 |
Post Office Box 1147
▪
Marblehead, Massachusetts 01945
▪ (781) 639-9709
“Every Tax is a Pay Cut ... A Tax Cut is a Pay Raise”
47 years as “The Voice of Massachusetts Taxpayers”
— and
their Institutional Memory — |
|
CLT UPDATE
Sunday, July 18, 2021
Gov signs $47.6
Budget Amidst Beacon Hill "Standard Procedures"
Jump directly
to CLT's Commentary on the News
|
Most Relevant News
Excerpts
(Full news reports follow Commentary)
|
|
When Governor Charlie Baker first proposed that sales
taxes in Massachusetts be suspended this summer — not,
as in years past, for two days but for two months — my
reaction was lukewarm. Rather than eliminate the sales
tax for one-sixth of the year, I reasoned, why not
reduce the sales tax rate by one-sixth — from 6.25
percent to 5.2 percent — and leave it there for good?
On Beacon Hill, however, permanent tax cuts are about as
popular as cholera. While a year-round cut in the sales
tax rate might be ideal, the Legislature would never
consider it.
But why should it balk at Baker’s far more restrained
bill to suspend sales taxes just for August and
September?
After all, it’s not like the government has been starved
of revenue. The government is gorged with revenue. The
state’s tax collections for the just-ended 2021 fiscal
year far outstripped projections. When June’s numbers
are finalized, the Treasury will have banked at least $4
billion more than it had anticipated. The COVID-19
pandemic had been expected to stretch the government’s
resources to the breaking point, but the opposite
happened: Beacon Hill was inundated with cash. Instead
of drawing down the so-called rainy day fund, the state
has been adding to it. It now totals $4.4 billion,
higher than it was before the pandemic.
Baker’s sales-tax moratorium would leave in consumers’
hands about $900 million that would otherwise go to the
Treasury. That isn’t a trivial sum, but compared with
the tsunami of tax receipts flooding the Commonwealth’s
accounts, it’s not much more than a rounding error. The
Legislature just passed a 2022 budget totaling $48.1
billion — that is 53 times the cost of the governor’s
proposed sales-tax holiday. The foregone revenue would
not diminish any spending in the massive new budget;
under Baker’s bill, the tax holiday would be paid for
out of the unexpected and unspent 2021 surplus.
Yet Democratic lawmakers and their allies instantly
declared their opposition.
Senate President Karen Spilka told reporters that it was
“sufficient” to give taxpayers a two-day break from the
sales levy; two months was out of the question because
“there’s a lot of need in the state.”...
Yet when it was a question of more money in their
pockets, legislators raised no objections. In January,
the salaries of Bay State legislators went up by
thousands of dollars as not one, not two, but three
separate pay raises kicked in. Spilka’s total
compensation jumped to nearly $178,500 — a $9,000 hike.
It didn’t occur to her to object on the grounds that
“there’s a lot of need in the state.” ...
A two-month reprieve from
sales taxes won’t undo all the distress caused by
Massachusetts’ pandemic restrictions. But it will help.
And it’s only fair that state government, which was
unexpectedly enriched by billions in surging tax
revenue, allow some of that revenue to flow back to the
people. Massachusetts politicians will spend more money
this year than they have ever spent before. The sky
won’t fall if they let their constituents hang on to a
little more cash as well.
The Boston Globe
Wednesday, July 14, 2021
Beacon Hill, hoarding billions in surplus dollars, won’t
give taxpayers a break
A sales-tax reprieve won’t undo all the distress caused
by the shutdown, but it will help.
By Jeff Jacoby
Gov. Charlie Baker signed a $47.6 billion fiscal 2022
budget into law Friday afternoon, his office announced,
vetoing $7.9 million in gross spending and an outside
section that would delay implementation of a charitable
giving tax deduction approved by voters in 2000.
State lawmakers unanimously passed a $48.1 billion
spending bill on July 9, approving a House-Senate deal
that does not include any broad-based tax hikes and,
unlike earlier versions of the budget, does not draw
from the state's "rainy day" stabilization fund. A surge
in tax collections well beyond projections allowed
budget negotiators to cancel a planned $1.5 billion
withdrawal.
In his message to lawmakers, Baker wrote that the state
must "remain alert to the risk that economic activity
has been bolstered by ultimately unsustainable levels of
federal spending, and that our currently high tax
revenue growth might slow down as federal emergency
spending phases out." ...
In addition to his vetoes, Baker returned 25 policy
sections with amendments. He said he approved
approximately $90 million in earmarked funding.
State House News Service
Friday, July 16, 2021
Baker Signs $47.6 Billion Annual Budget
In 2000, Massachusetts voters overwhelmingly approved a
small but notable piece of tax relief: a state deduction
on charitable donations, something the vast majority of
states already offered.
But more than two decades later, taxpayers have been
allowed to take advantage of the deduction only once,
because lawmakers suspended the measure in 2002, citing
a budget crunch. Under a complex formula, it was
supposed to return this year, but the Legislature and
Governor Charlie Baker in late 2020 delayed it again,
citing the fiscal uncertainty wrought by the COVID-19
pandemic.
Now, despite a once-in-a-generation federal stimulus
windfall and surging tax revenues, lawmakers voted as
part of its state budget package to put the deduction on
hold yet again, this time until at least 2023.
The decision has created friction with Baker, who on
Friday vetoed the delay, arguing it is “unnecessary”
amid better-than-expected tax receipts. The
Democratic-controlled Legislature will now have to
decide whether to overrule his veto.
If lawmakers do, it raises the prospect they could seek
to permanently override the will of the 1.8 million
voters who supported the measure amid a wider debate on
tax policy expected in the months ahead.
“You also have to realize that a lot has changed in 21
years. Our economy has changed drastically over the last
21 years,” Senator Michael J. Rodrigues, the Senate’s
budget chief, said before Baker issued his veto Friday
afternoon....
The deduction has already followed a long, tortured
path. Voters approved it at the ballot box, 72 to 28
percent, the same year they called for incrementally
lowering the state’s income tax rate to 5 percent. But
taxpayers were able to use the tax deduction for only
one tax year before the Legislature suspended it and
tied it to a drop in the income tax rate, which they
also slowed by hooking it to a series of economic
triggers.
The charitable tax deduction would only be allowed
again, they decreed, when the income tax rate ticked
down to 5 percent, which wound up taking 20 years. It
was slated to become an option again in 2021, before the
Legislature delayed it for a year. And then for one
more.
The Boston Globe
Friday, July 16, 2021
Voters approved a tax deduction on
charitable donations in 2000
Lawmakers and Baker are odds on whether to delay it
again
Governor Charlie Baker on Friday signed a $47.6 billion
state budget for fiscal year 2022, cementing a plan
based on a solid fiscal outlook in a year many feared
would require deep cuts.
Baker vetoed just $7.9 million in spending and two
policy proposals from the Legislature, including a
provision that would have delayed the implementation of
the charitable tax deduction. He also amended dozens of
policies included in the budget.
“The [fiscal year 2022] budget makes historic
investments in our communities, schools, economy, and
workers as Massachusetts emerges from the pandemic,”
Baker said in a statement. “We are able to responsibly
grow our reserves without raising taxes, while
continuing to make historic investments in our schools,
job training programs and downtown economies.”
Among the key items from the governor’s action on
Friday:
He moved to implement the charitable tax deduction,
which has been delayed for decades even after voters
approved it in 2000. It would allow taxpayers to take a
5 percent deduction on donations on their state taxes in
an effort to spur charitable contributions — an option
they have been able to take advantage of only once,
after state leaders delayed its implementation time and
again. Baker wrote that the deduction should go into
effect given “the combination of strong state revenues
and serious needs facing non-profits and charitable
organizations.” ...
The budget does not contain the broad-based cuts that
some forecasters feared would be necessary amid the
COVID-19 economic downturn, nor does it carry
broad-based tax hikes. Instead, the budget Baker signed
is a 3.6 percent increase over the fiscal year 2021
budget.
The Boston Globe
Friday, July 16, 2021
9 things you should know about the
state budget
Governor Charlie Baker just signed
The Legislature passed an infrastructure bill on
Thursday that had been under negotiation for several
weeks, padding the traditional $200 million in annual
financing for local road and bridge repairs with $150
million spread across six grant programs to pay for bus
lanes, electric vehicles and other municipal
transportation projects.
The House and Senate passed the $350 million
transportation funding bill unanimously, clearing one
major item off the Legislature's to-do list as it
approaches the summer break....
Both branches were seeking $200 million for the
statewide municipal road repair program known as Chapter
90, which will deliver funds to all 351 cities and
towns. That remained unchanged in the final bill....
The Legislature, however, added spending for competitive
grants after the House had pushed for $75 million for
three different programs, and the Senate recommended
$100 million in additional financing for four programs.
The compromise funded all of the priorities sought by
both branches, plus an additional $25 million for
transit-supportive infrastructure, like bike and bus
lanes.
State House News Service
Thursday, July 15, 2021
House, Senate Send Baker
$350 Mil Transportation Bill
Six Grant Pots Added to $200 Mil in Annual Ch. 90 Funds
Maura Healey said she’ll make a decision “by the fall”
on whether to pursue a run for governor, hinting at a
ballot-box showdown with Gov. Charlie Baker — who has
booked a hot fundraiser down the Cape next month.
The invite list for Baker’s Aug. 20 soiree at public
relations executive George Regan’s Mashpee estate for
Baker and Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito reads like a who’s who
list of Massachusetts politics.
That list, obtained by the Herald, includes names like
former Attorney General Francis Bellotti, Mintz chairman
attorney Bob Popeo, former Boston Police Commissioner
William Gross and car entrepreneur Herb Chambers, among
others, who are co-hosting the affair. Former top cop
Bill Bratton, developer Jay Cashman, Legal Seafood’s
Roger Berkowitz and scores more — many Democrats — are
also on the list.
“The governor is not going down to Cape Cod in August to
get ice cream,” said an inside source. “He wouldn’t be
going if he wasn’t running.”
Those attending are asked to kick in $500 to $1,000 for
the governor or Polito, or both....
Baker had about $524,500 in his campaign account by the
end of June, according to state campaign finance data.
He had 10 times as much in his coffers on the same month
in the runup to his 2018 re-election. Polito, by
contrast, had more than $2.2 million banked in June....
Healey is widely considered a top contender for the
Democratic nomination should she launch a bid....
The two-term attorney general has been a leader in
fundraising among potential gubernatorial candidates
throughout much of the past year and has been making the
rounds at appearances around the state. Healey’s
campaign account is the highest among potential and
declared 2022 contenders with $3.12 million in cash on
hand....
So far former state Rep. Geoff Diehl of Whitman is the
sole declared Republican candidate.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, July 15, 2021
Maura Healey to make decision on
run for governor ‘by the fall’
as Charlie Baker fundraising heats up
Maura Healey appears to be playing a game of chicken
with Charlie Baker over whether either is running for
governor of Massachusetts in 2022....
