Skip to comments.Romney oversaw millions in fee hikes as Massachusetts governor (August, 2007 Article)
Posted on 04/27/2012 12:15:57 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
BOSTON --When Mitt Romney wanted to balance the Massachusetts budget, the blind, mentally retarded and gun owners were asked to help pay.
The Republican managed to slash spending to eliminate a deficit pegged at $3 billion, but he also proposed or presided over a far-ranging series of fee hikes -- a strategy that allowed him to maintain the no-new-taxes stance he now boasts about as he runs for president.
In all, then-Gov. Romney proposed creating 33 new fees and increasing 57 others -- enough, he said, to pull in an extra $59 million for the cash-strapped state.
Horseback riding instructors, prisoners, those seeking training to combat domestic violence and used car shoppers were asked to dig a little deeper.
Romney and Democratic lawmakers ended up approving hundreds of millions in higher fees and fines, making it more expensive to use an ice skating rink, register a boat, take the bar exam, get a duplicate driver's license, file a court case, install underground storage tanks, sell cigarettes or alcohol, comply with air quality rules and transport hazardous waste.
A survey of states by the National Conference of State Legislatures found Massachusetts led the nation during Romney's first year, raising fees and fines by $501 million. New York was second with $367 million. Nine other states raised fees and fines by more than $100 million.
Romney campaign spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom said some of the fees that kicked in during Romney's first year had been approved before he became governor. He said the fees approved during Romney's first year totaled $260 million.
That doesn't include an additional $140 million in what Romney described as business tax "loophole closings" approved that year, the vast majority recommended by Romney.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
Pro Øbama, huh? How long will this tantrum last?
And the Romneybots wonder why I plan to write Sarah Palin for POTUS this November instead of voting for this Progressive (aka collectivist) clown.
Yes, Romney has said that he calls himself a Progressive and does not like the Pubbie label.
And on the other hand we have a candidate who is somewhat more liberal than your rarified standards would allow.
Something tells me you're going to have to change your FR user ID after the election, if Obama wins.
To what purpose? You must be a shill for Obama since you seem to be continuing your 2008 act.
Joined in 2007 and trashed McCain. This is an Old Tired Act. I'd rather have someone other than Romney but missing the chance to vote against Obama is treason.
look, romney is crappola but at least he isn’t some shufflebutt marxist punk ass black panther loving America hating kenyan./
Fee hikes???? They were TAX HIKES!
Thanks for these threads
there cant be too much exposure of The Secret Life of Willard Mitty
for those who dont know or dont remember...
Raising fees is sometimes a very conservative move. Think about it. Who should be paying: the user (beneficiary) of a service, or the general public through taxation.
The normal conservative approach, also favored by libertarians; and the most market-based and efficient is for the USER to PAY. This puts costs where they belong: on the beneficiary. You visit a museum, for example, why should someone in another part of the state be paying for what you enjoy? You register a car, why should someone else pay? You need a building permit, why should someone else pay?
User pays brings a bit of market discipline into play. The user can always choose not to make the deal. But if it is covered by a tax, there is no escaping.
Government bureaucracies prefer to be paid by the tax rolls. Then their performance does not have to be very good. They have no customers, only captive taxpayers, wh are modern-day serfs.
The post office is another example of user paying, after the reforms of some decades back. It has worked very well. US mail is better than almost all postal services of other countries in the world, and it is cheaper. It is even cheaper than Canada, if you check the rates. Now they are in trouble, because people have found that new technology provides cheaper and faster communication. We probably can cut back on post offices.
Note that it is the unions and the left which want to plow billions into supporting the post office, moving back away from the user pays principle.
Students and their families should be paying their own education costs, in my ideal world. Then education would offer more choice, cheaper tuition, and would move more quickly into improved technology. Instead, we have an education bubble of mammoth proportions, unrestrained tuition hikes by colleges, foolishly luxurious campuses (more like country clubs), and students who hang around in the academic world when they should be getting a productive life.
There is no such thing as a free lunch. Someone has to pay. User should pay.
Now, as far a the matter of presidential politics goes, any dope can see that this is now a race between Romney and the dastardly incumbent. We had a find array of aspirants, but the race for the nomination is over. Is that not obvious?
Then make up your mind. Romney may not be your favorite candidate. He is nonetheless worlds better than the unmentionable incumbent. Romney is also a much nicer person. He will be endorsed by all his former Republican opponents.
Make up your mind. If you dont support Romney this summer and fall, you will be preferring the dismantling of the Republic by a life-long radical, virtually a communist. There is no way that the would be a good thing. Acting stupid does not demonstrate superior dedication to your principles.
Please keep in mind the picture of 0 leaning forward and telling Medvedev that he will have more of a free hand after the election. The current incumbent in that moment was caught telling a truth: he will have more of a free hand if we don’t stop him, and then he and his friends can work their plans almost unimpeded. Do you wish to see that?
I’d rather vote for Gingrich than Romney, but he won’t be the nominee. Besides, Gingrich would never win against Obama. The bottom line is, would you rather have Obama or Romney? Whatever you might say about Romney’s liberal policies, he probably won’t nominate Lawrence Tribe to the Supreme Court.
Sarah Palin is supporting Mitt.
She doesn’t want your vote, she’s not running.
If Mitt turns in the Elder Bush .... that is still a much much better fate than we have with the current president. We won’t actually witness the destruction our country by default... damn the principles save the republic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.