetts between 1993 and 2018.
That news hits
as Massachusetts’ Democratic lawmakers have proposed a
hike in taxes on the rich to bolster funding for
education and transit. Another vote, Sullivan says, is
expected to come up again this spring....
The Pioneer
study adds high rates of immigration have bolstered
Massachusetts’ economic health and kept its population
stable. But that’s not going to help the bottom line
forever.
“The
legislature needs to be very careful in the new
post-pandemic environment, when talent is more mobile,”
said Pioneer Institute Executive Director Jim Stergios.
“Businesses look at the business climate closely —
especially tax issues — when they think about location.
I’d hate to see us follow in Connecticut’s footsteps
toward economic decline.”
States that
have lost taxable income to Massachusetts are in the
Northeast, with New York, Connecticut, and New Jersey
contributing the most, the report adds. Illinois, Ohio,
and Michigan, lost smaller amounts.
But wealth
migration out of Massachusetts is a “nightmare
scenario,” Sullivan adds, that will only get worse in
our “Zoom economy.”
The Boston
Herald
Tuesday, February 2, 2021
Taxes driving wealth out of
Massachusetts and into Florida, New Hampshire: report
When the going
gets taxed, the taxed get going — right out of
Massachusetts....
What
destinations are on the GPS? According to the study,
many choose Florida and New Hampshire.
Pioneer
Institute Research Director Greg Sullivan and research
assistant Andrew Mikula mined data from the IRS and
found a strong trend of wealthy residents leaving
high-tax states for low-tax ones.
Even when the
economy was on the upswing.
“Because of
our stable tax environment and concentration of talent,
Massachusetts has outperformed most states and outpaced
the nation in job growth since the Great Recession,”
said Pioneer Institute Executive Director Jim Stergios.
“Yet even during that period of growth we were shedding
almost a billion dollars a year to low-tax states like
Florida and New Hampshire.”
One way the
rich stay that way is keeping their eyes out for a
bargain. Why pay more in taxes when you don’t have to?
Especially when your tax burden is already hefty. The
Heritage Foundation reported that, according to 2016 IRS
data, the top 10% of income earners pay almost 70% of
federal income taxes.
A Boston
Herald editorial
Tuesday, February 2, 2021
Wealthy have options to avoid
tax hikes
A white paper
released Monday by the Pioneer Institute compares the
adjusted gross income changes in Massachusetts and
Florida and concludes that snowbirds are not only
seeking the sun, but “the data also show a strong
correlation between state taxes and migration.” In other
words, states like Florida and New Hampshire that have
no personal income tax are seeing more people from
Massachusetts with annual gross incomes of $200,000 or
more moving in than we are seeing from those states.
And, as wealthier Bay Staters move south or north over
the border, Massachusetts loses the personal income tax
revenue those higher-income people were contributing.
It’s not
shocking that wealthier people -- who are more mobile --
would be drawn to states with no personal income tax.
But the loss of millions in state tax revenue is no
small matter....
While
Massachusetts still has a growing population, most of
that comes from the steady influx of people from other
countries, as opposed to migrants from other states.
“Migration
within the United States has seen Massachusetts shedding
residents every year since 2011,” the white paper says,
with 50,000 more Bay Staters moving to other states
every year during the mid-2000s than those who moved
from other states to Massachusetts....
So the high
number of immigrants should offset what we’re losing,
right? In terms of population, maybe, but there’s a big
difference in the adjusted gross income the majority of
immigrants bring with them versus the adjusted gross
income of Bay Staters leaving Massachusetts for points
south.
The report
says the average adjusted gross income of an immigrant
moving to Massachusetts in 2018 was $36,809, while
taxpayers leaving Massachusetts took with them an
average adjusted gross income of $87,628 that year.
A Salem News
editorial
Wednesday, February 3, 2021
Sun, lack of taxes might tip the
balance
January tax
collections obliterated the Baker administration's
expectations, coming in almost a half-billion dollars
above the Department of Revenue's already-upgraded
monthly benchmark and helping to brighten the state's
financial picture heading into a fresh round of budget
deliberations.
DOR collected
$3.347 billion from taxpayers last month, which is $392
million or 13.3 percent greater than what the state
collected in January 2020 and $429 million or 14.7
percent above DOR's benchmark for the month, which had
already been boosted by $180 million from an earlier
estimate....
January is the
fourth-largest revenue month of the year for
Massachusetts, and tax collectors usually bring in a
shade more than 10 percent of their annual haul during
the month.
Now seven
months through fiscal year 2021, Massachusetts state
government has collected $764 million more in taxes from
people and businesses than it did during the same seven
pre-pandemic months of fiscal year 2020. The last month
Massachusetts saw a year-over-year decline in tax
collections was September....
If collections
come in at exactly the DOR benchmarks from February
through May, the state would enter June having collected
about $2.159 billion more than it had collected to that
point of fiscal year 2020.
State House
News Service
Wednesday, February 3, 2021
January Tax Haul Far
Surpasses Pre-Pandemic Receipts
Receipts Rising, Not Falling as Forecast Predicted
Following
market volatility and uncertainty at play through much
of the first half of 2020, a strong second-half
performance for the Massachusetts state pension fund --
the largest six-month return in its 37-year history --
helped drive the fund up to an all-time high of $86.9
billion by the end of 2020.
The Pension
Reserves Investment Trust (PRIT) Fund saw a return of
16.4 percent from July 1 through Dec. 31, outperforming
its benchmark for that period of 12.5 percent. That
topped the record for a half-year return of 15.7 percent
that had stood since June 1986, officials said
Tuesday....
Michael
Trotsky, executive director and chief investment officer
of the Massachusetts Pension Reserves Investment
Management Board, presented the fund performance report
during a meeting of PRIM's Investment Committee on
Tuesday morning but reminded committee members that the
positive results "mask hardships and uncertainties" that
persist in the economy and society.
"The strong
market return seems like a cruel irony because it does
not capture the hardships that so many in our country
are facing. Sometimes, we all know, markets do not seem
logical. So let's please review today's results with
appropriate humility and let's be gratified that we're
doing our important part to grow the assets used to
support more than 300,000 beneficiaries," Trotsky said.
"A strong return, so to speak, is a shot in the arm to
pension security for our beneficiaries in this time of
so much struggle and uncertainty."...
"Each week, I
notice more businesses folding and I notice more and
more homeless on the streets as I walk from the train
station to the office. It actually often feels dangerous
right in the Financial District, right where our offices
are," he said. "And believe me, it does not seem like
the Boston of a year ago and it breaks my heart."
The fund's
calendar year performance equates to an investment gain
of $9.6 billion for the PRIT Fund.
"Nearly $10
billion in one year ... staggering," Trotsky said.
State House
News Service
Tuesday, February 2, 2021
State Pension Fund Returns
Soar Amidst Pandemic
PRIT Fund Assets Rose Nearly $10 Billion in 2020
Lawmakers did
not reach an agreement on the current state budget until
five months into the fiscal year amid the uncertainty
inflicted by the pandemic, but the Senate's budget chief
said Wednesday he believes the next cycle will follow a
"more traditional process."
Sen. Michael
Rodrigues told human service providers that preparations
are underway in the Legislature to roll out fiscal year
2022 budget bills after Gov. Charlie Baker released his
proposal last week....
The Westport
Democrat recounted some of the factors that pushed Baker
and lawmakers to seek several short-term interim budgets
instead of an annual plan last summer and fall,
including uncertainty over federal aid and early
forecasts from economists that tax revenues could fall
billions of dollars below expectations.
"Now, we're
beyond that. We're already working on FY22, " Rodrigues
said, later adding, "We are hoping that by July 1, we're
going to have an FY22 budget signed by the governor."
The state
received about $12.8 billion in federal revenues in
fiscal 2020 and is projected to receive about $13.97
billion this fiscal year. For fiscal 2022, the state has
slotted in $12.56 billion in federal aid.
State House
News Service
Wednesday, February 3, 2021
Rodrigues Hoping for Signed
Budget by July 1
The creation
of three new legislative committees to focus on the
state's COVID-19 response, racial equality and
cybersecurity will come at a cost of $137,672 to
taxpayers, according to a News Service calculation based
on the 2017 pay law.
House Speaker
Ron Mariano and Senate President Karen Spilka announced
Wednesday night that they intended to create three new
standing joint House-Senate committees to start the new
session...
With the
creation of those committees comes new chairmanships and
vice chairmanships for Mariano and Spilka to award, each
with their own stipends. Based on the 2017 law that
increased pay for legislators and other public
officials, committee chairs can earn between $17,042 and
$73,851 on top of their base salaries, depending on
which committees they lead....
