Red Mass Group - Massachusetts

What CEO's Are Really Saying About Massachusetts

yankeepundit — Sat, 18 May 2013 10:28:21 GMT

Geoff Diehl's recent post http://www.redmassgroup.com/sh... mentions the annual CEO Magazine survey of then views of corporate CEO's on the business climates of each of the 50 states. No surprise that Massachusetts ranks near the bottom (47th). But this year, CEO Magazine has posted comments from the CEOs.

What is really telling is that these comments are anonymous. CEOs are reluctant to openly criticize the governments of the states or countries in which they do business less the pols use the regulatory and taxation apparatus to attack them or their firms. Of course, there are exceptions like the CEO of Honeywell, a technology and manufacturing giant. http://bostonherald.com/busine...

Here are just the first four comments from CEO's on doing business in Massachusetts (excerpted from CEO Magazine): http://chiefexecutive.net/mass...

"If I were designing Hell for a company, I couldn't do as good a job as Massachusetts has. We will be leaving the state within the next year."
"We are moving out of CA, MI, MA and NY in 2013 and terminating our employees there. The regulatory and tax environment has become untenable."
"Massachusetts is returning to the state of Taxachusetts, thanks to Governor Deval Patrick and the overwhelming Democratic party majority in both houses of the Legislature."
"Taxation and regulation are always the key barometers. Massachusetts and Oregon are the worst."

There is a real cost to the tax and regulatory climate-and the hostility to the market and capitalism evidenced by the Governor, legislature and the bureaucracy. Companies are not investing in Massachusetts. According to E&Y's recent survey, Massachusetts lags badly in private sector capital investment (at page 9). http://www.ey.com/Publication/...

CEOs are the ones who make the decisions that determine where investments in productive, good paying jobs will be made. And as far as America's CEOs are concerned, that's not going to be Massachusetts.

Paging Secretary Bialecki ....

The state in which we live: Massachusetts most liberal state says Time magazine

Karl Marx — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 17:25:25 GMT

Decrepit Time magazine channels Jon Keller: Massachusetts is the most liberal state. (D.C. ranked first but that's not a state). We know that we aren't going to turn into Alabama nor should we ever graft such a conservative agenda upon Massachusetts. But this is the world in which we operate, at a great disadvantage. It's a reality check the "Republican wing of the Republican Party" ought to acknowledge. Stating the obvious should be a regular exercise.

Alabama has taken the crown previously held by Mississippi as the most conservative state in the union, according to a new Gallup poll. Last year the top four were Mississippi, Utah, and Wyoming, with Alabama coming in fourth. Overall, Americans in 2012 remained more likely to identify as conservative (38%) than as moderate (36%) or as liberal (23%), although liberals have gained 2 percentage points compared to 2011.
On the liberal side, the medalists have gotten stronger. Washington DC, Massachusetts, and Oregon, the 2011 liberal top three, retain their titles in 2012, as more residents identify as liberal than the prior year. Residents of Washington DC are more liberal than the highest state, Massachusetts, by over ten percentage points.

Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2013...

Get rid of the non-compete

seascraper — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 18:52:49 GMT

I am reading Walter Isaacson's doorstop biography of Steve Jobs. As he is being kicked out of Apple in the mid-80s, Jobs decides to form another computer company (NeXT) and takes five top performers from the Macintosh team with him.

This could not happen in Massachusetts because of the enforcability of non-compete clauses here. It is a major block on innovation that serves the interests of institutions and established businesses in the state.

To really thrive and use the energy of the young people here, we need a business climate where young companies can form, rise up and kill the old ones. Too much of our wealthy political establishment is set on maintaining the old companies.

Why Scott Brown Failed To Get Re-Elected

The Angelic One — Wed, 07 Nov 2012 15:20:09 GMT

Although a final count has yet to be made, Democrat Elizabeth Warren last night ousted Massachusetts Republican US Senator Scott Brown. Scott's re-election was his to lose & he proceeded to do just that.

Was it inevitable? It didn't have to be. But the reasons for Brown's failure to hold onto "the people's seat" aren't complex & sadly reflect a lack of vision that tragically afflicts both the man himself & his political party.

When Brown won his seat in a special election following the death of legendary Democrat Ted Kennedy, he had a golden opportunity to create a new image for the Massachusetts Republican Party that reflected an alternative strain of the Bay State's culture. It could be a party that represented the culture of New England - not the culture of the American South, or the Midwest, or even the West Coast. His initial success was due, in part, to his ability to win over independent & Old Left voters. All he had to do was boldly articulate a practical ideology consistent with the values/culture of Massachusetts that would transform the Bay State & (if successful) a blueprint for reuniting the American nation. Such an approach would revitalize the state GOP & make him a rising star on the national scene.

Instead Brown squandered the opportunity. He cultivated an image as a moderate that made no ideological sense once you studied his voting patterns on certain social or economic issues. The lack of continuity generated an impression of opportunism. After awhile he came across as somebody who tacitly accepted the Democrat paradigm since he refused to question its foundational assumptions. Indeed, his "bipartisan" or "moderate" approach more often than not validated the worldview of the Democrat Party. Is it no wonder that when presented with the "real" thing in the person of Warren that voters chose the "authentic" voice of the Democrat paradigm over the pretender Brown?
Brown campaigned that he "was one of us" without bothering to articulate how he would leverage his membership in this "us" group into being a successful national/international leader. He thus came across as too small for the office once held by the great men of Massachusetts' past political history. He was too small to even bother having a prominent role at his party's national convention (in sharp contrast to Warren who used her appearance at her party's convention to bolster her brand as a rising progressive star). Massachusetts voters are proud to be at the vanguard of changing the country (& the world). They expect their leaders to carry out their role as thought leaders & change agents. Brown never aspired to anything beyond being a nice guy who is willing to compromise for the good of all.

