Page 18 THE REVERE ADVOCATE – FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2022 If you have any questions about this week’s report, e-mail us at bob@beaconhillrollcall.com or call us at (617) 720-1562 Senate last week. This week, Beacon Hill Roll Call reGET A FREE SUBSCRIPTION TO MASSTERLIST – Join more than 22,000 people, from movers and shakers to political junkies and interested citizens, who start their weekday morning with MASSterList—the popular newsletter that chronicles news and informed analysis about what’s going on up on Beacon Hill, in Massachusetts politics, policy, media and influence. The stories are drawn from major news organizations as well as specialized publications selected by widely acclaimed and highly experienced writers Keith Regan and Matt Murphy who introduce each article in their own clever and inimitable way. MASSterlist will be e-mailed to you FREE every Monday through Friday morning and will give you a leg up on what’s happening in the blood sport of Bay State politics. For more information and to get your free subscription, go to: https://lp.constantcontactpages. com/su/aPTLucK THE HOUSE AND SENATE: There were no roll calls in the House or ports on the number of times in the 2021-2022 session each senator sided with Republican Gov. Charlie Baker and voted to sustain the governor’s 31 vetoes of items, mostly in the fi scal 2022 and fi scal 2023 state budgets. A vote to sustain means the senator supports Baker’s veto. A vote to override means the senator voted to fund the item despite the governor’s veto. The current makeup of the Senate is 37 Democrats and three Republicans. A two-thirds vote is required to override a gubernatorial veto in the 40-member Senate. The governor needs the support of 14 senators to sustain a veto if all 40 senators voted—and fewer votes if some members are absent or there are vacancies. Baker fell far short of that goal as WASTE REMOVAL & BUILDING MAINTENANCE • Landscaping, Lawn Care, Mulching • Yard Waste & Rubbish Removal • Interior & Exterior Demolition (Old Decks, Fences, Pools, Sheds, etc.) • Appliance and Metal Pick-up • Construction and Estate Cleanouts • Pick-up Truck Load of Trash starting at $169 • Carpentry LICENSED & INSURED Call for FREE ESTIMATES! KITCHEN CABINETS To Look Like New 508-840-0501 FURNITURE STRIP & FINISH eight votes was the most support he received on any veto. The Senate easily overrode all 31 vetoes, including eight that were overridden unanimously. The vetoes had no support from 28 of the 37 Democrats who never once voted to sustain Baker’s veto. Only nine Democratic senators voted to sustain any of the governor’s vetoes. The Democrat who voted the most times with Baker to sustain his veto is Sen. Walter Timilty (D-Milton) who voted with Baker fi ve times. Sen. Marc Pacheco (DTaunton) voted with Baker three times. Sens. Sonia Chang-Díaz (DBoston), Nick Collins (D-Boston), Diana DiZoglio (D-Methuen), Anne Gobi (D-Spencer), Jason Lewis (DWinchester) and Mike Rodrigues (D-Westport) and John Velis (DWestfield) each voted with Baker once. None of the three Republicans voted with Baker 100 percent of the time. The Republican senator who voted the greatest number of times with Baker was Sen. Ryan Fattman (R-Sutton) who voted with Baker 20 times. GOP Minority Leader Sen. Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester) was a close second and voted with Baker 17 times. Sen. Patrick O’Connor (R-Weymouth) voted with Baker only eight times, the least number of times among the three Republicans. NUMBER OF TIMES SENATORS SUPPORTED GOV. BAKER’S VETOES IN THE 2021-2022 SESSION Gov. Baker vetoed 31 proposals that we approved by the Legislature in 2021-2022. Here is how your senator fared in his or her support of Gov. Baker on the vetoes. The percentage next to the senator’s name represents the percentage of times that he or she supported Baker. The number in parentheses represents the actual number of times the senator supported Baker. Sen. Lydia Edwards 0 percent (0) ALSO UP ON BEACON HILL 2.9 BILLION IN TAX RELIEF IS ON ITS WAY – State Auditor Suzanne Bump has certified that the Department of Revenue’s (DOR) fi gures are correct and Massachusetts must return $2.9 billion to taxpayers based on Chapter 62F, a 1986 law approved by the voters. That law requires that tax revenue above a certain amount collected by the state go back to the taxpayers. Bump has determined that the net state tax revenues of $41,812,654,358 for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022 is $2,941,499,731 above the allowable state tax revenues of $38,871,154,627. “Our review requires us to do more than check DOR’s math,” said Bump. “As has been done each year of my tenure, we apply generally accepted government auditing standards in our review to verify the accuracy and completeness of the report provided by DOR. This provides us with reasonable assurance required by those standards that DOR’s fi gures are correct.” “Stronger-than expected state tax revenues have led to a major surplus for fiscal year 2022, and we are pleased to be able to return nearly $3 billion in excess revenue to the taxpayers,” said Gov. Charlie Baker. “With families facing continued pressure from high prices and infl ation, these returns will provide some needed relief. Even with nearly $3 billion going back to taxpayers, signifi cant state and federal resources remain, and we look forward to working with the Legislature to invest this funding into our economy, communities and families.” According to the Baker Administration, the $2.9 billion will be returned to eligible taxpayers by the DOR in proportion to personal income tax liability in Massachusetts incurred by taxpayers in 2021. “Eligible taxpayers will receive a credit in the form of a refund that is approximately 13 percent of their 2021 personal income tax liability,” said a statement released by the Offi ce of Administration and Finance. “This percentage is a preliminary estimate and will be fi nalized in late October, after all 2021 tax returns are fi led. To be eligible, individuals