The EU

Google says the EU requires a notice of cookie use (by Google) and says they have posted a notice. I don't see it. If cookies bother you, go elsewhere. If the EU bothers you, emigrate. If you live outside the EU, don't go there.
Showing posts with label Beacon Hill. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Beacon Hill. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 22, 2020

Christmas Tree Bill


For John, BLUF:  This links to the previous Blog Post, regarding the length of the COVID-19 Relief Bill.  Nothing to see here; just move along.




Here is the sub-headline:

BY VICTORIA TAFT DEC 21, 2020.

Here is the lede plus one:

As feared, the so-called COVID relief bill is another behemoth Christmas tree offering by politicians spending your money on behalf of Uncle Sugar.  This allegedly $900 billion bill ostensibly was written to help people wracked by the economic hit of COVID.  It’s anything but.  It’s another spendulous travesty and should be vetoed by President Trump – before Christmas.  Opening the economy while encouraging best health practices is the appropriate response at this point.  Congress has thrown $3.3 trillion at the problem during the coronavirus pandemic.  It’s time to let the people run their own affairs.

The Washington Post calls it likely “one of the most costly bills” ever considered by any United States Congress.

Ever.

The only thing missing is money for a study of shrimps on a treadmill, a notoriously ridiculous program funded by the infamous Obama-era stimulus bill — a bill that threw money at anything and everything in hopes of jump-starting the U.S. economy after the housing crash of 2008-09.

Read the whole thing to get a picture of the size of the trouble.

I am not sure that President Trump should veto this bill.  It has taken much too much time to get to this point.  Let's take our lumps and then act to change Congress.

As we leave the 2020 Election behind us, almost, it is time to start thinking about 2022 and the nead to clean house on Capitol Hill.  Some Republicans are saying focus local, and that is vitally important, but I am thinking we need to challenge the House of Representatives as well.  It is not working for "We the People."

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

COVID Relief Legislation


For John, BLUF:  One wonders how many bells and whistles the COVID-19 Stimulus Bill contains.  Yes, we need the bill, but over 5,000 pages?  Those Congresscritters are playing us.  Nothing to see here; just move along.




From The New York Post, by Reporter Steven Nelson, 21 December 2020.

Here is the lede plus three:

Congressional leaders on Monday released the text of a 5,593-page COVID-19 stimulus package hours before a midnight government funding deadline.

The massive legislation is one of the longest bills ever considered, but is expected to pass swiftly over back-bench grumbles.

The bill contains $600 stimulus checks for most Americans with another $600 per child, a $300 weekly unemployment supplement and $284.4 billion in forgivable small-business Paycheck Protection Program loans.

The stimulus checks are means-tested, with people earning more than $75,000 — or $150,000 per married couple filing jointly — getting less money, and people earning over $95,000 getting nothing.

I know it is newspaper writing, but four paragraphs, each one sentence long, seems strange to me.  And the last one is 29 words long, counting each number as a word.  That violates what I was taught, which is that sentences should not exceed twenty words.  Writing sentences longer than that should be left to the experts, like Shakespheare and James Joyce.

Speaking of too long, a 5,593 page bill, even with wide margins and large type, is way too long.  It is especially too long when it is exposed to the public only hours before the vote.  Our Federal legislative leaders are treating us like mushrooms.  It is something that should raise a cry.  But, alas, no.

And it isn't just Capitol Hill.  Look at Massachusetts, on Beacon Hill, where the General Court deliberated in private for 100 days to birth its Police Reform Bill.  Sure, it is COVID Time, but still, there is the media to disperse the information.  Are we too weak to have our legislation debated in public?  I think not.  I think it is time for a house cleaning on Beacon Hill.

Maybe Vanna Howard, my State Rep Elect, will start the Revolution in January.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Tuesday, November 10, 2020

Urgent Matters on Beacon Hill


For John, BLUF:  An EMail from Mr Evan Lips, MASS GOP Communications Director, alterted me to this.  Nothing to see here; just move along.




From WGBH, by Reporter Mike Deehan, 9 November 2020.

Here is the lede plus two:

House lawmakers will vote on allowing abortions after 24 weeks and ending parental consent for the procedure this week when they take up their budget bill.

A version of the ROE Act, redrafted and filed by Judiciary Committee Chairwoman Claire Cronin, will come up for a vote with Speaker Robert DeLeo's blessing this week when the House tackles nearly 800 budget amendments.

In a statement, DeLeo wrote that "it is urgent that the House take up an immediate measure to remove barriers to women’s reproductive health options and protect the concepts enshrined in Roe v. Wade," in state law.

So what is urgent at this time?  I would think that the cause of urgency would be laid out, but then I am a Republican.

