[State Sen. Steven A.] Tolman said that, even in losing,
opponents can point to some positive signs in the outcome of the ballot fight.
"A tax cut on the face of it is very attractive to
people. But don't forget ... more than 40 percent said no [to it], that they'd prefer to invest in
Massachusetts than to take the meager tax" offered to middle-class people.
"For us to get even 40 percent, I think we did OK," Tolman said.
The Boston Globe [Globe West edition]
Sun., Dec. 17, 2000
[story below]
When in debate, our opponents inevitably say they don't
mind paying higher taxes, and I say, 'Well, then pay for them. No one is stopping you,' the response of our
opponents is always one of shock. [Barbara Anderson]
"Since they find it so shocking that we suggest they just write a check to their state, local or federal
government, we thought we'd make it easier for them."
The Boston Globe [NorthWeekly edition]
Sun., Dec. 17, 2000
[story below]
"For us to get even 40 percent, I think we did OK"? If our rollback side got only 40 percent, I'd sure not
think we did okay, would you? If Sen. Tolman had an opponent running for his seat and Sen. Tolman got
only 40 percent of the vote, would he still feel he did "okay"?
Senator, your Gimme Lobby lost in a landslide ... it got hammered and for that I feel okay and then some!
You should feel really okay that we're offering you the opportunity to reach out to that "okay" 41 percent
who want higher taxes. Surely they'll leap at a chance to contribute more to your favorite programs.
Take advantage of our creative proposal; invite your "okay 41 percent" to continue paying the tax rate they
said they don't mind paying. When all that additional revenue pours in, you can again "invest in
Massachusetts" as you've been doing for a decade, spending more and more and more "taking care of
our most vulnerable" ... and don't forget all those "unmet needs."
Will it work? "Time will tell," Senator, "time will tell."
For once, everyone can be a winner. Winners, not whiners: It doesn't get any better than this!
 |
|
Chip Ford |
The Boston Globe
Sunday, December 17, 2000
North Weekly
The Political Trail
By John Laidler
Globe Correspondent
Taking a poke at foes of Question 4
It is not every day that Citizens for Limited Taxation
executive director Barbara Anderson is involved in an effort to help residents pay more taxes.
But Anderson, of Marblehead, has been doing just that in
promoting a recent legislative plan by her group. The CLT initiative would provide a simple way for people, who so
desired, to pay their income tax each year at the higher tax rates that would have existed had Question 4, the
tax rollback, not passed in November. The resident could exercise that option
by filling in a box that would be included on all state income tax forms.
Anderson conceded that the proposal is at least in part
intended as a poke at foes of Question 4. "There's a certain element of that," she said. "But it would permanently address
something we've noticed in over 20 years of being taxpayer advocates. When in debate, our opponents
inevitably say they don't mind paying higher taxes, and I say, 'Well, then pay for
them. No one is stopping you,' the response of our opponents is always one of shock.
"Since they find it so shocking that we suggest they just
write a check to their state, local or federal government, we thought we'd make it easier for them."
The Boston Globe
Sunday, December 17, 2000
Globe West
Political Notebooks
By John Laidler
Globe Correspondent
State Senator Steven A. Tolman says he has no regrets about
the active role he played in opposition to Question 4, the ballot measure to roll back the state's income taxes.
The Brighton Democrat, whose district includes Watertown and
part of Waltham, was among the more outspoken lawmakers in the unsuccessful fight against the tax rollback championed by
Governor Paul Cellucci. He was also a vocal foe of Question 6, which would have provided a
tax deduction for tolls and excise taxes. That measure failed.
"I'm glad I took the stand," Tolman said of his efforts
against Question 4. "I'm glad I worked as hard as I worked."
Tolman, who ran unopposed for a second term this fall, said
"time will tell" whether his opposition to a ballot measure supported by a majority of voters will cost him any political
support. But he said he remains convinced he did the right thing.
"When I took my oath, I took it with a fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayers of
Massachusetts," said Tolman, the brother of Warren E. Tolman, a former state senator and
possible 2002 gubernatorial candidate. "And [Queston 4] is a reckless course, because there
are no safeguards in giving back this rebate. ... To arbitrarily say in the best economic times
that things are going to stay this way, I think we are risking the stability we have in state
government."
He said the rollback will also undermine the state's efforts
to tackle many of the problems that the public has said it wants addressed. "In the first year, only $300 million [is
cut]," he said. "In the second year, $600 million. We could probably absorb that if the economy stays the way it
is. But in the third year, $1.2 billion comes out of the budget. Where do
you cut? You know you're going to lose programs" -- including those affecting the blind, schoolchildren, the elderly,
and hospitals.
"I think we should be investing in those programs," Tolman
said. "How many nursing homes do we know that have closed? I can think of a half-dozen at the top of my head. This isn't
taking care of our most vulnerable."
Referring to Cellucci, Tolman said, "The same guy that is
telling us [Question 4] is not going to impact any programs is the same guy that told us the Big Dig is on time and on
budget."
Tolman said that, even in losing, opponents can point to
some positive signs in the outcome of the ballot fight.
"A tax cut on the face of it is very attractive to people.
But don't forget ... more than 40 percent said no [to it], that they'd prefer to invest in Massachusetts than to take the
meager tax" offered to middle-class people. "For us to get even 40 percent, I think we did OK," Tolman said.
[...]
Residents who want to forgo the state tax cut recently
approved by voters should have the ability to do so, in the view of one area legislator.
Republican state Senator Jo Ann Sprague of Walpole is chief
sponsor of a measure proposed by Citizens for Limited Taxation in the wake of voter approval of Question 4, the tax rollback.
According to Sprague, whose district includes Medfield, her bill would provide a simple way
for people to pay their income tax at the higher rates that would have applied had Question 4
not passed. A resident could exercise that option by filling in a box that would be included on
all state income-tax forms. A similar measure has been filed by House GOP leader Francis L.
Marini of Hanson.
The income tax, currently at 5.85 percent, is slated to fall
to 5.6 percent next year under Question 4. It would then fall to 5.3 percent in 2002 and 5 percent in 2003. Had Question 4
been defeated, the tax would have fallen to 5.8 percent next year and to 5.75 percent in 2002.
Although Barbara Anderson, director of Citizens for Limited
Taxation, said last week that the proposal was intended at least in part as a poke at foes of Question 4, Sprague last
week said she did not view it that way.
"The reason I signed on to this is because I think basically
it's an excellent idea. ... It's a step closer to a government of and by the people," said Sprague, who was a strong backer of
Question 4.