Matt Patrick's Blog

Toward a More Equitable Tax System in Massachusetts

 May 3, 2010

Recently, I have received a lot of attention for one of my budget amendments that would have increased the tax on wealth.  Talk show personality, Howie Carr, decided it wasn't a good thing to do so he dedicated an entire column to misrepresenting it.  Mr. Carr, who is currently, and somewhat ironically, battling his employer because he is upset with his million dollar a year salary, does not endorse me for re-election.  Bob Murray said I should put that on my bumper sticker, "not endorsed by Howie Carr."

The intent of my amendment to the budget was to restore the tax on income derived from wealth to support the Commonwealth's institutions and services which are being severely curtailed.  We have undergone an 18% decline in tax revenue and are only surviving on Federal money which will end next year leaving us in a very deep hole.  We have had to cut the equivalent of 1500 full time jobs in next year's budget and many more last year.  For the first time in years we have cut local aide and education aide to cities and towns.  If my amendment had passed, it would have given the Commonwealth about $500 million that we desperately need.

What is clear is that a disproportionate share of our state and local tax burden falls on the bottom half of our wage earners.  According to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, the top one percent of income earners in Massachusetts pay less than 5% of their income in state and local taxes while the lower half of us pay about 10% of our income in state and local taxes.[i]  My amendment would have restored the tax rate on interest and stock dividends to the 12% level it was at before 1998.  The first $5,000 in this income would be exempt for people 65 years of age.  It doesn't include income from social security or pensions.

After being in the Peace Corps in Ghana, Africa, a third world nation, I gained a tremendous appreciation for what our taxes do to provide infrastructure and the institutions that enable people to become wealthy and stay wealthy.  Without our infrastructure such as roads, bridges, water, sewer, airports, ports, internet, parks and open space and institutions such as schools, colleges, courts, libraries, hospitals, fire and police protection , regulatory agencies that protect our health, welfare and the environment, people would not be able to earn and keep wealth.  It's that simple. 

Ghana was a military dictatorship in 1977.  Government as we know it was almost nonexistent, roads and bridges were barely passable, the phone system hardly ever worked, the courts were subject to manipulation, hospitals were filthy and places to be avoided.  Basic services like water supply were tentative at best.  I don't remember an income tax but I believe it was a type of VAT tax or value added tax on all imported commodities.  There was no upkeep or modernization of the basic infrastructure and institutions that the British had left behind when Ghana became independent.  Sometimes the traditional system would fill the gaps.  Chiefs of various clans would act as a court helping to resolve minor disputes for example.

[Accra water]

Even a very smart, highly motivated person would have difficulty starting a business in the third world because you couldn't depend on government doing its normal functions.  You couldn't depend on shipping your products on time.  If you had a legal problem with one of your business associates, you could not depend on the courts to resolve the issue fairly and equitably.  It would be difficult to get educated people to work for you.  You didn't even know if you would have water, sewer and electricity.  You might have to bribe the police to do their jobs.  If people think they can make it on their own without government, they should try making it in a third world country where a "small government" is a reality.

In stark contrast, generation upon generation has paid taxes to create a Massachusetts with a significant infrastructure that enables businesses to make money and wealth.  We have the highest ranking kids in nationwide education tests and they rank 3^rd in the world in reading and math.  That's impressive when you consider the very real problems we still have with inner city schools.  97% of our citizens are covered by health insurance and our overall health rates are very good compared to other states.   Massachusetts is in the top 3 in terms of per capita income and we have a very low divorce rate and teen birth rate. 

One often hears that Massachusetts isn't a good place for business.  However, there are two recent studies that say we are a good place for business.  The Beacon Hill Institute ranks us 2^nd in the nation in terms of business competitiveness second only to Utah and the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation's New Economy Index ranked us first in the nation for business.

Massachusetts is no longer a high tax state.  During the dot com bubble in the 1990s, the legislature cut about 40 different taxes which contributed to a structural deficit even before the economy tanked in 2003 and then again in 2007.  We are ranked 24^th among other states in total state and local tax burden as a percent of our income by the Tax Foundation.

I don't think it is fair to tax people's income derived from their labor at the same rate we tax income generated from wealth because the infrastructure, institutions and services we provide through our taxes enable and help the wealthy more than it helps the average working man or women.  The average working person will never ship products from our ports or airports.  He or she won't use our highways to truck goods to nearby states.  He or she won't be hiring our students to work in their business.  Businesses are the main users of our courts.  Businesses depend heavily on all of this infrastructure and institutional service.