This pay
structure could not be immediately confirmed with Senate
leaders. Senate rules limit members to collecting a
maximum of two stipends for their assigned
responsibilities, while House members can collect just
one stipend, according to that branch's rules.
The stipends
started at $15,000 for a chair and $5,200 for a vice
chair in 2017, but have been adjusted biennially in
accordance with the law based on statewide salary and
wage changes as recorded by the Bureau of Economic
Analysis in the United States Department of Commerce.
Treasurer
Deborah Goldberg certified an 8.32 percent increase in
stipend pay in 2019 and another 4.89 percent increase
this year. Legislators also saw their base pay increase
in January by 6.46 percent to $70,536 for the next two
years, based on the state's Constitution.
State House
News Service
Thursday, February 4, 2021
Lawmakers creating more
paid leadership positions
3 new committees will cost taxpayers $137,672 in
stipends
Gov. Charlie
Baker is making another attempt to cap expanding sick
time banks for state employees that have taxpayers on
the hook for tens of millions of dollars.
Baker’s plan,
tucked into his preliminary $45.6 billion budget, would
limit a vast number of state employees to accruing 1,000
hours of sick leave, or about six months’ worth. The
limit is expected to save the state more than $8 million
a year.
Baker has
argued that capping sick time accruals will save
taxpayers money and align state benefits with those of
other states and the private sector.
The cap would
only affect the executive branch. As of Friday at least
5,400 employees whose departments answer to the governor
had banked 1,000 hours of sick time or more, according
to the Baker administration. That's roughly 12% of the
executive branch's workforce.
Those figures
don’t include quasi-governmental agencies, the state
court system or the five-campus University of
Massachusetts, the state’s second-largest employer with
more than 24,000 employees.
Beacon Hill
watchdogs say the state's current policy is
unsustainable, especially with a sizable portion of the
workforce set to retire in coming years.
"Sick pay
shouldn't roll over, year after year," said David Tuerck,
president of the Beacon Hill Institute. "It only drives
up the overall cost of the state budget."
That's because
retiring state employees are allowed to cash out 20% of
their unused time....
In 2017, state
Inspector General Greg Cunha found more than 10,400
employees — about 12% of the state’s 90,000-member
workforce — sitting on 1,000 hours or more of unused
time. That represented a liability of more than $117
million for taxpayers.
Baker's
efforts to reel in the state's payroll liabilities face
resistance in the Legislature, which is reviewing his
budget. Similar proposals by the governor have been
flatly rejected in the past by the Democrat-controlled
House and Senate.
The Salem
News
Saturday, February 6, 2021
Baker seeks to limit sick pay for
state workers
Geoff Diehl,
the former state lawmaker and Republican State Committee
member, has given up his role as finance committee
chairman for the party to focus on recruiting new
candidates and helping to organize fundraisers....
Diehl has not
ruled out being a candidate himself in 2022, keeping
open the possibility that he would run for governor. The
former Whitman legislator ran against U.S. Sen.
Elizabeth Warren in 2018, and played a role in former
President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign in Massachusetts.
Diehl said he
thought his energy would be "best spent devoted to
making sure we make the necessary preparations ahead of
the upcoming midterms."
"Our party's
commitment to freedom, economic opportunity, and
personal responsibility has never been more important
than it is now, and the work to push that message begins
now," Diehl said....
Gov. Charlie
Baker, who despite being a Republican has largely broken
away from the state party, has not yet said whether he
would seek a third term.
State House
News Service
Friday, February 5, 2021
Diehl Departing Finance Committee Role
at MassGOP |
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
CLICK ABOVE GRAPHIC
TO WATCH AND HEAR FOR YOURSELF
The state’s
$130,000-a-year undersecretary for climate change is being
blasted by a fiscal watchdog for saying the administration needs
to “break” the will of taxpayers when it comes to heating homes
and driving cars.
The video shows
David Ismay, Gov. Charlie Baker’s Under Secretary for Climate
Change, telling Vermont climate advocates that it’s time to go
after homeowners and motorists to help reduce emissions.
At the end of the
clip, he adds: “I can’t even say that publicly.” ...
In the video posted
by MassFiscal Alliance, Ismay says the state needs to “break
their will” and “turn the screws on” ordinary people to force
changes in their consumption of heating fuels and gasoline.
Ismay described the ordinary people as the “person across the
street” and the “senior on fixed income.” ...
Paul Diego Craney,
spokesman for MassFiscal, said the video clip provides a “sneak
peek into the minds of regulators” with Ismay’s choice of words.
Ismay’s direct
quote is: “So let me say that again, 60% of our emissions that
need to be reduced come from you, the person across the street,
the senior on fixed income, right… there is no bad guy left, at
least in Massachusetts to point the finger at, to turn the
screws on, and you know, to break their will, so they stop
emitting. That’s you. We have to break your will. Right, I can’t
even say that publicly.”
The remarks were
made on January 25, 2021 at the Vermont Climate Council meeting.
Craney added it’s
“frightening to think an official so high up in the Baker
administration is bragging to an out of state group about the
economic pain he wants to inflict on the very people who he’s
supposed to work for.”
The Boston Herald
Friday, February 5, 2021
Charlie Baker climate official blasted for comments to ‘break
your will’ over emissions
Obviously David Ismay,
Gov. Charlie Baker’s Undersecretary for Climate Change and a
graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis missed the class
that taught the phrase "Loose lips sink ships." Howie Carr
called it on the mark Saturday in his Boston Herald column ("Massachusetts
climate hack fits in well with Charlie Baker & Co."):
So this was
the old D.C. definition of a gaffe — inadvertently
blurting out the truth. . . . Ismay’s only mistake
was letting the cat out of the bag to a bunch of his
fellow Bernie Sanders acolytes.
Mass Fiscal Alliance
uncovered the video (thanks to a Vermont colleague in our
multi-state anti-TCI coalition) and released it to the media
on Friday morning. Part of MassFiscal's message:
Ismay’s comments
are simply reprehensible. He describes his target as ordinary
people in Massachusetts like the elderly on fixed incomes and
the person across the street. They’re his target simply
because they cannot change their lifestyles enough to be
acceptable to his climate agenda. The weapon he intends to
use to “turn the screws” on them is the new climate legislation
and administrative tax increases like the Transportation and
Climate Initiative, which seek to drive up costs in order to
“break their will” and force decreases in consumption.
It’s frightening to
think an official so high up in the Baker administration is
bragging to an out of state group about the economic pain he
wants to inflict on the very people who he’s supposed to work
for. Remarks like this have no place in state government.
Ismay should be dismissed from his position in state government,
as he’s clearly demonstrated he does not have the best interests
of the residents of Massachusetts at heart.
Nothing more needs to be added.
Baker's response? The State
House News Service reported later on Friday ("Video
Captures Climate Official Commenting on Need to “Break” Consumers"):
MassFiscal sharply criticized
Ismay's remarks, and when Baker was asked during a
Friday press conference about the topic he said he and
Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito watched the video in the morning
and spoke to Energy and Environmental Affairs Secretary
Kathleen Theoharides about it....
"First of all, no one who works in
our administration should ever say or think anything
like that," Baker said. "Secondly, Secretary
Theoharides is going to have a conversation with him
about that. And third, one of the main reasons we
didn't sign the climate bill when it got to our desk was
because we were specifically concerned about the impact
it was going to have on people's ability to pay for many
of the pieces that were in it, which means it also
doesn't represent administration policy or position."
So what are the consequences for such
a threat that allegedly "doesn't represent administration policy or
position" but which appears to precisely advance the Baker
administration's obsessive goal? Baker will probably promote
him another rank.
Massachusetts continues to shed
productive taxpayers, especially those of higher-income. They
are being replaced by low-income immigrants. "Immigration
has also helped to offset population decline in Massachusetts,"
according a
Pioneer Institute report issued on Monday, "but on average an
immigrant moving to Massachusetts earned $36,809 in 2018 compared to
an average adjusted gross income of $87,628 for taxpayers who left
Massachusetts for other states." You do the math.
The State House News Service reported
on Tuesday ("Remote Work Growth Adds Dimension to Tax Debate; Study
Examined Income Flows Out of Massachusetts"):
Greg Sullivan, the state's former
inspector general and the research director at the
conservative-leaning Pioneer Institute, said the ongoing
exodus of wealth from Massachusetts to low-tax states
like Florida and New Hampshire could be amplified in
coming years.
The popularity of new work
arrangements that no longer tether workers, or their
employers, to geographic location could make it easier
for workers to seek housing or lifestyle changes
elsewhere, he said.
The outcome of a proposed surtax on
income over $1 million and a Supreme Court case in which
New Hampshire is challenging Gov. Charlie Baker's right
to tax the income of workers living in New Hampshire,
but working remotely for Massachusetts companies, could
also become factors.
