How taxes and open road tolls could become an EZ-Pass for GOP candidates in 2014

What if your local cable provider jacked your monthly bill, telling you that they needed the money to provide you better service? And, what if just a few weeks later, you found out that they were actually spending half of the money to make it easier for them to bill you, instead of doing anything to improve your cable service?

We're guessing you'd be upset. But, then again, if there wasn't another cable company in town, or if there was one but you didn't think they offered a better option, would you switch or stay?

In a nutshell, that's exactly the conundrum facing Massachusetts voters these days. And, if Massachusetts Republicans don't see this as a terrific opportunity to show voters how they could run the state better, it will be a huge wasted opportunity.

Just a few weeks ago, Democratic state lawmakers enacted a $500 million tax increase allegedly aimed at fixing certain transportation problems here in Massachusetts.

The transportation finance package included a hefty increase in the state's gas tax, now 24 cents a gallon. Making matters worse, Democratic lawmakers also for the first time added automatic escalators to the gas tax so it would rise each year along with the rate of inflation starting in 2015. It also included a highly-controversial move to levy a sales tax on certain technology services, and it increased the state excise on the sale of cigarettes by $1 to $3.51 per pack. And, as usual, we were told this money was needed to "fix our state's crumbling infrastructure" and to forestall MBTA fair hikes.

Just days later, the Turnpike announced that it's reinstating the tolls on the Western Turnpike. And now, today, the Turnpike is announcing that it's going to spend $250 million constructing open road tolling apparatus along the Turnpike.

So, let's put this all together and boil it down to its simplest form: The state is going to collect an additional $500 million from Massachusetts taxpayers, half of which is going to be spent building a new system to allow the state to collect even more money from Massachusetts drivers at the speed of light and track your travels with precision.

This sort of nightmare could only happen in a state like Massachusetts. These taxes and tolls aren't just bad, they're truly obnoxious and offensive. It's literally highway robbery. What's worse, it's exactly the sort of "Beacon Hill shell game" Governor Patrick led Democrats to campaign against when he first took office.

Yet, the very same people who levy these higher taxes keep getting returned to office, while the GOP (as the party offering an anti-tax message) sees its numbers dwindling.

Why?

Running for office is essentially a job interview where the voters are the employer and the candidate is the recruit.

Any successful applicant for any job needs three basic things to land the position – you need to show you're qualified, you need to be likable, and you need to convince your employer you could do a better job than anyone else could.

Individual candidates stumble for many different reasons, some personal, but generally it's the third part of that test that Massachusetts Republicans mess up. Republicans consistently fail to convince Massachusetts voters that they could do a better job actually running Massachusetts (that is, solving the problems that actually confront us) than the Democrats could – even if Democrats mess up, and even if Republican candidates seem highly-qualified and if the conservative principles they expound seem logical and ring true with taxpayers.

Let's face it. Nobody actually likes paying higher taxes. But, people also don't want crumbling roads any more than they want under-performing schools or ineffective health care. As misguided as we think Democrats may be by trying to raise taxes to solve every problem, Republicans will not beat them unless they offer opposing conservative plans that are credible, viable and sufficient, or unless they convince voters that the solutions to certain problems simply should not be found in the public sector. Voters will always vote for an expensive solution over no solution at all – and when the GOP fails to offer real solutions to problems, that's how you end up with a blue state like Massachusetts.

Trust us. Even in this supposedly true-blue state, Massachusetts voters will support a tax-cutting GOP reformer over a tax-and-spend liberal Democrat any day of the week – but ONLY if they think the GOP candidate is qualified, likable, and that they can actually get the job done. And, GOP candidates can only prove the last element by proving that they have conservative plans which are credible, viable, and sufficient to address the problems on voters minds, or that voters would actually be better off by having problems addressed outside of government instead of by the government itself. For example, instead of just (rightfully) trashing the gas tax, Republicans need to come forward with a real plan for addressing all of our state's transportation needs. There are lots of smart people in the Republican Party, and we have no doubt that plan is sitting out there somewhere. It just needs to be brought forward to the voters.

So, if you're a GOP candidate thinking about running for office in 2014, here's our advice. Put on your thinking cap. And don't just trash the other side. Sure, talk about how they're wrong, but offer good ideas and a real alternative in the process. Massachusetts needs a strong Republican Party again. Stand up. Be a leader. Get the job done.

Fed up with the gas tax increase? We have your talking points.

The three-cent-a-gallon increase to the Massachusetts gas tax which went into effect today is giving a lot of Bay Staters, well, gas.