Healey is widely considered the most likely Democratic
nominee in 2022 if she runs. But it’s not clear that she
wants to run against Baker, a fiscally moderate,
socially liberal Republican who has maintained high poll
numbers through six and a half years in office.
A loss could stunt or end Healey’s political career,
when she’d be the odds-on favorite to win re-election as
Attorney General and may draw interest as a candidate
for other elected office or for an appointed federal
office....
Massachusetts Attorney General on paper seems like a
good steppingstone, but it hasn’t worked out that way in
recent decades. The last Attorney General to go on to
subsequent elected office was Ed Brooke, who served as
Attorney General from 1963 to 1967; he was elected to
the U.S. Senate in 1966 — 55 years ago.
Brooke’s successor, Elliot Richardson, served as state
Attorney General from 1967 to 1969, before joining
President Richard Nixon’s Cabinet. (He eventually became
U.S. Attorney General.) Richardson is the last
Republican to have served as Massachusetts Attorney
General. (He lost in 1984 when he ran for U.S. Senate.)
Since Richardson, five of the most recent six state
attorneys general (all Democrats) have lost when they
ran for governor, ending their political careers. They
are Robert Quinn, Francis X. Bellotti, Scott Harshbarger,
Tom Reilly, and Martha Coakley (who lost running for
U.S. Senate before she lost running for governor).
The New Boston Post
Friday, July 16, 2021
Maura Healey Running for Governor?
Well, Charlie, You Go First
Some MassGOP donors say they have no confidence in
embattled state party leadership and won’t contribute
another cent until the state committee takes action to
“restore the Massachusetts Republican Party’s
reputation” — pledging $1 million in support if it does.
“Over the past six weeks, we have lost our remaining
confidence in current party leadership,” states the
Monday letter signed by 16 Republican donors who claim
they have collectively raised more than $900,000 for the
party and candidates over two decades.
The letter does not explicitly call out Republican State
Party Chairman Jim Lyons by name but goes on to list
several scandals that have embroiled Lyons and the party
in recent weeks.
“The State Chair failed to denounce homophobia, used
party resources to openly attack 29 of the elected
Republican House members, is under investigation by law
enforcement for potential campaign finance violations,
and is facing calls for resignation from elected
officials, past party Chairmen, and from major media
outlets like the Boston Herald,” the letter continues.
The letter from donors follows calls for the chairman to
step down by Republican Gov. Charlie Baker and prominent
former party leaders.
Lyons called the letter “unfortunate and misguided” in
an interview with the Herald, saying he would be “happy
to sit down with anyone” who signed the letter. Lyons
pointed out most of the donors who signed on had not
actually donated to the MassGOP since before he took the
helm in 2019....
The state party’s campaign account has dwindled from
over $1.1 million in October 2016 to $122,966, according
to last month’s report filed with the state Office of
Campaign Finance....
State GOP Party Vice Chairman Tom Mountain, who has
distanced himself from Lyons in recent weeks, called the
letter “the most important signal” from donors yet.
Mountain blamed Lyons’ public relations faux pas as the
No. 1 problem preventing party fundraising.
“The chair has become a liability and the walls are
closing in,” Mountain said. “It’s like Nixon’s last days
and the question is when will Nixon Jr. do the party a
favor and leave.”
Prominent out-of-state Republicans have canceled
appearances at big-ticket fundraising events in recent
weeks.
The Boston Herald
Monday, July 12, 2021
16 Massachusetts GOP donors
pledge to cut off funding
until party leadership change
More than a dozen donors say they will stop giving to
the Massachusetts Republican Party unless it makes major
changes, writing in a letter Monday that “we have lost
our remaining confidence in current party leadership.”
It’s an escalation of the MassGOP’s troubles, which have
sharpened internal divisions between establishment
moderates and social conservatives. And it raises
questions about whether the struggling party — already
facing dwindling fund-raising and vote share, not to
mention a strained relationship with its top elected
official, Governor Charlie Baker — can remain a viable
political entity. The letter, analysts say, presents a
direct threat to Chairman Jim Lyons, whose party badly
needs money if it is to mount meaningful challenges in
next year’s elections....
The letter, obtained by the Globe and confirmed by five
recipients, was signed by 16 people who said they have
collectively given more than $900,000 “to support the
party’s mission.” Many of the donors have also
contributed to Democratic candidates over the years,
ranging from moderate leaders at the State House like
former House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo to more liberal
officials like Attorney General Maura Healey....
Still, at a June meeting of the state committee, there
was no concerted effort to oust Lyons, a step that would
require two-thirds of the body. Lyons still maintains
enough support to stay in his post, supporters said.
In a recent letter rebuking the former party chairs who
had questioned Lyons, 28 members of the state committee
— just over the one-third margin Lyons requires to stay
in power — wrote that Lyons “has outlined a plan for
victory, and we are here to work with him to achieve
it.”
Massachusetts Republicans have lost tens of thousands of
voters over the last 20 years, and now represent under
10 percent of the state’s registered voters. In last
year’s presidential election, Donald Trump lost the
state with just 32 percent of the vote.
While Republicans struggle to win statewide, the
moderate Baker has bucked that trend, winning in 2018
with a decisive 67 percent of the vote even as
Massachusetts also elected progressives including
Senator Elizabeth Warren and Healey.
The Boston Globe
Monday, July 12, 2021
In escalating drama for
Massachusetts GOP,
some donors say they won’t give unless the party makes
major changes
Reflecting on fractures within the party he leads,
Republican Gov. Charlie Baker said Tuesday that he is
"not surprised" that historically loyal donors are
having second thoughts about giving to the GOP.
At a press conference on future of work trends, Baker
was asked about fissures in the party. The Republican
State Committee under party chairman Jim Lyons has
focused on supporting Donald Trump and pushing many of
the same issues as the former president, while moderates
like Baker and many Republican lawmakers remain locked
in on bipartisanship and trying to work with the
Democrats who control most elected offices in
Massachusetts.
Baker said many elected Republicans in Massachusetts,
including former officeholders, "don't believe many of
the recent decisions and statements that have been made
by the leadership at the state party are consistent with
where we believe most Republicans are generally."
"I mean, the State Committee at the end of the day,
needs to make decisions about the state party
apparatus," Baker said. "That's their role. That's their
responsibility. But I'm not surprised that a number of
folks who have been loyal, generous donors and
supporters to the party, have raised serious concerns
about some of the things that have been coming out of
the State Committee and I hope they address them." ...
Republican State Committee member Geoff Diehl, a Trump
supporter who has aligned himself with Lyons and
preached a "message of common-sense conservatism" while
serving as MassGOP finance chair, launched a run for
governor this month. Party officials have also knocked
GOP legislators and said that about 20 members of the
state committee work for the Baker administration and
are "not necessarily voting for the good of the
Republican party."
State House News Service
Tuesday, July 13, 2021
Baker “Not Surprised” That
Donors Are Upset With MassGOP
Gov. Charlie Baker said he is “not surprised” by an
escalation from typically loyal Republican donors fed up
with party antics as others pointed to a widening
fissure within a party wrestling with the influence of
former President Donald Trump in heavily Democratic
Massachusetts.
“The State Committee, at the end of the day, needs to
make decisions about the state party apparatus,” Baker
said speaking in Boston on Tuesday. “That’s their role.
That’s their responsibility. But I’m not surprised that
a number of folks who have been loyal, generous donors
and supporters to the party, have raised serious
concerns about some of the things that have been coming
out of the State Committee and I hope they address
them.” ...
Lyons hit back Tuesday at “a bunch of wealthy donors who
haven’t even contributed to the party since I’ve been
here and … who have given primarily to Democrats.” ...
The Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political
Finance revealed just two of the 16 signees had donated
to the MassGOP since 2019 when Lyons took over. Many of
the donors have also contributed to Democratic
candidates, including state Speaker of the House Robert
A. DeLeo and state Senate President Karen Spilka as well
as more liberal officials like Attorney General Maura
Healey, Secretary of State William Galvin and U.S. Labor
Secretary Marty Walsh, who formerly served as mayor of
Boston.
Data supported donors’ claim that they’ve donated more
than $900,000 collectively to Republican candidates and
causes over roughly two decades.
Seven of the 16 signees of the Monday letter have also
contributed to Massachusetts Majority Independent
Expenditure Political Action Committee, contributing a
combined $193,322 since its inception in 2019. The PAC
started by real estate developer Gregg Lisciotti of
Leominster — who also signed the letter — has pumped out
tens of thousands to support candidates aligned with
Baker.
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, July 14, 2021
Charlie Baker ‘not surprised’ by
escalating antics of MassGOP
Governor Charlie Baker’s campaign has canceled a Cape
Cod fund-raiser after a public employee was accidentally
listed as part of the host committee on an invitation.
Marty Meehan, president of the University of
Massachusetts system, was named on an invitation to the
Aug. 20 fund-raiser at the Cape Cod home of public
relations executive George Regan. Listing Meehan — a
public employee who under state law may not solicit
campaign contributions — was a mistake, said campaign
spokesman Jim Conroy.
After realizing the error, Conroy said, the campaign
consulted with the Massachusetts Office of Campaign and
Political Finance and determined the cleanest solution
would be to cancel the event, returning any donations
that had already been received. The fund-raiser will be
rescheduled, according to a Friday evening e-mail that
campaign finance director Tim O’Leary sent to
supporters, though he did not list a date.
Meehan said in a brief phone interview Saturday morning
that he had not authorized his name to appear on the
invite but declined further comment....
The event would have marked a return to a pre-pandemic
fund-raising style for Baker, who had just $524,500 in
his campaign account at the end of June after spending
the COVID-19 pandemic mostly staying away from such
events. That sum is a far cry from the roughly $5.9
million he had in the bank at the same point ahead of
his 2018 reelection campaign. Baker has said he is
discussing the matter with his family and promised a
decision “soon.” ...
“We will be returning any contributions we receive in
connection with this event,” O’Leary wrote. He added
that “we will be reaching out in the coming days with a
new date for a new event, and hope that you will be able
to participate.”
The Boston Globe
Saturday, July 17, 2021
Charlie Baker campaign
cancels fund-raiser after error
in listing UMass president among hosts |
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
On Wednesday Boston Globe token
conservative columnist Jeff Jacoby wrote ("Beacon Hill, hoarding billions in surplus dollars, won’t
give taxpayers a break"):
When Governor Charlie Baker first proposed that sales
taxes in Massachusetts be suspended this summer — not,
as in years past, for two days but for two months — my
reaction was lukewarm. Rather than eliminate the sales
tax for one-sixth of the year, I reasoned, why not
reduce the sales tax *rate* by one-sixth — from 6.25
percent to 5.2 percent — and leave it there for good?
