I began my day yesterday at a Corridor Nine Chamber of Commerce breakfast to discuss the status of current political issues on Beacon Hill and Capitol Hill.
One of the things I focused on is the state budget. Basically, I think the budget plan that Governor Patrick released the other day is unsustainable because it relies too much on a risky hope that tax revenues will pick up this year and that additional stimulus money will be received. It also adds about three percent to the bottom line of last year’s budget using one-time money from the federal government and the Rainy Day Fund, money that won’t be there for us when we try to balance the budget next year.
I also talked about health care. To be sure, health care is one of the biggest issues facing America right now given the debate in Washington, D.C. It was interesting to hear Congressman McGovern’s thoughts in that regard. But health care also remains an important policy issue for state government. There’s more our state could do independently to help drive down health care costs. For example, Governor Patrick should be doing more to require insurers, providers and hospitals to be accountable and explain why their costs are going up at regular public hearings. We passed such a law in 2008, but it remains virtually unenforced.
By mid-day, I was sitting in the House Chamber in Boston listening to Speaker Robert DeLeo tell legislators his visions for the upcoming year. He sees the House passing a budget that’s free of new taxes, and possibly a gaming bill that creates jobs. He promised to pass additional cost-saving reforms. Meanwhile, there is lots of talk about the possibility of passing legislation to cut municipal budget costs and to ban texting while driving. It will be interesting to see how these visions play out over the coming months and how many of them turn into reality.
What’s your vision of how things are going on Beacon Hill and where things might go over the next few months? I’d like to know. Please post a comment below.
Showing posts with label Patrick. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Patrick. Show all posts
Friday, January 29, 2010
Thursday, January 28, 2010
THOUGHT OF THE DAY - 01/28/2010
Yesterday, Governor Deval Patrick announced his budget plan for Fiscal Year 2011. Here’s how I think the Governor’s Budget adds up:
Patrick’s recommendation for an overall three percent increase in spending, based on a risky bet that state tax collections in this poor economy will actually increase by about the same amount;What’s your calculus? How do you think the Governor’s budget adds up? I’d love to hear from you. Please let me know your thoughts.
PLUS, Patrick’s plan to base long-term spending commitments on $800 million of one-time federal economic stimulus payments that have been promised to our state this year;
PLUS, Patrick’s proposal to base spending on the uncertain receipt of another $600 million of federal economic stimulus funds that have not even been committed by Congress yet;
PLUS, Patrick’s withdrawal of another $175 million from our state’s already-depleted Rainy Day Fund to cover spending;
PLUS, Patrick’s request for new tax hikes on tobacco, candy, and soft drinks;
PLUS, Patrick’s empty promise not to cut local aid, which does not account for local aid cuts last year, and which overlooks his request for additional “9C powers” that would allow him to cut local aid after the budget is passed;
PLUS, Patrick’s blueprint for state government that includes 66,575 full-time equivalent positions, up from about 62,000 workers needed to run state government just five years ago;
PLUS, Patrick’s plan to cut spending on some vulnerable populations as a way to cover spending increases in other areas;
EQUALS, a spending plan that is: not fiscally responsible; unsustainable; contrary to the best interests of Massachusetts residents; and, something I can’t support.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Thought of the Day - 01/26/2010
Governor Patrick is filing is budget plan for Fiscal Year 2011 tomorrow, and today's morning papers are providing our first glance into what his plans might include.
According to the Boston Globe, Governor Patrick is proposing to change several laws related to state pension benefits as a way of cutting down on pension costs and closing loopholes that allow unfair benefits. In a separate story, the paper reports that the Governor is proposing to consolidate energy costs within the executive branch.
Together, these proposals could save millions of dollars a year.
I give credit to the Governor for taking these steps to help balance our budget and keep costs down. But, I wonder if they are mostly symbolic, or if they are actually indicative of a budget that starts making more responsible choices than we’ve been accustomed to.
Yesterday, the Beacon Hill Institute put out a press release advocating for a Tax and Expenditure Limitation (TEL) on state spending. That sort of plan would limit line item expenditure growth to the rate of inflation, adjusted for population growth. There are lots of details that would have to be worked out, but overall, I think this is the sort of bold reform we need to bring our budget back under control.
We need to get our state fiscal priorities back in order, and there’s no better time than right now.
