 |
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
Friday, November 19, 2021
Gov. Baker At Long
Last Drops His TCI "Boondoggle"
Jump directly
to CLT's Commentary on the News
|
Most Relevant News
Excerpts
(Full news reports follow Commentary)
|
|
Gov. Charlie Baker has
pulled the plug on a regional climate initiative
that would have capped tailpipe emissions and was
projected to hike gas prices at a time of record
inflation, admitting the multi state-deal is “no
longer the best solution.”
He backs out of the
Transportation and Climate Initiative just days
after Connecticut did....
One of the few
remaining states, Connecticut, pulled out Tuesday,
with Gov. Ned Lamont citing high gas prices — which
would creep up even higher by up to 9 cents per
gallon by 2023 if TCI were enacted.
Initially, 12 states
plus the District of Columbia were in talks to enter
the agreement, but just Massachusetts, Connecticut,
Rhode Island and D.C. eventually signed a memorandum
of understanding by December 2020.
“Today is a major win
for the taxpayers of Massachusetts,” said GOP
gubernatorial candidate Geoff Diehl. “Joining TCI
was a bad idea from the start, and it would cost our
state too much money.” ...
Pro-TCI backers slammed
the move, saying the “climate needs … leadership,”
said Janet Domenitz, executive director of advocacy
group MASSPIRG, who added she’s “disappointed” with
Baker’s move.
However, the most
outspoken opponents of the bill, including
conservative watchdog Mass Fiscal Alliance, backed
Baker.
“TCI is a regressive
gas tax scheme that would have hurt (the) middle
class and the working poor the most. It’s such
wonderful news to see that Massachusetts families
will not be forced to endure the economic hardship
TCI would have imposed upon them,” said its
spokesperson, Paul Diego Craney.
Craney called
MassFiscal “the loudest voice against TCI” and
credited an alliance including MassGOP Chair Jim
Lyons, that began a 2022 ballot initiative process
to withdraw the state from TCI with its defeat.
The
Boston Herald
Thursday, November 18, 2021
Baker drops out of
TCI,
admitting initiative ‘no longer best solution’ for
state
Gov. Ned Lamont said
Tuesday that he will no longer pursue a
controversial climate change initiative that stalled
after legislators argued it would lead to higher
gasoline prices for Connecticut drivers.
Lamont, a Democrat,
said his reasons were pragmatic for cooling on the
Transportation and Climate Initiative, a regional
plan to reduce greenhouse gases that was once at the
heart of his effort to address climate change.
“Look, I couldn’t get
that through when gas prices were at a historic low,
so I think the legislature has been pretty clear
that it’s going to be a pretty tough rock to push
when gas prices are so high, so no,’' Lamont said
Tuesday, acknowledging that the cost of motor fuel
was likely to rise under the initiative, known as
TCI.
At a later appearance
in East Hartford, Lamont said that gasoline prices
had reached a seven-year high and there was not
enough support in the legislature in 2022 — a year
when both Lamont and the entire legislature are up
for reelection....
While Lamont said that
prices would increase by 5 cents per gallon in 2023,
opponents countered that it could be 17 to 37 cents
per gallon as gasoline and diesel wholesalers would
be forced to pay $80 million per year that would be
passed along to consumers at the pump.
The
Hartford (Conn.) Courant
Tuesday, November 16, 2021
Gov. Lamont says he will no
longer push for climate change legislation
that Republicans say could raise gasoline prices.
It would have been
among the nation’s most ambitious efforts to fight
climate change.
For years, the Baker
administration prodded other states in the region
and beyond to join Massachusetts in a controversial
cap-and-invest pact that would have led to
substantial cuts to transportation emissions, the
nation’s largest source of greenhouse gases.
On Thursday, the
administration announced that it was pulling its
support for the so-called Transportation Climate
Initiative, likely a death knell for the
agreement....
Baker’s decision comes
after Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont this week made
a similar announcement to pull his support from the
pact. Unlike Massachusetts, Connecticut and other
states require a vote by their Legislature for the
pact to take effect....
“Today is a major win
for the taxpayers of Massachusetts,” said Geoff
Diehl, a former Republican state representative now
running for governor. “The Baker administration has
finally acknowledged what we have known all along,
and what I have said while meeting with countless
working families across this state — joining TCI was
a bad idea from the start, and it would cost our
state too much money.”
