 |
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
Monday, July 5, 2021
Despite Beacon Hill
Lethargy News Happens
Jump directly
to CLT's Commentary on the News
|
Most Relevant News
Excerpts
(Full news reports follow Commentary)
|
|
Former state representative Geoff Diehl (R-Whitman) will
run for governor of Massachusetts in 2022.
Diehl, who represented the Seventh Plymouth district
from 2011 to 2019, made the announcement at an event in
western Massachusetts on Sunday, July 4, with no press
in attendance. Diehl confirmed the news in an email
message to NewBostonPost on Sunday afternoon, after
multiple sources alerted NewBostonPost of the matter....
A conservative Republican, Diehl supported President
Donald Trump in both the 2016 and 2020 presidential
elections. He was also one of the few elected officials
in the state to endorse Trump in the 2016 primary....
Diehl told NewBostonPost he will have a press release on
the matter with more information later today.
The New Boston Post
Sunday, July 4, 2021
Geoff Diehl To Run For Governor
Of Massachusetts
Former state Rep. Geoff Diehl has set his sights on the
governor’s office, becoming the first Republican to
formally declare he’s in the race while incumbent Gov.
Charlie Baker remains on the fence.
“It is time for a new path forward. It is time to
re-empower the individual. It is time to free our
economy. It is time to help our children overcome the
damage inflicted by government over this past year,”
Diehl said in a statement after announcing his plans at
an Independence Day Freedom Festival hosted by the
Western Mass. GOP Patriots....
Diehl took aim at Baker’s coronavirus pandemic response,
condemning widespread business closures and
“over-taxation and reckless spending by government.” He
also plugged his support for law enforcement and
immigration reform.
Citing his past record in leading the repeal of the 2013
indexed gas tax legislation, Diehl also took aim at the
Transportation Climate Initiative championed by Baker,
which seeks to limit carbon emissions through a
cap-and-invest program and would likely lead to a 5 to 9
cent per gallon increase at the gas pump per state
reports....
Diehl served as former President Donald Trump’s
Massachusetts campaign co-chair during the 2016
presidential election.
The Boston Herald
Sunday, July 4, 2021
Geoff Diehl announces GOP run
for governor in 2022
"When I was first elected as State Representative in
2011, the budget that passed in the legislature was
$28B. Ten years later, the FY ’21 budget came in
at $46B – a 70% increase. I’m not sure I
know anyone who has been able to increase their take
home pay by 70% in the last decade, so we must pass a
budget that eliminates the reckless spending that has
taken hold on Beacon Hill and in Washington. We’re
already suffering from the high cost of inflation with
housing, food and gas due to DC printing money and
putting generations of our families in debt. The
Diehl Administration will protect your wallet and allow
you to enjoy the savings and economic freedom your hard
work earned and you and your children deserve."
Geoff
Diehl For Massachusetts
The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear New Hampshire Gov.
Chris Sununu’s cross-border tax tiff — a decision that will
force Bay State employees who worked remotely from their
Granite State homes during the pandemic to pay a 5% income
tax.
Sununu accused Supreme Court justices of “setting a costly
precedent” Monday when they tossed the case without comment.
“This decision will have lasting ramifications for thousands
of Granite State residents,” Sununu said in a statement.
New Hampshire sued Massachusetts last October for taxing
remote workers who are employed by Bay State companies but
who worked from their New Hampshire homes during the
pandemic. Under normal circumstances, those workers only had
to pay the 5% income tax for days they physically went into
their offices in the Commonwealth.
In April 2020, Gov. Charlie Baker moved to continue taxing
those workers even if they didn’t step into their Bay State
buildings. The emergency rule went into effect until June
15, 2021, and retroactively affected earnings beginning
March 10, 2020.
Baker’s new rule hit up about 100,000 workers.
The decision to throw out Sununu’s case was nearly unanimous
— only justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented.
The Boston Herald
Monday, June 28, 2021
Supreme Court throws out New
Hampshire’s tax complaint,
forcing remote workers to pay Massachusetts
The U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to take up a lawsuit
New Hampshire filed challenging Massachusetts's application
of its income tax on residents working remotely from other
states during the pandemic, a case that financial analysts
said could have resulted in "the reallocation of billions of
income tax dollars between certain states." ...
The country's high court on Monday denied New Hampshire's
motions for leave to file bills of complaint, though the
order noted that Associate Justices Clarence Thomas and
Samuel Alito would have granted the motions.
Had the Supreme Court taken the case and decided it in favor
of New Hampshire, Massachusetts and five other states that
tax out-of-state residents for income earned working from
home -- Arkansas, Delaware, Nebraska, New York and
Pennsylvania -- could have lost billions of dollars in tax
revenue to states where many residents commute out of state
for work, like New Jersey, Connecticut, Hawaii and Iowa....
In a brief filed by New Jersey, Connecticut, Hawaii and
Iowa, the states that potentially stood to gain from a
SCOTUS ruling in favor of New Hampshire said the court's
decision "has far-reaching implications as to which States
will collect billions in revenue during the pandemic --
whether the States that unlawfully tax nonresidents working
from home or the Home States" and that the court's ruling
"will remain critical well after the pandemic ends" because
of the states that, unlike Massachusetts, did not tie their
tax rules for remote workers to the end of the COVID-19
state of emergency.
S&P Global Ratings said that, if the Supreme Court declined
to take up New Hampshire's case, it expected "similar
challenges to reappear."
The Biden administration, in a brief filed by Acting
Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, suggested that the
Supreme Court should deny New Hampshire's motion because
"the issues New Hampshire seeks to present can adequately be
raised and litigated by New Hampshire residents who are
subject to the Massachusetts income tax" and while the
Granite State might "prefer that its residents not pay
personal income taxes to any government, an independent tax
obligation falling on a State's residents generally is not
an injury to that State's own sovereign prerogatives."
With the second half of June still to be counted, Mass. DOR
has collected $32.454 billion in tax revenue so far in
fiscal year 2021, which ends June 30.
That's $3.364 billion more than the Baker administration's
most recent estimate for the full 12-month fiscal year and
$1.3 billion more than the pre-pandemic estimate of $31.15
billion in tax revenue for fiscal year 2021. It is also
$2.334 billion more than the consensus revenue agreement of
$30.12 billion the governor, House and Senate used to craft
their fiscal year 2022 budget proposals.
State House News Service
Monday, June 28, 2021
Supreme Court Won’t Hear Remote
Work Tax Case
New Hampshire Challenged Mass. Application of Income Tax
After the U.S. Supreme Court decided this week not to take
up New Hampshire's lawsuit challenging Massachusetts's
taxing of residents working remotely from other states
during the pandemic, members of Congress from the Granite
State and Connecticut filed a bill to prevent states from
taxing out-of-state workers.
U.S. Reps. Jim Himes and Jahana Hayes of Connecticut, and
Chris Pappas and Annie Kuster of New Hampshire this week
proposed the "Multi-State Worker Tax Fairness Act" which
would prohibit any state from taxing income that a
non-resident earns when not physically in that state....
"The ability of Massachusetts or any other state to tax you
should stop at the state line, and that's what this
legislation will ensure," Pappas said. "For the nearly one
in five Granite Staters employed by companies out of state,
every dollar they can keep in their pockets makes a
difference, especially as we recover from the pandemic."
Himes added, "If you wake up every morning in Connecticut,
and walk downstairs to your home office in Connecticut, it
only makes sense that you should be paying taxes to
Connecticut, not to New York or whatever state your
company's headquarters happens to be in."
A major credit rating agency earlier this year highlighted
an analysis from a New Hampshire economic advisor that
estimated that Massachusetts collects about $1.2 billion
from New Hampshire residents who work remotely but are
employed by an organization located in Massachusetts. S&P
Global Ratings also said that Connecticut "estimates it will
lose $339.0 million-$444.5 million of 2020 income tax
revenue to New York State."
State House News Service
Thursday, July 1, 2021
Fight Over Mass. Taxation of Non-Residents
Spills Into Congress
Now guaranteed to miss the deadline to have a annual budget
in place by July 1, the Legislature passed a temporary
budget on Monday that would keep government programs funded
through July while negotiations on an annual spending plan
continue.
The new fiscal year starts on Thursday, but budget talks
between the House and Senate over competing $47.7 billion
annual budgets (H 4001 / S 2465) remain behind closed doors
and ongoing. Even if a deal were to be struck before the
start of fiscal 2022, the Senate adjourned Monday with plans
not to meet again until Thursday.
The House and Senate both enacted a $5.41 billion interim
budget filed by Gov. Charlie Baker last week to keep
government funded through July. Baker had asked that the
Legislature approve the interim budget, which would be
voided upon passage of a general appropriations bill, no
later than June 29 to ensure that the state can meet its
financial obligations.
Sen. Cindy Friedman, the vice chair of the Senate Ways and
Means Committee, called passage of the interim budget
"standard procedure" while the six-member conference
committee works to "finalize" a fiscal 2022 budget.
"The interim budget will provide $5.41 billion to cover the
bills and services estimated for the first month of the
year, and will allow us to finish our thoughtful and
collaborative work with our House colleagues on the final
full-year budget," Friedman said....
With tax collections soaring to close out fiscal 2021 and
debate over how to spend an expected surplus, Democratic
leaders have suggested they may also take a fresh look at
projected tax collections for next year.
State House News Service
Monday, June 28, 2021
Legislature Passes Bill to Fund
Government Through July
It may be an unusual year, but one annual Beacon Hill
tradition is continuing: getting the state budget done late.
July 1 marks the start of the 2022 fiscal year, but a final
budget bill is nowhere in sight.
Last year, amid COVID-19-related economic uncertainty,
lawmakers intentionally delayed passing a budget for months
as they waited to see what would happen with the economy and
with congressional stimulus bills. This year, however,
lawmakers pursued a more normal path. The House and Senate
have both passed their versions of the budget, and the two
bills are sitting with a six-member conference committee.
