Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Debate Questions I Wish Would Be Posed To Lt. Gov. Healey

By

What were you working on these past four years that you felt was more important than the platform you’ve  begun publicizing last week?

In order to get most of your initiatives implemented, you’d need to work effectively with a Democratic Legislature to get programs passed and funded. One sign of that ability would be effectively championing your causes within your own party and administration first, and then to the Legislature. Can you tell us what policy initiatives you successfully spearheaded, which Gov. Romney either opposed or was lukewarm to at the outset, which are now in effect in Massachusetts because you successfully argued for them first to the governor and then to legislators?

You draw a major policy distinction between yourself and Deval Patrick over the income tax rollback. However, under the Romney-Healey administration, no rollback of the rate has taken place during your entire term in office. Why not?

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. The median income for a family of four in Massachusetts is $82,561.

    <

    p>
    If the income tax were to be rolled back from 5.3% to 5.0%, how much more per week would be in their paycheck? 

      • There is a $9150 personal exemption.

        <

        p>
        $82,561-$9,150=$73,411

        <

        p>
        $73,411*0.003=$220.23 (annual tax savings)
        $220.23/52=$4.24 (weekly tax savings)

        <

        p>
        Now, if the family makes $1,000,000 per year:
        $1,000,000-$9,150=$990,850

        <

        p>
        $990,850*0.003=$2972.55 (annual tax savings)
        $2972.55/52=$57.16 (weekly tax savings)

        <

        p>
        Every town has its property tax or fee story.  In Arlington, when state money was whacked, our full day kindergarten fee increased from $500 to $1500 per year.  We instituted a $180 bus fee this year.  Athletic fees went up.  Elementary librarians were eliminated.  All this with a $6 million override.  According to the Boston Globe:

        In a June 11 (2005) special election, voters will decide whether they want to increase their property taxes by $6 million a year. The measure would increase the annual tax bill on a $415,000 house, the average in Arlington, by $415, to $4,615, according to the town’s assessor.

        <

        p>
        That income tax reduction looks anemic compared to the impact on the property taxes and fees.  More taxes.  Less services.  The income tax is a shell game – or a fraud to shift the tax burden away from the wealthy and into the laps of low income homeowners (senior citizens).

        • Are you talking about the model of a family of 4? Is the $9,150 the total exemption for all 4 individuals?  What year is that median income based upon and is it a statewide average?  It seems much higher than what I have read….the central/western MA averages are of course much lower.  Thank you.

        • The family making $82K gets the personal exemption whether the rates is 5.3 or 5.0

          <

          p>
          Such appalling disregard you have for other people’s money (whoop de do…only four dollars per week).

          <

          p>

          The income tax is a shell game – or a fraud to shift the tax burden away from the wealthy and into the laps of low income homeowners (senior citizens).

          <

          p>
          I’ll show you a shell game: 

          <

          p>
          Step 1:  Give to the State your income tax equal to .3%.
          Step 2:  The State will take their cut.
          Step 3:  The State MAY return more local aid.
          Step 4:  The Town MAY lower property taxes.

          <

          p>
          Great policy:  Take from everyone then give to the rich (because property owners are most certainly not the poor).

          • The family making $82K gets the personal exemption whether
            the rates is 5.3 or 5.0

            <

            p>
            Yes, and that’s how the poster did the math. They took the personal exemption out and then did the difference. Hence it was taken out of both situations.

            <

            p>
            You seem to be implying that it was done incorrectly, but that’s just not true.

            <

            p>

            Such appalling disregard you have for other people’s money
            (whoop de do…only four dollars per week).

            <

            p>
            I don’t call it appalling disregard for other people’s money  just to point out what’s actually being talked about here. To actually put some numbers into the process.

            <

            p>
            Perhaps if anyone was speaking about raising the income tax, without a substantial need, you could say that its a disregard for other people’s money, but just putting some numbers to it does no such thing.

            <

            p>
            Especially when this is all based on the fact that equal amounts will just be suctioned up elsewhere.

            <

            p>

            I’ll show you a shell game:
            Step 1:  Give to the State your income tax equal to .3%.
            Step 2:  The State will take their cut.
            Step 3:  The State MAY return more local aid.
            Step 4:  The Town MAY lower property taxes.

            <

            p>
            I don’t think anyone is saying that keeping income taxes as is would necessarily lower property taxes by itself. There needs to be a greater move and plan for that – like Patrick has.

            <

            p>
            Rather, the point is that lowering them would force an increase in proprety taxes. Because the state would have less money to return to local aid. And in term the town would have to raise taxes or institute more and more fees (which is the same difference).

            <

            p>
            Patrick is saying ‘listen, if they cut the income tax, other taxes are just going to have to be increased, so why don’t we keep things where it is so we can attack the real problems that make property taxes so high’

            <

            p>
            Meanwhile, this election is not a choice between an income tax cut and no income tax cut. Its between a candidate who is honest and is telling you a plan to actually go about repairing our problem, and another candidate with an election year promise that is never going to happen anyway.

            <

            p>
            If you’d rather vote for phantom promises, that’s your right.

            <

            p>
            P.S. Property taxes are paid by everyone, not just those that own property. Its calculated into the rents that need to be paid, prices that businesses need to charge, and more.

