CITIZENS   FOR  LIMITED  TAXATION  &  GOVERNMENT
and the
Citizens Economic Research Foundation

 

CLT UPDATE
Friday, June 7, 2002

MTF calls for bigger tax increase


Some Democratic senators, saying that a proposed $1.2 billion tax and fee package doesn't go far enough to shore up state finances, are backing a move to raise more taxes by increasing the state income tax from 5.3 percent to 5.6 percent.

State Senator Frederick E. Berry, vice chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, has filed a budget amendment that would generate an estimated $210 million in the next fiscal year by hiking the income tax effective next month. His amendment would direct all of that cash to the state's rainy day fund, ensuring that the state will have adequate reserves in future years even if the economy does not recover quickly....

Taxation Committee chairman Marian Walsh is also filing a budget amendment that would subject alcoholic beverages to the sales tax.... "It's a very helpful, common-sense approach," said Walsh, a West Roxbury Democrat who is also supporting the move to increase the income tax....

The taxes were part of a budget proposal that - despite a slowdown that's been described as a fiscal crisis - would boost spending $332 million over this year in the fiscal year that begins July 1. That's $200 million more than the proposed spending plan for fiscal 2003 approved by the House last month....

"It's raining right now, and you can't hit the taxpayers over and over and over again with new taxes," said [Sen. Brian] Lees, an East Longmeadow Republican. "The only thing coming out of the Democrat camps is more fees and taxes. It's mind-boggling." ...

Michael J. Widmer, president of the nonpartisan Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, said he supports Berry's idea of using a tax increase to replenish reserves.

The Boston Globe
Jun. 7, 2002
Some eye hike in income tax rate
Democrats cite rainy day fund


The increases are among dozens of fee hikes strewn throughout budget proposals by the Massachusetts House and Senate.

Faced with what Democratic leaders say is a $2.7 billion spending gap for the new fiscal year that begins July 1, lawmakers are scrambling for ways to balance spending cuts with higher revenues.

Associated Press
Jun. 7, 2002
Fee hikes run gamut to grave


State Sen. Steven A. Baddour, D-Methuen, said he won't be able to support the budget because it comes with a $1.2 billion tax package he opposes.

The Lawrence Eagle Tribune
Thursday, June 6, 2002
Health, education are budget priorities 
By Jennifer D. Jordan


Chip Ford's CLT Commentary

You've got to love that so-called Mass. Taxpayers Foundation at least for its consistency. It hasn't met a tax increase it doesn't like -- unless, of course, it affects the Fat Cat business community, their membership.

MTF created the "fiscal crisis" atmosphere, then coined the term "blended approach" that's so popular today on Beacon Hill. MTF didn't count on losing its beloved capital gains tax cut, but I suppose that was merely collateral damage. Perhaps the Fat Cats who pay Mike Widmer's salary don't mind losing it, along with the Charitable Deductions ballot question some of his members championed and won.

Perhaps they'll continue to fund Michael Widmer and the so-called Mass. Taxpayers Foundation, but if they do, it does call into question their business acumen.

As far as Widmer and MTF are concerned, more is never enough stashed away in the state's rainy day slush fund -- even if it means taxing the average taxpayer back into the Stone Age.

Let's look at the history of this:

When we were fighting to get the Legislature to keep its promise and roll back the "temporary" income tax hike, when excess revenue was pouring in, MTF insisted they have to instead stash ever-increasing billions into the rainy day fund, for "the inevitable economic downturn."

A burp in the economy and suddenly the state had reached a "fiscal crisis" as defined in advance by MTF.

But then, MTF advised that the rainy day fund not be spent, that we need a "blended approach" of spending cuts and tax increases.

The MTF also has for years half-heartedly suggested budget cuts, but those have been ignored.

So the Senate now proposes in its budget released on Wednesday that the Legislature spend $332 million more than last year's budget.

Now MTF supports an additional tax increase -- from the 5.3 percent "temporary freeze" of the income tax rate proposed by the House to a whopping 5.6 percent tax rate -- to "replenish" the rainy day fund that was allegedly intended to get the state through an eventual economic slowdown.

In the middle of a slowdown that the billions were supposed to mollify.

Are we getting the picture yet?

I think we are.

More Is Never Enough (MINE) ... when it's coming out of our pockets and going into theirs.

Chip Ford

FIND AND CALL YOUR STATE SENATOR


The Boston Globe
Friday, June 7, 2002

Some eye hike in income tax rate
Democrats cite rainy day fund

By Rick Klein
Globe Staff

Some Democratic senators, saying that a proposed $1.2 billion tax and fee package doesn't go far enough to shore up state finances, are backing a move to raise more taxes by increasing the state income tax from 5.3 percent to 5.6 percent.

State Senator Frederick E. Berry, vice chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, has filed a budget amendment that would generate an estimated $210 million in the next fiscal year by hiking the income tax effective next month. His amendment would direct all of that cash to the state's rainy day fund, ensuring that the state will have adequate reserves in future years even if the economy does not recover quickly.

"It's the fiscally responsible thing to do," said Berry, a Peabody Democrat and the Senate's longest-serving member. "There's no sun on the horizon. All we have is clouds. It's time to build the ark."

Berry has six cosponsors for his amendment and said he has the support of a majority of the 40-member Senate, though he acknowledged that it will be difficult to find two-thirds support - the threshold needed to override a gubernatorial veto. Swift has said she would veto any significant tax increases. The Senate's $23.2 billion budget plan will be debated and approved next week.