On Beacon Hill, however, permanent tax cuts are about as
popular as cholera. While a year-round cut in the sales
tax rate might be ideal, the Legislature would never
consider it.
But why should it balk at Baker’s far more restrained
bill to suspend sales taxes just for August and
September?
After all, it’s not like the government has been starved
of revenue. The government is gorged with revenue. The
state’s tax collections for the just-ended 2021 fiscal
year far outstripped projections. When June’s numbers
are finalized, the Treasury will have banked at least $4
billion more than it had anticipated. The COVID-19
pandemic had been expected to stretch the government’s
resources to the breaking point, but the opposite
happened: Beacon Hill was inundated with cash. Instead
of drawing down the so-called rainy day fund, the state
has been adding to it. It now totals $4.4 billion,
higher than it was before the pandemic.
Baker’s sales-tax moratorium would leave in consumers’
hands about $900 million that would otherwise go to the
Treasury. That isn’t a trivial sum, but compared with
the tsunami of tax receipts flooding the Commonwealth’s
accounts, it’s not much more than a rounding error. The
Legislature just passed a 2022 budget totaling $48.1
billion — that is 53 times the cost of the governor’s
proposed sales-tax holiday. The foregone revenue would
not diminish any spending in the massive new budget;
under Baker’s bill, the tax holiday would be paid for
out of the unexpected and unspent 2021 surplus.
Yet Democratic lawmakers and their allies instantly
declared their opposition.
Senate President Karen Spilka told reporters that it was
“sufficient” to give taxpayers a two-day break from the
sales levy; two months was out of the question because
“there’s a lot of need in the state.”...
Yet when it was a question of more money in their
pockets, legislators raised no objections. In January,
the salaries of Bay State legislators went up by
thousands of dollars as not one, not two, but three
separate pay raises kicked in. Spilka’s total
compensation jumped to nearly $178,500 — a $9,000 hike.
It didn’t occur to her to object on the grounds that
“there’s a lot of need in the state.” ...
A two-month reprieve from
sales taxes won’t undo all the distress caused by
Massachusetts’ pandemic restrictions. But it will help.
And it’s only fair that state government, which was
unexpectedly enriched by billions in surging tax
revenue, allow some of that revenue to flow back to the
people. Massachusetts politicians will spend more money
this year than they have ever spent before. The sky
won’t fall if they let their constituents hang on to a
little more cash as well.
When Jeff contacted me while
writing his column for my view on Gov. Baker's sale tax
relief proposal I responded:
My first thought was and is
that a short two-month sales tax-free period would be a
gracious, perfect way to return some of that unexpected
revenue surplus bonanza —
simple, one-time, wouldn’t cost the state anything, and
is the right and proper thing to do with at least a
portion of the excess taxation. As
I commented
for Bob Katzen at Beacon Hill Roll Call a couple of
weeks ago:
“Gov. Baker’s proposal to
return some of taxpayers’ overpayment, considering the
historic hardships imposed on citizens over the past 15
months, is proper and compassionate,” said Chip Ford,
executive director of Citizens for Limited Taxation
(CLT). “The usual resistance to even this
small tax relief proposal when the state finds itself
awash in an unexpected $4 billion-plus revenue surplus
and $5 billion-plus in additional federal grants, every
cent provided by taxpayers, is shameful and demonstrates
why we’ve always asserted at CLT: ‘More is never
enough and never will be.’” ...
Jeff, the knee-jerk
obstinacy from the Legislature is nothing new, it’s what
Sen. Cindy Friedman, vice-chair of the Senate Ways and
Means Committee, when commenting on the passage of the
interim budget, called "standard procedure" on Beacon
Hill.
One of CLT’s longstanding
phrases is “More Is Never Enough (MINE)” and never will
be until they have it all. What’s yours is theirs
and what’s theirs is theirs.
The Boston Globe reported on Friday ("Voters
approved a tax deduction on charitable donations in
2000; Lawmakers and Baker are odds on whether to delay
it again):
In 2000, Massachusetts voters
overwhelmingly approved a small but notable piece of tax
relief: a state deduction on charitable donations,
something the vast majority of states already offered.
But more than two decades later,
taxpayers have been allowed to take advantage of the
deduction only once, because lawmakers suspended the
measure in 2002, citing a budget crunch. Under a complex
formula, it was supposed to return this year, but the
Legislature and Governor Charlie Baker in late 2020
delayed it again, citing the fiscal uncertainty wrought
by the COVID-19 pandemic.
Now, despite a once-in-a-generation
federal stimulus windfall and surging tax revenues,
lawmakers voted as part of its state budget package to
put the deduction on hold yet again, this time until at
least 2023.
The decision has created friction
with Baker, who on Friday vetoed the delay, arguing it
is “unnecessary” amid better-than-expected tax receipts.
The Democratic-controlled Legislature will now have to
decide whether to overrule his veto.
If lawmakers do, it raises the
prospect they could seek to permanently override the
will of the 1.8 million voters who supported the measure
amid a wider debate on tax policy expected in the months
ahead.
“You also have to realize that a
lot has changed in 21 years. Our economy has changed
drastically over the last 21 years,” Senator Michael J.
Rodrigues, the Senate’s budget chief, said before Baker
issued his veto Friday afternoon....
The deduction has already followed
a long, tortured path. Voters approved it at the ballot
box, 72 to 28 percent, the same year they called for
incrementally lowering the state’s income tax rate to 5
percent. But taxpayers were able to use the tax
deduction for only one tax year before the Legislature
suspended it and tied it to a drop in the income tax
rate, which they also slowed by hooking it to a series
of economic triggers.
The charitable tax deduction would
only be allowed again, they decreed, when the income tax
rate ticked down to 5 percent, which wound up taking 20
years. It was slated to become an option again in 2021,
before the Legislature delayed it for a year. And then
for one more.
The charitable deduction was on the same 2000 ballot as
CLT's "temporary" income tax rollback. The
successful charitable deduction ballot question was
temporarily "frozen" by the Legislature in 2002 simultaneously with CLT's successful income tax rollback ballot question,
also temporarily "frozen" by the Legislature. We've always thought it
was outrageous that voters and taxpayers had to wait two
decades before voters' orders to their "representative"
in the Legislature were respected, but finally the
voters' orders were obeyed twenty years later, just last
year.
Still the Legislature refuses to follow its
employers' orders and insists on obstinately refusing a voters' mandate.
Yet another example of "What’s yours is theirs and
what’s theirs is theirs," and voters are expected to
just comply and shut up.
State House News Service
reported on Thursday ("House,
Senate Send Baker $350 Mil Transportation Bill; Six Grant
Pots Added to $200 Mil in Annual Ch. 90 Funds"):
The Legislature passed an
infrastructure bill on Thursday that had been under
negotiation for several weeks, padding the traditional
$200 million in annual financing for local road and
bridge repairs with $150 million spread across six grant
programs to pay for bus lanes, electric vehicles and
other municipal transportation projects.
The House and Senate passed the
$350 million transportation funding bill unanimously,
clearing one major item off the Legislature's to-do list
as it approaches the summer break....
Both branches were seeking $200
million for the statewide municipal road repair program
known as Chapter 90, which will deliver funds to all 351
cities and towns. That remained unchanged in the final
bill....
The Legislature, however, added
spending for competitive grants after the House had
pushed for $75 million for three different programs, and
the Senate recommended $100 million in additional
financing for four programs. The compromise funded all
of the priorities sought by both branches, plus an
additional $25 million for transit-supportive
infrastructure, like bike and bus lanes.
In my commentary for the July
12, 2021 CLT Update ("Legislature
Passes $48.1B Budget, Larger Than Submitted) I wrote:
The State House News Service reported on Friday
("State’s $48.1 Bil Budget Nets Unanimous,
Bipartisan Support") ...
.
. . Remember that both the House and the Senate each
passed its own respective FY 2022 budget in May.
Both of those budgets which next went to the secret
conference committee proposed to spend $47.7
Billion.
The state budget which was rubber-stamped on Friday
and rushed off to the governor spends either $48.07
Billion or $50.062 Billion, depending on who's
talking. Even the lower figure of $48.07 Billion is
more than the $47.7 Billion that went into that
secret conference committee. Spending more is how
a compromise was reached. On Beacon Hill spending
more is called "compromise" to grand applause.
More spending on infrastructure
than was initially proposed once again was applauded.
Every member of the Legislature —
Democrat and Republican alike, in both House and
Senate — voted for greater
spending. If the Legislature's got taxpayers'
overpayments they more than happy to spend it, after all,
it's not coming out of their own deep pockets.
If it was we'd quickly see spending reduced radically.
Senate Ways and Means Vice
Chair Cindy Friedman hit the nail on the head a couple of
weeks ago when she blithely shrugged off (and everyone
recognizes) such outcomes as "standard procedure" on Beacon
Hill.
Massachusetts voters' potential
choice for next governor: Disappointing Charlie Baker
vs. Disastrous Maura Healey, aka, Managing the Decline vs.
The Decline Super-Charged?
The Boston Herald reported on
Thursday ("Maura Healey to make
decision on run for governor ‘by the fall’ as Charlie Baker
fundraising heats up"):
Maura Healey said she’ll make a
decision “by the fall” on whether to pursue a run for
governor, hinting at a ballot-box showdown with Gov.
Charlie Baker — who has booked a hot fundraiser down the
Cape next month.
The invite list for Baker’s Aug. 20
soiree at public relations executive George Regan’s
Mashpee estate for Baker and Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito reads
like a who’s who list of Massachusetts politics.
That list, obtained by the Herald,
includes names like former Attorney General Francis
Bellotti, Mintz chairman attorney Bob Popeo, former
Boston Police Commissioner William Gross and car
entrepreneur Herb Chambers, among others, who are
co-hosting the affair. Former top cop Bill Bratton,
developer Jay Cashman, Legal Seafood’s Roger Berkowitz
and scores more — many Democrats — are also on the
list....
Healey is widely considered a top
contender for the Democratic nomination should she
launch a bid....
The two-term attorney general has
been a leader in fundraising among potential
gubernatorial candidates throughout much of the past
year and has been making the rounds at appearances
around the state. Healey’s campaign account is the
highest among potential and declared 2022 contenders
with $3.12 million in cash on hand.
Last week I noted that Boston Globe columnist Joan
Vennochi wrote ("If
Baker runs for a third term, he’ll win. Unless...If
Governor Charlie Baker doesn’t run, he’s a lame duck. If
he does, he’s governor again"):
. . . With help from independent
voters who can vote in a Republican primary, Baker will
beat Geoff Diehl, who has mysteriously decided to come
at him from the Donald Trump wing of the party in a
state where Joe Biden won 65 percent of the vote. Then,
in the general election, Baker will beat any of the
lefty-loving Democrats already in the race. If Attorney
General Maura Healey decides to run and is the
Democratic nominee, Baker is still the favorite. AGs
don’t move up to governor in this state, and neither do
women. Besides, Healey is known for suing the Trump
administration, not for taking on the Baker
administration....
