.jpg)
The article piece below was written by James Aloisi on sustainable funding for transportation. It is an admirable attempt at finding a solution to a problem that should not exist in the first place. Failing to make that connection puts the remainder of his thesis in doubt. His use of the standard divisive terminologies in describing the efforts of citizens to reign in an out-of-control tax policy lends further credence to where his political ideologies lie. That ideology being that bigger government is better government.
Behold the one trick pony.
" In Massachusetts, raising the gas tax in any meaningful way is politically difficult to do. As a result, its purchasing power has significantly deteriorated over time. I tried unsuccessfully in 2009 to raise the gas tax by 19 cents a gallon; last year the Legislature enacted a paltry 3-cent-per-gallon hike - the first such increase since George H.W. Bush was president. Also last year, for the first time, the Legislature acted to allow the gas tax to be automatically adjusted for inflation. That commonsense notion is now under attack by right-wing activists who have placed a repeal proposition on this year's general election ballot. The fight over the gas tax inflation adjustment, while important in the short term, is a distraction to the conversation that needs to take place regarding finding a long-term fair and sustainable approach to transportation funding. One thing seems certain: the gas tax is not the future of transportation funding. As automobiles become more fuel efficient and hybrid/electric oriented, the gas tax will diminish as a reliable source of transportation revenue. We need to find sustainable alternatives, derived from transportation sources. First, though, we need to put an end to the old habits of evading responsibility by turning to political slogans, financing gimmicks and excessive borrowing."
And just who is James Aloisi? (from Wikipedia)
James A. "Jim" Aloisi Jr. is a Boston-based writer, lawyer and consultant with a specialty in transportation planning and policy. Aloisi is secretary of Boston-based transit policy advocacy group TransitMatters and a lecturer at the MIT Department of Urban Studies and Planning.[2][3].
So, Jimmy here is a classic policy wonk. I mean.. Look at that guy!
Wikipedia goes on to list his accolades as Chief of Massachusetts Revenue back in the 80's! The guy never met a tax hike he didn't like.
Having stated himself and his tenure in government only magnifies his inability to understand the economic crush of mounting taxation upon the working poor of the state. Taxation for taxation's sake does not produce sustainable revenue for a specific agency (in this case transportation). The history of government mismanagement of tax revenues is as old as government itself.
At the original writing of this blog piece the tax revenue surplus in Massachusetts was in the billions of dollars. At no point in time was there talk of plugging the transportation gap with that surplus, nor paying off deficits, nor any tax relief for the taxpayers. However, the legislators granted themselves pay raises, remodeled the State House corner office and laid the plans for a billion+ dollar Convention Center.
The unfunded liabilities in the transportation sector went, well. Unfunded.
The automatic gasoline tax would do nothing to address this problem. Just as the DMV rate hikes of 75% will never go to fixing roads and bridges. Mr. Aloisi conveniently neglects to mention that all tax revenues now go into a general fund. So, the ruse of an indexed gasoline tax being the panacea to our transportation woes is simply not true.
I personally filmed the DMV dog and pony show and I personally worked on the Repeal petition of the automatic gasoline tax. Once the public was informed on the ramifications of such a scheme many became upset and educated themselves even more. I spent most of the fall of 2013 educating the signers of the first round of petitions. By the summer of 2014 when we gathered the second round of signers, I ran into more and more people who saw the plan written up in newspapers, local news stations and many articles online. By this time, it no longer mattered what side of the political aisle you sat on, this policy was going to affect Democrats and Republicans alike. Basically, anyone who drives a car or drives as part of their job, business or vocation.
People of every ilk just signed the petition.
This brings me back to the disconnect that Mr. Aloisi seems to have. Increased costs of gasoline mean increased costs of goods and services. This is called inflation. And since the gasoline tax is indexed on inflation the tax will rise incrementally each and every year.
But that was the whole plan to begin with, wasn't it?
Well, that was some years ago. Today in 2024 we have a Democrat in the corner office at Beacon Hill. Our esteemed rug munching Governor has dusted off the shelf and is re-introducing TCI once more upon the citizens of Taxachusetts.
And it is all about transportation. She has commissioned a "Task Force". I am sure Climate Change will enter the picture sometime soon.
In the Howie Carr piece, he asks the basic questions of any cognizant person who a turnip is NOT. Where did the other money go?
I wrote a blog piece years ago about Worcester getting lots of that Cigarette money from the Congressional hearings. Apparently, Massachusetts was to get $64 million for X amount of years for health care and the whole 'Stop Smoking" campaign. But only $8 million was actually targeted and spent.
Where did the rest of the money go?
