[Now THIS needs cross-posting and total blog dissemination! We need to put pressure on our legislators – who are they more afraid of, us, or Sal DiMasi? Let’s make it US.]
According to this Boston Globe report, DiMasi, self-styled King of Beacon Hill, has decided unilaterally to quash Patrick’s proposal which would help close the state’s budget deficit without too many cuts and without the rainy day fund (hint: we’re supposed to be in a good economy right now…it’s about to be crushed by real estate problems among others, so I wouldn’t dive into that rainy day fund just yet).
The Globe says that the House Ways and Means committee is going to come out with its own version of the budget by mid-April. This is your chance to say to DiMasi, you ain’t the boss of the voters. Call the House Ways and Means committee and express your views about closing the tax loopholes that only will affect the largest businesses in the Commonwealth and make them finally pay their share. (To view the proposals in a neat table format, BMG has it here.)
The main number for the whole committee is: (617) 722-2380 722-2700 [updated –ed.]. Here are the individual members and their responsibilities and the towns they’re from. You can get the list, with links to the members’ phone numbers and web pages, here. If one of these is your Rep, call them especially.
Robert A. DeLeo of Winthrop – Chair: 617-722-2990
Marie P. St. Fleur of Boston – Vice Chair: 617-722-2380
James E. Vallee of Franklin – Assistant Vice-Chair: 617-722-2380
Theodore C. Speliotis of Danvers
Frank M. Hynes of Marshfield
Thomas P. Kennedy of Brockton
William C. Galvin of Canton
Louis L. Kafka of Stoughton
William G. Greene, Jr. of Billerica
John F. Quinn of Dartmouth
Paul Kujawski of Webster
Colleen M. Garry of Dracut
Harold P. Naughton, Jr. of Clinton
Geraldine Creedon of Brockton
Barry R. Finegold of Andover
Alice K. Wolf of Cambridge
Elizabeth A. Malia of Boston
Walter F. Timilty of Milton
David Paul Linsky of Natick
Mark V. Falzone of Saugus
Anne M. Gobi of Spencer
Mary E. Grant of Beverly
William Lantigua of Lawrence
Robert M. Koczera of New Bedford
Christopher N. Speranzo of Pittsfield
Michael J. Moran of Boston
Update: Republicans, too, inexplicably left off the list:
Vinny deMacedo of Plymouth (Ranking Member)
Karen Polito of shrewsbury (Asst. Ranking Member)
Lew Evangelides of Holden
Paul Loscocco of Holliston
Jeff Perry of Sandwich
Daniel Webster of Hanson
When I call my rep, he’s going to ask me. He won’t offer suggestions, either.
<
p>
There’s been a number of loopholes discussed… are we going for all seven on the pdf?
<
p>
1. Combined Reporting
2. “Check the Box:” Conform Entity Classification Rules
to Federal Laws; Tax Business Trusts as Corporations
3. Insurance Companies Operating Non-Insurance Business
4. Deeds Excise Avoidance
5. Room Occupancy Tax – Internet Resellers
6. Sales Tax – Captive Leasing Companies
7. Income Tax – Earned Income Credit for Non-Residents
<
p>
T’anks a mil.
What happened to the telephone pole property tax loophole?
says the Globe.
but part of a different piece of legislation – municipal patnership act.
<
p>
There is a public hearing on Mar 29 pm at 1:00 in Room B-2 on this.
<
p>
<
p>
Would they be charged tax? Section 26
<
p>
<
p>
I wonder: if underground conduit wasn’t charged but poles were, would we see a push by the telecom folks to bury more cable? In urban areas in particular, this would be a nice touch.
…if underground conduit wasn’t charged but poles were, would we see a push by the telecom folks to bury more cable? In urban areas in particular, this would be a nice touch.
<
p>
Buried cable is nice for the view, but it really is more difficult to repair.
<
p>
BTW, I agree with what I infer from your comment. Telecom companies should be taxed on their property, just like every other company. The litany in your blockquote is part of the telecom companies’ property, and it’s amazing that it is apparently exempt from taxation.
but less likely to need repair? I have no idea, but it sure seems plausible.
<
p>
In addition to the view, there’s been [contentious] claims that it will reduce traffic fatalities. Maybe not as much an issue in really urban areas, but it’s possible that it would reduce fatalities in more suburban areas.
<
p>
For me though, it’s about the view. I ain’t going to lie. On a side note, some infrastructure investment in buried cables might also make FTTH (fiber to the home) more prevalent, and everybody likes faster internets.
…but less likely to need repair? I have no idea, but it sure seems plausible.
<
p>
Pole-based distribution is less susceptible to flooding than conduits. (Not tongue-in-cheek). Power and telecom distribution systems are very complex, including not only the wires, but also repeaters, transformers, routing technology etc., etc., etc. I did study electrical engineering within my engineering physics degree. At a minimum, the problem is, finding out where the problem is; before they do that, the problem cannot be corrected. And that is much more difficult with underground conduits than with pole-based lines.
why?
<
p>
If the problem is at a junction (and I’d imagine that most are), then you’ll find it by testing adjacent junctions. If the problem is in a line itself, then testing the two ends of it should discover it pretty easily.
<
p>
Now, accessing the problem between junctions would seem to be easier with lines above ground, but that’s different than diagnosis…
…in articles in issues of ProcIEEE over the last couple of decades, it is clear that it is much more complicated than you suggest to find failure locations.
are my favorite things 🙂
He’ll ask which ones? Come on. That’s his job to figure out.
<
p>
Phone calls and letters are a blunt instrument, stomv. We’re not making policy here, we’re putting the pressure on for a general direction in policy. The point of knowing what these loopholes are is so that your rep knows that you know what’s on the table. They may keep some and jettison some in the final product.
<
p>
Do you think the revenue should come from these sources, or the rainy day fund, or from social services, or from whatever Sal happens to think is a good idea? Should business lobbyists have veto control over the budget-writing process?
<
p>
You are a citizen. I really, really admire and appreciate that you take that seriously. But you are not expected to write the legislation yourself.
One phone call is no big deal.
<
p>
Five calls is unusual.
<
p>
Ten calls means business.
<
p>
More than ten calls is extraordinary.
<
p>
Also – a real, handwritten note is noticed.
<
p>
To get a ‘real letter’ is rare – and several noticed.
<
p>
One constituent is worth ten other callers.
<
p>
Just a few pearls of wisdom.
and know him well enough. He knows me well enough to know I’ve been paying attention and generally line up behind Deval Patrick.
<
p>
If I were Joe Blow, he wouldn’t ask. But, I’m not. I’m me. He knows me well enough to push me further. He’ll also take the time to talk with me a little bit about each loophole, especially if he’s got a position on each one.
<
p>
So, if I call and don’t have specifics, he won’t feel as much pressure, I’ll lose the opportunity to learn more from him, and the call won’t be as effective.
<
p>
Your results (with your rep) may vary.
If you lobby, and do not know specifics or seem informed about the issue, your call is blown off. Not on the line, not in perosn, but behind closed doors.
<
p>
If this is the advice you have been giving out in budgets past, no wonder ‘progressive’ initiatives fail over and over.
<
p>
Likewise – several of these were debated about 7 months ago in a loophole-closing bill that Romney filed that was rejected. DiMasi said yesterday on WRKO that those would absolutly not be reconsidered, as they were just discussed. So – find the NEW ones that Patrick filed, not the ones he recycled from Romney, and advocate for THOSE.
The fact that stomv can list the loopholes considered is informed enough for this act of citizenship. His rep should be attuned and aware of the fact that he would prefer those to other, more short-sighted or crueler methods of making up the gap in the budget.
<
p>
We simply cannot all be budget experts, or economists. In fact, we lose if we treat this as something hands-off, as something that the Wise People will take care of perfectly well without our intervention. Of course it’s better to be thoughtful and specific — I’m certainly not arguing the opposite. But not having perfect information is no reason to paralyze oneself politically. Guess what? They don’t have perfect information either.
<
p>
To answer stomv’s original question, I think the most significant are 1 (moving income out-of-state to avoid taxes) and 2 (declaring different corporation types on state and federal tax returns). There’s the most money involved, and they just don’t seem justifiable to me. I don’t know if those were the ones considered by Romney. PP, can you tell us?
<
p>
Anyway, we’re learning that Terry Murray plans to find that money somewhere else, too. So we’ll see what she comes up with. In the meantime, no sense in just letting the AIM’s of the world steamroll everyone else. Again, that money’s got to come from somewhere. If we don’t tax the people who can pay, we’ll tax the people who can’t.
First inning – House One [the Governor’s budget]- due every January 15th except for a governor’s first budget, which is given until the end of February.
<
p>
Second inning – the House of Representatives Ways and Means budget – “rolled out” about 4/15 and 4/28. Watch those outside sections, though less then pre-DiMasi, they are still “out there” and change entire laws.
<
p>
Third Inning – the representatives propose and negotiate amendments and then pass a final budget by 4/28. Usually there are 3-5 days only for filing those amendments. Amendments are now filed electronically and co-sponsors sign on electronically.
<
p>
Fourth Inning – Senate Ways and Means Budget – rolled out about 5/15 [they have the more complete revenue figures to work with, by the way]. Watch those outside sections, the Senate does many more the the House though less than “once upon a time”, they are “out there” and change entire laws, remove and add entire programs.
<
p>
Fifth Inning – the senators propose and negotiate amendments and the pass a final budget by 5/30. Usually there are are 3-5 days only for filing those amendments. Amendments are now filed electronically and co-sponsors sign on electronically. New outside sections often appear at this state in the Senate.
<
p>
Sixth Inning – the House/Senate conference committee, which has a goal of agreement on a joint budget ironing out whatever is different. This is supposed to be done before the end of the fiscal year, but sometimes, not.
<
p>
Seventh Inning: The budget goes to the Governor. What will he veto and take into overtime?