Before 1998 the legislature reduced the wealth tax from 12 % to the same rate as the income tax.  So, people felt that wealth should be taxed at a higher rate previously.  That's about a 6.7% premium paid for income generated by wealth. 

The blue collar perspective should also be considered.  Before I landed a white collar job in the mid 1980's, I worked a number of jobs in the building trades from mason's tender, mason, framer to plumber.  It was satisfying work.  I actually got to see what the product of my work at the end of the day, which is something I rarely see these days.  However, there were days I came home so dead tired and dirty that I could barely eat.  Sometimes it was so grueling working two jobs that I wanted to quit yet I hung on to support my young family.  I'm sure most blue collar workers know what I mean.  I could barely take a shower and crawl into bed some nights.  Not complaining, that's just what I had to do to earn a living but we should not put it on the same level of taxation as income derived from wealth. 

No labor, whether it is white collar or blue collar, should be taxed at the same rate as income from wealth.  Think about it; it's just money making money.  A person can inherit wealth without ever needing to work and his or her money will pay enough in stock dividends and interest that they will never need to work.  It is an unfair advantage that has assisted in creating the biggest divergence in income between the wealthy and middle class since the 1920s.[ii]  Of all the industrial nations, the United States has the biggest gap between rich and poor.  This is not healthy for our democracy.

You would think my proposal would be popular with the middle class but the right will twist it and frame it to make me look like a socialist.  They want you to forget that the income tax rate for the highest bracket was 90% in the 1950s when we had the largest middle class and the greatest growth in income equality in our Nation's history.  We also had a Republican president and real bipartisanship in Congress.

That is why I believe the wealthy should pay more for the infrastructure and institutions that enabled them to make and keep their wealth.  After all, it was the taxes of all of our labor that built them and made this Commonwealth and nation into great wealth producers. 

I will continue to push the measure if reelected to a new term in November.  Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to you today and have a wonderful day.  Happy birthday America!

[i] Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, Third Edition, November 2009, "Who Pays?, A Distributional Analysis of the Tax Systems in All 50 States" p. 58 A disproportionate tax burden falls on the lowest income people in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts who pay: lowest 20% earning less than$20,000 pay 10.1 % of their income in state and local taxes; the 2^nd lowest 20% earning between $20,000 and $41,000 pay 10.1%...; the middle or 3^rd lowest 20% earning  between $41,000 and $66,000 pay 9.6%....; the fourth 20% earning between $66,000 and $111,000 pay 8.8%; the next 15% earning between $111,0000 and $243,000, pay 7.7%...; the next 4% earning between $243,000 and $683,000 pay 7.1%...and the top 1% earning over $683,000 pay 4.8 % of their income in state and local taxes.

[ii] Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez, "Income Inequality in the united States, 1913-1998," Quarterly Journal of Economics 118, no. 1 (Feb. 2003), pp. 1-39. Updated data available at http://elsa.berkeley.edu/ saez/.

You are the Government, Part 2

  Economic downturn adds unprecedented challenges for us all

This is a very difficult time for state and local governments but we have survived bad times before and we will survive this downturn.  The economic downturn and background budget pressures that have been growing for a decade are placing unprecedented challenges before us. But it is important to remember that we have survived bad times before.   It is equally important to remember the constructive role that government has played in helping us weather past recessions paving the way toward recovery.  In the midst of the current crisis it is easy to forget the essential role that our public systems play in the quality of life we enjoy in Massachusetts.   We must keep in mind that our state and local governments provide the services and infrastructure that we couldn't create as individuals. 

I think most of us would agree that the Commonwealth provides a fairly good life for our citizens.  It's not well known but Massachusetts leads in most quality of life indicators when compared to other states.  For example, we rank in the top five in levels of education because we have more high school and college graduates than most other states.  We rank in the top five in terms of income.  We have a lower divorce rate, lower unwed mother rate and lower teen pregnancy rate than most other states.  We provide more care for our needy citizens.  We also have one of the more healthy populations in the country and more than 93% of us have health insurance.

Yet when you compare our total state and local tax burden as a percentage of our income, we rank only 24^th in the nation in 2008.  Why use total tax burden as a percentage of income?  It's a fairer gauge because we earn a lot more than most other states.  Using a per capita tax ranking is like putting a light weight in a boxing ring with a heavy weight.  Comparing us to the southern states is not fair to them because they earn less and pay a larger percentage of their income in taxes greatly reducing their spending power.  In addition, our sales tax is the 44^th lowest of all states and the current gas tax is ranked even lower and hasn't gone up in 16 years. 