"My concern has to do with the
competitiveness of the state," Sullivan said.
Sullivan and the Pioneer Institute
published a report this week that found between 1993
and 2018 a total of $20.7 billion in adjusted gross
income left Massachusetts, with 46.5 percent of that
wealth going to Florida and 26 percent to New Hampshire.
Both Florida and New Hampshire have
no income taxes, and in Florida residents do not pay
capital gains or estate taxes. The average
taxpayer who left Massachusetts for Florida in 2018
earned $120,325, while those leaving for New Hampshire
earned less, or about $64,992.
The state Legislature will decide,
potentially by the spring, whether to put a question on
the 2022 ballot that would impose a 4 percent surtax on
all income above $1 million. The tax on wealthier
residents has been pitched by proponents as a revenue
generator for education and transportation, worth up to
$2 billion a year.
But critics have long said it could
prompt employers to steer clear of Massachusetts and
wealthy residents to move out of state.
"I think that there's no question
that the post-COVID continued growth of work from home
arrangements creates a real risk for a state like
Massachusetts just because there are so many reasons why
someone would want to move to New Hampshire," Sullivan
said.
"The proposed surtax could
exacerbate that," Sullivan said....
The wealth tax will need to be
advanced again at a Constitutional Convention in the
2021-2022 session in order to go before voters on the
statewide November ballot in 2022. While there was
some turnover on Beacon Hill this session, the
Legislature easily advanced the proposal 147-48 in June
of 2019 and new Speaker Ron Mariano supported the
measure two years ago, after initially voting against
it....
Sullivan said tax policy alone is
not necessarily driving wealth out of the state.
He also cited the high cost of living, density and
weather as contributing factors.
While Florida has seen more than 70
percent in wealth migration into the state come from
taxpayers earning $200,000 or more, Pioneer's research
found that less than 40 percent of taxpayers leaving
Massachusetts fell in that same income bracket.
Immigration has also helped to
offset population decline in Massachusetts, according
the Pioneer report, but on average an immigrant moving
to Massachusetts earned $36,809 in 2018 compared to an
average adjusted gross income of $87,628 for taxpayers
who left Massachusetts for other states.
After Florida and New Hampshire,
the remaining 27 percent of the income leaving
Massachusetts went to a mix of warm or lower
cost-of-living states like California, Maine, North
Carolina and Texas.
The Boston Herald on Tuesday added
("Taxes driving wealth out of Massachusetts and into Florida, New
Hampshire: report"):
. . . That news hits as
Massachusetts’ Democratic lawmakers have proposed a hike
in taxes on the rich to bolster funding for education
and transit. Another vote, Sullivan says, is expected to
come up again this spring....
“The legislature needs to be very
careful in the new post-pandemic environment, when
talent is more mobile,” said Pioneer Institute Executive
Director Jim Stergios. “Businesses look at the
business climate closely — especially tax issues — when
they think about location. I’d hate to see us
follow in Connecticut’s footsteps toward economic
decline.” ...
But wealth migration out of
Massachusetts is a “nightmare scenario,” Sullivan adds,
that will only get worse in our “Zoom economy.” ...
Progressives who want the wealthy to pay even more to
fund free college, free healthcare and a host of other
programs would be wise to keep the mobility trend in
mind.
On Wednesday The
Salem News editorial ("Sun, lack of taxes might tip the
balance") opined:
While Massachusetts still has a
growing population, most of that comes from the steady
influx of people from other countries, as opposed to
migrants from other states.
“Migration within the United States
has seen Massachusetts shedding residents every year
since 2011,” the white paper says, with 50,000 more Bay
Staters moving to other states every year during the
mid-2000s than those who moved from other states to
Massachusetts....
So the high number of immigrants
should offset what we’re losing, right? In terms
of population, maybe, but there’s a big difference in
the adjusted gross income the majority of immigrants
bring with them versus the adjusted gross income of Bay
Staters leaving Massachusetts for points south.
The report says the average
adjusted gross income of an immigrant moving to
Massachusetts in 2018 was $36,809, while taxpayers
leaving Massachusetts took with them an average adjusted
gross income of $87,628 that year.
Upon release of
the Department of Revenue's
January collections report, The State House News Service
reported on Wednesday ("January
Tax Haul Far Surpasses Pre-Pandemic Receipts; Receipts
Rising, Not Falling as Forecast Predicted"):
January tax collections obliterated the Baker administration's
expectations, coming in almost a half-billion dollars above the
Department of Revenue's already-upgraded monthly benchmark and
helping to brighten the state's financial picture heading into a
fresh round of budget deliberations.
DOR collected $3.347 billion from taxpayers last month, which is
$392 million or 13.3 percent greater than what the state
collected in January 2020 and $429 million or 14.7 percent above
DOR's benchmark for the month, which had already been boosted by
$180 million from an earlier estimate....
January is the fourth-largest revenue month of the year for
Massachusetts, and tax collectors usually bring in a shade more
than 10 percent of their annual haul during the month.
Now seven months through fiscal year 2021, Massachusetts state
government has collected $764 million more in taxes from people
and businesses than it did during the same seven pre-pandemic
months of fiscal year 2020. The last month Massachusetts saw a
year-over-year decline in tax collections was September....
If collections come in at exactly the DOR benchmarks from
February through May, the state would enter June having
collected about $2.159 billion more than it had collected to
that point of fiscal year 2020.
Did you catch that?
"Massachusetts state government has collected $764 million more
in taxes from people and businesses than it did during the same
seven pre-pandemic months of fiscal year 2020" when businesses
were wide open and everyone who wanted a job was working.
No wonder Gov. Baker wants to keep the
economy locked down for as long as he possibly can! The fewer
businesses open, the fewer "folks" working, the better the state
coffers seem to be doing. Imagine how much Maskachusetts could
rake in if every resident was confined to his home in perpetuity
never to see the light of day!
Honestly, I have no idea how this
works but it gets even crazier. On Tuesday the
State House News Service reported ("State Pension Fund
Returns Soar Amidst Pandemic; PRIT Fund Assets Rose Nearly $10
Billion in 2020"):
Following market volatility and
uncertainty at play through much of the first half of
2020, a strong second-half performance for the
Massachusetts state pension fund -- the largest
six-month return in its 37-year history -- helped drive
the fund up to an all-time high of $86.9 billion by the
end of 2020.
The Pension Reserves Investment
Trust (PRIT) Fund saw a return of 16.4 percent from July
1 through Dec. 31, outperforming its benchmark for that
period of 12.5 percent. That topped the record for
a half-year return of 15.7 percent that had stood since
June 1986, officials said Tuesday....
The fund's calendar year
performance equates to an investment gain of $9.6
billion for the PRIT Fund.
And —
believe it or not — it gets even
better yet! How can that possibly be? On
Wednesday the State House News Service reported ("Rodrigues
Hoping for Signed Budget by July 1"):
. . . The state
received about $12.8 billion in federal revenues in fiscal 2020
and is projected to receive about $13.97 billion this fiscal
year. For fiscal 2022, the state has slotted in $12.56
billion in federal aid.
Wait until China hears about all
this — they'll be demanding their
Wuhan Virus back, or at least a royalty from Massachusetts for
providing it!
But before China can swoop in for its
reparations, with all this cash piling up in otherwise empty State
House corridors legislators jumped in to do what they do best:
feather their own nests. On Thursday the News Service reported
("Lawmakers creating
more paid leadership positions; 3 new committees will cost taxpayers
$137,672 in stipends"):
House Speaker Ron Mariano and
Senate President Karen Spilka announced Wednesday night
that they intended to create three new standing joint
House-Senate committees to start the new session...
With the creation of those
committees comes new chairmanships and vice
chairmanships for Mariano and Spilka to award, each with
their own stipends. Based on the 2017 law that
increased pay for legislators and other public
officials, committee chairs can earn between $17,042 and
$73,851 on top of their base salaries, depending on
which committees they lead....
This pay structure could not be
immediately confirmed with Senate leaders. Senate
rules limit members to collecting a maximum of two
stipends for their assigned responsibilities, while
House members can collect just one stipend, according to
that branch's rules.
The stipends started at $15,000 for
a chair and $5,200 for a vice chair in 2017, but have
been adjusted biennially in accordance with the law
based on statewide salary and wage changes as recorded
by the Bureau of Economic Analysis in the United States
Department of Commerce.
Treasurer Deborah Goldberg
certified an 8.32 percent increase in stipend pay in
2019 and another 4.89 percent increase this year.
Legislators also saw their base pay increase in January
by 6.46 percent to $70,536 for the next two years, based
on the state's Constitution.
It didn't take them long amidst the
embarrassment of plague riches to take care of themselves, did it.
