 |
Post Office Box 1147
▪
Marblehead, Massachusetts 01945
▪ (781) 639-9709
“Every Tax is a Pay Cut ... A Tax Cut is a Pay Raise”
48 years as “The Voice of Massachusetts Taxpayers”
— and
their Institutional Memory — |
|
CLT UPDATE
Monday, May 30, 2022
Memorial Day
New Tax Hikes Before
Dubious "Tax Relief"?
Jump directly
to CLT's Commentary on the News
|
Most Relevant News
Excerpts
(Full news reports follow Commentary)
|
|
The Senate
on Thursday approved a nearly $50 billion state
budget, after adopting more than 500 amendments over
three days.
Senate
President Karen Spilka said prior to the unanimous
vote that she hopes House and Senate negotiators can
"quickly" resolve the differences between their
fiscal 2023 spending plans.
House and
Senate Democrats over the years have often been
unable to agree on a consensus budget by the July 1
start of the fiscal year. Failing to reach a timely
agreement this year, in particular, could be
consequential since legislative leaders are trying
to find common ground on other major bills and
formal sessions for the year, under legislative
rules, end on Sunday, July 31.
During
Thursday's session, Senate Minority Leader Bruce
Tarr noted the budget bill, passed as state tax
collections continue to crest, managed to jack up
spending by more than $2 billion but still enlarges
the state's significant rainy day savings account.
Still, Tarr said, the bill fails to meet the state's
statutory responsibility to fully fund regional
school transportation....
A Senate
Ways and Means spokesman said senators added more
than $93 million to the budget through amendments,
raising the bill's bottom line to $49.78 billion,
which is in the same ballpark as the bill that
cleared the House in April.
State
House News Service
Thursday, May 26, 2022
Senate Passes
Budget, Next Stop Conference Committee
The Senate
unanimously approved a $49.78 billion budget for the
fiscal year that starts July 1, after tacking on
more than $93 million in spending over the course of
three days of debate.
A
conference committee could be appointed as soon as
next week to hash out the Senate's differences with
the House, which passed its own version of the
budget in April, also in the nearly $50 billion
ballpark.
Also
Thursday, the Senate gave its final approval to a
bill opening up Massachusetts driver's license
access to undocumented immigrants. That measure
heads to Gov. Baker's desk with 80 percent of
senators voting in support, well above the
two-thirds needed to override a veto or potentially
defeat an amendment in the event Baker tosses it
back to the Legislature.
The Senate
returns on Tuesday morning, without a formal
calendar, following the Memorial Day weekend. The
big budget debate's over and there are around nine
weeks left in formal sessions if legislative
leadership want to push any further priorities onto
the floor before the term's end.
State
House News Service
Thursday, May 26, 2022
Senate Session Summary - Thursday, May 26, 2022
By Sam Doran
Minority Leader Bruce Tarr uses burlap moneybags to
illustrate components of the Senate's nearly $50
billion budget proposal during debate Wednesday.
Tarr's "taxpayer sack" was nearly empty, save for an
IOU representing Democratic leadership's promise of
a future debate on tax relief. [SHNS/Senate Broadcast]
When the
Senate Ways and Means Committee rolled out its $49.7
billion budget for fiscal 2023 earlier this month,
the bill was, in the eyes of Chairman Michael
Rodrigues, "pretty light on policy."
Three days
of debate and some 500 adopted amendments later,
it's gotten quite a bit heavier.
As is
typical for either branch, the Senate loaded its
spending bill up with earmarks, to the tune of tens
of millions of dollars. And senators were not afraid
to add in some policy heft, beefing up their budget
with what the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundations
tallied as
104 new outside sections.
Those
policy pieces cover everything from protections for
providers and seekers of reproductive and
gender-affirming health care, to continued
permission for remote municipal meetings, to the
exoneration of the last woman convicted in the Salem
Witch Trials whose name has not yet been cleared.
A
substantial lift, sure, for the negotiators who will
ultimately come together to settle the differences
between the House and Senate. But, the glut of cash
in the Bay State's coffers means they'll have the
option of throwing money at some problems that may
arise -- why haggle over House versus Senate
spending priorities if the revenue's there to just
fund both? ...
Minority
Leader Bruce Tarr, never one to shy away from a
prop, illustrated his point with a series of burlap
moneybags. The biggest represented the budget's
billions in spending, while a smaller one, labeled
"Taxpayer," was nearly empty, save for an IOU.
Thursday
evening, with debate wrapped up, Tarr ceremoniously
presented Rodrigues with that Taxpayer Sack, saying
he hoped the chairman would find a way to fill it up
with tax breaks in the next two months.
Top Senate
Democrats have said they want to tackle tax relief
sometime after the budget. Since budget talks often
stretch into July and formal sessions this year end
on July 31, the timing question looms larger.
Tax
changes have to start in the House, and leadership
in that branch has also been sparse on details of
what might emerge, or when.
Speaker
Ronald Mariano said Thursday he's having the Revenue
Committee run some numbers, and that the House will
"try and put some things together" with the goal of
a "more equitable dispersal of the benefits and tax
benefits." ...
With
lawmakers still playing their cards close to the
vest on what future tax-relief efforts might look
like, an official opposition campaign to a potential
new tax launched on Monday. The Coalition to Stop
the Tax Hike Amendment kicked off its efforts to
defeat the November ballot question that would write
a 4 percent surtax on income over $1 million into
the state's Constitution.
While
opponents warn against the potential of writing
lawmakers a "blank check" with the new tax, the
money it would raise is intended to go toward
transportation and education needs.
State
House News Service
Friday, May 27, 2022
Weekly Roundup - In The Bag
The state
Senate approved a nearly $50 billion budget on
Thursday after plowing millions of dollars in new
spending into the package, but rejected a buffet of
proposed tax cuts and a temporary holiday from the
state's gas tax.
The
spending package, which passed unanimously, calls
for tapping the state's record surplus revenues to
make major investments in schools, child care,
workforce development and housing while boosting
state aid to communities.
"This is a
truly terrific budget," Senate President Karen
Spilka, D-Ashland, said in remarks ahead of its
passage. "From the start, this budget has been about
getting money, and keeping money, in the pockets of
people who keep this commonwealth moving forward."
...
While
there are no wholesale tax or fee increases in the
spending bill, the Senate's Democratic majority
rejected a $700 million buffet of proposed tax cuts
that were part of Baker’s preliminary budget package
filed in January.
Baker’s
proposal called for adjusting state income tax laws
and boosting rent deductions to provide relief for
low-income residents, expanding tax credits for
housing and child care, and a major overhaul of the
estate or "death" tax.
Senate
Republicans also made another push to suspend the
state's gas tax of 24 cents per gallon through Labor
Day as part of the budget deliberations, but the
proposed amendments were rejected by the Democratic
majority, who said they would affect the state’s
bond rating and provide minimal relief for
motorists.
Senate
Minority Leader Bruce Tarr, R-Gloucester, said the
state is awash with surplus revenue and can afford
to provide relief for consumers who are paying
higher prices for food, gas and other goods amid
supply chain disruptions and record-high inflation.
"We don't
know if that inflationary number will change but we
know it's going to have a significant detrimental
effect," Tarr said in remarks Wednesday. "We have an
obligation to take these reasonable actions — a
fraction of one month of excess revenue — to respond
and help them weather the storm and gain a little
bit of traction, survive and prosper."
Ahead of
this week's budget debate, Spilka said she wants to
pursue a tax relief package before the end of the
session but has not provided additional details.
On
Wednesday, Senate Ways & Means Chairman Michael
Rodrigues defended the Democratic majority's
rejection of the tax cuts and pointed out that the
Senate's spending plan includes funding to help
taxpayers struggling with higher costs.
"This body
has not stood by and done nothing. We have done
enormous things to help," Rodrigues said in remarks
during the budget debate. "Just the fact that we're
passing close to a $50 billion budget with money for
services that assist every resident in education,
child care, mental health, health care."
Rodrigues
argued that Baker's tax cuts are skewed toward the
state’s wealthiest and said the Senate intends to
hold a "comprehensive tax debate to ensure that
those residents that deserve it most will get the
largest share of tax breaks." ...
House
Republicans also sought to amend the spending
package to include parts of Baker’s tax cuts plan
and a gas tax holiday, but the proposals were
rejected.
During
closing remarks in the Senate budget debate, Tarr
walked across the chamber and handed Rodrigues a
burlap "taxpayer sack" with proposals to cut taxes.
"I'm
hoping, in giving this to you, that within the next
40 days you will find a way to fill it with tax
relief for the citizens of the commonwealth," Tarr
said.
The Salem
News
Friday, May 27, 2022
Senate approves nearly $50B state
budget
House
Speaker Ronald Mariano said the House is working to
assemble a tax relief package by the end of July and
that he has a willing dance partner in the Senate,
but he also indicated Thursday that relief is not
where the tax talk is likely to end.
"We're
gonna try and put some things together. There's
still two or three things that I'd like to do that
I'm having the numbers run through Revenue
[Committee]. I want a more equitable dispersal of
the benefits and tax benefits," Mariano told
reporters Thursday after addressing the Greater
Boston Chamber of Commerce.
The
speaker, who has said for months that he is open to
the idea of tax relief without having advanced Gov.
Charlie Baker's proposals or outlined his own, said
the idea of changing the threshold at which the
estate tax kicks in "was something that jumped out
at us right away," but otherwise did not get into
the details of what a House relief package might
look like.
Senate
President Karen Spilka has also said that she wants
to get a tax relief bill through her chamber and
said she will turn her attention to the issue after
the Senate budget debate is over. Mariano said his
conversations with Spilka give him "the impression
that she does want to do something."