On Monday, lawmakers passed a temporary budget to keep
government funded for a month while they continue to haggle
over details of the annual budget. Gov. Charlie Baker
quickly signed it. According to the State House News
Service, Sen. Cindy Friedman, vice chair of the Senate Ways
and Means Committee, called passage of the interim budget
"standard procedure." ...
It’s not clear what the holdup is. The two bodies have a
small number of real policy differences, such as different
versions of a film tax credit extension. But overall, state
revenues are coming in much higher than expected, meaning
lawmakers have lots of money to spend....
The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation analysis suggests
that the biggest issue may be figuring out how to deal with
extra money. The budget is based on certain revenue
assumptions, many of which have since changed. The
business-backed foundation estimates that lawmakers will
have at least $3.8 billion more to spend than was assumed in
January....
MTF recommends setting aside money to use alongside an
influx of federal funds, which are expected to be allocated
through a separate budget process. (After a brief dispute
with lawmakers, Baker signed a bill Monday giving the
Legislature authority to determine how to spend that money
through the normal legislative process, while laying out his
own proposal for how to spend more than half of it.) ...
According to the National Conference on State Legislatures,
as of June 23, 32 states had already enacted their fiscal
2022 budgets, while another four states had budgets on their
governors’ desks. Five states either had two-year budgets in
place or have fiscal years that start this fall.
Only one state – New York – failed to have a budget in place
by the start of its fiscal year (which was April 1). In two
days, Massachusetts will join that club.
CommonWealth Magazine
Tuesday, June 29, 2021
Continuing an annual tradition: The
late state budget
Massachusetts has long had politicians who think the answer
to every government failure is to raise taxes. But
Massachusetts has prospered despite the greed of the
political class because our state constitution has one very
strong protection for taxpayers: a constitutional
requirement for a single-rate tax.
The flat tax means politicians cannot divide Massachusetts
taxpayers into different income groups and mug them one at a
time.
Today the Massachusetts single tax rate is 5%.
Some states allow a graduated or progressive income tax. The
average income tax rate in graduated tax rate states is
4.9%. Flat rate tax states have an average state income tax
of 3.9%. Everyone wins. California’s rates run from 1% to
13%. Connecticut from 3% to 6.99%. New York from 4% to 10.9%
But in Massachusetts and other single-rate states, the
politicians have to look us all in the eye when they claim
they have a “great idea.” With a flat tax, they have to
admit — “you are all going to pay for it.” It had better be
a very good idea to get majority support from all
taxpayers....
Nine states have single-rate taxes. North Carolina,
Kentucky, Utah, Colorado, Michigan, Indiana, Massachusetts …
and Illinois?
Illinois? Isn’t that a very liberal deep blue Democrat state
controlled by a political machine in Chicago? How do they
have a flat-rate income tax of 4.95%?
Well, the drafters of the Illinois constitution had the same
insight that Massachusetts constitution writers had: If
everyone faces the same tax rate, it limits the ability of
the politicians to divide and conquer — and tax and
spend....
And the Massachusetts amendment has a unique problem. One of
the worst parts of this proposal is that writing tax policy
into the state constitution makes it difficult to fix. If
the tax ends up damaging the economy and chasing jobs,
individuals, families and employers out of state, lawmakers
and voters can only fix the damage by amending the
constitution again. That will take many years to fix.
The middle class and working families will be the key
constituency that will ultimately reject this proposal
because they have the most to lose under this tax hike.
While lawmakers want the public to think it’s a tax hike
only for the rich, the state’s most affluent will quickly
flee because they have the ability to leave. The middle
class and working families will be left to cover the bill.
As more middle class and working families realize this is an
attempt to tax them next, this will eventually fail for the
sixth time and be a victory that all taxpayers can relish.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, July 1, 2021
Millionaire’s tax lets politicians
divide us
By Paul Diego Craney and Grover Norquist
Gov. Charlie Baker’s hope to establish a regional
Transportation Climate Initiative has waned further as Rhode
Island lawmakers recessed for the summer without entering
the agreement.
The lack of action mirrors Connecticut that just a month ago
pulled out of the deal amid budget negotiations....
Thirteen eastern jurisdictions, including Maine, New York,
Pennsylvania and Vermont, expressed interest in the plan in
2019. By the time states signed a memorandum of
understanding in December, only Massachusetts, Connecticut,
Rhode Island and Washington, D.C., remained....
“The Baker-Polito Administration understands the challenges
in developing an ambitious multi-state program like the
Transportation and Climate Initiative Program, but continues
to believe the program’s capacity to combat climate change
and build better, cleaner transportation infrastructure is
unmatched,” said Executive Office of Energy and
Environmental Affairs spokesperson Craig Gilvarg. He added
that Massachusetts will only move forward with TCI if
multiple states opt in....
“Lawmakers have a very good pulse for what their
constituents want and realize that there is no desire to
raise gasoline and diesel costs anywhere,” Paul Diego Craney,
spokesperson for the conservative nonprofit Mass. Fiscal
Alliance, said in a statement.
The Boston Herald
Friday, July 2, 2021
Rhode Island lawmakers recess without
adopting TCI,
leaving just Mass. and Washington, D.C.
Like Connecticut, Rhode Island must seek legislative
approval of the agreement before their state officially can
enter into it. On June 4, Connecticut lawmakers were unable
to gain a consensus to approve TCI, despite using the budget
as negotiation leverage, due to its lack of support by
rank-and-file lawmakers. Essentially, TCI suffered a similar
blow in Rhode Island on Thursday. The bill in the Rhode
Island House remains in the House Finance Committee, as
lawmakers there realistically view it as a gas tax.
“What happened in Connecticut in early June is clearly
having an impact on what’s happening in Rhode Island in
early July. Lawmakers have a very good pulse for what their
constituents want and realize that there is no desire to
raise gasoline and diesel costs anywhere. While gasoline is
surpassing $3.00/gallon and inflation is devaluing wages,
TCI is about to make matters worse for working people and
low-income families in order to subsidize electric cars for
the affluent. Aside from small pockets in Massachusetts that
continue to push TCI, this doesn’t sound appealing to anyone
and states from Virginia all the way up to Maine continue to
reject it,” stated Paul Diego Craney, spokesperson for
MassFiscal. ...
“At some point, the regional approach to TCI is going to
lose whatever credibility it has left when it’s just
Massachusetts entering into the agreement next year. It’s
clear to everyone but Gov. Baker and Lt. Gov. Polito that
there is no appeal to TCI and Massachusetts should withdraw
from the program and stop wasting taxpayer money on trying
to advance a regional gas tax that only the Governor of
Massachusetts wants to see implemented,” concluded Craney.
Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance
Friday, July 2, 2021
News Release
Rhode Island Follows Connecticut as
Lawmakers Recess
without Taking Up Controversial and Costly TCI Gas Tax
Scheme
Legislative leaders released a new statement on State House
reopening plans Wednesday, but did not outline any concrete
steps to reopen the building.
The statement comes just over two weeks after the Baker
administration rescinded nearly all of the pandemic-era
restrictions that governed life for 15 months across
Massachusetts and as businesses start to reopen their
offices to employees. The State House has been mostly closed
for 471 days.
In a joint statement, Senate President Karen Spilka and
House Speaker Ronald Mariano said the Legislature "is in the
process of developing a comprehensive and nuanced reopening
plan with the goal of returning employees and the public
safely to the State House in the fall." Fall begins Sept. 22
and ends on Dec. 21....
The State House first closed to the public in March 2020,
when legislative leaders shuttered the building as COVID-19
cases started to surge. Since then, a small number of
lawmakers, staff, and other workers have made their way to
Beacon Hill, while many others who used to work in the
building are working remotely instead.
State House News Service
Wednesday, June 30, 2021
No Timeline for State House Reopening
Other Than Fall
Visitors to Boston this summer can enjoy many of the sites
that make the city a magnet for tourists.
The Museum of Fine Arts is open, so too is the Museum of
Science, the Bunker Hill Museum, Old South Meeting House,
Old North Church and other itinerary musts.
And then there’s the State House, which is sitting out the
summer with a wistful eye toward the fall.
What’s the holdup?
As the State House News reported, a little over two weeks
after the Baker administration rescinded nearly all of the
state’s pandemic-era restrictions of the past 15 months,
Senate President Karen Spilka and House Speaker Ronald
Mariano issued a statement. The gist: They’re not flipping
the switch on the “open” sign....
Safety protocols are the crux of successful reopening — just
ask the businesses and institutions that have them in place
and are seeing foot traffic once more.
Lawmakers should lead the way, not lag behind.
A Boston Herald editorial
Friday, July 2, 2021
If businesses can reopen, so can State
House
The six lawmakers who have been trying to reconcile
differences between the House and Senate budgets for fiscal
2022 now have even more on their plates -- all six were
appointed Thursday to also negotiate a compromise version of
a supplemental fiscal 2021 budget bill, raising the
possibility that issues in the two sweeping bills could
become intertwined.
State House News Service
Thursday, July 1, 2021
Annual Budget Negotiators Also Asked
to Settle Supplemental Budget
The Legislature kicked off a hazy, humid, scorcher of a week
by passing a $5.4 billion budget that will keep government
running through July. That allowed fiscal year 2022 to dawn
on Thursday without disruption even though an annual budget
was not in place, once again.
"Standard procedure," assured Senate Ways and Means Vice
Chair Cindy Friedman.
And she's right. For better or worse, the Legislature often
takes negotiations over its annual spending plan past the
July 1 due date, and the governor tends to go along. Without
COVID-19 to blame this year, negotiators have been granted
more time to not only figure out how to spend the state's
billions, but how many billions they have to spend.
Tax revenues are soaring and the Massachusetts Taxpayers
Foundation recommended that the conference committee working
on the $47.7 billion budget upgrade revenue projections for
fiscal 2022 by a minimum of $3.8 billion.