It was never my personal goal to run for office but it grew naturally from my early volunteer work.  Here is the story of how I got involved in public service.  There is great trout stream running through my village of Waquoit.  I had worked with local members of Trout Unlimited to restore the river that had been damned up and turned into a cranberry bog hundreds of years ago.  Because of thousands of man and woman hours we put into the effort, it was turning into a very productive trout stream with large sea run brown trout.

However, all that was on the verge of being destroyed.  A developer had cobbled together various parcels of the river valley and was proposing an 800 unit condominium development on either side of the river.  The pollution from the septic systems would have ruined the fishery in the stream and hastened the deterioration of Waquoit Bay into which it flowed.  While many of my friends and fellow volunteers became despondent by the news, I became incensed and decided to find a way to protect the river by stopping the development.

I organized the community and worked to put a coalition of civic and environmental groups together to urge the legislature to fund the acquisition of some 370 acres of the river valley.  It took three years but the Commonwealth bought the acreage for ten million dollars, an unheard of sum for land protection back in those days.  Without, the Commonwealth, it could not have happened.  Today, we have many parcels of open space throughout the Commonwealth that would have been developed and lost forever. 

It is easy to forget the often invisible role that government plays in our daily lives.  Whether it is simply the park we walk in every day or the some critical service we have received.  Maybe you got a grant or loan to attend college or help with a disabled loved one.  Perhaps it was assistance with elderly parents.  Where would we be without unemployment insurance or social security?  Who would build and maintain our roads, bridges, airports and railroads?  What about the Food and Drug Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency its laws and enforcement?  How would we get mail or the internet services we all take for granted? 

On a local level, who would provide water, trash pick-up, public schools, police and fire protection?  Who would provide planning, zoning, health and building inspections?

On a state level, what would happen if we didn't have our system of laws and the courts? Where would we get money to build and operate our schools?  Who would provide assistance for the sick, hungry, homeless, the mentally ill, the handicapped and our seniors?  There are endless services that our state and local governments provides for us.  We take them for granted but our lives would be more difficult without them. 

We have a clear choice ahead of us as legislators and citizens of the Commonwealth.  We can watch our services and infrastructure crumble because of a lack of funding or we can step up to the plate and take on the responsibility to maintain this great and beautiful state that we have built for ourselves and our children.  For me, this means that we should all be willing to accept a reasonable increase in our state taxes in order to protect and preserve the public systems we rely on and that are essential to our economic recovery.

You are the government

YOU ARE THE GOVERNMENT

“It’s what they do,” said Governor Patrick in a fitting response to a question from the press about what he thought of the critical comments made by Republican leaders regarding the proposed gas tax.  The Republicans want you to believe that the Governor and Democratic legislators are too lazy to look for efficiencies in government and will tax you because it’s easy to do.

It’s not easy.  It’s a lot more difficult to raise taxes than it is to cut budgets even in what people think is a liberal legislature, which it isn’t.  The majority of the Democrats in the legislature consider themselves fiscally conservative and even liberals don’t casually suggest taxes.  Senate Minority Leader Richard Tisei is showing his party’s desperation with his broad brushed critique of the Governor and Democrats in the legislature.  He’s only got four Republican colleagues in the Senate and sixteen in the House.

The extreme example is the pill popping, multi-millionaire, right wing, radio entertainer Rush Limbaugh who proudly says he wants President Obama to fail when he knows full well that he is saying he wants America to fail.  The irony is he accused Democrats of being unpatriotic or worse for disagreeing with the former President but I never recall hearing a Democrat say they wanted the President to fail.  As Robert F. Kennedy said, “The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of Country.” You may disagree with the President but nobody says they want him to fail, except for rightwing prima-donnas.

Assume the Republicans are correct for a second.  If government is no good, who will save the economy?   Is it the private sector that brought you this recession?  The current recession, verging on depression, was brought to us by greedy bank and financial managers who lobbied a Republican dominated Congress and the former administration to deregulate their industry so they could give mortgages to anyone who could sign their name regardless of their income.  These same free market fanatics gave us the Haliburton, Enron and World Com scandals and countless other examples of corporate greed, dishonesty and mismanagement.

As of 2008, American CEOs are paid $475 for every dollar earned by the average worker in their firm. The U.K. is $22. Canada is $20. France is $15 and Japan is $11. This is a tremendous increase for American CEOs because as recently as1990 American CEOs were about par with these previously mentioned countries. Can we count on the investment bankers who take bailout money and then complain about having to live on $500,000 a year?  Are we to look for economic saviors in the likes of Bernard Madoff who stole $50 billion from his investors and got away with it for years because the Securities Exchange Commission didn’t do their job?