Not mentioned by Reporter Deehan is that the model bill, the ROE Act, includes the authority to terminate the life of those who survive abortion, or birth.  Mr Lips wrote:

Massachusetts Republican Party Chairman Jim Lyons said Monday.  “As WBUR reported, this budget amendment is essentially the same bill as the so-called ROE Act which allows babies who have survived abortions to be killed on the spot.”
How does ending a live birth help the Mother?  Are there no adoption agencies?  Have they all be squeezed out?  Or does the Mother need to know the child is extinguished in order to move on with her life?

Regards  —  Cliff

Sunday, March 18, 2018

Beacon Hill Calls Attention to Itself


For John, BLUF:  Poor General Hooker.  Known for ever for his camp followers.  Nothing to see here; just move along.




This is a blog post by Law Professor Glenn Harlan Reynolds, posted today, at InstaPundit.

Here it is:

Sign Referencing Civil War Hero Is Sexual Harassment, Says Massachusetts Lawmaker:  Rep. Michelle DuBois wants to remove a statehouse sign that reads “General Hooker Entrance” because it is an affront to “women’s dignity.”

But if there were such a test in Massachusetts, it would feature an IQ ceiling, not a floor.  .  .  .

Plus: “Of course, DuBois is positioning herself as a crusader against sex-based harassment and patriarchy.  But attitudes like hers—which treat women as excessively fragile beings, and which posit that female ‘dignity’ is diminished by even so slight an association with sex work as walking under a door that says ‘hooker’—just props up old-fashioned and patriarchal ideas about sex and gender.”

It would be easy to write an argument for restoring the patriarchy based solely on feminists’ statements about how weak, fragile, and stupid women are.

Surely State Rep DuBois was joking.  As a joke it works.

Top Comment so far:

stosh
Everyone wants to be Maxine Waters.
Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Wednesday, November 29, 2017

Who Can Vote?


For John, BLUF:  Yes, voting should not be suppressed.  However, those who aren't good citizens shouldn't be joining the rest of us in voting.  Nothing to see here; just move along.




Here is the sub-headline:

These state laws are another form of voter suppression – like gerrymandering, voter ID requirements, and bars on anyone with felony convictions from voting.

From Nation of Change, by Professor Robert Reich, 21 November 2017.

I was reading with an open mind until I got to the "like gerrymandering, voter ID requirements…".

Here is the lede plus one:

Hundreds of thousands of Americans are being denied the right to vote because they are poor.

In nine states, Republican legislators have enacted laws that disenfranchise anyone with outstanding legal fees or court fines.  For example, in Alabama more than 100,000 people who owe money – roughly 3 percent of the state’s voting-age population – have been struck from voting rolls.

Dealing first with Gerrymandering, it is an issue and it exists everywhere, including here in Lowell and Chelmsford.  This isn't a Republican issue.  This is a power issue.  That is, those who are in power, working to stay in power.  Professor Reich should understand this, having twice lived in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

As for Voter ID, there is the fact that if the folks checking you in to vote don't know you, an ID is the quick way to confirm you are who you are.  If you go to a hospital or a physician's office, you are expected to present an ID.  Why is voting different?  Besides, why isn't Professor Reich urging all those Democrats on Beacon Hill to repeal our Commonwealth's Voter ID Law?

As for felons, they lose their rights.  Should they get them back once they are out of prison and they are past all post-release encumbrances?  Maybe.  Should they then have the right to obtain a Commission in the US Army Reserve or the National Guard?  I wouldn't object to them getting their vote back after they have fully paid back their debt to society.  But, not before.

I would say that if there are small amounts owed to courts or government, then the person should be allowed to vote.  However, there should be a limit to this.  If large amounts are owed then the person should lose their right to vote.  I would draw the line somewhere between $1,000 and $10,000.

The "poll tax" line is just another Democratic Party dog whistle.

Regards  —  Cliff

Sunday, June 19, 2016

Commonwealth Budget Problems?


For John, BLUF:  Do you trust the Great and General Court to spend wisely?  Nothing to see here; just move along.



I am dubious about this headline from The New Boston Post, but it is another thing to worry about.  Mr Daniel Huizinga tells us:

Massachusetts in bottom five of nationwide financial rankings

And here is the lede plus two:
Can your state pay its bills? In coming years, a surprising number of states may be in trouble. A new report by the Mercatus Center sheds new light on the state of finances for all 50 states and Puerto Rico. Researchers Eileen Norcross and Olivia Gonzalez looked at several measures of fiscal solvency and uncovered some alarming trends.

Puerto Rico comes in dead last in the rankings for overall solvency, which is unsurprising given its recent debt crisis. But several other states are surprisingly close to Puerto Rico’s position, the study found.

