Big Government fails in California, free markets thrive in Texas

The American Big Government Experiment has failed, as the Soviet one did previously. A cautionary tale for Massachusetts, if we are not too far gone already to heed it.

Calif., not Texas, made own mess

By Michael Barone
Tuesday, March 9, 2010

“Stop messing with Texas!” That was the message Gov. Rick Perry bellowed on election night as he celebrated his victory over Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison in the Republican primary for governor. In his reference to Texas’ anti-littering slogan, Perry was making a point applicable to national as well as Texas politics and addressed to Democrats as well as to Republicans.

His point was that the big government policies of the Obama administration and Democratic congressional leaders are opposed not just because of their dire fiscal effects but also as an intrusion on voters’ ability to make their own decisions.

No one would include Perry on a list of serious presidential candidates, including himself. But in his 10 years as governor, the longest in the state’s history, Texas has been teaching lessons that the rest of the nation should heed.

They are lessons that are particularly vivid when you contrast Texas, the nation’s second most populous state, with the most populous, California. Both were once Mexican territory. Both have grown prodigiously over the past half-century. Both have populations that today are about one-third Hispanic.

But they differ vividly in public policy and in their economic progress - or lack of it. California has gone in for big government. Democrats hold large margins in the legislature.

Those Democratic majorities have done the bidding of public employee unions to the point that state government faces huge deficits. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s attempt to reduce the power of the Democratic-union combine was defeated in 2005 when public employee unions poured $100 million - all originally extracted from taxpayers - into TV ads.

Californians have responded by leaving the state. For the first time ever, it appears that California will gain no House seats or electoral votes from reapportionment.

Texas is a different story. Texas has low taxes - and no state income taxes - and a much smaller government. Its legislature meets for only 90 days every two years, compared to California’s year-round legislature. Its fiscal condition is sound. Public employee unions are weak or nonexistent.

But Texas seems to be delivering superior services. Its teachers are paid less than California’s. But its test scores - and with a demographically similar school population - are higher. California’s once fabled freeways are crumbling and crowded. Texas has built gleaming new highways.

Full column

What part of "IT'S A NEW TAX!" don't Democrats understand?

In an article Debate around meals tax heats up in yesterday's Boston Globe, Eric Moskowitz reports how many towns have seen a greater windfall than expected, that people did not stop eating out and have paid the tax, but strangely many of us still oppose this tax. They just don't get it.

The only reason this tax has not had the expected effect of depressing business at restaurants is that many of us that oppose this idiotic NEW TAX decided not to hang our local business owners out to dry. I contemplated going over the border into Melrose to eat, or up the road to Stoneham, but I am friendly with the owners of my favorite Medford eateries, and could not bring myself to abandon them. This does not make it OK for pro-tax Democrats to nickel and dime me(literally, in the "adding 15 cents to every $20 restaurant tab" used by the author) with NEW TAXES during a Democrat created and fueld recession.

Taxes are meant to fund the necessary services of government, and the supporters of the NEW TAX dutifully employ the usual stock Democrat talking point to thus justify it; “Unfortunately, I think some of the chamber of commerce organizations, the business organizations, see this as a threat when it’s not a threat,’’ Geoffery Beckwith, executive with the pro-tax Massachusetts Municipal Association said. “The greater threat is to have municipal services such as police, fire protection, or schools erode more because of a lack of revenue."

Well, a few things here. First of all, any NEW TAX is a threat from our current state(and now City) government. The threat is the NEW TAX will increase over time, and become a permanent NEW TAX as is the norm in ths corrupt Commonwealth. Second, why is it that policemen, firemen, and teachers (who thanks to the MTA are more secure in their jobs than toll takers) are always threatened when tax money dries up? Why are Mayor McGlynn and Deval Patrick's personal cars and staff members safely insulated from any economic shortfalls, but first responders and teachers are permanently endangered(I'll answer that one for you, that is how pro-tax folks - commonly called "Democrats" - generate sympathy for unconstitutional NEW TAXES)? And third, does anyone really think that Patrick at the state level and McGlynn locally will not still come up with a budget shortfall, no matter how much new revenue is dumped into the public sector sink-hole?

"It's .15 on a $20 tab." "It's a new cup of coffee." "It's not a threat."

It's a NEW TAX, and in the age of aggressively growing, out of control, unaccountable state and local government, every NEW TAX is a threat. Expect the 7% tax on meals to become the law of the land for perpetuity from here on out, and even a .75% "correction" to the 6.25% sales tax in the future to make 7% the rate for all sales in Massachusetts, meals or otherwise. And then expect Mayor McGlynn to have our city engage in more unsafe borrowing schemes, and Deval Patrick to beg money from the state to pay for normal operating costs again next year anyways. Because tax-and-spend Democrats can never have enough money, they are always one new electronic toll, one casino scheme, or one ".15 on a $20 tab" tax away from being back in the black, but in reality, any new funds generated will be siphoned away to welfare programs and to line the pockets of Massachusetts politicians.

