Will Brownsberger -- State Representative, Democrat, 24th Middlesex District

In April, the House, with leadership support, passed two big steps in the right direction on financial transparency. The Senate, during budget debate, approved roughly the same measures, making their final passage highly likely.

I would support this law change if it were subject to a vote of the people consistent with the spirit of Proposition 2.5. As written right now, there is no such provision for a local electoral vote and I expect to vote against the change. I will make my final decision after listening to debate on the floor.

Last week, I voted with a surprisingly small minority to curtail the state’s film tax credit, which was expanded under the leadership of former speaker Sal DiMasi. Mike Widmer, the President of the Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation, has stated that “All the evidence shows that it is a very costly tax credit with minimal economic impact, [...]

I voted this afternoon for the FY2010 budget which passed with 110 votes in the House and 31 in the Senate, in both branches more than the 2/3 needed to override a possible veto.

Perhaps the main things to underline at this stage are: (a) nothing at all is settled yet about the budget, reform or revenue; (b) all the major players endorse the principle of reform before revenue and are trying to do the right thing.

Even with the sales tax increase, the budget will sustain deep cuts and Massachusetts will have a roughly average tax burden compared to other states. The increase will fund local aid, Big Dig debt and limited restorations of key programs.

A proposal to raise the personal income tax exemption and simultaneously raise the rate — so as to make the income tax more progressive — has merit, but it is not politically viable at this time.

An outline of the financial issues that will be front and center throughout the coming legislative session.

Most feedback to me has been overwhelmingly supportive of the gas tax — simple, fairer than high tolls, environmentally sound, definitely needed, a broad-based mechanism to fund a broadly-used commonwealth asset.

A conversation is developing about the gas tax and also about how to protect low and middle-income tax payers from additional financial stress.

The major elements of the emerging House approach to the budget are essentially the same as in the Governor’s proposal, except that, instead of casino revenues, the House proposes to levy a cigarette tax.

The Governor’s proposal for closing the gap consists of the following items — roughly speaking 1/3 savings, 1/3 new revenues and 1/3 use of reserves.

The answer appears to be Yes in the sense that we face needs that considerably exceed revenue as we prepare the 2009 budget and look out over the next few years. 

Although specific quantities are hard to predict even one year out, and the uncertainties multiply as one looks further, it seems fair to say that the state cannot meet any of its presently well-identified major unmet needs without making big changes — either in spending priorities or in broad-based tax revenues.

Taxes, fees, lottery profits and grants from the federal government comprise the bulk of the available revenue for budgeting.