A state’s budget solvency score measures whether a state is operating with consistent surpluses or deficits each year. Norcross and Gonzalez determined this value with an “operating ratio,” which indicates whether a state has enough revenue coming in (from taxes or other sources) to pay all of its expenses.

It is an indication that we have to pay attention.  Those ladies and gentleman on Beacon Hill are not to be trusted with our money.  And they are more likely to want a tax increase than to find a better way of doing business.

Regards  —  Cliff

Wednesday, December 2, 2015

Beacon Hill Institute Separates


For John, BLUF:  Maybe it is a sign that Gov Baker is doing well.  Nothing to see here; just move along.



We were initially told it was a budget issue, but it now appears Suffolk University dropped the Beacon Hill Institute for pushing the envelope, the recent example being a study of the economic impact of the PP&ACA.

The lede:

Beacon Hill Institute projects vetoed by Suffolk University included an Obamacare study involving a prominent University of Chicago economist, BHI director David Tuerck told Boston Herald Radio today -- adding that he had been chided for his comments to the Herald in the past.
Is there any working with Democrats?  I have thought there was, but maybe not.

And what IS the economic impact?  Is it true United Healthcare is trying to weasel out?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff


Friday, August 14, 2015

Mass Republican [Official] View of Presidential Race


For John, BLUF:  There will be a lot of trash talked before this Presidential season is over.  Nothing to see here; just move along.



In today's edition of The [Lowell] Sun is an article from the State House News Service (By Reporters Matt Murphy and Colin A. Young).  It is headlined "Mass. GOP looking beyond Trump".

The problem is, the article is about Republicans in the State House (of course, it IS the State House News Service).  Well, they did mention National Committeewoman Chanel Prunier, who backs Senator Rand Paul.

Here is a sample from the fairly long article (1760 Words):

Gov. Charlie Baker, in a radio interview on Thursday, criticized Trump, who has been in the news for days after initiating a spat with Fox News host Megyn Kelly over her pointed questioning during the debate.  In the aftermath, Trump has made several comments considered to be disparaging toward women.

Though Baker has been reluctant to share his opinions on national politics in great detail, and is unlikely to endorse before the general election, he served up a pointed admonishment of Trump on Boston Public Radio.

"I was raised by my parents, you know, in a certain way and I find a lot of those comments to be reprehensible, outrageous and ridiculous, and I wish he would take them back," Baker said.

House Minority Leader Brad Jones is equally unimpressed with his party's surging frontrunner at the moment.

"To me, Donald Trump is the letter to the editor you write late at night and hopefully put in your top drawer and never send," said Jones, who called himself "not the biggest Trump fan."

In reading this offering we should keep in mind "the latest figures put together by political scientists at Georgetown and Princeton universities", as reported in The Boston Globe (9 August 2015):
It’s not that Massachusetts Democrats are particularly left wing.  Relative to legislators in a number of other states, they’re fairly moderate.  In New York and Vermont, the Democratic caucuses lean further left, and the same is true in a handful of redder states, like Arizona and Wisconsin.

The reason Massachusetts ranks so high on the list of liberal legislatures is that there are almost no conservative members.  Not only do Democrats control about 80 percent of both houses, but the few Republicans who do hold seats are pretty centrist.  They have roughly the same political preferences as Democrats in Oklahoma, and they’re actually further left than Democrats in Arkansas.

That should tell you something right there.  And, you should ask, what are the real Republicans thinking?  What we are seeing is the views of the "down town [Boston]" Republicans, who hope the "grass roots" Republicans will just fall into line.  The problem is, those of us out in the sticks may not be like those on Beacon Hill.  If you are looking for a watchword, it might be that Mr Donald Trump is the replacement for Andrew Breitbart, mining the seam of unhappiness that is out there.  The unhappiness with Social Justice Warriors (SJWs) and with the PC Police.

As you read the article, ask yourself where were the comments from the Chairpersons of Town and City Committees?  Where were the comments from the Greater Lowell Tea Party?  Where were comments from MARA, the Massachusetts Republican Assembly?

Will there be companion pieces talking to what local Republicans think?  I would hope so.  When you look at the article you note that not even Lowell's surrogate Republican Legislator, David Nangle, was mentioned.

Actually, it is worse.  When the folks from Beacon Hill come to Lowell they don't bother to meet with the folks in the trenches, the folks who are part of the official Lowell Republican City Committee.  It is truly the "down town" Republicans vs the "grass roots" Republicans.

As a side note, I am not for Mr Trump.  I am for Governor Scott Walker.♠  Just saying.  And, back on 5 March of this year I picked Governor Walker for the Republican nominee.

Not everyone sees it that way—Talking to you, Rick.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  If you read The New York Times, that would be "Governor Scott".

