You wanted a good news story to come from the Healey camp? You wanted them to have something positive to talk about? Well, you just got it.
Today the Turnpike Authority Board just voted to abolish tolls west of 128. Who likes that? EVERYBODY. Especially voters in the western and central sub- and ex-urbs who WILL decide this election.
Make no mistake, this was not something that came out of the blue (as much as Romney/Healey may assert it did or that it’s not political).
This is about making people who vote happy. This accomplishes that.
Deval is full of hope, but a couple things need to happen to counter this.
First, he needs some “happy” to come out. Some good news. Yes, he’s about hope, but playing on hope implicitly says “I know something is wrong” which, while correct based on where we are in our state today, plays on a “negative.” He needs some happy.
Second, the Murray Machine that propelled him to an overwhelming victory in the primary just got the heat turned up on it a bit. They need to convince those CMass voters who HATE tolls that there are other things to focus on. They’ve proven their Machine before, now they have to kick it up a notch.
So, do you think this will be the first question at the debate tomorrow?
“Mr. Patrick, you’ve said you’re against rolling back the income tax. Are you also against tearing down the tolls?”
The real vote will come after the elections. Big shock.
“Pending a legal and financial review?” Excuse me? Shouldn’t you do that review BEFORE you take such a vote?
<
p>
So what’s behind this pre-election “preliminary” vote? Is it because voters are being bribed – keep us in office and we’ll tantalize you with the prospect of eliminating tolls? But it won’t happen if you don’t support Romney/Healey?
<
p>
Is it because it was something they’d probably do anyway, but needed to rush an early vote for Healey’s political benefit, yet they weren’t quite sure they could do it?
<
p>
Or is it because they know they’re unlikely to be able to do it after a “legal and financial review,” suspecting something bad would happen if they took a definitive vote, such as bond ratings going down? (Has anyone looked at the Big Dig bond prospectuses lately to see what specifically was promised/guaranteed in terms of toll revenue funding?)
<
p>
I suspect Mihos will be all over this at the next debate. I already heard him on WBZ tonight questioning the “preliminary” part, saying that usually board members don’t vote on something until they’re sure and they’re actually prepared to make a decision.
<
p>
Oh, and if it wasn’t politically motivated, what was Healey doing as the lead speaker at the press conference?
“They should have done it three weeks after they were inaugurated, not three weeks before the next election.”
<
p> – Dan
Yes, this really is “utterly irresponsible,” as Michael Widmer of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation says here: http://news.bostonhe…
<
p>
How do they intend to pay back all the bonds they have out? The Authority’s rating is going to hit rock bottom. The Commonwealth’s rating will probably take a hit, too.
<
p>
Who’s going to maintain the road? Mass Highway? How much is that going to cost and how will that be paid for?
<
p>
This is a dumb stunt by a group that doesn’t give a damn about Massachusetts or the state government’s financial health.
<
p>
It’s the same dumb stunt that earned Christy Mihos a pink slip (albeit one he successfully fought in court. Amazing to think, but true: Jane Swift was the responsible one in that situation.)
<
p>
If the state wants to get rid of tolls, fine, as long as there’s an honest and realistic plan to replace the income and continue competently managing the infrastructure.
<
p>
This Romney-appointed crew obviously intends to leave out the second half of that sentence and dump the resulting mess in the laps of the next administration.
<
p>
It’s their big F-U to the citizens of Massachusetts for having the gall to kick their party out of office.
Yep, I’m now voting for Reed instead of Tim. If Mitt can promise to add those extra lanes on Route 3, and the Southeast Expressway, I’ll drop Deval for Sherry Healey, too! [/snark]
In 2002, there was $871,000,000 on deposit for the MTA. The reason for this is that their bonds are NOT general obligation bonds backed by the full faith and credit of the Commonwealth. Sooooo – they had to have cash to back them up.
<
p>
At the time, Mr. Finneran was looking at this lake of money in order to offset the $3 billion shortfall. This was when Mitt began to take down the authorities – he DID succeed with the MDC, but the Turnpike eluded him.
<
p>
Mr. Kriss will make sure that they don’t get to squander the money, and the transition will be a smooth one.
Wow. I didn’t realize that if the Turnpike cuts the revenue source that the bond holders are expecting them to use to pay back the loans, the Commonwealth could then just use the Turnpike’s cash reserves to take over the Turnpike’s abandoned operating expenses. Those are some generous bond holders, letting Massachusetts go without repaying them like that!
<
p>
Of course, didn’t Dear Mr. Kriss recently issue a report saying that the Turnpike was in some sort of bad financial shape? Why would he say that if the Pike’s sitting on a mountain of freely available cash? Something (or many things) just aren’t adding up.
<
p>
How do you suppose you get to be known as a ‘watchdog’? More like lapdog if you read Barbara Anderson. She and Widmer go way back.
<
p>
When Barbara Anderson criticizes someone, I put MORE stock in that person’s opinions and understanding of economics!
would anyone in their right mind read Barbara Anderson?
The MTA’s 2004 financial statementreveals that the MTA had $767 million in cash and investments. $324 million of that total was held in trust for bondholders or otherwise restricted.
<
p>
However, the principal amount of indebtedness on the books of the MTA was $2.4 billion. Interest on that debt will be an additional $2.9 billion in total. Annual debt service is currently about $137 million. In other words, the debt is partially offset by reserves, but the major part of the security for the bondholders is the MTA’s ability to collect tolls.
<
p>
IF the MTA is merged with the MHWY, then those bonds DO become general obligation bonds – and become part of the Commonwealth’s debt portfolio. And our bond rating is very good, so we may even be able to call some in and reissue at at lower rate, if they were isssued with calls.
<
p>
$767 m you say? Frankly, I’m surprised it wasn’t squandered in the last few years – the dollar figure and financial picture are substantially the same as they were five years ago.
I don’t see this as an October surprise. I see this as the last gasp of small-government ideologists who realize that a Deval Patrick administration is imminent. They’re trying to sneak in the lowering of state revenue before they get tossed from office. Nothing like hampering a new administration by cutting its revenue, right?
<
p>
I love this line:
<
p>
<
p>
Hmm. Sounds like we’re going to need some more revenue for the added responsibility that the state Highway Department will take on, won’t we? How are we going to get that? Hey, let’s cut the income tax!
Using this logic, the revenue lost by cutting the income tax would be saved by the closing down of the tax collection apparatus!
Just like the income tax roll back?
Do you think this isn’t going to be hammered home by Kerry Healey over the next 2+ weeks? Of course it is, and I still say it’s a dangerous spot for Deval – unless his crack media and message team has come up with a pithy response. (just kidding guys, I know you’re good)
<
p>
This is much more tangible for people – hell, I would LOVE it if I didn’t have to get stuck in traffic on I-84 eastbound coming from CT into Sturbridge even though I have a FastLane pass. Those Sunday evenings after Thanksgiving are about the worst (yes, I know the single land merge with the Pike will still be clogged even if the tolls go away… and I know there won’t be any money to pay to upgrade that interchange…)
<
p>
Anyways, you get my point.
On the New Jersey Turnpike, and on some sections of the NJ Garden State Parkway, if you have EZ pass, you go through the tolls at 55 mph. They have redesigned the toll booths so essentially if you have EZ pass, you just keep driving on the highway and those who do not have EZ pass go through a toll booth off to the righthand side of the road. I have gone through NJ a couple of times since I got my EZ pass and have not had to wait at all. I still have had to wait at the tolls in Massachusetts even with EZ pass.