That revenue adjustment, the think-tank said, would allow
lawmakers to cover all approved spending in both the House
and Senate versions and cancel any planned use of "rainy
day" funds. And this wouldn't even begin to account for the
expected surplus from fiscal 2021 and the billions in
federal aid at the disposal of state and local government.
On that front, Gov. Charlie Baker signed the bill to sweep
nearly $5 billion in American Rescue Plan Act funds into a
special account subject to legislative appropriation,
choosing not to prolong his battle with Democrats over the
process that will be used to spend those funds....
STORY OF THE WEEK: At times, politicians and journalists
have an adversarial relationship. But this week proved they
often work by the code: Deadlines are made to be broken.
State House News Service
Friday, July 2, 2021
Weekly Roundup - Overtime
An overdue state budget. A midyear spending bill with
time-sensitive appropriations. Lapsed reforms intended to
make voting easier. An MBTA now operating without its own
oversight board. And nearly $5 billion in federal American
Rescue Act funds sitting idle, much to the consternation of
Gov. Charlie Baker.
The state Legislature opens July with COVID-19 still on the
run but the State House still closed and both branches still
operating under state of emergency rules, and with the
knowledge that Beacon Hill is sitting on a massive and
growing pile of cash. Lawmakers on Thursday broke for the
holiday weekend and are likely wondering when they will get
the chance to tie up major loose ends before the traditional
summer recess of undetermined length.
As the six-month mark for the session approaches next week,
the branches remain in disagreement over the joint rules
that govern their interaction and the House has yet to
tackle updates to its own rules, a task that is usually
taken care of at the outset of each session.
A boilerplate, annual local road repair funding bill that
cities and towns would like to see approved each spring
remains unfinished and likely headed for a conference
committee.
And more than a year after Baker proposed Holyoke Soldiers'
Home governance reforms, lawmakers have not acted on them or
rolled out a counter-proposal to improve oversight at the
long-term care facility.
State House News Service
Friday, July 2, 2021
Advances - Week of July 4, 2021 |
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
With a heavy lethargy
overcoming
Beacon Hill (as if this lethargy has not consumed
legislators for the past 15 months and counting) there isn't
much activity to report of any progress being made in the
Legislature. But there is a lot of ancillary news
swirling around that should be of interest to taxpayers,
which has occurred despite still masked and
sheltered-in-place trembling legislators.
Yesterday on Independence Day
conservative Republican Geoff Diehl made it official,
announced that he is a candidate for governor and will take
on Gov. Charlie Baker and/or Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito for the
position in the coming year's Republican primary.
I think Geoff Diehl would make
an excellent governor, but is he electable in Massachusetts?
I expect he will win the
Republican primary and become the GOP's nominee for
governor, but where does he go from there?
I won't dismiss that
anything is possible, but we are talking about
the Massachusetts electorate.
I cast my last primary vote for
governor of Massachusetts for Scott Lively with little
expectation of him winning, though he did surprisingly
better than expected. I cast my final vote in
Massachusetts before abandoning the commonwealth forever two
weeks later. I left the race for governor blank on my
ballot, for the first time in my life. I just couldn't
bring myself to vote for Baker and certainly wouldn't vote
for Gonzalez.
In Kentucky only registered
Republicans are allowed to vote in a Republican primary;
same with Democrats, and unenrolled/unaffiliated voters are
not allowed to vote in primary elections at all. I've
always thought that's how it should be so as to eliminate
political mischief. With unenrolled voters in
Massachusetts making up the vast majority and allowed to
take a Republican primary ballot and choose the GOP's
candidate to go up against the Democrat nominee who knows
what the outcome will be.
According to the
Secretary of State's office, here's the Massachusetts voter enrollment
breakdown as of February 12, 2020.
|
Enrollment Breakdown as of 02/12/2020 |
|
Democrat |
1,491,600 |
32.56% |
|
Republican |
462,586 |
10.10% |
|
Unenrolled |
2,564,076 |
55.97% |
The Boston
Herald reported on Monday ("Supreme
Court throws out New Hampshire’s tax complaint, forcing
remote workers to pay Massachusetts"):
The U.S. Supreme Court declined to
hear New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu’s cross-border tax
tiff — a decision that will force Bay State employees
who worked remotely from their Granite State homes
during the pandemic to pay a 5% income tax.
Sununu accused Supreme Court
justices of “setting a costly precedent” Monday when
they tossed the case without comment.
“This decision will have lasting
ramifications for thousands of Granite State residents,”
Sununu said in a statement....
In April 2020, Gov. Charlie Baker
moved to continue taxing those workers even if they
didn’t step into their Bay State buildings. The
emergency rule went into effect until June 15, 2021, and
retroactively affected earnings beginning March 10,
2020.
Baker’s new rule hit up about
100,000 workers.
The decision to throw out Sununu’s
case was nearly unanimous — only justices Clarence
Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented.
State House News Service
reported on Monday ("Supreme Court
Won’t Hear Remote Work Tax Case"):
Had
the Supreme Court taken the case and decided it in favor
of New Hampshire, Massachusetts and five other states
that tax out-of-state residents for income earned
working from home -- Arkansas, Delaware, Nebraska, New
York and Pennsylvania -- could have lost billions of
dollars in tax revenue to states where many residents
commute out of state for work, like New Jersey,
Connecticut, Hawaii and Iowa....
S&P Global Ratings said that, if
the Supreme Court declined to take up New Hampshire's
case, it expected "similar challenges to reappear."
The Biden administration, in a
brief filed by Acting Solicitor General Elizabeth
Prelogar, suggested that the Supreme Court should deny
New Hampshire's motion because "the issues New Hampshire
seeks to present can adequately be raised and litigated
by New Hampshire residents who are subject to the
Massachusetts income tax" and while the Granite State
might "prefer that its residents not pay personal income
taxes to any government, an independent tax obligation
falling on a State's residents generally is not an
injury to that State's own sovereign prerogatives."
With the second half of June still
to be counted, Mass. DOR has collected $32.454 billion
in tax revenue so far in fiscal year 2021, which ends
June 30.
That's $3.364 billion more than the
Baker administration's most recent estimate for the full
12-month fiscal year and $1.3 billion more than the
pre-pandemic estimate of $31.15 billion in tax revenue
for fiscal year 2021. It is also $2.334 billion more
than the consensus revenue agreement of $30.12 billion
the governor, House and Senate used to craft their
fiscal year 2022 budget proposals.
Remember how hard all the wacko
liberals fought to keep conservatives off the U.S. Supreme
Court, how hard conservatives fought to get them confirmed?
Trump's three nominees finally confirmed by the U.S. Senate —
Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett
— all
voted along with Chief Justice John Roberts and the other
liberal justices. Quite a disappointment, to say the least.
Ducking and dodging thorny issues important to the nation
seems to be the High Court's modus operandi these days,
almost its default position.
An op-ed by Paul Craney (Mass.
Fiscal Alliance) and Grover Norquist (Americans for Tax
Reform) was published in The Boston Herald on Thursday ("Millionaire’s
tax lets politicians divide us") that described well the
threat of a graduated income tax (aka, "Millionaires Tax" or
"Fair Share Amendment") which will be on the 2022 statewide
ballot — and the advantage for
taxpayers of the state's flat tax as it exists:
The flat tax means politicians
cannot divide Massachusetts taxpayers into different
income groups and mug them one at a time.
Today the Massachusetts single tax
rate is 5%.
Some states allow a graduated or
progressive income tax....
But in Massachusetts and other
single-rate states, the politicians have to look us all
in the eye when they claim they have a “great idea.”
With a flat tax, they have to admit — “you are all going
to pay for it.” It had better be a very good idea to get
majority support from all taxpayers....
Nine states have single-rate taxes.
North Carolina, Kentucky, Utah, Colorado, Michigan,
Indiana, Massachusetts … and Illinois?
Illinois? Isn’t that a very liberal
deep blue Democrat state controlled by a political
machine in Chicago? How do they have a flat-rate income
tax of 4.95%?
Well, the drafters of the Illinois
constitution had the same insight that Massachusetts
constitution writers had: If everyone faces the same tax
rate, it limits the ability of the politicians to divide
and conquer — and tax and spend....
The middle class and working
families will be the key constituency that will
ultimately reject this proposal because they have the
most to lose under this tax hike. While lawmakers want
the public to think it’s a tax hike only for the rich,
the state’s most affluent will quickly flee because they
have the ability to leave. The middle class and working
families will be left to cover the bill. As more middle
class and working families realize this is an attempt to
tax them next, this will eventually fail for the sixth
time and be a victory that all taxpayers can relish.
Citizens for Limited Taxation was founded in 1975 to oppose
and ultimately defeat the fourth graduated income tax
attempt on the 1976 ballot, then CLT defeated the next one
on the 1994 ballot as well. Let's hope this latest
permutation can be defeated at the ballot box next, or
that vault will be cracked open forever and too soon The
Takers will be coming for everyone, one income bracket
at a time.
The State House News Service
reported last Monday ("Legislature
Passes Bill to Fund Government Through July"):
Now guaranteed to miss the deadline
to have a annual budget in place by July 1, the
Legislature passed a temporary budget on Monday that
would keep government programs funded through July while
negotiations on an annual spending plan continue.
The new fiscal year starts on
Thursday, but budget talks between the House and Senate
over competing $47.7 billion annual budgets (H 4001 / S
2465) remain behind closed doors and ongoing. Even if a
deal were to be struck before the start of fiscal 2022,
the Senate adjourned Monday with plans not to meet again
until Thursday.
The House and Senate both enacted a
$5.41 billion interim budget filed by Gov. Charlie Baker
last week to keep government funded through July....
With tax collections soaring to
close out fiscal 2021 and debate over how to spend an
expected surplus, Democratic leaders have suggested they
may also take a fresh look at projected tax collections
for next year.
On Tuesday
CommonWealth Magazine noted ("Continuing
an annual tradition: The late state budget"):
It may be an unusual year, but one
annual Beacon Hill tradition is continuing: getting the
state budget done late.
