Aims to inform public on the substantial costs and minute benefits of the legislation
Earlier this week, the latest educational mailing from the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance began arriving in homes across the Commonwealth. The piece highlights lawmaker support for H2810, the leading Carbon Tax proposal making its way through the Massachusetts legislature.
“Massachusetts has the most generous taxpayers in the country, but $755 a year is a lot even for them. For that kind of outlay, they expect a significant benefit. You just don’t see that with this bill. They deserve to know that,” said Paul D. Craney, spokesman for the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance.
The cost/benefit analysis cited by Craney is the result of a study commissioned by the Fiscal Alliance Foundation and carried out by the Beacon Hill Institute. The study found that the bill, including the rebate, would cost the average Massachusetts household $755 in the first year alone. This figure would rise to just over $1200 per household by the fifth year of implementation. This tax increase would just yield a .0035% reduction in global CO2 emissions, but is also projected to result in the loss of over 18,000 jobs throughout the state.
“This isn’t some tax on rich millionaire’s or multinational manufacturers. This is a tax on the essentials of life in New England; it’s on the gasoline for your car. It’s a tax on the oil or natural gas for your furnace. People don’t buy these things voluntarily, and they’re going to have to make some difficult choices if this law gets on the books. It’s an exercise in shrinking incomes for the purpose of redistributing them and yields almost no benefit for the climate” continued Craney.
The advocacy campaign, which is landing in the mailboxes, focuses on the big-ticket items that working families could potentially purchase with their lost earnings. A copy of the piece is available here.
“The trend both on Beacon Hill and nationally right now is to promise people everything and completely ignore any associated costs. Well, nothings free. This bill would cost a lot of people a great deal. Whether it’s an extra tank of heating oil, a new phone, or even their job—residents need to think critically about the bill and let their lawmakers know their opinions,” he finished.