Worcester County Freedom Trail

From Rep. George Peterson’s column in December 14, 2007, Worcester Telegram (sorry I’m late posting, been in California for some client work). It’s been over a month n0w. Where is our money, the money Gov. Patrick promised would be coming back to us in property tax relief?!?!?

I, as well as Republican representatives of Central Massachusetts, champion local aid for cities and towns because we believe money is best spent at the local level by officials who know their communities and who know best how to provide essential services such as education and public safety to our citizens.

Unfortunately, the state has not abided by that philosophy in recent years.
When tough fiscal times hit the state in 2003, the Legislature voted to put a cap on the amount of local aid sent to cities and towns from state Lottery proceeds. Over the course of three years, the state withheld a total of $450 million from our cities and towns.

From the state’s perspective, the cap of Lottery aid was a windfall. It helped grow the state’s rainy-day fund by more than $1.5 billion, more than doubling what was in there to start.
But for local communities, the cap cost millions. They watched their own coffers decline as the state got richer, and many cities and towns were forced to cut back on services. Local officials throughout the state found themselves asking residents for Proposition 21/2 tax overrides just to make ends meet.

The money withheld from our communities during those three years, in the end, wasn’t needed by the state after all and we strongly feel it should be reimbursed to them. I, as well as Reps. Paul Frost, Karyn E. Polito, Lewis G. Evangelidis, Paul J. P. Loscocco, Todd M. Smola, and the Republican caucus led by Rep. Brad Jones, recently filed legislation to immediately return all of the $450 million that the state diverted from local communities.

Our bill is fair, reasonable and affordable. The state currently has well over $2.2 billion in its rainy-day fund. Even if we returned the $450 million to cities and towns, we would still have over $1.8 billion in reserves.

The money would be given back as unrestricted local aid, so that cities and towns could use it for whatever they choose, including capital projects, property tax relief for residents or repair of local roads, bridges, dams or schools.

We encourage all local municipal officials and residents to look around their communities and imagine the many areas where this money could be put to good use, even if it is a one-time payment or reimbursement. The needs of our local communities are great, and this reimbursement to our cities and towns will go a long way for them.
It’s our local communities’ money, it’s your money, and we in the Republican caucus want to return it to you.

So, we collectively ask for residents’ support of House Docket 4651, and ask you to join us in pushing this legislation through the process. It’s important for the rest of the Massachusetts Legislature and the governor to hear voters’ voice of support.

Ask for your city or town Lottery aid reimbursement. It’s money that belongs to you and your community. Returning the money is the right thing to do, and we will fight for it with your help.

Rep. George Peterson is Mass. House Minority Whip.

RealClearPolitics shows Romney and McCain in a virtual tie for the Florida Presidential primary. As of early December, most of the polls showed Florida was Giuliani’s to lose. Now it looks like he has, regardless of how many references he makes to the Giants!

In January, both Romney and McCain have made significant gains. Romney’s popularity is rising off his Michigan win as his business background and understanding of complex economics show his ability to handle our challenging economy. McCain is riding his NH win and continues to pull strongly because of his military background. It will be an interesting race.

Polling numbers for Florida:

Just so you know we don’t only talk about Romney , here are the post-NH primary poll results from State House New Service. It shows Romney has the lead among Republicans, but when you factor in independents, the preference leans toward McCain. Clinton will carry the Democrats, which doesn’t look all that great for Gov. Patrick and his campaigning efforts.

Perhaps Deval Patrick should spend more time campaigning in Massachusetts.

Residents here disagree with their current governor in the Democratic presidential primary, and dislike the idea of their previous governor winning the general presidential election, according to the latest State House News Poll.

They are also evenly divided on repeal of the state income tax, and give the governor bad marks on his efforts to control property taxes. But they now believe the economy, not taxes, is the biggest problem facing Massachusetts.

The scientific survey of 400 Massachusetts adults, conducted right after the New Hampshire primary, found Hillary Clinton holding her lead over Barack Obama among likely Democratic voters here, 37 to 25 percent. Her lead persists despite vigorous and visible campaigning by Patrick for Obama in other states, which has led to a certain amount of grumbling back home.

The horse-race numbers among these likely Democrats, where the margin of error was plus or minus 6.2 percent:

Hillary Clinton 36.7%
Barack Obama 25.4%
John Edwards 14.3%
Dennis Kucinich 1.2%
None/other 7.1%
Don’t know 11.2%

If a Republican is to win the White House, Massachusetts residents as a whole would prefer Arizona U.S. Sen. John McCain to their former governor, 45 to 18 percent. The rest of the field and “Undecided” split the remaining 37 percent. Independents here said they’d prefer McCain to Romney by a 47 to 20 percent margin.

