Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Cacr 12 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senator proposes asking voters to require supermajority for broad‑based taxes; committee questions municipal impacts and definition of 'broad‑based'
Summary
Sen. Tim Lang asked the committee to put CACR 12 to voters so the General Court would have to win a supermajority before enacting new broad‑based taxes; members questioned definitions, potential unfunded mandates, and whether fees are covered (answer: taxes only).
Sen. Tim Lang told the House Ways and Means committee on April 16 that CACR 12 is a simple question to take to voters: should a supermajority (two‑thirds) of the General Court be required before the legislature enacts any new broad‑based tax.
"We're asking the voter whether or not... a super majority bipartisan, bicameral solution is necessary to make this work on such a big scale," Lang said, framing the measure as returning a major fiscal test to the electorate.
Members pressed him on details. Representative Opel asked whether giving voters the choice on a constitutionally significant design was always appropriate; Lang said the voters are the directly impacted party and can make the decision. Representative Breyer asked why two‑thirds was chosen instead of another supermajority (for example 60%); Lang said the number could be adjusted but he recommended two‑thirds as a clear threshold.
Several members raised fiscal and municipal concerns. Representative Schamberg asked whether the amendment would prevent the state from responding to emergencies or shift burdens to local property owners; Lang replied that local governments retain control of their spending and that constitutional protections against unfunded mandates remain in force. Representative Murphy asked whether the provision would also touch business taxes; Lang said the resolution applies to "new broad‑based tax" and not to existing tax bases, and that existing revenue options remain available.
Critics called the proposal a political maneuver; Representative Elmi called it a "political stunt" and warned of consequences if the legislature abdicated responsibility for revenue choices. Lang replied it is good governance to require broader bipartisan agreement for decisions that impose a broad burden on taxpayers.
The committee closed the public hearing; Lang said an amendment to CACR 12 may be filed and could require a subsequent public hearing.
