Lawmakers drop effort to add fee to insurance
State lawmakers have temporarily dropped an effort to add a small surcharge to auto insurance policies that would raise about $20 million a year to pay for police training.
The measure, a budget amendment that would have cost policyholders an average of about $5 a year, had faced opposition from some insurance companies. Arbella Insurance Group, one of the state's largest auto insurers, argued it was unfair to tax just one specific group - drivers - to pay for a public service.
Several dozen Beacon Hill lawmakers tried unsuccessfully to push through a similar measure four years ago, after police chiefs complained they didn't have enough money for training. Now the issue has emerged again, because cities and towns are strapped for cash.
The fee was originally included in the new state budget Governor Deval Patrick submitted to the state Legislature. It was first dropped by the House Ways and Means Committee, and then reintroduced as an amendment to the budget this month by Representative Christopher Donelan, Democrat of Orange, who is vice chairman of the Joint Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security. But the amendment was dropped yesterday.
Donelan said he still supports the surcharge, adding the state needs to find ways to better fund training for police officers.
"Police training has been chronically underfunded," he said.
Donelan said it was unclear, however, whether he had the votes needed to push the measure through as part of the budget process.
In addition, Donelan said the Legislature already plans to consider revamping police training in the next few weeks, so it might make more sense to consider the funding issue afterward. Donelan said Patrick has proposed a bill that would accomplish the same goal as his budget amendment, but it would be considered later in the Legislative session.
Other insurance companies had mixed response to the proposed surcharge.
The Massachusetts Insurance Federation, which represents many insurance companies, said it opposes the measure but doesn't consider it a top concern on Beacon Hill.
And the Massachusetts Association of Insurance Agents, which represents agents, said it has no objections to the fee, provided the state requires companies to clearly label the charge on consumer bills.
Still, the surcharge is just the latest in an array of small taxes and fees that were floated and then quickly withdrawn or defeated in the House in recent weeks as lawmakers instead concentrated their energies on raising the state sales tax to 6.25 percent, which the House of Representatives approved on Monday. Meanwhile, Patrick is lobbying to instead raise the state gasoline tax by 19 cents.
"I would be surprised to see many, if any, of these proposals, approved," said Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a Boston nonprofit that analyzes the state's fiscal policies.
Todd Wallack can be reached at twallack@globe.com. 
