"It's good choreography," said Chip Ford, director
of operations at Citizens for Limited Taxation. "They're going to scare the bejesus out of the most
vocal organizations in the state, who depend on taxpayer funding. You fire up the pack."
The Boston Globe
Apr. 26, 2002
Budget time turns State House
into the best theater in town
More than 2,000 University of Massachusetts
students, faculty and supporters converged on the State House to protest tuition and fee hikes as well
as proposed funding cuts.
The Boston Herald
Apr. 26, 2002
Protesting UMass cuts,
students, staff show some class
"It's the busiest time of the semester, exams are
coming up, and I'd rather be playing Frisbee," said Ashley Pendergast, a junior from Turners Falls. "But
if we spend the day lobbying now, we have a better chance of getting into the classes we need in the
fall. Our legislators must hear our voices: Education is more important than tax cuts for the
wealthy."
A clueless UMass student protestor
From the "Save UMass" news release
"Save UMass rally at the State House"
Apr. 25, 2002
But the phrase the powerful House speaker detests is
one being attached more and more to his solution: artifice.
"Orchestration, that's all it is," said state Rep.
Bradley Jones (R-North Reading), an assistant minority leader in the House. "That speaker, he's a
crafty guy." ...
Insiders and outsiders say it's a classic Finneran
sleight of hand, a course charted weeks ago that will pan out - with high drama - over the coming
weeks at the State House.
The to-the-bone cuts in the House budget, once felt
locally, will force a speedy insistence on tax freezes and even tax hikes that, only months ago,
would have meant deep political trouble for lawmakers.
The Boston Herald
Apr. 26, 2002
It's a classic sleight of hand:
Finneran fans, foes say cuts are typical trick
The House budget released yesterday on Beacon Hill
employs what is known on Capitol Hill as the Washington Monument scenario. You know, if you want
to convince people the crisis is real - well, the first thing you do is shut down the Washington
Monument to tourists....
But to consider freezing the voter-mandated income
tax cuts (and make no mistake, a freeze is a tax hike and no amount of word parsing will disguise
that), or - even worse - to wipe out cuts already made, is to break trust with the voters of this
state.
A Boston Herald editorial
Apr. 26, 2002
Cuts vs. tax hikes: The choice is clear
"It's the busiest time of the semester, exams are coming up,
and I'd rather be playing Frisbee."
In an Apr. 10 Boston Herald report, House Speaker Tom Finneran even went so far as to say: "What
cynical person would suggest that? It's almost preposterous. I mean, I can't keep a
straight face."
If you're not cynical by now, either you're hopelessly gullible or have reached room temperature.
Call your legislators. Call Gov. Swift's office.
Please do it NOW.
The governor's phone number is: (617) 727-6250.
Find
and contact your state rep and senator
The Boston Globe
Friday, April 26, 2002
News Analysis
Budget time turns State House
into the best theater in town
By Yvonne Abraham
House Ways and Means Committee chairman John Rogers somberly
quoted Thomas Paine and talked of Hobson' s choice, sadly informing the people it truly tried his soul, but he had
no alternative bu to put together the most drastically austere budget the state has seen in a
decade.
"For these vulnerable populations," he said of those who
rely on the social services cut in the House budget, "it's inhumane. It's grim, and sad for me personally."
Meanwhile, hundreds of students swarmed Beacon Street
holding signs reading "Stop Cuts! Raise Revenues!" They fanned out in the State House, leaving potted African violets in
legislators' offices, asking them to save their colleges by blocking the huge reductions
proposed this year.
Legislators shook their heads, bracing for the inevitable
calls from worried constituents, asking them to do something to save their local schools. But what?
It was House budget day on Beacon Hill, and everybody played
their roles to perfection.
Of course, many in the State House knew yesterday's show was
strictly limited-run. The budget was abysmal news for just about everybody, but won't stay quite that bad for long.
Next week, legislators will set about collecting more money,
hundreds of millions of dollars more. That task will be made easier by yesterday's display of sadness and indignation.
On Tuesday, the House will begin debating how - not if -
they should increase taxes to take the sting out of the budget presented yesterday. Rogers, House Speaker Thomas
Finneran, and just about everybody else knows that once those tax increases
arrive, the budget won't hurt quite as much. The social services advocates know they won't get hit so badly after than.
They also know that the louder their outrage now, the more open the public will be to those
tax increases later. And the legislators know the draconian budget, and the outrage that has
immediately followed it, will give them a measure of cover as they prepare to perform this
most unpopular of legislative acts.
