QUESTION 1: “Subject to Appropriation”
This is a reminder that constitutionally all State income/spending bills are subject to appropriation. The Legislature often sells bills with laudable goals and, when passed, we find the money goes to the General Fund.
The State Legislature authored Question 1 to amend the State’s Constitution allowing them to set taxes by classes of groups or people. Class taxation has failed at least six times before as unconstitutional. Now, those who (a) do not deliver a budget on time, (b) feel voters don’t care and (c) have a surplus of $4 billion dollars because of their ineptness want more power over your pocketbook.
The bill is nicknamed a “fair share” bill. If you and your neighbor make the same amount of money and he/she pays less taxes than you, is that fair? Tax laws written to aid political supporters that others benefit from are on the books? Don’t amend the Constitution. Change the existing tax laws. This requires considerable effort and potential pain in their wallet, however, and it isn’t likely.
The Legislature wants to “dedicate” more money for improving education and infrastructure. What makes you think they will live up to this altruistic goal? They want to change the Constitution so they do not have to be constrained by the Constitution protecting the taxpayer. The Lottery was established to support education! Remember their effort to index the gas tax to inflation rather than voting on changes? How would that be working out today if it had passed?
With a $4 billion dollar surplus, three of which is owed to the taxpayer due to prior overtaxing, we DO NOT have a revenue problem! We have a major SPENDING problem. Challenge Representatives and Senators to do their jobs. Demand they write and manage a balanced budget. Hold them accountable to the Constitution. Failing that, fire them in the next election. Punishing small businesses and people with more than $1 million dollars in income due to legislative failures is wrong.
Small businesses generate jobs and revenue for the Commonwealth but will now be penalized for income over a million dollars. Would you continue to do business here? And, pay attention to the line that says “To ensure that this additional tax continues to apply only to the commonwealth’s highest income taxpayers, this … income level shall be adjusted annually to reflect any increases in the cost of living by the same method used for federal income tax brackets.” There is that wonderful indexing again.
The bill states: “To provide the resources for quality public education and affordable public colleges and universities…” and “…for the repair and maintenance of roads bridges and public transportation…”
Two special interest groups, the Massachusetts Teachers Union and construction unions are a major force behind this bill. If the system is inadequate, why are they not working for better management of the existing system? What is their motivation? We’ve seen how they’ve managed current projects like the Big Dig and Southcoast rail. This sounds suspiciously like a way to maintain the control of folks in power by providing money to special interest groups.
Question 1 is one of the worst bills I have seen in years. The concept failed at least six times in court. The Legislature wants to amend the Constitution, allowing unfettered revenue increases and changes of income levels so they don’t have to vote on thorny issues. Eventually all will pay this additional tax. Without the constitutional controls on the legislature, we are at their mercy. I would vote NO on Question 1.
Marsby Warters, Fairhaven
•••
Click here to download the entire 10/20/22 issue: 10-20-22 HalloweenTrail
Support local journalism, donate to the Neighb News with PayPal
