Election Year Vote or Sincere Vote?

Those that read incumbent State Representative, James J. Dwyer’s most recent Legislative Update might be perplexed by his most recent position on Massachusetts’s new alcohol tax.

Yes, Mr. Dwyer voted to impose the alcohol tax last year.

During last year’s budget debate, the Massachusetts Legislature, voted to impose the new 6.25% sales tax in addition to the alcohol excise tax, which subjects alcohol to double taxation. Mr. Dwyer voted to impose the alcohol tax first as an amendment to the budget and then when he voted for the budget.

In Mr. Dwyer’s January Legislative Update, he said that he voted for the alcohol tax because it was in a “consolidated amendment” and attached to the local aid amendment. Consolidated amendments bundle together approximately 25-30 different topics, resulting in one “consolidated amendment.” However, Mr. Dwyer voted to allow this “consolidated amendment” practice to continue rather than debate and vote on each amendment individually. Furthermore, upon reading the House Journal, I saw no local aid consolidated amendments that included the alcohol tax. The amendment dealing with the alcohol tax was withdrawn before a vote. The House did not vote on the issue of the alcohol tax until it was part of the final budget, which Mr. Dwyer supported.

On November 18, 2009, Mr. Dwyer voted for a so-called fiscal stability bill. This bill rejected the repeal of the new alcohol tax and the roll back of the state sales tax from 6.25% to 5% while adding an additional $30 million in off-budget spending.

In January, Mr. Dwyer discussed the damage the alcohol tax imposed on small business owners, but took no responsibility for his vote to impose the tax.

Currently, Mr. Dwyer is acting as if he never voted to impose or keep the alcohol tax. His most recent statements in his Legislative Update catch you unaware when he now says that this double taxation on alcohol is unfair. Mr. Dwyer never takes responsibility for his vote in favor of the tax despite the unfairness of the double taxation of the alcohol. Nor does he mention that funding for alcoholism services could be found elsewhere without imposing this new tax.

Mr. Dwyer is trying to rewrite his record. Unfortunately for Mr. Dwyer, he cannot rewrite the wrong votes he cast nor can he undo the damage his votes caused to businesses. Apparently, in Mr. Dwyer’s eyes, double taxation of alcohol was not unfair last year nor were there damaging effects to businesses the first time he voted for the tax.

The only thing that changed in this past year to make Mr. Dwyer act as if he can rewrite his record is the fact that it is an election year and incumbents, especially those that voted to increase your taxes are in danger.

As Mr. Dwyer’s opponent, I pledge to fight for real reform on Beacon Hill and to fight against new tax increases. I stand for representing the people and not myself or the House Leadership.

Mr. Dwyer has already shown us how he will vote when he is unopposed and unaccountable. I will be on your side and fight tax increases regardless of whether it is an election year. To learn more about me and my campaign, please visit my website at http://www.karafratto.com.