I hope Governor Patrick’s budget will include solid ideas to save our state money, and that it will place a priority on local aid, health and human services spending, education, job creation and housing. These are the things Massachusetts residents need the most in this current economy.
I also call upon the Governor to submit a budget that’s free of new taxes, and which includes bold reforms that will streamline state government and improve our delivery of core services while eliminating waste, duplication and inefficiency, and stripping out spending on unnecessary programs or programs that could wait until a better day to be funded.
We will see tomorrow what Governor Patrick ends up proposing in his budget, what his priorities are and how they would affect the quality of life of citizens across our state during the coming year.
And, if I’m not satisfied by the Governor’s solutions, I will start working immediately to make sure the budget that comes out of the Legislature this summer is one we can be proud of, and one that will protect people and communities the right way.
According to the Boston Globe, Governor Patrick is proposing to change several laws related to state pension benefits as a way of cutting down on pension costs and closing loopholes that allow unfair benefits. In a separate story, the paper reports that the Governor is proposing to consolidate energy costs within the executive branch.
Together, these proposals could save millions of dollars a year.
I give credit to the Governor for taking these steps to help balance our budget and keep costs down. But, I wonder if they are mostly symbolic, or if they are actually indicative of a budget that starts making more responsible choices than we’ve been accustomed to.
Yesterday, the Beacon Hill Institute put out a press release advocating for a Tax and Expenditure Limitation (TEL) on state spending. That sort of plan would limit line item expenditure growth to the rate of inflation, adjusted for population growth. There are lots of details that would have to be worked out, but overall, I think this is the sort of bold reform we need to bring our budget back under control.
We need to get our state fiscal priorities back in order, and there’s no better time than right now.
I hope Governor Patrick’s budget will include solid ideas to save our state money, and that it will place a priority on local aid, health and human services spending, education, job creation and housing. These are the things Massachusetts residents need the most in this current economy.
I also call upon the Governor to submit a budget that’s free of new taxes, and which includes bold reforms that will streamline state government and improve our delivery of core services while eliminating waste, duplication and inefficiency, and stripping out spending on unnecessary programs or programs that could wait until a better day to be funded.
We will see tomorrow what Governor Patrick ends up proposing in his budget, what his priorities are and how they would affect the quality of life of citizens across our state during the coming year.
And, if I’m not satisfied by the Governor’s solutions, I will start working immediately to make sure the budget that comes out of the Legislature this summer is one we can be proud of, and one that will protect people and communities the right way.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Thought of the Day - 01/21/2010
On Tuesday, more than two million Massachusetts voters went to the polls in search of someone and something to believe in. They found it in the form of Scott Brown and his promise of bold new leadership in Washington.
Last night, those same voters will be disappointed by what Deval Patrick failed to offer them in his State of the Commonwealth address.
Governor Patrick had an opportunity to prove to Massachusetts residents that he has a way to lead us through the next year with plans and strategies to make Massachusetts a better place. He had a chance to rise to the occasion and to match the energy in the electorate with an energetic vision for progress for our state. But he didn’t.
I am disappointed because the Governor did not offer a vision that adequately addresses ways to fix our state’s economy. He needed to demonstrate that he can bring jobs back to Massachusetts and trigger investment here. But he didn’t.
He also needed to confidently show that he will balance the budget this year and control state spending, while holding the line on new taxes and fees. But he didn’t.
Governor Patrick had an opportunity to roll out new ideas to make government less costly, more efficient, increasingly transparent, and completely accountable to those it serves. But he didn’t.
And, he could have shown leadership by getting back to basics and putting emphasis on the right priorities this year, things like supporting cities and towns with local aid, improving our schools and making our streets safer. But he didn’t.
In short, Deval Patrick had an opportunity to prove to Massachusetts voters last night why he is the right man to lead Massachusetts and to fix the problems our residents are facing in their daily lives. He needed to convince voters that he deserves another chance. But he didn’t.
Last night, those same voters will be disappointed by what Deval Patrick failed to offer them in his State of the Commonwealth address.
Governor Patrick had an opportunity to prove to Massachusetts residents that he has a way to lead us through the next year with plans and strategies to make Massachusetts a better place. He had a chance to rise to the occasion and to match the energy in the electorate with an energetic vision for progress for our state. But he didn’t.