Tuesday, February 10, 2015

Happenings on Beacon Hill


For John, BLUF:  It is the same old story.  Nothing to see here; just move along.



Physician, heal thyself.

In yesterday's edition of The [Lowell] Sun we have a rundown on what has been happening on Beacon Hill.  Incidentally, the Reporter, Mr Bob Katzen, noted that last week the House met for a total of 11 minutes and the Senate for a total of seven minutes.  I expect they were doing a lot of Committee and Constituent Services work.  Well, there was the snow storm.

Last week we heard about how Speaker Robert DeLeo, who six years ago thought it was a good idea to limit the Speaker to eight years.  He got the Mass House to agree with him.  They all thought it was a great idea to have term limits.  Well, they did vote for it.

Now, however, Speaker DeLeo and his merry band think it was, after all, a very stupid idea.  They have voted to lift the restriction.  I wonder if they got advice from UMass Lowell Chancellor Marty Meehan.  At any rate, those folks down on Beacon Hill are a lot smarter than those folks we had in office six years ago.  Those solons were not very smart.

This week, looking back on last week, Mr Katzen tells us about a proposal to give the State Reps a full 24 hours to review legislative proposals, emergency legislation exempted.

24 HOURS TO READ LEGISLATION (H 2015): House 115-38, rejected a rule that would require 24-hour notice, not including weekends and holidays, between the release of a bill from an executive session and its consideration on the House floor. The 24-hour rule could be suspended for an emergency if waived by a two-thirds vote.

YES:  Reps. Sheila Harrington, R-Groton; Marc Lombardo, R-Billerica; James Lyons, R-Andover.

NO:  Reps. James Arciero, D-Westford; Cory Atkins, D-Concord; Jennifer Benson, D-Lunenburg; Colleen Garry, D-Dracut; Thomas Golden, D-Lowell; Kenneth Gordon, D-Bedford; James Miceli, D-Wilmington; Rady Mom, D-Lowell.

DIDN'T VOTE:  Rep. David Nangle, D-Lowell.

Seemed like a good idea to me.

Regards  —  Cliff

Thursday, January 15, 2015

Is the T Up To The Olympics?


For John, BLUF:  .  Nothing to see here; just move along.



Over at MassterList was this article, which we are all free to publish.

Regards  —  Cliff

It will take more than an Olympic effort to deleverage the T

JANUARY 14, 2015
By George Donnelly

Here’s an interesting coincidence about the Olympic price tag of roughly $4.5 billion: That’s about how much the commonwealth’s public transportation system is in debt. But the T’s $5.4 billion in obligations is a moving target, and really a lowball number. When one factors in interest on the debt (almost $4 billion), repairs from years of deferred maintenance (at least another $2.5 billion), unfunded pension obligations (estimated at $700 million). That’s almost $13 billion, and doesn’t count the extra operational costs that will come with the planned extensions and improvements on the Green Line and the Fairmount Line.

Boston already has won the gold medal for the most indebted public transportation system in the country. As Boston begins to ponder the Olympic dream, one that compels the city to conjure an array of new investments, it already has failed to properly invest in one of the most basic services.

Of course, one of the selling points of the Olympics is to force the region to confront its infrastructure shortcomings. But the T’s woes, even when considering John Fish’s impressive power of persuasion and fund-raising, require far more than Olympian treatment. They require new revenue, and the restructuring of crushing debt.

The T has been trapped in financial quicksand for almost 15 years, burdened with debt and interest payments that eat up over 20 percent of the annual operating budget. It operates deeply in the red, despite significant fare increases over the past few years. Without $100 million-plus subsidies from the state budget every year, the T would have to significantly hike fares and radically reduce service.

One would think that a state with an economy whose future hinges on the brains of young workers who often depend on subways and buses wouldn’t let such a critical economic tool fall into disrepair. The state came to the rescue in 2013 with a transportation financing plan – the 3-cent gas tax increase is mostly paying for it – and fresh money has begun to flow to address some of the T’s pressing maintenance issues and other neglected transportation infrastructure. The state also took on a heap of transportation debt last year. The T, however, can’t afford to pay its share of the repair budget without piling on even more IOUs.

The T has been on the wrong track since 2000, when, tired of runaway costs, the Legislature gave the system a new funding source – 20 percent of the sales tax. It also transferred about $3.3 billion in debt to the T, and the transit authority has since borrowed another $2 billion since for capital improvements. The sales tax failed to grow at the anticipated rate, and has never generated enough revenue to allow the T to balance its books. Thus the T has been running a deficit, still beholden to the Legislature to write it a check. This year that number has been budgeted at $135 million.

