We’re Back! You are reading the first edition of the State House Column in blog format. This column was originally written for and published in the West Newbury News. It ran for nearly a dozen years. Recently, Ron and Lee Ann Delp closed the paper for the foreseeable future. The Delps gave the State House Column its beginning, and social media will provide its future.
A Hand Up or a Hand Out? A lot has been written about the $35 million dollar bond authorization bill for the city of Lawrence. My comments on the issue can be found in the Eagle-Tribune story here.
Basically, the intent of the Lawrence legislation is to allow the city to borrow upwards of $35 million, with the state being the guarantor for what Lawrence borrows. This means that all Massachusetts taxpayers would be liable for the debt in the event the city defaults. Because the possibility of a default exists, I think that the entire Commonwealth – not just the residents of Lawrence – has a stake in this legislation. That is why I argued for strong outside fiscal oversight.
There was also a personal angle. About 25 years ago, as an investment banker, I worked on a “special” financing for Lawrence. (It was “special” because the city had so many financial issues that no one would buy their bonds.) The Commonwealth had to get involved then, too, and not much has changed. Giving Lawrence another hand-out is not really the answer.
Casinos Back “On the Table.” It’s true. With the exit of former Speaker Sal DiMasi – long a gambling opponent –Massachusetts may become a casino destination. Honestly, It’s a proposal I’ve been on both sides of but every bill is different.
Win, lose or draw on this proposition, the Commonwealth still needs to consider how to spur the growth of innovative long-term (and good paying) jobs. Casinos offer more of those jobs than slots, but the Commonwealth needs every job it can get right now.
The 2011 Budget. The House is coming out with its own version of the state budget in mid-April. The Governor’s budget proposal sought to level fund local aid. But, as I emailed constituents, the Governor’s level-funding was based on projected revenue growth during the coming fiscal year, (very) high estimates of federal stimulus aid and additional taxes. While the Commonwealth may luck out on one of these, all three are unlikely to occur. After a controversial sales tax hike last year, the House won’t pursue increased taxes this year. (Which is good, because I wouldn’t support them.)
Latest estimate? A 4% cut in both local aid and Chapter #70 educational funding. Why? Not because legislators want to cut either account. Because the state’s tax revenues aren’t enough to level fund.
Holding The Line on Health Care. As the House Chair of the Health Care Financing Committee, I’ve spent a lot of time looking for ways to bring the annual (exponential) growth in health care costs under control. The emerging Massachusetts plan to rein in costs is a lot different than what is currently under consideration in Washington D.C.
This week, there were major hearings on the Massachusetts version of the issue and two factors emerged as culprits: medical price-inflation and the fee-for-service (FFS) system. Medical price inflation is about 3X regular inflation, and the FFS system often times drives over-testing and greater costs. What is currently being discussed on Beacon Hill is the potential for “global payments.” Global payments are a kinder and gentler form of capitation. You can read about the ongoing debate, as well as the differences between fee-for-service and global payments, here.
Glad to see the Common Sense on your blog. I will read it regularly. Thank you.
ReplyDelete---Norman J Landry, Haverhill
Hi Harriett,
ReplyDeleteRe: the 2011 budget, can you provide the percentage growth expected for spending FY2010 for all other items outside local aid and Chapter 70? A lot of people are concerned about cuts to Chapter 70 and local aid, and there is a broad perception that state spending in other areas is growing at a pace significantly greater than inflation. Any information to clarify would be helpful.
Since local aid and Chapter 70 is expected to go down by 4%, does that mean that state spending in other areas is also declining by 4%?
ReplyDeleteRE: Holding the line on Health Care.
ReplyDeleteVery happy to see an elected official providing a place for "cordial" and "candid" commentary.
In that spirit I'd like to see some candidness in the Commonwealth's new health care system. In short, is it working? Or are costs increasing far more than anyone imagined?
I saw some news stories about stimulus money coming to state health clinics...is this federal money disguising the run away costs of a plan that will bankrupt the state as Treasurer Cahill has suggested?
Your good friend,
Lenny
Casinos, seems we already missed the boat on that one. Legalize cannabis. More revenue and zero harm. Harm reduction and legalization works and will bring in more revenue than casinos.
ReplyDeleteMA teen and adult cigarette use down while cannabis use has skyrocketed. Regulation, education, harm reduction works. Prohibition is a major problem. One of the biggest issues in this state. Black market cannabis only benefits dealers. Prohibition of cannabis is bad for the community, bad for the children, bad for our tax base.
Thanks for allowing an open forum, Rep. Stanley.
Re: A Hand Up or a Hand Out?
ReplyDeleteBut how did you vote? If I read the Roll Call correctly you DIDN'T. Is this so? Regardless of your arguments your constituents did not get a say.