I am disappointed because the Governor did not offer a vision that adequately addresses ways to fix our state’s economy. He needed to demonstrate that he can bring jobs back to Massachusetts and trigger investment here. But he didn’t.
He also needed to confidently show that he will balance the budget this year and control state spending, while holding the line on new taxes and fees. But he didn’t.
Governor Patrick had an opportunity to roll out new ideas to make government less costly, more efficient, increasingly transparent, and completely accountable to those it serves. But he didn’t.
And, he could have shown leadership by getting back to basics and putting emphasis on the right priorities this year, things like supporting cities and towns with local aid, improving our schools and making our streets safer. But he didn’t.
In short, Deval Patrick had an opportunity to prove to Massachusetts voters last night why he is the right man to lead Massachusetts and to fix the problems our residents are facing in their daily lives. He needed to convince voters that he deserves another chance. But he didn’t.
THOUGHT OF THE DAY – 01/21/2010
Now that the US Senate race is over, some political attention is shifting back to Beacon Hill.
People are asking how Massachusetts political leaders intend to address some of the biggest problems facing our state.
Tonight, we might get a glimpse into some of those proposals when Governor Deval Patrick delivers his annual State of the Commonwealth Address.
I will be listening intently to what the Governor says in his remarks, and specifically what he envisions for the upcoming year. And, I’ll be looking for him to make specific proposals to move our state forward in several ways, including:
- FIXING THE ECONOMY – In order to be successful tonight, I think Governor Patrick needs to prove that he has a plan to fix our state’s economy. He needs to demonstrate that he can bring jobs back to Massachusetts and trigger investment here.
- FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY – I want Governor Patrick to show me that he will balance the budget this year and control state spending, while holding the line on new taxes and fees.
- GOOD GOVERNMENT – I will be watching to see if Governor Patrick has any new ideas to make government less costly, more efficient, increasingly transparent, and completely accountable to those it serves.
- RIGHT PRIORITIES – In addition to the above, I hope Governor Patrick will convince me that he is getting back to basics and putting emphasis on the right priorities this year, things like supporting cities and towns with local aid, improving our schools and making our streets safer.
- LEADERSHIP – Most of all, I think Governor Patrick needs to lay out a vision for how to make Massachusetts a better place and how he intends to take the lead in making that vision a reality.
We’ll see what happens when the speech starts at 7 p.m. tonight. I’ll be sure to let you know what I think. Until then, I’d love it if you’d let me know what you think. What should Governor Patrick talk about tonight? Please post a comment below and let me know.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Thought of the Day - 12/02/09
City and town officials received bad news from the state earlier this week.
It seems that Governor Patrick unilaterally cut Payment In Lieu Of Taxes (“PILOT”) distributions by about 40 percent as a way to trim the state budget.
PILOT payments are the state’s way of compensating cities and towns for the tax revenue they miss out on because they can’t tax property owned by the state. State officials look at everything from state parks right down to salt sheds, and they apportion a designated pot of money to municipalities based on the amount of tax-exempt state-owned property in each community. The payments do not necessarily make up for the whole amount the municipality could collect in taxes if the property were owned privately, but they’re certainly better than nothing.
More to the point, cities and towns have come to depend on PILOT money as an important component of local aid. That’s why the Governor’s $10 million cut to this account is so painful. It’s made even worse by the fact that it’s coming mid-fiscal year, at a time when municipal budgets already have been long since approved.
In my district, Shrewsbury received about $45,000 less PILOT money than it was expecting, and Westborough’s cut was about $55,000. It’s important to remember that these communities, like many others across the state, already have been trimming their municipal budgets to the core (or beyond) to deal with challenging fiscal times. This deeper reduction in state aid will have real consequences for municipal services, whether it means eliminating an important position or scaling back a program that helps people. And it’s also worth noting that this cut comes on the heels of other local aid reductions earlier this year that forced municipal officials to come up with new ways of dealing with challenging fiscal issues on their own.
I think the Patrick Administration is doing a great disservice to people across the Bay State by cutting local aid. Citizens depend on municipal government to provide some of the most important public services that government delivers, including education, public safety, road maintenance, health safety, environmental conservation and libraries. Even if those services are supplemented by other levels of government, municipal government often delivers them more directly and efficiently, thereby improving quality of service and reducing taxpayer cost. Cutting local aid that cities and towns depend on to deliver these services is simply the wrong approach to dealing with our state’s fiscal problems, especially when our state has failed to enact cost-saving reforms and efficiencies within its own administrative operations.