July 1 marks the start of the 2022
fiscal year, but a final budget bill is nowhere in
sight....
On Monday, lawmakers passed a
temporary budget to keep government funded for a month
while they continue to haggle over details of the annual
budget. Gov. Charlie Baker quickly signed it. According
to the State House News Service, Sen. Cindy Friedman,
vice chair of the Senate Ways and Means Committee,
called passage of the interim budget "standard
procedure." ...
It’s not clear what the holdup is.
The two bodies have a small number of real policy
differences, such as different versions of a film tax
credit extension. But overall, state revenues are coming
in much higher than expected, meaning lawmakers have
lots of money to spend....
The Massachusetts Taxpayers
Foundation analysis suggests that the biggest issue may
be figuring out how to deal with extra money. The budget
is based on certain revenue assumptions, many of which
have since changed. The business-backed foundation
estimates that lawmakers will have at least $3.8 billion
more to spend than was assumed in January....
MTF recommends setting aside money
to use alongside an influx of federal funds, which are
expected to be allocated through a separate budget
process. (After a brief dispute with lawmakers, Baker
signed a bill Monday giving the Legislature authority to
determine how to spend that money through the normal
legislative process, while laying out his own proposal
for how to spend more than half of it.) ...
According to the National
Conference on State Legislatures, as of June 23, 32
states had already enacted their fiscal 2022 budgets,
while another four states had budgets on their
governors’ desks. Five states either had two-year
budgets in place or have fiscal years that start this
fall.
Only one state – New York – failed
to have a budget in place by the start of its fiscal
year (which was April 1). In two days, Massachusetts
will join that club.
On
Thursday the State House News Service reported ("Annual
Budget Negotiators Also Asked to Settle Supplemental Budget"):
The six
lawmakers who have been trying to reconcile differences
between the House and Senate budgets for fiscal 2022 now
have even more on their plates -- all six were appointed
Thursday to also negotiate a compromise version of a
supplemental fiscal 2021 budget bill, raising the
possibility that issues in the two sweeping bills could
become intertwined.
On Friday
the News Service in its Weekly Roundup
added:
The Legislature kicked off a hazy,
humid, scorcher of a week by passing a $5.4 billion
budget that will keep government running through July.
That allowed fiscal year 2022 to dawn on Thursday
without disruption even though an annual budget was not
in place, once again.
"Standard procedure," assured
Senate Ways and Means Vice Chair Cindy Friedman.
And she's right. For better or
worse, the Legislature often takes negotiations over its
annual spending plan past the July 1 due date, and the
governor tends to go along. Without COVID-19 to blame
this year, negotiators have been granted more time to
not only figure out how to spend the state's billions,
but how many billions they have to spend.
Tax revenues are soaring and the
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation recommended that the
conference committee working on the $47.7 billion budget
upgrade revenue projections for fiscal 2022 by a minimum
of $3.8 billion.
That revenue adjustment, the
think-tank said, would allow lawmakers to cover all
approved spending in both the House and Senate versions
and cancel any planned use of "rainy day" funds. And
this wouldn't even begin to account for the expected
surplus from fiscal 2021 and the billions in federal aid
at the disposal of state and local government.
In its
Advances - Week of July 4, 2021 the
State House News Service reported on Friday:
An overdue state budget. A midyear
spending bill with time-sensitive appropriations. Lapsed
reforms intended to make voting easier. An MBTA now
operating without its own oversight board. And nearly $5
billion in federal American Rescue Act funds sitting
idle, much to the consternation of Gov. Charlie Baker.
The state Legislature opens July
with COVID-19 still on the run but the State House still
closed and both branches still operating under state of
emergency rules, and with the knowledge that Beacon Hill
is sitting on a massive and growing pile of cash.
Lawmakers on Thursday broke for the holiday weekend and
are likely wondering when they will get the chance to
tie up major loose ends before the traditional summer
recess of undetermined length.
As the six-month mark for the
session approaches next week, the branches remain in
disagreement over the joint rules that govern their
interaction and the House has yet to tackle updates to
its own rules, a task that is usually taken care of at
the outset of each session.
A boilerplate, annual local road
repair funding bill that cities and towns would like to
see approved each spring remains unfinished and likely
headed for a conference committee.
And more than a year after Baker
proposed Holyoke Soldiers' Home governance reforms,
lawmakers have not acted on them or rolled out a
counter-proposal to improve oversight at the long-term
care facility.
Do you
see the pattern here? Nothing is being
accomplished in the Legislature and won't be until a
deadline arrives and often not even then. Whatever is tossed out
by some secretive and unaccountable conference committee will be
rubber-stamped by rank-and-file legislators without being read or understood
until later if ever. It's
what Senate Ways and Means Vice Chair Cindy Friedman
blithely shrugs off as "Standard procedure" on Beacon Hill.
Is there
any wonder why this lack of productivity or concern is
happening when every state but New York and Massachusetts
has completed and passed their respective state budgets
already this year, many of them months ago?
Do you
suppose it's going to improve any time soon, if ever?
Consider this latest affront.
The State
House News Service reported on Wednesday ("No
Timeline for State House Reopening Other Than Fall"):
Legislative leaders released a new
statement on State House reopening plans Wednesday, but
did not outline any concrete steps to reopen the
building.
The statement comes just over two
weeks after the Baker administration rescinded nearly
all of the pandemic-era restrictions that governed life
for 15 months across Massachusetts and as businesses
start to reopen their offices to employees. The State
House has been mostly closed for 471 days.
In a joint statement, Senate
President Karen Spilka and House Speaker Ronald Mariano
said the Legislature "is in the process of developing a
comprehensive and nuanced reopening plan with the goal
of returning employees and the public safely to the
State House in the fall." Fall begins Sept. 22 and ends
on Dec. 21....
The State House first closed to the
public in March 2020, when legislative leaders shuttered
the building as COVID-19 cases started to surge. Since
then, a small number of lawmakers, staff, and other
workers have made their way to Beacon Hill, while many
others who used to work in the building are working
remotely instead.
In its editorial on Friday ("If
businesses can reopen, so can State House") The Boston
Herald opined:
Visitors to Boston this summer can
enjoy many of the sites that make the city a magnet for
tourists.
The Museum of Fine Arts is open, so
too is the Museum of Science, the Bunker Hill Museum,
Old South Meeting House, Old North Church and other
itinerary musts.
And then there’s the State House,
which is sitting out the summer with a wistful eye
toward the fall.
What’s the holdup?
As the State House News reported, a
little over two weeks after the Baker administration
rescinded nearly all of the state’s pandemic-era
restrictions of the past 15 months, Senate President
Karen Spilka and House Speaker Ronald Mariano issued a
statement. The gist: They’re not flipping the switch on
the “open” sign.
"What's the holdup?"
Legislators have settled into
the ease and comfort of "legislating" and voting from
their homes or outside businesses.
Preordained outcomes of most if not all bills, concocted by
a few in leadership, that manage to actually come up for a
rare roll call vote with the tired rubber-stamp outcome
hardly justifies travel to the State House these days.
Most legislators are perfectly
content to just phone it in, and collect their generous pay
checks. Content especially since that
obscene pay grab the Legislature took for itself in 2017,
which included ending legislators' documented per-miles
traveled when the Legislature was in session as a reimbursable expense for
commuting to and from the
State House — was replaced by a
tax-free flat $15,000 per year for those living within 50 miles of
the State House, $20,000 for legislators living beyond 50
miles. Today they collect that lucrative "travel expense"
whether or not they ever leave home or appear in the State
House.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
Full News Reports
(excerpted above) |
|
The New Boston Post
Sunday, July 4, 2021
Geoff Diehl To Run For Governor Of Massachusetts
By Tom Joyce
Former state representative Geoff Diehl (R-Whitman) will run
for governor of Massachusetts in 2022.
Diehl, who represented the Seventh Plymouth district from
2011 to 2019, made the announcement at an event in western
Massachusetts on Sunday, July 4, with no press in
attendance. Diehl confirmed the news in an email message to
NewBostonPost on Sunday afternoon, after multiple sources
alerted NewBostonPost of the matter.
Diehl, a conservative Republican, ran statewide for U.S.
Senate against incumbent Democrat Elizabeth Warren in 2018.
A conservative Republican, Diehl supported President Donald
Trump in both the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections. He
was also one of the few elected officials in the state to
endorse Trump in the 2016 primary.
He is the second Republican to announce he is running for
governor in the state.
Darius Mitchell of Lowell was the first.
Incumbent governor Charlie Baker, also a Republican has not
said if he plans to seek a third term. If Baker doesn’t,
Lieutenant Governor Karyn Polito is widely expected to run
for governor.
Diehl told NewBostonPost he will have a press release on the
matter with more information later today.
The Boston Herald
Sunday, July 4, 2021
Geoff Diehl announces GOP run for governor in 2022
By Erin Tiernan
Former state Rep. Geoff Diehl has set his sights on the
governor’s office, becoming the first Republican to formally
declare he’s in the race while incumbent Gov. Charlie Baker
remains on the fence.
“It is time for a new path forward. It is time to re-empower
the individual. It is time to free our economy. It is time
to help our children overcome the damage inflicted by
government over this past year,” Diehl said in a statement
after announcing his plans at an Independence Day Freedom
Festival hosted by the Western Mass. GOP Patriots.
A conservative Republican who represented the 7th Plymouth
District from 2011 to 2019, Diehl is seen by some as a
counterweight to Baker’s more moderate brand of GOP
politics.
Diehl took aim at Baker’s coronavirus pandemic response,
condemning widespread business closures and “over-taxation
and reckless spending by government.” He also plugged his
support for law enforcement and immigration reform.
Citing his past record in leading the repeal of the 2013
indexed gas tax legislation, Diehl also took aim at the
Transportation Climate Initiative championed by Baker, which
seeks to limit carbon emissions through a cap-and-invest
program and would likely lead to a 5 to 9 cent per gallon
increase at the gas pump per state reports.