Did that attitude get him re-elected? The question answers itself. And the emphasis of Brown's campaign to hammer away at Warrens inconsistencies at the expense of the good guy image he cultivated - to go "negative" - reflected a desperation stemming from the realization that Brown had nothing to offer the public beyond his personal charisma. To paraphrase Osama Bin Laden, he wasn't a strong enough horse in the eyes of the voters. There was no "there" there.

And in that regard, Brown perfectly reflected - if not personified - the consistent shortcomings of his party. The Massachusetts Republican Party remains visionless, bitterly disorganized, & not up to the task of governing millions of people who will support anyone & any party - no matter how corrupt - as long as said individuals & the party to which they belong continue to deliver a practical ideology that offers most of them some tangible benefit to their lives.

DealDash Auctions

Binky — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 17:05:20 GMT

There is an excellent way for you to make your shopping all the more interesting and thrilling too! Yes! The site of DealDash is here to be the most honest, fair and trustworthy bidding site! Deal Dash is one of the amazing sites I discover just recently. Before Christmas, hubby and I had a hard time getting the stuff we wanted to get at the store. We tried several times to visit the store but in all our attempts, we do not come out victorious. The stuff that I so like am for hubby and I desperately want it for him on Christmas Eve unfortunately I could not find it in any store. Until I talk to a relative and told me about Deal Dash. She told me about the mechanics because I ask here many questions about the site but she told me visit the website as soon as I get home.

Moreover, I did immediately check the website and to my amazement the thing that I wanted was there, the problem is how to get it. So I read the website work, what is the catch and I did see all the winners that they feature in there site too. After checking on it, I decided to be a member of Deal Dash once there I read more and learn to make a bid. Every bid cost sixty cents and must purchased prior to bidding and if you don't win you can get all your bids back very cool huh! Also, if you are bidding for the first time and you have lost all your bids without winning even a single item, they are generous enough to give back all the bids to you to go for a second chance! Is it not good? Then why waste time with other sites when you have Deal Dash to give you the best deals ever?

The Most Important Vote You Will Cast in November

Disability Advocate Against Question 2 — Mon, 08 Oct 2012 20:00:49 GMT

Barack Obama? Mitt Romney? Scott Brown? Elizabeth Warren? Massachusetts voters have some real choices to make this November when they show up to the ballot box. The most important vote which they will be casting however, is one they might not even know about. On the ballot this November, is a law that would cause Massachusetts to become a state which recognizes "Physician Assisted Suicide".

There is so much that we don't know about what a carefully written law allowing Assisted Suicide might cause here in Massachusetts, but there is even more unknown about what a law with very few safeguards, regulations, and precautions would cause. This is what we are actually considering here in Massachusetts and we should be very troubled by it. With loose wording, loose oversight, and virtually zero safeguards, we are almost promised unintended scenarios and many unfortunate and tragic outcomes.

Perhaps more compelling is why many members of the disabled community are so troubled by this legislation. What message do we send to these people in our lives and communities when we encourage others with similar afflictions (lack of independence, daily physical struggles, feelings of being a burden) to possibly seek to end their own lives. Does that convey that we love them? Does that convey that we honor their dignity and daily struggles? Or does it send the message to them that life is not worth living? For handicapped, elderly, and psychologically ill people already feeling like they might be a burden, this might cause pressure to take their own lives in a tragic unfortunate way. What is worse, is that even their own family and caretakers wouldn't even be allowed to be part of the decision or be notified until it was too late.

What else do we not know? The questions are endless:

How will insurance companies react to such a change in laws?
Would they begin to implement policies to encourage this "more efficient", "less costly" policy?
How will doctors react to such a brazen conflict with their Hippocratic oath to "do no harm"?
How will doctors determine when such a "prescription" is appropriate?
Might such a definition expand with time out of desire for "greater efficiency" and "options'?

There is so much to wonder about what a poorly written law about suicide might cause in our Commonwealth. Perhaps the greatest question we should ask is: Why should we take the chance?

The Author is an advocate for the disabled. Please visit NoOnQuestion2.org for more information.

Do Massachusetts Republicans Need a Scott Brown Win?

Tappan Wentworth — Wed, 19 Sep 2012 10:44:37 GMT

This isn't an anti-Brown posting by any means. I have no doubt that Massachusetts Republicans are much better off if Scott Brown wins a full term in the US Senate. He serves as both the public face of the party, reminding Massachusetts voters that Republicans do exist in the state, and as an inspiration to Republican foot soldiers. I think everyone ought to do everything within their power to secure his victory in November.

Having said that, is a Scott Brown loss the worst thing that could happen for Massachusetts Republicans? I don't think so. The MAGOP organization has often been criticized for excessive focus on the top of the ballot and ignoring down-ballot races. We shouldn't be guilty of the same mistake. Brown is up against a significant headwind in terms of the presidential election. Does anyone doubt that Brown will outperform Mitt Romney here in Massachusetts? Elizabeth Warren's campaign has been flooded with outside money as the national Democratic establishment works their tails off to help her. From a national perspective, the simple fact that the Democrats are having to devote significant effort and money to Massachusetts helps Republicans in the battle for control of the Senate.

