High living costs, rough commutes and sluggish job growth are still dragging Massachusetts down. That was according to a new report card from the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a business backed policy group. Reporter Colin Young of the State House News Services lays out what solutions Massachusetts political candidates offering voters with the election just a month away.
Colin Young, SHNS: You're right, Carrie, the elections a month away! But you'd be hard pressed to find real concrete solutions to these affordability issues from either gubernatorial candidate Maura Healey or Mike Minogue.
The one that is out there and that they both seemingly agree on, is to suspend the state gas tax for at least some amount of time while gas prices are high. They've aligned behind that idea. It doesn't seem like the legislature will go along with it.
But after you get through the gas tax holiday idea, there aren't very many real concrete ideas. The Republican Minogue says he'll cut taxes and audit the state government to find waste, fraud and abuse that will save money that could turn into relief for taxpayers and residents. And Maura Healey says that she's going to keep resisting the Trump administration, which she says is the way to affordability here. Nothing real black and white.
Carrie Healy, NEPM: Many people say lawmakers should be bolder in taking on the state's high cost of living and reducing heavy business regulation. Most of the state's tax revenue seems to be currently coming from higher education and health care. Do lawmakers have the stomach for some major changes in tax policy.
I don't think they do. I think the most clear evidence of that is the fact that voters did an awful lot of work over the last few years to bring questions to the ballot this fall, to essentially do it themselves, with the Legislature choosing not to act. Voters did get (onto the ballot) a question that could affect state tax collections and could mean more frequent tax rebates for residents. And I think we should expect to see that in future [election] cycles as well.
Governor Maura Healey is preparing for Thursday's debate against Republican candidate Mike Minogue. Given Minogue's background as a CEO, are we expecting him to challenge her management of state agencies or stick to traditional Republican tax and spend talking points?
I think we're going to get a little bit of both from Minogue. He has been on the campaign trail, at least, going very hard at the tax and spend argument that Maura Healey is overtaxing and overregulating and overspending.
But he's also been hammering away at things that get at Healey's management: he's criticizing the Springfield courthouse deal, he's mentioned the Mass Pike Service Plaza's contract that fell apart last year.
So, I think he'll surface these things and try to chip away at the incumbent with those. But really, the foundation of his argument is overtaxing, overregulating and overspending.
After a Boston Globe report revealed, Massachusetts routinely approved nursing home licenses for operators linked to fraud in other states. State officials say they'll vote this month to finally enforce a 2024 oversight law. So what actually changes under those rules?
It's a little squishy. If you listen to the Healey administration, they say once these regulations are voted on, they will actually be able to do what that 2024 law says, which is that when nursing home transactions come up, the state can consider the new operator's record in other states.
There's been some question as to whether the state was precluded from doing that before, but now they will have that explicit authority, and that's a big one to know whether the operator coming into Massachusetts is someone who has done well in other states, or if it's someone who's gotten slaps on the wrist by regulators elsewhere.
That's something that the state thinks really should be part of its thinking and its determination.
Finally, Colin, when out of state operators siphon money out of nursing homes instead of funding proper staffing or facilities, what can the state actually do? Is Beacon Hill talking about capping profits or mandating reinvestment in resident care?
I wouldn't be surprised if reinvesting in resident care comes up probably in next session as a topic of debate. Long term care is something that the legislature has been focused on in recent years, but clearly the laws they've passed haven't addressed all of the problems and all of the concerns.
This is something that House Speaker Ron Mariano, especially, has championed. So I wouldn't be surprised to see another long term care bill next session. And I think things from this report will probably inform that legislation.