Paul Diego Craney, a
spokesman for the conservative Massachusetts Fiscal
Alliance, called the initiative “a regressive gas
tax scheme that would have hurt middle class and the
working poor.”
“We are so pleased to
finally see it defeated in Massachusetts,” Craney
said.
The
Boston Globe
Thursday, November 18, 2021
Baker pulls
support for regional pact that would address climate
change
After years of touting
a multi-state compact to reduce transportation
sector carbon emissions as "critical" to achieving
environmental goals in Massachusetts, the Baker
administration on Thursday effectively scrapped its
participation and declared the program "no longer
the best solution."
Gov. Charlie Baker had
long been one of the most vocal proponents of the
Transportation Climate Initiative, touting it as an
essential component of the state's effort to rein in
the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions.
But expected impacts on
gas prices have caused many to shy away from the
compact and with support for the compact in other
states crumbling or simply failing to materialize,
Baker's office signaled on Thursday that it would
pull the plug.
"The Baker-Polito
Administration always maintained the Commonwealth
would only move forward with TCI if multiple states
committed, and, as that does not exist, the
transportation climate initiative is no longer the
best solution for the Commonwealth's transportation
and environmental needs," Baker press secretary
Terry MacCormack said in a statement.
"At the same time, the
new federal infrastructure funding package, American
Rescue Plan investments, as well as tax revenue
surpluses generated by Massachusetts' strong
economic recovery make the Commonwealth better
positioned to upgrade its roads, bridges and public
transportation systems, while also making
investments to reduce transportation emissions,
deliver equitable transportation solutions and
benefits and meet the state’s ambitious climate
goals," MacCormack added....
The administration's
decision comes less than a year after Massachusetts,
Rhode Island, Connecticut and Washington D.C. --
already a smaller contingent than the 13 governments
that participated in discussions about the program
-- signed on as initial TCI members.
Baker's announcement
follows that of Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont, who on
Tuesday said he did not believe he could get
legislative support for the multi-state compact.
TCI's demise represents
the second major blow to clean energy efforts this
month after Maine voters rejected a transmission
project that Massachusetts has been counting on to
draw clean hydropower down from Canada.
It also stands as a
victory for opponents of the program, including
Republican gubernatorial candidate Geoff Diehl, who
could face off against Baker in a primary election
next year if the governor decides to seek a third
term.
Since the early days of
TCI discussions, the planned cap-and-invest program
faced vocal opposition from groups such as the
Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, who argued that its
impact on fuel costs would harm consumers more than
backers anticipated.
"TCI is a regressive
gas tax scheme that would have hurt middle class and
the working poor the most. It's such wonderful news
to see that Massachusetts families will not be
forced to endure the economic hardship TCI would
have imposed upon them," MassFiscal spokesperson
Paul Craney said in a statement celebrating the
Baker administration's announcement.
"MassFiscal took a lot
of punches for usually being the loudest voice
against TCI. At times, we were the only voice,"
Craney continued. "We worked diligently to ensure
people knew exactly what it was that policy makers
were getting our state into and by the end we formed
a solid and robust coalition of opponents.
MassFiscal is stronger for the effort. Ultimately,
it's the everyday citizens of Massachusetts that
benefited the most for our persistent advocacy to
see the program ended and never settling for
anything less than its defeat." ...
Sen. Michael Barrett,
who co-chairs the Telecommunications, Utilities and
Energy Committee, said Thursday that the decision is
a "major setback" even if it does not come as a
surprise....
Barrett, who last week
attended a United Nations climate change conference
in Glasgow, Scotland, said he wants to see the state
embrace a ban on the sale of gasoline-fueled
vehicles by 2035, calling it "ambitious enough to
substitute for the setback we're seeing today."
The Baker
administration has committed to allowing sales of
only zero-emission passenger vehicles by 2035, and
Barrett said he hopes the administration will
"codify" that in state law with a firm ban on
gasoline cars and trucks.
Some Republican
leaders, such as Rep. David DeCoste and Geoff Diehl,
have been seeking a potential November 2022 ballot
question seeking to undermine the state's
participation in TCI.