If Baker doesn’t run, he’s a lame
duck and the race for governor is wide open. If he does,
he’s governor again — unless something that hasn’t
stuck, finally sticks. The Massachusetts political world
awaits his decision.
Expanding on Vennochi's observation, The New Boston Post
offered a deeper insight into voters' reluctance to
elevating attorneys general to higher office in its
report on Friday ("Maura Healey Running
for Governor? Well, Charlie, You Go First
Healey is widely considered the
most likely Democratic nominee in 2022 if she runs. But
it’s not clear that she wants to run against Baker, a
fiscally moderate, socially liberal Republican who has
maintained high poll numbers through six and a half
years in office.
A loss could stunt or end Healey’s
political career, when she’d be the odds-on favorite to
win re-election as Attorney General and may draw
interest as a candidate for other elected office or for
an appointed federal office....
Massachusetts Attorney General on
paper seems like a good steppingstone, but it hasn’t
worked out that way in recent decades. The last Attorney
General to go on to subsequent elected office was Ed
Brooke, who served as Attorney General from 1963 to
1967; he was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1966 — 55
years ago.
Brooke’s successor, Elliot
Richardson, served as state Attorney General from 1967
to 1969, before joining President Richard Nixon’s
Cabinet. (He eventually became U.S. Attorney General.)
Richardson is the last Republican to have served as
Massachusetts Attorney General. (He lost in 1984 when he
ran for U.S. Senate.)
Since Richardson, five of the most
recent six state attorneys general (all Democrats) have
lost when they ran for governor, ending their political
careers. They are Robert Quinn, Francis X. Bellotti,
Scott Harshbarger, Tom Reilly, and Martha Coakley (who
lost running for U.S. Senate before she lost running for
governor).
My money's on Maura Healey
definitely running — but
only if Charlie Baker doesn't. Politically
ambitious Healey will not risk losing a campaign for
governor, giving up her highly-paid spotlight sinecure as
attorney general — being tossed
out into "the dreaded private sector."
The Boston Herald reported on Monday ("16
Massachusetts GOP donors pledge to cut off funding until
party leadership change"):
Some MassGOP donors say they have
no confidence in embattled state party leadership and
won’t contribute another cent until the state committee
takes action to “restore the Massachusetts Republican
Party’s reputation” — pledging $1 million in support if
it does.
“Over the past six weeks, we have
lost our remaining confidence in current party
leadership,” states the Monday letter signed by 16
Republican donors who claim they have collectively
raised more than $900,000 for the party and candidates
over two decades.
The letter does not explicitly call
out Republican State Party Chairman Jim Lyons by name
but goes on to list several scandals that have embroiled
Lyons and the party in recent weeks....
The letter from donors follows
calls for the chairman to step down by Republican Gov.
Charlie Baker and prominent former party leaders.
The state party’s campaign account
has dwindled from over $1.1 million in October 2016 to
$122,966, according to last month’s report filed with
the state Office of Campaign Finance.
The Boston Globe in its report on Monday ("In
escalating drama for Massachusetts GOP, some donors say
they won’t give unless the party makes major changes")
noted:
It’s an escalation of the MassGOP’s
troubles, which have sharpened internal divisions
between establishment moderates and social
conservatives. And it raises questions about whether the
struggling party — already facing dwindling fund-raising
and vote share, not to mention a strained relationship
with its top elected official, Governor Charlie Baker —
can remain a viable political entity. The letter,
analysts say, presents a direct threat to Chairman Jim
Lyons, whose party badly needs money if it is to mount
meaningful challenges in next year’s elections....
Massachusetts Republicans have lost
tens of thousands of voters over the last 20 years, and
now represent under 10 percent of the state’s registered
voters. In last year’s presidential election, Donald
Trump lost the state with just 32 percent of the vote.
While Republicans struggle to win
statewide, the moderate Baker has bucked that trend,
winning in 2018 with a decisive 67 percent of the vote
even as Massachusetts also elected progressives
including Senator Elizabeth Warren and Healey.
The perennial MassGOP shootout
in the lifeboat presents itself in all its typical splendor,
the Massachusetts Republican Party's traditional circular
firing squad. Within such a relatively insignificant
political party that makes up just 10% of the state's
registered voters it always amazes me that this is how they
waste their effort.
|
Enrollment Breakdown as of 02/12/2020 |
|
Democrat |
1,491,600 |
32.56% |
|
Republican |
462,586 |
10.10% |
|
Unenrolled |
2,564,076 |
55.97% |
What Massachusetts needs is a
shakeup of political parties to more honestly identify
themselves, a realignment and repackaging. The
Democratic Party should more accurately become The Socialist
Non-Workers Party of Massachusetts. The Republican
Party of Massachusetts will then be free to adopt the
Democratic Party label with a twist ("We're your
grandfather's Democratic Party that left you behind").
But if moderate Republicans decline to rebrand, then instead
of the vicious infighting amongst their small numbers, the
Jim Lyons' wing of the MassGOP can realign, break away and
become the Conservative Party of Massachusetts as has been
done in New
York and
other states with
some success. It's the unenrolled voters who
decide Bay State election outcomes anyway. Why
distract and alienate them with this sort of political
insiders circus?
While thinking about a
Socialist Non-Workers Party —
make sure you check out Mark Levin's latest best-seller (#2
on the Amazon books' best-seller chart today). I
ordered my pre-release copy and it arrived on Tuesday, the
day it was released. You can read many of the
reviews here.
Mark Levin will be interviewed
about the book on his own FoxNews show, "Life, Liberty &
Levin," by Pete Hegseth this evening (Sunday) at 8:00 PM
EDT, replayed at 11:00 PM EDT.
Its publisher,
Simon and Schuster, summarizes Levin's work:
In American Marxism,
Levin explains how the core elements of Marxist
ideology are now pervasive in American society and
culture—from our schools, the press, and
corporations, to Hollywood, the Democratic Party,
and the Biden presidency—and how it is often cloaked
in deceptive labels like “progressivism,”
“democratic socialism,” “social activism,” and more.
With his characteristic trenchant analysis, Levin
digs into the psychology and tactics of these
movements, the widespread brainwashing of students,
the anti-American purposes of Critical Race Theory
and the Green New Deal, and the escalation of
repression and censorship to silence opposing voices
and enforce conformity. Levin exposes many of the
institutions, intellectuals, scholars, and activists
who are leading this revolution, and provides us
with some answers and ideas on how to confront them.
As Levin writes: “The counter-revolution to the
American Revolution is in full force. And it can no
longer be dismissed or ignored for it is devouring
our society and culture, swirling around our
everyday lives, and ubiquitous in our politics,
schools, media, and entertainment.” And, like
before, Levin seeks to rally the American people to
defend their liberty.
I haven't finished the book yet
but have read enough to write an Amazon review encouraging
more to read it:
Eyes Wide Opened
July 16, 2021
Mark Levin has removed
the shade and deception from this most frightening
threat against all that patriotic Americans hold
most dear. American Marxism lays out in detail how
what the cognizant among us recognize is happening
to our nation, those who have followed as the
sickness has metastasized over decades, from its
philosophical inception a century ago to today's
crass and blatant assault on the fabric of our
society, culture and our very being.
Levin today is a
combination of patriots Paul Revere spreading his
warning and Thomas Payne spreading encouragement in
dark times, and what they risked, sacrificed and
accomplished to help make the American Miracle
happen and so far succeed.
As Benjamin Franklin
asserted at the close of the Constitutional
Convention in Philadelphia: "We have given you a
Republic ... if you can keep it."
Now we shall see if
there are enough of us to keep faith with America's
founders.
I don't think I much need to
encourage or recommend it to you! Just making you
aware of it will be enough.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
The Boston
Globe
Wednesday, July 14, 2021
Beacon Hill, hoarding billions in surplus dollars, won’t give
taxpayers a break
A sales-tax reprieve won’t undo all the distress caused by the
shutdown, but it will help.
By Jeff Jacoby
When Governor Charlie Baker first proposed that sales taxes in
Massachusetts be suspended this summer — not, as in years past,
for two days but for two months — my reaction was lukewarm.
Rather than eliminate the sales tax for one-sixth of the year, I
reasoned, why not reduce the sales tax rate by one-sixth
— from 6.25 percent to 5.2 percent — and leave it there for
good?
On Beacon Hill, however, permanent tax cuts are about as popular
as cholera. While a year-round cut in the sales tax rate might
be ideal, the Legislature would never consider it.
But why should it balk at Baker’s far more restrained bill to
suspend sales taxes just for August and September?
After all, it’s not like the government has been starved of
revenue. The government is gorged with revenue. The
state’s tax collections for the just-ended 2021 fiscal year far
outstripped projections. When June’s numbers are finalized, the
Treasury will have banked at least $4 billion more than it had
anticipated. The COVID-19 pandemic had been expected to stretch
the government’s resources to the breaking point, but the
opposite happened: Beacon Hill was inundated with cash. Instead
of drawing down the so-called rainy day fund, the state has been
adding to it. It now totals $4.4 billion, higher than it was
before the pandemic.
Baker’s sales-tax moratorium would leave in consumers’ hands
about $900 million that would otherwise go to the Treasury. That
isn’t a trivial sum, but compared with the tsunami of tax
receipts flooding the Commonwealth’s accounts, it’s not much
more than a rounding error. The Legislature just passed a 2022
budget totaling $48.1 billion — that is 53 times the cost
of the governor’s proposed sales-tax holiday. The foregone
revenue would not diminish any spending in the massive new
budget; under Baker’s bill, the tax holiday would be paid for
out of the unexpected and unspent 2021 surplus.
Yet Democratic lawmakers and their allies instantly declared
their opposition.
Senate President Karen Spilka told reporters that it was
“sufficient” to give taxpayers a two-day break from the sales
levy; two months was out of the question because “there’s a lot
of need in the state.” Michael Rodrigues, the Senate Ways and
Means chair, derided Baker’s proposal as “a short-term political
gimmick.” The heads of the state’s big teachers unions — Merrie
Najimy of the Massachusetts Teachers Association and Beth Kontos
of AFT Massachusetts — called for more government spending on
education and transportation, not on a “billion-dollar
giveaway.”
To repeat: Baker isn’t proposing to reduce state spending. He
isn’t suggesting that the entire surplus be turned over to
taxpayers. He is calling only to let them keep a modest slice of
it by relieving them from paying sales taxes for a while. But to
Beacon Hill’s liberals, that is a “gimmick” and a “giveaway.” To
them, it is axiomatic that whatever taxpayers might choose to do
with their own money is unimportant. Only the state can be
trusted to spend those dollars wisely and well.