So if Scott Brown's victory isn't the most important thing, what is? I'd say it's securing and expanding upon the gains made by Republicans in the state legislature in 2010. Republicans currently hold 33 seats in the House of Representatives. If they still have more than 30 after the 2012 election, I'd consider that an acceptable result because it would mean entrenching some of the 2010 intake. It's very difficult to dislodge an incumbent once they win a second term. In fact, Democrats don't even bother to mount serious challenges to most Republican state legislators in their second term or beyond. If Republicans make net gains in the House, all the better. The 4 Senate seats currently held by Republicans seem safe, and there are possibilities for gains there too. The legislature is important, not just for influence over state policy but because it should serve as the farm team for future congressional and statewide candidates.

Don't get me wrong. Scott Brown winning a full term in the Senate or one or more Republicans winning US House races would be nice. But ask yourself which situation you'd rather have when you wake up on November 7:

A) Scott Brown re-elected, Richard Tisei defeats John Tierney, Republicans drop to 24 seats in MA House and 3 seats in MA Senate

B) Brown and all Congressional candidates lose, Republicans increase to 40 seats in MA House and 6 seats in MA Senate.

If forced to choose, give me option B.

Cavaretta Press Release Addresses Attacks From MA Democrats

DeanCavaretta — Wed, 08 Aug 2012 23:27:29 GMT

MAYNARD- Candidate for the MA State Senate Dean Cavaretta (R-Stow) has issued the following statement showcasing the utter desperation of MA Democratic Party Communications Manager, Kevin Franck to try and link comments Cavaretta made in an online live chat appearance, with the silly assertion that Dean somehow claimed the endorsement of President Bill Clinton.
At noontime, earlier today, Dean wrapped up a live, online chat with www.Patch.com readers. It lasted over an hour, and Cavaretta was able to answer a wide array of questions from readers. In fact, the chat went so well that Kevin Franck, Communications Manager for the Massachusetts Democratic Party, posted a link to the Cavaretta Chat, in its entirety, on his own Twitter feed!

Cavaretta wants to sincerely thank the Mass. Dems for the free publicity:

"Today, the Political Machine that Sen. Scott Brown talks about showed its true colors. In a reference to tax policy my liberal opponent's hired guns inserted foot in mouth, and claimed that I touted the endorsement of former President Bill Clinton. Instead, what Mr. Franck has done is give me another opportunity to tell voters that on the issue of NOT raising state taxes during a Recession - this is a position that I wholeheartedly share with Mr. Clinton. This is in stark contrast to the massive tax increases on income, capital gains, payroll and gasoline that my opponent, Sen. Jaime Eldridge (D-Acton) has freely introduced this past legislative session."

You can view the full transcript of the Cavaretta for State Senate 'Patch Chat' by clicking here: http://acton.patch.com/article...

--
Dean Cavaretta for State Senate
www.DeanCavaretta.com

The Cavaretta Committee
P.O. Box 136
Stow, MA 01775
(978) 310-1245 HQ

"Putting Education and the Economy First"

Former MassGOP Chair Jim Rappaport Joins Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance

RMG News — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 21:21:00 GMT

John McKenna
RMG News

Former MassGOP head Jim Rappaport has been announced as the new board member for the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, a center-right non-profit that advocates for fiscal prudence and good governance. Rappaport was a US Senate candidate in 1990, and served as the head of the MassGOP from 1992 to 1997, during the time of the Weld Administration.

"I have always believed that it is important for all of us as individuals to become involved in the political process if we want to see any significant improvement in the quality of the lives of all citizens in our Commonwealth," Rappaport said in a statement upon taking his position on the board.

Continued after the Break
"Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance is honored to have the support and leadership of Jim Rappaport. Mr. Rappaport has both the political and the civic background that make him an outstanding addition to Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, as we work to bring sound economic policies back to our government to give our middle class a chance to have a successful future for them and their families," stated Paul D. Craney, Executive Director of Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance.

Rappaport outlined his vision of how Massachusetts can get back to being a competitive state with a strong economy, and a government that is accountable to the citizens:

"Massachusetts needs to become more economically competitive, if our neighbors and children are to have a better future. We need more sunlight in our state government, how we hold our meetings and to how we create legislation and provide services. We need more fiscally responsible voices heard in these areas of public discourse."

Patrick Administration says Flags can be Displayed at Housing Authorities

RMG News — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 17:54:59 GMT

By John McKenna, RMG News

Public displays of the American flag have recently been called into question at a Wrentham housing complex, which sent a notice to its residents that public displays of the flag were not allowed outside the building. This caused frustration and anger for many tenants yesterday, before the state intervented and corrected the error in the face of public pressure.

According to The Sun Chronicle, residents of the Garden Lane public housing complex were told through a notice on their doors that public displays of the flag were not allowed in public housing, even though there are flag-holding apparati affixed to most windows in the complex.