I hope the Legislature will find a way to supplement these payments when we return to legislative sessions in January. Cities and towns are depending upon us to do so.
It seems that Governor Patrick unilaterally cut Payment In Lieu Of Taxes (“PILOT”) distributions by about 40 percent as a way to trim the state budget.
PILOT payments are the state’s way of compensating cities and towns for the tax revenue they miss out on because they can’t tax property owned by the state. State officials look at everything from state parks right down to salt sheds, and they apportion a designated pot of money to municipalities based on the amount of tax-exempt state-owned property in each community. The payments do not necessarily make up for the whole amount the municipality could collect in taxes if the property were owned privately, but they’re certainly better than nothing.
More to the point, cities and towns have come to depend on PILOT money as an important component of local aid. That’s why the Governor’s $10 million cut to this account is so painful. It’s made even worse by the fact that it’s coming mid-fiscal year, at a time when municipal budgets already have been long since approved.
In my district, Shrewsbury received about $45,000 less PILOT money than it was expecting, and Westborough’s cut was about $55,000. It’s important to remember that these communities, like many others across the state, already have been trimming their municipal budgets to the core (or beyond) to deal with challenging fiscal times. This deeper reduction in state aid will have real consequences for municipal services, whether it means eliminating an important position or scaling back a program that helps people. And it’s also worth noting that this cut comes on the heels of other local aid reductions earlier this year that forced municipal officials to come up with new ways of dealing with challenging fiscal issues on their own.
I think the Patrick Administration is doing a great disservice to people across the Bay State by cutting local aid. Citizens depend on municipal government to provide some of the most important public services that government delivers, including education, public safety, road maintenance, health safety, environmental conservation and libraries. Even if those services are supplemented by other levels of government, municipal government often delivers them more directly and efficiently, thereby improving quality of service and reducing taxpayer cost. Cutting local aid that cities and towns depend on to deliver these services is simply the wrong approach to dealing with our state’s fiscal problems, especially when our state has failed to enact cost-saving reforms and efficiencies within its own administrative operations.
I hope the Legislature will find a way to supplement these payments when we return to legislative sessions in January. Cities and towns are depending upon us to do so.
Friday, November 13, 2009
Thought of the Day - 11/13/09
There’s news in today’s papers that the Patrick administration is proposing to allow cities and towns across the state to put up cameras to catch people who run red lights at intersections.
This is an issue that has been circulating around the Legislature for a long time. Red light cameras would have obvious benefits for safety, and they would take some burden off direct enforcement.
But at the same time, there is evidence from other states that red light cameras are ineffective, harmful to privacy, or that they actually cause accidents in some cases. This story in today’s Boston Globe tells more about the pros and cons.
But the Globe story also suggests that Governor Patrick is making this proposal mainly as a way to allow cities and towns to raise money, and that worries me.
Even though I staunchly support cities and towns and want to find ways for them to improve their fiscal situation, I think it’s bad policy to enact laws that relate to public safety just as a way to increase revenue. It seems like the Governor wants to raise money with red light cameras, and if they happen to improve public safety at the same time, then that’s all the better. In my opinion, if we ultimately decide to allow red light cameras, then it should be based on a set of priorities that are the other way around. There are other ways to help cities and towns, like passing a municipal reform and relief bill that I filed that would give municipalities tools to cut costs like health care and pension costs.
What do you think? Do you think red light cameras would help or hurt public safety here in Massachusetts? Do you think they’re being proposed to make our roads safer, or just as another way to raise money? Please post your comments below. I’d love to hear from you.
This is an issue that has been circulating around the Legislature for a long time. Red light cameras would have obvious benefits for safety, and they would take some burden off direct enforcement.
But at the same time, there is evidence from other states that red light cameras are ineffective, harmful to privacy, or that they actually cause accidents in some cases. This story in today’s Boston Globe tells more about the pros and cons.
But the Globe story also suggests that Governor Patrick is making this proposal mainly as a way to allow cities and towns to raise money, and that worries me.
