A PROMISE TO KEEP: 5%
A Ballot Committee of
Citizens for Limited Taxation & Government
PO Box 408 * Peabody, MA 01960
Phone:(617) 248-0022 * E-Mail: cltg@cltg.org
Visit our web-page at: http://cltg.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------

*** Promise Update ***
Tuesday, January 20, 1998

The (Quincy) Patriot Ledger
Sat., Jan. 17, 1998

(Reprinted in The Salem Evening News and The Attleboro Sun-Chronicle)
Fooling the People; Finneran Gives It His Best
BY BARBARA ANDERSON

Never have so many—politicians, media, the general public
· been rolled so far by so few—one Thomas Finneran, Speaker of the Massachusetts House.

They roll, they swoon, they gush, they croon, they editorialize and rhapsodize, they elect him and respect him and never, ever suspect him; they eat rhetoric from his hand, lap grandiloquence from his plate, kiss the ground he walks on in the boots that they lick. And once having declared him the poster boy for fiscal conservatism, they defend this illusion forever.

I don’t blame Tom Finneran. Just because Abe Lincoln said you can’t fool all of the people all of the time is no reason not to give it your best shot. And if you pull it off, you get to be the first Speaker of the House with his own televised State of the State address, as though you’ve been elected by the people of Massachusetts instead of a few thousand voters in a corner of Boston.

How does he do it?! He spends years in the House voting for new taxes and giant new government programs like universal health care. During his tenure as Ways & Means Chairman he files changes in Proposition 2 ½ that would have dramatically increased property taxes were it not for Governor Weld’s veto.

At present, Finneran is pretty much alone is denying that the 1989 income tax increase, for which he voted, was temporary. He preaches fiscal restraint, insisting that the state must resist the urge to spend the surplus and irresponsibly increase the size of government, then refuses to cut the tax rate which allows that tempting surplus to lie around waiting to be spent. During his annual policy speech, from his defiant perch on top of the state’s broken promise, he continues to define himself as a fiscal conservative and basks in the applause of those who buy this outrageous act.

Those who would keep the government’s promise on the "temporary" tax are accused of "irrational exuberance" and their efforts dismissed as "background noise". And yet somehow, Finneran has managed to convince many otherwise intelligent people that letting taxpayers keep their own money would be an irresponsible expenditure. If we ever, as a commonwealth, agree that tax cuts are government expenditures, we are lost to both fiscal restraint and common sense.

Fiscal responsibility means never spending more than you have, period. It can’t possibly mean taking as much as you want from others so you can pay for everything you feel like doing. We would all agree that it is fiscally irresponsible to borrow money for operating expenses, as was done during the Dukakis years, but is it considered fiscally prudent if politicians steal the money instead of borrowing it?

Webster defines fiscal responsibility as "a trust, obligation or duty pertaining to public revenues". This doesn’t tell us much if we don’t carry a clear idea of what trust means, what an obligation is, what duty requires. Can we trust a government that promises us a tax increase will be temporary, then defends its decision to make it permanent even in times of revenue surplus? Does the state have an obligation to keep its fiscal word? Can a Speaker of the House have a duty to pretend a promise was never made?

This week, the Massachusetts Teachers Association is challenging the signatures of those voters who want the promised income tax rollback to be on the 1998 ballot so that they can define fiscal responsibility for themselves. The MTA’s four lawyers have served subpoenas to two-thirds of the city and town clerks of the commonwealth, demanding they haul their records to the state Ballot Law Commission in Boston. There they are made to wait for hours, even days, outside the hearing room where one by one their judgment on certifying voters is attacked. If the teachers union prevails, proponents of the tax rollback will have to go to Superior Court and subpoena the clerks again, to gain signatures that were not certified even though they are in the state central voter registry.

Then in June volunteers will have to collect additional signatures to place the rollback petition on the November ballot. Finally, after more than a year of extraordinary effort on the part of those who just want a promise kept, the voters will get their chance to define fiscal responsibility. It will be interesting to learn if Finneran and the other fiscally reprehensible will find a way to roll the voters too.
---------------------------------------------------------------

Barbara Anderson is co-director of Citizens for Limited Taxation and Government. Her [now syndicated] column appears bi-weekly.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
You can e-mail A Promise to Keep: 5% at --> cltg@cltg.org
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *