Dear Colleagues,
We will soon be in a tremendously challenging fight to prevent huge state and local budget cuts and to work for the new taxes needed that would lessen these cuts. Otherwise, imagine the additional hardships this means to our already recession battered members, clients, residents.
***The Safe Teens/Safe Communities Coalition will have a Conference Call meeting this Wednesday April 15 at 3:30 PM.
Two Key Agenda Items
I. Results on our budget line items in the House Ways and Means Committee being release this Wednesday and key next steps on organizing for amendments to restore these cuts and for new taxes to lessen the budget cuts.
II. Next steps on campaign to target 15% of Stimulus Funded Jobs to lower wage earners, long term unemployed, and/or out of work young adults aged 18-24
4/15/09 Conference Call Agenda
I. Results on our budget line items in the House Ways and Means Committee and key next steps on organizing for amendments to restore these cuts and for new taxes to lessen the budget cuts (see copy of fact sheet below that can be used for informing and educating your membership).
A. Political Context
Recession, Budget Deficit, “Bad” Budget with big cuts, Taxes or Not, Fighting and Probably losing on budget amendments is first battle but not the whole war
B. What's known about House Ways and Means Budget on [we will fill in their proposals once we know them hopefully on Wednesday]
1. EOHHS/DPH Youth Violence Prevention Program 4590-1506 , now funded at $3.5 M
2. EOPS Shannon Anti-Gang Violence Program 8100-0111, now funded at $13 million
3. DLWD YouthWorks Public Sector Jobs for Teens Program 7002-0012, now funded at $9 million
4. DOE School to Career Connecting Activities Private Sector Jobs for Teens Program 7027–0019, now funded at $4.1 million
5. DOE After School Out of School Time Program for after school programs, 7061-9611, now funded at $5.5 million
6. EOPS Transitional Employment Pilot Program 7004-0099, now funded at $200,000
7. DOE Mentoring
C. Amendments process
1. Amendments are due Friday
2. Lead sponsors
3. Calling your state representatives to co-sponsor–they can call the lead sponsor's office through Friday to co-sponsor and from April 20-27, they can go to the House Clerk's Office and sign on as a co-sponsor
4. Also asking your representative to commit to attend the Caucus held between House Ways and Means and the legislators sponsoring the amendment during the budget debate April 28-30
D. Taxes–it's now or live with big cuts
1. Education of our members regarding:
The Huge recession means less tax revenue from businesses and individuals to the state because of less wages, unemployment, decline in business sales.
Less state tax revenue means a big budget deficit which means big budget cuts.
Less state tax revenue also means cuts in State Local Aid to cities and towns which means big cuts in school and town/city budgets.
No one enjoys paying more taxes, but it's either that or live with these huge state and local budget cuts.
2. Possible taxes that will help lessen the cuts if passed
a. Gas tax—this is needed due to all the deficits from the Big Dig and in the MBTA, but it will not help save youth violence prevention and teen jobs programs, it just goes to transportation
2. Other taxes that could help lessen the cuts
Alcohol tax–raises about $250 million
Sales tax increase–raises about $700 million
Income tax increase–raises about $750K to $1.5 billion
3. Local Option taxes enable cities and towns to raise revenue and lessen local school and city/town budget cuts–taxes on meals, hotels and motels, and ending the telecommunications property tax break. A proposal to enable cities and towns to join the State Health Care plan which saves them money is sometimes included in this package. Municipal unions don't want this to happen because it may limit choice and benefits vs. in these hard times, everyone must sacrifice.
4. Getting letters, calls, meetings to both state representatives and state senators about the need to raise some kind of taxes now to lessen the amount of state and local budget cuts.
And local media re articles and Letters to the Editor.
State Budget Politics and Process re Budget Cuts and Taxes
I. Political Context
1. The House Ways and Means Committee will release their budget proposal on Wednesday April 15. It will probably contain very major budget cuts.