"It's good choreography," said Chip Ford, director of
operations at Citizens for Limited Taxation. "They're going to
scare the bejesus out of the most vocal organizations in the state, who depend on taxpayer funding. You fire up the pack."
And voila. Suddenly the state is ripe for a tax hike.
Rogers did not clutter yesterday' funereal proceedings with
much talk of income tax rollback freezes and cigarette tax increases. He said he thought it would be unfair for the House
to release a budget that included tax increases - "revenue enhancement options," in the
preferred parlance on Beacon Hill - and that it was important to show the people just how
dire a situation the state was in.
Others, including a member of his committee, thought it
might be as much a matter of strategy as of justice: If the House had proposed tax increases now, House leaders would have
been pilloried by constituents.
"It's a tactic," said Representative Philip Travis, a
Rehoboth Democrat who cast the only vote against sending the budget to the full House for consideration. "By doing a revenue
increase next week, the leadership leaves its responsibility. They leave it to the rank and file,
so we can take the hit on the amendments."
But the budget released yesterday is also the House's best
argument for a tax freeze or increase, said others.
"Many people have not understood just how desperate the
situation is," said Michael J. Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.
"This budget says what will happen if we don not consider
revenue enhancements," said Stephen E. Collins, executive director of the Massachusetts Human Services Coalition.
"Obviously, they are trying to prove the case for the need for revenues, and I think they've
made a very legitimate case."
For months, Finneran has ben preparing the state for
yesterday's sad news, and laying the groundwork for a tax increase.
Finneran was absent from yesterday's proceedings, but Rogers
echoed the sky-is-falling theme. "I'm sure there are those who think the House Ways and Means Committee is
engaging in scare tactics," Rogers said. "That is not the case. We're telling te
truth, and that's why it's scary. I'm scared about it too. I hope this budget is not the final act," he said. "In next
week's debate, we will have an opportunity to redefine ourselves."
Legislators will be helped in that endeavor by human service
advocates, who are determined to keep the proposed budget cuts in voters' faces until next week. They are staging a day of
"Raise the Revenue/Stop the Cuts" rallies on Tuesday, and expect about 3,000 protestors to
converge on the State House as the legislature takes up the tax issue.
That, too, will be part of the theater.
"We realize we have to give our representatives and senators
cover to vote for taxes in an election year," said one advocate yesterday. "I guess they would like to call it courage, but I
call it cover. We realize we're part of an elaborate dance here, and it's a dance we're willing
to partake in because we think revenues need to be raised to take care of this
situation."
Return to top
- A CLT BLAST FROM THE PAST
-
CLT Update
Thursday, January 3, 2002
Beacon Hill is put on notice
The strategy to "temporarily freeze" our income tax
rollback is beginning to surface: "Do nothing."
Our Legislature proved last year that it is a world-class expert at doing nothing, so they won't
need to even break a sweat; something else for which they have no peers.
They'll just sit back until the fiscal crisis becomes
white hot, then decree that there's no other solution now than to "temporarily freeze" our tax rollback.
The only alternative, of course, for them will then be tossing senior citizens out into the street, starving
"The Children," firing entire police and fire departments, and letting the "The Most Vulnerable
Among Us" die by the scores.
Remember this date: January 3, 2002. They have been
advised, warned, and put on notice: If "The Best Legislature Money Can Buy" acts now, there will be no
need to cry later that the sky is falling.
The longer they wait to act, the further they intentionally increase the suffering, for cheap
political gain.
- ANOTHER CLT BLAST FROM THE PAST -
CLT Update
Friday, March 15, 2002
House budget czar pledges no new taxes?
"'No one is talking about raising taxes,' House Ways
and Means Chairman John Rogers declared yesterday, a complete reversal of what he's been threatening for
weeks." - Associated Press
If this is true, just what was the purpose to the House "Revenue Working Group," that
recently held three dog-and-pony show "public hearings" across the state?
Did he and Speaker Finneran intend to just waste everyone's time?
And why did Speaker Finneran schedule April 29 to vote
on probable tax increases?
If you hadn't yet figured out what we're up against,
this should cement your appreciation.
On Feb. 27, Rep. Rogers sent a letter to his "colleagues" in the House of Representatives,
proposing sixteen tax increases. In it he unambiguously stated:
"With looming shortfalls in FY03, it is apparent that
deep spending cuts will only scratch the surface of the FY03 deficit. In addition to innovative non-tax
revenue ideas, we will have to consider sensible options for raising tax revenue."
