By Eric Grunebaum  |  May 25, 2009

DESPITE the Massachusetts Senate’s passage of a tax package last week, it’s clear that funds allocated for transportation – principally from the sales tax – are simply not enough. Moreover, with the rejection of 19- and 11-cent gas tax increase options, what seems to be absent from the debate is the compelling environmental argument for a hike in the gas tax.

Looking at the evidence for climate change – and its dire consequences – it’s clear that we need to get serious about weaning ourselves from our CO2-emitting, petroleum-based economy. Already in evidence is faster-than-expected melting of the polar ice cap, an incipient rise in sea levels, and increasingly destructive storms, droughts, and heat waves, with more serious consequences likely to follow. Meanwhile we’re spending vast treasures buying oil from largely hostile nations.

What we need are policies that send clear market signals encouraging change. The governor and business groups demonstrated real leadership in proposing 19- and 25-cent gas tax increases, respectively. Even tax-averse New Hampshire is considering a 15-cent increase. And in April, the Globe itself endorsed removing the sales tax exemption for gas, which equates to about a dime a gallon. At a minimum, we need the 19-cent increase and the $500 million it would raise for the transportation system.

However, we need the increased gas tax not just to provide a dedicated source of funding to fix crumbling infrastructure, not just to create jobs, and not just to rescue our public transportation authority. What we need it for above all else is to encourage the move toward more efficient cars, hybrids, and plug-in electrics. And we need the gas tax hike, not just to prevent layoffs and service cutbacks, but to make public transportation and trains more attractive relative to driving, and to increase transit availability. Based on last summer’s gas prices, it’s clear that people do adjust to sustained price signals.

We also need the gas tax to encourage people to bicycle and to fund design work so that we can unlock federal dollars for more bikeways. Eighty million dollars of federal funds for these projects, which Massachusetts has left on the table, may soon be forfeited. Similarly, we’re behind the Midwest and California on high-speed rail. As with bikeways, our lack of planning may cost us a share of $8 billion in federal subsidies, which could help us move to a less auto-centric future.

While the wisdom of the Big Dig can be debated, it’s a done deal and the bill is due, as well as the bills for long-deferred maintenance of our highways and perpetually underfunded public transportation. But let’s recognize that all corners of the state do share in the Big Dig’s benefits, if not directly while driving to the airport and hospitals or while taking part in the city’s commerce or culture, then certainly in the lifting of the state’s broader fortunes.

Yet, rather than more tolls – an inequitable and selective tax – what we need are the subtle market adjustments of a gas tax to put Massachusetts ahead of other states in making the switch to a post-petroleum transportation model, and perhaps closer to our friends across the gradually rising Atlantic. And despite its green credentials, the Northeast is the seventh largest producer of CO2, when compared with the world’s largest nations. As a major emitter, this is our problem to solve.

In the move toward a greener economy, Massachusetts has done well so far. Due to the governor and state Legislature’s efforts – along with our region’s academic leadership, business ingenuity, and groups like the New England Clean Energy Council – we are well-poised to create more green jobs, reduce our environmental impact, and keep advancing our leadership position. But we have a long way to go.

Yes, we need additional revenue from the sales tax to maintain services. And yes we need reform, transparency, and less redundancy in our transportation bureaucracy. But what we need above all else is the political will to use the tools available only to our government to give us a nudge in the right direction. And the gas tax hike is precisely the nudge we need.

Eric Grunebaum is a documentary film producer.

Photo by Angela Rowlings (file)

Three weeks from today, the tolls go up. Maybe it’s not too late to stop this rip-off.

Everybody’s obsessed with Deval Patrick’s proposed 19-cent gas tax increase, and rightly so. But some pol could make a name for himself trying to halt Deval’s other outrageous highway robbery – the two-step toll increases that start kicking in March 29.

Why doesn’t some ambitious solon file a bill to halt the toll hikes until, say, July 1, so we can see how Deval’s “transportation reforms” are coming along? Oh sure, most reps will throw up their hands and say they can’t do anything, that the hikes are a fait accompli, the Pike has to worry about its bond rating, etc., etc.

So what? Don’t we have a “rainy day” fund? Use some of that to tide the Pike hacks over until July. Impose a “stealing freeze” on the sticky-fingered toll-takers.