The result of the year-to-year tin cup rattling is a massive system that is fraying at the seams, one that is unworthy of Boston and its image of itself as a 21st century city. It’s beyond bizarre to descend into Park Station on a pleasant June evening, only to marinate in temperatures underground in the mid-80s, thick with humidity, as if ventilation had never been invented. Add in sardine-like conditions, commuter rail cars that lack air conditioning in the summer, and the constant screech of ancient steel on ancient steel, and far from appearing primed for 2024, the T looks like it’s trying to escape from the 1970s.

Our public transportation system is the nation’s fifth largest. It serves 1.3 million daily riders with an annual budget of about $1.9 billion (debt service this year will be about $424 million, or 22 percent of the operating budget). A look at the T’s capital improvement plan from 2013 tells a complex story about a large, multifaceted, needy system. It owns about 1,000 buses, 630 subway cars, and 490 commuter rail cars. The plan notes that some of those Green Line cars date back to 1946.

The T has been asked to generate more revenue — fare increases are now limited to 5 percent per year, and you can bet the T won’t miss a chance to raise them. The cost of expanding service, such as the Green Line extension, are being covered by the Feds and the state. But they promise to strain the T’s budget once they’re operational.

The answer is to steadily retire the T’s debt with new, dedicated funds. With gas prices plummeting, perhaps the Legislature could tack another 3 cents on the gas tax that would be dedicated to paying down the T’s debt. No one would notice, right? One way or the other, Boston’s public transportation system must get out of the red and have the resources to begin to think about the future – Olympics or not.

George Donnelly, former editor of the Boston Business Journal, is a regular contributor to MASSterList. Reach him at gdonnelly67@bizjournals.com.

Wednesday, December 10, 2014

Cleaning Up Bad Hiring Practices


For John, BLUF:  The corruption in the Probation Dep't hiring needs to exposed  Not looking for jail time or anything, just some sunshine.  Nothing to see here; just move along.



In yesterday's edition of The [Lowell] Sun there was an article by Reporter Andy Metzger, of the State House News Service.  The headline was "Chair: Probation hiring probe beyond panel's jurisdiction".  This is about how the Commonwealth is dealing with way Probation Department jobs were being passed out improperly, and the fact that the Feds have been dealing with it for us.

Here is the lede and following paragraphs.

A House oversight committee will not investigate how a rigged hiring system was able to operate for years in the Probation Department, a decision a Republican lawmaker attributed to the culture that enabled the secret patronage.

House Committee on Post Audit and Oversight Chairman David Linsky told two Republicans in a letter Friday that the committee does not have the "jurisdiction" to look into what factors permitted the sham hiring to continue.

[Chairman] Linsky was unavailable for comment, but an aide cited the statute that sets out the jurisdiction of oversight committees and excludes any legislative agencies from being targets of oversight investigation.

How convenient.

It is the General Court.  The casual observer might be misled into thinking that the Legislature could amend the statute to allow such actions.  And, if there are reasons not to, reasons dealing with possible corruption of the process and the danger of paybacks, someone should say it.

Transparency.

Regards  —  Cliff

Friday, August 1, 2014

Thoughtless OpEd Writing


For John, BLUF:  If it ain't broke, don't fix it.  Nothing to see here; just move along.



In today's edition of The [Lowell] Sun Mr Peter Lucas weighs in on the value of the Lieutenant Governor here in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.  He thinks the office is unnecessary.  I disagree.

I also disagree that we should characterize the person as Acting Governor when the Governor has not just left the State, but has died or moved on to a new vocation.♠  This is a pernicious characterization pushed by The Boston Globe, a while back, when then Lieutenant Governor Jane Swift fleeted up.  It isn't like the former Governor is likely to come back from the dead.♥

If Governor Deval Patrick were to be appointed US Secretary of State, who would backfill for his replacement?  Hold a special election?  Have the person hold two offices?  There are no great solutions for this unlikely eventuality.

But, this brings up the concept of the number two as place holder.  The Lieutenant Governor needs to be somewhat independent of the Governor, just in case we the People have to replace the Governor via actions in the General Court.  In the same way, and even more important, the Vice President of the United States needs to not be the close buddy of the President.  I realize that it was a problem that Vice President Harry Truman didn't now about the Manhattan Project, but he quickly absorbed the important information and made the proper decisions and made them correctly.  The number 2 is not just about the number 1 being out of State♦ or incapacitated, but it is also about if the number 1 is impeached.♣  The new Number 1 should not be so close to the old Number 1 as to be caught up in the scandal.♣

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  For example, becoming US Ambassador to Mexico.
♥  It reminds me of a joke, but I am moving on.
♦  Speaking of which, with modern communications why can't the Governor perform his functions perfectly well while visiting Bora Bora?
♣  No, Linda, that is not a Republican call for Impeachment of President Obama.  That would be a stupid and embarrassing move on the part of the US House of Representatives.  And, as long as the Democrats are in Control of the US Senate, where conviction must take place, impossible, until the President's conduct gets to the point that Senator Harry Reid stops by House Speaker John Boehner's office and asks for a Bill of Impeachment.  I think the Democrats are hoping that talk of Impeachment will appeal to those Mr Limbaugh★ refers to as the "low information voters".
★  Today Mr Limbaugh celebrated his 26th Anniversary as host of his own talk show.

