CLT Update
Wednesday, August 1, 2001
Anything to keep our tax
over-payment ... anything
"While the first year of the proposed pilot
would be funded from fiscal '01 surplus dollars, future years would be
paid for through surpluses and Medical Security Trust, [state Sen. Mark]
Montigny said."
Senate proposes its version of Paid Family Leave
SHNS - Aug. 1, 2001
"Under Montigny's and Senate President Thomas
Birmingham's proposal, 15 percent of the surplus would be diverted from the Stabilization Fund stream
and sent into an Open Space Acquisition Fund....
"Speaker Thomas Finneran recently announced a plan
to put even more money into the Stabilization Fund by raising its cap to 10 percent from the current
7.5 percent.
"Finneran wants to avoid an automatic tax cut that
will occur if the Stabilization Fund, now nearly $1.8 billion, exceeds its statutory bounds."
Senate proposes surplus-driven state fund
to pay of open space
SHNS - Jul. 31, 2001
Remember when these very same people proclaimed that the sky was falling, life as we knew it would
come to an end, in their usual knee-jerk reaction to our negligible tax rollback of the
11-year old "temporary" income tax hike?
Now they can't scramble fast enough to find new ways to spend our tax over-payment -- "their" surplus --
that's still pouring in!
Their arrogance is simply shameless.
Though CLT is not involved in Carla Howell's petition to abolish the state income tax, it's greedy grabs
like the Legislature is proposing that make it seem more and more like a great idea. Heck, anything
TEAM's Jimmy St. George calls "a stupid idea" has to make a thoughtful taxpayer at least
consider it!
 |
|
Chip Ford |
PS. Anyone interested in helping to collect signatures or working
on this initiative can contact its sponsors and volunteer through Carla
Howell's website.
State House News Service
Wednesday, August 1, 2001
Senate proposes its version of Paid Family Leave
Senate leaders are offering a three-year, $210 million pilot
program for paid family leave, Senate Ways and Means Chairman Mark Montigny told the News Service Wednesday
morning.
The plan, contained in a $278 million capital supplemental
budget to be released this morning, relies on $70 million worth of fiscal 2001 surplus funds to allow men and women to
take up to 12 weeks off work, with pay, to care for a newborn or newly adopted child. The
so-called "baby UI" program would operate on financial principles similar to the
unemployment insurance program -- participants would be eligible to receive up to 50
percent of their average weekly salary.
While the first year of the proposed pilot would be funded
from fiscal '01 surplus dollars, future years would be paid for through surpluses and the Medical Security Trust, Montigny
said.
"We will forgo other tempting end-of-the-year programs to
put this forward," Montigny said. "We think it's a huge missing piece of keeping families together."
House Speaker Thomas Finneran has offered a paid leave
proposal that relies on tax credits to private employers, and Acting Gov. Jane Swift has said she's mulling the various
options.
Also, US Sen. Ted Kennedy announced this week that he'll
lead a ballot campaign to provide paid leave through mandatory employer contributions.
The Senate is slated to debate the entire supplemental
budget during a formal session Thursday. In addition to filling year-end deficiencies in various state government accounts,
the budget bill includes monies for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund (which the House
originally tried to axe, then reversed course and funded), an open space preservation
proposal announced Tuesday, a "major debt defeasance" plan, and a provision to boost the
Stabilization Fund's cap to 10 percent of budgeted revenues, from the current 7.5 percent.
Now that the Senate is on board with the "Rainy Day Fund"
cap increase, it appears likely to become law, given that Speaker Finneran has been pushing the proposal and it's
included in the House version of the budget.
State House News Service
Tuesday, July 31, 2001
Senate proposes surplus-driven state fund
to pay of open space
Fifteen percent of annual, unspent surplus revenues would be dedicated to open space
preservation, under a new plan announced Tuesday by Senate leaders.
Senate Ways and Means Chairman Mark Montigny (D-New Bedford) is pushing the plan,
which will be released from his committee Wednesday as part of a capital supplemental
budget.
Under current law, any money left over from one fiscal year that's not spent by the end of
August becomes a "statutory surplus." Of that surplus, 60 percent goes into the
Stabilization Fund and 40 percent goes into the Capital Projects Fund.
Under Montigny's and Senate President Thomas Birmingham's proposal, 15 percent of the
surplus would be diverted from the Stabilization Fund stream and sent into an Open Space
Acquisition Fund.
"Once we lose a parcel of open space ... it's gone forever," Birmingham said.
Had the plan been in place the last five fiscal years, $172.4 million could have been raised for
the purchase of 40,000 acres, Montigny said.
The Senate will debate the proposal during Thursday's formal session. Its fate in the House is
unclear. Speaker Thomas Finneran recently announced a plan to put even more money into
the Stabilization Fund by raising its cap to 10 percent from the current 7.5 percent.
Finneran wants to avoid an automatic tax cut that will occur if the Stabilization Fund, now
nearly $1.8 billion, exceeds its statutory bounds.
Birmingham today said raising the cap is a "good idea." The fiscal 2001 surplus is estimated
around $600 million, but lawmakers will undoubtedly spend some chunk of that in
supplemental budgets over the next month.
Associated Press
Tuesday, July 31, 2001
Proposed ballot question would abolish state income tax
By Steve Leblanc
BOSTON (AP) Massachusetts voters last year gave themselves the largest tax cut in state
history. Now some anti-tax activists are saying that's not enough.
A proposed ballot question being pushed by former Libertarian U.S. Senate candidate Carla
Howell would abolish the state income tax altogether.
Howell says ending the income tax would deny the state about $9 billion a year.
"Massachusetts' government is too big and Massachusetts taxes are too high. That's why
most people call our state Taxachusetts," Howell said. "We're going to take the income tax
out of Massachusetts."
Next year's proposed state budget is nearly $23 billion. A $9 billion cut would drop it to
about $14 billion. That's close to the level of spending in 1990, when the state budget was
$13.3 billion.
Howell submitted the question to the attorney general's office on Tuesday, the first step to
putting it on the ballot.
If the question is deemed constitutional, and if supporters get the 57,100 signatures needed,
the question could appear on next year's ballot.
Opponents vow to fight the measure, saying it would be a devastating blow to services in
Massachusetts.
"It's a really stupid idea. The income tax is the way we fund our schools, our police and fire
departments and health care programs for the elderly," said James St. George of the
Tax Equity Alliance of Massachusetts, which battled last year's tax cut question.
"If you get rid of the income tax, you have to get rid of much of (those services)," he said.
"This just goes to far. It is an absurd proposal."
Howell called the proposal a "bold first step toward small government."
"We know it's a long shot, but we have a chance," she said.
The measure would bar taxes on income, interest, dividends and capital gains. If it passes,
the average family could save about $2,000 on taxes each year, supporters said.
Last year, Massachusetts voters overwhelmingly approved the largest tax cut in state history.
The $1.4 billion cut lowers the income tax rate to 5 percent over three years.
Supporters, including former Gov. Paul Cellucci, raised about $1.36 million to push the
measure, while opponents led by the state's largest teachers union spent about $3.5 million to
fight it.
The question passed by a 59 to 41 percent margin.
Howell, a Libertarian, got about 12 percent of the vote last year in a three-way contest
against Democratic U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy and Republican candidate Jack E.
Robinson.
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