At this rate pretty soon every legislator will be a chairman of his
or her own committee, or two. You've got to hand it to the
greedy pols — if you're a self-dealing,
insatiable bottom-feeder. Taking so little heat from
constituents after conspiring to plunder taxpayers with
their obscene pay
grab of 2017 as their first order of business upon return that
January only encouraged them to enrich themselves more.
"Hey, when you've got it spend it
fast. There's always more where that came from," has long been
the Beacon Hill creed. As the top of the state government heap
gets fatter the wealth is spread around; the coat-holders and hired
help need a taste of the largesse too. The Salem News reported
yesterday ("Baker seeks to limit sick pay for state workers"):
Gov. Charlie Baker is making
another attempt to cap expanding sick time banks for
state employees that have taxpayers on the hook for tens
of millions of dollars.
Baker’s plan, tucked into his
preliminary $45.6 billion budget, would limit a vast
number of state employees to accruing 1,000 hours of
sick leave, or about six months’ worth. The limit
is expected to save the state more than $8 million a
year.
Baker has argued that capping sick
time accruals will save taxpayers money and align state
benefits with those of other states and the private
sector.
The cap would only affect the
executive branch. As of Friday at least 5,400
employees whose departments answer to the governor had
banked 1,000 hours of sick time or more, according to
the Baker administration. That's roughly 12% of
the executive branch's workforce.
Those figures don’t include
quasi-governmental agencies, the state court system or
the five-campus University of Massachusetts, the state’s
second-largest employer with more than 24,000 employees.
Beacon Hill watchdogs say the
state's current policy is unsustainable, especially with
a sizable portion of the workforce set to retire in
coming years.
"Sick pay shouldn't roll over, year
after year," said David Tuerck, president of the Beacon
Hill Institute. "It only drives up the overall
cost of the state budget."
That's because retiring state
employees are allowed to cash out 20% of their unused
time....
In 2017, state Inspector General
Greg Cunha found more than 10,400 employees — about 12%
of the state’s 90,000-member workforce — sitting on
1,000 hours or more of unused time. That
represented a liability of more than $117 million for
taxpayers.
Baker's efforts to reel in the
state's payroll liabilities face resistance in the
Legislature, which is reviewing his budget.
Similar proposals by the governor have been flatly
rejected in the past by the Democrat-controlled House
and Senate.
What's a mere $117 million liability
in the big picture of Massachusetts taxing, spending, and debt?
Doesn't everyone get to cash in "unused sick time"
—
when and if, that is, they have a job that's open for business?
"Similar proposals by the governor
have been flatly rejected in the past by the Democrat-controlled
House and Senate." Of course they have. It's not
their money they're squandering. Their well-earned
attitude is "It comes out of those stupid taxpayers' pockets and
they keep voting for more abuse, so let's give them more of what
they want!"
Political Watch
On Friday the
State House News Service reported ("Diehl Departing Finance
Committee Role at MassGOP"):
Geoff Diehl, the former state
lawmaker and Republican State Committee member, has
given up his role as finance committee chairman for the
party to focus on recruiting new candidates and helping
to organize fundraisers....
Diehl has not ruled out being a
candidate himself in 2022, keeping open the possibility
that he would run for governor. The former Whitman
legislator ran against U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren in
2018, and played a role in former President Donald
Trump's 2016 campaign in Massachusetts....
Gov. Charlie Baker, who despite
being a Republican has largely broken away from the
state party, has not yet said whether he would seek a
third term.
Do I hear footsteps
sneaking up on Charlie Baker? They seem to be getting louder .
. .
Just wondering. Do
you ever regret being among the most politically informed citizens
of the Commonwealth? Have you ever considered the axiom
"Ignorance is bliss" and pondered if this might be so, wondered what
you're missing? I do, but it's too late for me now.
I have always lived by the
admonition of the ancient Greek statesman and warrior Pericles:
"Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn't mean
that politics won't take an interest in you." He had nothing
to say about bliss, unfortunately.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
Full News Reports Follow
(excerpted above) |
|
The Boston
Herald
Friday, February 5, 2021
Charlie Baker climate official blasted for comments to
‘break your will’ over emissions
By Joe Dwinell and Sean Philip Cotter
The state’s
$130,000-a-year undersecretary for climate change is being
blasted by a fiscal watchdog for saying the administration needs
to “break” the will of taxpayers when it comes to heating homes
and driving cars.
The video shows David Ismay, Gov. Charlie Baker’s Under
Secretary for Climate Change, telling Vermont climate advocates
that it’s time to go after homeowners and motorists to help
reduce emissions.
At the end of the clip, he adds: “I can’t even say that
publicly.”
Ismay a return Herald request for comment Friday morning.
Asked about the video during a press conference, Baker said he
and Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito had seen the video earlier that
morning that Climate Secretary Kathleen Theoharides, Ismay’s
boss, is also aware of it.
“First of all, no one who works in our administration should
ever say or think anything like that — ever,” the governor said.
“Secondly, Secretary Theoharides is going to have a conversation
with him about that.”
Baker continued, “And the third — and one of the main reasons we
didn’t sign the climate bill when it got to our desk was because
we were specifically concerned about the impact that it’s going
to have on people’s ability to pay for many of the pieces that
were in it, which means it also doesn’t represent the
administration policy or position.”
In the video posted by MassFiscal Alliance, Ismay says the state
needs to “break their will” and “turn the screws on” ordinary
people to force changes in their consumption of heating fuels
and gasoline. Ismay described the ordinary people as the “person
across the street” and the “senior on fixed income.”
In the clip, he starts by saying there is “no bad guy left” in
Massachusetts and that 60% of emissions comes from “residential
heating and passenger vehicles.”
This all comes as sweeping climate policy legislation is being
pushed that would force net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, set
interim emission reduction targets, establish appliance energy
efficiency standards and authorize additional purchases of
offshore wind power. Baker has until Sunday to sign, reject or
amend that bill.
Also part of the debate is the Transportation Climate Initiative
championed Baker that aims to reduce motor vehicle pollution by
at least 26% and generate over $1.8 billion in Massachusetts by
2032, according to a deal Massachusetts signed with Rhode
Island, Connecticut and Washington, D.C.
It will up the price of gas by 5 to 7 cents per gallon,
according to state estimates. Eight other states are still
considering the deal.
Paul Diego Craney, spokesman for MassFiscal, said the video clip
provides a “sneak peek into the minds of regulators” with
Ismay’s choice of words.
Ismay’s direct quote is: “So let me say that again, 60% of our
emissions that need to be reduced come from you, the person
across the street, the senior on fixed income, right… there is
no bad guy left, at least in Massachusetts to point the finger
at, to turn the screws on, and you know, to break their will, so
they stop emitting. That’s you. We have to break your will.
Right, I can’t even say that publicly.”
The remarks were made on January 25, 2021 at the Vermont Climate
Council meeting.
Craney added it’s “frightening to think an official so high up
in the Baker administration is bragging to an out of state group
about the economic pain he wants to inflict on the very people
who he’s supposed to work for.”
The New Boston
Post
Friday, February 5, 2021
Charlie Baker Climate Undersecretary:
State Must Break People’s Will To Reduce Climate Emissions
By Tom Joyce
David Ismay, the state undersecretary for climate change under
Massachusetts Republican governor Charlie Baker, said in a
recent Zoom call that the Commonwealth needs to “break their
will” when referring to ordinary people and their use of fossil
fuels.
Ismay made the remarks in a Zoom call with the Vermont Climate
Council on Monday, January 25.
The Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance obtained a clip of the meeting
and posted it on the alliance’s YouTube channel.
During the Zoom call, Ismay said, “So let me say that again, 60
percent of our emissions that need to be reduced come from you,
the person across the street, the senior on fixed income, right
… there is no bad guy left, at least in Massachusetts to point
the finger at, to turn the screws on, and you know, to break
their will, so they stop emitting. That’s you. We have to break
your will. Right, I can’t even say that publicly ….”
The “60 percent of our emissions” he refers to in the video come
from residential heating and passenger vehicles, he says.
Ismay could not immediately be reached for comment Friday
afternoon.
Ismay’s comments were condemned by MassFiscal in a statement
from spokesman Paul Craney.
“Ismay’s comments are simply reprehensible. He describes his
target as ordinary people in Massachusetts like the elderly on
fixed incomes and the person across the street,” Craney said in
the written statement. “They’re his target simply because they
cannot change their lifestyles enough to be acceptable to his
climate agenda. The weapon he intends to use to ‘turn the
screws’ on them is the new climate legislation and
administrative tax increases like the Transportation and Climate
Initiative, which seek to drive up costs in order to “break
their will” and force decreases in consumption.”