But while
tax relief may dominate the tax-related talks
between now and the end of formal lawmaking in July,
Mariano said in his remarks to business groups
Thursday that "it's absolutely critical for the
Legislature to continue to look for new, smart ways
to generate more revenue for the commonwealth." ...
Asked by a
reporter if he has given any consideration to a tax
on services, the speaker said he had not "per se."
"But it's
an interesting avenue to look at though and I will
take a look at that. I don't know exactly how you
would structure that and how we would identify these
services, but there may be something there," Mariano
said.
State
House News Service
Thursday, May 26, 2022
Speaker Exploring New
Revenues, On Top Of Tax Relief
Opponents
of the proposed surtax on household income over $1
million launched their campaign Monday morning to
defeat the Constitutional amendment on November's
ballot, focusing on the potential impact on small
businesses and retirees as well as the possibility
that the Legislature treats the estimated $1.3
billion in annual surtax revenue as a "blank check."
The
Coalition to Stop the Tax Hike Amendment, a group of
small businesses, chambers of commerce, some of the
state's most influential trade organizations,
retirees and concerned citizens, formally kicked off
its anti-surtax efforts and said its members have
"united to communicate to voters the damage this
massive tax increase will have on our state's
economy."
"Proponents of the amendment claim that it will
raise taxes only on Massachusetts' highest earners,
but in practice, it will harm hardworking families
across the state," Dan Cence, a veteran lobbyist and
political strategist and spokesperson for the
Coalition to Stop the Tax Hike Amendment, said.
"Massachusetts already has a budget surplus of
billions of dollars. We must work together to
strengthen our economy and ensure Massachusetts
remains a place where small business owners can
thrive." ...
"The Tax
Hike Amendment is not just a tax on people making a
million dollars a year. It will also tax the nest
eggs of longtime homeowners and small business
owners whose retirement depends on their
investments," the coalition wrote on the fact
sheets. "That is because, unlike federal taxes, this
amendment would treat one-time gains from selling a
home or business as regular income, pushing many
retirees and small business owners into the new
higher tax bracket, and nearly doubling their
taxes." ...
In its
launch Monday, the coalition also called attention
to the fact that while the amendment itself would
require the surtax revenue to be spent on
transportation and education, it would not
necessarily lead to actual increases in spending on
transportation and education because future
Legislatures could stop appropriating money from
other revenue sources to those areas.
"As the
former head of the MBTA, I know there is zero
guarantee that the money raised from this amendment
will increase education and transportation spending.
Due to a loophole in the amendment, 'subject to
appropriation' means legislators can take this money
and use it for their own pet projects -- it means
giving Beacon Hill a blank check with no
accountability," Brian Shortsleeve, a former general
manager at the T who has since founded M33 Growth,
said.
Lisa
Alcock, a former public school teacher, echoed the
same sentiment in her comments on the coalition's
website. She said the amendment is "deceptive" and
that "the politicians who put this on the ballot are
giving themselves a blank check to redirect existing
funding for education and transportation to their
own pet projects, with no accountability."
State
House News Service
Monday, May 23, 2022
Surtax Opponents Warn
Against Beacon Hill “Blank Check”
Opposition Campaign Forms, Accelerating Debate
A newly
formed coalition of business groups launched a
campaign to defeat the proposed millionaires’ tax,
foreshadowing what could be a costly battle over the
proposed constitutional amendment ahead of the
November elections.
The
Coalition to Stop the Tax Hike Amendment, which
includes business groups, chambers of commerce,
hoteliers, developers and “concerned citizens,”
argues that the proposed 4% surtax on the state’s
top earners would be “one of the state’s highest
income tax increases in history,” affecting tens of
thousands of residents.
“Now, more
than ever, is not the right time to raise income
taxes,” Dan Cence, the coalition’s spokesman, said
in a statement. “Proponents of the amendment claim
that it will raise taxes only on Massachusetts’
highest earners, but in practice, it will harm
hardworking families across the state.” ...
“There is
nothing fair about subjecting small businesses who
serve as the backbone of the Massachusetts economy
to a constitutionally locked-in income tax
increase,” said Chris Carlozzi, state director of
the Massachusetts chapter of the National Federation
of Independent Business, a member of the coalition.
“Not only
does the income tax hike reduce a pass-through small
business’ ability to reinvest in their operation and
their employees, but it also taxes the owner at a
higher rate when they seek to sell their business
and retire,” Carlozzi said.
Members of
the coalition, which include Associated Industries
of Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Seafood
Collaborative, Retailers Association of
Massachusetts, and the Pioneer Institute, note that
the state’s voters have several times rejected
proposals to replace the state’s flat personal
income tax with a graduated rate....
The Raise
Up Massachusetts coalition, a coalition of labor
unions, community and faith groups behind the
referendum, dismissed the newly formed opposition
group and accused them of distorting details of the
proposed amendment.
“The
super-rich got richer during the pandemic, and a
small number of them will say anything to keep from
paying their fair share to build a better future for
Massachusetts families,” said Steve Crawford, the
coalition’s spokesman....
“The Fair
Share Amendment is simple: If you earn less than a
million dollars in a year you won’t pay a penny
more. Only the very rich will pay a little extra,”
he added. “And the money raised is constitutionally
required to be spent on making our kids’ schools
better and fixing our roads, bridges, and transit.”
The
referendum faces a challenge from a lawsuit filed by
Massachusetts High Technology Council and other
opponents who argue that backers of the surtax may
try to mislead voters by using an “inaccurate”
summary of the referendum.
They say
despite claims the money will be used for education
and transportation, lawmakers could divert the funds
for other purposes and voters should know that
before they go to the polls.
The
outcome of the legal challenge is pending a ruling
by the state Supreme Judicial Court, which heard
arguments in the case about three weeks ago.
The Salem
News
Tuesday, May 24, 2022
Coalition forms to oppose
millionaires' tax
Gov.
Charlie Baker on Friday vetoed a bill making
immigrants without legal status eligible to seek
state-issued driver's licenses, saying the Registry
of Motor Vehicles, an agency that he oversees,
doesn't have the ability to verify the identities of
potential applicants.
Following
years of advocacy for the bill, House and Senate
Democrats on Thursday enacted the legislation, which
supporters say will make the roads safer by granting
access to licenses for many undocumented immigrants
who are already living throughout the state.
Republican
opposition to the bill was steady throughout its
journey through the Legislature, and officeholders
and candidates at the GOP convention last weekend in
Springfield sporadically and pointedly expressed
their opposition to the proposal.
In his
veto message, Baker said the legislation
"significantly increases the risk that noncitizens
will be registered to vote," a possibility that bill
supporters have refuted. The governor said the bill
"restricts the Registry's ability to share
citizenship information with those entities
responsible for ensuring that only citizens register
for and vote in our elections."
The bill
cleared both branches with more than enough support
to override Baker's veto.
State
House News Service
Friday, May 27, 2022
Baker Vetoes Immigrant License
Access Bill
Voting, Verification Concerns Outlined In Veto
Message
One day
after state legislators approved a bill to allow
undocumented immigrants to get driver’s licenses in
Massachusetts, Governor Charlie Baker vetoed the
measure, saying it poses a risk to election
security.
In a
letter rejecting the legislation late Friday
afternoon, Baker said the bill requires the Registry
of Motor Vehicles “to issue state credentials to
people without the ability to verify their identity”
and “increases the risk that noncitizens will be
registered to vote.”
He also
expressed concern that the identification wouldn’t
distinguish an undocumented person from a documented
one.
“Consequently, a standard Massachusetts driver’s
license will no longer confirm that a person is who
they say they are,” Baker wrote.
The House
and the Senate voted overwhelmingly to approve the
bill Thursday, supporting it 118-36 and 32-8,
respectively.
Those
margins were large enough to override Baker’s veto.
A two-thirds vote is required in each branch to
override the governor’s veto and make the bill law.
A
spokesperson for Senate President Karen E. Spilka
said the chamber will override, but did not provide
a date. The House will override the veto during its
next formal session on June 8, according to a
spokeswoman for House Speaker Ronald J. Mariano.
In a
tweet, Spilka called Baker’s veto “misguided” and
said her chamber looks forward to overriding it.
The
Boston Globe
Friday, May 27, 2022
Governor Baker vetoes bill to give
driver’s licenses to undocumented residents
A big
winner in last weekend’s Republican convention was a
Democrat.
That would
be Attorney General Maura Healey, the two-term
progressive who is running for governor....
So, if
Diehl wins the GOP primary over fist time candidate
Doughty, as expected, he will face a well-funded
Healey, who may not even face a primary challenge.
Healey,
who has scored a series of Democrat and progressive
endorsements — but has not heard from Joe Biden —
has raised close to $5 million in campaign funds.
This
compares to the less than $400,000 that Diehl has
raised.
Doughty, a
successful manufacturer, has put $500,000 of his own
fortune — and perhaps more to come — into his
campaign, which makes one wonder what his six
children and four grandchildren are thinking.
Still,
Healey has easily raised more money than the two
Republicans combined, and you could throw in
Chang-Diaz as well, and the three do not come close
to equaling the cash Healey has on hand....
If the
convention vote is any indication, Diehl should beat
Doughty in the primary. In 2018 Diehl beat out two
other Republicans for the U.S. Senate nomination
only to lose to Democrat Elizabeth Warren. So he is
better known.
But that
is only the beginning. There are only 459,663
registered Republicans in Massachusetts, compared to
1,494,990 registered Democrats. Diehl could win
every Republican primary vote and he would still be
well behind Healey, both in votes and in money.
