It could be one of the nastiest
political battles ever waged in Massachusetts, all of it over
whether taxpayers should get an extra buck or two a day.
The fight is between those who
want to roll back the state's income tax to 5 percent, down from its
current 5.85 percent, and those who think state lawmakers' plans to
drop it to 5.75 percent are enough. The final showdown will be the
Nov. 7 election, when citizens will cast their votes on a ballot
question.
Dollarwise, it would mean about
$320 extra a year for wage earners who make $50,000. New Hampshire
residents who work in the Bay State would also get the same tax cut.
Politically, it is already shaping
up as a vicious fight that will only get meaner as November
approaches. But some observers say it could also prove to be a
watershed moment in the political career of Gov. A. Paul Cellucci,
who has set the tax fight as his priority for the year.
Opponents, such as the liberal
labor-backed Tax Equity Alliance of Massachusetts, dismiss it as an
ill-advised cut that will translate into little more than "a
pizza a week" to taxpayers at a $1.4 billion expense to
schools, the poor and the elderly.
Meanwhile, the tax break's main
champion, the conservative group Citizens for Limited Taxation and
Government, uses words like "greedy", "buffoon",
and "transparent hypocrite" to describe TEAM.
Observers say the fight will test
Gov. Cellucci's ability to get his way in spite of a recalcitrant
Legislature, which thwarted his attempt's last year to reduce
education spending and has continually portrayed him as an
ineffectual leader.
"The governor is putting
himself on the line with this one," said state Rep. Brian S.
Dempsey, D-Haverhill, who was one of only five House members to vote
for a roll back last year. "I think there is a danger in that,
given the record of the vote which happened in the House and Senate
last year on the income tax issue. This will be a test of his
ability to communicate to the electorate."
Paul A. Melkonian, chairman of the
Roll Back Committee for the Republican State Committee, stops short
of calling the issue an all-or-nothing for the governor.
"Nobody wants a defeat. It's
a very important initiative to him," Mr. Melkonian said.
"He threw the gauntlet down, and it's down."
Being heard above the clamor of an
anticipated 10 other ballot questions will take some effort.
Campaigns to ban dog track racing and to allow Internet companies
access to cable television lines are expected to be pretty heated,
with both securing financial backing from private and non-profit
groups.
With Senate President Thomas F.
Birmingham, D-Chelsea, vowing to fight the proposal, and House
Speaker Thomas M. Finneran, D-Boston, remaining doubtful about
lowering the rate without doing the same to spending, it is likely
the issue is headed for the Nov. 7 referendum.
The Legislature has until the
first Wednesday in May to pass the petition into law. If it doesn't,
supporters need to collect an additional 9,517 signatures to have
the question put on the ballot in November.
But while other ballot propaganda
mills are months away from beginning their grinding, Gov. Cellucci
and the State Republican Committee have been off and running for
months, pushing an initiative they need to win.
Early on they partnered with CLT,
giving a needed boost to an organization that almost folded after
failing to get the required signatures two years ago to move the
petition forward. They dedicated web sites to the initiative, and a
few months back Gov. Cellucci came up with a $100,000 retainer to
hire a professional signature gathering company from Nevada to
insure his item got the needed 57,100 signatures by Dec. 31 to make
it before the Legislature. The move brought criticism from TEAM, who
claimed it tainted the citizen petition process.
How much the Republicans have
spent so far to get their way won't be know until Roll Back
Committee files financial disclosure forms this month with the
secretary of state.
Locally, other Republicans also
have been brought in to push the question, including Essex County
Sheriff Frank G. Cousins, and Republican fund-raiser and State
Committeewoman Dorothy P. Early of Haverhill, who organized the
governor's inaugural. State Rep. Kevin L. Finnegan, R-Newburyport,
also has been active in the campaign.
TEAM stymied CLT's petition two
years ago by questioning the validity of signatures. For their part,
TEAM charged supporters with putting children at risk by taking away
money that could be spent on fixing schools.
TEAM Executive Director James R.
St. George agrees the fight could get nastier, if for no other
reason than the fact the governor has made it so important.
"It's essentially his only
agenda item," Mr. St. George said. "He's had a pretty bad
first year, and he is trying to get off the mat.
"This is all he has
going," Mr. St. George added. "The problem is the
initiative he picked on here is one the public doesn't really want.
The question is who is going to be successful at defining the
message. If the message is: 'Give us a tax cut,' they're going to
win. If people hear that a tax cut has implications, that there is a
connection between taxes you pay and the quality of life, we're
going to win."
Keeping up with the governor's
fund-raising ability may be the most difficult part, he said.
"We're going to do everything
we can to stay as even as it gets," Mr. St. George said.
Gov. Cellucci argues the rate
reduction will help create between 20,000 and 50,000 jobs because it
will decrease the burden in small businesses. At the same time, it
will decrease labo costs, and make the state more attractive
to businesses looking to locate here.
With the state flush with money --
$3.2 billion in trust fund and rainy day accounts -- the state can
afford to keep its promise and pay for programs, supporters say.
They point to a national study done recently by the Center for
Budget and Policy, a liberal think tank in Washington, D.C., which
found Massachusetts was one of eight states that could weather a
recession.
Opponents say it would hurt state
spending making it impossible to fix schools and bridges in good
economic times. They also point to $1.3 billion in taxes slashed
over the past two years.
While a supporter, Rep. Dempsey
said he does see momentum being the biggest problem for the
governor. There is not an urgency among voters on the issue, he
said.
"People aren't angry because
of the economy and that hurts their cause at this time," he
said. "I think it will be a battle. I honestly don't think it
is the top third or fourth priority in the electorate's mind. I hear
more about education and health care."
Rep. Dempsey thinks the state can
do both -- keep its promise to reduce the rate and also deal with
education and public safety.
"I think there is a danger in
having too much money in government. Now we run into a situation
where we can't pass a budget and new things are being created all
the time," he said. "We're going to have programs that
have been funded that people are going to expect us to continue to
fund."
Meanwhile, Mr. St. George said his
group is gearing up for its own campaign. It is rebuilding the
grassroots coalition from two years ago, including community,
housing and religious organizations and business people.
"It's going to be a big
campaign," Mr. St. George said. "That would be the
technical description."
The key will be to fill in the
gap, and let people realize it's not just a tax cut, he said.
"It's going to cost you. You
save in taxes, but when it comes to schools and public safety you're
going to pay," he said.
Barbara Anderson, CLT's executive
director, said the argument for her, with or
without the political angst of the governor, has always been the
same.
"The big argument for us, and
I really think the key issue here, is they promised this would be
temporary, just for the life of those bonds when they voted it in
1989," Ms. Anderson said. "I think at this particular
point of time, you have to hold your politicians to some standard
because there is no limit to how low they will go. They said it was
temporary. They should keep their word. The world is ready for a
revolution in standards."
Ms. Anderson calls
opponent's claims that the money will be used for bridges and
schools a sham.
"They have to keep that
reason to justify raising taxes. They deliberately neglect
improvements on things," she said. "The fact is the state
is funding everything it wants to and has enough to fund more if it
wants to. It's not that the state needs the money.
"But I still think the bottom
line is they promised it would be done," she added. "If
they are not forced to do it they will lie to us and break promises
again and next time it will be a lot more serious than a pizza a
week."