Mon, 09 Aug 2010 15:39:44 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/ Matt Patrick Site Admin en-us http://www.mattpatrick.org/images/logo.gif http://www.mattpatrick.org/ info@mattpatrick.org http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=97 Hello, Matt,  I have a suggestion regarding automatically granting American citizenship to children who are born here of illegal parents. I feel these children should be CONCEIVED here as well as born here. The mother must prove she has been living in the United States for the 10 months before the birth of her child. Also, I would not grant American citizenship to the child until the mother applies for and receives citizenship for herself. Thank you for reading this! R.T. Dear R.T., Thanks for writing. I don't have anything to do with immigration because it is all Federal Law and I don't think states should be making their own laws on immigrants because you will have 50 different laws. I believe John F. Kennedy had the right idea with the Alliance for Progress in Latin America. For a time we were building nations to make them stronger economically so they would have the jobs that kept them in their countries. After Kennedy, the Alliance for Progress fell by the wayside and instead we started sending all of our jobs to Mexico with our industry which of course became nonunion jobs. Our industries continued to pay the Mexicans dirt wages to work in demeaning and often life threatening conditions. Who won? The rich who let their money earn more money for them. We now have the biggest gap between rich and poor than any other developed nation...only a few steps ahead of Mexico. The top tax bracket used to be 91% in the 1950s when we had the largest growth in the middle class in the U.S. It wasn't until Reagan's free market theories went into effect with tax cuts for the rich and anti union and anti regulatory policies that we started losing middle class families and seeing widespread homelessness. CEOs in America now earn more than 367 times what the average working stiff earns in the US. That is the highest of all developed nations in which CEOs average about 40 times the average wage of workers in Europe and Japan. In the 1940s through 1970s, US CEOs only earned about 40 times the average workers wages. Unions played a big part in keeping CEOs honest and their salaries at reasonable levels but their numbers and the industries they worked in have shrunk substantially due to Republican free market policies that, by the way, recently gave us this current recession. If all workers had kept up to the increase in CEOs salaries we would be making about $125,000 a year on average. Let me ask you this. Would you break the law if there was no other way to feed your kids?  Don't let this right wing bull !@#$ about immigrants change the real subject that should be asked about any candidate that runs for office. Will they vote against union organizing and for free market, anti regulatory laws? Will they vote to stop the tax credits for moving industry out of our nation? Will they let Wall Street Bankers continue to conjure up ways to steal money from hard working people who only hope to have a decent retirement from their investments?  Matt Mon, 09 Aug 2010 15:39:44 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=96 Rep. Patrick and Colleagues Push Feds on PACE Boston Rep. Patrick and 108 colleagues sent a letter today pushing Federal law makers to support legislation that would force FHFA, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to adopt standards that support PACE. Property Assessed Clean Energy, PACE is a program enabling cities and towns to acquire funding through bonds to help residents finance two types of improvements in their homes: energy efficiency improvements and renewable energy improvements. After loaning the money out, the municipalities will place a betterment charge on the homeowner’s property taxes. The homeowner will get the benefit of low cost financing for their energy project that will allow them to capture other government incentives. An added benefit is that if they decide to move the new owner will take over the payments. Originally Patrick's bill, the PACE legislation was passed by the Massachusetts House and Senate last week. It is awaiting the Governor’s signature. The letter states, “In just the past two years, twenty-two states have passed laws enabling local governments to develop PACE programs. State and local governments are embracing PACE because of its tremendous potential to cut energy bills, increase homeowner cash flow for mortgage payments, reduce mortgage default risk, create tens of thousands of local jobs and dramatically reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by spurring investment in clean energy improvements. PACE has received strong bipartisan support nationwide because creating jobs, saving energy and reducing utility bills for families and businesses is important to all Americans. Our nation’s PACE programs were set to launch a 24-month pilot period this summer, funded by $150 million in grants from the Department of Energy, and with consumer and lender protections that were developed by an inter-agency working group that consisted of HUD, NEC, OMB, CEQ and DOE. The White House has also shown strong support for PACE and was instrumental in the issuance of guidelines that ensure PACE programs adequately protect both mortgage lenders and property owners. Unfortunately, despite PACE’s great promise, on July 6th, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) issued statements blocking our nation’s PACE pilot programs, wrongly claiming that the consumer and lender protections and the White House guidelines were not sufficient.” Mon, 26 Jul 2010 14:46:35 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=95 RE: DPU 10-54 National Grid/Cape Wind Contracts Dear Chairwomen Berwick and Commissioners Woolf and Westbrook, I believe we must be realistic about our need as a nation to change our current fossil fuel usage that is