must have fi led a 2021 state tax return on or before October 17, 2022. An individual’s credit may be reduced due to refund intercepts, including for unpaid taxes, unpaid child support and certain other debts. “That our tax cap has been dormant for over three decades until today shows that it is working exactly as it was designed to do,” said Chip Ford, executive director of Citizens for Limited Taxation which sponsored the 1986 ballot question. “Our tax cap was intended as an automatic release valve for when revenue surpluses reach an unnecessary level, especially such an extraordinary level as recently. It was meant as a check on unlimited taxation and unsustainable spending.” “It’s unfortunate that our late-executive director Barbara Anderson, who worked so hard for adoption of our 1986 ballot question (and so many other tax reforms) is no longer with us to celebrate this success she achieved for all taxpayers of Massachusetts,” continued Ford, “But I’m confi dent she’s up there joining us joyfully in spirit.” “This is a tremendous victory for all taxpayers of the commonwealth,” said Paul Craney of the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance. “We were fully prepared to bring the auditor to the Supreme Judicial Court to enforce this certifi cation and are even more thrilled that they’ve made this certifi cation ahead of the September 20 deadline.” “The 1986 law was regressive when it passed before I was born, and it is regressive today,” said Jonathan Cohn, the policy director at the group Progressive Massachusetts. “It is incumbent upon the Legislature to ensure that the implementation of such a law does not make inequality in our state worse, as it undoubtedly will if it is used to disproportionately benefi t the highest-income residents— those who bear the impact of infl ation and economic turbulence of any kind the least—as Gov. Baker proposes.” “I support the idea to deliver $2.9 billion in relief checks to taxpayers this fall,” said Rep. Mike Connolly (D-Cambridge). “However, Chapter 62F would send the largest checks to the state’s top income earners, while those most impacted by infl ation would get the smallest checks. That’s not just inequitable, it’s also bad economic policy. Moreover, 62F only authorizes tax credits for next year, not checks this fall. That’s why I am calling on legislative leaders to return to formal session as soon as possible to adjust the 62F distribution formula so that middle-income residents and the working poor are prioritized, as they are the ones who are being most crushed by infl ation. At the same time, I think the legislature should take action to legally authorize the distribution of these checks this fall. Otherwise, Gov. Baker’s rebate scheme could get tied up in the courts. REDUCED TRAFFIC FATALITIES AND PROTECT PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLISTS (H 5103) – The House and Senate approved and sent to Gov. Baker a bill designed to protect “vulnerable road users” which includes pedestrians, constructions workers, emergency responders bicyclists, skateboarders, roller skates and wheelchair users. A key provision requires vehicle drivers, when passing a vulnerable user, to pass at a safe distance of not less than 3 feet when the motor vehicle is traveling at 30 miles per hour or less, and an additional foot of clearance for every ten miles per hour that the vehicle is traveling above 30 miles per hour. Other provisions include establishing a process to lower the default speed limit to 25 mph on state highways and parkways in thickly settled or business districts; requiring higher-visibility mirrors and lateral sideguards on certain state-owned, state-operated and state-contracted trucks; creating a uniform reporting tool for crashes involving a pedestrian or cyclist; and requiring bicyclists to have red rear lights. “[The bill] strengthens traffic safety regulations, making our roads safer and taking critical steps to save lives, and reduce crashes that needlessly put people at risk,” said Rep. Christine Barber (DSomerville), sponsor of an earlier version of the bill.“With an emphasis on enhancing safeguards for pedestrians and bikers, the commonwealth positions itself as a leader in road user safety and promotes alternative modes of transportation.” Others sponsors of earlier versions of the bill, including Reps. Michael Moran (D-Brighton),Bill Strauss (D-Mattapoisett) and Dave Rogers (D-Cambridge) did not respond to repeated requests from Beacon Hill Roll Call to comment on the bill being approved and sent to Gov. Baker. BALLOT QUESTION ASKS VOTERS TO REPEAL THE NEW LAW ALLOWING DRIVER’S LICENSE FOR UNDOCUMENTED/ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS (H 4805) – The new law that would allow, starting July 1, 2023, undocumented/illegal immigrants to apply for a Massachusetts standard driver’s license is going to be on the November ballot for voters to decide whether to repeal it or leave it intact. “Fair and Secure Massachusetts,” the group spearheading the repeal campaign, submitted 71,883 voter signatures to get the question on the ballot, far more than the 40,120 signatures required. The law would require an applicant for a driver’s license “without legal presence” in the United States to provide the Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV) with a foreign passport and at least one of fi ve other documents: a driver’s license from another state, a foreign driver’s license, a birth certifi cate, a foreign national identifi cation card or a marriage certifi cate or divorce decree from any U.S. state. The bill became law when the House and Senate on June 9 overrode Gov. Charlie Baker’s veto of the bill. Maureen Maloney, whose son Matthew Denice was killed by a drunk driver who did not have legal status in the United States, is the chair of the repeal campaign. She said that Massachusetts roads “will be much more unsafe” if the law takes eff ect. “Voters lined up to sign our petition, they voiced to us their reasons for opposing the law,” Maloney said. BEACON | SEE Page 20
19 Publizr Home