The point here is that we can find greed and corruption in every human endeavor.  Is it worst than in the past?  I don’t know.  I do know that there has always been corruption and greed both in government and the private sector throughout history.  I also know that everything we do requires careful regulation, constant vigilance and oversight with just punishments.  To me the public trust is the most valuable asset I have as an elected official and I would never do anything intentionally to put it in jeopardy.

Remember that we the people are the government in a democracy.  It’s not pretty at times, in fact it can get ugly, but it’s the best form of government on the planet.  Government is what we do together for the common good to make our neighborhood, our town, our county, our state and our nation better places for everyone.  We use government to plan for the future and to build the institutions to improve our lives both as individuals and together.

We have wonderful examples of it all around us.  Our courts,  registry of deeds, public schools, libraries, police, fire/rescue personnel, public beaches and parks, boards of health, planning and zoning boards, departments of public works for our roads and bridges, departments of natural resources, water departments, airports, mass transportation like the Cape Cod Regional Transportation Authority, trash collection, public colleges like Cape Cod Community College.  We have the Cape Cod Commission to plan for new development and protect natural resources.  We have the Cape Light Compact to help us get a reasonable price for electricity and energy efficiency services.  All of these public agencies have withstood the test of time and survived because they serve a useful purpose by performing functions for society that we could not have done by ourselves.

We get all these services at a bargain price in Massachusetts.  According to the Taxpayers Network 50 State Comparisons, 2008 Edition, we rank 29th when compared to the rest of the states for state and local tax burden as a percent of income.  After cutting 2.5 billion from the budget with a need to cut another 500 million or more, there is no room for funding maintenance or improvements to our transportation infrastructure with our debt load.  Anyone claiming otherwise is either trying to flim-flam us or doesn’t understand the complexity of the problem we are up against.

Were mistakes made in the past?  Yes, by Republican Governors who mismanaged the Big Dig and by Democratic Legislatures that turned a blind eye to the mess.  Will there be reforms before new taxes?  The answer is absolutely, yes.  However, the past is in the past and there is nothing we can do about it now except make corrections and go forward.

I will work to ensure that, if the gas tax passes, we get our fair share to improve our local transportation infrastructure, grow the Cape Cod Regional Transit Authority, assist people who want to buy fuel efficient vehicles and extend the commuter rail line to Cape Cod.

Rep. Patrick's position on the gas tax

Facts instead of hyperbole

The radio propaganda machine is in full gear cranking people up with misinformation about the Governor's position on the gas tax. Good for them because they forced me to make my position public and provide facts instead of hyperbole.

First let's consider if we need a gas tax. Do we want to maintain our roads and bridges? Do we want more mass transportation? I think we do and most people agree with me after remembering what happened to the price of gasoline just last year. We have already seen how the price of gas can become unaffordable in a matter of months and eventually, it will happen again and again with more and more frequency. There is no question that we must be prepared for it by encouraging people to get out of their big inefficient cars and get onto mass transportation whether it is the MBTA or our local Regional Transportation Authorities. Some people will be living in such rural circumstances that they will never have access to mass transportation. In those cases we should be able to provide incentives so they can afford fuel efficient cars.

Heck, at our present course we won't even be able to maintain our present highway infrastructure let alone expand our mass transportation system.  According to its March 28, 2007 report, the Massachusetts Transportation Finance Commission stated, "...we estimate that over the next 20 years, the cost just to maintain our transportation system exceeds the anticipated resources available by $15 to $19 billion.  This does nothing to address necessary expansions or enhancements."

Why is a lot of what the talk show jocks are saying misinformation?  The fact of the matter is that Governor Patrick did not initiate the gasoline tax idea.  It came from legislators in the metropolitan Boston area that reacted strongly to the proposed increases in bridge and highway tolls in their area.  However, like any good administrator, the Governor is evaluating a range of political options for funding all areas of transportation.  The gas tax he is considering ranges from a low of 5 cents to a high of 28 cents in combination with toll increases.

By the time a gas tax wends its way into law, it will probably be someplace in the middle in addition to an increase in tolls.  Here's why.  The proponents of the gasoline tax need legislators from outside the Boston metropolitan area to get a gasoline tax passed.  Legislators from western, central, southeastern Massachusetts and the Cape are going to demand that their regions benefit from this investment in transportation before they vote for a gas tax.  That means improving our regional transportation authorities and extending commuter trains further from Boston are essential.  We are not going to give the people driving into Boston a free ticket either.  Tolls must, not only remain in place, but increase to again encourage people to use mass transit into the city.

I also agree with Senate President Murray, that the Commonwealth's transportation agencies must reform which would include consolidations and pension reforms.  I will also insist that there are incentives to help moderate to low income people afford fuel efficient vehicles.