“It’s frightening to think an official so high up in the Baker
administration is bragging to an out of state group about the
economic pain he wants to inflict on the very people who he’s
supposed to work for,” Craney added. “Remarks like this have no
place in state government. Ismay should be dismissed from his
position in state government, as he’s clearly demonstrated he
does not have the best interests of the residents of
Massachusetts at heart.”
The press office for Governor Charlie Baker could not be reached
for comment on Friday.
State House News
Service
Friday, February 5, 2021
Video Captures Climate Official Commenting on Need to “Break”
Consumers
By Chris Lisinski
Gov. Charlie Baker called out an official in his environment
secretariat on Friday, describing comments that Undersecretary
for Climate Change David Ismay made last month about pushing
consumers to reduce carbon emissions as something that "no one
who works in our administration should ever say."
The right-leaning Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance published a
video clip Thursday of Ismay addressing the Vermont Climate
Council at a Jan. 25 virtual meeting.
"Sixty percent of our emissions come from residential heating
and passenger vehicles," Ismay said, according to the video.
"Let me say that again: 60 percent of our emissions that need to
be reduced come from you, the person (inaudible) the street, the
senior on fixed income. There is no bad guy left, at least in
Massachusetts, to point the finger at, turn the screws on, and
break their will so they stop emitting. That's you, we have to
break your will."
"I can't even say that publicly. What I'm trying to say is --"
Ismay continued before the video posted by MassFiscal ends
mid-sentence.
MassFiscal sharply criticized Ismay's remarks, and when Baker
was asked during a Friday press conference about the topic he
said he and Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito watched the video in the
morning and spoke to Energy and Environmental Affairs Secretary
Kathleen Theoharides about it.
Baker also pointed to his veto last month of a wide-ranging
climate change response bill the Legislature sent him and the
concerns he raised about the costs it would create.
"First of all, no one who works in our administration should
ever say or think anything like that," Baker said. "Secondly,
Secretary Theoharides is going to have a conversation with him
about that. And third, one of the main reasons we didn't sign
the climate bill when it got to our desk was because we were
specifically concerned about the impact it was going to have on
people's ability to pay for many of the pieces that were in it,
which means it also doesn't represent administration policy or
position."
The climate bill is back on Baker's desk after the House and
Senate approved a re-filed version of it now that the
Legislature is into a new two-year session.
The Boston
Herald
Saturday, February 6, 2021
Massachusetts climate hack fits in well with Charlie Baker & Co.
By Howie Carr
Until now, did you even know that the state had a
$130,000-a-year “undersecretary of climate change?”
Or that his job description includes, in the bragging coat
holder’s own words, “breaking the will” of the working classes
of Massachusetts by raising the cost of fuel so high that they
can no longer afford to either heat their homes or drive their
cars?
Can somebody say Transportation Climate Initiative?
Meet David Ismay, a 49-year-old blow-in drifter and bust-out
lawyer from California who is now living the high life in a
mansion in Chestnut Hill.
Here is how Ismay described his dream job, at a conference last
month with a bunch of similarly entitled, trust-funded ersatz
hippies from Vermont:
“Sixty percent of our emissions that need to be reduced come
from you, the person across the street, the senior on fixed
income, right? There is no bad guy left in Massachusetts to
point the finger at, to turn the screws on and, you know, break
their will so they stop emitting.
“That’s you. We have to break your will. Right? I can’t even say
that publicly.”
I offered Ismay a chance to come on my radio show Friday to
discuss his stated goals of “breaking the will” of and “turning
the screws on” people who actually work for a living.
Naturally, he declined.
How moronic is Ismay, going all Jonathan Gruber like this?
The answer is, he’s a Rhodes scholar, one of those perennial
bum-kissing student-leader types who, post-Oxford, flit from one
la-de-da no-heavy-lifting sinecure to another, always trading
off their allegedly prestigious credentials, never accomplishing
much of anything, but somehow always failing … upward.
This is why Ismay fits in so perfectly in the administration of
the man Joe Biden calls Gov. Charlie Parker, as well as his
direct boss, the environmental secretary Climate Katie
Theoharides. Birds of a feather …
For the last year, Parker himself has done little else except
try to “break the will” of those who elected him, with his
hysterical overreactions to a seasonal virus that other
governors have managed to handle without decimating their
state’s economies.
This is why Ismay still has a job today. Asked Friday about
Ismay’s dark, fascistic musings, his boss shrugged them off.
“Um,” Charlie Parker said, “first of all, no one who works in
our administration should be saying or thinking anything like
that – ever.”
So this was the old D.C. definition of a gaffe — inadvertently
blurting out the truth.
“Secretary Theoharides is going to have a conversation with, um,
him about that.”
In other words, Charlie Parker, a supercilious Harvard snot who
lives on a palatial estate in Swampscott and hasn’t lost a
single penny of his $250,000-a-year pay during the dystopian
disaster he’s authored, instructs Climate Katie, a Dartmouth
puke who lives in her own mansion in chi-chi Arlington and
likewise hasn’t given up a penny of her $170,405.81-a-year
salary, to have a chat with the Rhodes scholar who hasn’t even
bothered to change his old cell phone number from the 510 area
code in radical-chic Berkeley, Calif.
For a year now, all of them have been relishing this
once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to break the will of everyone
who, unlike them, wasn’t born with a silver spoon in their
mouths.
Ismay’s only mistake was letting the cat out of the bag to a
bunch of his fellow Bernie Sanders acolytes.
But imagine the hubris of the state government of Maskachusetts
presuming to cure “climate change,” whatever that might entail.
After all, this is the same incompetent government that has
presided over the deaths of one of every eight nursing-home
residents in the state — the highest per-capita death toll in
the nation.
The commonwealth has also shed 9.1% of its entire workforce —
the fourth highest job-loss toll in the U.S.
Yet these same hacks, none of whom have been laid off, give
themselves raises and bonuses while not even bothering to come
to work, instead wallowing in unprecedented levels of greed and
corruption — the State Police, the Registry of Motor Vehicles,
the MBTA, Massport, UMass, etc.
Now Charlie Parker has totally botched the rollout of the
vaccination program, again dropping the state into the bottom
quintile, behind even Mississippi in efficient delivery of
inoculations. But all that really matters is that we have an
“undersecretary of climate change.”
Why stop there, though? Shouldn’t Climate Katie, with her very
impressive master’s degree from UMass-Boston, be tackling other
intractable problems of nature that have bedeviled mankind
through the ages?
Doesn’t Massachusetts need an “undersecretary of volcanoes?”
Perhaps deputy commissioner of earthquakes, or clerk of
sunspots? Senior administrator of continental drift?
One final question: It’s supposed to snow Sunday. If Boston gets
more than a dusting, what are the odds that the esteemed
undersecretary of climate change gets Monday off as a
nonessential state employee?
Breaking the will of the people may have to wait until Tuesday.
A snow day comes first!
State House News
Service
Tuesday, February 2, 2021
Remote Work Growth Adds Dimension to Tax Debate
Study Examined Income Flows Out of Massachusetts
By Matt Murphy
The combination of new remote working opportunities made popular
during the COVID-19 pandemic and higher income taxes on wealthy
residents could land like a one-two punch on the chin of the
Massachusetts economy and state finances, the author of a new
study said.
Greg Sullivan, the state's former inspector general and the
research director at the conservative-leaning Pioneer Institute,
said the ongoing exodus of wealth from Massachusetts to low-tax
states like Florida and New Hampshire could be amplified in
coming years.
The popularity of new work arrangements that no longer tether
workers, or their employers, to geographic location could make
it easier for workers to seek housing or lifestyle changes
elsewhere, he said.
The outcome of a proposed surtax on income over $1 million and a
Supreme Court case in which New Hampshire is challenging Gov.
Charlie Baker's right to tax the income of workers living in New
Hampshire, but working remotely for Massachusetts companies,
could also become factors.
"My concern has to do with the competitiveness of the state,"
Sullivan said.
Sullivan and the Pioneer Institute published a report this week
that found between 1993 and 2018 a total of $20.7 billion in
adjusted gross income left Massachusetts, with 46.5 percent of
that wealth going to Florida and 26 percent to New Hampshire.
Both Florida and New Hampshire have no income taxes, and in
Florida residents do not pay capital gains or estate taxes. The
average taxpayer who left Massachusetts for Florida in 2018
earned $120,325, while those leaving for New Hampshire earned
less, or about $64,992.
The state Legislature will decide, potentially by the spring,
whether to put a question on the 2022 ballot that would impose a
4 percent surtax on all income above $1 million. The tax on
wealthier residents has been pitched by proponents as a revenue
generator for education and transportation, worth up to $2
billion a year.
But critics have long said it could prompt employers to steer
clear of Massachusetts and wealthy residents to move out of
state.