You pols say the Pike is a “quasi-independent authority.” But that didn’t stop you from packing the board with new members to protect the bloated idiot state senator who got the Pike into this jam that supposedly requires higher tolls.

I know, it’s St. Patrick’s Month. Yes, you’ll need to hold hearings. Will Speaker DeLeo deep-six the bill? Don’t forget (even if he has) that he represents Winthrop, Ground Zero of this latest Deval campaign against working people. Maybe the hacks will appease DeLeo by cutting Winthrop in on the toll-discount program, but $5 and then $7 tunnel tolls are not going to help property values there.

You say Deval will veto the bill? Let him. Did you get a load of his latest poll numbers? If they go any lower they’ll be calling him “W.” His credibility is zero. Increasingly he surrounds himself with poster boys for the hackerama, like his new fork-tongued frontman, the ever-loathsome Jim Aloisi.

In public, in Boston and Springfield, Aloisi talks up reform. “We need to have reform,” he said in Springfield. In Boston it was, “We are committed to reform.”

Then, behind closed doors, with the legislators, the career coatholder brushes it all off by saying “Reform is a meaningless slogan.”

It is, when Deval is in charge of it. Look at the marvelous savings he’s already realized from his vaunted civilian flagmen reform: $12,500. Wow! Next, Aloisi says they’re going to “abolish” the Turnpike Authority. The truth is, the only change will be the name above the tollbooths – “Mass Highway” instead of “Mass Pike.”

Together we con.

Deval is still talking about rescinding the toll increases if . . . if the Legislature cuts its own throat by voting him the highest gas tax in the United States. Now he hints maybe he’d be willing to phase in the gas tax increase, the way New Hampshire is going to do it.

The only difference is, New Hampshire has a three-year phase-in. Deval is thinking more in terms of three weeks. Please, some rep out there, file a bill to stop the increases. Put a rocket in Deval’s pocket. Think of the headlines you’d get. He might even fly back from Jamaica – nah, probably not. Deval’s been called a lot of things, but never a workaholic.

Three weeks and counting. Tick . . . tick . . . tick.

Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1156988

Unfair burden for region, many at hearing contend

Transportation Secretary James A. Aloisi Jr. responded to addressed the panel of state legislators at the first of four state hearings a Springfield hearing on increasing the gas tax. (Michele McDonald/Globe Staff)

“Let me be clear, there isn’t going to be a gas tax increase as high as 19 cents,” said Representative Joseph F. Wagner, a Chicopee Democrat who leads the House on transportation issues.

Wagner had not previously taken such a firm stance, though he also predicted last night that the Legislature would eventually reach consensus with Patrick. Wagner said in an interview that he spoke out against the 19 cents after canvassing fellow House members and not seeing the support. He did not provide an alternate number, but said he expected the final bill to rely on a combination of sources to meet the state’s estimated $20 billion in transportation needs over the next 20 years. A 19-cent hike would raise the state’s gas tax to 42.5 cents a gallon.

The hundreds of people gathered in the Springfield Technical Community College auditorium applauded loudly at statements alluding to an unfair burden that Western Massachusetts would bear with a higher gas tax. Some residents spoke in favor of raising the gas tax to fix the state’s transportation problems, but the opposition was particularly critical that money would go toward avoiding fare hikes on the MBTA and paying off Big Dig debt.

Patrick and his transportation secretary, James A. Aloisi Jr., have been touring the state in hopes of building support for their plan. The regional flavor of Patrick’s comments, and the nod to the tough economic times, underscore the challenges of winning over disparate areas in support of a plan that raises taxes.

“What do we do, go out and buy Priuses?” asked Jeff Koscis, an area resident who testified in front of the joint transportation committee. A Prius is a hybrid car made by Toyota. “Those cost money. We can’t catch a break from you people.”

Patrick emphasized that each region would get back most of what they put into the tax in the form of road and bridge construction. He acknowledged the Big Dig debt is an obstacle in the state’s ability to invest elsewhere.

He also pointed out that some projects benefit Western Massachusetts more than Greater Boston, including expansion of a universal broadband project and help with the Springfield government’s finance plan.