However,
there are 2,717,293 unenrolled voters, or
Independents, who normally do not vote in September
primaries. But they do vote in November.
Diehl is a
longshot, for sure, even if he wins the primary. But
we live in strange, angry and anything-can-happen
times.
Diehl
needs to nationalize the election. With Trump at his
back, needs to make the election about Joe Biden,
who Healey supports, even as Biden has brought the
country to its knees.
Gas
prices? Food costs? Crime? Drugs? Homelessness?
Illegal immigration? No baby formula? Empty shelves?
Hate? Divisiveness? Afghanistan? Joe Biden has
failed on every front.
Democrat
election officials are now treating Biden as though
he had monkeypox.
Yes, Biden
whipped Trump in Massachusetts in 2020 when 2,382,
202 people voted for him. He would not get that vote
today. Trump back then got 1,167,202 votes. Today he
would get those same votes and more.
Biden sold
out his supporters to a bunch or radicals. Now his
disenchanted supporters — Democrats and Independents
— are deserting him. These are the people Diehl must
go after if he has any chance at all. They are out
there; you just have to get them.
The
Boston Herald
Wednesday, May 25, 2022
Race for governor must be about
gas, crime and no baby formula
By Peter Lucas
The
perfect Donald Trump storm is brewing in
Massachusetts — an unabashed conservative taking on
the Democratic power structure, a liberal candidate
and the left-wing media.
So it’s no
surprise Trump is considering making an appearance
for gubernatorial candidate Geoff Diehl’s campaign.
A Trump
rally would take the Bay State gubernatorial race
national — which is just what Diehl wants — and
shine a spotlight on the former state rep and failed
U.S. Senate candidate.
It would
also bring in cash, notoriety and of course plenty
of criticism in the establishment media and in the
Democratic party.
Democratic
front-runner Attorney General Maura Healey is the
perfect Trump foil — she has sued the former
president dozens of times and at times seemed
obsessed by him.
Healey has
tried to hang the Trump label on Diehl and he seems
perfectly willing to embrace it.
Trump and
Diehl would also be running against the state
Democratic Party establishment, including the
super-liberal Legislature, which has resisted
passing tax cuts despite a huge state surplus and
just passed a bill allowing non-citizen immigrants
to get a drivers’ license....
The
question for Diehl is can he stitch together enough
of a coalition of staunch conservatives, veterans,
law enforcement, anti-vaxers and others to win the
primary and make it a contest against Healey or the
other Democrat, Sonia Chang-Diaz?
Trump may
be able to help fire up conservatives — more than a
million of them voted for him in 2020 in
Massachusetts — but he’ll also energize Democrats,
too.
Whether
the former president makes an actual visit to the
Bay State is in question — he’s promised to do
“something” for Diehl but he may not want to invest
too much time in a race he’s likely to lose.
The
Boston Herald
Saturday, May 28, 2022
Trump perfect political storm
brewing in Massachusetts
By Joe Battenfeld |
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary |
|
The Salem News reported on Friday ("Senate
approves nearly $50B state budget"):
The state
Senate approved a nearly $50 billion budget on
Thursday after plowing millions of dollars in new
spending into the package, but rejected a buffet of
proposed tax cuts and a temporary holiday from the
state's gas tax.
The spending package,
which passed unanimously, calls for tapping the state's record
surplus revenues to make major investments in schools, child care,
workforce development and housing while boosting state aid to
communities.
"This is a truly terrific
budget," Senate President Karen Spilka, D-Ashland, said in remarks
ahead of its passage. "From the start, this budget has been about
getting money, and keeping money, in the pockets of people who keep
this commonwealth moving forward." ...
While there are no
wholesale tax or fee increases in the spending bill, the Senate's
Democratic majority rejected a $700 million buffet of proposed tax
cuts that were part of Baker’s preliminary budget package filed in
January....
On Wednesday, Senate Ways
& Means Chairman Michael Rodrigues defended the Democratic
majority's rejection of the tax cuts and pointed out that the
Senate's spending plan includes funding to help taxpayers struggling
with higher costs.
"This body has not stood
by and done nothing. We have done enormous things to help,"
Rodrigues said in remarks during the budget debate. "Just the fact
that we're passing close to a $50 billion budget with money for
services that assist every resident in education, child care, mental
health, health care."
Rodrigues argued that
Baker's tax cuts are skewed toward the state’s wealthiest and said
the Senate intends to hold a "comprehensive tax debate to ensure
that those residents that deserve it most will get the largest share
of tax breaks." ...
House Republicans also
sought to amend the spending package to include parts of Baker’s tax
cuts plan and a gas tax holiday, but the proposals were rejected.
During closing remarks in
the Senate budget debate, Tarr walked across the chamber and handed
Rodrigues a burlap "taxpayer sack" with proposals to cut taxes.
"I'm hoping, in giving
this to you, that within the next 40 days you will find a way to
fill it with tax relief for the citizens of the commonwealth," Tarr
said.
Minority Leader Bruce
Tarr uses burlap moneybags to illustrate components of the Senate's
nearly $50 billion budget proposal during debate Wednesday. Tarr's
"taxpayer sack" was nearly empty, save for an IOU representing
Democratic leadership's promise of a future debate on tax relief.
[SHNS/Senate Broadcast]
In its Weekly Roundup on
Friday, the State House News Service noted:
When the Senate Ways and
Means Committee rolled out its $49.7 billion
budget for fiscal 2023 earlier this month, the
bill was, in the eyes of Chairman Michael
Rodrigues, "pretty light on policy."
Three days of debate and
some 500 adopted amendments later, it's gotten
quite a bit heavier.
As
is typical for either branch, the Senate loaded
its spending bill up with earmarks, to the tune
of tens of millions of dollars. And senators
were not afraid to add in some policy heft,
beefing up their budget with what the
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundations tallied as
104 new outside sections.
Those
policy pieces cover everything from protections
for providers and seekers of reproductive and
gender-affirming health care, to continued
permission for remote municipal meetings, to the
exoneration of the last woman convicted in the
Salem Witch Trials whose name has not yet been
cleared.
A
substantial lift, sure, for the negotiators who
will ultimately come together to settle the
differences between the House and Senate. But,
the glut of cash in the Bay State's coffers
means they'll have the option of throwing money
at some problems that may arise -- why haggle
over House versus Senate spending priorities if
the revenue's there to just fund both?
On Thursday the News Service reported ("Speaker Exploring New
Revenues, On Top Of Tax Relief"):
House
Speaker Ronald Mariano said the House is working to
assemble a tax relief package by the end of July and
that he has a willing dance partner in the Senate,
but he also indicated Thursday that relief is not
where the tax talk is likely to end.
"We're
gonna try and put some things together. There's
still two or three things that I'd like to do that
I'm having the numbers run through Revenue
[Committee]. I want a more equitable dispersal of
the benefits and tax benefits," Mariano told
reporters Thursday after addressing the Greater
Boston Chamber of Commerce.
The
speaker, who has said for months that he is open to
the idea of tax relief without having advanced Gov.
Charlie Baker's proposals or outlined his own, said
the idea of changing the threshold at which the
estate tax kicks in "was something that jumped out
at us right away," but otherwise did not get into
the details of what a House relief package might
look like.
Senate
President Karen Spilka has also said that she wants
to get a tax relief bill through her chamber and
said she will turn her attention to the issue after
the Senate budget debate is over. Mariano said his
conversations with Spilka give him "the impression
that she does want to do something."
But while
tax relief may dominate the tax-related talks
between now and the end of formal lawmaking in July,
Mariano said in his remarks to business groups
Thursday that "it's absolutely critical for the
Legislature to continue to look for new, smart ways
to generate more revenue for the commonwealth." ...
Asked by a
reporter if he has given any consideration to a tax
on services, the speaker said he had not "per se."
"But it's
an interesting avenue to look at though and I will
take a look at that. I don't know exactly how you
would structure that and how we would identify these
services, but there may be something there," Mariano
said.
"But while tax relief may
dominate the tax-related talks between now and the end of formal
lawmaking in July, Mariano said in his remarks to business groups
Thursday that 'it's absolutely critical for the Legislature to
continue to look for new, smart ways to generate more revenue for
the commonwealth.'"
I think I see where this
"tax relief" is going.
The House and Senate
budgets propose spending over $2 Billion more than last year's
budget, including pouring hundreds of millions more into the "rainy
day" fund bulging it to a record level of $6.74 billion. It's
become difficult for legislators to answer why none of this largesse
can be allocated back to those who earned and over-paid it, so
they've come up with a fig leaf response —
if they can't figure out a way to stall it into oblivion.
"I want a more equitable
dispersal of the benefits and tax benefits," House Speaker Ron
Mariano told reporters.
"From each according to
his ability to each according to his needs" seems to be the game
plan. Those who paid the least taxes will receive the most
"tax relief" benefits — if they can't
come up with a way to stall it into oblivion.
And if they can't come up
with a way to stall it into oblivion, they'll simply increase taxes
somewhere else to cover the cost — and
then some no doubt.
Need I remind you that
they're still counting on the additional bounty they hope will be
raked in by the proposed graduated income tax scheme that will be on
the November ballot, their "Fair Share Amendment," aka,
"Millionaire's Tax"?
In its Weekly Roundup on
Friday the News Service noted:
As is
typical for either branch, the Senate loaded its
spending bill up with earmarks, to the tune of tens
of millions of dollars. And senators were not afraid
to add in some policy heft, beefing up their budget
with what the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundations
tallied as
104 new outside sections.