"I think that there's no question that the post-COVID continued
growth of work from home arrangements creates a real risk for a
state like Massachusetts just because there are so many reasons
why someone would want to move to New Hampshire," Sullivan said.
"The proposed surtax could exacerbate that," Sullivan said.
Gov. Baker has not taken a position on the surtax, but in his
State of the Commonwealth address last week he talked about the
importance of adapting smartly to "the future of work" after the
COVID-19 pandemic is under control.
The wealth tax will need to be advanced again at a
Constitutional Convention in the 2021-2022 session in order to
go before voters on the statewide November ballot in 2022. While
there was some turnover on Beacon Hill this session, the
Legislature easily advanced the proposal 147-48 in June of 2019
and new Speaker Ron Mariano supported the measure two years ago,
after initially voting against it.
Neither Rep. Jim O'Day nor Sen. Jason Lewis, the principal
sponsors of the Constitutional amendment in both branches, could
be reached for comment Tuesday to discuss if and how the
pandemic has impacted their views on wealth taxes.
Sullivan said tax policy alone is not necessarily driving wealth
out of the state. He also cited the high cost of living, density
and weather as contributing factors.
While Florida has seen more than 70 percent in wealth migration
into the state come from taxpayers earning $200,000 or more,
Pioneer's research found that less than 40 percent of taxpayers
leaving Massachusetts fell in that same income bracket.
Immigration has also helped to offset population decline in
Massachusetts, according the Pioneer report, but on average an
immigrant moving to Massachusetts earned $36,809 in 2018
compared to an average adjusted gross income of $87,628 for
taxpayers who left Massachusetts for other states.
After Florida and New Hampshire, the remaining 27 percent of the
income leaving Massachusetts went to a mix of warm or lower
cost-of-living states like California, Maine, North Carolina and
Texas.
The greatest influx of wealth to Massachusetts over the same
15-year period came from New York, Connecticut, New Jersey,
Pennsylvania and Illinois, according to Pioneer.
"The big picture takeaway is that Massachusetts and New England
states, really, has been in pattern of losing large amounts of
income to other states," Sullivan said.
Also Tuesday, Sen. Elizabeth Warren announced she is joining the
U.S. Senate Committee on Finance and plans to introduce
legislation implementing a nationwide wealth tax of 2 cents on
every dollar earned over $50 million, with an additional surtax
on wealth over $1 billion.
The Boston
Herald
Tuesday, February 2, 2021
Taxes driving wealth out of Massachusetts and into Florida, New
Hampshire: report
By Joe Dwinell
Wealthy residents and businesses are leaving the state at a
troubling rate — an exodus that could grow now that working
remotely is gaining widespread acceptance, a new Pioneer
Institute report states.
Massachusetts has seen a net loss of $20 billion to other
states, especially New Hampshire and Florida where taxes are
much lower, the report warns.
“COVID has dramatically accelerated working from home and that’s
bad news for the state,” said Pioneer Institute Research
Director Greg Sullivan, who co-authored the report on “Do the
Wealthy Migrate from High-Tax States?”
The Pioneer report found wealthy residents have been packing up
and moving out of state over the last 25 years, taking with them
much-needed taxable income. The report found that some $20.7
billion in adjusted gross income left Massachusetts between 1993
and 2018.
That news hits as Massachusetts’ Democratic lawmakers have
proposed a hike in taxes on the rich to bolster funding for
education and transit. Another vote, Sullivan says, is expected
to come up again this spring.
He warns the post-pandemic economy will see companies be more
mobile and searching for the best deals they can — all while
employees could be free to choose where they want to live also.
Sullivan cited Tesla as Exhibit No. 1.
Tesla CEO and SpaceX entrepreneur Elon Musk, now considered the
richest person on Earth, has moved his base of operations to
Texas. He shunned California and its high income tax.
The brain drain from Massachusetts, the Pioneer report states,
has resulted in no-income-tax states like Florida capturing 46%
of the lost wealth and New Hampshire 26%.
“We saw this trend slow down temporarily during the Great
Recession, when people became less mobile,” Sullivan said. “But
it’s since come roaring back, and the magnitude is staggering.”
The Pioneer study adds high rates of immigration have bolstered
Massachusetts’ economic health and kept its population stable.
But that’s not going to help the bottom line forever.
“The legislature needs to be very careful in the new
post-pandemic environment, when talent is more mobile,” said
Pioneer Institute Executive Director Jim Stergios. “Businesses
look at the business climate closely — especially tax issues —
when they think about location. I’d hate to see us follow in
Connecticut’s footsteps toward economic decline.”
States that have lost taxable income to Massachusetts are in the
Northeast, with New York, Connecticut, and New Jersey
contributing the most, the report adds. Illinois, Ohio, and
Michigan, lost smaller amounts.
But wealth migration out of Massachusetts is a “nightmare
scenario,” Sullivan adds, that will only get worse in our “Zoom
economy.”
The Boston
Herald
Tuesday, February 2, 2021
A Boston Herald editorial
Wealthy have options to avoid tax hikes
When the going gets taxed, the taxed get going — right out of
Massachusetts.
That’s the gist of a new Pioneer Institute study which found
that wealthy residents have been packing up and moving out of
state over the last 25 years, taking with them much-needed
taxable income. The report found that some $20.7 billion in
adjusted gross income left Massachusetts between 1993 and 2018.
What destinations are on the GPS? According to the study, many
choose Florida and New Hampshire.
Pioneer Institute Research Director Greg Sullivan and research
assistant Andrew Mikula mined data from the IRS and found a
strong trend of wealthy residents leaving high-tax states for
low-tax ones.
Even when the economy was on the upswing.
“Because of our stable tax environment and concentration of
talent, Massachusetts has outperformed most states and outpaced
the nation in job growth since the Great Recession,” said
Pioneer Institute Executive Director Jim Stergios. “Yet even
during that period of growth we were shedding almost a billion
dollars a year to low-tax states like Florida and New
Hampshire.”
One way the rich stay that way is keeping their eyes out for a
bargain. Why pay more in taxes when you don’t have to?
Especially when your tax burden is already hefty. The Heritage
Foundation reported that, according to 2016 IRS data, the top
10% of income earners pay almost 70% of federal income taxes.
Progressives who want the wealthy to pay even more to fund free
college, free healthcare and a host of other programs would be
wise to keep the mobility trend in mind.
Back in November, Massachusetts’ Democratic lawmakers proposed a
hike in taxes on the rich to bolster funding for education and
transit.
Cambridge Rep. Mike Connolly’s amendment would have spiked the
tax rate for unearned income — bank interest, profit from stock
and real estate sales, real estate rent income and other capital
gains revenue — from 5% up to 9% as part of the House’s fiscal
2021 budget.
The proposal failed.
Which is not to say that it, or some other variation of
legislation to increase taxes on high-income residents, won’t
make a return appearance.
The economy — both state and national — is reeling because of
the coronavirus pandemic, and the wealthy are in the crosshairs
of progressives looking for cash.
But just as big-bucks Bay Staters can fill out a change of
address form when their Massachusetts taxes start rising, so too
do wealthy households across the country.
They’re just looking to foreign shores for cash comfort.
According to Bloomberg, Joe Biden’s win and COVID-19 unease
prompted a surge in wealthy Americans applying for second
passports.
“We haven’t seen the likes of this before,” said Paddy Blewer, a
London-based director at citizenship and residency-advisory firm
Henley & Partners, referring to queries from U.S. individuals.
Countries such as Cyprus, Malta and islands in the Caribbean
have raised hundreds of millions in these
citizenship-by-investment programs.
Great for them, bad for the U.S.
With Biden in office, the progressive wing of the Democratic
Party has been trying to push the needle further to the left
with pricey climate and social program proposals, paid for with
high taxes on America’s wealthy.
If these efforts continue without thought to the potential loss
of these taxpayers, the country will be literally all the
poorer.
The
Salem News
Wednesday, February 3, 2021
A Salem News editorial
Sun, lack of taxes might tip the balance
A glance at the mounds of heavy, wet snow dumped by Monday
night’s nor’easter might be all you need to know about why the
Bay State consistently loses more wealthy residents to Florida
each year than it gains. But the out-migration of high-income
Massachusetts residents to New Hampshire is second to Florida,
which means this steady flight isn’t all about white sand
beaches and sunny skies.
A white paper released Monday by the Pioneer Institute compares
the adjusted gross income changes in Massachusetts and Florida
and concludes that snowbirds are not only seeking the sun, but
“the data also show a strong correlation between state taxes and
migration.” In other words, states like Florida and New
Hampshire that have no personal income tax are seeing more
people from Massachusetts with annual gross incomes of $200,000
or more moving in than we are seeing from those states. And, as
wealthier Bay Staters move south or north over the border,
Massachusetts loses the personal income tax revenue those
higher-income people were contributing.
