by @BarryRafkind in Politics, Video
Posted on April 14, 2010 at 9:41 pm
Last Modified on April 16, 2010 at 11:37 am
loading…
On Tuesday evening, State Sen. Pat Jehlen sat down with Joe Lynch for his show “Greater Somerville” on SCAT to discuss the pending driving bill, the shrinking state budget, health care reform, and casino gambling. I just watched the show and took some notes from their conversation.
Greater Somerville – MA State Senator Patricia D. Jehlen with Joe Lynch
Driving Bill
- will be a very positive bill
- bans texting while driving, but favors banning anything except hands-free driving
- will require folks older than 75 to bring in a note from the doctor indicating any problems
- conference committee is still meeting
- didn’t like the idea of road testing b/c it’s unnecessary and expensive
- family/doctor/public safety who report an unsafe driver can not be held liable
State Budget
- this is the worst budget year we’ve ever faced
- people are resigned about cuts, feel lucky if they can keep what they had last year
- now, we have the longest wait-list in 35 years for elder home-care
- home-care is cost-effective, prevents falls and injuries that lead to expensive health care
- nursing homes are reducing long-term care and increasing short-term care
- National Health care Decisions day is coming up soon, meant to get people to think about end-of-life decisions
Health Insurance
- Joe: what’s the effect of insurance companies not being allowed to raise premiums?
- Pat: the insurance companies will need to negotiate with the health care providers
- Pat: the new national health care reform law will be good for insurance companies
- Pat: give Gov. Patrick credit for refusing the premium increases
State Budget
- Joe: state budget will have trickle-down effect
- Joe: cuts in municipal aid will result in more and higher parking tickets
- Joe: spoke with someone in T&P recently who explained the ticket appeals process – it is no longer possible to get a ticket forgiven by Alderman, now you need approval of city clerk John Long
- Joe: good news… East Somerville Community school will get its emergency funding… State Treasurer Tim Cahill said on the show that it was an emergency funding system to get the funding back to Somerville
Casino Gambling
- Speaker Deleo supports
- A third of the house changed their minds miraculously
- Senate Pres. Murray said she doesn’t like the idea of slot machines at race tracks, but Pat says she likes the idea of resort casinos
- Joe: A neighbor explained that if resort casinos are built, one needs to be near Boston to cater to folks coming in through the airports
- There are costs to the state when folks become gambling addicts or lose their savings
- Pat: the more safe-guards you have (against problem gambling) the less money you’ll make
- Pat; I knew a woman who became addicted to lottery tickets and almost became homeless…, you know that this is an industry that does cause gambling addiction, social problems, bankruptcy,suicide, … these are bad things… in other states, the state becomes addicted to the income
- Pat; Casinos are supposed to bring many benefits, but communities around them want money for mitigation… restaurants in surrounding communities will lose business
- Joe: Towns around Foxwoods asked for relief because of lost business
- Joe: Heard on a tv show : In all likelihood, it would be an Indian tribe that gets one or both licenses.
- Pat: Thinks that Indian tribes wouldn’t even need a license to build a casino
- Joe: Large corporations finance Indian casinos and pay the tribes
- Joe: Types of jobs are low-paying
- Pat: Those are real jobs, but they displace workers from higher-paying jobs
- Joe: Would you support a casino at Assembly Square? Pat: absolutely not.
- Pat: I think there will be a requirement of some sort for local approval. Since a casino doubles addiction in a 50 mile radius, I think there should be approval from surrounding communities who will be affected : local businesses, like in Worchester
Final Thoughts:
Pat: I supported Mike Albano in today’s special election
loading…
I understand that people become addicts to many things – gambling, smoking, drinking, shopping, sex, etc. But you cannot control EVERYONE! Not everyone becomes an addict. People have free will to do what they want, when they want to. There are those of us who are able to control our urges for many things. Please remember us, Pat, as you represent us too.
loading...
Janine, the fact is that while the costs will be high for those who cannot control their gambling urges, the costs will be even higher for those of us who can because we’ll be absorbing the social and financial costs of addiction. Sounds like fool’s gold to me.
From United to Stop Slots in MA :
loading...
Barry, please don’t cite sources like “United to Stop Slots”. It just makes your argument look silly to use a partisan organization.
The issue is – and I agree with Janine – the government already is taking over everything and making decisions for people. Gambling is legal now in most states – people are going to gamble. Some responsibly and some like fools.
The question is – should MA ignore that over 1 billion dollars of MA resident’s $$$$ now go to CT (Foxwoods/Mohegan)? Forget how much goes to other states. I’ve gambled in NV, LA, NY (NY has a full casino near Syracuse), CT, OK, NJ and in Europe. I find that gambling — and the whole adult entertainment (shows/fights/etc) — a great time. Always have… always will. So why shouldn’t I be allowed to sepnd those “entertainment” $$$s in my own state? I’m going to spend it — and I’d prefer that it comes back to me in some way (by less tax $$$$).