Only those identifying themselves as Republicans would prefer a Romney presidency to a McCain win, and they made up just 11.6 percent of the respondents, reflecting the party’s weakness here.

The poll also found:

– Respondents were split, 45 to 46 percent, on the elimination of the state income tax, a proposal that garnered a surprising 45 percent vote the last time it was on the ballot. About 8 percent were undecided.

– Residents continue to be closely split on casino gambling, but they decidedly believe Patrick won’t be able to provide property tax relief without casino revenue. The governor’s three-casino proposal is bogged down in the House.

– By 4 points, just within the poll’s plus or minus 4.8 percent margin of error, respondents said they support the imposition of fines on people who can afford health insurance, but don’t buy it. The state’s new health insurance law imposes such penalties, being paid for the first time this tax season.

– Residents think Patrick is doing a bad job keeping his pledge to bring property taxes under control. About 67 percent rated his performance on property taxes “below average” or “poor.”

– Patrick receives mixed reviews on his first year as governor, with a few percentage points more respondents rating his performance “below average” or “poor” than rated it “above average” or “excellent.”

Matching surveys in other states, this State House News Poll found residents increasingly concerned about the economy. For the first time in years, when they were given the chance to name the most important issue facing Massachusetts, respondents named the economy most often, as opposed to taxes, health care, or education. In fact, 41 percent identified “the economy” or “jobs” as the most important issue.

Another well-penned article from MassGOP State Committeeman Matt Kinnaman. I post this mostly because I’m fed up with Deval Patrick saying he inherited a massive deficit. He did not. He created that all on his own, within days of taking office.

In his hit-job on Governor Mitt Romney’s economic record in Massachusetts, Deroy Murdock wrote in the American Spectator yesterday that Romney presided over a “parade of economic stagnation and retreat.”

What parade was Murdock watching? It certainly wasn’t happening in Massachusetts. I know, because as a Massachusetts voter, political candidate, and Republican activist, I was there for Mitt Romney’s governorship, and what I witnessed was one of the rarest feats of economic leadership on the entire American stage, one which makes Mitt Romney’s record as governor a stunning success.

The bottom-line analysis is strikingly simple:  When Mitt Romney walked into the corner office on January 1, 2003, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts staggered under a $3 billion budget deficit. Romney quickly reversed the tide of red ink, delivering the citizens of his state a $1 billion surplus by 2006.  And he did it while preventing a Democratic legislature from raising income taxes or capital gains taxes.

As Governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney displayed precisely the economic leadership needed at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. He stood athwart the most tax-happy legislature in the nation and shouted “stop!” And he won.

This was politically impossible, except for Romney’s extraordinary abilities as an executive.  The Massachusetts state legislature is dominated by Democrats to a greater degree that any other legislature in the country. When Romney took office, Democrats held 138 of 160 house seats, and 34 of the 40 seats in the state senate.

Murdock pooh-poohs these numbers, seemingly missing the mathematical force of such overwhelming opposition to Romney’s governorship in the legislative branch. This imbalance means that the Massachusetts legislature was in a political position to absolutely ignore the leadership of a Republican governor. It could literally do whatever its legislative heart desired.  The legislature had the votes to pass any bill and to override any veto.

Against these odds, it is remarkable that Governor Romney not only held the line on taxes. He also pressured the legislature to abandon its dark-of-the-night plans to impose a retroactive capital tax increase on Massachusetts taxpayers.

When was the last time in American politics that a veto-proof Democrat majority in any legislature failed to raise taxes, never mind being forced to reverse course on a tax hike they had already approved? Mitt Romney made sure they didn’t get away with it.

In Massachusetts, Governor Romney did the politically impossible. He said no, stood firm, and we all watched the largest Democratic majority in the country turn tail and run away from its love of tax hikes.  His success in this tax battle truly constitutes not only a “Massachusetts Miracle” but foreshadows far greater possibilities for achieving pro-growth tax reduction nationwide under the leadership of a Romney presidency.

Governor Romney achieved a Reagan-caliber victory on income and capital gains taxes in Massachusetts. Murdock misses this entirely, and snipes away on a variety of smaller economic issues, complaining that Governor Romney raised fees to help balance the budget, and that the Bay State lagged the nation in selected economic measurements.  Those of us who live and work here, and who have campaigned here as Republicans understand what Murdock apparently doesn’t: Massachusetts has suffered for nearly 50 years under a growing Democrat monopoly in the legislature, leading to one of America’s most inhospitable business and economic climates.