It’s not shocking that wealthier people -- who are more mobile
-- would be drawn to states with no personal income tax. But the
loss of millions in state tax revenue is no small matter.
The Pioneer report found that Massachusetts residents who moved
to Florida between 1993 and 2018 took more than $20 billion in
adjusted gross income with them. Florida was the biggest
beneficiary of that wealth, capturing 47.5% of it; New
Hampshire, which shares the weather of Massachusetts, if course,
captured just over 26% of that incoming wealth.
A larger percentage of high-income Massachusetts residents moved
to Florida than moved to New Hampshire, according to the report.
While Massachusetts still has a growing population, most of that
comes from the steady influx of people from other countries, as
opposed to migrants from other states.
“Migration within the United States has seen Massachusetts
shedding residents every year since 2011,” the white paper says,
with 50,000 more Bay Staters moving to other states every year
during the mid-2000s than those who moved from other states to
Massachusetts.
“For now, immigration has offset this trend, and Massachusetts
had one of the highest immigration totals as a share of its
population in 2018, second only to Florida,” the report says.
So the high number of immigrants should offset what we’re
losing, right? In terms of population, maybe, but there’s a big
difference in the adjusted gross income the majority of
immigrants bring with them versus the adjusted gross income of
Bay Staters leaving Massachusetts for points south.
The report says the average adjusted gross income of an
immigrant moving to Massachusetts in 2018 was $36,809, while
taxpayers leaving Massachusetts took with them an average
adjusted gross income of $87,628 that year.
Florida tourism officials have been singing the praises of their
state since back when it was still swampland and grids of
suburban neighborhoods existed only in the minds of land
speculators. But the allure eventually took hold, turning
seasonal visitors into permanent residents, many of them retired
and with sizable incomes. It’s those wealthier migrants who
might have come for the sun and stayed for the lack of taxes.
The report draws conclusions based on the data analyzed by its
two authors – one of whom, Greg Sullivan, served 10 years as the
commonwealth’s inspector general, and was a state rep for 17
years before that – but doesn’t advocate any course of action.
Draw your own conclusions: No state would consider ditching its
personal income tax just to keep residents where they are. But
lawmakers and state revenue officials might be wise to read the
report and consider the positives and negatives people weigh
when they think about heading elsewhere.
We know we can’t offer as much fun in the sun as Florida, but we
beat them hands down on the sledding hills.
State House News
Service
Wednesday, February 3, 2021
January Tax Haul Far Surpasses Pre-Pandemic Receipts
Receipts Rising, Not Falling as Forecast Predicted
By Colin A. Young
January tax collections obliterated the Baker administration's
expectations, coming in almost a half-billion dollars above the
Department of Revenue's already-upgraded monthly benchmark and
helping to brighten the state's financial picture heading into a
fresh round of budget deliberations.
DOR collected $3.347 billion from taxpayers last month, which is
$392 million or 13.3 percent greater than what the state
collected in January 2020 and $429 million or 14.7 percent above
DOR's benchmark for the month, which had already been boosted by
$180 million from an earlier estimate.
"January revenue included increases in withholding, income
estimated payments, regular sales tax, and 'all other tax,' as
well as a decrease in meals tax," Revenue Commissioner Geoffrey
Snyder said. "The increase in withholding is likely related to
unemployment insurance benefits and bonus related payments, and
income estimated payments were strong likely because of 2020
investment-related income gains. The increase in 'all other tax'
is primarily attributable to estate taxes, a category that tends
to fluctuate."
January is the fourth-largest revenue month of the year for
Massachusetts, and tax collectors usually bring in a shade more
than 10 percent of their annual haul during the month.
Now seven months through fiscal year 2021, Massachusetts state
government has collected $764 million more in taxes from people
and businesses than it did during the same seven pre-pandemic
months of fiscal year 2020. The last month Massachusetts saw a
year-over-year decline in tax collections was September.
"To this point, tax collections have exceeded every expectation
and projection, and we really need to figure out why that is,"
Evan Horowitz, director of the Center for State Policy Analysis
at Tufts University, said. "Perhaps it's a testament to the
robustness of our tax system but it could also be an indictment
of the models and partners the state relies on for planning
purposes."
Gov. Charlie Baker said last week that the state's tax revenue
picture remains "somewhat unpredictable" and DOR does not expect
the $764 million revenue cushion it has accumulated to last.
If monthly collections come in at current benchmark levels for
the rest of the fiscal year, Massachusetts would be looking at a
drop of $90 million from actual fiscal 2020 tax collections.
Less than a month ago, before the administration upped its
overall revenue estimate for fiscal year 2021 and before January
collections more than doubled the state's cushion over fiscal
2020 collections, hitting the DOR benchmarks for the rest of the
year would have put the state on track for a $268 million drop
from 2020 collections.
DOR expects that it will collect $1.502 billion in taxes in
February, which would be a drop of $13 million from February
2020. In March, the agency is projecting tax collections to be
$2.413 billion, a decrease of $246 million from March 2020. In
April, DOR expects to collect $3.48 billion, about $1.5 billion
more than in April 2020, when the tax filing deadline was
extended. May 2021 is expected to bring in $1.893 billion or
$155 million more than May 2020.
If collections come in at exactly the DOR benchmarks from
February through May, the state would enter June having
collected about $2.159 billion more than it had collected to
that point of fiscal year 2020. But DOR expects to collect about
$2.249 billion less this June than it did last June, meaning the
month (and therefore the fiscal year) would end with DOR having
taken in $90 million less than it did through all of fiscal year
2020.
State House News
Service
Tuesday, February 2, 2021
State Pension Fund Returns Soar Amidst Pandemic
PRIT Fund Assets Rose Nearly $10 Billion in 2020
By Colin A. Young
Following market volatility and uncertainty at play through much
of the first half of 2020, a strong second-half performance for
the Massachusetts state pension fund -- the largest six-month
return in its 37-year history -- helped drive the fund up to an
all-time high of $86.9 billion by the end of 2020.
The Pension Reserves Investment Trust (PRIT) Fund saw a return
of 16.4 percent from July 1 through Dec. 31, outperforming its
benchmark for that period of 12.5 percent. That topped the
record for a half-year return of 15.7 percent that had stood
since June 1986, officials said Tuesday.
For the full calendar year 2020 -- a year that saw volatility
rock financial markets as the pandemic first took hold before
they stabilized and some indices set new records -- the PRIT
Fund produced a return of 12.1 percent, beating its benchmark of
10.8 percent.
Michael Trotsky, executive director and chief investment officer
of the Massachusetts Pension Reserves Investment Management
Board, presented the fund performance report during a meeting of
PRIM's Investment Committee on Tuesday morning but reminded
committee members that the positive results "mask hardships and
uncertainties" that persist in the economy and society.
"The strong market return seems like a cruel irony because it
does not capture the hardships that so many in our country are
facing. Sometimes, we all know, markets do not seem logical. So
let's please review today's results with appropriate humility
and let's be gratified that we're doing our important part to
grow the assets used to support more than 300,000
beneficiaries," Trotsky said. "A strong return, so to speak, is
a shot in the arm to pension security for our beneficiaries in
this time of so much struggle and uncertainty."
Trotsky said he is reminded daily of the economic struggles so
many people in Massachusetts and across the country are
contending with, often as he walks from the train station to
PRIM's offices on State Street.
"Each week, I notice more businesses folding and I notice more
and more homeless on the streets as I walk from the train
station to the office. It actually often feels dangerous right
in the Financial District, right where our offices are," he
said. "And believe me, it does not seem like the Boston of a
year ago and it breaks my heart."
The fund's calendar year performance equates to an investment
gain of $9.6 billion for the PRIT Fund.
"Nearly $10 billion in one year ... staggering," Trotsky said.
After the PRIT Fund shed 9.9 percent during the first quarter of
2020 as the COVID-19 pandemic rocked the global economy, Trotsky
said in April that PRIM would "continue to have no problem
paying pension benefits."
The PRIT Fund paid out a net $1.5 billion in benefits to
retirees during 2020. The retirement funds of state employees,
teachers and many municipal employees in Massachusetts are
invested through PRIM.
"The PRIT Fund continues to perform very well in both up and
down markets. Down markets like we had in the March quarter,
where we performed admirably, but also in up markets like we had
in the September and December quarters," Trotsky said. "In all,
it was a very strong calendar year performance and the fund,
again, is at a record high of $87 billion despite the extreme
volatility and uncertainty we faced during the year, a year that
we won't soon forget."