One Political Aspirant Alert to Illegal Immigration


For John, BLUF:  You should check this guy out.  Nothing to see here; just move along.



The issue of illegal immigrants is beginning to bring out comments from politicians, even Dr John Miller, who is claiming to be a problem solver and not a politician.  The "Doctor" is from MIT, where he earned it in "Infrastructure Systems".♠  At any rate, here is what he is proposing to deal with the surge of illegal immigrants coming to Massachusetts:
  1. Send an independent, investigative team from Massachusetts to the border to obtain factual information regarding the medical and safety situation of individuals that the DHS plans to send to Massachusetts.  [News reports may not properly reflect the actual public health and public safety situation on the ground along the Southern border.]

  2. Instruct and work with local Sheriffs and law enforcement to create a record for each individual DHS proposes to enter Massachusetts as a way to keep accurate information about those coming to our state, and assure that each individual is given a health screening (vaccination and examination) similar to any immigrant entering through Massachusetts ports of entry.

  3. Secure a binding legal commitment by grant agreement with the DHS to timely reimburse cities, towns, and entities in the Commonwealth for the cost of shelter, food, clothing, education, and healthcare provided to individuals transferred to the state by DHS.
This is a plan, but only for Massachusetts and only for dealing with the influx.  It does nothing to address the underlying problems that are causing this influx and nothing about addressing the upper limit of what we here in Massachusetts, what we here in the United States, can absorb. On the other hand, he is calling for this to come out from the shadows:
Tell Governor Patrick and Attorney General Coakley that it is time to document the arrangements he is making on behalf of the citizens of this state with the federal government.
When governments operate in the shadows bad things happen.  Not all of the time, but too much of the time.  Just ask Senators Dianne Feinstein or Mark Udall.

Yes, Dr Miller is running, in his case, for Mass AG.♥

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Actually, I like that.  Someone with some education on Infrastructure.  It is obvious to anyone who commutes more than five miles that we have done a horrible job with our road infrastructure.  It is badly clogged up and thus wasteful of fuel and the time of the commuters.  And, the extra time on the highway increases atmospheric pollution.
♥  Should Attorney General really be an independent office, or should it be an appointee under the Governor?

Thursday, July 25, 2013

Partial View of Beacon Hill


For John, BLUF:  We don't understand all we know about new revenue bill.  Nothing to see here; just move along.



The [Lowell] Sun, on Wednesday, had a State House News Service item by Matt Murphy and Michael Norton, "Rep: Patrick using 'scare tactics' on road-project warning".♠  The gist of it seems to be that the Governor vetoed "a $500 million tax bill that will dedicate $805 million in new spending to finance-transportation investments over the next five years."

Then Governor Patrick's veto was overridden by the Legislature.♥  From this bill we will get a three cent a gallon hike in gas taxes and an increase of one dollar on a pack of cigs.♦

My problem with the first article is that it throws out four different numbers,♣ several times, but never ties them all together.  To be fair, the on-line version of the article is much better than the version on Page 2 of the dead tree edition of The Sun.  Missing is the cost of the toll takers along the Turnpike.  Also missing is the question of if they will go into a thriving economy or become additions to the welfare roles.  How many will be able to retire?

As sort of a side issue is the environmental impact of tolls, in terms of cars having to slow down and speed up, not to mention idling as people wait to pay tolls.

And what are we getting for $161 million a year in terms of improvements to our transportation infrastructure?  There is the mention of the MBTA, which seems to be one of the ways the rest of the Commonwealth underwrites Boston.  They need to replace cars that are 35 to 45 years old.

And, there is talk of 480 new buses, which I bet cost at least a million a piece and more with accoutrements, spare parts packages and simple graft.