Below are the concepts I signed on to along with many of my colleagues in a letter that we sent to Governor Patrick.  These are the elements I must see in an overall transportation plan before I will vote to increase the gas tax.

The transportation sector accounts for roughly one third of greenhouse gas emissions in Massachusetts.  It is critical that we undertake a comprehensive reform that responds to the full magnitude and urgency of our climate problem as well as our financial problem.

As transportation reform moves forward, we hope that the following principles are reflected:

• Transportation reform should be comprehensive and respond fully to the problems detailed by the Transportation Finance Commission. Specifically, reform should meet the system's long term funding needs and achieve all cost-savings identified.
• Public transit systems (both the MBTA and the RTAs) should receive sufficient debt, capital and operating relief to allow them to (a) keep fares reasonable; (b) expand routes; (c) improve service.
• A responsible gas tax increase needs to be part of the solution -- to provide adequate funds dedicated to transportation, but also to encourage economy in automobile use.
• We oppose the dramatic turnpike and tunnel toll increases proposed because they are unfair and will channel traffic into residential neighborhoods. We do not as a group offer a specific toll plan, but we feel that some equitable tolls reasonably related to maintenance costs may have a long term role to play. They may be necessary financially and can be used to manage congestion.
• If registration fees or other automobile fees are part of the consensus financial solution, we urge that the fees be structured to lower net fees and taxes on buyers of smaller, more efficient vehicles, while raising the most revenues from buyers of larger less efficient vehicles.
• We urge that the bill include explicit language to favor transportation capital investment that (a) supports smart growth development patterns (core density as opposed to sprawl); and (b) supports traffic calming, bicycle routes and pedestrian safety facilities -- street livability measures which make higher density pleasant and efficient; (c) supports transportation demand management programs.
• We urge that, to the extent that necessary revenue increases burden persons of limited income, mechanisms be included to provide appropriate relief.

Thank you for considering my position on the future of the Commonwealth's transportation system.

Sandwich Board of Selectmen Need a Reality Check

The rest of The Cape shouldn't have to pay your town expenses

Somebody has to ask the Sandwich Selectmen if they expect citizens who do not live in their town to continue to pay their tax bills and whether it's worth keeping the plant open if just one family will have a member suffer and perhaps die from an illness created by the pollution coming from the plant.

Is it worth keeping the canal power plant open if even one Cape Codder suffers and perhaps dies from an illness created by the pollution it causes?

I know it's a tough economic hit for the town but there is no rationale to keep a power plant running that can't compete.  I would rather just contribute to their annual $2 million tax bill than to keep the Canal Power Plant running at an annual cost of about $100 million.  It's just plain illogical.  

Nationallizing the power plant

Good Capitalists know that the way ISO NE was allowing that plant to operate even though it couldn't compete economically, was the equivelent of nationallizing the power plant.  

Sandwich has had a good thing going for a long, long time but they need to deal with economic realities.  If Mirant doesn't install new combined cycle gas turbines, it is very likely they will shut the plant down.  That is a fact. 

The SEMA issue caught my attention roughly four years ago at an Energy Committee hearing.

It's one of the dirtiest power plants in New England

 I learned for the first time that the Canal Electric plant, one of the dirtiest power plants in New England, was being kept running even though it couldn't compete on a cost efficiency basis.  The Independent System Operator of New England (ISO NE) ordered that it be kept running at less than 20 percent capacity for reliability purposes.  They deemed it would protect the grid from failure if two of the 345 KV power lines went out at the same time even though the chances of that happening are extremely remote.  It's only happened once in the history of the system when there was a fire at the Canal Power Plant in 2004.

The total from 2005-08 is more than $350 million, money that could have been spent to put wind turbines or new photovoltaic installations  throughout the region

 The power plant operation out of economic merit, in ISO NE code words, costs all of southeastern Massachusetts about $19 million a month at the peak oil costs this past summer.  This is on top of electric rates that are the highest in the continental U.S.  The total from 2005 through 2008 is more than 350 million dollars.

 This is money that could have been spent to put wind turbines or new photovoltaic installations  throughout the region.  Those installations could be paying for themselves in free fuel for the next twenty or thirty years.  Instead the $350 million has gone to Venezuala leaving behind only the tons of carbon dioxide, SOX and NOX along with heavy metals such as one of the most poisonous, cadmium, which is unique to Venezuelan bunker oil which they burn at the Canal Power Plant.