A transportation overhaul, financed by giving the state the highest gas tax in the nation, is the first of several initiatives Patrick and other Beacon Hill leaders will consider. Collectively, the initiatives might help restore public confidence in the Legislature and change the way Massachusetts government does business. If they fall flat, Republicans are pining for Harvard Pilgrim Health Care executive Charles Baker to challenge Patrick for re-election in 2010.

Patrick’s challenge is to ensure that Senate President Therese Murray, House Speaker Robert DeLeo and their various constituencies are willing to share the risks with him.

There are reasons, beyond Democrat party loyalty, to think DeLeo and Murray will back Patrick this year. That may explain why Patrick aides had the political courage to include a 27-cent gas tax hike in a draft copy of the transportation overhaul obtained last week by The Associated Press, and expected to be formally unveiled by Patrick as soon as Wednesday.

In the House, DeLeo started his tenure as speaker by pushing through new rules for his members he hopes lay the foundation for an upcoming debate on ethics reforms. Patrick has already proposed a comprehensive ethics overhaul in the aftermath of a federal bribery indictment against former Sen. Dianne Wilkerson and the ethics investigations into former House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi. Now he has an ally in DeLeo, who is eager to buff up the image of his chamber following DiMasi’s departure.

And Patrick, Murray and DeLeo all want to move next to a sweeping change of the state’s transportation system — Murray has already filed legislation in the Senate.

But Murray has declared the Legislature must seek “reform before revenue.” So before talking about toll or tax increases, she is eager to first consider how the state can reshape its transportation bureaucracy and privatize some of its functions. Patrick has tried to address that by proposing to sell or lease the service plazas on the Massachusetts Turnpike.

But the governor also argues the state needs a jolt of tax revenues to address a staggering $5.1 billion debt at the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, a $2.2 billion debt at the Pike and a backlog of road and bridge projects priced into the billions. If Patrick were to accept the heat for a massive tax increase — more than doubling the state’s 23.5-cent gas tax — he would survive the political damage only if he could show results and a pattern of improvement across state government.

Besides ethics and transportation reform, the leaders have all said they want to eliminate pension perks that permeate state government and aggravate taxpayers. That sets up the next major legislative initiative: retirement reform. Among the ideas are standardizing the state system around private-sector retirement programs and eliminating such concepts as enhanced pensions for lawmakers who get voted out of office.

The ethics, transportation and pension debates will take place at the same time as two other major discussions: how to close the state’s current $1.1 billion budget deficit, and what, amid a national and state recession, to include in the roughly $28 billion budget that will govern the 2010 fiscal year starting July 1.

Resolving all those issues will require give-and-take by groups and people close to Patrick, DeLeo and Murray, as well as horse-trading over a span of issues that might not otherwise be connected.

If they succeed, DeLeo could trumpet ethics reforms that sharpen penalties for bad behavior by lawmakers, and Patrick could sign a transportation overhaul that staves off projected Turnpike toll increases while streamlining government in the ways envisioned by Murray.

All three could lay claim to having ended pension abuses that undercut the public’s willingness to accept tax and fee hikes — all during the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

Or not.

Patrick acknowledged the stakes during his State of the State speech last month.

“The times demand that we confront some issues that we may have avoided in ordinary times,” he told members of the House and Senate. “Seizing these opportunities will make us stronger in the long run. So, I am asking the Legislature tonight to join me in a season of significant government reform.”

Gas tax, Pike hike add fuel to fire
By Howie Carr | Sunday, February 22, 2009 | http://www.bostonherald.com | Local Politics

Gov. Deval Patrick, what part of “no” do you not understand?

No to the 19-cent increase in the gas tax.

No to the obscene hike in the tolls.

I know, the highest state gas tax in America will merely cost the “average” motorist “one large cup of coffee a week.” It’s the least we can do for what Deval calls the infrastructure – the bloated T pensions, the sticky-fingered Mass Pike tolltakers and Troop E’s detail-inflated, six-figure salaries, not to mention the “prevailing wage” scam – methadone-addled ditch diggers making $50 an hour.

How appropriate that Deval’s as-yet-unwritten legislation is called the “Transportation and Economic Security Plan.”

Economic security, all right. For hacks and pinky-ring union thugs.

Like Wimpy in the old Popeye cartoons, Deval will gladly give you “reform” tomorrow for a tax increase today. He leaked his soak-the-motorists scam to his sycophants at the dying broadsheet Friday morning, then delivered the speech on the Friday afternoon of a school-vacation week. How much more do you need to know?