Asked Thursday if
supporters would continue to push the question after
the administration effectively withdrew from the
program, Craney said it is "too early to know" amid
certification of voter signatures.
State
House News Service
Thursday, November 18, 2021
Baker Pulls Plug
on Transportation Emissions Compact
Admin Says It's "No Longer The Best Solution"
|
|
To everyone's surprise and
to the delight of many, yesterday Gov. Baker dropped
his obsession with his multi-state Transportation & Climate
Initiative (TCI) vanity project. We who have been vehemently
opposing it for over two years couldn't help but high-five each
other long-distance and celebrate an unexpected early victory.
We'd just submitted to
town clerks around the state all the signatures sheets our volunteers had
collected since September for a
ballot question to block TCI by the deadline on Wednesday, only
the day before. That was the day after the governor of
Connecticut, Ned Lamont, dropped his support for TCI. Gov.
Baker followed the day after our delivery.
Whether or not the
petition had any influence on their decisions, we're still looking
to go ahead with the ballot question if we've qualified with enough
signatures to move forward. Just because a politician says
something today doesn't mean he'll say the same thing tomorrow.
And there's no telling what a new governor and administration will
do.
From the beginning of
the early opposition to TCI over two years ago, Paul Craney's
strategy and that of Massachusetts
Fiscal Alliance was to invite and recruit other aligned
opposition groups (such as CLT) and public policy think tanks from
the effected 14 states to coordinate and work together, build our own "multi-state"
opposition coalition to take on Gov. Baker's "multi-state
compact."
The goal was to delay and prevent reaching the critical mass of states that
Gov. Baker deemed necessary for TCI to succeed. Though the
governor's
goal line shifted as more states rejected TCI, in the end there was
only Massachusetts and tiny Rhode Island left standing, alone.
Gov. Charlie Baker finally pulled the plug on the Bay State's lonely
participation in "Baker's Boondoggle" yesterday.
Our opposition coalition ally in
Rhode Island, the Rhode Island Center for Freedom & Prosperity,
issued a news release today:
Providence, RI
—
On Thursday, Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker followed
the surrender to reality by Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont
earlier this week by publicly divorcing themselves from the
Transportation & Climate Initiative (TCI) gas tax. The
rejection of TCI by the powerful two New England Governors
leaves Rhode Island as the only state among the original 14
states that is still considering imposing a crushing fuel
tax on motorists.
Despite the
rejection by Baker, a founding member and primary driver of
this plan to systematically restrict the supply of gasoline,
Ocean State Governor Dan McKee and Speaker of the House
Joseph Shekarchi are still on record as supporting the TCI
gasoline cap-and-trade scheme.
"It's time for the
Governor and Speaker to throw in the towel and admit defeat.
In no reality-based scenario could any politician support a
unilateral major gas tax hike in the coming election year,
especially given the historically high gas prices that we
are already seeing due to misguided energy policies advanced
by climate alarmists," suggested Mike Stenhouse, CEO for the RI Center
for Freedom & Prosperity. "The defeat of TCI is a
tremendous victory for the 14-state #NoTCItax coalition we
are part of, which has been fighting against this
job-killing initiative for many years."
Again thank you to all
those who collected signatures to hopefully put stopping TCI on the
2022 ballot. If its threat alone didn't change minds of its
former backers, it still might provide a backstop if the situation
changes.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
The Boston
Herald
Thursday, November 18, 2021
Baker drops out of TCI, admitting initiative ‘no longer best
solution’ for state
By Amy Sokolow
Gov. Charlie Baker has pulled the plug on a regional climate
initiative that would have capped tailpipe emissions and was
projected to hike gas prices at a time of record inflation,
admitting the multi state-deal is “no longer the best
solution.”
He backs out of the Transportation and Climate Initiative
just days after Connecticut did.
“The Baker-Polito Administration always maintained the
Commonwealth would only move forward with TCI if multiple
states committed, and, as that does not exist, the
transportation climate initiative is no longer the best
solution for the Commonwealth’s transportation and
environmental needs,” Baker press secretary Terry MacCormack
said in a statement Thursday.