neither environmentally nor financially sustainable. Our current course is a dead end and the catastrophe now happening in the Gulf is one in a long line of damaging symptoms we are inflicting on the planet and ourselves. We are all somewhat responsible for the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico because we demand to have cheap gasoline, heating oil and all the petro chemicals that are used to make the plastic products and grow the food we demand. Peak oil is just around the corner if not here already and oil that is readily accessible is now gone. That’s one of the reasons we are drilling a mile under water to get oil. Heavy tax subsidies make it feasible. After peak oil, the price of it will climb to a point that it will be impossible to heat homes or run our current fleet of light vehicles. Just recently we have seen how cheap coal costs lives and does untold damage to the environment by leveling entire mountains and burying and poisoning streams. Natural gas exploration is doing untold damage to ground water supplies. And of course, all fossil fuels contribute to global climate change. Global climate change is real and we are already seeing its impact in the form of more violent hurricanes. Our oceans are becoming more acidic killing off coral and the microscopic plankton that forms the basis of our food chain. Even the oceans have a maximum capacity for absorbing CO2. All damage is caused by our profligate use of fossil energy. For those who say that oil drilling is not relevant to today’s discussion, the power capacity of our 175 million light vehicles is 24 times larger than the nation’s entire electric generation system according to the Council of State Governments. If we could convert just one fourth of our fleet to electric vehicles, the power stored in their batteries would be about the same as the entire generation of the grid. The battery storage of electric vehicles would work very well with wind energy which tends to generate electricity at night when our usage is down and thus help us adopt intermittent renewables like wind and cut emissions by 80 percent for each electric vehicle. I intend to file legislation next session to set up the regulations and incentives to prepare Massachusetts for the conversion of our light vehicle fleet to electricity. Electric vehicles are four times more efficient than gasoline powered vehicles. That is why Cape Wind is directly related to the production of oil and the transportation sector of our economy. In addition, we should remember that all the health and environmental costs of burning fossil fuels are not currently included in the price. Fossil fuel exploration and generation have been heavily subsidized by the Federal Government for decades. Estimates of $20 billion in subsidies for fossil fuels are conservative. If the health and environmental impacts were included in the price of fossil fuel generated electricity, it would be much more expensive. Therefore, the price for Cape Wind generated electricity is quite reasonable due to its benign impact on the environment. I am proud of the efforts the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has made to reverse our dependence on fossil fuels. The Green Communities Act and the Regional Greenhouse Gas legislation are monumental tributes to the people of Massachusetts who looked to the future and set an example of what can and should be done. Thank you for your consideration, Sincerely, Matthew C. Patrick, State Representative, Third Barnstable District. Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:11:36 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=94  Toward a More Equitable Tax System in MassachusettsSpeech at the Unitarian Universalist Church, East Falmouth Rep. Matthew C. Patrick July 4, 2010 Recently, I have received a lot of attention for one of my budget amendments that would have increased the tax on wealth.  Talk show personality, Howie Carr, decided it wasn’t a good thing to do so he dedicated an entire column to misrepresenting it.  Mr. Carr, who is currently, and somewhat ironically, battling his employer because he is upset with his million dollar a year salary, does not endorse me for re-election.  Bob Murray said I should put that on my bumper sticker, “not endorsed by Howie Carr.” The intent of my amendment to the budget was to restore the tax on income derived from wealth to support the Commonwealth’s institutions and services which are being severely curtailed.  We have undergone an 18% decline in tax revenue and are only surviving on Federal money which will end next year leaving us in a very deep hole.  We have had to cut the equivalent of 1500 full time jobs in next year’s budget and many more last year.  For the first time in years we have cut local aide and education aide to cities and towns.  If my amendment had passed, it would have given the Commonwealth about $500 million that we desperately need. What is clear is that a disproportionate share of our state and local tax burden falls on the bottom half of our wage earners.  According to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, the top one percent of income earners in Massachusetts pay less than 5% of their income in state and local taxes while the lower half of us pay about 10% of our income in state and local taxes.[i]  My amendment would have restored the tax rate on interest and stock dividends to the 12% level it was at before 1998.  The first $5,000 in this income would be exempt for people 65 years of age.  It doesn’t include income from social security or pensions.   After being in the Peace Corps in Ghana, Africa, a third world nation, I gained a tremendous appreciation for what our taxes do to provide infrastructure and the institutions that enable people to become wealthy and stay wealthy.  Without our infrastructure such as roads, bridges, water, sewer, airports, ports, internet, parks and open space and institutions such as schools, colleges, courts, libraries, hospitals, fire and police protection , regulatory agencies that protect our health, welfare and the environment, people would not be able to earn and keep wealth.  