Still, you owe it to yourself to read the entire opus – preferably on an empty stomach. Let’s get right to it: “Every time we hear another story . . . about a state worker collecting one pension from the T while earning another in state government, the average citizen gets madder.”

One of those double-dippers would be the son of Billy Bulger, he of the $197,000-a-year state pension, with whom Deval met regularly at Mul’s Diner on West Broadway during the 2006 campaign to concoct grand schemes to beggar the working man. Another of those MBTA double-dippers is the boss of the Massachusetts Convention Center Authority, Jim Rooney, several of whose board members Deval appoints. Maybe I missed it, but have any of Patrick’s MCCA appointees ever raised concerns about Rooney’s rip-offs?

“Don’t perpetuate the Big Dig culture,” Deval intones.

Right . . . the one that provided sleazy Jim Aloisi, Deval’s new transportation secretary, with millions in legal fees, not to mention one of those tsarist pensions that make us “average citizens” get madder.

“Let me be clear: the ‘23 years and out’ rule, where T employees start receiving a pension earlier than any reasonable retirement, is coming to an end.” Let me be clear: If you believe that whopper, you’re probably still holding your breath waiting for that property tax relief that candidate Patrick promised you in 2006.

Strangely, there wasn’t a single word in his speech about removing the toll booths on the Pike, which were supposed to come down in 1987. He does mention the “stiff imminent increases in tolls” that his Pike board may be rubber-stamping soon. He’s quite worried about all of us from “the North Shore, East Boston and MetroWest,” though not concerned enough to order his tax-fatted hyenas who run the Pike to take that extortionate option off the table.

Deval does promise to eliminate “about 300 positions,” no names attached, and I predict neither of Rep. John Fresolo’s siblings will have to be extracted from their Worcester toll booths with the Jaws of Life.

How stupid does Patrick think we are? As long as the Pike toll booths are up, we are all held hostage, like that rich businessman shaken down by the “escort” from Canton who kept blackmailing him every time she ran short on dough.

Don’t blame me, I voted for Muffy. For the rest of you guilt-ridden sheeple, how’s this one-party rule thing working out for you?
Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1153783

Gas tax: Paying cents to save big bucks

WITH times as tough as they are, it is not surprising that Massachusetts legislators and residents are balking at Governor Patrick’s proposal to raise the state gasoline tax. But before deciding whether an additional $8 per month for the typical driver is too expensive, it’s worth thinking about how much drivers will pay if the gas tax is not raised. Strange as it may seem, increasing the gas tax by 19 cents a gallon will actually save most Massachusetts drivers more than the higher tax will cost them.

How can that be?

If the gas tax does not go up, tolls (on the Pike and Tobin Bridge) and fares (for MBTA and regional transit riders) will. An increase of even 25 cents per toll or transit trip amounts to more than $10 per month for regular users, so current toll payers and transit riders save if tolls and fares are frozen and the gas tax rises by the proposed 19 cents per gallon.

But what about those who never pay a toll or transit fare? They, too, are better off financially with a higher gas tax. Due in no small measure to inadequate funding, the Massachusetts transportation system is so poorly maintained and badly congested that Massachusetts motorists spend an estimated $718 million each year on car repairs attributable to bad roads. This amounts to nearly $300 per household or roughly three times the proposed gas tax increase. One blown-out tire or bent wheel can cost a lot more to fix than several years of a higher gas tax.

Inadequately maintained roads and lack of funding for paving and other improvements also contributes to Massachusetts’s growing traffic congestion, which costs motorists both time and money. The Texas Transportation Institute has calculated that each rush-hour driver in metropolitan Boston bears an annual cost of $895 due to time and gasoline wasted sitting in traffic jams.

The costs don’t stop there. In addition to these out-of-pocket costs, Massachusetts taxpayers are already paying for years and even decades of deferred maintenance on roads, bridges, and transit. Bridges that aren’t painted and maintained often require more extensive and costly repairs down the road. When conditions become unsafe, transportation officials are increasingly required to undertake expensive emergency repairs, which we pay for one way or another in the long run.