MacCormack said the federal infrastructure package and a
statewide tax revenue surplus puts the state in a strong
position to upgrade its infrastructure and public transit,
while also investing in emissions reduction strategies.
TCI would have capped carbon emissions by forcing fuel
companies that exceeded limits to buy additional permits and
invest those proceeds into green transportation and
climate-resilient infrastructure. It aimed to reduce vehicle
emissions by 26% by 2032.
One of the few remaining states, Connecticut, pulled out
Tuesday, with Gov. Ned Lamont citing high gas prices — which
would creep up even higher by up to 9 cents per gallon by
2023 if TCI were enacted.
Initially, 12 states plus the District of Columbia were in
talks to enter the agreement, but just Massachusetts,
Connecticut, Rhode Island and D.C. eventually signed a
memorandum of understanding by December 2020.
“Today is a major win for the taxpayers of Massachusetts,”
said GOP gubernatorial candidate Geoff Diehl. “Joining TCI
was a bad idea from the start, and it would cost our state
too much money.”
Diehl could be up against Baker next year if the governor
decides to seek re-election to a third term.
TCI suffered another blow earlier this year when Rhode
Island lawmakers recessed for the summer without entering
the agreement.
Pro-TCI backers slammed the move, saying the “climate needs
… leadership,” said Janet Domenitz, executive director of
advocacy group MASSPIRG, who added she’s “disappointed” with
Baker’s move.
However, the most outspoken opponents of the bill, including
conservative watchdog Mass Fiscal Alliance, backed Baker.
“TCI is a regressive gas tax scheme that would have hurt
(the) middle class and the working poor the most. It’s such
wonderful news to see that Massachusetts families will not
be forced to endure the economic hardship TCI would have
imposed upon them,” said its spokesperson, Paul Diego Craney.
Craney called MassFiscal “the loudest voice against TCI” and
credited an alliance including MassGOP Chair Jim Lyons, that
began a 2022 ballot initiative process to withdraw the state
from TCI with its defeat.
Josh Ostroff, interim director of Transportation for
Massachusetts, said the climate won’t wait and he called on
Baker and lawmakers to “double down on transportation
investments that are clean, equitable, healthy, and safe.”
State Sen. Michael Barrett, who co-chairs the
Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy Committee, told
State House News the decision is a “major setback” even if
it does not come as a surprise.
The Hartford (Conn.)
Courant
Tuesday, November 16, 2021
Gov. Lamont says he will no longer push for climate change
legislation that Republicans say could raise gasoline
prices.
By Daniela Altimari and Christopher Keating
Gov. Ned Lamont said Tuesday that he will no longer pursue a
controversial climate change initiative that stalled after
legislators argued it would lead to higher gasoline prices
for Connecticut drivers.
Lamont, a Democrat, said his reasons were pragmatic for
cooling on the Transportation and Climate Initiative, a
regional plan to reduce greenhouse gases that was once at
the heart of his effort to address climate change.
“Look, I couldn’t get that through when gas prices were at a
historic low, so I think the legislature has been pretty
clear that it’s going to be a pretty tough rock to push when
gas prices are so high, so no,’' Lamont said Tuesday,
acknowledging that the cost of motor fuel was likely to rise
under the initiative, known as TCI.
At a later appearance in East Hartford, Lamont said that
gasoline prices had reached a seven-year high and there was
not enough support in the legislature in 2022 — a year when
both Lamont and the entire legislature are up for
reelection.
“It’s probably not the year to do it this year with gas
prices where they are,’' Lamont said. Asked whether the
proposal could be revived in 2023, Lamont said, “Yeah, let’s
see where we are.’'
On electronic highway tolls, Lamont said they were no longer
needed.
“We have more tax revenue coming in so that’s strengthening
our transportation fund in a way no one could have
anticipated,’' Lamont said. “On top of that, we have the
highway user fee that kicks in I think it’s next year, so
that’s going to make a difference in the big tractor trailer
trucks coming in often from out of state. So I think we’re
going to be in pretty good shape.”
TCI is a regional “cap-and-trade” proposal to raise money to
address climate change by reducing motor vehicle pollution,
which is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions. It
would require large gasoline and diesel fuel wholesalers to
purchase allowances to offset the environmental harm caused
by combustion of the carbon-based fuels they sell in
Connecticut, essentially putting a price tag on pollution.