There is a lot yet to learn about what is going on down on Beacon Hill.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Remember, articles in The [Lowell] Sun go away after a while, to a different place.  I will not be updating their links unless I am bedridden and have read every book in the house.  And, besides, the Editor tells me the links cost money after a few weeks.  It is the new business model.
♥  From the second story, "The House voted 123-33 to override Patrick's veto. The Senate followed a short time later, voting 35-5 to override."
♦  Is there anyone out there who wonders if there is a tipping point on cigarette taxes, beyond which people just start smuggling cigs into our Commonwealth.  From my time living in the Naples, Italy, area, in the 1970s, I know that cigarette smuggling can be big business.  In Canada it is a $1.5 Billion dollar a year business.  I also know that cigarettes, as in Post-War Berlin, can be a form of currency.
♣  We still owe $70 million on the Turnpike.  The tax bill is for $500 million (per annum, one assumes).  There is $805 in new construction over the next five years, which averages out at $161 per annum.  Then there is $135 million in lost tolls from the Turnpike, if the Turnpike debt is retired and the road is in good condition.

Saturday, May 25, 2013

The Agnew Rule


For John, BLUF:  Sign that A/G Eric Holder is in trouble—Lt Gov Tim Murray is stepping down.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

Per Hot Air there is growing discontent with the Federal Attorney General, Eric Holder.  Even The Huffington Post is down on the Attorney General.  Is it possible he will have to go?  If he goes, who replaces him?  Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick (Harvard Law), of course.  But first there is what I call the "Agnew Rule".  When the number two, and constitutionally designated successor, is deemed unacceptable by the political powers that be, he or she goes, so that the principal can be thrown over the side without endangering the institution.  For example, Vice President Spiro T Agnew.

Let us remember how the Watergate incident and the eventual resignation of President Nixon went down.  As this abbreviated timeline (see here for a more complete version) shows, it took over two years from the Watergate break in until the resignation.  I would assert that a key function in allowing the US Congress to go forward was the forced resignation of Vice President Agnew.

September 9, 1971The White House “plumbers” unit burglarizes a psychiatrist’s office to find files on Daniel Ellsberg
June 17, 1972Five men, one of whom says he used to work for the CIA, are arrested at 2:30 a.m. trying to bug the offices of the DNC at the Watergate hotel.
January 30, 1973Former Nixon aides G. Gordon Liddy and James W. McCord Jr. are convicted.
April 30, 1973Nixon’s top White House staffers, H.R. Haldeman and John Ehrlichman, and Attorney General Richard Kleindienst resign.
May 18, 1973The Senate Watergate committee begins its nationally televised hearings.
July 13, 1973Alexander Butterfield reveals taping system.
October 10, 1973Spiro Agnew resigns for tax evasion, over $100,000 in bribes while Gov of Maryland.
October 20, 1973Saturday Night Massacre.
July 27, 1974House Judiciary Committee Passes First Article of Impeachment.
August 8, 1974President Nixon Resigns

What is the point of all this?

The point is that the sign that Attorney General Eric Holder's grip on office is slipping is that Massachusetts Lieutenant Governor Tim Murray is leaving office early to become head of the Worcester Chamber of Commerce.  Worcester is Mr Murray's home town.  The date is 2 June.

But, the fact is, Lieutenant Governor Murray has become a political liability, after (1) his close associate Chelsea Housing Authority director Michael McLaughlin crashed and burned and (2) he crash his government furnished automobile at 108 mph (and he wasn't wearing his seatbelt).  Not that it proves anything, but Lieutenant Governor Murray was unhurt.

Now the safe and reliable Secretary of State, William Galvin, is in line for the Governorship,♠ when the current Governor, Deval Patrick, is summoned to Washington, to replace current Attorney General Eric Holder.

UPDATE:  Thanks to The InstaPundit for 5000+ page views.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  It is to be noted that even when giving birth to twins, Governor Jane Swift did not turn the reigns over to Mr Galvin to act in a temporary capacity as Governor.  I wonder why that was?

Monday, December 24, 2012

Election Fraud


For John, BLUF:  A Democratic Party State Rep felt he had to commit Voter Fraud to regain election.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

I have been told time and time again that "voter fraud" is a myth perpetuated by Republicans on an innocent population.

Thus, I am very perplexed about why the FBI and the Federal Attorney for our area went after poor Mr Stephen Smith, of Everett, Massachusetts, Representative of the 28th Middlesex District (Lower House), here in Massachusetts.  They apparently bullied him into a plea agreement that calls for him to resign his position in the Massachusetts House of Representatives, effective January 1, 2013.  Further, he will be bared from seeking elected office for a period of five years.

Per the FBI Web Posting, U.S. Attorney Carmen Milagros Ortiz said,

Fair and free elections are the foundation that this great nation was built upon. Our electoral system is unrivaled, and it is egregious that an elected member of our Commonwealth would rob his constituents of a fair and honest election. I want the voters of Massachusetts to know that we will continue to root out public corruption and restore confidence in our state’s political system.
And, Assistant Attorney General (Criminal Division) Lanny Breuer commented:
Rep. Smith compromised the legitimacy of his races for public office by facilitating the casting of invalid ballots for ineligible and unaware voters.  In doing so, he undermined the democratic process in Massachusetts and violated the public’s trust.
Did you have to ask?  Mr Smith is a member of the Party of Woodrow Wilson.