Even though I staunchly support cities and towns and want to find ways for them to improve their fiscal situation, I think it’s bad policy to enact laws that relate to public safety just as a way to increase revenue. It seems like the Governor wants to raise money with red light cameras, and if they happen to improve public safety at the same time, then that’s all the better. In my opinion, if we ultimately decide to allow red light cameras, then it should be based on a set of priorities that are the other way around. There are other ways to help cities and towns, like passing a municipal reform and relief bill that I filed that would give municipalities tools to cut costs like health care and pension costs.
What do you think? Do you think red light cameras would help or hurt public safety here in Massachusetts? Do you think they’re being proposed to make our roads safer, or just as another way to raise money? Please post your comments below. I’d love to hear from you.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Call to Action
Have you heard about plans for convicted terrorist Raymond Luc Levasseur to speak at UMass Amherst?
Governor Patrick has asked university officials not to allow the event to take place, but a group of faculty members reportedly have extended the invitation nonetheless.
I'm planning to send a letter to Governor Patrick later this week opposing the appearance on campus, and also asking the Governor to block additional taxpayer funds from being spent.
You can read a copy of the letter below. What do you think about this issue? Please leave me a comment to let me know. Or, better yet, if you oppose Mr. Levasseur's appearance at UMass Amherst, I urge you to call the Governor's office to let him know how you feel. The number is 617-725-4005.
Thanks!
Karyn
-------------------------------------------------------
November 10, 2009
His Excellency Deval Patrick
Governor of the Commonwealth
The State House, Room 360
Boston, MA 02133
Dear Governor Patrick:
According to published reports, UMass Amherst is proceeding with plans to allow an on-campus speech by Raymond Luc Levasseur. Mr. Levasseur is the convicted leader of a radical group linked to courthouse bombings, the murder of a police officer and the attempted assassination of two Massachusetts State Police troopers.
We oppose Mr. Levasseur's appearance on state property, and we understand that you do as well. While you say you have directed UMass officials not to allow the speech to take place, they apparently are not abiding by your instructions.
We think it is an insult to Massachusetts residents to have this speech occur at a publicly-funded facility, and we still prefer that all possible means be used to block this event. But, if you are unable to stop it from occurring, we are asking that you at least spare taxpayers the gross indignity of having to foot the bill for the event. We are asking that no extraordinary efforts be made to accommodate Mr. Levasseur's appearance on campus, and that the state limit its commitment to such ordinary measures as would be taken to protect student safety on campus. And specifically, we are asking that all additional costs associated with the event (added security, venue fees, and any other expenses) either be assumed by private groups responsible for the appearance or that they not be incurred in the first place.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Karyn E. Polito
[Other signatures pending]
Friday, October 30, 2009
Thought of the Day - 10/30/2009
There’s an interesting editorial in the Boston Herald today entitled, “State seeing double?”
The editorial talks about an economic development summit Governor Patrick sponsored earlier this week. One of the Governor’s plans is to create a new small-business loan program. But, as the Herald points out, there are already two other state programs doing the same thing.
The point of the editorial is that in these tough fiscal times, state government can’t afford to be duplicating its efforts. We need to take an inventory of existing state programs and overhaul them first before starting new initiatives.
I think that’s a good approach. Basically, we need to reset state government and take a fresh look at how we’re spending money, delivering services, etc. Having that sort of a master plan is critical if we’re going to come up with creative ways to get through this fiscal crisis.
What do you think? Please feel free to post a comment below to get the conversation started.
The editorial talks about an economic development summit Governor Patrick sponsored earlier this week. One of the Governor’s plans is to create a new small-business loan program. But, as the Herald points out, there are already two other state programs doing the same thing.
The point of the editorial is that in these tough fiscal times, state government can’t afford to be duplicating its efforts. We need to take an inventory of existing state programs and overhaul them first before starting new initiatives.
I think that’s a good approach. Basically, we need to reset state government and take a fresh look at how we’re spending money, delivering services, etc. Having that sort of a master plan is critical if we’re going to come up with creative ways to get through this fiscal crisis.
What do you think? Please feel free to post a comment below to get the conversation started.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Statement of Representative Karyn Polito on Budget Cuts Announced by Governor Patrick Today
With a budget gap that has now reached $600 million in Massachusetts, it appears that Governor Patrick has finally decided it is time do the necessary thing by making substantial cuts in state spending, while preserving local aid and protecting vulnerable citizens in our state.
