The problem, my dear Frustrated, is that you and your sensible friends have not yet done enough public education to build the kind of political support that elected officials need to vote for new taxes.
That’s political support with a small “p”. We’re not talking about voting we’re talking about talking with our neighbors and friends and our own elected officials about the importance of paying attention to those facts of yours and making a decision on the merits. Yes the merits.
You know It really is quite satisfying and oddly comforting for an elected official to make decisions on the merits of the situation – what is good for the state’s economy, what’s good for the safety and health of their communities residents.
Depriving your community because your vote has been influenced by the big P Politics of re election strategies for an election 19 months away, makes it hard to sleep at night. Sometimes. For some people.
Take comfort in the fact that Massachusetts policy makers are not thinking about revenue options like ultimate fighting as Jon Stewart reports. When it comes to raising (gasp) taxes he asks “Why should we have to pay for things done for us?
Anyway take heart. As the members of Red Sox Nation would say “There's always THIS year.
Crossposted at Hecate at the Public Policy Institute
After all, every single dollar that goes into the general fund came from a person or business in a city or town. Beacon Hill doesn’t create revenue – it sucks revenue in via statute, and then doles that revenue back out by statute.
p>What if Beacon Hill made choices based on the well being of all of its citizens, as I believe all of our elected legislators actually would like to do, not on the well being of the 87,000 millionaires or more in Massachusetts?
p>Remember – so-called “local aid” is not charity from Beacon Hill – it is a partial return of capital. By not assuring sufficient revenue for the basics(like public higher education), the body politik – you and I – are being starved of the revenue necessary for society to function and prosperity to be general.
This is THE kickoff for the revenue conversation. With the Mayors, Education leaders, the MMA … all saying that cuts are going to have a consequential affect on the quality of education, graduation rates, and longer lasting affects that will cost us more in the long run… how can the Gov. and legislative leadership not address this issue with solutions other than more cuts?
It’s time people stood up and supported Rep. Jim O’Day and Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz, sponsors of H.R. 2553 and S.B. 1460. While most of their colleagues on Beacon Hill want to pretend that increasing revenue is “off the table,” these legislators are standing by their principles. Let’s make sure they know how much support they have.