Regards  —  Cliff

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Not Really Accepting Responsibility


For John, BLUF:  The Governor is trying to bamboozle us over the Sheila Burgess affair.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

Ms Sheila Burgess, our Commonwealth's Director of Highway Safety has offered her resignation, effective 31 December.  This was precipitated by revelation that she has a bad driving record, including 34 incidents in her "permanent record", including two failures to stop for a police officer.

The search for who hired her has been ongoing, with Governor Patrick going on the radio and telling us that the Administration has been having trouble finding the records.  It looked like buck passing.

President Harry Truman famously said "The buck stops here".  There was no one he could blame for bad things happening.  In yesterday's edition of The [Lowell] Sun is an article♥ that tells us our Governor, Deval Patrick, says "I'm to blame for hiring highway chief".

You know the answer to that.  The ultimate responsibility for all things that go wrong or right in the administration lies with me, and I've said before, and if you want me to say it again I will, she shouldn't have been hired for that position.
The problem is, while he can say he was to blame, with the lack of understanding what happened it seems pretty bloodless.  It actually looks like a "limited hangout".♠  The actions of the Governor in this incident meets the criteria.

I would hope that Editors and Bloggers across the Commonwealth will call the Governor out on this.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  Makes one think of the Richard Nixon Modified Limited Hangout.
♥  Remember, articles in The [Lowell] Sun go away after a while, to a different place.  I will not be updating their links unless I am bedridden and have read every book in the house.

Thursday, November 29, 2012

Sheila Burgess as Melchizedek


For John, BLUF:  It is hard to comprehend how the Patrick Administration doesn't know who has what appointment.  How can they properly manage patronage and no-show jobs if they don't keep track of these things?  Nothing to see here; just move along.

NOTE For Gerry:  No, this isn't politics, but rather an issue of competence.  However, if I say it's typical of the corrupt ways on Beacon Hill then it is political, isn't it?  But not local politics.

Adults can differ on whether UN Amb Susan Rice was deliberately wrong when she won't on Sunday talk shows after the 9/11 attack in Benghazi.♠  Two plus months later the facts are still murky.  My question is, how can the Patrick Administration not know who hired disgraced Highway Safety Director Sheila Burgess ?  I wonder if I could just walk into the office, sit down and begin work as Ms Burgess' replacement.

Melchizedek?  The High Priest of Salem.  He came out of nowhere and took a tithe from Abraham.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  I am one who thinks Amb Rice was set up by the Administration and thus was not lying to the Great American Public.  That puts me opposed Senators McCain, Graham and Ayotte.  Worse it puts me in company with people who are pushing some outlandish ideas regarding the situation.

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

State Senate Debate


For John, BLUF:  Dabate is good.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

It is ongoing right now at The [Lowell] Sun, where Challenger James Buba is concern that with low income housing we can't get out of our own way. Incumbent Eileen Donoghue is now arguing that we have been fairly successful in bringing in market rate housing.  She then says that 40B is not a factor in Lowell, but it is outside.  Then the Julian Steele Project—housing for returning WWII Vets—never meant to be permanent.  Back to Jim and a problem with maintenance.  Eileen notes it was hard to make J/S go away.  Now it is River's Edge.  Looking to the next phase.

Moderator Chris Scott is happy with rehabbed Tyngsboro Bridge.  I secretly demure.

Both talk about infrastructure rehab.

Regards  —  Cliff

Sunday, June 17, 2012

Taxing Auto Milage

I usually don't purchase The Boston Herald, so I missed this Howie Carr item on a mileage tax for our autos.  Apparently the proposal is for only 0.85¢ a mile—initially.  That would be 8.5 mills (₥).  Any bets on how long it would take for it to go to a whole cent?  That would average about three bucks every time I fill up.  How will they know how far I drove?  Annual Inspection odometer check?  A GPS tracker I have to pay for, and pay to have installed in a tamper-proof manner?

My problem is that (1) it is politicians, afraid of bumping the gas tax or the income tax, looking for some cutesy new way to extract money and (2) it does not provide any incentive to get better gas milage, either through better driving or selective purchasing.

Whatever we do, we have to pay for it, but that payment needs to be up front.

Here is my supplemental question.  If I drive to our Nation's Capitol, will I be paying this milage tax as I wander through Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland and the District itself?

There will be an election in November, if anyone cares.  Now would be a good time to send cards and letters (and EMails) to our elected representatives down on Beacon Hill.  They may be listening.

Hat tip to the Instapundit.

Regards  —  Cliff