It’s that simple. [i] Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, Third Edition, November 2009, “Who Pays?, A Distributional Analysis of the Tax Systems in All 50 States” p. 58 A disproportionate tax burden falls on the lowest income people in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts who pay: lowest 20% earning less than$20,000 pay 10.1 % of their income in state and local taxes; the 2nd lowest 20% earning between $20,000 and $41,000 pay 10.1%...; the middle or 3rd lowest 20% earning  between $41,000 and $66,000 pay 9.6%....; the fourth 20% earning between $66,000 and $111,000 pay 8.8%; the next 15% earning between $111,0000 and $243,000, pay 7.7%...; the next 4% earning between $243,000 and $683,000 pay 7.1%...and the top 1% earning over $683,000 pay 4.8 % of their income in state and local taxes. Thu, 06 May 2010 11:17:15 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=93 Rabbi Elias Lieberman Remarks for the presentation of the Presbrey Public Service Award to Rep. Matthew Patrick April 7, 2010 When I was informed, last year, of the HAC tradition that would find me presenting this year’s Presbrey Public Service Award to some worthy recipient, I naturally wondered who that person might turn out to be and what kind of sleuthing I might need to do in order to find praiseworthy things to say about that individual. You can imagine my immense relief, therefore, when I was told that this year’s recipient is Rep. Matthew Patrick. Not only am I one of Matt’s constituents who has, on more than one occasion, bent his ear or sent him an impassioned e-mail, I am also, admittedly and unabashedly, a tremendous fan of this man. I’d like to think that it has something to do with our both having graduated college in the same year or that we can both lay claim to that dubious mantle of being “baby-boomers’, but Matt Patrick exemplifies for me everything that I would hope to find in someone who has committed himself to public service: passion, integrity, thoughtfulness, courage, stamina, compassion and vision. Spend even a few minutes reading any of Matt’s blog entries and you’ll get a sense of the man. He is passionate about, and has proven himself over the decades to be a great steward of, Cape Cod’s environment. Long before any of us had even heard the word “Prius”, Matt was driving around the Cape in that little silver Honda hybrid vehicle. He was, as they say, an “early adopter”. Tue, 04 May 2010 19:49:59 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=90 THE LARGER PROBLEM IN THE MASSACHUSETTS HOUSE By Representatives Matthew C. Patrick, Thomas M. Stanley, Lida E. Harkins, William G. Greene, Jr., Will N. Brownsberger, Steven J. D’Amico, Joseph R. Driscoll and John F. Quinn January 21, 2010 We want the House to become a functional democracy. We clearly see that consolidation of power in the Speaker has given the Massachusetts House a less than democratic form of governance and we believe that the most important thing we can do as members is point out what is so obvious that it has been taken for granted. We want each bill deliberated in the committees and referred to the floor based on merit where it will be fully debated. The Speaker is preventing members of the Massachusetts House from being able to see how their budget is being spent and specifically, the legal expenses we provided for the former Speaker’s case. This is a symptom of a much larger problem that confronts our representative democracy in Massachusetts. Over time most power in the House has been consolidated in the office of the Speaker. Sat, 23 Jan 2010 20:03:02 -0500 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=88 There are fifty sponsors of H 2127.  That is a significant number for any bill that comes before us and one has to ask why, after all these years this bill has been before the legislature in one form or another, does one quarter of our legislature still support this bill.  Looking down the list one sees the usual liberal members.  But there are also conservative members of the legislature that have signed on as sponsors.  Why? Can it be that health care premiums continue to go up even after significant reform in 2006?  Could it be that we continue to look to other industrial nations that have national, single payer health care plans that are half the cost of our national average?  Could it be that these other industrialized nations provide their citizens with better health care in spite of their lesser costs?  Could it be that the average health care premium in the nation has gone up by 130% since the year 1999 while wages have gone up only 38 percent and inflation 28 percent?[i]  Premiums are projected to hit an extraordinary average of $24,000 per family by 2019.[ii] Could the reason this bill enjoys so much support by legislators be that only 60 to 70 percent of our health care dollars actually are spent on health care?  Could it be that legislators deal directly with much of the discontent of constituents with the current revamped system?  It covers more people but puts many into financial distress. We should ask why out of all the possible methods of saving health care dollars, we, in Massachusetts and Washington, have not considered single payer health care systems?  If nothing else it’s a tribute to the lobbying power of the health care industry.  In Washington, there are about 6 lobbyists employed by the insurance and pharmaceutical industries to every legislator.  The money they are spending is fantastic. [i] Report by the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Health Research and Educational Trust, based on a survey of more than 3,100 U.S. firms, 2009. [ii] Kaiser Family report. Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:52:44 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=87 The amount of state and local taxes paid in Massachusetts as a share of state personal income fell from 10.6 percent in Fiscal Year 2006 to 10.5 percent in FY 2007, according to the U.S. Census Bureau's annual survey of State and Local Government Finances.  