Yet when it was a question of more money in their pockets,
legislators raised no objections. In January, the salaries of
Bay State legislators went up by thousands of dollars as not
one, not two, but three separate pay raises kicked in.
Spilka’s total compensation jumped to nearly $178,500 — a $9,000
hike. It didn’t occur to her to object on the grounds that
“there’s a lot of need in the state.”
Over the course of the past 15 months, with the tacit approval
of the Legislature, countless Massachusetts retail vendors,
restaurants, and other companies were forced into a months-long
revenue “holiday,” shut down by emergency orders in which they
had no say. The number of small businesses open in the state
plunged by 37 percent between January and December; small
business revenue dropped by 44 percent.
A two-month reprieve from sales taxes won’t undo all the
distress caused by Massachusetts’ pandemic restrictions. But it
will help. And it’s only fair that state government, which was
unexpectedly enriched by billions in surging tax revenue, allow
some of that revenue to flow back to the people. Massachusetts
politicians will spend more money this year than they have ever
spent before. The sky won’t fall if they let their constituents
hang on to a little more cash as well.
State House News
Service
Friday, July 16, 2021
Baker Signs $47.6 Billion Annual Budget
By Katie Lannan
Gov. Charlie Baker signed a $47.6 billion fiscal 2022 budget
into law Friday afternoon, his office announced, vetoing $7.9
million in gross spending and an outside section that would
delay implementation of a charitable giving tax deduction
approved by voters in 2000.
State lawmakers unanimously passed a $48.1 billion spending bill
on July 9, approving a House-Senate deal that does not include
any broad-based tax hikes and, unlike earlier versions of the
budget, does not draw from the state's "rainy day" stabilization
fund. A surge in tax collections well beyond projections allowed
budget negotiators to cancel a planned $1.5 billion withdrawal.
In his message to lawmakers, Baker wrote that the state must
"remain alert to the risk that economic activity has been
bolstered by ultimately unsustainable levels of federal
spending, and that our currently high tax revenue growth might
slow down as federal emergency spending phases out."
"Reflecting this mixture of confidence and caution, the
Legislature proposed that we set aside $600 million in this
budget for future education and pension costs ($350 million and
$250 million respectively)," he wrote. "We applaud the instinct
to use unanticipated revenue for future liabilities, but
respectfully suggest that we could achieve the same result, with
less risk, by making those transfers from the Fiscal Year 2021
(FY21) surplus rather than a projected future surplus."
In addition to his vetoes, Baker returned 25 policy sections
with amendments. He said he approved approximately $90 million
in earmarked funding.
Fiscal Year 2022 Vetoes
Charitable Deduction Delay
Section 99
I am vetoing this section
because it is unnecessary to further delay the charitable
tax deduction where the Commonwealth’s fiscal situation has
improved materially in recent months, and the Commonwealth
is on track to close Fiscal Year 2021 with no transfer out
of the Stabilization Fund.
The Boston Globe
Friday, July 16, 2021
Voters approved a tax deduction on charitable donations
in 2000
Lawmakers and Baker are odds on whether to delay it
again
By Matt Stout
In 2000, Massachusetts voters overwhelmingly approved a
small but notable piece of tax relief: a state deduction
on charitable donations, something the vast majority of
states already offered.
But more than two decades later, taxpayers have been
allowed to take advantage of the deduction only once,
because lawmakers suspended the measure in 2002, citing
a budget crunch. Under a complex formula, it was
supposed to return this year, but the Legislature and
Governor Charlie Baker in late 2020 delayed it again,
citing the fiscal uncertainty wrought by the COVID-19
pandemic.
Now, despite a once-in-a-generation federal stimulus
windfall and surging tax revenues, lawmakers voted as
part of its state budget package to put the deduction on
hold yet again, this time until at least 2023.
The decision has created friction with Baker, who on
Friday vetoed the delay, arguing it is “unnecessary”
amid better-than-expected tax receipts. The
Democratic-controlled Legislature will now have to
decide whether to overrule his veto.
If lawmakers do, it raises the prospect they could seek
to permanently override the will of the 1.8 million
voters who supported the measure amid a wider debate on
tax policy expected in the months ahead.
“You also have to realize that a lot has changed in 21
years. Our economy has changed drastically over the last
21 years,” Senator Michael J. Rodrigues, the Senate’s
budget chief, said before Baker issued his veto Friday
afternoon.
“I don’t know if it’s an effective public policy,” the
Westport Democrat said of the deduction. “I’m going to
keep an open mind on that and all tax policy.”
Lawmakers included the delay until 2023 in a $48 billion
state budget they had sent to Baker last week. Rodrigues,
who helped negotiate the spending package, said House
and Senate leaders did not discuss removing the
deduction delay from the budget bill during the
closed-door talks even as they added $4.2 billion in
anticipated revenue and canceled a hefty withdrawal from
the state’s savings account.
While initially delayed to help ensure the state budget
weathered the pandemic, the deduction is becoming part
of a longer-term policy debate, with lawmakers weighing
how best to safeguard the state’s coffers in the years
ahead.
Progressive advocates and policy makers have chafed at
the tax policy, which is intended to help spur
charitable donations by allowing taxpayers, including
those who don’t itemize their deductions on their
federal taxes, to take a 5 percent deduction on
donations on their state taxes. For example, for a $500
charitable donation, the tax savings would be as high as
$25.
Critics say it’s apt to benefit the state’s wealthiest
residents most, because they are far more likely to
itemize deductions and thus be eligible to deduct
charitable giving on their federal taxes. It also makes
it more likely that they’d then take the deduction on
their state taxes.
Democratic lawmakers have already expressed openness to
reshaping the tax code to target the state’s richest,
voting last month to advance to next year’s ballot a
proposal to impose a 4 percent surtax on annual personal
income above $1 million.
Senator Adam G. Hinds, a Pittsfield Democrat and Senate
chairman of the Committee on Revenue, said this week
that lawmakers are balancing whether eliminating the
deduction would discourage donations against the revenue
hit the state would absorb if state taxpayers are
allowed to take the tax subsidy.
“Sure, we have a surplus that we’re navigating now,”
Hinds said. “But I think a lot of us are looking at this
in terms of the long-term impact and how we ensure
sustained revenues. We’re not looking at this from one
fiscal year to the next.”
Given the passage of time, some supporters wonder how
hot of an issue it will even be for taxpayers who have
rarely, if ever, gotten to take advantage of the
deduction.
“Politically, it seemed to be attractive,” said David
Tuerck, president of the right-leaning Beacon Hill
Institute, which argued in 2000 that the measure would
help boost charitable giving. “But it has been quite
some time, I think the voters may have forgotten about
it.”
The House and Senate had passed identical language to
ensure it “not be allowed” for 2022. But Baker on Friday
rejected the section, saying it wasn’t necessary to
delay the deduction because the state’s “fiscal
situation has improved materially in recent months,” to
the point it’s on track to no longer have to use money
from its emergency savings account to balance its books
on the fiscal year that ended in June.
It wasn’t immediately clear Friday how the Legislature
would respond.
The deduction has already followed a long, tortured
path. Voters approved it at the ballot box, 72 to 28
percent, the same year they called for incrementally
lowering the state’s income tax rate to 5 percent. But
taxpayers were able to use the tax deduction for only
one tax year before the Legislature suspended it and
tied it to a drop in the income tax rate, which they
also slowed by hooking it to a series of economic
triggers.
The charitable tax deduction would only be allowed
again, they decreed, when the income tax rate ticked
down to 5 percent, which wound up taking 20 years. It
was slated to become an option again in 2021, before the
Legislature delayed it for a year. And then for one
more.
The state constitution doesn’t bar the Legislature from
amending what voters approve, a path it has repeatedly
taken to reshape what lawmakers viewed as problematic
parts of ballot initiatives, from the 2016 cannabis
legalization law to the 2012 Right to Repair measure.
But delaying the charitable deduction forever would be a
more muscular response to a voter-passed law.
Further complicating the debate is what the deduction
could actually cost. State officials estimate the delay
would be worth $64 million in revenue. But the Baker
administration has previously said it could cost the
state about $300 million on a full-fiscal-year basis
starting this fiscal year, with it escalating to
anywhere from $300 million to $363 million by fiscal
year 2024.
Those estimates, which the administration released in
April 2020, came with huge caveats, including that they
were based on pre-pandemic data.
Nonprofit leaders have pushed officials to reinstate the
deduction, saying it could help motivate residents to
donate at a time that’s uncertain for charitable groups,
too.
“We have no doubt that when it does get reinstated, it
will provide a terrific boost to giving,” said Jim
Klocke, chief executive of the Massachusetts Nonprofit
Network, which has urged officials to restore the
deduction for 2022 because of the better-than-expected
tax returns as COVID-19 eases its grip.
“We knew the state had to focus first on the pandemic.
We totally understood that,” he said. “But we’re now in
a much better place.”
Others disagree. The Massachusetts Budget and Policy
Center, a left-leaning think tank, has argued that if
lawmakers keep it, they should consider reshaping the
deduction by capping it or making it available only to
those who do not itemize on their federal income taxes.
That could promote more lower- and middle-income people
to use it, rather than high earners.
The center has also questioned whether the 5 percent
deduction could dramatically spur more donations, given
that wealthy taxpayers can already deduct at a far
higher rate on their federal taxes by claiming a
charitable deduction.
“Any policy where most of the benefits are going to be
the very highest-income earners is inappropriate at a
time when we have raging inequity,” said Phineas
Baxandall, an analyst with the Massachusetts Budget and
Policy Center.
The Boston Globe
Friday, July 16, 2021
9 things you should know about the state budget Governor
Charlie Baker just signed
By Emma Platoff
Governor Charlie Baker on Friday signed a $47.6 billion
state budget for fiscal year 2022, cementing a plan
based on a solid fiscal outlook in a year many feared
would require deep cuts.
Baker vetoed just $7.9 million in spending and two
policy proposals from the Legislature, including a
provision that would have delayed the implementation of
the charitable tax deduction. He also amended dozens of
policies included in the budget.
“The [fiscal year 2022] budget makes historic
investments in our communities, schools, economy, and
workers as Massachusetts emerges from the pandemic,”
Baker said in a statement. “We are able to responsibly
grow our reserves without raising taxes, while
continuing to make historic investments in our schools,
job training programs and downtown economies.”
Among the key items from the governor’s action on
Friday:
۰ He moved to implement the charitable tax deduction,
which has been delayed for decades even after voters
approved it in 2000. It would allow taxpayers to take a
5 percent deduction on donations on their state taxes in
an effort to spur charitable contributions — an option
they have been able to take advantage of only once,
after state leaders delayed its implementation time and
again. Baker wrote that the deduction should go into
effect given “the combination of strong state revenues
and serious needs facing non-profits and charitable
organizations.”
۰ Baker vetoed a proposed study on the impact of
COVID-19 on children’s behavioral health, saying that an
existing administration plan called the Behavioral
Health Roadmap “is the most comprehensive approach to
identifying behavioral health needs and implementing
services.”
