The Springfield Union News
Wednesday, March 27, 2002
Romney touches base in WMass
By Dan Ring
SPRINGFIELD In his first appearance in Western Massachusetts
since announcing his candidacy for governor, W. Mitt Romney last night pledged to oppose any tax increases and
fight "mismanagement and waste" on Beacon Hill.
The Republican candidate for governor appeared at the
Springfield Marriott in front of about 75 delegates for the party's nominating convention on April 6 in Lowell. Romney this
week is holding similar receptions for GOP delegates from all regions of the state.
Acting Gov. Jane M. Swift eight days ago dropped out of the
governor's race, saying the prospects of a bruising Sept. 17 primary with Romney would leave her little time to deal with
the budget crisis and spend time with her family.
If elected governor, Romney said, he would work to protect
people from new or increased taxes.
"This is not the time to go to folks and say, 'Oh, we have
to raise your taxes,'" Romney told the crowd after he was introduced by Senate Minority Leader Brian P. Lees of East
Longmeadow.
Romney said that at this time he would not sign a "no new
taxes pledge" offered by the anti-tax group Citizens for Limited
Taxation. Swift and her two Republican predecessors in the corner office at the Statehouse did sign the pledge.
To solve the state's fiscal crisis, Romney said, he would
cut waste and patronage on Beacon Hill and manage the state better.
"I'm against tax increases," said Romney, who was credited
for making a success out of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City as president of the game's organizing committee. "I
do not support them. But I'm not intending to, at this stage, sign a document which would
prevent me from being able to look specifically at the revenue needs of the commonwealth."
Romney said he favors the voter-approved cut in the state's
5.3 percent income tax. He said he supports allowing the income tax to drop to 5 percent in January 2003 as scheduled
under a phased reduction in the tax passed by voters in November 2000.
In a phone interview after the reception, Senate President
Thomas F. Birmingham, D-Chelsea, one of five Democratic candidates for governor, criticized Romney's position on
taxes as too radical.
"He's pledged to implement the biggest tax cut in the
history of the state in the middle of a recession," Birmingham said. "That necessarily means he's prepared to jeopardize the
gains we've made in education and health care in order to forward an extreme position."
State government is facing a projected budget shortfall of
about $2 billion for the fiscal year that starts July 1. Birmingham favors freezing the income tax at 5.3 percent or
possibly putting it back at 5.6 percent to help erase the budget shortfall.
Other Democrats running for governor include businessman
Steven Grossman of Newton, former state Sen. Warren E. Tolman of Watertown, Treasurer Shannon P. O'Brien of
Whitman and former U.S. Secretary of Labor Robert B. Reich of Cambridge.
The winner will face Romney in the Nov. 5 general election.
Republican activists from Western Massachusetts cheered
Romney's entrance in the race, saying it gives the party an excellent shot at retaining the governor's office. Swift was
sagging in the polls, but a poll earlier this month by Suffolk University in Boston showed Romney
beating Birmingham, O'Brien and Reich.
"It's given the party a great big boost," said Elizabeth J.
Boulais of Springfield, a delegate at the GOP convention and retired craft-shop manager. "We see that we can win now."
Victor M. Anop, a lawyer and delegate from Chicopee, said
the Republicans are unified.
Return to top
The Salem Evening News
Monday, March 25, 2002
Editorial
Swift should reverse stand on tax rollback too
Back in 1990 when Bill Weld was first campaigning for
governor, Massachusetts voters had the opportunity to vote on another income tax rollback.
Those were difficult times for the commonwealth and voters
wisely rejected the initiative by a 58-39-percent margin. Weld supported the tax cut, but its defeat was the best thing that
could have happened to him as he struggled over the next few years to bring the state budget
back into balance.
Twelve years later as Weld's protege, Jane Swift, prepares
to leave the scene, she could perform a major service for the next governor, be it Mitt Romney or whichever Democrat is
nominated, by withdrawing her threatened veto of legislation that would freeze the tax
rollback approved two years ago.
Those too were very different times than the ones we are
experiencing today. Though there were faint signs of trouble ahead, the economy was still booming and revenues were running
well ahead of projections. So the question before voters in November of 2000 was not
whether to reduce services in order to give themselves a tax cut, but how to distribute all that
surplus money the state had in its coffers.
Two years later ... well, listen to what the Massachusetts
Taxpayers Association [sic] had to say in a release issued earlier this month: "The precipitous drop in underlying tax
revenues combined with the major cut in the income tax rate have propelled the state into a fiscal crisis
rivaling that of the late 1980s."
The nonprofit research organization estimates that "after
plummeting more than $1.8 billion in fiscal 2002, state revenues will remain flat in 2003 as gains from a projected
mild economic recovery are offset by the impact of tax cuts." Part of the blame rests with the income tax
rollback which cost the state an estimated $425 million in the current fiscal year,
according to the MTF's figures, and will cost it an additional $450 million in the fiscal year that begins July
1.
Meanwhile, as the local aid pot shrinks, municipal building
projects are put on hold, schools and public safety departments warn of layoffs, and mayors and selectmen look to wring
every last penny out of fees and property tax rates.
Don't let the Barbara Anderson types fool you. There's a
price to be paid for the income tax cut, and it will those who can least afford it the hardest.
Those taxes now being eyed as a last resort to fund
essential services -- the property tax, excise taxes, the cigarette tax -- are totally regressive. In other words, unlike
the income tax, the amount you pay has nothing to do with how much you make.
Meanwhile, the least fortunate among us will have to make do
with less and suffer more as holes begin to appear in the social welfare net.
"I'm really depressed at the thought of the cuts that will
be necessary," state Sen. Fred Berry, D-Peabody, a longtime champion of the state's disadvantaged, told us last week.
He's right when he says it takes courage to advocate for a
freeze in the tax rollback. But an increasing number of organizations, including MTF and Associated Industries of
Massachusetts, are getting behind the idea.
Berry feels a majority of his colleagues in both the House
and Senate would vote for a freeze -- if they didn't think a Swift veto would leave them hanging.
The acting governor insists that staying the course on the
income tax cut is the best strategy for turning the economy around, ignoring the fact that in the boom times of a few years
ago the tax rate was half a point higher than it is today.
Last week Swift said that eschewing a grueling re-election
campaign was the right thing for her family. Now she ought to do the right thing for her fellow citizens by reconsidering her
position on the tax rollback.
Return to top