2. Because of the recession, state tax revenues are down leaving a $2 billion + deficit in our $30 billion state budget
3. Why it won’t contain a tax increase proposal that would lessen the amount of cuts
a. Political fear of legislators to vote to raise taxes
b. A calculation that they may raise taxes if there’s enough outcry over the cuts they are proposing
II. How this could affect our communities and organizations
A. Major cuts in the 5 youth violence prevention programs we’ve worked for funding for–the Shannon Anti-Gang Violence Program the DPH Youth Violence Prevention Program, the YouthWorks teen jobs program
B. Major cuts in state Local Aid to cities and towns leads to local cuts in the school budget and city/town budget
III. How the state budget process works
April 15 House Ways and Means budget proposal released
April 17 Deadline to file Budget amendments
April 27 Deadline for legislators to sign on to co-sponsor bugdet amendments
April 27-30 House debates and votes on the budget
Caucuses held between Ways and Means Committee and state representatives who sponsored, co-sponsored budget amendments
IV. Politics of tax increases that would lessen the budget cuts
A. Legislators don’t want to vote for taxes because they feel the majority of their constituents are against them.
B. They are but a majority is also against major budget cuts.
C. Despite their political fears almost never is an incumbent state legislator defeated for re-election
D. Possible taxes to support
1. Gas tax—this is needed due to all the deficits from the Big Dig and in the MBTA, but it will not help save youth violence prevention and teen jobs programs, it just goes to transportation
2. Other taxes
Alcohol tax–raises about $250 million
Sales tax increase–raises about $700 million
Income tax increase–raises about $750K to $1.5 billion
3. Local Option taxes enable cities and towns to raise revenue and lessen local budget cuts–taxes on meals, hotels and motels, and ending the telecommunications property tax break. Often linked to this proposal is another one to a
llow cities and towns to move their employees to the state health insurance plan which would save them money. Municipal unions and employee associations generally oppose this as it may limit choice and benefits. The other side is that these are hard times and all most sacrifice to lessen the cuts.
IV. What can our organizations do?
A. Ask our state representatives to co-sponsor these budget amendments–they either call in their co-sponsorship to the lead sponsoring state representative by Friday April 17 on the amendment or sign on at the House Clerk’s Office between April 20-27
B. Ask them to fight for this amendment by attending the Caucus with the House Ways and Means Committee on the amendment held sometime between April 28-30
C. Tell them you support some tax increases that would lessen the amount of budget cuts they need to make and you want them to work for such a tax increase
These salaries and pensions are only the tip of the iceberg. Much of our corruption takes place in trade between contractors and developers seeking work from the city, state and the feds. This is facilitated through appointed boards, lawyers, judges and politicians.
<
p>There would be criminals in any government system, but with the massive amounts of money available to our particular system makes government the best place to steal.
<
p>The way to get criminals out of government is to cut the portion of the economy that is controlled by the government.
I will support a progressive tax 100%.
Part 1:
“Who Stole the people’s confidence in government…?”
Answer, very simply: The conduct of government.
<
p>Part 2:
“…and how do we get it back?”
Some food for thought. It’s interesting that the pronoun “we” was used. Perhaps it shouldn’t be taken for granted that everyone here (nor the majority of the Commonwealth) believes that they should ever “get it back”. A watchful, even mistrustful electorate demanding accountablity of government is a good thing.
<
p>
<
p>Government, in America, got this responsibility — and the confidence of the people — during the FDR years, because private enterprise and charity FAILED SO MISERABLY at it.
<
p>Perhaps a majority of the Commonwealth should spend more time learning about recent US history, especially here in Massachusetts. Take a walk through the now-abandoned mills in Lawrence, learn a bit more about what really happened during the early years of the labor movement — stretch a little beyond GOP columnists when you learn about the history of everybody BUT the government. Churches failed miserably at this job. Private enterprise failed miserably at this job.
<
p>The roles within the last ten years are fairly representative. In Massachusetts, how much leadership or responsibility has private enterprise demonstrated in tackling and solving the problems we all face? What issues has “the church” been known for?
<
p>I’ll tell you my answer to the question of “who stole the people’s confidence in government:
<
p>Unscrupulous, greedy, and selfish criminals of both parties. Callously venal demagogues of both parties who pandered to equally greedy and self-centered elements of the public — all looking for easy scapegoats on which to blame the consequences of their own irresponsibility.
<
p>The natural order will assert itself eventually. As a society, we will eventually reap the harvest that we have sown. The “natural order” is very harsh.
<
p>I’d like to see us be a bit more proactive now.