Perhaps most insidious is the cost of Massachusetts’s longstanding reliance on debt to pay for basic road operations and maintenance. About half of the Massachusetts Highway Department’s budget is currently funded by issuing 20-year bonds. That means Massachusetts taxpayers are not only paying interest for 20 years on the costs of construction, but often on the salaries and supplies needed to pick up litter and mow grass in medians. Twenty years of interest payments more than doubles those highway maintenance costs. Without more gas tax revenues, Massachusetts will continue to issue bonds to pay for maintenance on state highways and this will cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars in added debt service costs – which will, of course, come from income or sales taxes or other fees.

In many different ways, Massachusetts drivers, transit riders and taxpayers are paying the costs of the state’s underfunded, debt-burdened, poorly maintained, inequitable, and unreliable transportation system. Our choice is not whether to pay for the transportation system, but how and when. We can continue paying for ever-higher tolls and transit fares, car repairs, time lost to traffic jams and delayed trains, wasted gasoline, emergency repairs, and soaring debt service charges. Or we can increase gasoline taxes and begin to reverse the cycle of denial and neglect that is costing Massachusetts and its residents dearly.

If we are wise, we will raise the gas tax now, and reform the way government offers transportation services – and most of us will save a bundle in the process.

Barry Bluestone is director and Stephanie Pollack is associate director of the Dukakis Center for Urban and Regional Policy at Northeastern University.

Gov. Deval Patrick looking to implement changes

Demonstrators react to the man on the scooter who honked in response to their signs during a protest in front of the State House in Boston on Wednesday. The protest, organized by the Massachusetts Republican Party, was held in opposition to a proposed 19-cent state gasoline tax increase.

By GLEN JOHNSON
Associated Press
February 26, 2009 6:00 AM

BOSTON — Boston drivers cruising past the Statehouse on Wednesday honked horns in opposition to a proposed 19-cent gasoline tax increase, as the governor tried to ease fears that the hike would run tandem with toll increases on the Massachusetts turnpike.

Gov. Deval Patrick told reporters a 4-cent gas tax increase would provide the state with enough money to avoid the toll hike altogether. But, he said, it would be in the best interest of the state to tackle a host of transportation issues at once.

Four cents, he said, “is wrong; it doesn’t get us anything.”

The gas hike doesn’t necessarily have to be the 19 cents he has proposed, Patrick said — only something sufficient to support the transportation bureaucratic reforms he is seeking.

He did not specify an alternative amount, but he has proposed a menu of changes that would require different levels of revenue.

“If I don’t get all that, if we don’t get all that, you know, then all we’re asking people to do is to pay more for the same old thing, and I will veto that bill,” the Democratic governor said. “The number alone is not enough; we have to have the series of reforms.”

House Speaker Robert DeLeo said he favored keeping Boston-area tolls at current levels and using an enhanced gas tax to achieve the other transportation changes. He will work with Senate President Therese Murray to move the gas tax hike bill through the Legislature in time to prevent the toll increases from taking effect, he said.

The first phase of the toll hike is set for March 29; the second, July 1.

DeLeo also said he expected a gas tax hike would exceed 4 cents but probably wouldn’t reach the full 19 cents Patrick wanted.

“We have to get our arms around all of those different concerns and try to come up with a package that everyone — or at least 81 people — can agree to,” he said, alluding to the majority vote in his 160-member chamber.

He added: “Bottom line, if we’re going to get it passed, we’re going to have to try to keep it, you know, as low as possible.”

An anti-gas tax protest organized by the state Republican Party drew about 25 people to the Statehouse steps on Wednesday morning. Passing motorists honked in response to signs urging them to show their disapproval of the gasoline tax.

Party chairwoman Jennifer Nassour said the state should not burden people already struggling with a national recession.

“It is important that we are not harming families of Massachusetts, people of Massachusetts, at these difficult times,” she said.

One protester, a state party intern, said a gas tax increase is too broad compared with a targeted toll increase.

“We will all have to pay the gas tax, as opposed to if tolls are increased,” said Amanda Witt, 22, of Duxbury. “A limited number of people will have to pay them, and they can be avoided.”

Patrick has proposed the increase as an alternative to doubling the turnpike tolls. Costs at the Boston Harbor tunnels, for example, would rise from $3.50 to $7 unless the state guarantees a revenue stream to avoid the increase.