<
p>
Overtime – the veto/over ride process.
Good for all of us to have a schedule in mind.
why don’t you also recommend the post I did to put the schedule out there? If some of the baseball terms in my analogy are a bit off, I am actually nearly illiterate regarding baseball – sorry!o
I guess our posts crossed in Internet float time. As I said, sorry for any incorrect use of baseball language.
…But there are 9 innings in a standard baseball game. I was wondering whether the “overtime”–the overturning of vetoes–would be considered the “7th inning stretch.”
From the book, Lobbying on a Shoestring:
<
p>
“Legislators behave differently when they know their constituents are watching”.
Awesome!
“Hi. Please close the loopholes. Thanks.”
<
p>
Kinda a lame appeal. First, they’re not loopholes, but I’ve said that enough.
<
p>
But second, if they are loopholes, and the Governor is truly not interested in expanding the Corporate tax base, then give up something.
<
p>
Close the loopholes, and lower the rate, so that all companies are paying their fair share. Level playing field.
According to State House News, there’s a session scheduled for 2:00 today in the house. Rumor is that the corporate loopholes will be brought to vote.
<
p>
If you want to make a call, do it soon.
Good grief! Have they even been heard in a committee yet?
Hearings are apparently optional. Let me know if you want a post explaining what I mean.
Very likely the measure won’t make it to committee.
<
p>
Odd question: Who are the legislators more fearfull of? The speaker calls all the shots and controls all of the extra money and goodies. Ergo the solons are far more worried about the speaker viz a vis the constituents. You deal with the constituentssix months prior to re-election.
<
p>
Now that Senator Trav is gone, the governor hobbled (or worse) and a new senate president, Representative Di Masi is in the “Cat Birds Seat” and he knows it. Back to business as usual.
Better safe than sorry, of course, but I don’t know for a fact that the vote will be today. (I wish I had those kinds of connections…)
according to State House sources. So everyone can un-press the panic button.
(just to reiterate) — sources tell me that the tax loophole bill has been referred to the Revenue Committee.
It was Rep. Natale who I overheard bragging about killing the loophole legislation because of his lost earmarks. Looks like we have some work to do.
For getting more specific on the loopholes to close. I was in a bit of a rush. 🙂 But those are the ones I’d have put down too. I’ll update my own blog as well.
Vinny deMacedo of Plymouth (Ranking Member)
Karen Polito of shrewsbury (Asst. Ranking Member)
Lew Evangelides of Holden
Paul Loscocco of Holliston
Jeff Perry of Sandwich
Daniel Webster of Hanson
I grabbed that listing from the webpage with the Ways and Means list. It didn’t have party affiliation, but I assumed it was the entire list? Why wouldn’t they have all memebers of any party listed?
…ergo, they don’t exist?
I hadn’t seen the Mass.Gov list.
<
p>
SO – be careful. It appears that ALL the Committee lists may be incomplete.
Because hell, I’m a bit snippy about it too. Not only is the official list on the Commwealth website incorrect in what seems like a partisan manner, which is inexcusable, but it made ME look like I left stuff out, so it hurt my credibility too.
<
p>
This is definitely an oversight we should pester the lege about ASAP.
I’m shocked. Does seem strange all those that failed to be identified just happened to be republicans.
<
p>
Not only is the website inaccurate but if these folks were intentionally deleted the offense may rise to something
beyond being impolite.
I don’t think anything nefarious is going on. If you look at the Committee listing from the General Court homepage you can see a list, which is the assignments made by the Speaker as the majority party, and a letter from the minority leader containing the Republican appointments. I think whoever updated the webpage just didn’t realize that the first list is only the assignments made by the Speaker.
Thank you to everyone for their efforts on this issue. The revenue raised from closing these loopholes will help increase local aid and avoid the budget cuts that could really devastate health and human services, and many other budget areas.
<
p>
I wanted to update everyone on what some House members are doing to support closing these loopholes. The House session just ended for the day, but there were lots of conversations today about supporting Governor Patrick’s proposal.
<
p>
Carl Sciortino and I spent a lot of time today talking to colleagues. We are drafting a letter to show that there is support for doing this amongst State Representatives, and that the proposal deserves a fair hearing before the Joint Committee on Revenue.
<
p>
In addition, we are in direct communication with the advocacy groups like Neighbor to Neighbor on supporting this effort, and emphasizing the need for these revenues to avoid devastating budget cuts.
<
p>
Finally, this morning at the N. Central Mass Health and Human Services breakfast in Fitchburg, I encouraged all attending service providers to express their support for closing corporate tax loopholes, to help achieve their agenda.
<
p>
As legislators we are hoping to meet first thing next week to further discuss this critical legislation, and express our support for Governor Patrick’s proposal. Thanks again to everyone on their own efforts and hard work.
To see a legislator directly connecting with the netroots to explain the impact of this issue on real people and what work is being done to support it.
if you’d like to turn this into a separate post, I’ll front-page it. This is important news that everyone here needs to know. Thanks!
Let’s see this letter first.