It's  YOUR money they are wasting

All this was decided without even asking the residents of southeastern Massachusetts what they would prefer.  Would they be willing to pay an additional 2 cents per kWh for a questionable reliability enhancement?  Would they prefer that the money be spent on energy efficiency programs and renewable energy programs that could reduce peak demand and provide jobs and cleaner air in the process?  What did the ratepayers of SEMA get for their money? 

 Needless to say, after finding out about this in 2005 I started to agitate.  The answers were delayed and not satisfactory so I agitated some more and got my colleagues involved.  Senator O'Leary is equally enraged.   I met with representatives from ISO and the DPU but their answers to these questions were unsatisfactory.

 Well low and behold, ISO NE did come up with system upgrades that will eliminate the need to run the Canal Power Plant when it can't compete economically except for the worst days in the summer.  It's too bad for the ratepayers that this fact couldn't have been established 3 or 4 years ago.  We will still have to pay for the upgrades.

To shut off the plant even on peak summer days, ISO is considering transmission upgrades instead of renewable energy or energy efficiency programs ranging in cost from $98 million to $670 million.

To shut off the plant even on peak summer days, ISO is considering transmission upgrades instead of renewable energy or energy efficiency programs ranging in cost from 98 million to 670 million dollars.   Where are the estimates and studies for alternatives to transmission?  Couldn't this money be better spent on demand reduction?  The Green Communities Act now mandates that all new generation be compared to new energy efficiency programs or renewable energy to determine the least cost not only economically but to society and the environment as well.  I have filed legislation to do the same thing with transmission and we will take our argument to Washington and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission if need be.

 Where is the accountability to ratepayers?  Is there any consideration for what is best for the customers?  Do we just go on mindlessly accommodating new fossil fuel generation or transmission for large generators without considering distributed generation?  Apparently, If the industry has its way, we do.

First of many endorsements for Rep. Matt Patrick

Massachusetts League of Environmental Voters Endorses Rep Matt Patrick
MLEV Cites Patrick's Strong Commitment to Renewable Energy

The Massachusetts League of Environmental Voters (MLEV), the non-partisan political voice for the environment, announced its endorsement of Representative Matthew Patrick for re-election in the third Barnstable House race today, citing his strong commitment to environmental issues that affect both the commonwealth and the Cape. Matt id shoen below with former Governor and Presidential candidate Mike Dukaklis.

"MLEV is proud to endorse Matthew Patrick for reelection, a representative who understands the need to leave our children a healthy world," said MLEV Executive Director Lora Wondolowski.  "We need to keep environmental champions like Matt on Beacon Hill."

In his MLEV questionnaire, Patrick cited increasing energy efficiency and providing tax incentives to citizens for using renewable energy as his top environmental priorities.  Rep. Matthew Patrick is also committed to promoting alternative energy that will spur economic growth in the Commonwealth and conserve resources. In the 2006 MLEV Environmental Scorecard, Rep. Patrick received a 99, a near perfect score.

"This endorsement from the Massachusetts League of Environmental Voters carries a great deal of weight in the world of environmental advocacy and I'm grateful to receive it," replied Rep. Patrick.  "Energy and the environment are key issues for me, and they closely examine each candidates' credentials so I appreciate their seal of approval very much."

For information on all MLEV's 2008 endorsed candidates, go here.

Join us for a fun Labor Day Fundraiser!

The Committee to Elect Matt Patrick invites you to a fundraiser to celebrate Labor Day and the working men and women of our local unions.

Come join Representative Matt Patrick and his labor friends for good talk, good humor and good food!  Admission includes a picnic lunch of chowder, salad, hamburgers and hot dogs, corn on the cob, cake and watermelon with a cash bar.

Date:  Labor Day, Monday, September 1st, 2008, RSVP by August 28th.

Time:  12pm, noon

Place:  Navigator, 55 Ashumet Rd., East Falmouth (Portuguese American Club, corner of Sandwich and Ashumet Rd., nearer to Rte. 151)

Admission:  $50 per person, children free. 

If you can't make it, and still would like to contribute, send a check to:

C.T.E. Matt Patrick
POB 3252
Waquoit, MA 02536-3252

State law requires us to use our best efforts to collect and report the name, mailing address, occupation and name of employer of individuals whose contributions are $200 or more in an election cycle.  Political contributions are not tax deductible.  Questions, call 508-540-6308.

Paid for by the Committee to Elect Matt Patrick, Ken Braga, Treasurer, POB 3252, Waquoit, 02536

Thoughts on flag day and a yes for the Peace Rock

 Dear Mr. Chairman,

"The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country." Robert F. Kennedy

I had a thought provoking experience at Flag Day ceremony in Mashpee.  I was reminded about how my father, a combat veteran of WWII, felt about war.  A colleague read a poem about the flag that talked.  It talked almost exclusively about the blood and glory of war.  It spoke of being in every battle in the last 200 years and using its torn pieces to staunch the bleeding of the wounded on the battle field.  It is a moving piece appealing to our nationalistic instincts.  It never asks us to examine what the flag represents.