Patrick said the 19-cent increase he has proposed would give the state the money it needs to solve the chronic debt problems at the turnpike, the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority and other state transportation agencies.

Mass. gas tax seen as boost to NH

Courtesy of:  Union Leader

By DERRICK PERKINS
Sunday News Correspondent

SALEM – Local station owners are hopeful a proposed 19-cent jump in the Massachusetts gas tax will bring in more customers from across the border, although talk of the tax hike has left Bay State motorists steaming at the pumps.

Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick on Friday unveiled a plan to increase the gas tax as part of an overall transportation package aimed at raising $500 million a year to help offset the cost of repairing the commonwealth’s deteriorating roads, bridges and tunnels.

Reaching a total of 42.5 cents per gallon, the increase would leave Massachusetts surpassing New York and California with the highest gas tax in the nation.

By comparison, the current gasoline tax in New Hampshire is 19.6 cents per gallon, which includes a 1.6-cent environmental fee, although legislators here are eyeing a gas tax hike of 15 cents a gallon — 5 cents per year over the next three years, to 34.6 cents — as a way to fund the upkeep of the state’s transportation infrastructure.

If passed, it would be the first gas tax hike here since 1991.

Across the country, motorists are already paying an 18.4-cent federal tax on each gallon of gasoline purchased.

“If you keep on taxing people, they are not going to buy it,” said Jim Massahos, owner of Salem’s R and J Getty. “People from Massachusetts will start coming over here. If someone gets 20 gallons, that’s like 8 to 10 bucks a week. That’s a lot of money, especially now.”

Massachusetts resident Gary Roding predicts his state’s 19-cent gas tax would cost him an extra $30 a month. (DERRICK PERKINS)

Massahos, who has been operating his Main Street gas station since 1972, said a Massachusetts tax hike would be good news for border communities such as Salem, inviting Massachusetts residents to consider crossing the border for gas as one way to save money.

Frank Laratonda, manager of the Route 28 One Stop Retail Shoppe, said he already had seen a roughly 7 percent increase in the amount of customers from Massachusetts filling up at his pumps, a figure he expects to rise if the Commonwealth increases its gas tax.

“I believe that it will help our sales, at least on-the-border stores,” he said. “People are coming up here right now for other items; why not come up for gas, too? This should definitely be a benefit for us.”

While many New Hampshire motorists view an increase in Massachusetts as making the Granite State a more attractive location for out-of-state consumers — like Derry resident Mike Stankus, who called the proposed move “great news” for the economies of border communities — the plan has left a sour taste in the mouths of Massachusetts motorists.

Topping off his gas tank at Salem’s North Broadway Street Hess station, Richard Bartholdson, a resident of Massachusetts’ South Shore, said the proposed tax increase disgusted him.

“Where does it end?” he asked. “Between that and the cost of food, the lack of jobs, and then the little guy gets to pay more for gas. Do you have to lose your home before you get relief?”

A comparison of the current gas prices here and in Massachusetts, as tracked online at gasbuddy.com, shows little difference at the pump right now — the lowest in New Hampshire was $1.71 per gallon at the Gulf on Union Street in Manchester, compared with prices ranging from $1.85 to $1.89 at stations in Methuen, Mass., with the average in both states hovering around $2 per gallon.

Last week, a New Hampshire gas tax proposal, House Bill 644, sponsored by Rep. David Campbell, D-Nashua, won backing from municipal groups, regional planners and construction companies during a House Public Works and Highways Committee meeting in Concord.

Supporters say the increase is long overdue as a remedy for fixing the state’s depleted highway fund.

Casting a critical eye on such a move here in New Hampshire, Massahos predicted an increase would backfire, inspiring motorists to stay off the roads and dampening business for gas station owners. If the state wanted to lend residents a helping hand during the recession, he said, it ought to cut taxes, rather than raise them.

“These people have already adjusted to where they’re learning not to use two cars anymore because of the price of fuel. All (a tax increase) is going to do is keep people from driving,” Massahos said. “If (legislators) were smart, they wouldn’t raise the tax, and everyone will come over here. It’s a no-brainer.”

Carol Robidoux of the New Hampshire Union Leader staff contributed to this report.