The Senate's budget as
passed is not yet available online so I haven't been able to scour
it yet to see if any of the stealth assaults on Proposition 2½
are contained in any of those policy change outside sections.
Hopefully, the unavailability yet of the Senate budget isn't the
pinnacle of stealth.
News on the graduated
income tax front was
reported by the News Service on Monday ("Surtax
Opponents Warn Against Beacon Hill “Blank Check”—Opposition Campaign Forms, Accelerating Debate")
Opponents of the proposed
surtax on household income over $1 million
launched their campaign Monday morning to defeat
the Constitutional amendment on November's
ballot, focusing on the potential impact on
small businesses and retirees as well as the
possibility that the Legislature treats the
estimated $1.3 billion in annual surtax revenue
as a "blank check."
The Coalition to Stop the
Tax Hike Amendment, a group of small businesses,
chambers of commerce, some of the state's most
influential trade organizations, retirees and
concerned citizens, formally kicked off its
anti-surtax efforts and said its members have
"united to communicate to voters the damage this
massive tax increase will have on our state's
economy." ...
"The Tax Hike Amendment is
not just a tax on people making a million
dollars a year. It will also tax the nest eggs
of longtime homeowners and small business owners
whose retirement depends on their investments,"
the coalition wrote on the fact sheets. "That is
because, unlike federal taxes, this amendment
would treat one-time gains from selling a home
or business as regular income, pushing many
retirees and small business owners into the new
higher tax bracket, and nearly doubling their
taxes." ...
In its launch Monday, the
coalition also called attention to the fact that
while the amendment itself would require the
surtax revenue to be spent on transportation and
education, it would not necessarily lead to
actual increases in spending on transportation
and education because future Legislatures could
stop appropriating money from other revenue
sources to those areas.
"As the former head of the
MBTA, I know there is zero guarantee that the
money raised from this amendment will increase
education and transportation spending. Due to a
loophole in the amendment, 'subject to
appropriation' means legislators can take this
money and use it for their own pet projects --
it means giving Beacon Hill a blank check with
no accountability," Brian Shortsleeve, a former
general manager at the T who has since founded
M33 Growth, said.
On Tuesday The Salem News added ("Coalition
forms to oppose millionaires' tax"):
The Coalition to Stop the
Tax Hike Amendment, which includes business
groups, chambers of commerce, hoteliers,
developers and “concerned citizens,” argues that
the proposed 4% surtax on the state’s top
earners would be “one of the state’s highest
income tax increases in history,” affecting tens
of thousands of residents.
“Now, more than ever, is
not the right time to raise income taxes,” Dan
Cence, the coalition’s spokesman, said in a
statement. “Proponents of the amendment claim
that it will raise taxes only on Massachusetts’
highest earners, but in practice, it will harm
hardworking families across the state.” ...
“There is nothing fair
about subjecting small businesses who serve as
the backbone of the Massachusetts economy to a
constitutionally locked-in income tax increase,”
said Chris Carlozzi, state director of the
Massachusetts chapter of the National Federation
of Independent Business, a member of the
coalition.
“Not only does the income
tax hike reduce a pass-through small business’
ability to reinvest in their operation and their
employees, but it also taxes the owner at a
higher rate when they seek to sell their
business and retire,” Carlozzi said....
The referendum faces a
challenge from a lawsuit filed by Massachusetts
High Technology Council and other opponents who
argue that backers of the surtax may try to
mislead voters by using an “inaccurate” summary
of the referendum.
They say despite claims the
money will be used for education and
transportation, lawmakers could divert the funds
for other purposes and voters should know that
before they go to the polls.
The outcome of the legal
challenge is pending a ruling by the state
Supreme Judicial Court, which heard arguments in
the case about three weeks ago.
It's game-on for the
opposition to this sixth attempt to impose a graduated income
tax in Massachusetts by amending the state constitution, forever.
Citizens for Limited Taxation led the opposition to the last two
attempts and defeated both on the ballots in 1976 and 1994.
I'm gratified to see others with much deeper pockets taking up the
leadership this time. CLT is behind their effort completely.
All my life as an activist I've heard "I'm behind you all the way!"
but when I turned and looked back there were so few. At least
this newly-minted group, The Coalition to Stop the Tax Hike
Amendment, starts out with numbers and financial backing.
Gov. Baker did the right
thing on Friday, vetoing the driver's license for illegal immigrants
bill overwhelmingly passed in both the House and Senate, but as with
most "right thing" vetoes he exercises, it's with the full knowledge
that his veto won't make any difference.
The
State
House News Service reported on Friday ("Baker Vetoes Immigrant License
Access Bill—Voting, Verification Concerns Outlined In Veto
Message"):
Gov.
Charlie Baker on Friday vetoed a bill making
immigrants without legal status eligible to seek
state-issued driver's licenses, saying the Registry
of Motor Vehicles, an agency that he oversees,
doesn't have the ability to verify the identities of
potential applicants.
Following
years of advocacy for the bill, House and Senate
Democrats on Thursday enacted the legislation, which
supporters say will make the roads safer by granting
access to licenses for many undocumented immigrants
who are already living throughout the state.
Republican
opposition to the bill was steady throughout its
journey through the Legislature, and officeholders
and candidates at the GOP convention last weekend in
Springfield sporadically and pointedly expressed
their opposition to the proposal.
In his
veto message, Baker said the legislation
"significantly increases the risk that noncitizens
will be registered to vote," a possibility that bill
supporters have refuted. The governor said the bill
"restricts the Registry's ability to share
citizenship information with those entities
responsible for ensuring that only citizens register
for and vote in our elections."
The bill
cleared both branches with more than enough support
to override Baker's veto.
Massachusetts is about to
create overnight tens of thousands of undocumented Democrats, and I
predict it's only a short matter of time before the first voting
"scandal" is revealed — maybe even by
November.
There were a couple of
interesting opinion perspectives in The Boston Herald over the past
week concerning the race for governor.
In his column on Wednesday
("Race for governor must be about
gas, crime and no baby formula") veteran
Massachusetts political reporter and columnist Peter Lucas offers:
. . . Diehl is a
longshot, for sure, even if he wins the primary. But
we live in strange, angry and anything-can-happen
times.
Diehl
needs to nationalize the election. With Trump at his
back, needs to make the election about Joe Biden,
who Healey supports, even as Biden has brought the
country to its knees.
Gas
prices? Food costs? Crime? Drugs? Homelessness?
Illegal immigration? No baby formula? Empty shelves?
Hate? Divisiveness? Afghanistan? Joe Biden has
failed on every front.
Democrat
election officials are now treating Biden as though
he had monkeypox.
Yes, Biden
whipped Trump in Massachusetts in 2020 when 2,382,
202 people voted for him. He would not get that vote
today. Trump back then got 1,167,202 votes. Today he
would get those same votes and more.
Biden sold
out his supporters to a bunch or radicals. Now his
disenchanted supporters — Democrats and Independents
— are deserting him. These are the people Diehl must
go after if he has any chance at all. They are out
there; you just have to get them.
This was followed up on
Saturday by Herald columnist
Joe Battenfeld ("Trump perfect political storm
brewing in Massachusetts") in which posits:
The perfect Donald Trump
storm is brewing in Massachusetts — an unabashed
conservative taking on the Democratic power
structure, a liberal candidate and the left-wing
media.
So it’s no surprise Trump
is considering making an appearance for
gubernatorial candidate Geoff Diehl’s
campaign....
The
question for Diehl is can he stitch together enough
of a coalition of staunch conservatives, veterans,
law enforcement, anti-vaxers and others to win the
primary and make it a contest against Healey or the
other Democrat, Sonia Chang-Diaz?
Trump may
be able to help fire up conservatives — more than a
million of them voted for him in 2020 in
Massachusetts — but he’ll also energize Democrats,
too.
Whether
the former president makes an actual visit to the
Bay State is in question — he’s promised to do
“something” for Diehl but he may not want to invest
too much time in a race he’s likely to lose.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
State House News
Service
Thursday, May 26, 2022
Senate Passes Budget, Next Stop Conference Committee
By Michael P. Norton
The Senate on Thursday approved a nearly $50 billion state
budget, after adopting more than 500 amendments over three
days.
Senate President Karen Spilka said prior to the unanimous
vote that she hopes House and Senate negotiators can
"quickly" resolve the differences between their fiscal 2023
spending plans.
House and Senate Democrats over the years have often been
unable to agree on a consensus budget by the July 1 start of
the fiscal year. Failing to reach a timely agreement this
year, in particular, could be consequential since
legislative leaders are trying to find common ground on
other major bills and formal sessions for the year, under
legislative rules, end on Sunday, July 31.
During Thursday's session, Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr
noted the budget bill, passed as state tax collections
continue to crest, managed to jack up spending by more than
$2 billion but still enlarges the state's significant rainy
day savings account. Still, Tarr said, the bill fails to
meet the state's statutory responsibility to fully fund
regional school transportation.
Senate budget chief Michael Rodrigues ticked off areas where
the Senate bill made investments, including early, K-12 and
higher education, health care, workforce accounts, housing
aid. Spilka said the bill fully funds the state's obligation
under the Student Opportunity Act, a landmark education bill
that seeks to plug gaps in local education budgets over a
seven-year stretch.
A Senate Ways and Means spokesman said senators added more
than $93 million to the budget through amendments, raising
the bill's bottom line to $49.78 billion, which is in the
same ballpark as the bill that cleared the House in April.
Rodrigues, of Westport, and House Ways and Means Chair Aaron
Michlewitz of Boston will lead budget negotiations in
conference. The two branches will name six conferees, and
the conference panel will almost certainly vote to conduct
its work entirely in private.