Excuse me if we imagined that he was talking about raising taxes -- especially since he went
on to specifically detail those 16 tax increases or repeal of tax exemptions -- the whole point
of his letter.
Is there anyone who read his letter who didn't then
believe he was encouraging a host of tax increases ... anyone even among his "colleagues"?
He now says that he won't include new taxes "in the
House budget plan." Will he then propose tax increases elsewhere?
Or, does he figure that what he proposed are not "new"
tax increases, but instead the reinstatement of old taxes? Very Clintonesque, possibly.
Remember how "temporary" was later defined by those
who'd made the promise and those who were responsible for keeping it.
We have learned to parse words.
We have learned their game.
We didn't get this cynical without good cause.
But on the bright, positive side, perhaps he realizes
that the two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate needed to override the governor's promised veto just
is not there; that proposing tax increases as the economy begins to rebound will not fly.
And thanks to Acting Gov. Swift for standing fast on
her "no new taxes" pledge, forcing that two-thirds vote in the Legislature. Without it, there would not
be this public retreat, for whatever purpose.
Prepare for the upcoming onslaught of "blood on the
streets without tax increases" hysteria. I predict that's the game plan: cut where it hurts the most, as
usual: and they'll pour the blood, liberally.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Friday, April 26, 2002
Protesting UMass cuts, students, staff show some class
by Ed Hayward
Instead of trampling the flowerbeds, University of Massachusetts students delivered potted
plants to state representatives and senators yesterday during a demonstration
aimed at sparing campuses from deep budget cuts.
More than 2,000 University of Massachusetts students,
faculty and supporters converged on the State House to protest tuition and fee hikes as well as proposed funding cuts.
The protesters tied up traffic on Beacon Street, but
conducted an orderly demonstration in an effort to preserve higher-education funding at risk of being slashed by
legislative budget makers.
UMass-Amherst assistant art professor Max Page estimated
that 2,500 students and staff attended the rally, traveling to the State House in 50 buses.
As opposed to rowdy protest efforts in the past, a newly
formed coalition called SAVE UMass has tried more even-handed lobbying. More than a decade ago, angry students
trampled flowers during a Beacon Hill protest. This time, some students
carried flowers.
According to Page, UMass President William M. Bulger advised
the students, "Be purposeful. Be respectful. Be persuasive."
Professors at the Amherst campus were encouraged to excuse
absent students for the day.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Friday, April 26, 2002
It's a classic sleight of hand:
Finneran fans, foes say cuts are typical trick
Analysis/by David R. Guarino
Tom Finneran has a lot of words to describe the cuts he's
proposed to fill the state's yawning, $3 billion budget gap: severe, difficult, austere, painful.
Cops and firefighters, parks and pools, the homeless and the
elderly - none was spared.
But the phrase the powerful House speaker detests is one
being attached more and more to his solution: artifice.
"Orchestration, that's all it is," said state Rep. Bradley
Jones (R-North Reading), an assistant minority leader in the House. "That speaker, he's a crafty guy."
Within Finneran's own office suite, among his lieutenants
and on down to town halls around the state, few believe the frightful budget misery laid bare yesterday will stand.
Insiders and outsiders say it's a classic Finneran sleight
of hand, a course charted weeks ago that will pan out - with high drama - over the coming weeks at the State House.
The to-the-bone cuts in the House budget, once felt locally,
will force a speedy insistence on tax freezes and even tax hikes that, only months ago, would have meant deep political
trouble for lawmakers.
And once the public realizes they're losing the beat cop, a
favorite teacher or the local lifeguard, how could they get mad at the officials who raise taxes to save all three?
Finneran's critics said it's a political ploy to fend off
heat.
Supporters welcome it as "straight talk," another stroke of
political brilliance wrapped in Finneran's streetwise Mattapan style.
"It is helpful to dramatize the consequences because it
reflects reality," said Michael Widmer, president of the business-backed Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation.
That much, Finneran embraces.
A backbencher in the late 1980s, Finneran said his top goal
is to make sure the fiscal "mistakes" of that period aren't repeated. He was one of the lone voices arguing through the
lush 1990s that money should be set aside, not spent or squandered.
His actions often shrouded in secrecy, Finneran this year
hit the road and set the stage for the soap opera now playing out.
In newspaper tours, interviews and high-minded addresses,
Finneran said painful cuts were coming. He mailed about 6,000 reporters, pols and opinion leaders a video of his annual
state address, joined by a letter headed by his mantra of "Fair, Firm and Honest."