The ban was enforced after an anonymous tenant reportedly complained to the state Department of Housing and Community Development, but the rule itself enforcing the ban was never brought up.

continued after the jump
Upon hearing the news, Senator Scott Brown (R-MA), a Wrentham resident himself, criticized the state's decision in a press release this morning:

"Our flag stands for freedom, and is a symbol of the sacrifice made by our servicemen and women to protect the liberties we enjoy today. Flying the American flag should never be controversial, and no citizen should ever be prevented from doing so. I was deeply disturbed to learn of this misguided decision, and I call on the responsible authorities to undo this regulation immediately."

As pressure mounted from angered citizens, and the Senator, the state housing authority backed off the rule this afternoon. According to Jason Lefferts, spokesman for the Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development, the rule regarding public displays doesn't extend to universally accepted displays that are "safe", like the American flag:

"We were not aware of this decision when it was made, and it was a mistake that is being corrected immediately. Department of Housing and Community Development policy for local housing authorities includes not allowing displays of private materials in public areas. This does not extend to respectful and safe displays of the American flag."

What led the administration to reverse its policy remains unclear, but for the residents at Garden Lane, it feels good to wave the flag proudly once again.

Races Around the State: Out West

RMG News — Wed, 11 Jul 2012 10:49:00 GMT

RMG News this week will be touring the state's electoral landscape, from the very top of the ticket to the very local, giving you a one stop shop for all your election needs. From Lenox to Dorchester, from Salisbury to Provincetown, we're going to have you covered race by race in the march to November.

Today, we will be starting of with a look out West, with Berkshire, Hampden, Franklin, and Hampshire counties.
Congressional Races

This was an area represented by a Republican for nearly 140 years prior to the election of John Olver in 1991, but since Olver's election, it has been unabashedly blue. This time, Olver will not be seeking re-election, but he is expected to be preplaced by former 2nd District congressman Richard Neal. Jeffery Donnelly is the only Republican running for this seat.

State Senate Races

Most of the State Senate races in this area are not being contested by Republicans, save for the Second Hampden & Hampshire District, where Michael R Knapik is the incumbent running unopposed.

General Court Races

Given the heavilly Democratic nature of Western Massachusetts, very few races are expected to be contested by Republicans. The notable exceptions are in Hampden County, an area that gave Senator Brown 54% of the vote during the special election and Charlie Baker 50% in November.

2nd Franklin: With Christopher Donelan's retirement in 2010, this district became very competitive. The current incumbent, Democrat Denise Andrews, won by only 1,336 votes (50.9%), a far cry from the near 16,000 vote margain Donelan had in 2008 (73.8%). Susannah M. Lee will be running against Andrews this time around, and if the atmosphere is the same as it was two years ago, this could be a very interesting race to watch.

2010 Governor's Race: Patrick (D): 42.9% Baker (R): 42.8%

Finances: Andrews: $1,483.77 Lee: $6,932.64

2nd Hampden: In 2008 and 2010, this district was one of the most competitive in the state. Brian Ashe, the Democratic incumbent, hung on in 2008 and 2010 by only 1,987 and 467 votes respectfully. His challenger in 2010, Marie Angelides, is trying again to unseat him, but she must first survive a primary against Jack Villamaino, who has over $14,592 in the war chest. If the primary winner can make it through without spending a large sum of money in the process, a Republican victory may well be in the works in November if the top of the ticket (Romney and Brown) performs well in this part of the state, which it did during the two elections in 2010.

2010 Governor's Race: Patrick (D): 44.7% Baker (R): 44.5%

Finances: Ashe: $17,403.26 Angelides: $1,280.11 Villamaino: $14,542.67

3rd Hampden: This was one of the 17 House seats that flipped to Republican control in 2010, but expect this seat to remain as competitive as it was in 2010. Republican Nicholas A Boldyga won in 2010 by a mere 98 votes against Rep. Rosemary Sandlin on his second attempt at the seat. He is the favorite headed into November, but he will first have to defeat Democrat Samuel Salvatore DiSanti Jr. Boldyga currently has a 12-to-1 cash advantage, a rarity for any Republican in Massachusetts, so he should be able to hang on in this right of center district.

2010 Governor's Race: Patrick (D): 33.7% Baker (R): 50.4%

Finances: Boldyga: $12,784.89 DiSanti Jr.: $1,659.63

12th Hampden: Even though Republicans are starting to give this Springfield area district a good look, winning it appears to be unlikely, but Dennis John McCarthy will give it a try against Democrat incumbent Angelo Puppolo, although he has not reported any campaign expenditures with the OCPF. In 2010, Puppolo faced a challenger for the first time, and won with over 60.9% of the vote. Challenging this seat may be a signal that the GOP can compete in a city like Springfield down the line, but not right now.

2010 Governor's Race: Patrick (D): 51.9% Baker (R): 37.4%

Finances not available at this time

Massachusetts Congressional Candidates Sound off on the Obamacare Decision

RMG News — Thu, 28 Jun 2012 21:24:11 GMT

By John McKenna

Today, the Supreme Court ruling 5-4 in favor of the Obama administration on the Affordable Care Act, preserving the individual mandate, and assuring that Health Care will play a vital role in the November elections. Here is what some of the Republican congressional candidates here in Massachusetts had to say on their websites:
John Golink - Candidate in MA-3

"Let's first remember that the job of the Court is to decide what is a constitutional law, not what is a good or sound one...while I am disappointed in the outcome of the ruling, I am glad the Supreme Court affirmed what we all knew and have been saying-this health care law is a tax on every American. This Administration and the supporting democrats told us repeatedly it was not a tax. Now it is even more vital that we make sure we elect people into office that will work to repeal this terrible and massive tax. Let's start there and then implement measures that will actually lower health care costs with the market driven reforms. I support allowing individuals to buy insurance across state lines. This will drive down insurance costs as companies compete for our business, while maintaining the quality of our healthcare. We need real tort reform that is estimated to save $85 billion over 10 years, but the real savings will be gained when doctors do not have to practice defensive medicine. We need to allow individuals to receive similar tax treatment that small businesses receive when they deduct their healthcare costs. We need to let small companies pool together, so they can take advantage of the volume discounts that are available to large companies. These are common sense solutions that focus directly on lowering our health care costs through competition."