"No normal man who has smelled and associated with death ever wants to see any more of it..." - Bill MauldinI spoke next and reminded people it's not the flag itself but what it represents that is important.  It's the Constitution.  Without our Constitution, the flag just represents a place.  It could be a flag from any nation.  What makes our flag special is that it represents our Nation that is backed up by our Constitution.  The Constitution protects our democratic way of life.  It protects us from the tyranny of the government and the tyranny of the majority. All of our officers in the armed services swear to up hold the Constitution as do all of our state and federal legislators.  My dad warned me never to forget that it is the Constitution that makes this Nation great.

As a youngster, I was always curious about the war.  He discouraged me but I couldn't help admiring soldiers and loved to watch all the old WWII movies that, for the most part, glorified war.  Those movies never showed the awful and unavoidable brutality of war that deeply affected my dad and every other combat veteran.  In his later years, at my urging, my father was able to relate more of his war experiences.  They were truly gut wrenching.  The one movie my father said came close to a realistic picture of the brutality of war was in the opening scenes of D-Day in "Saving Private Ryan."  He said they were very accurate and he couldn't watch much of it.  My dad has passed on now but I can tell you that the war deeply and negatively impacted his life.

I wanted to know more about war so I read many books about it. To me the most important of the books were written by combat veterans.  "With the Old Breed, From Peleliu to Okinawa" by E.B. Sledge gave the most realistic accounts of what it is like to be in battle.  I also read the official history of my father's outfit the 27^th New York National Guard Division by Edmund Love which gives a heart rending account of how horribly wrong war can go and how mistakes by our own side destroyed many American lives on the Island of Saipan.  It's a story that should get more publicity someday.

Private Sledge wrote about the same battles my father was in using his diary written a few weeks after the battles.  The Marine divisions in the Pacific experienced 80% casualties.  The 27^th Division had more than 60% casualties.   Those numbers are not widely acknowledged in our memories of WWII.  From these extensive readings and talking to other combat veterans I began to realize what my father experienced.

I think Bill Mauldin gave the best account of how combat veterans felt about the war in his book "Up Front." Bill was the cartoonist that gave us the sometimes sad lives of two G.I.'s, Willy and Joe. Mauldin said, "No normal man who has smelled and associated with death ever wants to see any more of it.  In fact, the only men who are even going to want to bloody noses in a fist fight after this war will be those who want people to think they were tough combat men, when they weren't.  The surest way to become a pacifist is to join the infantry."

War cuts short the youth of our children, because that is what they are at 18 when they are recruited for war - children.  My father said that when he got back after two years at war, he couldn't even smile.  "It was like I had a mouth full of marbles," he said.   And he was a survivor, physically in good shape but mentally, scarred.  Combat affects some veterans worse than others, but it does some psychological damage to all of them.

In my opinion, the worse crime an elected official can commit is fabricating reasons for war.  War calls on our children to kill and be killed in our name.  In order to maintain their sanity they must believe what they are doing is right.  To find out otherwise is to know that they have been manipulated and exploited by their leaders of their Nation.  Imagine how you would feel.  You give the very essence of your being for the highest ideals of our Nation and then you find out you were misled.  

For these reasons and many more, I respectfully request that the Falmouth Board of Selectmen give permission for the Peace Rock to be installed at Peg Noonan Park.  It can remind us of how our children - their lives, their youth and their mental and physical health are the sacrifices made to war.  Hopefully, it will help us remember that we should only enter into war in defense or our Nation, our Constitution or to defend those who are defenseless.

Matt responds to right wing blogger's B.S., Draws ire

Red States, Blue States, these are Our States

It seems like I raised the hackles of a real live right wing blogger. That's probably not too hard for any of you to believe.  For the record, I disagreed with what the blogger wrote about our Democratic candidate for President. The blogger used the ususal right wing tactic to divert the focus from my original comment and implied that I dislike southerners but I have no dislike for southerners.  I wonder how they can vote for the people who have ruled their state houses for quite a long time and I think the facts speak for themselves. The product of right wing anti tax, anti government philosophy can be seen in the southern states.  The blogger didn't like that I called him on it.  But ask yourself, where would you rather live?