Pro active doing what? Does your natural order assume that we have sufficient revenues to finance the reforms we’ve been putting off for so long? Does your natural order assume that we continue to invest in the public structures that are so needed during this time — like unemployment insurance and health insurance for the recently laid off middle class? like food stamps,cash assistance and health care to recently foreclosed families or victims of domestic violence and other crimes against the natural order caused by the stresses of the recession.
<
p>Let me take your questions one at a time.
1. Pro active doing what?
Reforming the Beacon Hill political culture so that increased revenue can be raised without playing into the hands of those who strive to dismantle the government. Simultaneously raising significant new revenues, through major tax increases, to pay for the investments we must make in Massachusetts. I think the gas tax is needed and is not nearly enough. My own preference, so far, is a combination of an increased personal income tax, together with a new local income surtax levied by cities and towns.
<
p>I think we need to shift a significant portion of the burden of municipal services (schools, fire, police, etc.) away from regressive taxes like the property tax and towards more progressive taxes like the personal income tax.
<
p>I’m not a fan of a graduated personal income tax, but I think that’s better than doing nothing or — far worse — cutting spending as the legislature is currently blathering on about.
<
p>2. Does your natural order assume that we have sufficient revenues to finance the reforms we’ve been putting off for so long?
No. Significant increases in tax revenue are a crucial and absolutely required initial step.
<
p>3. Does your natural order assume that we continue to invest in the public structures that are so needed during this time
Yes. Specifically, in the following three areas (a) transportation infrastructure (b) health care and (c) public education. We have to start somewhere, I don’t think we can undo the incredible damage done by two decades of greed in one Governor’s term, and I think these are three best starting points. These also reflect the national priorities articulated by President Obama, and I agree with him at the federal level.
<
p>3-a. …like unemployment insurance and health insurance for the recently laid off middle class?
Definitely yes for health care, although I strongly suspect that paying more money to existing health insurance suppliers only enriches the already over-paid executives of those firms. As a very temporary measure, yes. I think it’s crucial that we move to a federally-supported single-payer health care system. I think that the private health insurance industry has been among the most destructive forces in our health care system for several decades now.
<
p>I am more mixed for unemployment insurance. I think that forcing crowds of recently laid-off wage-earners to squander increasing amounts of time applying for constantly diminishing job openings is counter-productive. I think we’re shifting to an economy dominated by large numbers of very small (1-10 person) independent businesses. This is a huge and traumatic change, especially for older members of the recently laid-off middle class. I think we should help them transition to the new economy, rather than force them to dig themselves ever-deeper into the failed models of the past. I’d like to see the same funds offered to these recipients in the form of start-up funding, business planning and counseling assistance (SBA style), low- and zero-cost filing fees and such, and similar measures.
<
p>The economy is not going to “recover” back into the form it took during the final decades of the twentieth century. I think government should help all of us make the transition to the new order, rather than coerce already weak constituents into further wage servitude under the old and failed order.
<
p>3-b. …like food stamps,cash assistance and health care to recently foreclosed families or victims of domestic violence and other crimes against the natural order caused by the stresses of the recession.?
<
p>Yes, to all of these.
<
p>I think that major state investments in a twenty-first century transportation infrastructure, health care system, and public education system will greatly benefit all the items you asked about.
<
p>I think the purpose of progressive government is provide a means to collectively work together to avoid the blood-bath that the unmitigated consequences of blindly (or lazily) ignoring the “natural order” will surely bring about.
<
p>The “natural order” is for toddlers to die of strep and staph infections. I think we can and must do better than that.
Because of the nature of its funding, government will always have more leeway to expand beyond efficiently meeting the needs of the people that can only be done by government. The opportunity for ripoff comes in that expansion.
<
p>Boss Tweed in the cartoon above became a millionaire by anticipating the actions of government, specifically taking inside information about the government building roads or rail lines, and buying up cheap real estate along the lines before they were built.
<
p>Because the state government is getting more involved in what is really private business, the opportunity for similar shenanigans has expanded beyond the physical expansion and into other areas as well. For instance private businessmen will lobby the state to pass laws to require that people buy their products such as health insurance, health information technology, wind energy and so on.
