Candidate Q&A: Part 1

From Monday to Wednesday, we’re featuring House candidates’ thoughts on six questions posed to them. The responses from Democrat Steve DiNatale and Republican Edward Niemczura are presented unedited. Our brief analysis follows their answers. Remember, the election is next Tuesday, Nov. 7.

Tax cuts have dominated the political conversation this year. Do you think it’s prudent to cut taxes at this point? Which tax cut would be better to cut, the property tax or the income tax?

DiNatale: I certainly respect the wishes of the voters and I would not be opposed to the voted upon roll-back. I would also like to research what services would be impacted by such a roll-back and also examine possible elimination of excess spending.

If the roll-back was instituted I would also favor a graduated decrease toward 5.0% that would be tied to revenue growth i.e. increases in revenue would correspond to decreases in the percentage of income taxed.

If we can reach a predictable revenue-sharing partnership with cities and towns we will have the ability to see some form of property tax relief.

Niemczura: Yes, it's always prudent to cut taxes. This money is better placed in the hands of taxpayers who can invest it, and grow the economy and not used by Beacon Hill on more boondoggles, pet projects, and patronage jobs. The tax that needs to be cut right now is the state income tax, which the voters have already stated needs to come down back to 5%. Beacon Hill should be more responsive to voters when their will is made known. If cuts need to be made, lay off mid level managers and consultants, not rank and file state workers.

The income tax reduction to 5% was approved by a majority of voters. The Democratic controlled legislature has refused to honor the taxpayer’s decision. I will support all votes to return the income tax rate to 5%.

High property taxes reflect a number of problems in Massachusetts. The high cost of municipal and state employees, with retirement benefits more lucrative than those of France, the most Socialistic country in Europe, State employee insurance costs, and the over regulation of land use brought to the Commonwealth by the Democratic controlled legislature and radial special interest groups over individuals land use has created the housing cost crunch that prevent s your children from being able to afford housing. Reducing the number of State employees through automated computer processing, reform of the State pension system to 401K plans, eliminating the 80% of pay benefits and the passing of legislation that prevents Nepotism at all levels of State and Municipal government, and reform of over zealous regulation will help reduce expenses, lowering property taxes.

Our Thoughts: DiNatale seems a little more willing to roll back the income tax than he did back in September. Maybe it’s the difference in reading an answer instead of hearing it. We’re not surprised they both target the income tax cut. It’s easier to explain politically, and it’s a lot easier to make happen rather than creating a new system to decrease property taxes.


Cities and towns continue to struggle with their budgets, constrained by Prop 2 ½ and are desperate for more state aid. Even affluent communities pass essentially annual overrides to cover expenses. How can the state ease the financial pinch on cities and towns? Should Prop 2 ½ be repealed or amended?

DiNatale: I would retain Prop 2.5. It is an effective protection for taxpayers. The state needs to enter into a predictable revenue-sharing partnership with cities and towns. I would support the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation recommendation that 40% of the revenues from corporate, sales, and income taxes be returned to cities and towns in the form of local aid.

Niemczura: By earmarking 40% of all state revenue for the cities and towns so that they have a predictable level of funding and can make multi year budgets. Beacon Hill tends to keep any money they get their hands on. There should be a set aside plan so that a certain percentage of money is automatically allocated to cities and towns. The municipal level is where the most visible service of government is rendered. Reform of pay and benefits for State employees, elimination of rampant nepotism in State hiring and State employee pay schedules comparable to the private sector will lower costs and reduce the need for higher and higher taxes, the vast majority of which go to pay salaries. My opponent will not implement these reforms because he is tied to the State employee benefits free for all system in his present job and wants to preserve it, not reform it. This will require taxpayers to pay more and more to the ruling class.

Our Thoughts: Interesting move by Niemczura right at the end there to tie DiNatale to the state’s pension system. Of course, Niemczura would eligible for the pension if elected. This 40 percent business will be Christy Mihos’ legacy, but this would demand a total overhaul of state government, including laying off thousands of people and shutting down programs that would be picked up by the municipalities. Is it more efficient for 351 cities and towns to run programs currently handled by the state? We need a ton more details on these 40 percent plans.