When Romney was inaugurated Governor in 2003, the Massachusetts legislature was routinely ignoring the will of the voters on ballot initiatives, including their smack-down of the overwhelming people’s approval of an income tax reduction which the legislature refused (and still refuses) to implement.  Meanwhile, these same lawmakers continued a spending and regulatory spree pushing the budget into mounting deficits with no end in sight while suffocating entrepreneurial energy and reducing incentives for existing companies to stay in the state, never mind relocate here.

It’s no wonder that Mitt Romney inherited a state economy that trailed overall national numbers in manufacturing, output, job growth, and employment. The real wonder is that, as a Republican governor entering this morass of economic opposition and obstructionism he was able to pull the budget into the black and build a big surplus, while forestalling an adversarial legislature on income and capital gains tax increases.

Murdock’s article quotes Barbara Anderson, executive director of Citizens for Limited Taxation, opposing a proposed “SUV levy” under Romney that was never enacted, and uses this quote to imply that, as head of the leading anti-tax group in Massachusetts, she is also anti-Romney in the presidential race.

Quite the opposite. This is the same Barbara Anderson who offers incredibly high praise and an immeasurably strong endorsement for Mitt Romney in her recent article “Why we need Mitt Romney to be president.”  In a sweeping positive assessment, Anderson concludes that “The nation needs leaders like Reagan and Romney to do what has to be done, to save the world for my grandchildren.”

Here’s the real story: Governor Mitt Romney, faced with the most hostile political environment in the country, attempted to do what few governors even with friendly legislatures attempt—to promote and enforce pro-growth economic leadership on the two most important fronts: income taxes and capital gains taxes.

Mitt Romney not only attempted it in Massachusetts. He succeeded.  Barbara Anderson knows it because she was here in Massachusetts to watch Mitt Romney’s performance as governor. So was I.  And here’s another thing we know from being in the front row: Mitt Romney will make the best president.

Shrewsbury elected Governor Mitt Romney by an overwhelming majority at the Presidential Straw Poll hosted by the Shrewsbury Republican Town Committee on Wednesday, January 16, 2008. The poll was open to Republicans and independent voters. All attendees cast a ballot for the Republican Presidential candidates which were then tallied by a four-member panel of judges.

Moderating the standing-room only crowd was Jeff Beatty of Harwich, Republican candidate for U.S. Senate. It was a boisterous crowd. Representatives of each of the major candidates made their pitch to the crowd and handled a challenging array of questions.

A secret ballot was used. The results of the poll are as follows:

CANDIDATE / % of VOTE
——————————–
-  Former Governor Mitt Romney  — 54%
-  Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani  — 15%
-  Senator John McCain — 11%
-  Former Senator Fred Thompson — 11%
-  Former Governor Mike Huckabee — 4%
-  Congressman Duncan Hunter — 4%
-  Congressman Ron Paul — 2%
-  Former Ambassador Alan Keyes — 0%

Of course, you never really know what’s going to happen in politics until the last vote is counted…and contested in court…and dragged to the Supreme Court…

This just in from MassGOP State Committeeman Matt Kinnaman from Western Mass:

Mitt Romney’s strong win in Michigan yesterday carries added significance because it indicates key strategic strengths that are critical to a Republican victory in the general election in November.

Governor Romney’s strong showing puts Michigan in play in the general election.

No Democrat since Jimmy Carter has won the White House without winning Michigan. It is difficult for any Democrat to get 270 electoral votes without 17 from Michigan.

Governor Romney’s victory is even more significant given the fact that this was an open primary, not limited to Republican voters. Winning an open primary in Michigan shows competitive strength nationwide, given Michigan’s demographic similarity to the nation as a whole.

This victory is even more significant given that Sen. McCain handily won the state in 2000 by more than 101,000 votes. Sen. McCain is far weaker today than he was in 2000. He has now lost Michigan and his victory in New Hampshire was much smaller than in 2000.

Most media outlets have missed these clearly visible indicators which—when added to Romney’s singular accomplishment in the early primaries of being the only candidate to place either first or second in every contest, while amassing a lead in delegates and overall vote count—establish him as not only the most successful candidate across the board through the early states, but the candidate who demonstrates the greatest ability to win in November.

Jeff Beatty, a stand-up kind of a guy with a tremendously impressive background in terrorism security, the FBI, CIA, and small business, is making a run for Senator Kerry’s seat. I’ve met Jeff many times and have talked to him at length. He’s a good, strong conservative Republican who will well represent the people of Massachusetts.

