Common Cause
Mass. Voters for Clean Elections
Citizens for Limited Taxation
NEWS RELEASE
CLT ENDORSES A YES VOTE ON QUESTION 3
Limited Taxation group reverses course
and supports Clean Elections
Contact:
Pamela Wilmot, Common Cause (617) 426-9600
Joe O'Brien, Mass. Voters for Clean Elections (617) 451-5999
Barbara Anderson, CLT (508) 384-0100
BOSTON (Oct. 17, 2002) - Citizens for Limited Taxation (CLT)
has changed course and is endorsing Clean Elections, urging thousands of its members to vote Yes on Question 3,
Common Cause Massachusetts and Mass. Voters for Clean Elections announced today.
In its monthly newsletter, The Activist News, the group, led
by Barbara Anderson, urges its members to support Question 3.
In 1998, CLT was opposed to Clean Elections since it was
concerned that money would fund candidates with whom taxpayers may not agree. But four years later, after the
Legislature has stonewalled a law that was passed by a 2-to-1 margin in 1998,
the group is switching gears.
"We have changed our mind ... as we've seen how much the
Legislature hates this law and its encouragement for competition for their seats," the newsletter states.
"Question 3 is just the Legislature's cute attempt to change
the discussion from overall reform to just the funding mechanism and get voters to reverse their 1998 decision," the
newsletter continues.
The Legislature also has failed to implement a CLT-backed
tax rollback that was overwhelmingly passed in an initiative ballot in 2000.
Barbara Anderson, CLT's executive director, sees the
big-picture danger. "If the Legislature gets away with ignoring initiative petitions like the tax rollback and Clean Elections,
then citizens have no voice on Beacon Hill at all," she warns.
CLT's endorsement of a Yes vote on Question 3 appears in a
newsletter being mailed to more than 8,000 members statewide in the next week. It can be viewed now on line at
www.cltg.org or at http://www.cltg.org/cltg/actnews/an-02-10.pdf.
"We're very pleased to have a leading taxpayer watchdog
group like CLT in our corner," said Pam Wilmot, executive director of Common Cause of Massachusetts. "The message is
clear: Clean Elections is about increased competition for offices, more voter choice and
reducing the influence of the corporate special interests at the State House. A Yes vote on
Question 3 will save Clean Elections and clean up the mess on Beacon Hill."
"Question 3 isn't about taxpayer money funding elections -
and support from CLT demonstrates that fact," said Joe O'Brien, project director of Mass Voters for Clean
Elections. "Question 3 is about making politicians accountable; it's about leveling
the fund-raising playing field for all candidates; and, it's about getting big-money interests off of
Beacon Hill. That's why we need to Save Clean Elections by voting Yes on Question
3."
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Friday, October 18, 2002
Libertarians lash out at biz leaders over tax question
by Elisabeth J. Beardsley
Business leaders launched a concerted effort yesterday to
torpedo a ballot question abolishing the income tax - prompting the question's Libertarian backers to fire back with
accusations of special interest profiteering.
The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, the Greater Boston
Chamber of Commerce, the Massachusetts Business Roundtable and Associated Industries of Massachusetts all signed
onto the public statement of opposition.
The organizations predicted a "political and fiscal crisis
of unprecedented proportions" over the $23 billion state budget if voters approve getting rid of the $9 billion income tax
stream.
MTF President Michael Widmer, during a debate last night
with Libertarian gubernatorial candidate Carla Howell, said the ballot question would eviscerate schools, higher education
and public safety - while driving up property and sales taxes.
"This is far and away the most potentially destructive and
far-reaching initiative ever to be put on the ballot," Widmer said.
Howell, who shepherded the question onto the ballot and has
made it a centerpiece of her campaign, dismissed the dire predictions. "These claims are absolutely absurd," she said. If
approved, the question would return $3,000 apiece to each of the state's 3 million taxpayers
- pumping money into local economies and allowing people to save or spend as they wish,
she said.
Local schools, which collectively receive $4 billion per
year from the state, would be better off under the "responsibility and control" of parents, teachers and local
officials, Howell said.
Return to top