Tom Weaver - Candidate in MA-3

"With the Supreme Court upholding the healthcare law, the Court has said that the government can destroy our freedom through unlimited taxation. The Court has said that unemployment can grow due to the cost of business rising and employers reducing staff to maintain profits. The Court has said that fundamental rule of law has a new definition,"

Sean Bielat - Candidate in MA-4

"I am very disappointed in the Court's ruling," Bielat said. "However, I am not discouraged. It's critical we repeal ObamaCare and work toward real healthcare reform that does not cripple the nation's economy, but rather supports job growth, competition and innovation... the White House chose to limit job growth and medical advancement exactly when our country needs it most...those are two pillars of American prominence. I will fight for reform that boosts our economy, puts people to work, increases research and improves the quality of care. The President chose to ignore these goals."

Richard Tisei - Candidate in MA-6

"If anything is clear from today's Supreme Court ruling it is that our leaders in Washington need to go back to the drawing board, and work together to pass a bi-partisan plan that will reduce rising health care costs and provide Americans with more access to affordable health care coverage.I believe that every American should have access to affordable health care and that every insurance plan should contain basic protections that provide health care security to every citizen of this nation. As a Congressman, I will bring that same spirit of cooperation to Washington and work with both Democrats and Republicans to pass legislation that provides incentives to states to create more choices and more coverage. Rather than a Washington based "one size fits all approach", I believe that every state needs to tailor a plan to their individual needs and that Americans should maintain control over their own healthcare decisions...I will approach health care reform with the recognition that we currently have the best quality system in the world. Rather than overhauling our current system I believe that it makes much more sense to work to improve what we have."

Joe Selvaggi - Candidate in MA-8

"Now we know that Obamacare is the biggest middle tax increase in the history of our nation. Didn't President Obama and professional politicians like Steve Lynch promised not to raise taxes on people earning under $250,000? They broke their promise...As a business owner, we provide health insurance for our employees. It is a very costly decision. I know many other small business owners just cannot afford to do it and keep people employed. It is time to elect a new Congressman who has extensive business experience not re-elect a flip flopping professional politician. If we want to improve our economy and grow jobs, then we need to repeal the mandate/tax,"

Christopher Sheldon - Candidate in MA-9

"As a result of today's ruling, health care recipients, medical providers, insurers, businesses, job creators and our economy will continue down the same turbulent path we have been traveling since the 2,700 page Obama health care law was rushed through Congress two years ago by Nancy Pelosi. To date, the majority of Americans and even the Members of Congress who voted in favor of this law are unclear regarding the ramifications of Obamacare. However, we do know the following: unlike what President Obama and his Administration promised, Obamacare did not and will not reduce the national deficit. We also know that Obamacare has caused far greater confusion, concern and frustration for the largest job creators in the United States: small businesses."

We can't repeal Obamacare until we replace Niki Tsongas

GolnikForCongress — Thu, 28 Jun 2012 18:49:26 GMT

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

June 28, 2012

Contact:

Alicia Preston
ap@theprestongroup.org
603-892-3215

JON GOLNIK, CANDIDATE FOR CONGRESS IN THE 3rd CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS, COMMENTS ON THE SUPREME COURT RULING CONCERNING THE TSONGAS-BACKED HEALTH CARE BILL

COURT SAYS INDIVIDUAL MANDATE CAN STAND BECAUSE IT'S A TAX!

Westford, MA-The United States Supreme Court handed down its ruling regarding the 2010 Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). The Court has determined that the individual mandate is Constitutional. However, the Court determined that it is Constitutional not under the Commerce Clause, but under the taxing authority of Congress.

"Let's first remember that the job of the Court is to decide what is a constitutional law, not what is a good or sound one," said Jon Golnik, candidate for Representative in the Third Congressional District of Massachusetts. "While I am disappointed in the outcome of the ruling, I am glad the Supreme Court affirmed what we all knew and have been saying-this health care law is a tax on every American. This Administration and the supporting democrats told us repeatedly it was not a tax. Niki Tsongas and her colleagues repeatedly have said we shouldn't increase taxes on the middle class. We now know that she indeed voted to hike taxes on the middle class and everyone else in this country."

The High Court also determined that states cannot be forced to participate in the expanded Medicaid portion of the law and cannot have current funding eliminated by opting out.

"I am glad the ruling included a protection of state's rights. States will now have to determine what level of participation they will employ and we will all have to wait and see what effect that has on implementation of the Affordable Care Act."
Jon Golnik has released several concepts to improve the health care and health insurance situation in America. "Now it is even more vital that we make sure we elect people into office that will work to repeal this terrible and massive tax. Let's start there and then implement measures that will actually lower health care costs with the market driven reforms.