Great Blog. I'd like to see a non biased view point of the Right to Repair bill including your perspective. Both sides seem to have strong arguments (biased, I know)and it is confusing.
ReplyDeleteHey guys – 7 posts on the first day. Guess I know what I’ll be doing on Friday afternoons in the future! And I hope you’ll do your part by using real names.
ReplyDeleteNorm Landry – thanks. My crackerjack staff and I have had fun getting this going.
Anonymous on the FY-11 budget – Right now, I don’t think there will be a percentage increase in spending for most of the budget. (Some categories always go up, like Medicaid, and others, like probation, get special treatment. But many more categories are going the other way again in FY-2011.)
Local aid and Chapter 70 are the most protected budget categories -- and have been since I’ve been on Beacon Hill. If you are subscribing to the theory that they will be hit disproportionately, ask the folks who use services – like disability.
Also, the broad perception that you reference is based on what?
Bob on the FY-11 budget – See above.
Lenny – It would take me the rest of the afternoon to come up with enough information about the state’s health care situation to scratch the surface. I’ll get back to you, but for now I think that Cahill is off the mark.
MikeCann – I don’t think we’ll see the Legislature legalize cannabis anytime soon. When I said (a decade ago) that I had no problem with medical marijuana, I got a trip to then-Speaker Finneran’s woodshed.
Anonymous on Lawrence – You’re right, I missed the first vote after it was rescheduled 3 times. On the final vote yesterday, I voted no. But you’re wrong about my constituents not having a say – we do a lot more around here than push the voting button.
SteveR from Groveland – I support right-to-repair because it’s better for the independents. Bigger is not always better.
John Sr from Haverhill- I am glad, and interested to have the chance to view your blog.I look forward to being an unlimited viewer and hopefully participate in the near future
ReplyDeleteIt would be very interesting if a draft budget for the state were to be posted.
ReplyDeleteWe need to prioritize our spending. If what we want to spend exceeds the tax revenue, then, we will have to raise some more revenue - its that simple. We can't have more state funded items unless we want to pay more taxes, and spend less on our "own" things. The trick is how to make these decisions democratically, and that's what's problematic here in West Newbury. Information and participation are key to a just resolution. Thanks for the blog.
RE: It would be very interesting...
ReplyDeleteHouse Ways and Means (HWM) will release their version of the state budget next month, which will be amended, voted on and passed by House members in early May. As soon as the HWM version is available, I will post a link to where it can be viewed. I will also make a link to the final House version of the budget available on this blog as well.
If you want to watch the budget debates as they happen, make sure to check out our Legislation page where there's a link to live House webcasts!
wow, i'm psyched, a blog! love the email updates in general.
ReplyDeletere:casinos- go ahead, it's a tax on math morons, just like the lottery.
and if we're looking for new sources of income, go ahead and tax candy and soda. they fall in the same category as cigarettes- you might like 'em, but you don't need 'em!
I'm not a huge fan of casinos or slots at the tracks, but we need the revenue. The casinos will create some decent jobs, but they are a mixed blessing for local communities because they kill local restaurants and entertainment venues. I hate to be a "NIMBY," but I would not want one in the Merrimack Valley or North Shore. Put them on the SouthCoast or in Western Mass., where local residents want them.
ReplyDeletePlease do something about creating JOBS for Massachusetts tax payers Stop giving jobs and contracts to companies that hire workers and then classify the as independant contractors they are cheating the state, Also the number of out of state construction workers that get a pay check while working in mass and then take that check and spend it in another state is out of control, i know of alot of workers who live in NH Rh but work here but dont shop here sure they pay a state tax but most of the money is spent outside mass some even send the money to Canada ,that money would help creat JOBs for Mass residents.
ReplyDeleteIf chapter 70 cuts do go forward this year, please support a budget provision that would ensure graduated chapter 70 cuts. The percentage should be graduated so that regional school districts that rely more heavily on chapter 70 (e.g. the 30 - 40% plus range) aren't hit proportionately harder with the cuts than districts that rely less of these funds. An across the board percentage cut is too much to absorb in a single year and disproportionately harms these schools.
ReplyDeleteGreat idea - nice to see interaction from a Rep. Hoping the Groveland bridge is made safe in the most economic/cost effective manner whether it be to repair or replace.
ReplyDeleteI agree with tax on luxuries like going out to eat/buying the finished product, no soda and candy in schools and many others. However, some people who buy candy buy it because they need it. I have to keep a bag of candy in the house because my husband is diabetic. OJ and a candy bar are sometimes necessary for quick sugar. He keeps a bar or two with him at work. Maybe they will issue "medical" tax-exempt certificates like governmental agencies or non-profits have? Kids going to school who are diabetics can carry candy in their lunchboxes just incase.
Thanks for what you do.
--K