These are not easy decisions to make, but the poor economy combined with years of overspending and overestimated revenues by state government is forcing our hand. And unfortunately, Massachusetts residents have already had to pay the price in increased taxes because we waited until now to make these spending reductions.
But now is not the time to place blame or point the finger. We should use the predicament in which we find ourselves now as a lesson for the future. Instead of being reactionary every time revenues go up or down, we need to reset the way Massachusetts government works and delivers core services. We need to have better foresight when it comes to our fiscal planning so we can set more reasonable benchmarks. We need to proactively work to streamline government operations, realize savings and efficiencies, and bring state employee benefits in line with the private sector. We need to be creative and inventive to identify innovative ways to better position our state for economic recovery and job creation.
These are not easy decisions to make, but the poor economy combined with years of overspending and overestimated revenues by state government is forcing our hand. And unfortunately, Massachusetts residents have already had to pay the price in increased taxes because we waited until now to make these spending reductions.
But now is not the time to place blame or point the finger. We should use the predicament in which we find ourselves now as a lesson for the future. Instead of being reactionary every time revenues go up or down, we need to reset the way Massachusetts government works and delivers core services. We need to have better foresight when it comes to our fiscal planning so we can set more reasonable benchmarks. We need to proactively work to streamline government operations, realize savings and efficiencies, and bring state employee benefits in line with the private sector. We need to be creative and inventive to identify innovative ways to better position our state for economic recovery and job creation.
Thought of the Day - 10/29/2009
According to today’s papers (Globe story, Herald story), Governor Patrick is poised to announce a series of budget cuts this afternoon that are designed to bridge an estimated $600 million budget gap this year.
Published reports indicate that everything could be on the table when the Governor makes these cuts, including deep reductions in spending on social service programs and cutbacks in local aid.
The Governor appears to be saying that he has no other choice but to make these cuts because furloughs of executive branch managers will not save enough money, and because state unions have been unwilling to make concessions to cut costs.
I think it’s necessary to make cuts in our state budget; in fact, I think that spending reductions are long overdue. But I disagree that balancing our budget should require us to provide less support to local services or to the most vulnerable people in our communities who are most in need of assistance. Those are the last places we should look. Instead, we should be focused on finding additional savings and efficiencies within the budget through reform.
Even with the Governor’s cuts, Massachusetts taxpayers still will be spending more than $26 billion a year to run state government. Cuts in administrative functions have been modest at best. Reforms also have been sparse, and what few have been implemented have taken too long to be effective. State payroll has continued to increase and new programs have continued to find their way into our spending plans. And in order to support this spending, Massachusetts taxpayers have been asked to pay more taxes and expect to receive fewer core government services. We need to do better.
I will be watching Governor Patrick’s announcement very carefully to see what happens in this latest round of cuts. I’ll post an update here later this afternoon to let you know what he says and what I think about it.
"What do you expect Governor Patrick to say this afternoon? What do you HOPE he'll say?" Please feel free to post a comment below.
Published reports indicate that everything could be on the table when the Governor makes these cuts, including deep reductions in spending on social service programs and cutbacks in local aid.
The Governor appears to be saying that he has no other choice but to make these cuts because furloughs of executive branch managers will not save enough money, and because state unions have been unwilling to make concessions to cut costs.
I think it’s necessary to make cuts in our state budget; in fact, I think that spending reductions are long overdue. But I disagree that balancing our budget should require us to provide less support to local services or to the most vulnerable people in our communities who are most in need of assistance. Those are the last places we should look. Instead, we should be focused on finding additional savings and efficiencies within the budget through reform.
Even with the Governor’s cuts, Massachusetts taxpayers still will be spending more than $26 billion a year to run state government. Cuts in administrative functions have been modest at best. Reforms also have been sparse, and what few have been implemented have taken too long to be effective. State payroll has continued to increase and new programs have continued to find their way into our spending plans. And in order to support this spending, Massachusetts taxpayers have been asked to pay more taxes and expect to receive fewer core government services. We need to do better.
I will be watching Governor Patrick’s announcement very carefully to see what happens in this latest round of cuts. I’ll post an update here later this afternoon to let you know what he says and what I think about it.
"What do you expect Governor Patrick to say this afternoon? What do you HOPE he'll say?" Please feel free to post a comment below.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)