If I had to sum this past week up using just three words, those words would be guns, rules, and taxes.
Guns. My office and the phones and email inboxes of my colleagues were flooded this week by citizens of the Commonwealth who were beginning to speak up about their right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by both the United States Constitution and the older, earlier Massachusetts Constitution.
While nearly universal in their sorrow over the terrible atrocity committed by the man in Newtown, Connecticut, every caller and every letter or email was adamant that even more draconian laws and stricter limits on the types of firearms and ammunition that a free and law abiding people could possess and legally use was not the answer to stopping horrible crime perpetrated by perverse and sickly twisted lawbreakers.
Most communications urged lawmakers to instead focus on factors such as violent video games, music, movies and television, and medications prescribed to young people that in some cases have caused psychotic breaks. Many who contacted my office called for more supports for the mentally ill and tougher background checks on those who were disturbed to prevent them from owning firearms.
And every person emphasized that any new laws would only be effective in regulating and restricting the behavioral of those who already followed the law: the law abiding. Criminals, by definition, disobey laws, whatever those laws may say and more laws on top of the many already on the books but rarely enforced would have little effect on stemming the violence perpetrated by a criminal few. I must say I cannot disagree with anything they said.
Governor Deval Patrick and Representative David Linsky (D-Natick) may be well intentioned or maybe they are just using this crisis in Connecticut to pursue an agenda, but I’ve read what they proposed in their new anti-gun owner laws and nothing would have stopped the shooting in Newtown.
This issue will be up for debate for a long time in Massachusetts. Unlike New York where they rushed a flawed package of laws through their process in two days we in Massachusetts will be much more deliberative and I hope inclusive in our debate.
The second word to describe the focus of this week is rules. On Wednesday the House of Representatives met in its first day of formal debate to take up a package of rules that the members of the House agree to abide by and operate under for the next two years of the session. My fellow Republicans and I offered numerous amendments to try to improve the rules but were on every single attempt rebuffed, unanimously, by the Democrat majority. I was surprised that not a single incoming freshman Democrat or veteran Democrat legislator had the courage to even question their leadership and vote for more openness and transparency in how the House conducts the people’s business.
I’ll let this blurb from the State House News Service speak for itself: “HOUSE REJECTS REFORMS, ADOPTS JOINT RULES: The House on Wednesday adopted rules governing its interactions with the Senate after rejecting amendments designed to make it more difficult to withdrawn funds from the state’s rainy day fund, require at least 24 hours for lawmakers to review conference committee bills, and forcing legislative committees to post votes on bills online.
“The rejected rules changes were proposed by the 29-member House Republican caucus and easily defeated, with brief or no debate, by the Democratic majority. The House also rejected a proposal aimed at speeding up consideration of home rule petitions filed with local support, requiring a resolution on minimum local aid by March 15, and forcing committees to give bills either favorable or unfavorable reports.
“House Minority Leader Brad Jones said that by requiring favorable or unfavorable committee reports on bills, the House would have a chance to force full floor debates and votes on bills rather than see so many bills die in committees after being voted into dead-end study orders.”
And finally, taxes. Last week I wrote about Governor Patrick’s state of the state speech and his call to increase the state income tax to pay for education and transportation. When his House 1 budget was released this week we were all surprised to learn it contained even more proposals to raise taxes on the families and businesses of our state.
Once more, from the State House News Service, “PATRICK ROLLS OUT $34.8 BILLION BUDGET PLAN FOR FISCAL 2014: Gov. Deval Patrick on Wednesday proposed what he called a “growth budget,” a $34.8 billion spending plan for fiscal 2014 that relies on $1.2 billion in new tax revenue to support investments in education and transportation.
“This is a plan to grow jobs,” Patrick said. In addition to the tax increases the governor has already recommended, Patrick’s budget proposes to repeal the exemption of candy and soda from the sales tax and increase the cigarette excise tax by $1 to $3.51 per pack. Under the budget proposal to be filed with the House, Chapter 70 funding for local school districts would increase by $226 million to $4.39 billion in fiscal 2014, which starts on July 1. Unrestricted local aid would see a more moderate increase of $31 million to $930 million. The total amount of funding in the budget dedicated to local aid would increase to $5.57 billion, accounting for 14.6 percent of the total budget.
“Administration and Finance Secretary Glen Shor said the budget also relies on $555 million in one-time revenue, including $400 million from the state’s “rainy day” account that would leave the reserve fund with a balance of more than $1 billion. Shor called the use of one-time revenue “completely in accord with the long-term fiscal plan,” and the total would be significantly less than the more than $800 million to $900 million being relied upon now to balance the current fiscal 2013 budget, including $550 million in stabilization funds. Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, said the tax proposal carried “some risk to the economy in the short term.” “There are probably more moving pieces in this tax proposal than anything I’ve ever seen from a governor,” Widmer said.
All I can say is “Be afraid. Be very afraid.” Taxachusetts is back!
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this column are those of the author and not the staff, editor, or publisher of the Westfield News.
Representative Don Humason and his Chief of Staff Maura Cassin may be reached at their Westfield District Office, 64 Noble Street, Westfield, MA 01085, (413) 568-1366.
Representative Don Humason may be reached at his Boston office, State House Room 542, Boston, MA 02133, (617) 722-2803.
Email address: [email protected]
Website: www.DonHumason.org