Senate President Thomas F. Birmingham has expressed support for a 5.6 percent income tax. But his spokeswoman said he has not decided if he will support the amendment. Senate Ways and Means chairman Mark C. Montigny said the idea is worth debating on the Senate floor, but so far he has not taken a position on Berry's amendment.

Taxation Committee chairman Marian Walsh is also filing a budget amendment that would subject alcoholic beverages to the sales tax. Such a move would generate about $57 million a year, and Walsh wants the money earmarked for homeless shelters and to treat drug addiction and alcoholism.

"It's a very helpful, common-sense approach," said Walsh, a West Roxbury Democrat who is also supporting the move to increase the income tax.

Senate Minority Leader Brian P. Lees said he'd be "surprised and very angry" if any of the body's six Republicans backed any move for more taxes. He said Democrats have lost touch with voters if they think it's a good idea to pile on more taxes to sock away money for the future.

"It's raining right now, and you can't hit the taxpayers over and over and over again with new taxes," said Lees, an East Longmeadow Republican. "The only thing coming out of the Democrat camps is more fees and taxes. It's mind-boggling."

The Senate Ways and Means Committee on Wednesday proposed more than $1.2 billion in new taxes and fees, including a freeze of the voter-approved income tax rollback, increased taxes on capital gains and cigarettes, and hikes in various court and Department of Environmental Protection fees.

The taxes were part of a budget proposal that - despite a slowdown that's been described as a fiscal crisis - would boost spending $332 million over this year in the fiscal year that begins July 1. That's $200 million more than the proposed spending plan for fiscal 2003 approved by the House last month.

Still, senators will be pressured to spend even more in the budget by a variety of special interest groups, especially if they raise additional taxes. Clergy representatives were at the State House yesterday asking lawmakers to boost spending on programs for at-risk youth and home care for the elderly.

"Our safety net is starting to become very weak, and the holes are beginning to show through," said the Rev. Richard Richardson, chairman of the political affairs committee of the Black Ministerial Alliance. "There's room for revenue enhancements without really hitting the taxpayers."

Michael J. Widmer, president of the nonpartisan Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, said he supports Berry's idea of using a tax increase to replenish reserves. But he questioned approving more spending.

"If anything, the Senate budget needs to shave spending, not add to it," Widmer said.

Return to top


Associated Press
Friday, June 7, 2002

Fee hikes run gamut to grave
By Steve LeBlanc

BOSTON -- Divorce could get more expensive in Massachusetts if state lawmakers get their way.

So could the cost of a nursing home bed, a speeding ticket, a driver's license, a felony conviction and the fee for filing a will.

The increases are among dozens of fee hikes strewn throughout budget proposals by the Massachusetts House and Senate.

Faced with what Democratic leaders say is a $2.7 billion spending gap for the new fiscal year that begins July 1, lawmakers are scrambling for ways to balance spending cuts with higher revenues.

The House has already overwhelmingly approved a $1 billion tax package, including a freeze of the state income tax rollback and a 75 cents hike on a pack of cigarettes. Senate Democrats say they also have enough support for the package to override a veto by Republican Gov. Jane M. Swift.

The fee hikes touch on a wide range of activities, from the cost of the care of a burial lot to the fee for filing a change of residence with the Registry of Deeds.

The most controversial new fee would charge nursing homes $9 a day per bed, or about $3,300 per year.

Supporters say the fee will allow the state to tap into about $145 million in federal matching funds and will aid nursing homes with higher numbers of Medicaid residents.

Private nursing homes say the move will drive up their costs.

Lucy Corsini, a resident of a private nursing home in Natick, said she worked and saved for 44 years and shouldn't be penalized by the new fee.

"I didn't inherit any money from anyone," said Corsini, 87.

The House and Senate do not agree on all proposed fee hikes.

The House budget, approved last month, would boost the cost of a Massachusetts driver's license from $33.40 to $40, and a car registration from $30 to $36. The registration fee could generate $23.4 million. The higher license fee would pull in $5.9 million more.

The Senate budget does not include those hikes.

The House and Senate do agree on some higher fees, including boosting the cost of a speeding ticket from $25 to $30, which would generate $1 million; and charging lawyers a higher application fee to the Massachusetts bar, from $275 to $385.

Senate Ways and Means Chairman Mark Montigny, D-New Bedford, defended the fee hikes, saying some fees had not been increased in decades.

"We tried to raise fees minimally and look at areas where there was truly a gap between fees and services," he said.

Many of the proposed fee hikes are in the judiciary, including the court costs for an adult convicted of a misdemeanor ($35 to $50), the fee for filing a civil restraining order ($50 to $75), and the cost of filing a will for safe keeping ($40 to $56).

Critics fault the Senate leaders for proposing new court fees while at the same time making deep cuts to the judiciary, including a 6 percent cut for district courts.

"We'd like to see any new revenues generated from the court system be put back into the courts," said Martin Healy, general counsel for the Massachusetts Bar Association. "We're always concerned when court fees are raised. In some instances you may be denying access to the courts."

Montigny said the court fees are fair.

"When you are running a very expensive system like the courts, those who are filing complaints or being called before the court ought to be paying higher user fees," he said.

The Senate is scheduled to begin debate on the budget next week.

Return to top


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


Return to CLT Updates page

Return to CLT home page