YOUR COMMENTS

Greg, The state leaves it up to each MA resident to properly declare and pay the use tax or sales tax on ANYTHING they purchased elsewhere and had sent to or took home with them to MA. Each state is limited in its power to tax sales in other states, but not in taxing its own residents who return home with good purchased elsewhere. So, yes, MA residents are expected to pay the MA tax on things they purchase in NH, including gasoline for motor vehicles. But MA cannot generally force NH vendors to collect sales taxes from MA residents, unless (perhaps) the vendor is also “doing business” in MA.
- Barry, Jefferson

Yeah, Yay that’s exactly what NH needs more Massplants!!!

Yes, because things as of late have been going sooooo great with our roads being flooded with Mass drivers. Oh, and safer too!

And I beg to differ with the comment “Deval Patrick is what’s wrong with Mass.” Patrick is a symptom of whats wrong with Mass, the people are the real problem.
Yes yes not ALL, but quite frankly; most.

You Mass people let all this happen and then keep on electing the same people. My sympathy for Mass residents is all but gone.
- Craig D, Manchester

Well we may not see that much of a difference in people coming to NH. It’s only about $2 for a tankful of gas. I don’t think people are going to go far out of their way for $2. Steve Vaillancourt a local Manchester politician and gadfly said it best in a qoute of another politician “the government that governs best governs least”. I guess you need no further example than to look at Massachusetts and look at how complex and expensive their beauracracy is.
- Jack Alex, Manchester

Bob,

You seem to be contradicting yourself.
- Mark, Bedford

Watch out gas station owners…like Taxachussetts trying to get their money from the tire warehouses selling tires to their residents, they may require their residents, via their chip on their decal whom travel across the border to pay their taxes per gallon. I hope Deval (Obama Mini Me) doesn’t have this in his evil plans.
- Mark, Milford

Bob Thornton, Milford. Ya Bob, good idea. Cans of gas bombs in their trunks as they travel at ninety miles per hour on route 3 and 93. Should be great for New Hampshire.

Leno, Raymond
- Leno Hebert, Raymond

This is a prime example of what happens when you vote in a liberal government verses a conservative government…generally they would rather raise taxes to cover fiscal irresponsibilities, rather then find ways to become fiscal responsible.

Remember any successful gas tax increase in MA, will eventually find it’s way into NH since the majority of our government representatives endorse liberal policies and will use the MA gas tax as an excuse to raise gas taxes here.

Richard Bartholdson quoted in the article has it dead one…you can’t tax you way out of an economic downturn, but clearly MA is going to try its earnest to do just that!

The funny thing I hear from my MA friends is how many of them wish Mitt Romney was still governor!
- Mike, Epping

I suspect our politicians will see it as an opportunity to raise the NH gas tax and keep it a few pennies below MA so we can still claim a NH advantage.

This would have been unthinkable in July when gas was $4 a gallon. Does anyone believe we won’t see $147 a barrel oil and $4 a gallon gas again?

Gov’t needs to continue to downsize along with the economy not increase taxes which will only make it harder for the economy to recover.
- Pete, Dover

“Supporters say the increase is long overdue as a remedy for fixing the state’s depleted highway fund.”

Let’s first see an accounting of how much of the previous gas tax was used for its stated purpose. I suspect it’ll be a bit less than 100%.
- Harvey B, Wilton

Much ado about nothing as usual. Gas in Massachusetts, even with their higher taxes, is cheaper than here in tax free New Hampshire. It turns out that there are a lot of other things involved in pricing. According to gas station owners, in less your station is across the street, people don’t go to other states to buy gas no matter how much credit you give them for being cheap.
- Robert, Deerfield

Deval Patrick is what’s wrong with Massachusetts .
- Lew, Manchester

If a Mass. motorist buys gas in New Hampshire, does Deval Patrick expect the motorist to send the difference in gas taxes to him? And does Deval expect NH gas stations to collect the Mass. gas tax on anyone putting gas into a car with Mass. plates?
- Greg, Manchester

Marie it depends on how close to the border you are. If you are close enough then you can save money. Also, some people drive up here to NH for other things too so they will fill up before they leave and possibly fill up a few extra cans of gas to bring home with them.

Taxachusetts is going to tax and spend itself out of its entire population. The only people left down there will be the political hacks and their parasite families along with the lazy welfare skanks.
- Bob Thornton, Milford

How many people drive farther away to purchase cheaper gas?