Nick McNulty
Medford GOP

With the bang-up job the Government has done fixing our economy, just imagine what they will be doing to our healthcare system

OT workers line pockets with stimulus dollars

By Joe Dwinell
Friday, March 5, 2010

Highly touted Bay State job creation programs have stimulated a pile of pocket-padding overtime for state workers and detail pay for cops even as the unemployment rate continues to climb, a Herald payroll analysis shows.

Three civil engineers with the Department of Conservation and Recreation racked up overtime tallies last year of more than $100,000 each working “night and day” on bridge projects, officials say.

One of the engineers propped up his $76,000 salary with added hours to secure a lofty $205,000 in take-home pay last year, according to the newly released state payroll obtained by the Herald.

Two other civil engineers pocketed an extra $117,000 each in OT on top of their modest salaries.

Full story

'All About the Ronnies, Baby!' Republican Congressman Pushes to Put Reagan on $50 Bill

By KAREN TRAVERS
March 4, 2010

In 1998, rapper P. Diddy introduced the nation to a new phrase. "It's all about the Benjamins, baby," he said, referring to $100 bills with the face of Benjamin Franklin.

A North Carolina congressman is pushing to get Ronald Reagan on the $50 bill.

Given the tough economic times, perhaps Diddy needs to update his song and aim for a smaller unit of currency.

And if Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., has his way, Diddy may soon be singing about "Ronnies," in honor of the nation's 40th president, Ronald Reagan.

McHenry has introduced legislation that would take President Ulysses S. Grant off of the $50 bill and replace him with Reagan.

"Every generation needs its own heroes," McHenry said in a statement. "One decade into the 21st century, it's time to honor the last great president of the 20th and give President Reagan a place beside Presidents Roosevelt and Kennedy."

Franklin D. Roosevelt's profile is on the dime and Kennedy's is on the half-dollar.

Full story

Scott Brown Scores a Trio of Committee Seats

By BERNIE BECKER

Scott P. Brown, the newest member of the Senate, has received his committee assignments, and there seems to be a theme: The Massachusetts Republican has been given a slot on the Armed Services, Homeland Security and Veterans’ Affairs panels.

Mr. Brown, a member of the National Guard for three decades, said in a statement: “We are currently involved in two wars, and these committees are critical in keeping our country safe, as well as protecting the men and women who defend us. It is equally important that the men and women in uniform receive the care and benefits they have earned through their selfless service.”

According to The Boston Globe, Mr. Brown — who won a January special election to capture the seat once held by the late Edward M. Kennedy — received two of the three committees he requested. But while he reportedly asked to sit on the Appropriations Committee instead of Veterans’ Affairs, Mr. Brown had made veterans issues one of his major topics of concern as a Massachusetts state senator.

The full Senate must approve Mr. Brown’s committee slots, which were handed out by the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell. But that typically happens with little difficulty.

Ah, if only Medford residents were as well represented as Abington

As many Medford residents will remember, our City Council unwisely listened to Mayor McGlynn and Governor Patrick, and Medford became one of 30 communities to enact this meals tax. That number is up to 70 now as the tax-lobbyists pressure other communities to join them, and soon this tax hike will be omnipresent, and as tempoary as the tolls on Rte. 90. Shame on Medford's City Council for listening to these two big government tax-and-spenders and helping to turn Medford into a tax-friendly, business-hostile city.

Tax leaves a bad taste

By Boston Herald Editorial Staff

Abington gets it.

Last week the Abington Board of Selectmen decided to take no action on a proposal to impose a local tax of .75 percent on restaurant meals, which would have brought the total state and local levy to 7 percent.

Like a number of their South Shore neighbors, selectmen in Abington decided the amount of revenue the tax would generate - an estimated $114,000 a year - wasn’t worth labeling Abington a tax-happy haven.

The local tax “may not seem like a lot, but what it says is Abington has a meals tax,” board chairman Thomas Corbett told the Patriot Ledger.

And if you’re Joe Sub Shop deciding between Abington and nearby Hanover or Rockland for your new location, well, wouldn’t that be part of the equation?

The tax has generated big bucks for some communities - namely Boston. In October, the most recent month for which figures are available, the tax produced nearly $1.5 million in new revenue for the Hub (far less for a community like Winthrop, which collected just under $8,000).

But frankly those sums pale in comparison to the savings that could be generated by bolder municipal reforms, including a plan that would give local officials broader authority to design health insurance plans for municipal workers. In a “municipal relief” bill unveiled last week state lawmakers, who approved the local meals tax championed by Gov. Deval Patrick, conspicuously left that reform out.

About 70 communities have adopted the local meals tax, but we would ask them the same thing the selectmen in Abington asked: Was it really worth it?

"If you make under $250,000 a year, your taxes won't go up one dime..."

"...unless you drink, or smoke, or eat in restaurants, or drive a car..."

Gov. Deval Patrick keeps driving up RMV fees

Critics slam new $5 fee for basic branch services

By Hillary Chabot and Edward Mason

Gov. Deval Patrick is quietly whacking beleaguered Bay State motorists with a $5 fee to use Registry of Motor Vehicle branches to renew their licenses and registrations, outraging critics who say the “back-door tax” hits poor and elderly drivers the hardest.

The fee, which goes into effect today, comes on the heels of a $10 license renewal increase last year.

Full story