This is what the right winger said,"Last week Barack Obama once again stepped out of the shadow of his own selfless rhetoric and into the spotlight of his own personal sunshine revealing himself to be exactly what many of us believed him to be long ago; an arrogant, naïve, snob, with Marxist leanings who attempts to hide his sense of personal entitlement and suppresses his militant views behind his flowery speeches." We are going to see more and more of this right wing propaganda and if you are a Democrat you should respond to let them and everyone else on the list know that it is foolishness.

I've listed some of the statistics where the Red States lead in human misery catagoriesI've listed some of the statistics where the Red States lead in human misery catagories and yes I did check on the statistics to make sure they are real and all can be found in U.S. Census Data or are derived from U.S. Census Data.

James Wolcott had an excellent article in the November 2006 issue of Vanity Fair entitled, "Red State Babylon" in which he discusses the findings of several books and studies that compare the red states to the blue states in quality of life statistics and morality issues. Of the top ten states with the highest divorce rates and the highest rates of illegitimacy all but one are red states. None are northeastern states. You remember when the former Senator from Pennsylvania made derogatory comments about the liberals in Massachusetts leading to the moral decay of the nation and pedophile priests in the Catholic Church. Well guess what, Massachusetts leads in the other direction having one of the lowest divorce rates in the nation and lowest rates of unwed mothers including teenage mothers.

Other categories of interest are incarceration rates for men and women. Again all but one of the leadings states in incarceration are red states. The states with the highest number of executions are all red states. The top fifteen states with the most deaths by firearms are all red states. Fourteen of the top fifteen states with the highest rates of suicide are red states.

Of the ten states with the highest rates of education, eight are blue statesOf the ten states with the highest rates of education, eight are blue states and New England States claim four of the top five rankings with Massachusetts coming in third. In terms of health all but one of the top fifteen states with the highest rates of obesity are red states. The level of obesity in a population is an indicator of overall health.

What is the difference between the blue states and the red states? Well, for one we pay more taxes to have better schools, public services and human services.

The claim of the conservative anti-government anti-tax politicians that have now ruled the red states for several decades is that their strategy is better than the liberal strategy of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Their basic philosophy goes something like this, keep taxes low and provide minimal human services. Make welfare benefits hard to get. This will encourage responsible and productive citizens and let the private sector do as much as possible. There is little concern for individuals or families falling on times of bad luck due to birth, health or education.

It seems to me that their philosophy is in reality a stark failure when compared to the blue states who take a more humanistic and practical view of their fellow citizens. We are more likely to give our fellow citizens a hand up out of difficulties that we all know can occur to anyone of us at any time. On top of all this when you compare our total taxes as a percentage of our income to the total taxes of the fifty other states, we are ranked 36th in tax burden, lower than some of the red states.

Comments to MMS at Cape Wind Hearing 3/10/08

I am State Representative Matthew Patrick of the Third Barnstable District.  I am a long time member of the Legislature's Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy Committee and I have volunteered many years to environmental causes on Cape Cod.  

Before joining the legislature I was the Executive Director of Self-Reliance, the non-profit energy advocacy and research organization for 15 years.  I led the successful effort to save the Quashnet River Valley from imminent development and was co-chair of the campaign to pass the Cape Cod Commission Act. 

Tonight, I'm offering some new information that you should consider.

1. Based on information I have received as a member of the Energy Committee, it is my opinion that it is likely that the Canal Power plant will be shut off most of the year if the Cape Wind Project is built and a peak load shedding program is implemented.

2. For a little more than a year the Canal Power Plant has been kept running only because of a transmission restriction in southeastern Massachusetts. If not for this transmission restriction the Canal Power Plant would be shut off most of the year because it could not compete due to the high price of oil.

3. Southeastern Massachusetts ratepayers are now paying $9 million a month to keep the Canal plant running at about 17% of its capacity and we don't even need its electricity.

4. The National Electric Reliability Council (NERC) requirements call for operating the system to protect for loss of two major transmission lines within a 30 minute period. Keeping the Canal Power Plant running satisfies the requirement. NStar is starting a Department of Public Utilities proceeding to install system upgrades that will improve but not fully relieve the problem.

5. I, along with any colleague that cares to join me, will ask that Independent Service Operator of New England (ISO) and the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (MDPU) to waive the requirement to run the Canal Power Plant in off peak hours and instead implement a load shedding program after the short term upgrade is completed. NERC standards do allow for load shedding in the event there is a two line loss.

6. The added generation of Cape Wind coupled with a peak load shedding program would greatly assist in relieving the need to keep the Canal Power Plant running except for extreme peak load requirements.

7. Wind monitoring in Nantucket Sound during summer peak hour usage shows that there have been strong winds that would compliment the high demand load profile of the Cape and Islands.

Thank you for considering my testimony.