“The last thing working families in Massachusetts need is
added cost to commuting, food and goods that are already
being hit by the inflationary effects of massive federal
spending,” Diehl said.
Diehl served as former President Donald Trump’s
Massachusetts campaign co-chair during the 2016 presidential
election.
Diehl will face a growing number of Democratic opponents in
his bid for the corner office.
So far, state Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz, former state Sen. Ben
Downing and Harvard professor and political adviser Danielle
Allen have announced their 2022 bids. Democratic Attorney
General Maura Healey is also widely rumored to be
considering a run.
Baker continues to dodge questions about a third term.
Lowell Republican Darius Mitchell has filed candidacy
paperwork with the state and previously told the Herald he
was “considering a run.” Diehl has yet to file paperwork
with the state.
Diehl is no stranger to the statewide election cycle. He
challenged U.S. Sen Elizabeth Warren in a failed bid for the
U.S. Senate in 2018.
The Boston Herald
Monday, June 28, 2021
Supreme Court throws out New Hampshire’s tax complaint,
forcing remote workers to pay Massachusetts
By Meghan Ottolini
The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear New Hampshire Gov.
Chris Sununu’s cross-border tax tiff — a decision that will
force Bay State employees who worked remotely from their
Granite State homes during the pandemic to pay a 5% income
tax.
Sununu accused Supreme Court justices of “setting a costly
precedent” Monday when they tossed the case without comment.
“This decision will have lasting ramifications for thousands
of Granite State residents,” Sununu said in a statement.
New Hampshire sued Massachusetts last October for taxing
remote workers who are employed by Bay State companies but
who worked from their New Hampshire homes during the
pandemic. Under normal circumstances, those workers only had
to pay the 5% income tax for days they physically went into
their offices in the Commonwealth.
In April 2020, Gov. Charlie Baker moved to continue taxing
those workers even if they didn’t step into their Bay State
buildings. The emergency rule went into effect until June
15, 2021, and retroactively affected earnings beginning
March 10, 2020.
Baker’s new rule hit up about 100,000 workers.
The decision to throw out Sununu’s case was nearly unanimous
— only justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented.
When Sununu filed the complaint, he alleged that by taxing
remote Granite State workers, Massachusetts was “punishing”
them for “making the decision to work from home and keep
themselves and their families and those around them safe.”
The Granite State governor asked the court to consider the
rule unconstitutional and refund affected workers those
wages.
“Massachusetts cannot balance its budget on the backs of our
citizens,” Sununu said last October.
New Hampshire’s tax structure is unique within the U.S. —
only Alaska has joined the Granite State in rejecting both
income and general sales taxes. The complaint dismissed by
the Supreme Court levied that Baker’s pandemic tax rule was
a “direct attack on a defining feature of the State of New
Hampshire’s sovereignty.”
The Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, a conservative watchdog
group, expressed disappointment at the ruling but said the
tax rule’s June 15 end date was likely the reason behind the
case’s dismissal.
“This rule by Gov. Baker’s administration should never have
been ordered. All it did was create an economic hardship for
businesses and out-of-state workers during a very trying
pandemic,” spokesman Paul Diego Craney said in a statement.
“While it’s good to see the rule expire, it should be a
lesson for future Governors to never repeat. Taxing
out-of-state workers who don’t work in Massachusetts is
unfair and cruel.”
In a brief filed by Acting Solicitor General Elizabeth
Prelogar in May 2021, the Biden administration discouraged
the Supreme Court from hearing New Hampshire’s case so that
it may be handled at the state level.
Administration and Finance spokesperson Patrick Marvin told
the Herald the Baker administration “appreciates the Supreme
Court’s decision.”
State House News Service
Monday, June 28, 2021
Supreme Court Won’t Hear Remote Work Tax Case
New Hampshire Challenged Mass. Application of Income Tax
By Colin A. Young
The U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to take up a lawsuit
New Hampshire filed challenging Massachusetts's application
of its income tax on residents working remotely from other
states during the pandemic, a case that financial analysts
said could have resulted in "the reallocation of billions of
income tax dollars between certain states."
In October, the Granite State sued Massachusetts's
Department of Revenue over a pandemic-era policy imposing
income tax on out-of-state residents who are working
remotely for Massachusetts businesses, with Gov. Chris
Sununu declaring the policy a "direct attack" on his state's
sovereignty and its appeal as an income tax-free state.
"All compensation received for services performed by a
non-resident who, immediately prior to the Massachusetts
COVID-19 state of emergency was an employee engaged in
performing such services in Massachusetts, and who is
performing services from a location outside Massachusetts
due to a Pandemic-Related Circumstance will continue to be
treated as Massachusetts source income subject to personal
income tax," the Mass. DOR declared in an emergency
regulation initially put into place last July as
telecommuting was widely adopted and work became separated
from the workplace for many people.
As of 2017, there were more than 103,000 New Hampshire
residents working for Massachusetts-based companies,
representing more than 15 percent of all New Hampshire
workers, the state said in its complaint. A major credit
rating agency pointed to an analysis from a New Hampshire
economic advisor that estimated that Massachusetts collects
about $1.2 billion from New Hampshire residents who work
remotely but are employed by an organization located in
Massachusetts.
"Massachusetts' actions undermine New Hampshire's efforts to
maintain attractive economic conditions that motivate new
businesses and workers to relocate to the State and existing
businesses to expand within the State," New Hampshire wrote
in its complaint.
The country's high court on Monday denied New Hampshire's
motions for leave to file bills of complaint, though the
order noted that Associate Justices Clarence Thomas and
Samuel Alito would have granted the motions.
Had the Supreme Court taken the case and decided it in favor
of New Hampshire, Massachusetts and five other states that
tax out-of-state residents for income earned working from
home -- Arkansas, Delaware, Nebraska, New York and
Pennsylvania -- could have lost billions of dollars in tax
revenue to states where many residents commute out of state
for work, like New Jersey, Connecticut, Hawaii and Iowa.
"New Jersey calculates that in 2018 it credited more than $2
billion to resident taxpayers who worked for out-of-state
employers, virtually all of which is attributable to New
York City employers, and of which $100 million--$400 million
of the credit was for work performed by New Jersey residents
working remotely. Once the pandemic began, New Jersey
estimates the work-from-home rates ranged from 44% to 58%,
indicating a loss of tax revenue of $928.7 million-$1.2
billion to New York for the 12-month period beginning March
2020," S&P Global Ratings wrote in a January report on New
Hampshire's then-pending motion. "The potential new revenue
from a favorable ruling could be significant compared with
the $36 billion of 12-month operating revenue New Jersey has
budgeted for fiscal 2021. Using a similar analysis,
Connecticut estimates it will lose $339.0 million--$444.5
million of 2020 income tax revenue to New York State."
In a brief filed by New Jersey, Connecticut, Hawaii and
Iowa, the states that potentially stood to gain from a
SCOTUS ruling in favor of New Hampshire said the court's
decision "has far-reaching implications as to which States
will collect billions in revenue during the pandemic --
whether the States that unlawfully tax nonresidents working
from home or the Home States" and that the court's ruling
"will remain critical well after the pandemic ends" because
of the states that, unlike Massachusetts, did not tie their
tax rules for remote workers to the end of the COVID-19
state of emergency.
S&P Global Ratings said that, if the Supreme Court declined
to take up New Hampshire's case, it expected "similar
challenges to reappear."
The Biden administration, in a brief filed by Acting
Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, suggested that the
Supreme Court should deny New Hampshire's motion because
"the issues New Hampshire seeks to present can adequately be
raised and litigated by New Hampshire residents who are
subject to the Massachusetts income tax" and while the
Granite State might "prefer that its residents not pay
personal income taxes to any government, an independent tax
obligation falling on a State's residents generally is not
an injury to that State's own sovereign prerogatives."
With the second half of June still to be counted, Mass. DOR
has collected $32.454 billion in tax revenue so far in
fiscal year 2021, which ends June 30.
That's $3.364 billion more than the Baker administration's
most recent estimate for the full 12-month fiscal year and
$1.3 billion more than the pre-pandemic estimate of $31.15
billion in tax revenue for fiscal year 2021. It is also
$2.334 billion more than the consensus revenue agreement of
$30.12 billion the governor, House and Senate used to craft
their fiscal year 2022 budget proposals.
State House News Service
Thursday, July 1, 2021
Fight Over Mass. Taxation of Non-Residents Spills Into
Congress
By Colin A. Young
After the U.S. Supreme Court decided this week not to take
up New Hampshire's lawsuit challenging Massachusetts's
taxing of residents working remotely from other states
during the pandemic, members of Congress from the Granite
State and Connecticut filed a bill to prevent states from
taxing out-of-state workers.
U.S. Reps. Jim Himes and Jahana Hayes of Connecticut, and
Chris Pappas and Annie Kuster of New Hampshire this week
proposed the "Multi-State Worker Tax Fairness Act" which
would prohibit any state from taxing income that a
non-resident earns when not physically in that state.
Last year, Massachusetts implemented a pandemic-era policy
imposing its income tax on out-of-state residents working
for Massachusetts businesses if they were physically working
in Massachusetts before the pandemic and shifted to working
remotely from another state. The U.S. Supreme Court opted
this week not to allow the suit New Hampshire filed to
proceed.
"The ability of Massachusetts or any other state to tax you
should stop at the state line, and that's what this
legislation will ensure," Pappas said. "For the nearly one
in five Granite Staters employed by companies out of state,
every dollar they can keep in their pockets makes a
difference, especially as we recover from the pandemic."
Himes added, "If you wake up every morning in Connecticut,
and walk downstairs to your home office in Connecticut, it
only makes sense that you should be paying taxes to
Connecticut, not to New York or whatever state your
company's headquarters happens to be in."
A major credit rating agency earlier this year highlighted
an analysis from a New Hampshire economic advisor that
estimated that Massachusetts collects about $1.2 billion
from New Hampshire residents who work remotely but are
employed by an organization located in Massachusetts. S&P
Global Ratings also said that Connecticut "estimates it will
lose $339.0 million-$444.5 million of 2020 income tax
revenue to New York State."