House conferees will be presented with a pair of major
Senate policy measures. Through amendments, the Senate
agreed on Thursday to a ban on non-disclosure agreements
across state government. On Wednesday, the Senate agreed to
licensing protections for doctors and other professionals
involved with the provision of reproductive care -- which
covers not just abortion but also contraception, miscarriage
management and other pregnancy-related services -- or many
supportive treatments for gender dysphoria.
State House News
Service
Friday, May 27, 2022
Weekly Roundup - In The Bag
Recap and analysis of the week in state government
By Katie Lannan
When the Senate Ways and Means Committee rolled out its
$49.7 billion budget for fiscal 2023 earlier this month, the
bill was, in the eyes of Chairman Michael Rodrigues, "pretty
light on policy."
Three days of debate and some 500 adopted amendments later,
it's gotten quite a bit heavier.
As is typical for either branch, the Senate loaded its
spending bill up with earmarks, to the tune of tens of
millions of dollars. And senators were not afraid to add in
some policy heft, beefing up their budget with what the
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundations tallied as
104
new outside sections.
Those policy pieces cover everything from protections for
providers and seekers of reproductive and gender-affirming
health care, to continued permission for remote municipal
meetings, to the exoneration of the last woman convicted in
the Salem Witch Trials whose name has not yet been cleared.
A substantial lift, sure, for the negotiators who will
ultimately come together to settle the differences between
the House and Senate. But, the glut of cash in the Bay
State's coffers means they'll have the option of throwing
money at some problems that may arise -- why haggle over
House versus Senate spending priorities if the revenue's
there to just fund both?
The House and Senate don't just differ on what they put in
their budget, but how they formally build it.
While much of the work in House Budget Week goes unspoken as
consolidated amendment packages are cobbled together behind
the scenes and adopted with little to no debate, the
Senate's features an almost constant stream of speeches.
The Senate speeds up its process by bulk-voting "yes" or
"no" on bundles of amendments compiled by leadership, but
almost every amendment it adopts outside of that process --
and quite a few that are withdrawn or rejected -- comes with
a detailed introduction from its sponsor.
For the body's handful of statewide candidates, it's an
opportunity for facetime and potential headlines.
Lieutenant governor hopefuls Sens. Eric Lesser and Adam
Hinds and auditor contender Sen. Diana DiZoglio gave
multiple speeches, while gubernatorial candidate Sen. Sonia
Chang-Diaz was quieter.
As outgoing Gov. Charlie Baker was in Nashville Wednesday
for an election-year confab with other GOP governors, the
Senate's trio of Republicans took up his call for tax
breaks, unsuccessfully making the case that the budget
should return some of the state's surplus to the residents
who provided it in the first place.
Minority Leader Bruce Tarr, never one to shy away from a
prop, illustrated his point with a series of burlap
moneybags. The biggest represented the budget's billions in
spending, while a smaller one, labeled "Taxpayer," was
nearly empty, save for an IOU.
Minority Leader
Bruce Tarr uses burlap moneybags to illustrate components of
the Senate's nearly $50 billion budget proposal during
debate Wednesday. Tarr's "taxpayer sack" was nearly empty,
save for an IOU representing Democratic leadership's promise
of a future debate on tax relief. [SHNS/Senate Broadcast]
Thursday evening, with debate
wrapped up, Tarr ceremoniously presented Rodrigues with that
Taxpayer Sack, saying he hoped the chairman would find a way
to fill it up with tax breaks in the next two months.
Top Senate Democrats have said they want to tackle tax
relief sometime after the budget. Since budget talks often
stretch into July and formal sessions this year end on July
31, the timing question looms larger.
Tax changes have to start in the House, and leadership in
that branch has also been sparse on details of what might
emerge, or when.
Speaker Ronald Mariano said Thursday he's having the Revenue
Committee run some numbers, and that the House will "try and
put some things together" with the goal of a "more equitable
dispersal of the benefits and tax benefits."
Addressing the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce, Mariano
identified ongoing conference talks involving offshore wind
and legalization of sports betting -- where he knocked the
Senate's approach as "paternalistic" -- as his areas of top
importance on the end-of-session agenda. Once those are
resolved, he said, lawmakers can "begin to start to tackle
some other things that we have that might be a little bit
less confrontational."
"Anyone who's been involved with the Legislature knows that
we operate best up against deadlines because it forces
people to take a realistic view of their position," Mariano
said.
The House added another bulletpoint to the Legislature's
pre-July 31 to-do list, sending the Senate a bill that would
have Massachusetts join the ranks of 48 other states with
some sort of ban on the sharing of sexually explicit images
without the subject's consent. The bill also creates new,
non-criminal options for responding to teen sexting cases.
Baker for years has been pushing lawmakers to take up
"revenge porn" legislation, and now that the House has, the
bill representatives passed goes a somewhat different route
than the governor has proposed. Rather than establishing a
new criminal offense, like Baker suggested, the House opted
to update existing criminal harassment laws.
Baker and legislative Democrats are much further apart on a
bill that would allow Massachusetts residents without legal
immigration status to apply for and obtain standard state
driver's licenses.
Over unanimous Republican opposition, the House and Senate
shipped Baker the final version of their license-access bill
on Thursday. Less than 24 hours later, he sent it back,
vetoed.
Baker's Friday afternoon veto message echoes many of the
concerns he raised while the bill, the subject of years of
impassioned advocacy, was working its way to his desk over
the past few months -- he says the Registry of Motor
Vehicles isn't equipped to verify foreign identify document
and worries about the risk of noncitizens ending up
registered to vote.
The veto is largely symbolic, as Democrats in both branches
have the numbers to override it.
Two of the Democrats running for attorney general this week
returned to an old friend of Massachusetts office-seekers,
reviving the "People's Pledge" for yet another campaign
season.
The latest incarnation, like the original version signed a
decade ago by then-Sen. Scott Brown and his challenger
Elizabeth Warren, aims to discourage outside spending by
super PACs. Unlike the Brown-Warren pledge, this one doesn't
have the signature of all candidates in the race.
Shannon Liss-Riordan and Quentin Palfrey signed their pledge
outside the State House Monday, calling on fellow Democrat
Andrea Campbell to do the same.
A day later, Environmental League of Massachusetts Action
Fund's independent expenditure political action committee
reported the contest's first super PAC spending -- about
$1,500 on mailers supporting Campbell.
The super PAC spent the same amount on its two other favored
statewide candidates, Chris Dempsey for auditor and Maura
Healey for governor. The committee's treasurer, Elizabeth
Henry, called the three Democrats "proven, effective
leaders, committed to making environmental and climate
action a top priority."
Healey, in her day job as attorney general, this week filed
suit against 13 manufacturers of the "forever chemicals"
known as PFAS, charging them with contaminating the state's
water sources and other resources.
Elsewhere in legal action, the Supreme Judicial Court
ordered a new round of fact-finding in a case involving the
Gaming Commission and the 2012 deal for the Everett land
that now hosts the Encore Boston Harbor casino.
With lawmakers still playing their cards close to the vest
on what future tax-relief efforts might look like, an
official opposition campaign to a potential new tax launched
on Monday. The Coalition to Stop the Tax Hike Amendment
kicked off its efforts to defeat the November ballot
question that would write a 4 percent surtax on income over
$1 million into the state's Constitution.
While opponents warn against the potential of writing
lawmakers a "blank check" with the new tax, the money it
would raise is intended to go toward transportation and
education needs.
A new pot of money for schools might sound pretty good right
now in Boston, where talk of a potential state receivership
has been bubbling for a while and hit a boiling point with a
new report from the Department of Elementary and Secondary
Education.
The department's report, a searing 188-page document, says
the Boston Public Schools are still falling short of an
"acceptable minimum standard" in key areas like
transportation and special education.
It calls for bold moves and immediate improvement, but
doesn't specifically recommend receivership. Mayor Michelle
Wu, one of a slew of local officials against the idea of
receivership, and state Education Commissioner Jeff Riley
have been talking about next steps.
Based on comments from Baker and Riley, a former Lawrence
receiver, the state will be looking for Wu to lay out
concrete steps and commit the city to taking them. If the
state does ultimately pursue receivership, Wu said Boston
will seek "a hearing and due process under the board's laws
and regulations to continue to make our case."
News at the state and city levels this week unfurled as the
nation coped with the horror of a school shooting in Uvalde,
Texas, which left 19 students and two adults dead.
"We must turn that anger into action. We must not lose
hope," Senate President Karen Spilka said as the Senate
paused its budget debate for a moment of silence honoring
the victims of that tragedy and other recent shootings in
New York and California.
STORY OF THE WEEK: The visual aids, speeches and earmarks
can only mean one thing -- another Senate Budget Week has
come and gone.
The Salem
News
Friday, May 27, 2022
Senate approves nearly $50B state budget
By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter
The state Senate approved a nearly $50 billion budget on
Thursday after plowing millions of dollars in new spending
into the package, but rejected a buffet of proposed tax cuts
and a temporary holiday from the state's gas tax.
The spending package, which passed unanimously, calls for
tapping the state's record surplus revenues to make major
investments in schools, child care, workforce development
and housing while boosting state aid to communities.
"This is a truly terrific budget," Senate President Karen
Spilka, D-Ashland, said in remarks ahead of its passage.
"From the start, this budget has been about getting money,
and keeping money, in the pockets of people who keep this
commonwealth moving forward."
The plan calls for increasing state aid to cities and towns
by more than $63 million to $1.23 billion in the next fiscal
year. Chapter 70 state funding for public schools would also
rise to more than $6 billion next fiscal year under the
plan.