Republicans have branded the plan as a gas tax and have been
pushing to kill it for months. Over the fall, the party
organized a series of rallies to stoke opposition against
TCI.
While Lamont said that prices would increase by 5 cents per
gallon in 2023, opponents countered that it could be 17 to
37 cents per gallon as gasoline and diesel wholesalers would
be forced to pay $80 million per year that would be passed
along to consumers at the pump.
The gasoline retailers and the state’s truckers association
lobbied heavily against the bill, saying that Lamont’s
projections about future gasoline prices were wrong. They
said the timing was bad as some consumers were still
struggling with high unemployment and financial problems due
to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.
But environmentalists were not happy, saying it was a
setback for the state’s efforts on climate change.
“The governor’s apparent abandonment of his top climate
priority is incredibly disappointing,’' said Charles
Rothenberger, an attorney for Save the Sound. “We know that
oil prices are incredibly volatile. That is one of the
strongest reasons to implement TCI and provide
transportation alternatives that won’t subject Connecticut’s
citizens to the whims of distant oil markets. We can’t base
long-term decisions about our climate commitments,
transportation infrastructure, and Connecticut residents’
health on the conditions of this moment — we need to look at
trends and needs over time and plan for decades to come.’'
He added, “Our state is at a crossroads on climate. ... The
governor must take the necessary action to protect
Connecticut’s residents and communities from climate change.
That’s exactly what the Transportation and Climate
Initiative does, with a proven cap-and-invest structure that
would cut emissions by 26 percent over the next 10 years and
invest in clean transportation and improved air quality in
the communities that need it most.’'
One of the most outspoken opponents, Senate Republican
leader Kevin Kelly of Stratford, said he hopes the dropping
of the plan will be permanent.
“I am hopeful that this shift in Gov. Lamont’s position is
sincere and more than just a campaign promise,’' Kelly said.
“I hope he is ready to rally with us and push back against
Democrats who continue to push for new taxes on those who
can least afford them.’'
One of the issues of concern has been the balancing of the
state’s $1.95 billion Special Transportation Fund. But with
gasoline prices rising, the fund has collected extra revenue
recently because the petroleum gross receipts tax is a
percentage of the wholesale price — meaning that more money
is collected as gasoline prices rise.
A key factor in keeping the fund solvent will be the highway
user tax on tractor trailer trucks that was approved by the
legislature and is expected to generate $90 million per
year, starting on January 1, 2023.
Lamont had been one of the climate plan’s early and ardent
backers. In late 2020, he joined with the governors of
Massachusetts and Rhode Island and the mayor of Washington
D.C. to sign a memorandum of understanding committing to the
groundbreaking multistate program that will reduce motor
vehicle pollution by at least 26 percent.
The plan, which needed approval from the legislature, was
incorporated into Lamont’s budget proposal. Lawmakers held a
public hearing on TCI earlier this year, but it failed to
come up for a vote in either chamber before end of the
legislative session in June.
Senate President Pro Tem Martin Looney, a liberal Democrat
from New Haven, said at the time that some Democratic
lawmakers were concerned about the expected increase in
gasoline prices on low-income drivers.
Climate activists had hoped the proposal would surface
during a special session of the legislature, but that did
not happen.
I understand the political concerns, but we cannot reach
carbon reduction goals with business as usual.
— Janet K. Ainsworth (@jainsworth) November 16, 2021
Lamont maintained his support for the initiative — as
recently as two months ago, he told NBC Connecticut, “TCI is
a fee on pollutants.”
The Boston
Globe
Thursday, November 18, 2021
Baker pulls support for regional pact that would address
climate change
By David Abel
It would have been among the nation’s most ambitious efforts
to fight climate change.
For years, the Baker administration prodded other states in
the region and beyond to join Massachusetts in a
controversial cap-and-invest pact that would have led to
substantial cuts to transportation emissions, the nation’s
largest source of greenhouse gases.
On Thursday, the administration announced that it was
pulling its support for the so-called Transportation Climate
Initiative, likely a death knell for the agreement.