        • In a June 11 (2005) special election, voters will decide whether they want to increase their property taxes by $6 million a year. The measure would increase the annual tax bill on a $415,000 house, the average in Arlington, by $415, to $4,615, according to the town’s assessor.

          <

          p>
          So your position is that we have to subsidize the poor folks in that $415,000 shack because they can’t afford a 35 dollar per month tax increase?

          <

          p>
          That’s your argument?

          • It’s no joke for Kerry Healey’s “overhoused” seniors, who are home-rich but income poor.

            <

            p>
            Even for the middle class family, what’s a better deal?  The income tax cut or the local fees and taxes?  Deval has it right.  “Shell game.”  And senior citizens and middle class homeowners are the big LOSERS!

            • The shell game:

              <

              p>
              1: Send the .3% to the State.
              2: State takes its cut.
              3: State may increase local aid.
              4: Local municipality may reduce property tax.

              <

              p>
              FYI, not that facts appear to be that important, but Massachusetts property taxes per dollar of per capita income are really quite within the median. (BTW, the per capita measure is the Massbudget.org stat of choice, not mine).

              <

              p>
              Mass is number 16 at 3.5% of per capita income.  Compare to: (property tax as percentage of income per capita)

              <

              p>
              1: Maine at 5.3%
              2: NH at 5%
              3: NJ at 4.8%
              4: Vermont at 4.5%
              5: Wyoming at 4.5%
              6: R.I. at 4.4%
              7: Conn at 4.1%
              8: Alaska at 4.0%
              9: Wisconsin at 4.0%
              10: NY 3.9%
              11: TX 3.9%
              12: Illinois 3.9%
              13: Montana 3.8%
              14: Iowa 3.5%
              15: Nebraska 3.5%
              16: Massachsuetts 3.5% …
              30: South Carolina 3.0% …
              40: Missouri 2.4%

        • their federal taxes, because state income tax is deductible from your federal tax return if you itemize.

          <

          p>
          I’d expect that many people earning over $80K in this state itemize, unless they’ve already paid off their mortgage or they rent.

          <

          p>
          So if you’re in the 25% tax bracket, and you itemize, and your state taxes go down by $220, I believe your federal tax goes up $55, making the actual net benefit of a rollback $165 and not $220, or $3.18 per week.

            • Last time I looked, your tax rate was over twenty bucks!  Mine is five.

              <

              p>
              And nooooooo, poor Cambridge needs LOTS of state aid, because Harvard, MIT, et al, all the charities, universities, churches, etc., all pay no property taxes.  That’s why our 5.03% goes to subsidize you.

              <

              p>
              I just resent paying for the Boston and Cambridge city councils and school committees while I’m at it!

              • Every year, MIT donates an amount equal to what they would pay in property taxes to Cambridge. They are not legally required to, but I think they have always done this. Cambridge can make things very difficult for MIT if they stop doing this.

                <

                p>
                I assume Harvard and other universities do the same thing, although I haven’t checked.

  2. No tough questions will be asked of Healey. Chris Wallace of Fox News is “moderating”. After Clinton’s stinging assualt on him Friday, he is going to be in “punish the Democrat” mode. I am worried.

  5. Do you think your attack ad on Chris Gabrieli was a mistake, or would he be outpolling you by even more than Patrick is?

    <

    p>
    In light of the questions on the current administration, am I correct in believing that Healey is acting governor when Romney is out of state?  And if so, does anyone know approximately (or exactly) how many days that has been over the term?

    <

    p>  – Dan

  6. Given your sensitivity to keeping the state tax rate where it is, if not actually increasing it – did you volunteer to pay at the 5.95% tax rate, as allowed on your Mass. income tax return?

    <

    p>
    If not – why not?

    • Why would he need to pay taxes at a higher rate in order to have the right to think that decreasing them is only a recipe for higher property taxes? And is just an election year promise anyway.

      <

      p>
      I know the general concept seems to be some kind of hypocrisy that you’re trying to point out. I mean, if someone was to say they thought everyone should pay the higher rate, then it’d be a fair question. But I frankly just don’t see the connection here. Can you clarify? Where’s the hypocrisy?

      • Here’s a question for Mr. Patrick:

        <

        p>
        Was your home in Richmond built entirely without union labor? Is it true that union contractors weren’t even allowed to bid on the job? 

        • Having half a head on my shoulders (some may even say more), it seemed pretty likely that that question was attempting to point out some sort of hypocrisy. Is that correct?

          <

          p>
          If so, I notice you haven’t explained how it would be hypocrisy.

          <

          p>
          If one were to claim to be the candidate to protect marriage, yet have been divorced 5 times and had children out of wedlock, that would be fairly hypocrical – a direct contradiction with your actual behavior.

          <

          p>
          If one were to claim to be the candidate to protect marriage, yet be single, that wouldn’t be hypocrisy, as your behavior has been different, but not opposite. It seems to me that wanting to keep income taxes that same, yet not having voluntarily paid higher taxes, is more closer to the latter.

          <

          p>
          Do you disagree? If so, I ask again, please explain the hyprocrisy. I’m honestly asking.

          <

          p>
          Or if it was intended to get to something else, please do explain.

          • …I wonder if Deval is willing to put is money where his mouth is.  I don’t think he’s a hypocrite, I think he’s genuinely ignorant of many facets fo state government.

Archives