And true to any Democrat policy that cannot defend the merits of their case Healey waited until the filing for ballot question opposition had passed. So, don't be looking to voice your opinion on this wallet grab in the little red cookbook the Sect. of State sends out this November.
The current Google search puts the Massachusetts Federal and State gas tax at just shy of .45 cents/gallon. According to the link below Massachusetts is responsible for .24 cents of that. And the Healey Administration has not disclosed any numbers as far as I can see.
As a political writer and former radio producer from 2009-2019 I have had the unique opportunity to speak with candidates, authors, activists, business leaders and Tea Party members on my show. I have conducted hundreds of interviews and never heard anyone tell me that higher taxes translate into a better economic model.
So, what does this leave us with? It leaves us with an underemployed population struggling to stay afloat amidst staggering inflation fueled by (pun intended) indexed gas taxes, net job losses and an increasing inability to make ends meet. Currently there are well over 1 million Massachusetts residents on some sort of state aid/ food stamps. That is roughly 1/6th of our population.
And now we have another un-knowned number of illegals our Governor has let in. Maybe they will be buying gas!
As I spoke to candidates from the western part of the state, they made me aware that they have to drive several miles just to get to work, the store, a hospital, school. Hell, anywhere due to the rural countryside. And jobs aren't exactly growing on trees out there in the Berkshires.
As I spoke to candidates from the western part of the state, they made me aware that they have to drive several miles just to get to work, the store, a hospital, school. Hell, anywhere due to the rural countryside. And jobs aren't exactly growing on trees out there in the Berkshires.
An indexed gasoline tax would cripple these people.
OH, and Mr. Aloisi? The T doesn't run out there so what good would it be for these people?
While the left claims that higher taxes forces the wealthy to pay more of their fair share the reality is that the major burden of taxes are borne by the working poor.
OH, and Mr. Aloisi? The T doesn't run out there so what good would it be for these people?
While the left claims that higher taxes forces the wealthy to pay more of their fair share the reality is that the major burden of taxes are borne by the working poor.
And let me point this simple model out.
Higher taxes reduce purchasing power on middle- and low-income workers. Higher DMV rates forces a working poor single mother to choose between a $50 inspection sticker or gas money. High fuel and DMV rates make automobile ownership virtually impossible for the working poor and they are just one break down, one cancelled high-rate insurance policy or one police pull over away from being screwed financially.
The car is towed at $200 and stored at $200 a day.
The poor suffer.
Higher costs mean businesses cannot pay decent wages to loyal employees and forces many to lay them off. The entire climb up the socio-economic ladder collapses. Food costs more because it takes fuel to get it to the store.
The poor suffer.
The crazy, suggested solution to this problem was that we raise the minimum wage. Not that it would do any of the wage earners any good if they knew they had to pay more of that 'imagined' raise in fees, fines, taxes, fuel costs, insurance hikes, never mind that any wage increase puts a person into a higher income tax bracket and may force their employer to lay them off because the employer simply can't afford it.
But Mr. Aloisi wouldn't know anything about this. Or our Governor.
To quote his own article; " having spent many years in and out of government."
The One Trick Pony.
This guy has no idea what the working poor have to deal with just to survive. Government agencies exist only for the perpetuation of those agencies, NOT to serve the public trust.
I attended the DMV hearings. I noticed the majority of audience members were union workers for the state. All their well-appointed cars were parked in the Union Station parking garage proudly displaying the state worker license plates.
The insurance, gas, maintenance, inspections, even the weekly wash and wax are performed by other people and paid for by you and I.
The insurance, gas, maintenance, inspections, even the weekly wash and wax are performed by other people and paid for by you and I.
Hell, when I grew up in Northborough the police drove the squad cars home at the end of their shifts. Talk about transportation costs.
So, before we begin to lament on the condition of our transportation system, we should take a critical look at the agency that oversees it. Mind you, the original 500 million back in the Doolittle Deval Administration wanted for Mass Transit was supposed to plug the pension gap; not to lay more track to western Mass or Fall River as he opined. Worcester alone had over 100 million in unfunded pensions, most of it centered around the transportation sector. Amazingly the city was still able to redesign and remodel the sidewalks and Worcester Common with expensive paving stone and a marble entryway sporting the city seal. Never mind the money spent on the new Hub and the new multi-million-dollar bus maintenance facility.
And let us not forget Polar Park.
The article Aloisi wrote and the comments he made for The Commonwealth Magazine is what I call The One Trick Pony.
The article Aloisi wrote and the comments he made for The Commonwealth Magazine is what I call The One Trick Pony.
He uses the same rhetoric we hear all the time.
Repeal The Automatic Gasoline Tax.
.... And That Is The Diatribe....
Repeal The Automatic Gasoline Tax.
.... And That Is The Diatribe....
No comments:
Post a Comment