As well it should. Three cents a gallon adds up to a lot of money for beleaguered consumers who are already paying a lot at the pump to drive to work and school. Not to mention the fact that the price of that so-called "stay-cation" (you know, the term politicians use to make us feel better about taking a short road trip instead of spending money on an expensive family vacation, since we have no money) just went up.

But, beyond the obvious objections to raising the gas tax, there are several under-reported facts about the gas tax increase which you should know about, particularly if you're thinking about running for office next year against an incumbent Beacon Hill pol. Or, maybe you're just a Republican activist who needs some talking points for your next debate at the water cooler.

Here are your talking points:

1. If someone says to you, "It's only three cents a gallon...":

It's true, the gas tax went up from 21.5 to 24 cents a gallon today. But the real pinch could come starting in January 1, 2015. For the first time in history, the gas tax will be indexed to inflation. It remains to be seen what those increases will be, but at current rates, it's entirely possible that additional increases of two to three cents a gallon will be reality ANNUALLY. And, there's more bad news… while politicians did include a floor for the tax (it can never dip back below 21.5 cents a gallon, if it goes down at all – and by our reading of the language, it will never go down), there is no cap on how high the tax can go.

2. When they say, "Don't worry, we'll fight 'em on the next increase instead...":

With regard to the automatic increase, there are two procedural points to note. First, because of the indexing used, it won't take a subsequent act or recorded vote of the legislature anymore to increase the gas tax in the future. Those increases will be automatic. This is similar to the way Beacon Hill decided to vote itself pay raises every year. Second, the automatic increases are slated to take effect starting on January 1, 2015 – curiously, just a few weeks after the next statewide and legislative elections take place. As Beacon Hill power plays go, this is a pure act of genius. It's also an unfortunate trend that Beacon Hill pols are using to avoid responsibility while at the same time punishing Massachusetts residents for economic progress. Put that in your gas tank and pump it.

3. When people tell you, "At least cities and towns are exempt from paying the tax on police and fire vehicles... They need all the money they can get to keep us safe...":

Au contraire. As noted by DOR on its Web site, "Very few entities are exempt from the excise due on fuel used on MA highways. Exempt entities include: the Federal Government, the Regional Transit Authorities and three state agencies exempted by their enabling statutes (the Water Resources Authority, the Port Authority and the MBTA)." Noticeably absent from this list: city and town vehicles. So, where will cities and towns get the money to pay for this tax increases? One guess – taxpayers.

LATE ADDITION - Here's one more little tidbit for you... At current MA gas prices of about $3.71 a gallon, the state gas tax works out to about 7.3% (24 cents out of a price of $3.286, which does not include the state tax or the federal $0.184 tax), which is a full percentage point more than the state sales tax.

As our identity slips away, we long for leadership to turn things around

This week, most everyone in and around Boston sat glued to their televisions, watching as ex-Patriot Aaron Hernandez was led away in handcuffs and arraigned on murder charges.

This surreal event marked the latest in a series of insults to the psyche of Bostonians -- a final punch in the gut after a series of disappointing and tragic events over the past year that cut at the very heart of our identity as a community.

How will we get Boston back? What will it take, and who will get us there?

Boston has always been revered as the 'Hub of the Universe', a city with a robust heart and soul. We pride ourselves on our revolutionary underpinnings, which make the Freedom Trail more than just bricks on a sidewalk. And we have adopted this patriotic spirit to carve out for ourselves a unique identity, a set of common bonds and experiences that define us and make us all quintessentially Bostonian, whether we live inside city limits or not.

Consider what it means to be from Boston.

We start every year with a boisterous First Night celebration, which thaws Old Man Winter's frosty bite with the warmth of community and the arts. For the next few months, we watch the snow fall outside as we follow the fortunes of the Bruins and Celtics, hoping this will be the year to hoist a new banner. We mark the time left until Spring by counting down the days until Spring Training and Opening Day. Then, it's Marathon Monday, a day when we're reminded of our patriotic roots at Lexington and Concord, and a day when virtually every one of us knows someone who's running or volunteering, whether it's for athleticism or charity. A few more weeks of swatting mosquitoes and dusting off the barbecue, and it's time to take in a few fireworks and the Pops on the Esplanade. We hit the beach for a few weeks, then it's time for every Bostonian to know one critical number -- how many games separate the Sox and Yankees in the race for the pennant. Soon, the kids are back to school, and it's time to rake leaves, pick apples, and grab a warm cider or two as we watch the Pats and prepare for Columbus Day in the North End, Plymouth-inspired Thanksgiving, and the Enchanted Village at the holidays. And then, as we prepare for another First Night, the cycle continues.

We love Boston, and these events make us who we are. They define us as a community, uniquely. Nowhere else in the world will you find a similar cycle. It's what makes our city special.

And, lately, it feels like it's all slipping away.