<
p>They do this through legalized graft of lobbying and the much larger illegal method of trading favors, government jobs, jobs in law firms etc.
<
p>Judy is a perfect example of the McNeil Lehrer syndrome, which imagines that decisions are made at the state house according to policy professionals sitting around a table and debating. In fact decisions are made according to many other influences such as sex, money, envy, nepotism, blackmail, bribery and so on. The smart payoffs are made in a form that never shows up as a quid pro quo. For every $40,000 in pension payoffs, the paid off wasted a huge factor beyond in public money, or allowed a degradation of the land for huge private gain.
<
p>
Venocchi wrote these words:
<
p>
<
p>This is a perfect example of “the crime of one indicts the entire group”. How is it any different than a racist saying something like “The Black community can point to rising levels of college graduates and inroads being made in every single profession in the country, but when people think of Blacks, they will instead picture drug-using, dog-fighting Michael Vick”.
<
p>The actions of one or a few do not represent the actions of an entire group, and suggesting that they should amounts to pure stereotyping.
<
p>People don’t vote to be black. Michael Vick didn’t run for office, he did not solicit votes based on his promises of “reform”, and he has never taken a vow to protect the public interests. Michael Vick does not wield influence over tax policy that affects every resident. Nobody — fans or detractors — is forced, by law, to pay for the vices of Michael Vick.
<
p>The abuses being highlighted by the Globe epitomize the pervasive cancer that riddles state and local government. In my opinion, the Globe has been silent about these abuses for far too long.
<
p>These abuses do grave damage to each and every one of us, and I think it’s long past time that we stop defending those who so selfishly perpetuate them.
But the abuse largely isn’t being perpetrated by the people in charge, and the abuse isn’t black and white. That’s where the stereotyping comes in.
<
p>Here are the examples from Venocchi’s column:
<
p>MBTA must end services due to budget cuts, but MBTA rehires 4 ex-officials as consultants after they retired.
<
p>OK, this is close, however this is not an uncommon practice, and it is being described in simplistic language. Typically this occurs when someone reaches retirement age; they retire, however they can still be valuable to the organization. A consultant arrangement allows them to work at their own pace. I think the MBTA’s retirement age needs to be made higher though, I think it should at least be 62 years old — I think state and local government in general should have minimum of 62, and this should increase as Social Security increases and as people are able to work longer in life.
<
p>Regardless of the pension reform, what is the exact allegation here? That these people are not working? Or is the complaint that they are allowed to “double-dip” — meaning they can be paid and collect a pension too? I can see why the latter is somewhat distasteful when portrayed the way it was, but people on pensions and social security work all the time.
<
p>Robert Deleo says that budget cuts must occur; The MBTA hires Dino DiFronzo as a consultant
<
p>These two things are unrelated. DeLeo didn’t hire this guy; the MBTA did. This is purely “guilty due to the sins of someone else”.
<
p>Cuts must be made to mental health programs. The town of Malden is paying a pension to someone who volunteered on the Malden Public Library Board
<
p>Completely unrelated; one group is at the state level, the other at the local level. This is a complete stretch; it’s like saying “Hood says that they must increase the price of milk, but people will be outraged because Bernie Madoff stole money from non-profits”. It’s nearly a non-sequiter, except for the “they’re both public employees” stereotypes.
<
p>Deval Patrick wants to reform patronage hiring; Deval Patrick “tries to plant his own patronage pick into one of those agencies”
<
p>This is also close but I think the “patronage” story was fairly manufactured, and the real story is more about Patrick trying to take control of this particular state agency.
<
p>I think that “patronage” is being very loosely defined here. I think that historically it applied to hiring political supporters to lower-level positions — like in municipal government, supporters of a mayor were given jobs sweeping streets and digging ditches; supporters of opponents need not apply. But in an administration, isn’t it expected that the governor will place trusted supporters into positions rather than at the top of them?
<
p>I don’t see Murray as wanting to coast to retirement in this particular position; I see Patrick inserting her there to take control of it. Whether that is right or wrong is an entirely different question.
<
p>Again, there are definitely abuses taking place, but people are trying to weave unrelated actions together using a stereotype — “inefficient government”. Sins should not be assigned due to a stereotype.