State House News Service
Monday, June 28, 2021
Legislature Passes Bill to Fund Government Through July
By Matt Murphy
Now guaranteed to miss the deadline to have a annual budget
in place by July 1, the Legislature passed a temporary
budget on Monday that would keep government programs funded
through July while negotiations on an annual spending plan
continue.
The new fiscal year starts on Thursday, but budget talks
between the House and Senate over competing $47.7 billion
annual budgets (H 4001/S 2465) remain behind closed doors
and ongoing. Even if a deal were to be struck before the
start of fiscal 2022, the Senate adjourned Monday with plans
not to meet again until Thursday.
The House and Senate both enacted a $5.41 billion interim
budget filed by Gov. Charlie Baker last week to keep
government funded through July. Baker had asked that the
Legislature approve the interim budget, which would be
voided upon passage of a general appropriations bill, no
later than June 29 to ensure that the state can meet its
financial obligations.
Sen. Cindy Friedman, the vice chair of the Senate Ways and
Means Committee, called passage of the interim budget
"standard procedure" while the six-member conference
committee works to "finalize" a fiscal 2022 budget.
"The interim budget will provide $5.41 billion to cover the
bills and services estimated for the first month of the
year, and will allow us to finish our thoughtful and
collaborative work with our House colleagues on the final
full-year budget," Friedman said.
The filing and passage of one or more interim budgets is not
unusual on Beacon Hill, where legislative negotiators
frequently take their private talks over the state's annual
budget beyond the July start of the new fiscal year.
After a pandemic-interrupted year that saw the Legislature
wait until the winter to tackle an annual appropriations
bill, this year's budget is back on its more traditional
cycle. House and Senate negotiating teams, led by Rep. Aaron
Michlewitz and Sen. Michael Rodrigues, were named on June 7
and met for the first time a day later to begin hashing out
a compromise budget. If and when they do strike a deal and
the full House and Senate pass a final fiscal year 2022
budget, Baker would still be afforded 10 days to review the
bill.
With tax collections soaring to close out fiscal 2021 and
debate over how to spend an expected surplus, Democratic
leaders have suggested they may also take a fresh look at
projected tax collections for next year.
The conference committee is also negotiating multiple policy
proposals baked into the spending bill, including the
looming expiration of and proposed reforms to the state's
film tax credit program and Senate-backed fee increases on
rides booked through transportation network companies like
Uber and Lyft.
CommonWealth Magazine
Tuesday, June 29, 2021
Continuing an annual tradition: The late state budget
By Shira Schoenberg
It may be an unusual year, but one annual Beacon Hill
tradition is continuing: getting the state budget done late.
July 1 marks the start of the 2022 fiscal year, but a final
budget bill is nowhere in sight.
Last year, amid COVID-19-related economic uncertainty,
lawmakers intentionally delayed passing a budget for months
as they waited to see what would happen with the economy and
with congressional stimulus bills. This year, however,
lawmakers pursued a more normal path. The House and Senate
have both passed their versions of the budget, and the two
bills are sitting with a six-member conference committee.
On Monday, lawmakers passed a temporary budget to keep
government funded for a month while they continue to haggle
over details of the annual budget. Gov. Charlie Baker
quickly signed it. According to the State House News
Service, Sen. Cindy Friedman, vice chair of the Senate Ways
and Means Committee, called passage of the interim budget
"standard procedure."
It’s not clear what the holdup is. The two bodies have a
small number of real policy differences, such as different
versions of a film tax credit extension. But overall, state
revenues are coming in much higher than expected, meaning
lawmakers have lots of money to spend. An analysis by the
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, released Monday, found
that their spending plans are relatively similar -- of a $48
billion budget, $47.4 billion in spending is common to both
versions, with each body having around $300 million in
unique spending.
The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation analysis suggests
that the biggest issue may be figuring out how to deal with
extra money. The budget is based on certain revenue
assumptions, many of which have since changed. The
business-backed foundation estimates that lawmakers will
have at least $3.8 billion more to spend than was assumed in
January.
Both the House and Senate counted on taking money from the
rainy day fund, so some extra money could go toward
restoring that. It could let budget-writers fund both House
and Senate earmarks and spending priorities. MTF recommends
setting aside money to use alongside an influx of federal
funds, which are expected to be allocated through a separate
budget process. (After a brief dispute with lawmakers, Baker
signed a bill Monday giving the Legislature authority to
determine how to spend that money through the normal
legislative process, while laying out his own proposal for
how to spend more than half of it.)
But beyond any significant policy debates, lawmakers may
simply be continuing their now-regular tradition of using
time as a negotiating tactic and failing to come to an
agreement until absolutely necessary. In 2018, Baker signed
the budget July 26, making Massachusetts the last state in
the country to have a budget. In 2019, Baker signed the
budget July 31. In October 2019, the state comptroller was
warning lawmakers that the state would lose money if they
waited too long to pass a supplemental budget to close out
the books on the last fiscal year.
According to the National Conference on State Legislatures,
as of June 23, 32 states had already enacted their fiscal
2022 budgets, while another four states had budgets on their
governors’ desks. Five states either had two-year budgets in
place or have fiscal years that start this fall.
Only one state – New York – failed to have a budget in place
by the start of its fiscal year (which was April 1). In two
days, Massachusetts will join that club.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, July 1, 2021
Millionaire’s tax lets politicians divide us
By Paul Diego Craney and Grover Norquist
Massachusetts has long had politicians who think the answer
to every government failure is to raise taxes. But
Massachusetts has prospered despite the greed of the
political class because our state constitution has one very
strong protection for taxpayers: a constitutional
requirement for a single-rate tax.
The flat tax means politicians cannot divide Massachusetts
taxpayers into different income groups and mug them one at a
time.
Today the Massachusetts single tax rate is 5%.
Some states allow a graduated or progressive income tax. The
average income tax rate in graduated tax rate states is
4.9%. Flat rate tax states have an average state income tax
of 3.9%. Everyone wins. California’s rates run from 1% to
13%. Connecticut from 3% to 6.99%. New York from 4% to 10.9%
But in Massachusetts and other single-rate states, the
politicians have to look us all in the eye when they claim
they have a “great idea.” With a flat tax, they have to
admit — “you are all going to pay for it.” It had better be
a very good idea to get majority support from all taxpayers.
Nine states have single-rate taxes. North Carolina,
Kentucky, Utah, Colorado, Michigan, Indiana, Massachusetts …
and Illinois?
Illinois? Isn’t that a very liberal deep blue Democrat state
controlled by a political machine in Chicago? How do they
have a flat-rate income tax of 4.95%?
Well, the drafters of the Illinois constitution had the same
insight that Massachusetts constitution writers had: If
everyone faces the same tax rate, it limits the ability of
the politicians to divide and conquer — and tax and spend.
In 2020, the liberal Democrats that control the Illinois
House, Senate and governorship put on the ballot a
constitutional amendment to allow a graduated or progressive
income tax. Governor J.B. Pritzker, the super-rich
Democratic governor, put $50 million of his own money to
fund the campaign to raise taxes by smashing the protection
of a flat tax and imposing a graduated or progressive income
tax structure.
Illinois has the same debate we had five times before when
Massachusetts voters voted down moving to a graduated income
tax in 1962, 1968, 1972, 1976 and 1994.
It was pointed out that taxpayers were already leaving
Illinois to move to lower states. That is also true of
Massachusetts. The commonwealth recently experienced a
five-year high of outmigration as former taxpayers fled to
friendlier, low-tax states like New Hampshire and Florida.
Among the factors contributing to this population loss is a
hostile tax climate. A recent study by The Beacon Hill
Institute determined that more than 4,000 families would
leave the Bay State and take with them nearly 9,000 jobs,
should this constitutional amendment be approved by voters
next year, workers would lose almost a billion dollars in
disposable income, and the study projects that GDP would
shrink by $431 million.
In Illinois, it was pointed out that once the flat tax was
smashed, politicians would be free to hike everyone’s taxes.
This is true in the Bay State.
Illinois realized that an income tax targeting the rich also
hits small businesses hard. Many pay their business taxes
through personal income tax. If approved, a Massachusetts
graduated tax could apply to the over 13,000 small
businesses that make up over 55% of the commonwealth’s
workforce. A massive new tax will have disastrous effects on
those businesses, discouraging new investment and job
creation.
And the Massachusetts amendment has a unique problem. One of
the worst parts of this proposal is that writing tax policy
into the state constitution makes it difficult to fix. If
the tax ends up damaging the economy and chasing jobs,
individuals, families and employers out of state, lawmakers
and voters can only fix the damage by amending the
constitution again. That will take many years to fix.
The middle class and working families will be the key
constituency that will ultimately reject this proposal
because they have the most to lose under this tax hike.
While lawmakers want the public to think it’s a tax hike
only for the rich, the state’s most affluent will quickly
flee because they have the ability to leave. The middle
class and working families will be left to cover the bill.
As more middle class and working families realize this is an
attempt to tax them next, this will eventually fail for the
sixth time and be a victory that all taxpayers can relish.
— Paul Diego Craney is the
spokesperson for Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance and Grover
Norquist is president of Americans for Tax Reform.
The Boston Herald
Friday, July 2, 2021
Rhode Island lawmakers recess without adopting TCI,
leaving just Mass. and Washington, D.C.
By Amy Sokolow
Gov. Charlie Baker’s hope to establish a regional
Transportation Climate Initiative has waned further as Rhode
Island lawmakers recessed for the summer without entering
the agreement.
The lack of action mirrors Connecticut that just a month ago
pulled out of the deal amid budget negotiations.
Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont’s spokesperson said Lamont has
not officially bagged the deal, and “remains committed to
the program and to action on the climate crisis,” he said.
“TCI has not yet been called for a vote by the General
Assembly.”