The Senate also calls for pumping more money into the
state's reserves or "rainy day" fund, bringing the fund to a
record level of $6.74 billion.
A key provision of the plan calls for spending $250 million
for pandemic-related state grants to buoy early education
and child care providers.
The spending package also contains policy changes, such as
making phone calls at state prisons and correctional
facilities and creating a $20 million fund to reimburse
county sheriffs for the costs.
Another provision seeks to provide legal protections for
reproductive and "gender-affirming" health care providers in
Massachusetts to shield them from potential lawsuits over
providing abortions and other services to out-of-state
residents, if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns the Roe v.
Wade ruling.
Over three days of debate, senators slogged through more
than 1,100 amendments to the spending package seeking
additional funding or changes in state policy. Many of the
amendments were packaged into large bundles that were
approved or rejected on single voice votes. About 500 were
approved.
While there are no wholesale tax or fee increases in the
spending bill, the Senate's Democratic majority rejected a
$700 million buffet of proposed tax cuts that were part of
Baker’s preliminary budget package filed in January.
Baker’s proposal called for adjusting state income tax laws
and boosting rent deductions to provide relief for
low-income residents, expanding tax credits for housing and
child care, and a major overhaul of the estate or "death"
tax.
Senate Republicans also made another push to suspend the
state's gas tax of 24 cents per gallon through Labor Day as
part of the budget deliberations, but the proposed
amendments were rejected by the Democratic majority, who
said they would affect the state’s bond rating and provide
minimal relief for motorists.
Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr, R-Gloucester, said the
state is awash with surplus revenue and can afford to
provide relief for consumers who are paying higher prices
for food, gas and other goods amid supply chain disruptions
and record-high inflation.
"We don't know if that inflationary number will change but
we know it's going to have a significant detrimental
effect," Tarr said in remarks Wednesday. "We have an
obligation to take these reasonable actions — a fraction of
one month of excess revenue — to respond and help them
weather the storm and gain a little bit of traction, survive
and prosper."
Ahead of this week's budget debate, Spilka said she wants to
pursue a tax relief package before the end of the session
but has not provided additional details.
On Wednesday, Senate Ways & Means Chairman Michael Rodrigues
defended the Democratic majority's rejection of the tax cuts
and pointed out that the Senate's spending plan includes
funding to help taxpayers struggling with higher costs.
"This body has not stood by and done nothing. We have done
enormous things to help," Rodrigues said in remarks during
the budget debate. "Just the fact that we're passing close
to a $50 billion budget with money for services that assist
every resident in education, child care, mental health,
health care."
Rodrigues argued that Baker's tax cuts are skewed toward the
state’s wealthiest and said the Senate intends to hold a
"comprehensive tax debate to ensure that those residents
that deserve it most will get the largest share of tax
breaks."
The Democratic-controlled House approved its version of the
budget two weeks ago after adding $130 million more in
spending to the plan.
House Republicans also sought to amend the spending package
to include parts of Baker’s tax cuts plan and a gas tax
holiday, but the proposals were rejected.
During closing remarks in the Senate budget debate, Tarr
walked across the chamber and handed Rodrigues a burlap
"taxpayer sack" with proposals to cut taxes.
"I'm hoping, in giving this to you, that within the next 40
days you will find a way to fill it with tax relief for the
citizens of the commonwealth," Tarr said.
Differences between the House and Senate versions of the
budget must be worked out by a yet-to-be appointed
conference committee of six lawmakers before heading to
Baker's desk for his review.
— Christian M. Wade covers
the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media
Group’s newspapers and websites.
State House News
Service
Thursday, May 26, 2022
Mariano Says Gig Economy Getting “Free Pass”
Speaker Exploring New Revenues, On Top Of Tax Relief
By Colin A. Young
House Speaker Ronald Mariano said the House is working to
assemble a tax relief package by the end of July and that he
has a willing dance partner in the Senate, but he also
indicated Thursday that relief is not where the tax talk is
likely to end.
"We're gonna try and put some things together. There's still
two or three things that I'd like to do that I'm having the
numbers run through Revenue [Committee]. I want a more
equitable dispersal of the benefits and tax benefits,"
Mariano told reporters Thursday after addressing the Greater
Boston Chamber of Commerce.
The speaker, who has said for months that he is open to the
idea of tax relief without having advanced Gov. Charlie
Baker's proposals or outlined his own, said the idea of
changing the threshold at which the estate tax kicks in "was
something that jumped out at us right away," but otherwise
did not get into the details of what a House relief package
might look like.
Senate President Karen Spilka has also said that she wants
to get a tax relief bill through her chamber and said she
will turn her attention to the issue after the Senate budget
debate is over. Mariano said his conversations with Spilka
give him "the impression that she does want to do
something."
But while tax relief may dominate the tax-related talks
between now and the end of formal lawmaking in July, Mariano
said in his remarks to business groups Thursday that "it's
absolutely critical for the Legislature to continue to look
for new, smart ways to generate more revenue for the
commonwealth." He spoke specifically about sports betting
and the money that could bring in for the state, but he told
reporters after his speech that he has his eyes on other new
revenue sources.
"Well, yeah. I don't know if I should tell you right now
what they are," he joked when asked if he's eying any other
sources of state revenue. "There's a whole gig economy issue
and how we deal with some of those things, I think that's
ripe for some examination. I think we'd be silly to just
give them a free pass without looking at it."
Asked by a reporter if he has given any consideration to a
tax on services, the speaker said he had not "per se."
"But it's an interesting avenue to look at though and I will
take a look at that. I don't know exactly how you would
structure that and how we would identify these services, but
there may be something there," Mariano said.
Five years ago, when state tax revenues were falling short
of expectations and budget writers resorted to one-time
revenues to balance the budget, then-Senate President
Stanley Rosenberg floated the idea of a sales tax on
services to better capture what is happening in a state
economy that's largely driven by services. Since then, the
idea that's deeply unpopular with the business sector has
seldom surfaced on Beacon Hill.
"As you may remember, we had a service tax in Massachusetts
and it didn't last long," Rosenberg said in 2017, alluding
to a state sales tax on business and professional services
that was passed in late 1990 in the waning days of the
Dukakis administration but repealed by the incoming Weld
administration before it ever took effect. "So it's very
controversial, but our economy is even more reliant now than
it was then on services and it is certainly worth looking
at."
The last attempt in Massachusetts at establishing a sales
tax on services was the Legislature's short-lived 2013 law
subjecting certain computer services to the sales tax.
Lawmakers wound up repealing their so-called tech tax amid
an outcry from businesses.
Though the Legislature's involvement with it is complete, a
major tax policy proposal is in line to go before voters on
November's ballot. The proposed 4 percent surtax on annual
household income above $1 million is projected to bring in
about $1.3 billion a year that the proposal calls to be
spent on transportation and education.
State House News
Service
Monday, May 23, 2022
Surtax Opponents Warn Against Beacon Hill “Blank Check”
Opposition Campaign Forms, Accelerating Debate
By Colin A. Young
Opponents of the proposed surtax on household income over $1
million launched their campaign Monday morning to defeat the
Constitutional amendment on November's ballot, focusing on
the potential impact on small businesses and retirees as
well as the possibility that the Legislature treats the
estimated $1.3 billion in annual surtax revenue as a "blank
check."
The Coalition to Stop the Tax Hike Amendment, a group of
small businesses, chambers of commerce, some of the state's
most influential trade organizations, retirees and concerned
citizens, formally kicked off its anti-surtax efforts and
said its members have "united to communicate to voters the
damage this massive tax increase will have on our state's
economy."
"Proponents of the amendment claim that it will raise taxes
only on Massachusetts' highest earners, but in practice, it
will harm hardworking families across the state," Dan Cence,
a veteran lobbyist and political strategist and spokesperson
for the Coalition to Stop the Tax Hike Amendment, said.
"Massachusetts already has a budget surplus of billions of
dollars. We must work together to strengthen our economy and
ensure Massachusetts remains a place where small business
owners can thrive."
Massachusetts voters will be asked in November whether the
Massachusetts Constitution should be amended to impose a new
4 percent surtax on annual household income in excess of $1
million to raise money for education and transportation. The
change is proposed as a Constitutional amendment because the
state Constitution currently requires that a tax on income
be applied evenly to all residents.
If the surtax is approved, the first $1 million of household
income would still be taxed at the current 5 percent rate
and all household income above and beyond that first $1
million would be taxed at an effective rate of 9 percent.
Estimates put the annual revenue that could be generated by
the surtax at about $1.3 billion and supporters pitch the
idea as a way to provide a sustainable revenue source for
education and transportation without dipping further into
the pockets of most residents.
But the Coalition to Stop the Tax Hike Amendment and other
opponents have repeatedly highlighted how the so-called
millionaire's tax could affect people who might not
typically be thought of as millionaires, like small business
owners that file as pass-through entities for tax purposes
or people who plan to sell their company to support their
own retirement.
On its new website www.StopTheMATaxHike.com, the coalition
links to fact sheets targeted at two particular industries
-- real estate and construction -- with reasons those fields
should oppose the surtax ballot question.
"The Tax Hike Amendment is not just a tax on people making a
million dollars a year. It will also tax the nest eggs of
longtime homeowners and small business owners whose
retirement depends on their investments," the coalition
wrote on the fact sheets. "That is because, unlike federal
taxes, this amendment would treat one-time gains from
selling a home or business as regular income, pushing many
retirees and small business owners into the new higher tax
bracket, and nearly doubling their taxes."
Supporters of the surtax have said that concerns about its
effects on small business sales are overblown, pointing to a
March analysis from the left-leaning Massachusetts Budget
and Policy Center that said taxes would only be due on the
capital gain -- the increase in value over time -- rather
than the total price.