Shrewd? Maybe, Finneran said, but painfully necessary.
"I don't pretend that this is an inspirational campaign.
This is not Winston Churchill trying to rally the forces during the dark hour," he said. "All this is, is information and the
information is very clear."
Finneran, with House Ways and Means Chairman John Rogers by
his side, said the budget exercise is simple: These drastic cuts are the only way to make it work without new money.
"There's not a gimmick in it, there's not a trick in it,"
Finneran said. "There's no denial or avoidance of it."
Better yet, Finneran said, it works.
"This is the budget that we are prepared to live with, as
difficult as that might be for some constituencies or some cities and towns who will see reductions in some areas that
they always hope to see growth," he said.
Tact or not, the impact was immediate.
Students hit Beacon Street by the thousands and human
service advocates said 3,000 will gather under the Golden Dome on Tuesday. Mayors, selectmen and lawmakers were saying
the cuts were just too deep - that tax hikes are inevitable.
"We call it the Armageddon budget," said Fall River Mayor
Edward M. Lambert Jr., president of the Massachusetts Mayors Association.
"The public, as well as the legislators, need to see what
the choices are and this is one choice," Lambert said. "I hope, and pray, that no one up there sees this as an acceptable
choice."
Lambert led the state's mayors in pitching not just a freeze
of the income tax rate at the current 5.3 percent, but hiking it back to 5.95 percent.
Still, Republicans and advocates will argue Finneran is
playing games. He ignored acting Gov. Jane M. Swift's bid to cut payments from Lottery games and continues to insist on
spending half the cash from the national tobacco settlement, leaving $146 million untouched.
"We don't think its necessary to make the choice between taxes and cuts," said Kevin
Sullivan, Swift's secretary of administration and finance.
But Finneran and his lieutenants said the painful choices
just might rally the troops.
"The speaker and I are not engaged in scare tactics," Rogers
said. "We are telling the truth and that, perhaps, is scaring people."
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Friday, April 26, 2002
A Boston Herald editorial
Cuts vs. tax hikes: The choice is clear
The House budget released yesterday on Beacon Hill employs
what is known on Capitol Hill as the Washington Monument scenario. You know, if you want to convince people the crisis
is real - well, the first thing you do is shut down the Washington Monument to tourists.
That's not to say the revenue shortfall this year isn't
real. It is. Nearly a decade of profligate spending has certainly contributed to the problem, and to their credit House
Speaker Tom Finneran (D-Boston) and House Ways and Means Chairman John Rogers (D-Norwood)
are the first to admit that.
They admitted yesterday in a meeting with Herald editors and
reporters that some of the innovative, cost-cutting ideas put forth a decade ago by then-Gov. Bill Weld - ideas the
Legislature turned aside - are needed now. Things like making state employees bear a larger
share of their own health insurance premiums (20 percent instead of the current 15
percent; 30 percent for new hires) makes good sense.
Budget crises are a good time to do things that need to be
done anyway - however belatedly.
Certain Medicaid reforms also fall into that category. The
program remains the uncontrolled and thus far uncontrollable budget-buster. And yet nearly half of the projected $450
million in cuts would depend on federal waivers to change the rules of the game (increase co-pays
for services, reduce from 20 to 10 days the required "hold" on a nursing home bed for
someone sent to an acute care facility). That means it's a bit of a gamble, but one worth
taking.
Still, as much as Finneran insists that he will not be
responsible for the kind of "denial" budgeting the Legislature engaged in during the last recession (spending money it did not
have), it is difficult to determine how much of the $1.5 billion in proposed cuts are real.
Clearly some of the budget is designed with malice aforethought to bring advocates for
every conceivable interest group and cause screaming up to the State House demanding tax hikes
as the only alternative to these "draconian" cuts. (Again, draconian is always in the eye
of the beholder.)
But to consider freezing the voter-mandated income tax cuts
(and make no mistake, a freeze is a tax hike and no amount of word parsing will disguise that), or - even worse - to wipe out
cuts already made, is to break trust with the voters of this state.
Some spending cuts will hurt. Some are likely blatantly
unfair. It is not above the House leadership to use the budget crisis to settle scores - surely the severe cuts in the
judicial budget are not all on the merits.
But if the choice is between budget cuts that hurt some and
tax hikes that will hurt everyone in this state - and slow any chance for economic recovery - then cuts it should be.