"I support allowing individuals to buy insurance across state lines. This will drive down insurance costs as companies compete for our business, while maintaining the quality of our healthcare. We need real tort reform that is estimated to save $85 billion over 10 years, but the real savings will be gained when doctors do not have to practice defensive medicine. We need to allow individuals to receive similar tax treatment that small businesses receive when they deduct their healthcare costs. We need to let small companies pool together, so they can take advantage of the volume discounts that are available to large companies. These are common sense solutions that focus directly on lowering our health care costs through competition."

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) just last month projected that the implementation costs of the Affordable Care Act would almost double from original estimates to $1.7 trillion. "There is simply nothing remotely 'affordable' about this legislation. It is terrible on its merits, as so many companies and economists have indicated, and this law is a job-killer. The unemployment crisis still exists as we approach the 40th month in a row with unemployment at 8% or higher. The unemployment crisis has only served to increase the ranks of those who cannot afford healthcare."

Some things to review:

DEMOCRATS' POLITICALLY TOXIC INDIVIDUAL MANDATE: IN NYT POLL 67% SUPPORTED OVERTURNING AT LEAST THE INDIVIDUAL MANDATE IF NOT ALL OF OBAMACARE: ("Results of The New York Times/CBS News Poll," The New York Times, 3/21-25/2012)

BROKEN: FAMILY HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS ROSE 9% IN 2011, WITH OBAMACARE PLAYING A ROLE: (Julie Appleby, "Cost of Employer Insurance Plans Surge in 2011," Kaiser Health News, 9/27/2011)

EMPLOYEES' SHARE OF PREMIUM COSTS HAS ALREADY INCREASED 9.3% FROM 2011 TO 2012, $235 PER PERSON: "Employees' share of premium costs increased 9.3% between 2011 and 2012, with the dollar burden rising from $2,529 to $2,764." ("Performance in an Era of Uncertainty," Towers Watson/National Business Group on Health Employer Survey on Purchasing Value in Healthcare, March 2012)

BY A MARGIN OF 8 TO 1, EMPLOYERS EXPECT OBAMACARE TO INCREASE COSTS: "By a margin of 8 to 1, those who believe Health Care Reform will trigger a cost increase outnumber those who believe Health Care Reform will create savings. Yet the survey responses re?ect that few employers have started to reframe employee expectations relative to Health Care Reform." ("The Health Care Reform Survey: 2011-2012," Willis, March 2012)

BROKEN PROMISE: OBAMACARE WOULD REDUCE THE DEFICIT: PELOSI: " 'The bill is fiscally sound, will not add one dime to the deficit,' Pelosi proclaimed." (Chris Good, "Pelosi: Health Care Bill Reduces Deficit, Spends More Than Senate Bill," The Atlantic, 10/29/2009)

MORE PELOSI: OBAMACARE WILL "CREATE 4 MILLION JOBS IN THE LIFE OF THE BILL AND DOING ALL OF THAT BY SAVING THE TAXPAYER $1.3 TRILLION DOLLARS." (Speeches, Office of Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, 3/22/2010)

OBAMACARE INCREASES TAXES BY $525 BILLION:("CBO's Analysis of the Major Health Care Legislation Enacted in March 2010," Congressional Budget Office, 3/30/2011)

CARDIAC DEFIBRILLATORS, ARTIFICIAL JOINTS, AND MRI SCANNERS ALL FACE NEW TAXES: "The 2.3% levy applies to the sale of everything from cardiac defibrillators to artificial joints to MRI scanners. The device tax is supposed to raise $28.5 billion from 2013 to 2022, and it is especially harmful because it applies to gross sales, not profits." (Editorial, "Improvised Explosive Device Tax," The Wall Street Journal, 5/28/2012)

AT LAST COUNT, OBAMACARE REGULATIONS AT 5,931 PAGES: (David Hogberg, "ObamaCare's 5,931 Pages of Regulations," Investor's Business Daily, 3/23/2012)

For more information on Jon Golnik, check out his website at www.jongolnik.com.

###

Will Niki Tsongas vote to repeal the tax she voted to impose?

JonGolnik — Thu, 31 May 2012 19:30:14 GMT

Contact:

Alicia Preston

603-892-3215

WILL NIKI TSONGAS VOTE TO REPEAL THE TAX SHE VOTED TO IMPOSE?

Will Politics or People Come First? Partisanship or Jobs?

Westford, MA-- The US House Ways & Means Committee tomorrow is scheduled to address a bill that would repeal the 2.3% excise tax imposed on Medical Device Manufacturers under the job killing healthcare reform law supported by Rep. Niki Tsongas. The tax is set to go into effect next year. Senator Scott Brown has co-sponsored a similar repeal bill for the Senate.

As the medical device tax looms closer, lawmakers and businesses affected by it are speaking out in opposition. Yet Rep. Tsongas, who voted for the Healthcare Reform legislation that included the device tax, has not stated her intentions with regard to the amendment.

Rick Packer, CEO of Zoll Medical, of Chelmsford, which is located in Rep. Tsongas's district, told a forum in Boston last week about the job loss implications of the tax in the healthcare reform law:

"We will move production offshore, which will mean fewer jobs at Zoll. We will do that because we can lower our cost basis and that lower cost basis will lower the tax. It will mean fewer engineers at Zoll, because we will not be likely able to afford them. It will mean a general hiring freeze over the next 18 months or so while we deal with this tax," he said. "In the long run, what every company will do is pass the cost along to our customers. The basic profitability of the industry will raise to its normal level, based on competitive issues, not tax levels. We know that that's going to happen.

