A looming landscape of budget cuts

April 13, 2008

"DEEP CUTS loom across state" read the front-page headline on April 6. They will affect us all.

There are three main reasons that the world's richest nation is cutting back on education for its children, services for those in need, and infrastructure.

Probably the biggest is the distorted priorities of our materialistic society. We spend liberally on such things as self-adornment, big cars and houses, and entertainment, and fight against the taxes needed for first-rate public education. Meanwhile, in the April 7 edition, you reported that parents are flocking to sign up younger and younger children for etiquette classes ("For younger set, a call to charms," Page A1).

The second reason is the $3 trillion war we chose to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The third is the big tax cuts our government provided to the rich, who don't need it.

Our profligate spending, by both individuals and government, and our short-changing education and research, promise to result in the United States becoming a second-rate nation within a generation.

MILT LAUENSTEIN
Gloucester

RECENT GRIM budget news, as reported in your April 6 story, is reason enough for the Senate to reject a proposed cut in the corporate income tax rate ("Mass. House OK's big tax hikes," Page A1, April 11). The rate cut negates much of the revenue that would be generated by the potential closing of some corporate tax loopholes, namely implementing combined reporting for companies and preventing firms from filing as partnerships in one state and corporations in another.

With municipalities receiving $566 million less in state aid then they did in fiscal 2002, many cities and towns are forced to cut teachers, police, and valuable services. At such a time, it is arrogant for the Legislature to even consider such a tax break. Our state has a fair tax structure for corporations. A recent study by Ernst & Young shows that businesses in 41 states pay a greater percentage of state and local taxes than Massachusetts businesses do, and 39 states collect more in business taxes than the Commonwealth.

During this budget cycle, the Legislature needs to listen to local taxpayers demanding sufficient state support for schools, roads, bridges, and safety, rather than to those pushing an irresponsible and unnecessary tax reduction that would do little to help our state's economy.

JEFF THIELMAN
Arlington

The writer is a member of the Arlington School Committee.

RE "MASS. House OK's big tax hikes": Would the Globe allow me to predict what a future headline will read after lawmakers' approval of new tax levies late Thursday night?

"Mass. Legislature shocked by number of companies moving out of state."

What part of this equation do they not understand?

DANIEL CARNEY
Milton

ACROSS THE Globe's pages and across the country, the news is filled with stories of state budget cuts totaling still-unknown billions of dollars. Not long ago, an economic stimulus package passed in Washington with much fanfare and promises to inject billions into the ailing economy. Of course, as state budget cuts grow, they cancel out the effects of the national stimulus package.

Worse yet, the stimulus package's tax rebates go disproportionately to upper-income Americans, while state budget cuts hit low-income Americans hardest.

Do these developments make anyone feel like our policy makers are responding well to the challenges we face?

STACY D. VanDEVEER
Malden

The writer is an associate professor of political science at the University of New Hampshire.

THE REPORTING on the condition of municipal budgets seems to downplay an alternative to the more common "cut staff and programs" option ("Deep cuts loom across state," Page A1, April 6). The alternative is to look at salaries and benefits. When a private-sector employer runs into fiscal problems, salaries and benefits are a natural part of the spectrum of options that are given a hard look. The auto and airline industries are prime examples. The Globe has consistently reported on the excess pensions and benefits that certain public sector employees are able to avail themselves of that have long ago disappeared from most private employers. Perhaps when the public has more confidence that pension and benefit promises are reasonable, municipalities will have an easier time with overrides.

MIKE BURNS
Jamaica Plain

LAST YEAR I was fired.

As soon as possible, I registered with the Department of Workforce Development for unemployment assistance. In about a month, I found another job, but never received any compensation from the Commonwealth.

In January, I received a 1099-G that stated that I'd received $1,200.00. I contacted the folks at the Division of Unemployment Assistance and asked them to send me a corrected 1099-G for $0.00. Instead, they sent me two $600.00 checks.

This is the crux of the problem. When a state government would rather cut checks than correct problems, a deficit is certain to ensue.

FRED BEMENT
Boxborough