STATE HOUSE, BOSTON, SEPT. 28, 2000 ... Norton resident Lisa
Burgess fears every night that her young son Jamie will go to sleep and never wake up.
Wheelchair-bound, dependent on 16 medications, suffering
from 21 separate medical conditions, Jamie needs around-the-clock nursing care every day. But finding nurses is "next to
impossible" because the state reimburses pediatric home care at a rate 30-35 percent below
actual costs, Burgess said.
Jamie and his mother today joined a new coalition of health
care organizations organized to oppose two tax cut questions on the November ballot. At a press conference on the State
House's Grand Staircase, the group claimed that if voters statewide approve the income tax cut
and the tolls-and-auto excise tax credit pass, programs that provide health care, education and
social services will suffer.
The coalition includes the AIDS Action Committee, the
Massachusetts Senior Action Council, the Massachusetts Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Massachusetts
Extended Care Federation, the Massachusetts Public Health Association, the Massachusetts
Hospital Association, and associations representing extended care, home care and
community health centers.
"Nurses are not being paid anywhere near the going rate, yet
the state says there's $2 billion to cut," Burgess said. "What message are we sending to our children?"
The income tax cut campaign (Question 4) estimates that once
fully phased in over three years, the reduction of the tax rate from 5.75 percent to 5 percent will take $1.2 billion out of
state government's coffers. The tolls-and-excise campaign (Question 6) estimates that its question is
worth between $400 million and $550 million a year, depending on how many people
take advantage of the tax credits.
Senate President Thomas Birmingham (D-Chelsea) joined the
coalition, calling the two tax cuts "overly aggressive and highly regressive." While acknowledging a "steeply uphill
fight" to defeat the income tax cut, he said the rate reduction would hamper government's ability to spend more
money on programs such as last year's $25 million in rate relief for financially struggling
hospitals.
"That's the sort of thing I would like to continue to do
next year," Birmingham said. "That is the sort of commitment that will necessarily be compromised if we are to indulge
ourselves in an overly aggressive, highly regressive tax cut."
Income tax cut crusader Barbara Anderson, who watched the
event from the edge of the crowd, said afterward she thinks it's a "sin" to use a disabled child as a press conference prop
and to "frighten his mother" by threatening service cuts. The income tax cut wouldn't affect
existing programs, she said.
"If they want to take the money that Sen. Birmingham voted
for Fenway Park and give it directly to Jamie and his mother, that is fine with me," said Anderson, director of Citizens for
Limited Taxation. "But they should be ashamed of themselves for using sick children to prevent
a tax rollback, the money of which they simply use to build their own power and buy votes."
Gov. Paul Cellucci's forces also fought back, countering
that the income tax cut will only bite into the state's surpluses and "not a penny" will come out of social programs.
Tax Rollback Committee Chairman Paul Melkonian cited a Beacon Hill Institute study that found state
revenues would grow over the next three years by $3.4 billion without the tax cut, and
by $2 billion with it. About 70 percent of the public support the tax cut in recent polls, the campaign
said.
"Despite Sen. Birmingham's reluctance, we've been able to
cut almost $3 billion in taxes over the last 10 years," Melkonian said. "As a result, revenues are up over 60 percent
and we've been making great strides in access to quality health care."
But while progress has been made during the economic boom of
the last decade, much more remains to shore up a fragile health care system, said Health Care Committee Co-chairman
Sen. Richard Moore (D-Uxbridge). Adolescent mental health services are still "woefully
deficient," and seniors are being squeezed harder all the time for prescription drugs, he said.
With the aging of the Baby Boom generation, the number of seniors -- and
the need for long term care -- will double in the next 20 years, he said.
"We're not going to be able to make the investments we need
to make if we don't have the resources to do it," Moore said. "Questions 4 and 6 -- and I would add Question 5 (managed
care reform) -- are not healthy for any of us."