"In the long run, you're going to have the worst case," Packer said. "You're going to have permanent job loss and higher cost to the healthcare system. It is clearly not my favorite piece of legislation."

Jon Golnik, who is running for Congress in what is now the 3rd District, opposed the healthcare reform bill and has been vocal in his opposition to the medical device tax imposed.

"This is not a new issue, it is simply one Rep. Tsongas has yet to address. She voted for a bill that along with all the other damage it will cause the economy would directly impact business and employment in her own district. People need jobs," Golnik said. "She is being given another opportunity. The vote that will come in the next few weeks in the House will give Representative Tsongas the opportunity to vote to repeal this burdensome tax. The question is, will she? Or, will she stand by what we now know unequivocally is a job-killing tax?"

Media wishing to speak with Jon on the issue may contact Alicia Preston at the email or number above.

Jon Golnik is a candidate for US Congress from the new Massachusetts 3rd Congressional District. His website can be found at JonGolnik.Com

Schilling For Taxpayer's Dollars

The Angelic One — Fri, 18 May 2012 21:10:06 GMT

According the the Boston Globe, former Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling's Rhode Island-based video game company (38 Studios) is having trouble staying afloat financially in spite of loan guarantees backed by the Ocean State's taxpayers:

After missing a $1.1 million payment May 1 and a personal plea from Schilling for more public assistance this week, 38 Studios has said it does not not have enough money to pay its employees. On Wednesday, the state economic development official who oversaw the loan guarantees resigned abruptly. In a bizarre twist, at one point Thursday, company representatives hand-delivered a check to the Rhode Island Economic Development Corporation, apparently to cover the late $1.1 million payment, but then later said the company had insufficient funds to cover it.
The precise cause of 38 Studios' current trouble is unclear; its latest negotiations with the economic development agency are confidential. But what is clear is that Schilling steered the company through a feverish hiring spree and into a high pay-off - but high-risk - realm of the gaming industry that requires enormous start-up money.
"It's a vibrant market, but it's a fairly risky market,'' said Barry Gilbert, vice president of Strategy Analytics, a Newton consulting firm that advised the Rhode Island agency during its negotiations with 38 Studios. "To be successful in the space requires superb timing, superb management, superb talent, and a good dose of luck.''

And taxpayer money - if you've got politicians from BOTH parties stupid enough to give it to you. Mercantile economics where the state picks & chooses winners has always been a fool's game. The taxpayer is usually fooled - in this case by the alleged conservative Schilling & former Republican Governor Donald Carcieri - into thinking the state can pick & choose successful businesses. Rhode Island should cut its losses by ending its investment with 38 Studios.

The State of the Massachusetts GOP - May 6th, 2012

tomweaverforcongress — Sun, 06 May 2012 22:54:43 GMT

The Republican Party of Massachusetts has an enrollment of about 11%, about half of the enrollment of the Democrat Party in this state. The remaining majority is un-enrolled and like their independence. They may tend to vote a certain way, but these voters are expressing dissatisfaction with the established parties. They are revolting and are demanding that the party system correct itself and work to make America better, helping to secure the future for our children and grandchildren.

Two weeks ago, there were statewide caucuses held in each Congressional Districts for the purpose of electing delegates for the National GOP convention. As reported on many of the news networks, that convention should formally nominate former Governor Romney as the GOP nominee for President on the first ballot.

The turnout at the district caucuses were above average. A Romney Presidential Slate of delegates was presented by the Mass GOP containing all good people with excellent GOP credentials. There was also the Ronald Reagan Liberty Slate of delegates, a group of young GOP voters who were handing out sheets with an alternative list of representatives , all pledging to support Mitt Romney on the 1st ballot.

This group was organized. They understood the rules of the caucus and each had a message of freedom when they addressed the crowd. They talked about liberty. They talked about how the current President was abusing power. They expressed beliefs that Mitt Romney would be the first step in returning the American Dream, as he was a fiscal conservative. The Liberty Slate won with over 50% of the total vote, leaving many longtime Republicans in complete disbelief.

Now rumors abound that the State GOP wants to null and void these proper elections due to cause. Cause is that undefined term in the convention by-laws. A basic gotcha which is allowed to correct an issue. If these lawful elections are overturned, it could cause irrevocable damage to the State GOP.

For years, many of to working as Republican activists behind the scenes, have begged that the State GOP open the tent flaps by attract more conservatives, more libertarians, Tea Party members and more John Kennedy minded Democrats. We have stressed that the GOP must be viewed as the party of opportunity, prosperity for all and, most important, as the party that defends liberty and freedom so that all can pursue happiness. Recent State Committee elections saw the election of many new conservative voices. It would seem that the GOP rank and file understands how important it is to open the tent.

The election of these young adults continues an expansion of the statewide GOP. These activists want to be involved. They understand that they will lose their freedom if they do not stay involved. The GOP must continue to expand, simply because the message of freedom resonates across this Commonwealth.

It is not enough to win the governorship once in a while. We must elect conservative republican State Reps and State Senators. We must elect conservative Congressmen and re-elect Scott Brown. This can only be done if we continue to expand the tent and stop acting like Northeastern Rockefeller Republicans.