Doesn’t that defeat the purpose of saving money?
- Marie, Concord

By GLEN JOHNSON

BOSTON

The Massachusetts gasoline tax would rise by 19 cents a gallon — to a nation-leading 42.5 cents — under a transportation system overhaul Gov. Deval Patrick was scheduled to unveil Friday, top aides said.

Combined with the 18.4-cent federal gas tax, the change would leave Bay State drivers paying 60.9 cents in fuel surcharges on every gallon of gas they buy. It could also stave off a proposed doubling of Massachusetts Turnpike tolls slated to take place this spring, assuming the Legislature acts quickly to approve it.

Nonetheless, the proposed increase is sharply less than the 27-cent-per-gallon increase the Patrick administration was considering last week. That hike was included in a draft of the transportation announcement obtained by The Associated Press, and was the centerpiece for a variety of planning throughout the document.

The draft included a specific plan for distributing the money, how the boosted gas tax would compare to other states and an analysis noting the extra cost would equate to about $120 per year, less than two small Dunkin’ Donut coffees per week.

The 27-cent increase would have raised an estimated $702 million in annual revenue; the 19-cent hike would generate $494 million. With the smaller tax increase, Patrick will have less money to do what he says the state needs: make long-term, structural changes to the transportation system and set the state on a course to long-term transportation financing stability.

And that raises the specter of future gasoline tax increases.

Patrick was scheduled to make his announcement during a 1 p.m. news conference at the state Transportation Building. The setting was symbolic one: It not only is the Turnpike’s headquarters, but it also is home to the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority and the Executive Office of Transportation.

Patrick’s plan calls for eliminating divisions between state transportation agencies and pooling their resources where possible, said the aides, who demanded anonymity in advance of the governor’s formal announcement.

Patrick said earlier this week that he would not seek a tax increase without getting legislative support for overhauling the state’s transportation bureaucracy. Such reforms — including abolishing the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, round out the proposal he was unveiling.

The draft plan obtained by the AP said Patrick was considering streamlining operations into Highway, Rail and Transit, Aviation and Ports, and Registry of Motor Vehicles divisions.

Patrick told a Chamber of Commerce audience this week that resolving the state’s problems long-term would require either a toll increase or a gas tax hike. A show of hands among the 600 at the speech revealed widespread support for the gas tax hike as the most equitable means for spreading transportation costs.

The governor also said he was considering Registry fee changes to promote drivership of fuel-efficient vehicles, as well as a “Vehicle Miles Traveled” system to eventually replace the gas tax.

Under such systems, one of which has already been tested in Oregon, drivers are charged precisely for the miles they drive — regardless of the fuel efficiency of their vehicle. It allows a state to continue raising the money for road and bridge repairs while efficiency reduces the demand for gasoline.

Concerns such a system could allow “Big Brother” tracking of vehicle movements were addressed in Oregon by using a passive — rather than active — GPS device to measure mileage. It could only tell when miles were incurred within the Oregon borders, not the specific roads on which they were traveled.

The bulk of the Pike’s $2.2 billion is from the Big Dig, while the MBTA’s $5 billion debt is from long-term costs. A panel also said state roads and bridges will need $20 billion in repairs during the next 20 years.

The Turnpike’s board of directors is scheduled to discuss a backup toll-increase plan at its meeting next Tuesday.

The agenda calls for further debate about a two-step increase proposed last month by board member Michael Angelini.

Under his plan, the authority would impose a 25 cent increase at the Allston-Brighton and Weston booths just inside the Route 128 beltway, raising the cash toll to $1.50, while making a $2 increase at the Ted Williams and Sumner tunnels at Logan International Airport. That would raise the toll from $3.50 to $5.50.

Angelini proposed making those rates effective at the end of March, but repealing them if the Legislature passed a gas tax increase before that date.

Angelini also outlined a second phase of increases if the gas tax is not increased: He would increase tolls to $2 at Allston-Brighton and Weston, and $7 at the harbor tunnels — the level that touched off public outrage and sparked discussion of a heightened gasoline tax.

Patrick has appointed the majority of the Turnpike’s board of directors, which historically has given a governor a measure of control over their actions.