Thirteen eastern jurisdictions, including Maine, New York,
Pennsylvania and Vermont, expressed interest in the plan in
2019. By the time states signed a memorandum of
understanding in December, only Massachusetts, Connecticut,
Rhode Island and Washington, D.C., remained.
The cap-and-invest program would be poised to cut an
estimated 26% of carbon emissions from gasoline and diesel
vehicles in the region between 2022 and 2032. The agreement
would also include an equity component, providing at least
35% of its revenue to underserved communities.
The program would place a declining emissions cap on gas and
diesel fuel, and require wholesale fuel suppliers to
purchase allowances to cover the fuel emissions.
The deal would generate an estimated $366 million in annual
revenues, with about $160 million going directly to
Massachusetts, as The Herald previously reported. The
program as a whole is expected to generate over $3 billion
over the 10 years for participating governments.
“The Baker-Polito Administration understands the challenges
in developing an ambitious multi-state program like the
Transportation and Climate Initiative Program, but continues
to believe the program’s capacity to combat climate change
and build better, cleaner transportation infrastructure is
unmatched,” said Executive Office of Energy and
Environmental Affairs spokesperson Craig Gilvarg. He added
that Massachusetts will only move forward with TCI if
multiple states opt in.
The fuel industry in particular has pushed back on this
plan, saying costs would be foisted onto consumers at the
pump. The Herald previously reported that state officials
predict gas prices would rise by 5 to 9 cents per gallon,
should the program take effect in 2023.
“Lawmakers have a very good pulse for what their
constituents want and realize that there is no desire to
raise gasoline and diesel costs anywhere,” Paul Diego Craney,
spokesperson for the conservative nonprofit Mass. Fiscal
Alliance, said in a statement.
Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance
Friday, July 2, 2021
News Release
Rhode Island Follows Connecticut as Lawmakers Recess
without Taking Up Controversial and Costly TCI Gas Tax
Scheme
By Paul Gangi
Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance made the following statement
today regarding the Rhode Island legislature going into
recess on Thursday without voting to approve their state
entering into the Transportation and Climate Initiative
(TCI) with Massachusetts
Like Connecticut, Rhode Island must seek legislative
approval of the agreement before their state officially can
enter into it. On June 4, Connecticut lawmakers were unable
to gain a consensus to approve TCI, despite using the budget
as negotiation leverage, due to its lack of support by
rank-and-file lawmakers. Essentially, TCI suffered a similar
blow in Rhode Island on Thursday. The bill in the Rhode
Island House remains in the House Finance Committee, as
lawmakers there realistically view it as a gas tax.
“What happened in Connecticut in early June is clearly
having an impact on what’s happening in Rhode Island in
early July. Lawmakers have a very good pulse for what their
constituents want and realize that there is no desire to
raise gasoline and diesel costs anywhere. While gasoline is
surpassing $3.00/gallon and inflation is devaluing wages,
TCI is about to make matters worse for working people and
low-income families in order to subsidize electric cars for
the affluent. Aside from small pockets in Massachusetts that
continue to push TCI, this doesn’t sound appealing to anyone
and states from Virginia all the way up to Maine continue to
reject it,” stated Paul Diego Craney, spokesperson for
MassFiscal.
As of today, TCI has still not disclosed how much they want
to raise the cost of diesel fuels. TCI had originally
started out with 12 states, from Virginia all the way to
Maine, engaged in the process. After intense political
pressure, the only Governors that joined on December 21,
2020 were Gov. Charlie Baker of Massachusetts, Gov. Ned
Lamont of Connecticut, and former Gov. Gina Raimondo of
Rhode Island. Recently, lawmakers in Connecticut and now
Rhode Island have refused to take up joining TCI, even
though their states require a legislative vote to enter into
the agreement so that fuel prices can start to increase by
as early as 2022 when TCI goes into effect. Kathleen
Theoharides, Gov. Baker’s Secretary of the Office of the
Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs is the
head of the TCI effort.
“At some point, the regional approach to TCI is going to
lose whatever credibility it has left when it’s just
Massachusetts entering into the agreement next year. It’s
clear to everyone but Gov. Baker and Lt. Gov. Polito that
there is no appeal to TCI and Massachusetts should withdraw
from the program and stop wasting taxpayer money on trying
to advance a regional gas tax that only the Governor of
Massachusetts wants to see implemented,” concluded Craney.
State House News Service
Wednesday, June 30, 2021
No Timeline for State House Reopening Other Than Fall
Mariano, Spilka Developing "Phased" Reopening Timeline
By Chris Van Buskirk
Legislative leaders released a new statement on State House
reopening plans Wednesday, but did not outline any concrete
steps to reopen the building.
The statement comes just over two weeks after the Baker
administration rescinded nearly all of the pandemic-era
restrictions that governed life for 15 months across
Massachusetts and as businesses start to reopen their
offices to employees. The State House has been mostly closed
for 471 days.
In a joint statement, Senate President Karen Spilka and
House Speaker Ronald Mariano said the Legislature "is in the
process of developing a comprehensive and nuanced reopening
plan with the goal of returning employees and the public
safely to the State House in the fall." Fall begins Sept. 22
and ends on Dec. 21.
"The Legislature is engaged with employees and will give
them advance notice and guidance so they can plan their
return to the State House, and a rebalancing of in-person
and remote work," the statement read. "We are simultaneously
planning a phased timeline of the reopening of the State
House to the public as well."
The State House first closed to the public in March 2020,
when legislative leaders shuttered the building as COVID-19
cases started to surge. Since then, a small number of
lawmakers, staff, and other workers have made their way to
Beacon Hill, while many others who used to work in the
building are working remotely instead.
Legislative leaders and Gov. Charlie Baker have pointed to
many challenges associated with reopening the State House,
including how the building functions as a tourism
attraction, a workplace for staff, and as a public gathering
space. But pressure has been building since the state of
emergency ended to reopen the building as much of the state
returns to post-pandemic lifestyles.
"There are a great number of factors to consider, as the
State House is not only a workplace to hundreds of people,
but a frequently visited public building," the statement
said.
Secretary of State William Galvin pushed legislative leaders
earlier in the day to reopen to the public several of the
large halls within the State House as tourism season gets
underway and people start visiting historical sites around
Boston.
During a morning press conference, he said he understands
concerns relating to large crowds, especially if there are
unvaccinated individuals, but believes halls like Doric
Hall, Great Hall, and the Hall of Flags could be opened
"without great risk."
"Those are all the large public spaces which could
accommodate, it seems to me, visitors from outside safely if
protocols are followed. My tours division is pretty
efficient at dealing with large groups of people, we bring
them in an orderly way," Galvin said. "I think if this was
planned out properly, we could reopen at least partially and
I think it'll be a step towards gradual reopening of the
building."
House leadership announced in May that Speaker Pro Tempore
Kate Hogan alongside Mariano's office were in the process of
creating a "comprehensive plan" to reopen the building to
saff and the public.
A timeline for when a plan would be released was not
included in Wednesday's statement. A spokesperson for Hogan
deferred to the statement released by Mariano and Spilka.
At a Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce forum in March,
Mariano also offered some hope for reopening the building in
the fall.
"The hope is as we progress through the summer that maybe by
the fall we can begin to open this building and start to
have some hearings and get people in to testify and make
their points," he said.
Throughout the course of the pandemic, a majority of
lawmakers and staff have participated in remote sessions
while a small group have made their way into the House and
Senate Chambers which Spilka and Mariano pointed to in their
statement.
"Members have retained the ability to participate in
Legislative sessions remotely or in-person in the Chambers
when necessary," they said. "Additionally, staff have
continued to work in a hybrid manner throughout the State of
Emergency and beyond, with the majority working from home
and some in the State House."
The Boston Herald
Friday, July 2, 2021
A Boston Herald editorial
If businesses can reopen, so can State House
Visitors to Boston this summer can enjoy many of the sites
that make the city a magnet for tourists.
The Museum of Fine Arts is open, so too is the Museum of
Science, the Bunker Hill Museum, Old South Meeting House,
Old North Church and other itinerary musts.
And then there’s the State House, which is sitting out the
summer with a wistful eye toward the fall.
What’s the holdup?
As the State House News reported, a little over two weeks
after the Baker administration rescinded nearly all of the
state’s pandemic-era restrictions of the past 15 months,
Senate President Karen Spilka and House Speaker Ronald
Mariano issued a statement. The gist: They’re not flipping
the switch on the “open” sign.
The Legislature, the statement said, “is in the process of
developing a comprehensive and nuanced reopening plan with
the goal of returning employees and the public safely to the
State House in the fall.” That would be Sept. 22.
Businesses around Massachusetts have started reopening, many
workers have returned to their desks. Companies are tackling
the new world of combining work from home with in-office
attendance. There are safety guidelines and capacity
restrictions — but the job is getting done.
Museums, whose livelihood depends on welcoming visitors,
have been doing so with safety measures such as time-entry
ticketing and mask mandates.
Even casinos, where all the action is indoors, are back in
business.
“The Legislature is engaged with employees and will give
them advance notice and guidance so they can plan their
return to the State House, and a rebalancing of in-person
and remote work,” the statement read. “We are simultaneously
planning a phased timeline of the reopening of the State
House to the public as well.”
A hallmark of Gov. Baker’s pandemic strategy has been phased
reopenings. Nothing in this “new normalcy” happened
overnight. Why is a plan still being hashed out?
We understand that figuring out which employees will remain
remote, or partly so, and which will be on site is a
balancing act, and there are logistical safety issues with
having the general public on site again. But companies,
national park sites, museums and venues across the state are
navigating these waters.
Secretary of State William Galvin tried to light a fire
under legislative leaders to reopen several of the large
halls within the State House to the public as tourism season
heats up.
During a press conference, he said he understands concerns
relating to large crowds, especially if there are
unvaccinated individuals, but believes halls like Doric
Hall, Great Hall and the Hall of Flags could be opened
“without great risk.”
