I am writing to urge readers to vote “no” on Question 1, the ballot question that proposes to eliminate the state personal income tax over the next two years. This measure, if passed, would cause us to make deep cuts in the state budget, amounting to 40 percent or $11 billion dollars in one year.
I am a professional engineer and I am deeply concerned about the current condition of our public infrastructure, including roads, bridges, water and wastewater systems, and public buildings. Passage of Question 1 would create a devastating loss of revenue for the state and, as a result, for our town. Our public health and safety would suffer greatly. The critical, poor condition of the commonwealth’s infrastructure has been well-documented recently. Examples include:
• $3 billion for needed bridge projects just passed by the Legislature
• A $15 to $19 billion projected deficit over the next 20 years just to maintain current transportation systems (MA Transportation Finance Commission, 2007)
• More than 300 high-hazard dams, including some that have been classified as “unsafe” (U.S. Water News, 2006)
Most of these costs consider only maintaining, repairing, and/or replacing our existing infrastructure so that it is safe and usable. Additional investment will be required for newer, more efficient systems. The ballot initiative does nothing to address this critical need and would make our dire situation even worse.
In addition, the loss of revenue would cause the loss of jobs for people who operate, maintain, design, and build our infrastructure systems. The ballot question provides no plan to address this issue either.
The proponents of this initiative have provided no plan for the delivery of services in the commonwealth, based on a state government with 40 percent less revenue. Their stated intent is to force a reduced size in the government through the loss of a revenue stream, but they are relying on the state Legislature to do this for them.
I support government reforms that reduce government waste, increase efficiencies, and make the best use of the taxpayers’ dollars. Passage of Question 1, however, would eliminate 40 percent of the commonwealth’s annual revenue without any plan for the delivery of services. The simple hope that the result will be smaller state government is irresponsible at best. At worst, someone could be injured from the failure of an old deficient bridge or dam that the state didn’t have enough money to fix.
Pete Jackson
Jacob Gates Road