Rep. Jim O'Day, the House sponsor of the proposed
Constitutional amendment, last June rejected opponents'
claims that the surtax would unduly harm small businesses in
the Bay State by asserting that "businesses earning over a
million dollars, in my estimation, are not small
businesses."
In its launch Monday, the coalition also called attention to
the fact that while the amendment itself would require the
surtax revenue to be spent on transportation and education,
it would not necessarily lead to actual increases in
spending on transportation and education because future
Legislatures could stop appropriating money from other
revenue sources to those areas.
"As the former head of the MBTA, I know there is zero
guarantee that the money raised from this amendment will
increase education and transportation spending. Due to a
loophole in the amendment, 'subject to appropriation' means
legislators can take this money and use it for their own pet
projects -- it means giving Beacon Hill a blank check with
no accountability," Brian Shortsleeve, a former general
manager at the T who has since founded M33 Growth, said.
Lisa Alcock, a former public school teacher, echoed the same
sentiment in her comments on the coalition's website. She
said the amendment is "deceptive" and that "the politicians
who put this on the ballot are giving themselves a blank
check to redirect existing funding for education and
transportation to their own pet projects, with no
accountability."
Worcester City Councilor At-Large Khrystian King addressed
that line of criticism earlier this month when the Fair
Share for Massachusetts campaign officially launched its
pro-surtax effort.
"We know that the devil's in the details in how the money
will be used, we acknowledge that," he said.
A Fair Share for Massachusetts spokesman said the language
of the amendment is "an ironclad dedication that the funds
raised by this amendment must be spent on those two areas"
and that the campaign feels confident that the Legislature
-- which last summer voted 159-41 to put the question to
voters -- intends to increase spending on transportation and
education.
The Massachusetts High Technology Council, which was
successful in getting the 2018 version of the surtax
amendment tossed off the ballot, is leading a legal effort
to influence how the surtax question could be described to
voters when they get their ballot with a particular emphasis
on the potential that education and transportation spending
is not increased despite the surtax - decisions on spending
are made by the Legislature, which experiences turnover
every two years.
The Supreme Judicial Court this month heard arguments
related to the complaint that the surtax summary that
Attorney General Maura Healey has prepared for voters will
mislead them.
The suit seeks to have the SJC order that ballot materials
tell voters that "the Legislature could choose to reduce
funding on education and transportation from other sources
and replace it with the new surtax revenue because the
proposed amendment does not require otherwise."
The Coalition to Stop the Tax Hike Amendment is made up of:
126 Self Storage, Associated Industries of Massachusetts,
AlerisLife Inc., Ballast Lane Applications LLC, Boston Sword
and Tuna, Brandon Landscaping, David Kindred Homes Inc.,
Diversified Healthcare Trust, EFR Mechanical, IBC
Corporation, Industrial Logistics Properties Trust, M33
Growth, MA High Tech Council, MA Seafood Collaborative,
National Federation of Independent Businesses, Norfolk &
Dedham Group, North Central MA Chamber of Commerce, Office
Properties Income Trust, Optikos, Pioneer Institute, PR
Restaurants, Retailers Association of Massachusetts, Service
Properties Trust, Seven Hills Realty Trust, Sonesta
International Hotels Corporation, Springfield Chamber of
Commerce, The RMR Group, TravelCenters of America Inc.,
Trudeau Construction, Western MA Economic Development
Council, and Westside Finishing Co.
The Salem
News
Tuesday, May 24, 2022
Coalition forms to oppose millionaires' tax
By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter
A newly formed coalition of business groups launched a
campaign to defeat the proposed millionaires’ tax,
foreshadowing what could be a costly battle over the
proposed constitutional amendment ahead of the November
elections.
The Coalition to Stop the Tax Hike Amendment, which includes
business groups, chambers of commerce, hoteliers, developers
and “concerned citizens,” argues that the proposed 4% surtax
on the state’s top earners would be “one of the state’s
highest income tax increases in history,” affecting tens of
thousands of residents.
“Now, more than ever, is not the right time to raise income
taxes,” Dan Cence, the coalition’s spokesman, said in a
statement. “Proponents of the amendment claim that it will
raise taxes only on Massachusetts’ highest earners, but in
practice, it will harm hardworking families across the
state.”
The Fair Share Amendment, which was cleared for the ballot
by the state Legislature, will ask Massachusetts voters to
amend the state constitution to set a new 4% surtax on the
portion of an individual’s annual income over $1 million.
The money would be earmarked for transportation and
education projects.
Estimates suggest the new tax could drum up between $1.3
billion to $2 billion a year to improve schools, expand
child care, and fix crumbling roads and bridges.
But opponents argue the surtax would hurt businesses, drive
away the wealthy and put a drag on the state’s economy as it
recovers from the pandemic.
“There is nothing fair about subjecting small businesses who
serve as the backbone of the Massachusetts economy to a
constitutionally locked-in income tax increase,” said Chris
Carlozzi, state director of the Massachusetts chapter of the
National Federation of Independent Business, a member of the
coalition.
“Not only does the income tax hike reduce a pass-through
small business’ ability to reinvest in their operation and
their employees, but it also taxes the owner at a higher
rate when they seek to sell their business and retire,”
Carlozzi said.
Members of the coalition, which include Associated
Industries of Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Seafood
Collaborative, Retailers Association of Massachusetts, and
the Pioneer Institute, note that the state’s voters have
several times rejected proposals to replace the state’s flat
personal income tax with a graduated rate.
But supporters argue the state’s top earners can afford to
dig deeper into their pockets to help drum up much-needed
education and transportation funds.
The Raise Up Massachusetts coalition, a coalition of labor
unions, community and faith groups behind the referendum,
dismissed the newly formed opposition group and accused them
of distorting details of the proposed amendment.
“The super-rich got richer during the pandemic, and a small
number of them will say anything to keep from paying their
fair share to build a better future for Massachusetts
families,” said Steve Crawford, the coalition’s spokesman.
Crawford said claims by the group that the surtax would hurt
“pass-through” small businesses — where profits are passed
through to the owners’ personal tax filings and business
income is taxed at personal tax rates — “distorts” the
ability of business owners to write off costs by reinvesting
in their companies.
“The Fair Share Amendment is simple: If you earn less than a
million dollars in a year you won’t pay a penny more. Only
the very rich will pay a little extra,” he added. “And the
money raised is constitutionally required to be spent on
making our kids’ schools better and fixing our roads,
bridges, and transit.”
The referendum faces a challenge from a lawsuit filed by
Massachusetts High Technology Council and other opponents
who argue that backers of the surtax may try to mislead
voters by using an “inaccurate” summary of the referendum.
They say despite claims the money will be used for education
and transportation, lawmakers could divert the funds for
other purposes and voters should know that before they go to
the polls.
The outcome of the legal challenge is pending a ruling by
the state Supreme Judicial Court, which heard arguments in
the case about three weeks ago.
A similar millionaires’ tax referendum was set to appear on
the November 2018 ballot until the SJC ruled it
unconstitutional.
— Christian M. Wade covers
the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media
Group’s newspapers and websites.
State House News
Service
Friday, May 27, 2022
Baker Vetoes Immigrant License Access Bill
Voting, Verification Concerns Outlined In Veto Message
By Michael P. Norton
Gov. Charlie Baker on Friday vetoed a bill making immigrants
without legal status eligible to seek state-issued driver's
licenses, saying the Registry of Motor Vehicles, an agency
that he oversees, doesn't have the ability to verify the
identities of potential applicants.
Following years of advocacy for the bill, House and Senate
Democrats on Thursday enacted the legislation, which
supporters say will make the roads safer by granting access
to licenses for many undocumented immigrants who are already
living throughout the state.
Republican opposition to the bill was steady throughout its
journey through the Legislature, and officeholders and
candidates at the GOP convention last weekend in Springfield
sporadically and pointedly expressed their opposition to the
proposal.
In his veto message, Baker said the legislation
"significantly increases the risk that noncitizens will be
registered to vote," a possibility that bill supporters have
refuted. The governor said the bill "restricts the
Registry's ability to share citizenship information with
those entities responsible for ensuring that only citizens
register for and vote in our elections."
The bill cleared both branches with more than enough support
to override Baker's veto.
"Allowing parents to drive their kids to school, take them
to doctor's appointments or be in charge of carpooling to
take their kids to soccer, all without the concern they may
be separated if they are pulled over, will allow children of
undocumented immigrants to breathe and have a sigh of
relief," bill supporter Sen. Adam Gomez, a Springfield
Democrat, said earlier this month.
It will be up to the House to initiate a veto override, with
a two-thirds vote required in each branch to make the bill
law. Ana Vivas, a spokeswoman for Speaker Ron Mariano, said
the House plans to take its override vote on June 8.
The House voted 118-36 Thursday to accept the conference
committee report on the bill; the Senate vote was 32-8.
Under the bill (H 4805), expanded access to standard
driver's licenses would begin on July 1, 2023. Applicants
under the bill would need to provide proof of their
identity, date of birth and residency in Massachusetts.
The Boston
Globe
Friday, May 27, 2022
Governor Baker vetoes bill to give driver’s licenses to
undocumented residents
By Samantha J. Gross
One day after state legislators approved a bill to allow
undocumented immigrants to get driver’s licenses in
Massachusetts, Governor Charlie Baker vetoed the measure,
saying it poses a risk to election security.
In a letter rejecting the legislation late Friday afternoon,
Baker said the bill requires the Registry of Motor Vehicles
“to issue state credentials to people without the ability to
verify their identity” and “increases the risk that
noncitizens will be registered to vote.”