“The Baker-Polito administration always maintained the
commonwealth would only move forward with TCI if multiple
states committed, and, as that does not exist, the
Transportation Climate Initiative is no longer the best
solution for the commonwealth’s transportation and
environmental needs,” said Terry MacCormack, a spokesman for
Governor Charlie Baker, in a statement.
He suggested the initiative was no longer necessary, given
the state’s economic rebound from the pandemic and the large
infusion of federal aid to Massachusetts, as a result of
Congress’s recent passage of the $1.2 billion infrastructure
bill.
The additional tax revenue from the recovery and an
estimated $10 billion for transportation infrastructure in
Massachusetts “make the commonwealth better positioned to
upgrade its roads, bridges and public transportation
systems, while also making investments to reduce
transportation emissions, deliver equitable transportation
solutions and benefits, and meet the state’s ambitious
climate goals,” he said.
The administration’s announcement deeply disappointed some
state lawmakers and environmental advocates, who viewed the
initiative as a key part of the state’s ability to comply
with the landmark climate law that Baker signed earlier this
year. The law requires the state to cut is carbon emissions
50 percent below 1990 levels by the end of the decade and
effectively eliminate them by 2050.
“This is a serious challenge to our climate planning,” said
state Senator Michael Barrett, a Lexington Democrat and one
of the climate bill’s lead negotiators. “Plan B needs to be
brought along quickly.”
He and others said the state must come up with a new way of
curbing transportation pollution, which before the pandemic
was responsible for 28 percent of greenhouse gas emissions
nationally and 40 percent of the region’s emissions.
“While we had hoped that other states would join us, we
can’t lose sight of the critical need to address carbon
emissions from the transportation sector,” said Nancy
Goodman, vice president for policy at the Environmental
League of Massachusetts. “We cannot meet our net-zero
mandate without doing so. The infusion of resources from the
federal level can help us move in that direction, but must
be spent effectively and with an explicit goal of reducing
greenhouse gas emissions.”
Baker’s decision comes after Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont
this week made a similar announcement to pull his support
from the pact. Unlike Massachusetts, Connecticut and other
states require a vote by their Legislature for the pact to
take effect.
Lamont, a Democrat, acknowledged such support was unlikely,
even though his party controls power in the Legislature. He
blamed rising gas prices, which he said had reached a
seven-year high in Connecticut.
“I couldn’t get that through when gas prices were at a
historic low, so I think the Legislature has been pretty
clear that it’s going to be a pretty tough rock to push when
gas prices are so high,’’ Lamont told reporters on Tuesday,
acknowledging that the cost of gas was likely to rise as a
result of the initiative.
The initiative was envisioned to mirror a similar pact known
as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. That nine-state
regional cap-and-invest system helped reduce power plant
emissions from Maryland to Maine by at least 40 percent
below 2005 levels without raising electricity prices.
Last year, as Baker administration officials led
negotiations, they hoped 11 other states and Washington,
D.C., would join the pact, which aimed to reduce tailpipe
emissions by a quarter over the coming decade from Maine to
Virginia. It would have required hundreds of fuel
distributors in participating states to buy permits for the
carbon dioxide they produce.
The tax on fuel distributors was expected to raise billions
of dollars over the coming decade for investments in public
transit and other cleaner forms of transportation, while
encouraging fuel efficiency and subsidizing electric
vehicles and charging stations, and other measures that
would promote the transition away from fossil fuels.
But it was controversial because it was expected to also
lead to higher gas prices throughout the region, as fuel
distributors would have passed their costs on to drivers.
Gas prices were expected to rise 5 to 9 cents a gallon when
the rules took effect in 2023, with some estimates
suggesting it could add as much as 24 cents to the price of
a gallon.
When the final agreement was announced last December, only
Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Washington, D.C., signed up
to take part. Other key Northeast and mid-Atlantic states
that had considered joining the program, including New York,
New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, declined to participate.
At the time, Baker said the “price of doing nothing is very
big.”
Kathleen Theoharides, the secretary of energy and
environmental affairs and the administration’s chief
champion of the pact, said at the time that the initiative
was “committing to bold action to achieve our ambitious
emissions reduction targets, while positioning the
jurisdictions and the region to grow the clean
transportation economy.”