Looking at the markets, Trotsky said it seems to him that they
"consistently look through any near-term bad news" like spikes
in COVID-19 cases and deaths, logistical problems distributing
the vaccine, the emergence of more-contagious coronavirus
variants, and a recent deceleration in overall economic growth.
"But these near term issues have not been enough to stop a
staggeringly strong market, mostly because of a few hopeful new
developments. First, the new administration is promoting a new
$1.9 trillion stimulus package and that's viewed as good news
for the economy, at least in the near term. Second, a new, more
centralized and hopefully better coordinated federal response to
the virus will help put that hopefully in the rearview mirror.
And third, signals that the Federal Reserve will continue to be
accommodative under the new [Treasury Secretary] Janet Yellen
will all lead to a better economy in the future," he said.
"Obviously, there is still a lot of economic, political and
public health uncertainty to worry about."
State House News
Service
Wednesday, February 3, 2021
Rodrigues Hoping for Signed Budget by July 1
By Chris Lisinski
Lawmakers did not reach an agreement on the current state budget
until five months into the fiscal year amid the uncertainty
inflicted by the pandemic, but the Senate's budget chief said
Wednesday he believes the next cycle will follow a "more
traditional process."
Sen. Michael Rodrigues told human service providers that
preparations are underway in the Legislature to roll out fiscal
year 2022 budget bills after Gov. Charlie Baker released his
proposal last week.
Asked by an attendee at an Association of Developmental
Disabilities Providers event if this year's spending debate
would reflect the unprecedented delays experienced last year,
Rodrigues replied, "We are hoping for a more traditional
process."
The Westport Democrat recounted some of the factors that pushed
Baker and lawmakers to seek several short-term interim budgets
instead of an annual plan last summer and fall, including
uncertainty over federal aid and early forecasts from economists
that tax revenues could fall billions of dollars below
expectations.
"Now, we're beyond that. We're already working on FY22, "
Rodrigues said, later adding, "We are hoping that by July 1,
we're going to have an FY22 budget signed by the governor."
The state received about $12.8 billion in federal revenues in
fiscal 2020 and is projected to receive about $13.97 billion
this fiscal year. For fiscal 2022, the state has slotted in
$12.56 billion in federal aid.
On the heels of a $900 billion aid bill signed by former
President Donald Trump in December, President Joe Biden is now
pushing a new $1.9 trillion package, which is hitting obstacles
in Washington. Rodrigues told the group Wednesday that lawmakers
are no longer trying to project the impacts of each proposal.
"We have stopped trying to figure out what the state is going to
receive with each proposal, or in the old days, with each
competing tweet coming out of the White House. It changes
daily," he said. "We will continue to be very thoughtful of any
federal money, but we're not going to count our chickens before
they hatch."
State House News
Service
Thursday, February 4, 2021
Lawmakers creating more paid leadership positions
3 new committees will cost taxpayers $137,672 in stipends
By Matt Murphy
The creation of three new legislative committees to focus on the
state's COVID-19 response, racial equality and cybersecurity
will come at a cost of $137,672 to taxpayers, according to a
News Service calculation based on the 2017 pay law.
House Speaker Ron Mariano and Senate President Karen Spilka
announced Wednesday night that they intended to create three new
standing joint House-Senate committees to start the new session:
the Joint Committee on Covid-19 and Emergency Preparedness and
Management; the Joint Committee on Racial Equity, Civil Rights
and Inclusion; and the Joint Committee on Advanced Information
Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity. There are currently
29 other joint committees.
The committees were included in a joint rules proposal that
surfaced in the Senate on Thursday and will be debated next
Thursday. "We look forward to utilizing these new committees to
focus attention and expertise to these timely and important
issues," Mariano and Spilka said in a joint statement.
With the creation of those committees comes new chairmanships
and vice chairmanships for Mariano and Spilka to award, each
with their own stipends. Based on the 2017 law that increased
pay for legislators and other public officials, committee chairs
can earn between $17,042 and $73,851 on top of their base
salaries, depending on which committees they lead.
Without a change in state law to specifically assign a higher
stipend to the new committees, it appears the leaders of the new
committees would be in line for stipends on the lowest rung of
the pay scale, with the six new chairs from each branch
receiving $17,042 each in additional pay and the vice chairs an
extra $5,903 each.
This pay structure could not be immediately confirmed with
Senate leaders. Senate rules limit members to collecting a
maximum of two stipends for their assigned responsibilities,
while House members can collect just one stipend, according to
that branch's rules.
The stipends started at $15,000 for a chair and $5,200 for a
vice chair in 2017, but have been adjusted biennially in
accordance with the law based on statewide salary and wage
changes as recorded by the Bureau of Economic Analysis in the
United States Department of Commerce.
Treasurer Deborah Goldberg certified an 8.32 percent increase in
stipend pay in 2019 and another 4.89 percent increase this year.
Legislators also saw their base pay increase in January by 6.46
percent to $70,536 for the next two years, based on the state's
Constitution.
The
Salem News
Saturday, February 6, 2021
Baker seeks to limit sick pay for state workers
By Christian M. Wade, Statehouse Reporter
Gov. Charlie Baker is making another attempt to cap expanding
sick time banks for state employees that have taxpayers on the
hook for tens of millions of dollars.
Baker’s plan, tucked into his preliminary $45.6 billion budget,
would limit a vast number of state employees to accruing 1,000
hours of sick leave, or about six months’ worth. The limit is
expected to save the state more than $8 million a year.
Baker has argued that capping sick time accruals will save
taxpayers money and align state benefits with those of other
states and the private sector.
The cap would only affect the executive branch. As of Friday at
least 5,400 employees whose departments answer to the governor
had banked 1,000 hours of sick time or more, according to the
Baker administration. That's roughly 12% of the executive
branch's workforce.
Those figures don’t include quasi-governmental agencies, the
state court system or the five-campus University of
Massachusetts, the state’s second-largest employer with more
than 24,000 employees.
Beacon Hill watchdogs say the state's current policy is
unsustainable, especially with a sizable portion of the
workforce set to retire in coming years.
"Sick pay shouldn't roll over, year after year," said David
Tuerck, president of the Beacon Hill Institute. "It only drives
up the overall cost of the state budget."
That's because retiring state employees are allowed to cash out
20% of their unused time.
Under current state law, public employees get up to 15 days of
sick time a year. Benefits vary but all state workers can accrue
unlimited amounts of sick time during their time on the job.
In 2017, state Inspector General Greg Cunha found more than
10,400 employees — about 12% of the state’s 90,000-member
workforce — sitting on 1,000 hours or more of unused time. That
represented a liability of more than $117 million for taxpayers.
Baker's efforts to reel in the state's payroll liabilities face
resistance in the Legislature, which is reviewing his budget.
Similar proposals by the governor have been flatly rejected in
the past by the Democrat-controlled House and Senate.
Public employee unions oppose changing sick leave policies,
accusing the Baker administration of bypassing the collective
bargaining process.
"This is a benefit that was negotiated in good faith and
included in a contract signed by our union and the governor,"
said Jim Durkin, legislative director for the Massachusetts
chapter of the American Federation of State, County and
Municipal Employees, which represents 35,000 government workers.
"Any changes to that benefit should be negotiated through the
same process."
— Christian M. Wade covers the
Massachusetts Statehouse for The Salem News and its sister
newspapers and websites.
State House News
Service
Friday, February 5, 2021
Diehl Departing Finance Committee Role at MassGOP
By Matt Murphy
Geoff Diehl, the former state lawmaker and Republican State
Committee member, has given up his role as finance committee
chairman for the party to focus on recruiting new candidates and
helping to organize fundraisers.
MassGOP Chairman Jim Lyons announced the change in roles at the
party on Friday. He did not say who would be taking Diehl's
place.
"Geoff (Diehl) performed outstanding work on behalf of all
Massachusetts Republicans during his time on the finance
committee, and we owe him our sincerest appreciation," Lyons
said. "During his tenure, notable national figures like Newt
Gingrich, Sean Spicer, and economist Stephen Moore appeared as
headliners for our important 'Chairman's Circle' events."
Diehl has not ruled out being a candidate himself in 2022,
keeping open the possibility that he would run for governor. The
former Whitman legislator ran against U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren
in 2018, and played a role in former President Donald Trump's
2016 campaign in Massachusetts.
Diehl said he thought his energy would be "best spent devoted to
making sure we make the necessary preparations ahead of the
upcoming midterms."
"Our party's commitment to freedom, economic opportunity, and
personal responsibility has never been more important than it is
now, and the work to push that message begins now," Diehl said.
The party did not immediately respond to an email seeking to
determine how long Diehl held the position of finance chairman
for the MassGOP.
Gov. Charlie Baker, who despite being a Republican has largely
broken away from the state party, has not yet said whether he
would seek a third term.
|
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
|
