Supporters, detractors choose sides on Question 1

“I think it’s preposterous,” said Roger Volk, a Lynn certified public accountant in business for 40 years. “In states like Massachusetts, New York and California, you would have to cut too many programs, and that means eliminating more jobs, which is going to hurt our economy tremendously. I’m all for cutting waste, but the government would still have to raise money somehow for public safety and education. Eliminating the income tax just isn’t realistic.”

The tax repeal derives the bulk of its support from the Committee for Small Government, led by Michael Cloud and Carla Howell. Cloud is a motivation speaker who was the state’s Libertarian Party candidate for U.S. Senate in 2002. Cloud founded the Center for Small Government in 2004, an organization advocating its namesake.

Those in favor of Ballot Question No. 1 contend state politicians have not kept faith with their promises to taxpayers. The state Legislature previously blocked a ballot question that, if approved by the voters, would have reduced the state income tax to 5 percent.

By eliminating the state income tax, over 3.4 million Massachusetts taxpayers would save an average of $3,600 each annually — the largest tax cut in the commonwealth’s history. Supporters say the tax cut is actually a pay raise, adding that Massachusetts would become a more attractive place to live, work, invest, and raise families.

Demographic studies show that from 1991-2007, more than 550,000 people moved out of Massachusetts, leaving the state ranked as the 49th worst in the United States in terms of population loss. Many transplants cited high taxes, which has earned the state the nickname Taxachusetts.

Although state income tax accounts for 39 percent of all revenue on Beacon Hill, even without those receipts state legislators each year would still have $18 billion to spend, according to Cloud.

The opposition is spearheaded by Michael Widmer, president of the business-backed Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, as well as by Gov. Deval Patrick, and the governing boards of various communities, typically those heavily dependent on state aid.

Other organizations against the income tax repeal include the Coalition for Our Communities, created by the Massachusetts AFL-CIO. The coalition’s funds come mainly from unions, including $750,000 from the National Education Association, and $250,000 from American Federation of Teachers Solidarity Fund, two Washington, D.C.-based groups.

Opponents also claim the measure is irresponsible, reminding taxpayers that Massachusetts has levied a state income tax for 92 years. They assert the state would lose nearly 40 percent of its income, which would deal an $11 billion blow, causing ripple effects throughout state government. Education, health care, public safety and infrastructure improvements purportedly would be put at risk.

To get the initiative on the Nov. 4 ballot as a binding referendum question, proponents submitted 100,000 signatures to the Secretary of State, of which more than 76,000 were deemed valid.

Despite the widespread public support, the Legislature declined to pass it by the first Wednesday in May. As a result, the petitioners had to collect an additional 11,099 valid signatures by June 18.

By July 3, the task was completed, with 15,913 additional certified signatures filed. The question was included on the ballot.

“If it passes, if the people say they don’t want a state income tax, then it would still go to the Legislature to be voted on,” said Volk, who under former Gov. William F. Weld was offered the job of state tax commissioner but declined.

“Personally, I think Massachusetts should revamp its entire tax system. Right now, we have a flat tax of 5.3 percent. You earn $10,000, you pay 5.3 percent. You earn $100 million, you pay 5.3 percent. It’s unfair. There should be a progressive tax. You make more, you pay a little more. We’re the only state with a flat tax.”

Volk cited Rhode Island’s tax system as a model. “Rhode Island takes your federal income tax and uses it as a measure. It’s one simple document and your state tax is determined by what it says on the federal tax form. It couldn’t be more simple,” he said.

Since Question No. 1 was placed on the ballot through an initiative petition, its results are binding, based on provisions in the state Constitution. If voters pass it, the law reducing the state income tax to zero over a two-year period would become effective 30 days after the election.

However, in the past, the Legislature has found ways to buck the will of the people despite the outcome of the vote. For example, in 2000 Massachusetts voters passed a gradual income tax rollback, but the Legislature simply ignored the edict.

July 2009

Local Weather