“Those are all the large public spaces which could
accommodate, it seems to me, visitors from outside safely if
protocols are followed. My tours division is pretty
efficient at dealing with large groups of people, we bring
them in an orderly way,” Galvin said. “I think if this was
planned out properly, we could reopen at least partially and
I think it’ll be a step towards gradual reopening of the
building.”
Safety protocols are the crux of successful reopening — just
ask the businesses and institutions that have them in place
and are seeing foot traffic once more.
Lawmakers should lead the way, not lag behind.
State House News Service
Thursday, July 1, 2021
Annual Budget Negotiators Also Asked to Settle Supplemental
Budget
By Colin A. Young
The six lawmakers who have been trying to reconcile
differences between the House and Senate budgets for fiscal
2022 now have even more on their plates -- all six were
appointed Thursday to also negotiate a compromise version of
a supplemental fiscal 2021 budget bill, raising the
possibility that issues in the two sweeping bills could
become intertwined.
Reps. Aaron Michlewitz of Boston, Ann-Margaret Ferrante of
Gloucester and Todd Smola of Warren, and Sens. Michael
Rodrigues of Westport, Cindy Friedman of Arlington and
Patrick O'Connor of Weymouth have been charged with working
through the differences in the House and Senate versions of
a roughly $260 million supplemental spending bill. The House
passed its version of the spending bill (H 3871) on June 10
and the Senate approved its own bill (S 2485) on June 24.
The conferees will have more than dollars and cents to talk
about. Both branches included their own proposals to replace
the MBTA's Fiscal and Management Control Board, which
expired Wednesday, in their supplemental budgets and the
House approved a provision that would make mail-in voting
permanent for state elections. Minority Leader Bruce Tarr
spoke during Thursday's Senate session about the importance
and urgency of re-establishing an MBTA oversight body.
Secretary of State William Galvin and municipal leaders have
been hoping the Legislature will resolve the issue of
mail-in and early voting, at least in the short-term, for
local elections scheduled to take place this summer and
fall. The Senate's plan to extend mail-in voting until
December is still in a separate conference committee that is
considering which other pandemic policies the Legislature
should extend.
State House News Service
Friday, July 2, 2021
Weekly Roundup - Overtime
Recap and analysis of the week in state government
By Matt Murphy
It may be a new fiscal year, but old rules still apply.
The Legislature kicked off a hazy, humid, scorcher of a week
by passing a $5.4 billion budget that will keep government
running through July. That allowed fiscal year 2022 to dawn
on Thursday without disruption even though an annual budget
was not in place, once again.
"Standard procedure," assured Senate Ways and Means Vice
Chair Cindy Friedman.
And she's right. For better or worse, the Legislature often
takes negotiations over its annual spending plan past the
July 1 due date, and the governor tends to go along. Without
COVID-19 to blame this year, negotiators have been granted
more time to not only figure out how to spend the state's
billions, but how many billions they have to spend.
Tax revenues are soaring and the Massachusetts Taxpayers
Foundation recommended that the conference committee working
on the $47.7 billion budget upgrade revenue projections for
fiscal 2022 by a minimum of $3.8 billion.
That revenue adjustment, the think-tank said, would allow
lawmakers to cover all approved spending in both the House
and Senate versions and cancel any planned use of "rainy
day" funds. And this wouldn't even begin to account for the
expected surplus from fiscal 2021 and the billions in
federal aid at the disposal of state and local government.
On that front, Gov. Charlie Baker signed the bill to sweep
nearly $5 billion in American Rescue Plan Act funds into a
special account subject to legislative appropriation,
choosing not to prolong his battle with Democrats over the
process that will be used to spend those funds.
The alternative would have been to force them to override a
veto, which in all likelihood would have only delayed, not
stopped, the plan. Furthermore, some close to the governor
believed causing delay for delay's sake would have undercut
the governor's argument that the money should be put to work
immediately.
Since Baker was not prepared to defy the Legislature and
just start spending the money on his own, the governor
instead refiled his plan to quickly pump $2.9 billion into
housing, job training and other priorities.
Now the wait begins for the Legislature to schedule hearings
on how and how quickly to spend the federal stimulus. And
there should be no shortage of interested parties lining up
for a piece of the pie.
In fact, the COVID-19 Cultural Impact Commission submitted
its final report to the Legislature this week calling for
the use of $575 million in ARPA funds to support arts and
cultural institutions reeling from the pandemic.
The MBTA got its own pot of money through ARPA, but as of
this week the board that oversaw the transit agency's
finances has been dissolved and what should replace it is
still being debated.
The future makeup of a new T oversight board to replace the
Fiscal and Management Control Board is one piece of a $260
million supplemental spending bill that was handed over to a
conference committee after House and Senate leaders were
unable to informally strike a deal.
Also intertwined with that bill is the future of voting by
mail, which was allowed by the Legislature through its
inaction to expire.
The House has proposed to make voting-by-mail permanent for
all biennial state elections, though it did not include
off-year municipal elections in its bill. The Senate,
meanwhile, is on record supporting an extension into
December to give policymakers more time.
The impasse has forced some local election officials, like
those in Somerset and Fairhaven, to quickly rethink the
administration of upcoming municipal elections, and raises
questions about whether mail-in voting will be available for
larger mayoral elections this summer and fall in Boston and
elsewhere.
Secretary of State William Galvin said lawmakers "really
need to get their act together."
One deadline that got met this week? The House Rules
Committee filed a report Thursday examining the chamber's
emergency pandemic rules and evaluating what should stay and
what should go.
And one decision House and Senate Democrats were prepared to
make this week? Making sure union labor is used to build the
new Holyoke Soldiers' Home.
The rules report written by Rep. William Galvin, the
committee's chairman, and Second Assistant Majority Leader
Sarah Peake, recommended that all sessions continue to be
livestreamed and that committees in the future use a hybrid
model for bill hearings that combines virtual and in-person
participation.
Galvin and Peake, however, recommended against showing the
public how every individual lawmaker votes on bills at the
committee level, arguing that legislators need the political
space to be able to change their minds as bills evolve.
The emergency rules expire on July 15 and new House rules
for the current session ought to be debated this month,
Galvin and Peake said, but their implementation should be
contingent on the reopening of the State House.
Speaker Ron Mariano and Senate President Karen Spilka said
they are working on a plan to bring employees back to the
State House by the fall and a "phased timeline" to welcome
the public back to the capitol building.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Judicial Court announced this week
that courthouses would fully reopen for business on July 12
when capacity limits and jury trial restrictions are lifted,
but masks will be required regardless of vaccination status.
As for the construction of the Soldiers' Home, Baker had
vetoed the pro-union clause in the Soldiers' Home financing
legislation requiring the $400 million facility to be built
with a project labor agreement.
The Republican argued that a PLA would put hundreds of
millions of dollars in federal reimbursements at risk by
driving up the overall cost of the project, and discourage
non-union contracting firms owned by women and minorities
from bidding on contracts.
Rep. Danielle Gregoire made the case for Democrats to
disregard Baker's concerns. The Marlborough legislator
contended that not only had PLAs successfully been used on
past public construction projects to keep them on time and
on budget, but she said protections had been put in place to
make sure the Holyoke project adheres to diversity hiring
goals.
Senate Ways and Means Chairman Michael Rodrigues was the
only Democrat to support Baker's position, and Sen. Patrick
O'Connor was the only Republican to oppose the governor.
Time will tell now who was right.
STORY OF THE WEEK: At times, politicians and journalists
have an adversarial relationship. But this week proved they
often work by the code: Deadlines are made to be broken.
State House News Service
Friday, July 2, 2021
Advances - Week of July 4, 2021
An overdue state budget. A midyear spending bill with
time-sensitive appropriations. Lapsed reforms intended to
make voting easier. An MBTA now operating without its own
oversight board. And nearly $5 billion in federal American
Rescue Act funds sitting idle, much to the consternation of
Gov. Charlie Baker.
The state Legislature opens July with COVID-19 still on the
run but the State House still closed and both branches still
operating under state of emergency rules, and with the
knowledge that Beacon Hill is sitting on a massive and
growing pile of cash. Lawmakers on Thursday broke for the
holiday weekend and are likely wondering when they will get
the chance to tie up major loose ends before the traditional
summer recess of undetermined length.
As the six-month mark for the session approaches next week,
the branches remain in disagreement over the joint rules
that govern their interaction and the House has yet to
tackle updates to its own rules, a task that is usually
taken care of at the outset of each session.
A boilerplate, annual local road repair funding bill that
cities and towns would like to see approved each spring
remains unfinished and likely headed for a conference
committee.
And more than a year after Baker proposed Holyoke Soldiers'
Home governance reforms, lawmakers have not acted on them or
rolled out a counter-proposal to improve oversight at the
long-term care facility. Rep. Linda Dean Campbell, who
co-chaired a legislative investigation into the deadly March
2020 outbreak at the facility that killed at least 76
veterans, told the News Service on Friday that committee
members are still drafting on an omnibus reform bill more
than a month after her panel completed its probe, and she
did not lay out a specific timeline for filing the
legislation. The slow-moving agenda appears to be of little
concern to both Democrats and Republicans in the
Legislature, who have been gifted a massive budget surplus
by the state's taxpayers, showered with billions of dollars
in federal stimulus funds, and seem content to continue
conducting business virtually and in the absence of outside
pressure to speed up their work.
Tuesday, July 6, 2021
CONNECTICUT STATE CAPITOL REOPENS: Members of the public in
Connecticut will once again be able to watch their elected
officials work on their behalf as the capitol building in
Hartford reopens for the first time since March 2020. That
means the public will be allowed on hand as the state's
General Assembly debates an extension of emergency powers
afforded to Gov. Ned Lamont, CT Mirror reported. The
Massachusetts State House has been closed since last March
as well and legislative leaders here have only offered vague
statements about "a comprehensive and nuanced reopening plan
with the goal of returning employees and the public safely
to the State House in the fall." |
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
|