Know Any Person or Organization with COURAGE?

martinalintuck — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 20:46:09 GMT

Are you frustrated by the lack of courage in Massachusetts public policy and politics? I sure am. And that's why I started MASS Courage (www.masscourage.org). My hope is to try to "change the conversation" and provide an incentive for elected leaders and interested citizens to be courageous. We will be launching in April, but in the meantime I need your help.

We know there are individuals and small groups across the Commonwealth that are fighting to make a difference in their communities. It takes courage to take on the system and we know there are a lot of people doing exactly that. MASS Courage wants to get behind some of these folks to help them have greater impact. We want to get behind those who have the guts to reject the status quo but need some extra help doing so.

I figured those who post here might have some good ideas. So, if you know anyone or any group that is courageous, let us know. Or tell them to let us know at www.masscourage.org. (Use the submission box at the middle bottom of the splash page.)

Thanks. I look forward to working with you all over the coming months to bring back courage to Massachusetts politics and public policy.

Beaty Asks Governor Patrick, Murray & Others, To Sign 'Taxpayer Protection Pledge'

RonaldBeaty — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 00:11:34 GMT

For social justice reasons, and simply as one of the tens of thousands of registered voters and citizens of this Commonwealth, I am writing to openly, respectfully and impartially call upon Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, Senate President Therese Murray, House Speaker Robert DeLeo, State Senator Dan Wolf, as well as all federal, state, county & municipal public office incumbents and candidates in Massachusetts to sign the Citizens for Limited Taxation, "Taxpayer Protection Pledge."

Bearing in mind the ongoing tough economic times that we all face, the aforementioned pledge provides a measure of good faith by said office holders and candidates to the taxpayers and constituents of their respective geographical areas and to all people within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Furthermore, it clearly indicates that they shall oppose and vote against any and all efforts to increase taxes during their tenure in office, if elected.

Cape Codders, along with the other citizens of this state, need to be reassured that their interests are going to be looked after and protected by the individuals they vote into public office. They do not need to have any further economic burdens thrust upon them in the form of increased taxes of whatever type for at least the next several years at a minimum.

Thank you.

RON BEATY
West Barnstable, MA

Stand for Children's proposal ensures new teacher evaluations drive staffing decisions

jwilliams — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 21:15:27 GMT

With the introduction of the Great Teachers Great Schools initiative - An Act to Promote Excellence in Public Schools – earlier this month, and the subsequent lawsuit the MTA filed to challenge Attorney General Martha Coakley’s decision to certify the initiative, a lot of information, some accurate and some inaccurate, has been circulating throughout the Commonwealth.

One point being made is that a recently updated and more rigorous teacher evaluation system is already being implemented. Stand for Children was proud to join the MTA, state education leaders, and other stakeholders in advocating for that new system. Not only did we sit on the task force that made an initial set of recommendations, we educated and mobilized our membership on the issue, generating 700 pieces of written testimony from educators and parents that were submitted to the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education.

All groups involved in advocacy around the content of the regulations were unanimously committed to creating a more functional and productive evaluation system centered on improving teaching and learning. While these evaluations represent a step in the right direction, unless key changes are made to state law, there is still no promise that all school districts will be using them as a benchmark for teacher placement anytime soon.

That’s where the Great Teachers Great Schools campaign comes in. The proposed initiative:

Will ensure that every classroom is led by an effective teacher. This is critical to closing the alarming achievement gap in Massachusetts.
Takes current evaluation systems one step further by guaranteeing that they will be consistently implemented by schools across the Commonwealth.
Has received significant statewide support - a UMASS Amherst poll showed 85% of MA voters believe teacher staffing decisions should be based on performance rather than how long a teacher has been in the classroom.
Successfully passed all procedural and constitutional reviews for introduction into the state legislature

I invite you to learn more about the Great Teachers Great Schools campaign. Visit our website to learn the facts, take action online and get involved.

Ron Beaty says that all Massachusetts political candidates should sign Taxpayer Protection Pledge

RonaldBeaty — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 17:07:59 GMT

WEST BARNSTABLE, MA - January 16, 2012 - While continuing to research the process of obtaining a presidential pardon, and still essentially only contemplating a run for Barnstable County Commissioner later this year, Cape Cod citizen activist, Ron Beaty, Jr. declared today that he staunchly believes that all federal, state, county & municipal public office incumbents and candidates in Massachusetts should sign the Citizens for Limited Taxation, "Taxpayer Protection Pledge." Bearing in mind the ongoing tough economic times that we all face, the aforementioned pledge provides a measure of good faith by said office holders and candidates to the taxpayers of their respective local geographical areas and to all people within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Furthermore, it clearly indicates that they shall oppose and vote against any and all efforts to increase taxes during their tenure in office, if elected. Cape Codders, along with the other citizens of this state, need to be reassured that their interests are going to be looked after and protected by the individuals they vote into public office. They do not need to have any further economic burdens thrust upon them in the form of increased taxes of whatever type for at least the next several years at a minimum.
On January 9th of this year, Ron Beaty also signed the "Taxpayer Protection Pledge" which in turn was witnessed by 2010 (Cape Cod) Red Cross Hero, Nancy L. Johnson.
Mr. Beaty stated that nomination papers to run for Massachusetts public office are going to be made available by the Secretary of State's Office, Elections Division at some point during the middle of next month. Beaty ought to come to a final decision by that time regarding whether or not he will definitely run for Barnstable County Commissioner later this year.

###