۰ He made the state’s controversial film tax credit
permanent. The tax break, which is meant to bring film
jobs to the state and costs between $56 and $80 million
annually, has been in some budget hawks’ crosshairs for
years, with critics saying its payoff does not justify
its expense. The House and Senate came to an agreement
to extend the tax credit permanently while tightening it
in some ways. Baker signed off on that plan, though he
has been critical of the incentive program in the past.
Teamsters Local 25 President Sean M. O’Brien praised the
decision, saying “while workers across the country are
under siege by greedy corporations and uncaring
politicians, workers can thrive in Massachusetts thanks
to a governor who listens to the concerns of working
families and is always there to support them.”
۰ Baker vetoed $2.9 million in funding for a charter
school reimbursement program that he said was “not
recommended.”
۰ He reduced by $1 million a $4.6 million allocation for
municipal police training committee operations.
۰ Where the Legislature had sought to end an eligibility
test for the state cash benefit program Transitional Aid
to Families with Dependent Children and eliminate an
asset test for the program Emergency Assistance to
Elderly, Disabled and Children, Baker maintained
versions of them.
۰ Baker kept alive two tax breaks that the Legislature
had voted to end: the harbor maintenance credit, a $1.4
million to $1.5 million annual benefit — which he said
benefits shippers, importers, and exporters — and the
medical device user fee tax credit, which costs the
state $400,000 to $600,000 annually.
۰ He approved about $90 million that lawmakers had
earmarked for one-time local projects throughout the
state.
۰ Baker signed off on $571 million for the University of
Massachusetts system, support which President Marty
Meehan said helped position “the university to serve as
a central pillar in the Commonwealth’s post-pandemic
economic recovery.”
The budget rests on strong forecasted tax revenue, which
came in billions higher than was anticipated in January.
That’s good news, Baker wrote, but officials “must
remain alert to the risk that economic activity has been
bolstered by ultimately unsustainable levels of federal
spending, and that our currently high tax revenue growth
might slow down as federal emergency spending phases
out.”
The budget does not contain the broad-based cuts that
some forecasters feared would be necessary amid the
COVID-19 economic downturn, nor does it carry
broad-based tax hikes. Instead, the budget Baker signed
is a 3.6 percent increase over the fiscal year 2021
budget.
Baker’s signature and vetoes bring the lengthy budgeting
process ever closer to its end. Massachusetts, as has
become typical, started its fiscal year July 1 without a
budget in place, instead funding the government through
July with a temporary $5.4 billion budget.
State lawmakers unanimously approved the budget July 9.
Now, the Democratic-dominated state House and Senate
have the opportunity to override Baker’s vetoes or
reject his policy amendments. Overriding a veto requires
a two-thirds vote.
Senate President Karen E. Spilka said in a statement
that she was proud the budget would “go a long way
towards getting us all ‘back to better’ as we recover
from the pandemic.”
“The Senate will continue to review the rest of the
Governor’s actions in the days to come,” she said.
A spokesperson for House Speaker Ronald Mariano did not
immediately return a request for comment on Baker’s
budget actions.
The state’s annual budget funds everything from salaries
and pensions for state employees to direct local aid.
Among its largest expenditures are health insurance for
low-income residents and investments in education.
State House News
Service
Thursday, July 15, 2021
House, Senate Send Baker $350 Mil Transportation Bill
Six Grant Pots Added to $200 Mil in Annual Ch. 90 Funds
By Matt Murphy
The Legislature passed an infrastructure bill on
Thursday that had been under negotiation for several
weeks, padding the traditional $200 million in annual
financing for local road and bridge repairs with $150
million spread across six grant programs to pay for bus
lanes, electric vehicles and other municipal
transportation projects.
The House and Senate passed the $350 million
transportation funding bill unanimously, clearing one
major item off the Legislature's to-do list as it
approaches the summer break.
Rep. William Straus, of Mattapoisett, and Sen. Joe
Boncore, of Winthrop, negotiated the compromise (H 3903)
after the House in late June and the Senate in early
July passed competing versions of the legislation.
Both branches were seeking $200 million for the
statewide municipal road repair program known as Chapter
90, which will deliver funds to all 351 cities and
towns. That remained unchanged in the final bill.
"We know that our municipalities need this money and
want this money," Boncore said, adding, "Not just to get
these roadway projects underway, but as we build out of
the COVID-19 pandemic to stimulate the construction
industry with jobs and economy around these projects."
The Legislature, however, added spending for competitive
grants after the House had pushed for $75 million for
three different programs, and the Senate recommended
$100 million in additional financing for four programs.
The compromise funded all of the priorities sought by
both branches, plus an additional $25 million for
transit-supportive infrastructure, like bike and bus
lanes.
"Philosophically, I think the Legislature's goal here is
to think of the state help to the municipalities in two
ways. Not just the traditional Chapter 90, but we're
also now suggesting people think of state assistance in
terms of these guided and directed programs for
congestion issues, as well as public transit," Straus
said.
The Massachusetts Municipal Association and others have
pushed for years to see the Legislature not only
increase the amount of money authorized through Chapter
90, but also to pass a long-term financing bill that
would allow projects to be planned out over multiple
years.
Instead, the bill sent to Gov. Charlie Baker on Thursday
put new funding into competitive grant programs that
each have their own policy objectives.
Straus's amendment authorized $25 million in additional
borrowing for the municipal small bridge program, $25
million for the bottleneck relief program, $25 million
for transit-supportive infrastructure, $25 million for
municipal bus transit grants, $25 million for municipal
mass transit access, and $25 million electric vehicles
and electric-vehicle infrastructure that would be
available to cities and towns, as well as regional
transit authorities.
Though the annual Chapter 90 authorization is supposed
to be made in the spring so cities and towns can sign
contracts and take advantage of the full construction
season, Straus said municipalities were notified of how
much money they could expect and no projects were
delayed.
"While we would have preferred it being done prior to
July 1, no project has been delayed that anyone needs to
be concerned about as a result," Straus said in remarks
to his colleagues on the House floor.
The amendment also included a new section making clear
that $5 billion in state COVID-19 recovery funding
received through the federal government is eligible to
be spent on "maintenance or pay-go funded building of
transportation infrastructure, including roads."
Straus said the clarifying language was added to the
bill "based on some indications that (the Baker
administration) had made in writing that seemed to show
a less than warm and inviting view toward transportation
projects" being funded with American Rescue Plan Act
money.
"The federal law makes it clear transportation is
included, but for some reason the governor's office has
said they won't recognize transportation. This is our
way, as politely as we can, reminding them that they got
it wrong," Straus said in an interview..
The Executive Office of Administration and Finance
issued a memo on June 3 to municipalities outlining the
different ways counties and municipalities could spend
$3.4 billion in direct aid through American Rescue Plan
Act. The memo made no mention of roads or transportation
infrastructure, nor did it suggest those uses would be
prohibited.
Instead, the memo borrowed language directly from the
ARPA law that listed drinking water, wastewater and
stormwater infrastructure or the expansion of access to
broadband internet as eligible infrastructure
expenditures.
A spokesman for the Executive Office of Administration
and Finance said at no time has the administration
contested the eligibility of transportation projects for
ARPA funds, which would be consistent with U.S. Treasury
guidance on how states and local government entities can
use the relief money.
Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr called the provision
"odd," and suggested it was "redundant" because he was
unaware of anyone who disputed the eligibility of
transportation projects. The Gloucester Republican,
however, said he did not want to hold up the bill over
his concern with that section's inclusion.
The MBTA has received additional direct federal recovery
funding from Congress, and Baker has filed a $2.9
billion plan to allocate more than half of the state's
ARPA relief money to housing, parks, wastewater system
improvement and other priorities, but not
transportation.
After a battle with Baker, the Legislature now has
control of the state ARPA funds, and has scheduled its
first hearing on how to spend the full amount for next
week when it will listen to testimony on Baker's plan.
The compromise road repair bill also excluded language
that had been in the original House version of the bill
requiring the Department of Transportation to maintain
two operational commuter rail tracks on the
Framingham/Worcester line during construction of an
Allston I-90 viaduct project.
"There was a consistency issue here. We're happy to
support programs in general and there are likely to be
other opportunities in the session for project specific
work by the Legislature," Straus said.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, July 15, 2021
Maura Healey to make decision on run for governor ‘by
the fall’
as Charlie Baker fundraising heats up
By Erin Tiernan
Maura Healey said she’ll make a decision “by the fall”
on whether to pursue a run for governor, hinting at a
ballot-box showdown with Gov. Charlie Baker — who has
booked a hot fundraiser down the Cape next month.
The invite list for Baker’s Aug. 20 soiree at public
relations executive George Regan’s Mashpee estate for
Baker and Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito reads like a who’s who
list of Massachusetts politics.
That list, obtained by the Herald, includes names like
former Attorney General Francis Bellotti, Mintz chairman
attorney Bob Popeo, former Boston Police Commissioner
William Gross and car entrepreneur Herb Chambers, among
others, who are co-hosting the affair. Former top cop
Bill Bratton, developer Jay Cashman, Legal Seafood’s
Roger Berkowitz and scores more — many Democrats — are
also on the list.
“The governor is not going down to Cape Cod in August to
get ice cream,” said an inside source. “He wouldn’t be
going if he wasn’t running.”
Those attending are asked to kick in $500 to $1,000 for
the governor or Polito, or both.
Baker last week promised a decision on his re-election
“soon.” The moderate Republican had backed off
fundraising efforts amid the pandemic, fueling
speculation he might bow out the 2022 race. But his June
fundraising numbers snapped back as his campaign
advisers confirmed he had resumed hosting events,
tallying $90,854 — nearly as much as he had raised in
the five prior months combined.
Baker had about $524,500 in his campaign account by the
end of June, according to state campaign finance data.
He had 10 times as much in his coffers on the same month
in the runup to his 2018 re-election. Polito, by
contrast, had more than $2.2 million banked in June.
Healey, too, kept the rumor mill churning about her
gubernatorial aspirations during an appearance on GBH’s
“Boston Public Radio” on Thursday.
“I’m thinking about that right now. I’m going to take
the summer to think about that. My term is up in 2022
and I need to make some decisions,” Healey said when
asked about her re-election plans.
Healey is widely considered a top contender for the
Democratic nomination should she launch a bid.
“I’m taking time to think about it and to talk to
people. I’ll know more by the fall,” Healey said.
The two-term attorney general has been a leader in
fundraising among potential gubernatorial candidates
throughout much of the past year and has been making the
rounds at appearances around the state. Healey’s
campaign account is the highest among potential and
declared 2022 contenders with $3.12 million in cash on
hand.
Three Democrats have announced bids for 2022: state Sen.