It’s nice that people want to nanny-state us and legislate what we can do, but it isn’t your business. Gambling is legal. Should be legal here.
loading...
Xumi, I guess your argument is the silly one since you’re wrong about USS being a partisan organization. From their About Us page :
Conveniently, this non-partisan organization also addresses the revenue myth you mentioned:
If you’d like to spend your gambling dollars the legal way in MA, try the lottery, although I’m not a fan of it, either
loading...
Barry, just because a site claims to be non-partisan doesn’t make it true. You should check out these folks and what they have to say. They’re non-partisan too.
http://www.jobsandgrowthtoday.com/
The ticker is over $2.3 BILLION. That is > than 2 BILLLLL-EEEEEEE-ON. That’s a lotta money!
What do you think of online gambling? People do that all the time. Trust me. Even Bawwww-ney likes it. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2008/07/13/unlikely_ace_for_online_gambling/
Pat, please back casinos — and not just slots. Full blown entertainment centers with shows, resorts, full table games (craps/blackjack/etc) – the whole nine yards.
loading...
Nice try Lynchie but you still could not get the Senator to tell us which way she will vote when the bill hits the Senate.
Will she fold to the will of senate president Murray, or just say no to jobs and revenue for Mass?
loading...
Given Sen. Jehlen’s strong anti-casino statements, I’d be very surprised if she didn’t vote against this fool’s gold.
loading...
Barry, NPR had a great commentary from an unemployed carpenter regarding casinos. I think Pat should look at that side of the coin too instead of focusing on gambling addiction and foreclosures. There are still 300,000 + people in MA who are unemployed and they are losing their houses, health insurance, etc. too. She focuses on one group and that is it and as one of her constituents, it is kind of sad.
loading...
Janine, thanks for alerting me to that WBUR story. [Commentary: The Promise Of Jobs Makes Gambling A Worthy Bet]
This is the comment I left there :
loading...
Barry, it’s easy to say “…I’d gladly pay higher taxes …” when you’re in the 47% that pays NO taxes, right? Most of us are already over-burdened with taxes – we can’t take any more. Don’t try to speak for us please.
If you want to pay more taxes voluntarily then you do know that you can, right? We have a two-tier income tax in this state, you know. You have the option of paying either at the standard rate of 5.3 percent, or at the old, higher 5.85 percent rate.
Have you ever filed at the higher rate? If not, why not? Make sure you check off to file at the higher rate. Otherwise, you’re just another limo liberal talking the talk, but not walking the walk.
loading...
Xumi, why do you wrongly think that I pay no taxes? When you go that far out on a limb, you’re bound to fall off. I assume you’re talking about income taxes, which I pay. But in case you mean all taxes, then I’d challenge you to find someone who really buys nothing, owns no property, and earns nothing and therefore owes no taxes.
Volunteering to pay more taxes will not generate enough revenue to afford the large infrastructure projects that will keep Bill and other construction workers employed. We need a progressive state tax code with higher rates for higher income levels.
loading...
Barry, LOL! You slay me, man, you absolutely slay me. I love your saying “…Volunteering to pay more taxes will not generate enough revenue…”… . So because – in your opinion – volunteering to pay more taxes does no good, we should then tax everyone across the board higher.
Since you’re one of the “progressive” folks who want higher taxes then why don’t you man up and volunteer to pay them? Every year – in this state – you’ve had the opportunity to and yet, you never have. Walk the walk, man, walk the walk. Don’t just talk the talk. Lead by example.
Oh and we already have a progressive tax…The personal income tax in Massachusetts has a flat 5.3 percent rate, but is still progressive in its application, due to provisions that reduce or eliminate income taxes on lower income people, and exclusions and deductions that have a greater relative impact on low and middle-income taxpayers.
loading...
Xumi, that’s exactly right, we need to raise taxes on the higher income earners. Me voluntarily paying higher taxes would have a negligible impact on the economy, so there’s no sense in me doing it. Even some wealthy people share my view. [See the Responsible Wealth Project]
loading...
Barry, my point is that the folks clamoring for higher taxes already have the opportunity to pay higher taxes, but – for some reason – none do.
Even if your neglible amount would do little – you would still be contributing to something you profess to want(higher taxes) and you would finally be walking the walk. Instead of reaching into my pocket – why don’t reach into yours first and show us how it’s done.
All I can say is…
I’m shocked, shocked to find that hypocrisy is going on in here!
loading...
Xumi, I’m arguing for a change in public policy (the way we raise and spend public funds), not for the individual right to pay more taxes, which I’m well aware I can do. It would be hypocritical of me if I were to say that everyone should voluntarily pay more taxes, and yet I still refused to do so, but that’s not what I’m suggesting. Yes, I could still pay higher taxes, but I don’t think it’s the best use of my money under the current system.
loading...