Over the weekend, Jim Ogonowski, another decent Republican who recently ran for Niki Tsongas’ US House seat, threw his hat into the ring.

So now we have the makings of a primary. Tough on the wallet but good for candidate development.

The only problem is, nasty mutterings behind the scenes are already at play, with anonymous sources trying to undermine Jeff Beatty’s credibility. Sometimes I really hate politics. It shows the darkest side of human behavior. In this case, I am mad. The nasty anti-Beatty email campaign that has surfaced is unwarranted and spineless (at least tell people who you are, unless you have no credibility yourself).

So I’m sharing Jeff Beatty’s response. It shows the kind of stand-up guy he is. Nothing against Jim, but I’m with Jeff.

Dear Friends and Supporters,

There is an old saying in politics, “There is no such thing as coincidence”.

This past weekend many Republicans from across the state received an email from an anonymous coward who slandered my good name and reputation. In addition, the good name of another fellow republican was defamed. Adhering to Ronald Reagan’s 11th commandment “thou shall not attack a fellow Republican,” I will let you make your own conclusions as to where these malicious and malevolent attacks stem from.

For too long we have seen the results of negative campaigning, it is beneath the citizens of this Commonwealth and has hurt our Party. There is no room in our great Party for negative attacks by shadowy figures and fictitious groups. Therefore I ask you to use your common sense and good judgment and condemn such hateful attacks.

I still adhere to and am inspired by the words of Ronald Reagan that we are the “shining city on the hill.” I also believe in the words of another great leader and Massachusetts native, John Kennedy who said “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.”

For over 30 years I have dedicated myself to our great nation and to the citizens and government of this Commonwealth. Whether my service has been in the military, the FBI, CIA or as a small businessman, it has been driven by my love for my country and my fellow Americans.

Like many of you, I am concerned about the direction of politics in our country and worried about the issues we face as a nation but more importantly I am alarmed over the prospects of six more years of John Forbes Kerry as a senator from Massachusetts. Our country needs a different direction, with a fresh approach and bold, dynamic leadership to help America continue to be the greatest nation on earth.

In my quest to be your next Senator I believe I bring a new vision with creative ideas backed by traditional American values. I ask you for your support and encourage your prayers.

God Bless you and God Bless the United States of America
Jeffrey K. Beatty

Great article by NRO contributor, Mark Levin. This is why I can’t vote for McCain for President:

The McCain domestic record is a disaster. To say he fought spending, most particularly earmarks, is to nibble around the edges and miss the heart of the matter. For starters, consider:

- McCain-Feingold — the most brazen frontal assault on political speech since Buckley v. Valeo.
- McCain-Kennedy — the most far-reaching amnesty program in American history.
- McCain-Lieberman — the most onerous and intrusive attack on American industry — through reporting, regulating, and taxing authority of greenhouse gases — in American history.
- McCain-Kennedy-Edwards — the biggest boon to the trial bar since the tobacco settlement, under the rubric of a patients’ bill of rights.
- McCain-Reimportation of Drugs — a significant blow to pharmaceutical research and development, not to mention consumer safety (hey Rudy, pay attention).

Here’s a great little survey on USA Today’s site that asks you 11 key questions, then matches your answers with the positions of the presidential candidates.

USAToday: Which Presidential Candidate

My answers came out with 1. Thompson, 2. Romney, 3. Huckabee, 4. Guiliani. No surprise for me there. Unfortunately, I don’t think Fred has the momentum he needs to make it to the nomination.

OK, the primary is almost here. In preparation, the Shrewsbury Republican Town Committee is hosting a Straw Poll on Wednesday, January 16th, at the Italian American Club in Shrewsbury, 7pm. All are welcome. Bring your vote. In the meantime, let’s find out who people are leaning toward.

- Our former Governor Mitt Romney

- Rudy Giuliani

- Mike Huckabee

- Duncan Hunter

- John McCain

- Ron Paul

- Fred Thompson

Personally, I like Duncan Hunter. Great guy. Strong on defense, strong on social issues. But I don’t think he has the visibility or the funding to make it all the way. So I’m going with my next best pick, Mitt Romney. Yes, he played a little too loose and liberal in his Senate race against Kennedy, but otherwise he’s got the financial and political smarts to make things happen. And he’s talking a straight conservative line now and has the backing of some very conservative organizations, like Bill Buckley’s National Review. So I’m thinking he’s going to hold steady. And he certainly has enough money in the bank. Let’s see how Michigan and South Carolina go.

This from USA Today:

In the Detroit Free Press-Local 4 Michigan Poll, Romney leads Sen. John McCain 27%-22% with former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in third place at 16%.