The Boston we encounter on January 1, 2014 will be fundamentally different from the city we have grown to know and love.

The Marathon is forever changed due to tragedy. Our Fourth of July won't be telecast nationwide, and First Night is on financial thin ice. Sports are tainted by too much chicken and beer in the bullpen and athletes behaving badly (and, in the case of Hernandez, perhaps even very badly), not to mention the fact that Rivers, Pierce and Garnett are gone and the Bruins lost the Cup.

Then, there are the changes coming to our other favorite sport - politics. For the first time in decades, there won't be a Menino in City Hall. Together with the absence of Ted Kennedy and John Kerry in the Senate, this makes our legendary political state culture look a lot less dynastic. Tim Murray's already gone, and Deval Patrick will soon start his last year in office.

Our roads and bridges continue to crumble away. Meanwhile, Beacon Hill keeps spinning its wheels over the state budget, taxes hikes and reforms to programs like welfare and probation.

Maybe our newest Patriot, Tim Tebow, isn't the only one who should spend time on bended knee this year. It seems like all of us Bostonians have a lot to worry about.

The truth is that Boston is, and forever will be, the Hub of the Universe. We will get through these tough times and shine again. We have no doubt; we refuse to lose faith in this city and its people. But, we also believe in the need for strong political leadership to keep us going and help us get there.

Who will be our next bold leader in a state where bold political leadership is historically almost as commonplace as 'lobstah and buttah in the summahtime'?

Who will fix it all? Who will step into the breach and lead us? Who will be our next Mayor? Governor? Will people challenge our incumbent congressmen, who with their colleagues share an approval rate of about ten percent, or will voters accept the status quo as good enough? (That's what they did this week by electing Ed Markey.) Will new leaders flock to Beacon Hill, or will they sit on the sidelines and watch?

Next year will mark a new beginning for Boston. As old traditions change or fade away, it will be a fresh identity as the City tries to pick itself up, dust itself off, and try to redefine itself. For Boston and the rest of Massachusetts to stop crumbling and succeed, we need dynamic, capable leaders to help us move forward.

And, so, we begin our search for new leadership in 2014.

Murray's out. What happens if Patrick follows?

Call us crazy, but in our humble opinion, Lt. Gov. Tim Murray's sudden resignation to take a $200K job with the Worcester Chamber of Commerce just doesn't pass the sniff test.

Why would the Chamber shell out so much cash for someone who is known more for his driving record than his ability to get things done on Beacon Hill? More to the point, why would the Chamber appoint someone as its Executive Director when that person will specifically be barred by law from lobbying the administration until after his "cooling off period" is done?

Something's up. And, just letting our imaginations run wild, we think it must have something to do with the future of the current administration and its head, Governor Patrick.

Which leads us to this important question: What happens if Patrick were to leave, too? After all, he himself has been widely rumored to be under serious consideration for a post with the Obama Administration, including perhaps filling Attorney General Holder's shoes at some point.

Massachusetts law has no provision for the appointment of a Lieutenant Governor when that office is vacant, which means both offices would be unfilled and the top job would pass to Secretary of the Commonwealth Bill Galvin until January 2015.

Here's our prediction – Odds are that Patrick will leave, but Galvin won't be Governor.

Let's face it. The Legislature can't help itself in these situations. Beacon Hill politicians love to fill vacancies. It's a great way for connected people to get a job. Heck, the only thing they seem to love more is getting people a job over at Probation (and we all know how that goes...).

We predict some intrepid legislator who's willing to "take one for the team," or perhaps even the Governor himself, will introduce legislation in the next few days to allow for the appointment of a Lieutenant Governor in the case of a vacancy in that office. And, despite the fact we're not even sure that would be constitutional, we expect it will probably sail right through. After all, it would make sense to have the seat filled, right?

Playing all of this through to its logical conclusion, there is a real possibility Massachusetts Democrats will be able to pave the way for someone – someone who most likely doesn't already hold statewide office and who was not selected by voters for an executive job – to be appointed acting Lieutenant Governor, and then acting Governor, and to thereby be the favorite for the job heading into the 2014 election cycle. Our guess is that Tim Murray didn't work for Massachusetts Democrats in this scenario, so he was ushered somewhere safe to open up the way for someone else.

Sound far-fetched? Perhaps. But, at least give us this much – as of this time yesterday, who really would have predicted that Tim Murray would start next week pulling down $200K a year at the Worcester Chamber of Commerce? In Massachusetts politics, expect the unexpected.

No matter what, if we were Republicans on Beacon Hill, we'd want to read this year's final budget very carefully to make sure an appointment provision doesn't magically appear. Republicans should vigorously oppose any such plan.