Joan has reported accurately, I think, how the public has begun to weave a whole bunch of unrelated outrageous scandals and unwise decisions by the administration together using a stereotype of inefficient, ineffective and corrupt government. Just read the comments here and in the MSM.
<
p>And that is precisely our challenge — to advocate for our issues by looking forward in a way that will begin to rebuild confidence in government at the same time.
<
p>Our stories should be about the need for additional resources to repair and reform, adequately fund and constantly monitor and maintain the public structures that keep our water and air clean and our economy strong and our children educated etc etc etc.
The word “stereotype” implies a very different behavior than the word “pattern”, and I think you’ve chosen the wrong word here.
<
p>You wrote:
<
p>I take serious and substantive issue with your assertion that these are “unrelated actions” and the people like me are trying to “weave” them together.
<
p>It appears to me that, instead, we are seeing a culture that is passed along from one practitioner to another. I suggest that the folks in Malden who arranged the sweetheart pension plan for the Library trustee didn’t just invent that mechanism out of the blue in some miraculous act of local creativity.
<
p>The Massachusetts House and Senate is deeply engaged in the question of pension reform, and the MBTA is a brightly visible aspect of that discussion. In my view, your assertion that Mr. DeLeo’s suggested budget cuts are “unrelated” to the hiring of Mr. DiFronzo strains credulity. It wouldn’t surprise me if, behind closed doors, Mr. Deleo suggested the budget cuts because of hirings like that of Mr. DiFronzo. The two are hardly “unrelated”.
<
p>You asked:
<
p>The strong inference, if not outright allegation, is that these arrangements were made to quietly increase the effective compensation of these individuals while avoiding the scrutiny that a more open process would bring in time of enormous shared sacrifice. The further inference, if not outright allegation, is that these specific arrangements were made in exchange for personal, rather than public, reasons.
<
p>You wrote:
<
p>I think the “real story” is that the Governor’s office seemed to be adjusting the gimbals of accessories in the dining room — to compensate for the increasingly severe list to starboard — instead of addressing the seawater pouring into the starboard hold through the gaping hole in the hull.
<
p>In summary, Massachusetts governance is permeated with abuse. Abuse at all levels — police and fire disability abuses, pension abuses, patronage abuses, investing enormous amounts of public money in an automated fare collection system that seems to be more focused on preserving jobs than expediting the flow of passengers — and the bilge-pumps can no longer stem the flood of seawater that is sinking the ship of state.
<
p>Yes, we desperately need bigger and stronger pumps. At the same time, the pervasive network of “little” holes must be plugged. The pattern of institutionalized back-scratching and corruption must be stopped.
The crime of one does indict the entire group, because the system is supposed to guard against corruption by regulating itself.
<
p>And before we weep too much, we should note that they aren’t shy about collective credit (“We got the budget done on time,” etc.) or collective benefits (state party funds, etc.).
Really thorough.
Who stole the people’s confidence?
<
p>The conservative movement at least back to 1980 hammered home an ideology of government-as-problem. Sure they were helped by some real doosies within the government, but they were also helped by our side not consistently pushing back and explaining why government is good. As a result even our last Democratic President felt compelled to declare “the era of big government is over”. This is the opposite of much of Europe, where even the conservative parties have pretty much made their peace with activist government.
<
p>Personally, I see attacking the government as a concept (as opposed to specific policies and actions which are fair game) is attacking the people because in our system of, by, and for the people, the people and the government are synonymous. There should be no us vs. them. If we don’t like what “them” are doing then we need to take it upon ourselves to change the guard at the next election and debate about how things can be done better rather than start saying that things shouldn’t be done at all. Not that some things on the merits are not better handled outside the governing structure, but that should be argued ad hoc rather than ideologically.
<
p>This reminds me of the old joke about the difference between the two parties. Democrats believe government can work and Republicans believe it can’t; both prove their points when they are elected!
<
p>The public may be stupid—they are not crazy. Taxes go up and you will have open revolt.
<
p>Our tax dollars are wasted 50 cents on the dollar. Whatever government purchases is grossly inflated to accomodate friends, family, unions, coat holders and special interest groups.
<
p>Public education in many communities is an egregious rip off ie Boston.
<
p>Deval Patrick is a one termer and he may not last his entire term after this past weekends performance of the MassPike.