THINKING
OUTSIDE THE BOX
It's your money ... end
the state income tax
Dr. Charles Ormsby
 On November 4th you will
have an opportunity to reclaim an average
of $3,700 of YOUR money every year, year
after year after year. This is money that
you have earned and that is currently
taken out of your paycheck every payday
by the Massachusetts Department of
Revenue. It is your money. But it is
being taken from you to line the pockets
of special interests.
Over the next month you will hear the
panicked screams of those who have become
comfortable at your expense. They will
threaten to take away police and fire
protection and they will tell you that
your children will no longer have
teachers, books or … well, they may
not even be fed!!
They will tell you every lie they can
manufacture to scare you into parting
with your earnings while continuing to
fund their gravy train. These lies will
be broadcast in ads paid for almost
exclusively by union contributions. As of
August 31st, the “Vote No”
coalition had received over $1.5 million
from public employee unions, but only
$100 from a single individual. More
than $5 million in union ads urging a
“no vote” is expected before
November 4th.
Of course, these unionized government
employees and government contractors are
screaming bloody murder! They have
arranged a sweet deal that they could
never command in a free market … and
they want to stick you, your children,
and your grandchildren with the bill.
Is this the kind of government you want
to support?
* Guaranteed jobs that can’t be lost
even based on pathetic performance or a
lack of attendance1
* Jobs with extravagant healthcare
coverage paid 80-90% by the taxpayers
* High, guaranteed-benefit pensions with
full healthcare coverage after a mere 20
years of service
* Thousands out on questionable
disabilities2
* Guarantees of “prevailing
wages” which only prevail in
government contracts because real
competition is absent
* Make-work jobs doled out to special
interests without competitive bidding and
often staffed at overtime wage rates
(e.g., police road details)
Extravagant, wasteful, non-competitive
personnel costs, driven up by government
unions, are only the tip of the iceberg.
The special interests also recognize that
many government programs paid for with
your income tax dollars are not needed at
any price. These expenditures represent
pure waste: No-show jobs for the
brother-in-laws of politicians,
overlapping police forces, and
agencies/programs for every conceivable
purpose. In fact, many programs actually
cause substantial harm!
You might ask yourself: How does our
Division of Insurance make your life
better when we have nearly the highest
car insurance and health insurance
premiums in the nation?
Call your state representative and ask
him or her why the state
agencies/departments listed in the nearby
box should be more important to you than
keeping the $3,700 currently taken from
you in income taxes.
This list of departments/agencies could
go on for pages … If you go to the
Mass.gov Web site you will find 500
such entities listed.
Some of you may read this list (or the
whole list) and say, “These sound
worthwhile.”
Do you support spending on all these
departments/agencies? Really? Are you
sure?
OK, I confess. One of those listed in the
box (but only one) is a fake. Can you
pick it out? The answer is at the end of
this article. I wonder if your state
representative or senator can tell you
which one doesn’t exist?
But they all sound like good ideas,
don’t they? Do you think anyone will
ever create an agency called The
Massachusetts Department of Does-No-Good?
Of course not. Every department and
agency has penned a name that seems
important, valuable, and even
indispensable. That is how they build a
constituency and protect themselves from
budget cuts or, heaven forbid,
elimination.
Elimination! Oh my God! So how often are
Massachusetts agencies eliminated? Almost
never. But one was recently eliminated:
The Office of Educational Quality and
Accountability.
It makes sense doesn’t it? We spend
over $10 billion every year on education
in Massachusetts, but we wouldn’t
want quality or accountability would we?
Do you think the teachers unions or
superintendents association might have
wanted this agency eliminated? Do you
smell foxes in the chicken coop?
Just consider these statistics: 5,500 new
state employees over the last five years;
2,000 just in the last year; prison
guards earning over $100,000; thousands
of government employees enjoying lifetime
disability gravy trains, on and on. Noone
has a complete list. It would take a
government agency just to catalogue
… well, I guess that is a bad idea!
It is embarrassingly obvious:
Massachusetts government is bloated,
wasteful, corrupt, and run for the
benefit of government employees and
special interests. NOT for the average
citizen like you and me.
But that still leaves a question that
must be answered: What budget level would
be adequate for Massachusetts?
There is only one way to figure this out.
Clearly, the average citizen can’t
research every department, agency and
program to decide where funding should be
reduced or eliminated. We certainly can
not depend on advice from those working
in these organizations or those who
benefit from related funding because they
have a conflict of interest. The only way
to determine an adequate budget/spending
level is to look at the best of the other
49 states. (We do want to be “the
best,” don’t we?)
Arkansas or Mississippi may not appeal to
Massachusetts voters as good models, but
New Hampshire does provide as good an
example as one could have. We are
contiguous states, we have a similar
climate, and we share similar lifestyles.
In fact, New Hampshire seems very
attractive to Massachusetts residents as
evidenced by a substantial migration out
of Massachusetts and into New Hampshire.
So how does New Hampshire’s
government spending, corrected for
population, compare to Massachusetts?
If the Massachusetts income tax is
eliminated, the total of our state and
local taxes, on a per capita basis, will
merely drop to just above (YES, ABOVE)
the level that currently exists in New
Hampshire, the fastest growing state in
New England.
Here are the current state and local per
capita tax burdens in New Hampshire and
Massachusetts from the U.S. Department of
Commerce and the Census Bureau:
• Massachusetts: $5,203
• New Hampshire: $3,321
• Difference: $1,882 more in
Massachusetts for every man, woman and
child.
When you multiply this difference by the
population of Massachusetts, you get over
$12 billion, which is more than the
projected reduction in tax revenues if
our state income tax is eliminated.
Your representatives will tell you that
they can’t do it. Tell them,
“Do it or get out.”
Current spending by the Massachusetts
state government totals approximately $47
billion including “off-budget”
expenditures. This total includes
revenues received from federal
reimbursements/grants, lottery proceeds,
license fees, investment earnings, etc.
… all of which will continue if the
income tax is eliminated.
If Question 1 passes, spending by our
state government would drop to $35
billion. This amount does not count local
spending based on property taxes totaling
approximately $20 billion. Thus, a grand
total of $55 billion in government
spending will still be available in
Massachusetts for essential services if
the income tax is eliminated.
Shouldn’t $55 billion be sufficient
to fund police, fire, and education -
with substantial sums left over?
After Question 1 passes, our state
Legislature needs to create a zero-based
budget strategy. Start by funding police,
the courts, fire, and education. Then
prioritize what is left. When the money
runs out … STOP!!
If our legislators need to create greater
savings to fund these essentials, then
eliminate compulsory bargaining and the
prevailing wage scam. Our Legislature
needs to work for the taxpayers, not for
the special interests. Passing Question 1
is the only way to force them to do
so.
It is as simple as that.
Don’t be intimidated by threats and
lies.
VOTE YES ON QUESTION ONE. Then, enjoy
your hard-earned money and insist that
essential services be funded.
Oh, yes, there is no Division of Minority
Health Services. But if Question 1 does
not pass, I’m sure there will be.
(Footnotes) 1 One state cop was recently
caught calling in sick to run his fishing
business on Cape Cod. 2 A fireman on
long-term disability was recently caught
in a body-building competition.
Dr. Ormsby is a member of the North
Andover School Committee. He is a
graduate of Cornell and has a doctorate
from MIT. You can contact Dr. Ormsby via
email: ccormsby@comcast.net
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
All
pictures and material are
(C) copyright, Valley Patriot, Inc., 2008
|
