Obviously we would have liked to see economic growth in MA last quarter, especially considering the national growth @ 3+%. However, that seems to be partly because we haven't suffered quite as badly as places like, say, Michigan.
UMass Dartmouth economic analyst Michael Goodman said it is not as bad as it looks. He co-edited the MassBenchmarks report and said much of the growth nationally was boosted by Cash for Clunkers and the first time homebuyer tax credit.
“The states that are much more dependent on auto manufacturing and have had much more difficult housing markets benefited disproportionately,” Goodman said.
Going through massive cutbacks while relatively insulating chapter 70 and local aid would be a remarkable achievement ... politically. But, as has been explained to me, you really only have two pots of money: Cities and towns, and social safety net. So even as we're not cutting schools as much as we might have, we are putting more homeless people on the streets -- straight up.
Here's urging the legislature to find the money (revenue) to keep programs -- especially those that save money in the long term. Here's urging the public employee unions to take the furlough, share the sacrifice and save more of their own jobs.
CBO says House bill reduces the deficit, in the near and long terms; covers 96% of the public by 2019. Do the moderate Dems in the Senate have any talking points left?
Will it "bankrupt the country", per Landrieu? No.
Per Lieberman, is it "asking for trouble ... [in re] the national debt"? No.
Evan Bayh ... I don't know what that dude wants.
I mean, I understand that some Senators feel that they need to be perceived as pushing back on something perceived as "liberal" -- not because it's bad policy, or even that they understand it at all, but just for positioning. I get it. But at some point you just have to say that your concerns have been addressed, and basta.