Sonia Chang-Diaz of Boston, former state Sen. Ben
Downing of Pittsfield and Harvard professor and
political adviser Danielle Allen. Quincy resident Scott
Khourie and Orlando Silva of Shrewsbury have also filed
candidacy paperwork.
So far former state Rep. Geoff Diehl of Whitman is the
sole declared Republican candidate.
Just one other Republican, Darius Mitchell of Lowell,
has filed candidacy paperwork with the state and
previously told the Herald he was “considering a run.”
The New Boston Post
Friday, July 16, 2021
Maura Healey Running for Governor?
Well, Charlie, You Go First
By Matt McDonald
Maura Healey appears to be playing a game of chicken
with Charlie Baker over whether either is running for
governor of Massachusetts in 2022.
Healey, the state Attorney General and a hard-left
Democrat, ducked questions Thursday about whether she
plans to run for governor in 2022.
“I’m thinking about that right now. I’m going to take
the summer to think about that. Obviously, my term is up
in 2022 and I need to make some decisions about what
that means for me,” Healey said during an interview
Thursday, July 15 on Boston Public Radio, an afternoon
talk show on WGBH. “So I’m taking time to think about it
and talk to people, and I’ll know more by the fall.”
Jim Braude, co-host of the show, asked Healey if that
means it’s likely she’ll make an announcement in the
fall. She didn’t say yes. She didn’t say no.
“Well, I think the reality is there’s a cycle, and there
are certain things one needs,” Healey said. “So it’s
something I’m thinking about now and taking the time to
consider.”
Braude asked Healey if she owes it to the announced
Democratic candidates for governor (former state senator
Ben Downing, Harvard professor Danielle Allen, and
current state senator Sonia Chang-Diaz) to announce a
decision, since their ability to raise money and nail
down support among voters and other politicians may be
more difficult if Healey’s plans are unknown.
Healey said she has “great respect for them” and praised
the other candidates for stepping forward.
But she didn’t give away the game.
“It’s serious stuff, right? I just want to get that
right,” Healey said.
Healey is widely considered the most likely Democratic
nominee in 2022 if she runs. But it’s not clear that she
wants to run against Baker, a fiscally moderate,
socially liberal Republican who has maintained high poll
numbers through six and a half years in office.
A loss could stunt or end Healey’s political career,
when she’d be the odds-on favorite to win re-election as
Attorney General and may draw interest as a candidate
for other elected office or for an appointed federal
office.
Baker has also refused to answer questions about whether
he plans to run for a third term. Last cycle, Baker
didn’t formally announce he was running for re-election
until November 28, 2017, less than a year before the
general election. But it was widely understood that he
planned to run. This time around, opinion seems to be
divided.
In June 2021, Baker’s campaign fund raised $90,854.60,
according to the state Office of Campaign and Political
Finance. That’s after raising only $3,432.80 in May
2021.
A common theme among political observers in
Massachusetts is that if Baker runs he’ll win, that if
he doesn’t run then a GOP primary featuring Lieutenant
Governor Karyn Polito (a Baker ally) and conservative
Geoff Diehl (who is currently the only announced GOP
candidate) could be a tossup, and that either Republican
would lose to Healey in the general election.
Massachusetts Attorney General on paper seems like a
good steppingstone, but it hasn’t worked out that way in
recent decades. The last Attorney General to go on to
subsequent elected office was Ed Brooke, who served as
Attorney General from 1963 to 1967; he was elected to
the U.S. Senate in 1966 — 55 years ago.
Brooke’s successor, Elliot Richardson, served as state
Attorney General from 1967 to 1969, before joining
President Richard Nixon’s Cabinet. (He eventually became
U.S. Attorney General.) Richardson is the last
Republican to have served as Massachusetts Attorney
General. (He lost in 1984 when he ran for U.S. Senate.)
Since Richardson, five of the most recent six state
attorneys general (all Democrats) have lost when they
ran for governor, ending their political careers. They
are Robert Quinn, Francis X. Bellotti, Scott Harshbarger,
Tom Reilly, and Martha Coakley (who lost running for
U.S. Senate before she lost running for governor).
The other one, James Shannon, lost in 1990 when he ran
for re-election as Attorney General.
The Boston Herald
Monday, July 12, 2021
16 Massachusetts GOP donors pledge to cut off funding
until party leadership change
By Erin Tiernan
Some MassGOP donors say they have no confidence in
embattled state party leadership and won’t contribute
another cent until the state committee takes action to
“restore the Massachusetts Republican Party’s
reputation” — pledging $1 million in support if it does.
“Over the past six weeks, we have lost our remaining
confidence in current party leadership,” states the
Monday letter signed by 16 Republican donors who claim
they have collectively raised more than $900,000 for the
party and candidates over two decades.
The letter does not explicitly call out Republican State
Party Chairman Jim Lyons by name but goes on to list
several scandals that have embroiled Lyons and the party
in recent weeks.
“The State Chair failed to denounce homophobia, used
party resources to openly attack 29 of the elected
Republican House members, is under investigation by law
enforcement for potential campaign finance violations,
and is facing calls for resignation from elected
officials, past party Chairmen, and from major media
outlets like the Boston Herald,” the letter continues.
The letter from donors follows calls for the chairman to
step down by Republican Gov. Charlie Baker and prominent
former party leaders.
Lyons called the letter “unfortunate and misguided” in
an interview with the Herald, saying he would be “happy
to sit down with anyone” who signed the letter. Lyons
pointed out most of the donors who signed on had not
actually donated to the MassGOP since before he took the
helm in 2019.
A Herald review of campaign finance data shows just two
— Daniel Quirk of Quirk Auto Dealers and Ray Stata of
Analog Devices — had under Lyons leadership. Three
signees, Jessica Tocco of A10 Associates, Robert Pereira
of The Middlesex Corp. and James Grossman of Rise
Construction, have never donated directly to the
Republican State Committee.
It’s unclear from the letter if donors plan to stem
donations to the state committee or all Republican
candidates and causes. Several signees did not return
calls to the Herald on Monday evening.
State GOP Party Vice Chairman Tom Mountain, who has
distanced himself from Lyons in recent weeks, called the
letter “the most important signal” from donors yet.
“They’re saying ‘we’re not going to give you a cent
unless there’s a change in leadership and if there is,
we’ll give you a million dollars.’ That’s a lot of money
in the state Republican party.”
It’s a threat Mountain said will “speed up the road to
insolvency” for a party already on the brink of
bankruptcy.
The state party’s campaign account has dwindled from
over $1.1 million in October 2016 to $122,966, according
to last month’s report filed with the state Office of
Campaign Finance.
Mountain blamed Lyons’ public relations faux pas as the
No. 1 problem preventing party fundraising.
“The chair has become a liability and the walls are
closing in,” Mountain said. “It’s like Nixon’s last days
and the question is when will Nixon Jr. do the party a
favor and leave.”
Prominent out-of-state Republicans have canceled
appearances at big-ticket fundraising events in recent
weeks.
Texas Republican U.S. Rep. Dan Crenshaw abruptly
canceled a June fundraiser planned at the chairman’s
house. Party insiders confirmed the internal party drama
was the cause.
Wyoming U.S. Sen. Cynthia Lummis also canceled a planned
appearance at a MassGOP fundraiser last month.
In their Monday memo to the Republican State Committee,
donors demanded a return to a “positive, big‐tent
MassGOP” that can compete in state elections, pledging
to give or raise $1 million if that happens. Under Lyons
leadership, the party has lost five seats in the
Legislature where Democrats have long held a
supermajority.
The Boston Globe
Monday, July 12, 2021
In escalating drama for Massachusetts GOP,
some donors say they won’t give unless the party makes
major changes
By Emma Platoff
More than a dozen donors say they will stop giving to
the Massachusetts Republican Party unless it makes major
changes, writing in a letter Monday that “we have lost
our remaining confidence in current party leadership.”
It’s an escalation of the MassGOP’s troubles, which have
sharpened internal divisions between establishment
moderates and social conservatives. And it raises
questions about whether the struggling party — already
facing dwindling fund-raising and vote share, not to
mention a strained relationship with its top elected
official, Governor Charlie Baker — can remain a viable
political entity. The letter, analysts say, presents a
direct threat to Chairman Jim Lyons, whose party badly
needs money if it is to mount meaningful challenges in
next year’s elections.
In the letter, 16 donors not only pledged to withhold
their cash if Lyons remains in charge, but even promised
to raise $1 million for the party should it “reorient
party leadership” and take “appropriate action to
restore the Massachusetts Republican Party’s
reputation.”
“The State Chair failed to denounce homophobia, used
party resources to openly attack 29 of the elected
Republican house members, is under investigation by law
enforcement for potential campaign finance violations,
and is facing calls for resignation from elected
officials, past party Chairmen, and from major media
outlets like the Boston Herald,” they wrote in a letter
to the 80-member Republican State Committee. “Due to
these events, we are no longer comfortable providing
financial support to the MassGOP.”
The letter, obtained by the Globe and confirmed by five
recipients, was signed by 16 people who said they have
collectively given more than $900,000 “to support the
party’s mission.” Many of the donors have also
contributed to Democratic candidates over the years,
ranging from moderate leaders at the State House like
former House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo to more liberal
officials like Attorney General Maura Healey. The donors
are Jonathan Bush, Bill Carey, Kimberly L. Dacier,
Christopher Egan, Jim Grossman, David Howe, John
Kingston, Scott Lemay, Gregg Lisciotti, William
McQuillan, Bob Pereira, Daniel J. Quirk, Kevin Rollins,
Victor Romeiro, Ray Stata, and Jessica Tocco.
Lemay, a Weston entrepreneur who served as chief
executive officer of United Material Management, said in
an interview that he did not want to support a
Republican Party that made “alienating comments toward
specific groups.” He said the GOP must prioritize
inclusivity alongside other core values like fiscal
responsibility. He has given thousands of dollars over
the years to Baker and the Republican State Committee,
as well as Democratic candidates, state campaign finance
records show.
Long the state’s political underdog, the Massachusetts
GOP has been in turmoil in recent weeks over the
revelation that Deborah Martell, who serves on the
80-member Republican State Committee, made anti-gay
remarks in e-mails to and about a Republican
congressional candidate. She told Jeffrey Sossa-Paquette
she was “sickened” that he and his husband had adopted
children together.
Baker and Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna
McDaniel both condemned the comments and said
discrimination has no place in a party premised on the
value of individual liberty. But Martell said at a
closed-door meeting in June that she would not be
“bullied” into resigning over expression of her Catholic
faith, leaving the party’s leadership under pressure to
respond.
Lyons acknowledged her comments were offensive but said
he would not bow to “cancel culture” by calling on her
to resign. Now, that stance is diminishing his standing
among elected Massachusetts Republicans, even as social
conservatives within the party double down on their
support for him.
The donors’ letter only worsens the forecast for a party
that was already in trouble, some in the GOP said. Some
party leaders said it’s been difficult to fund-raise and
promote Republican candidates amid the drama.