He also expressed concern that the identification wouldn’t
distinguish an undocumented person from a documented one.
“Consequently, a standard Massachusetts driver’s license
will no longer confirm that a person is who they say they
are,” Baker wrote.
The House and the Senate voted overwhelmingly to approve the
bill Thursday, supporting it 118-36 and 32-8, respectively.
Those margins were large enough to override Baker’s veto. A
two-thirds vote is required in each branch to override the
governor’s veto and make the bill law.
A spokesperson for Senate President Karen E. Spilka said the
chamber will override, but did not provide a date. The House
will override the veto during its next formal session on
June 8, according to a spokeswoman for House Speaker Ronald
J. Mariano.
In a tweet, Spilka called Baker’s veto “misguided” and said
her chamber looks forward to overriding it.
“We are a nation of immigrants,” she said. “We all benefit
from increased public safety. And everyone deserves to feel
safe and get to work, pick up children and be a part of
their communities without fear.”
If the bill becomes law, people without legal immigration
status could obtain a driver’s license by providing two
documents that prove their identity, such as a foreign
passport and birth certificate or a passport and a marriage
certificate. The new ID requirements would take effect on
July 1, 2023, after the next governor is elected.
In tweets Friday, Democrat gubernatorial candidates Attorney
General Maura Healey and state Senator Sonia Chang-Díaz said
they support the chambers in their presumptive override of
Baker’s veto.
“Advocates, legislators, and law enforcement have been
working to pass this bill for years, and we won’t give up
now. We will get this done for our immigrant community,”
Healey said.
Chang-Díaz said Baker’s veto is “nothing more than
fear-mongering.”
“Looking forward to overriding this veto,” she said.
Former state lawmaker Geoff Diehl and businessman Chris
Doughty, the state’s Republican gubernatorial candidates,
have each spoken against the legislation.
Massachusetts would join 16 other states and the District of
Columbia, which already allow undocumented people to receive
driver’s licenses, according to the National Conference of
State Legislatures.
The legislation, which the two-term Republican governor has
long opposed, has been backed by the attorney general, the
majority of the state’s sheriffs and district attorneys, and
the Massachusetts Major City Chiefs of Police.
Baker’s concerns over election security have been rejected
by Democratic leaders, including Secretary of State William
F. Galvin, the state’s top election official.
“The raising of the voting issue is a red herring,” Galvin
said in an interview Friday. “I am very committed to
election security, I always have been. I think this has been
exaggerated. This is about driving, not about voting.”
Advocates who have been pressing the issue of driver’s
licenses for decades expressed their disappointment in
Baker’s veto.
Kathy Henriquez Perlera, a 23-year-old consultant who
immigrated from El Salvador, volunteers for advocacy group
Cosecha Massachusetts. She said the veto was as upsetting as
it was empowering.
Henriquez Perlera, who is undocumented, said it’s satisfying
to know that her group and others have mobilized enough
voters to elect a legislature that overwhelmingly supports
their cause.
“We have done that work so well that we don’t need his
signature to pass it,” she said. “We knew from day one that
Governor Baker wasn’t on our side. We just had to do what we
needed to do.”
Lenita Reason of the Brazilian Worker Center and 32BJ SEIU
Vice President Roxana Rivera, cochairs of a coalition that
worked closely on the legislation, said in a joint statement
that “in his veto, the governor simply repeats claims that
have been disproven before.”
“We are confident that the majority of legislators from
across the state who initially supported the bill will not
be swayed by this veto and will swiftly vote to override,”
they said.
Elizabeth Sweet, the executive director of the Massachusetts
Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition, said her group
expects the legislature to “waste no time in overriding the
governor’s veto.”
“The policy would not only make our communities safer, but
benefit our economy and bolster trust between law
enforcement and immigrant communities,” she said.
The Boston
Herald
Wednesday, May 25, 2022
Race for governor must be about gas, crime and no baby
formula
By Peter Lucas
A big winner in last weekend’s Republican convention was a
Democrat.
That would be Attorney General Maura Healey, the two-term
progressive who is running for governor.
While the Republican convention overwhelmingly endorsed
Trump conservative Geoff Diehl for governor, he will be
challenged in the GOP primary by Wrentham moderate
businessman Chris Doughty.
Doughty qualified for the primary by getting almost twice
the necessary 15% of the delegate vote to appear on the
ballot.
This means that Diehl, a heavy primary favorite, will
nevertheless have to expend valuable time, money and energy
to deal with Doughty.
These are resources he hoped to use running against Healey,
who is expected to easily win the Democrat Party endorsement
at the party convention June 4 in Worcester.
Healey is being opposed by state Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz of
Boston, a fellow progressive.
Healey is expected to dominate the convention and in a
Democrat primary if one develops. Chang-Diaz would need to
win 15% of the convention vote to run in a primary.
So, if Diehl wins the GOP primary over fist time candidate
Doughty, as expected, he will face a well-funded Healey, who
may not even face a primary challenge.
Healey, who has scored a series of Democrat and progressive
endorsements — but has not heard from Joe Biden — has raised
close to $5 million in campaign funds.
This compares to the less than $400,000 that Diehl has
raised.
Doughty, a successful manufacturer, has put $500,000 of his
own fortune — and perhaps more to come — into his campaign,
which makes one wonder what his six children and four
grandchildren are thinking.
Still, Healey has easily raised more money than the two
Republicans combined, and you could throw in Chang-Diaz as
well, and the three do not come close to equaling the cash
Healey has on hand.
While the relatively unknown Doughty may outspend the
better-known Diehl, the GOP primary is not about money. It
is about political philosophy.
Diehl represents the Donald Trump conservatives who have
wrested control of the Massachusetts Republican Party away
from outgoing RINO moderate Gov. Charlie Baker. Hence the
endorsement.
Doughty, who voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016, is more
politically in tune with Baker, who did not even attend the
convention and who has not endorsed anybody for governor.
If the convention vote is any indication, Diehl should beat
Doughty in the primary. In 2018 Diehl beat out two other
Republicans for the U.S. Senate nomination only to lose to
Democrat Elizabeth Warren. So he is better known.
But that is only the beginning. There are only 459,663
registered Republicans in Massachusetts, compared to
1,494,990 registered Democrats. Diehl could win every
Republican primary vote and he would still be well behind
Healey, both in votes and in money.
However, there are 2,717,293 unenrolled voters, or
Independents, who normally do not vote in September
primaries. But they do vote in November.
Diehl is a longshot, for sure, even if he wins the primary.
But we live in strange, angry and anything-can-happen times.
Diehl needs to nationalize the election. With Trump at his
back, needs to make the election about Joe Biden, who Healey
supports, even as Biden has brought the country to its
knees.
Gas prices? Food costs? Crime? Drugs? Homelessness? Illegal
immigration? No baby formula? Empty shelves? Hate?
Divisiveness? Afghanistan? Joe Biden has failed on every
front.
Democrat election officials are now treating Biden as though
he had monkeypox.
Yes, Biden whipped Trump in Massachusetts in 2020 when
2,382, 202 people voted for him. He would not get that vote
today. Trump back then got 1,167,202 votes. Today he would
get those same votes and more.
Biden sold out his supporters to a bunch or radicals. Now
his disenchanted supporters — Democrats and Independents —
are deserting him. These are the people Diehl must go after
if he has any chance at all. They are out there; you just
have to get them.
— Peter Lucas is a veteran
Massachusetts political reporter and columnist.
The Boston
Herald
Saturday, May 28, 2022
Trump perfect political storm brewing in Massachusetts
By Joe Battenfeld
The perfect Donald Trump storm is brewing in Massachusetts —
an unabashed conservative taking on the Democratic power
structure, a liberal candidate and the left-wing media.
So it’s no surprise Trump is considering making an
appearance for gubernatorial candidate Geoff Diehl’s
campaign.
A Trump rally would take the Bay State gubernatorial race
national — which is just what Diehl wants — and shine a
spotlight on the former state rep and failed U.S. Senate
candidate.
It would also bring in cash, notoriety and of course plenty
of criticism in the establishment media and in the
Democratic party.
Democratic front-runner Attorney General Maura Healey is the
perfect Trump foil — she has sued the former president
dozens of times and at times seemed obsessed by him.
Healey has tried to hang the Trump label on Diehl and he
seems perfectly willing to embrace it.
Trump and Diehl would also be running against the state
Democratic Party establishment, including the super-liberal
Legislature, which has resisted passing tax cuts despite a
huge state surplus and just passed a bill allowing
non-citizen immigrants to get a drivers’ license.
No doubt the former president would also enjoy coming into
the home state of his Republican nemesis, Gov. Charlie
Baker. Trump has made it a point to slam Baker whenever he
can.
This scenario of course depends on Diehl actually winning
the primary against moderate underdog Chris Doughty. Diehl
will be the heavy favorite — he just won a vote of
Republican party delegates by a 70-30 point margin.
The question for Diehl is can he stitch together enough of a
coalition of staunch conservatives, veterans, law
enforcement, anti-vaxers and others to win the primary and
make it a contest against Healey or the other Democrat,
Sonia Chang-Diaz?
Trump may be able to help fire up conservatives — more than
a million of them voted for him in 2020 in Massachusetts —
but he’ll also energize Democrats, too.
Whether the former president makes an actual visit to the
Bay State is in question — he’s promised to do “something”
for Diehl but he may not want to invest too much time in a
race he’s likely to lose.
Trump would no doubt relish coming into the home state of
his frequent verbal sparring partner, U.S. Sen. Elizabeth
Warren.
|
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
|