Theoharides did not respond to requests for comment on
Thursday.
Opponents who have long criticized the initiative applauded
Baker’s decision.
“Today is a major win for the taxpayers of Massachusetts,”
said Geoff Diehl, a former Republican state representative
now running for governor. “The Baker administration has
finally acknowledged what we have known all along, and what
I have said while meeting with countless working families
across this state — joining TCI was a bad idea from the
start, and it would cost our state too much money.”
Paul Diego Craney, a spokesman for the conservative
Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, called the initiative “a
regressive gas tax scheme that would have hurt middle class
and the working poor.”
“We are so pleased to finally see it defeated in
Massachusetts,” Craney said.
While proponents of the initiative said the large infusion
of federal dollars would help the state achieve some of the
goals envisioned for the pact, they raised deep concerns
about how the state would now be able to reduce emissions.
Baker’s decision, they noted, comes just after Theoharides
and thousands of environmental officials and activists met
in Glasgow this month for a climate summit that underscored
the need for states and nations around the world to sharply
reduce their emissions.
“Today’s announcement leaves us with a steep hill to climb,”
said Jordan Stutt, carbon programs director at the Acadia
Center in Boston. “The region’s tailpipe emissions have been
trending in the wrong direction, and now we’re rolling back
a critical component of the commonwealth’s clean
transportation strategy.”
Janet Domenitz, executive director of the Massachusetts
Public Interest Research Group, blamed the governor for
failing to lead.
“We’re disappointed that Governor Baker is ceding, rather
than leading the way on TCI,” she said. “What our climate
needs more than anything right now is leadership.”
State House News
Service
Thursday, November 18, 2021
Baker Pulls Plug on Transportation Emissions Compact
Admin Says It's "No Longer The Best Solution"
By Chris Lisinski
After years of touting a multi-state compact to reduce
transportation sector carbon emissions as "critical" to
achieving environmental goals in Massachusetts, the Baker
administration on Thursday effectively scrapped its
participation and declared the program "no longer the best
solution."
Gov. Charlie Baker had long been one of the most vocal
proponents of the Transportation Climate Initiative, touting
it as an essential component of the state's effort to rein
in the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions.
But expected impacts on gas prices have caused many to shy
away from the compact and with support for the compact in
other states crumbling or simply failing to materialize,
Baker's office signaled on Thursday that it would pull the
plug.
"The Baker-Polito Administration always maintained the
Commonwealth would only move forward with TCI if multiple
states committed, and, as that does not exist, the
transportation climate initiative is no longer the best
solution for the Commonwealth's transportation and
environmental needs," Baker press secretary Terry MacCormack
said in a statement.
"At the same time, the new federal infrastructure funding
package, American Rescue Plan investments, as well as tax
revenue surpluses generated by Massachusetts' strong
economic recovery make the Commonwealth better positioned to
upgrade its roads, bridges and public transportation
systems, while also making investments to reduce
transportation emissions, deliver equitable transportation
solutions and benefits and meet the state’s ambitious
climate goals," MacCormack added.
The administration's decision comes less than a year after
Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut and Washington D.C.
-- already a smaller contingent than the 13 governments that
participated in discussions about the program -- signed on
as initial TCI members.
Baker's announcement follows that of Connecticut Gov. Ned
Lamont, who on Tuesday said he did not believe he could get
legislative support for the multi-state compact.
TCI's demise represents the second major blow to clean
energy efforts this month after Maine voters rejected a
transmission project that Massachusetts has been counting on
to draw clean hydropower down from Canada.
It also stands as a victory for opponents of the program,
including Republican gubernatorial candidate Geoff Diehl,
who could face off against Baker in a primary election next
year if the governor decides to seek a third term.
Since the early days of TCI discussions, the planned
cap-and-invest program faced vocal opposition from groups
such as the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, who argued that
its impact on fuel costs would harm consumers more than
backers anticipated.
"TCI is a regressive gas tax scheme that would have hurt
middle class and the working poor the most. It's such
wonderful news to see that Massachusetts families will not
be forced to endure the economic hardship TCI would have
imposed upon them," MassFiscal spokesperson Paul Craney said
in a statement celebrating the Baker administration's
announcement.