State Representative Shawn Dooley, a Norfolk Republican
who lost a race for the chairmanship to Lyons earlier
this year, said he has heard a similar sentiment from
other GOP donors, and worries about what the loss of
funds will mean for the party’s future.
“My fear is that their boycott of party contributions
may trickle down and leave them unwilling to donate to
individual Republican candidates as well,” he said.
Lyons has made the party vulnerable to attacks from
Democrats, he said.
Campaign finance records show the party has far less
cash on hand now than it did when Lyons took over in
2019. Neither the chairman nor a party spokesman
immediately responded to requests for comment.
Still, Lyons has his allies within the party, including
many who applaud him for refusing to more forcefully
condemn Martell. Others say the party may be in trouble,
but Lyons is not to blame.
“Are we in a good position right now? No, because we’re
at war with each other,” said Todd Taylor, a Lyons ally
on the state committee and a city councilor in Chelsea.
“If conservatives win this battle for control of the
party, I think we’ll be in a better position to
rebuild.”
He blamed the turmoil on more moderate members of the
party, who, he said, see every scandal as an opportunity
to disparage the chairman.
But for others, it has long since been time for Lyons to
go.
Seven former chairs of the state party, including one
who also served in the US House of Representatives and
one who was Massachusetts’ lieutenant governor, wrote in
a letter last month that Lyons should resign or be
removed.
Still, at a June meeting of the state committee, there
was no concerted effort to oust Lyons, a step that would
require two-thirds of the body. Lyons still maintains
enough support to stay in his post, supporters said.
In a recent letter rebuking the former party chairs who
had questioned Lyons, 28 members of the state committee
— just over the one-third margin Lyons requires to stay
in power — wrote that Lyons “has outlined a plan for
victory, and we are here to work with him to achieve
it.”
Massachusetts Republicans have lost tens of thousands of
voters over the last 20 years, and now represent under
10 percent of the state’s registered voters. In last
year’s presidential election, Donald Trump lost the
state with just 32 percent of the vote.
While Republicans struggle to win statewide, the
moderate Baker has bucked that trend, winning in 2018
with a decisive 67 percent of the vote even as
Massachusetts also elected progressives including
Senator Elizabeth Warren and Healey.
State House News Service
Tuesday, July 13, 2021
Baker “Not Surprised” That Donors Are Upset With MassGOP
By Michael P. Norton
Reflecting on fractures within the party he leads,
Republican Gov. Charlie Baker said Tuesday that he is
"not surprised" that historically loyal donors are
having second thoughts about giving to the GOP.
At a press conference on future of work trends, Baker
was asked about fissures in the party. The Republican
State Committee under party chairman Jim Lyons has
focused on supporting Donald Trump and pushing many of
the same issues as the former president, while moderates
like Baker and many Republican lawmakers remain locked
in on bipartisanship and trying to work with the
Democrats who control most elected offices in
Massachusetts.
Baker said many elected Republicans in Massachusetts,
including former officeholders, "don't believe many of
the recent decisions and statements that have been made
by the leadership at the state party are consistent with
where we believe most Republicans are generally."
"I mean, the State Committee at the end of the day,
needs to make decisions about the state party
apparatus," Baker said. "That's their role. That's their
responsibility. But I'm not surprised that a number of
folks who have been loyal, generous donors and
supporters to the party, have raised serious concerns
about some of the things that have been coming out of
the State Committee and I hope they address them."
The Boston Herald on Monday and the Boston Globe on
Tuesday reported that 16 people who said they
collectively gave more than $900,000 to support the
party's mission will stop giving to the party unless it
makes major changes. Lyons told the Herald the letter
was "unfortunate and misguided," said he would sit down
with anyone who signed it, and said most of the donors
who signed on had not donated to the MassGOP since
before he took the helm in 2019.
In a fundraising email on Monday, Lyons described
critical race theory as "blatant racism" and said that
"for far too long, Massachusetts Republicans have been
afraid to wade into so-called 'cultural issues.' "
Last week, Lyons announced a push to place on the 2022
ballot an initiative petition that would require voters
to present identification in order to prove their
identity at the ballot box. The party has also been
rounding up volunteers to help place on next year's
ballot a question that would repeal the 2020 law, passed
in December over Baker's veto, that codified the right
to an abortion in state law, made the procedure more
accessible by expanding access for women after 24 weeks
of pregnancy, and lowered the age of consent for an
abortion to 16.
Republican State Committee member Geoff Diehl, a Trump
supporter who has aligned himself with Lyons and
preached a "message of common-sense conservatism" while
serving as MassGOP finance chair, launched a run for
governor this month. Party officials have also knocked
GOP legislators and said that about 20 members of the
state committee work for the Baker administration and
are "not necessarily voting for the good of the
Republican party."
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, July 14, 2021
Charlie Baker ‘not surprised’ by escalating antics of
MassGOP
By Erin Tiernan
Gov. Charlie Baker said he is “not surprised” by an
escalation from typically loyal Republican donors fed up
with party antics as others pointed to a widening
fissure within a party wrestling with the influence of
former President Donald Trump in heavily Democratic
Massachusetts.
“The State Committee, at the end of the day, needs to
make decisions about the state party apparatus,” Baker
said speaking in Boston on Tuesday. “That’s their role.
That’s their responsibility. But I’m not surprised that
a number of folks who have been loyal, generous donors
and supporters to the party, have raised serious
concerns about some of the things that have been coming
out of the State Committee and I hope they address
them.”
A group of 16 Republican donors on Monday sent a letter
to Republican State Committee members, which was
obtained by the Herald. The donors threatened to shut
off funding if committee members fail to take action to
“restore the Massachusetts Republican Party’s
reputation.”
Donors said, “we have lost our remaining confidence in
current party leadership” after Chairman Jim Lyons
refused to call for the resignation of a committeewoman
who made homophobic statements. Lyons is also named in a
state campaign finance investigation.
Lyons hit back Tuesday at “a bunch of wealthy donors who
haven’t even contributed to the party since I’ve been
here and … who have given primarily to Democrats.”
Lyons loyalist and longtime party insider Wendy Wakeman
also said it’s a “huge stretch” to call those who signed
the Monday letter to committee members as being big-shot
Republican donors.
The Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political
Finance revealed just two of the 16 signees had donated
to the MassGOP since 2019 when Lyons took over. Many of
the donors have also contributed to Democratic
candidates, including state Speaker of the House Robert
A. DeLeo and state Senate President Karen Spilka as well
as more liberal officials like Attorney General Maura
Healey, Secretary of State William Galvin and U.S. Labor
Secretary Marty Walsh, who formerly served as mayor of
Boston.
Data supported donors’ claim that they’ve donated more
than $900,000 collectively to Republican candidates and
causes over roughly two decades.
Seven of the 16 signees of the Monday letter have also
contributed to Massachusetts Majority Independent
Expenditure Political Action Committee, contributing a
combined $193,322 since its inception in 2019. The PAC
started by real estate developer Gregg Lisciotti of
Leominster — who also signed the letter — has pumped out
tens of thousands to support candidates aligned with
Baker.
No one who could be reached by the Herald returned phone
calls on Tuesday.
Wakeman called the donors’ attack on Lyons the latest
“concerted hit” on the chairman, who has closely aligned
himself with Trump and his ideology — something Baker
has repeatedly distanced himself from.
“I like having a Republican governor, but right now he’s
leading at the expense of the rest of the party,”
Wakeman said, noting his rebuke of Trump and lack of
support for former state Rep. Geoff Diehl during his
U.S. Senate run. Diehl last week launched his candidacy
for governor. Baker has yet to say whether he’ll run for
reelection.
Wakeman has supported Baker in the past but said the
two-term popular Republican governor has shifted away
from GOP principles.
The Boston Globe
Saturday, July 17, 2021
Charlie Baker campaign cancels fund-raiser after error
in listing UMass president among hosts
By Emma Platoff
Governor Charlie Baker’s campaign has canceled a Cape
Cod fund-raiser after a public employee was accidentally
listed as part of the host committee on an invitation.
Marty Meehan, president of the University of
Massachusetts system, was named on an invitation to the
Aug. 20 fund-raiser at the Cape Cod home of public
relations executive George Regan. Listing Meehan — a
public employee who under state law may not solicit
campaign contributions — was a mistake, said campaign
spokesman Jim Conroy.
After realizing the error, Conroy said, the campaign
consulted with the Massachusetts Office of Campaign and
Political Finance and determined the cleanest solution
would be to cancel the event, returning any donations
that had already been received. The fund-raiser will be
rescheduled, according to a Friday evening e-mail that
campaign finance director Tim O’Leary sent to
supporters, though he did not list a date.
Meehan said in a brief phone interview Saturday morning
that he had not authorized his name to appear on the
invite but declined further comment.
The cancellation comes as the Massachusetts political
world waits to see whether Baker will seek a third term,
interpreting any tiny signal as a potentially major
clue.
The event would have marked a return to a pre-pandemic
fund-raising style for Baker, who had just $524,500 in
his campaign account at the end of June after spending
the COVID-19 pandemic mostly staying away from such
events. That sum is a far cry from the roughly $5.9
million he had in the bank at the same point ahead of
his 2018 reelection campaign. Baker has said he is
discussing the matter with his family and promised a
decision “soon.”
The Baker and Lieutenant Governor Karyn Polito campaigns
had invited donors to Regan’s Mashpee home, asking them
to contribute $500 or the maximum $1,000 to Baker,
Polito, or both. Blues musician James Montgomery was set
to perform.
Well-known names listed on the invitation include former
Boston Police Commissioner William Gross, auto mogul
Herb Chambers, Cape Cod Healthcare chief executive
Michael Lauf, and Mintz chairman R. Robert Popeo.
O’Leary wrote to supporters Friday evening saying that
“unfortunately, it has become necessary to cancel this
event.”
“We will be returning any contributions we receive in
connection with this event,” O’Leary wrote. He added
that “we will be reaching out in the coming days with a
new date for a new event, and hope that you will be able
to participate.”
Polito, who had $2.2 million on hand at the end of last
month, is widely viewed as a likely candidate for the
Republican nomination should Baker choose not to run.
That would pit the Shrewsbury Republican against
one-time US Senate candidate and former state
representative Geoff Diehl, who announced a
gubernatorial bid earlier this month.
Three Democrats have launched bids for governor: Harvard
professor Danielle Allen, state Senator Sonia Chang-Díaz,
and former state senator Ben Downing.
Allen had the most money available to close June with
$339,941, followed by Chang-Díaz ($232,786) and Downing
($117,316).
Hanging over the Democratic field is the question of
whether Attorney General Maura Healey, who boasts a
national reputation and $3.1 million in her campaign
account, will enter the field.
Healey said this week she is weighing her options and
“we’ll know more by 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
|