"MassFiscal took a lot of punches for usually being the
loudest voice against TCI. At times, we were the only
voice," Craney continued. "We worked diligently to ensure
people knew exactly what it was that policy makers were
getting our state into and by the end we formed a solid and
robust coalition of opponents. MassFiscal is stronger for
the effort. Ultimately, it's the everyday citizens of
Massachusetts that benefited the most for our persistent
advocacy to see the program ended and never settling for
anything less than its defeat."
The Baker administration will now face increased pressure to
roll out backup plans for fulfilling renewable energy needs
and cutting greenhouse gas emissions without TCI,
particularly with interim targets looming along the road to
achieving net-zero emissions by 2050.
Sen. Michael Barrett, who co-chairs the Telecommunications,
Utilities and Energy Committee, said Thursday that the
decision is a "major setback" even if it does not come as a
surprise.
"The collapse of the centerpiece of our climate
transportation strategy calls for the governor's immediate
attention and some very aggressive substitutions," he said.
"Climate isn't going to give us a pass because Plan A
collapsed. That's not the way this works."
Backers of TCI, which the Baker administration was leading
through its environmental secretariat, envisioned a regional
program capping vehicle emissions and allowing fuel
suppliers to purchase allowances for carbon dioxide their
products would emit.
When the founding coalition launched last winter, members
set an initial target of reducing carbon emissions 26
percent by 2032. They estimated that shift would add 5 to 9
cents to the price of a gallon of gas and generate more than
$366 million in revenue for participating governments, which
could then be invested in clean transportation and energy
improvements.
The transportation sector accounted for 42 percent of the
Bay State's greenhouse gas emissions in 2017, the most
recent year for which data was available, outpacing any
other source.
Transportation Committee Co-chair Rep. Bill Straus on
Thursday said he hopes the decision to withdraw from TCI
will refocus attention toward broader transportation funding
questions.
"As gas tax revenue becomes a smaller part of the picture
over the next decade, the need to provide funding to take
care of our public transit, roads and bridges becomes even
more important," Straus said in a statement. "Frankly TCI
was a distraction in getting that discussion going since
it's been apparent for the last couple of years that a New
England consensus on raising gas fees through this method
was never going to happen."
With a sizable pot of money, the Baker administration
appears confident that it can invest to help cut emissions
and advance clean energy in other ways.
Massachusetts is poised to receive at least $10 billion for
transportation infrastructure under the bill President Joe
Biden signed, according to Baker's office, combined with
billions more in American Rescue Plan Act funding.
The state committed to procuring 5,600 megawatts of offshore
wind through projects such as Vineyard Wind, and the
administration has also targeted significant incentive
programs to speed up adoption of electric vehicles.
Barrett, who last week attended a United Nations climate
change conference in Glasgow, Scotland, said he wants to see
the state embrace a ban on the sale of gasoline-fueled
vehicles by 2035, calling it "ambitious enough to substitute
for the setback we're seeing today."
The Baker administration has committed to allowing sales of
only zero-emission passenger vehicles by 2035, and Barrett
said he hopes the administration will "codify" that in state
law with a firm ban on gasoline cars and trucks.
Some Republican leaders, such as Rep. David DeCoste and
Geoff Diehl, have been seeking a potential November 2022
ballot question seeking to undermine the state's
participation in TCI.
Asked Thursday if supporters would continue to push the
question after the administration effectively withdrew from
the program, Craney said it is "too early to know" amid
certification of voter signatures.
Diehl could not be reached for immediate comment Thursday
afternoon. In 2014 he led a successful ballot initiative to
reverse the state law indexing the gas tax to inflation and
he has knocked TCI as a "gas tax" that is "designed to urge
drivers to buy electric cars by raising the price of
gasoline until it becomes unaffordable."
"TCI may be sold to you by the Administration as a 'fee' to
energy retailers but is nothing more than another TAX on the
people," Diehl, a former state representative, wrote in
August. "Commuting costs will increase, food and goods that
need to be transported will go up, and even your property
taxes will reflect the increased cost to municipalities for
the fleets they operate – Police cars, fire trucks and
ambulances and school buses."
— Michael P. Norton
contributed reporting.
|
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
|