Massachusetts dropped in rank from 35th among all states in 2006 to 38th in 2007 (including the District of Columbia), according to the Census data released today. Measuring taxes as a share of total personal income allows for a meaningful comparison among states. The numbers released today show that in FY 2007 the share of income paid in taxes for state and local public services was less in Massachusetts than in 36 other states and the District of Columbia.  To get the full story go to www.massbudget.org. Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:57:28 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=86           Today the Massachusetts legislature is not a democratic institution.  The birth place of western democracy in the new world is governed by a legislature that is a dictatorship masquerading as a democratic institution.  Through the centuries, the position of Massachusetts Speaker of the House has evolved into an imperial one, more akin to royalty than the leader of a democratic body.  The Speaker of the House determines everything.  He decides which bills are brought to the floor for a debate and which ones will never see the light of day.  He determines the outcome of those bills before they are even debated.              If you cross the Speaker by not voting for him for example, he can hold up even the most minor of home rule petitions that are necessary for the municipalities in your district to function.  If you have a bill that can solve a problem or benefit the commonwealth you had better convince the Speaker if you ever want it to pass.  Because of this fact, bills don’t often pass on their merit.  Bills pass because it benefits the Speaker’s agenda or there is an emergency in the Commonwealth.             Along with the legislative agenda, the Speaker controls everything in the House.  He controls all appointments from powerful Ways and Means Chair and Majority Leader to all committee chairs and vice chairs some of which receive extra salary.  He gives each member his committee assignments.  He also controls all of the staff.  He even determines who gets help with their re-election campaign.             When you are elected into the Massachusetts House, you are told over and over again that you always protect the institution.  That tradition accounts for the reticence among members to speak any ill of what goes on in the House.  However, that “speak no ill of the House” tradition only perpetuates the dictatorship, its human pecking order and our large dysfunctional family. Sun, 27 Sep 2009 14:40:47 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=85 REP. PATRICK’S COMMENTS BEFORE THE ELECTION LAWS COMMITTEE RE: H 656 September 10, 2009 Good afternoon Chairmen Moran; Chairman Kennedy and members of the committee. Let me be clear, I would never vote to eliminate the special election. However, giving the Governor the ability to appoint a replacement for the months before the special election is very important given the pending legislation in Congress. During the interim, it makes perfect sense to have someone capable of debating and voting for: the national health care bill, the global warming bill and financial regulation legislation. We also want to keep Senator Kennedy's staff there working for us. They would form the core of the new Senator’s staff. Without an interim appointee, his entire staff will be dismissed after two months. The Republicans will point out that they filed an amendment in 2004 to give the Governor the ability to make a temporary appointment to the seat. However, it did not preclude the appointee from using the power of that appointment to his or her advantage in the special election. Not only did the Democrats vote against it but 7 Republicans voted against it. To address that concern, Representative Koczera’s bill will only allow the Governor to appoint a person who hasn’t filed nomination papers. However, we would lose two months in the process. A public statement by the appointee saying that he or she had no intention to run in the special election would ensure that the person would lose all credibility if they later decided to run in the special. However, it would be unconstitutional to require such a measure in legislation. An amendment that Chairman Moran mentioned to me previously should help assure people. A requirement that the Governor only appoint someone from the same party would be a great compromise and one that is used in several other states. Hawaii, Utah, Arizona and Wyoming have this requirement and three of them further stipulate that the Governor must choose one of three candidates offered by the state party committee. In closing, this could be the most critical vote we take during our time in the Massachusetts legislature. It is our best opportunity to get some of the most important legislation in our national history passed into law and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts must be fully represented in that process. Thu, 10 Sep 2009 15:34:10 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=84 For a footnoted version of letter please email Rep. Patrick at repmattp@cape.com July 7, 2009 Falmouth Board of Selectmen, Falmouth Board of Health and Falmouth Conservation Commission Dear Members, Throughout the Cape, we are moving towards very expensive engineering solutions to our wastewater treatment. I am convinced that, at present, we are not giving sufficient consideration to viable alternative techniques. I am writing to reaffirm my concern for the Town’s lack of consideration of less expensive alternatives to conventional sewage treatment. The news of protests by residents (Cape Cod Times, 6/18/09, Residents balk at sewer project, Barnstable’s wastewater management plan would require some homeowners to pay tens of thousands of dollars) who will be forced to shoulder $27,000 to $38,000 betterments to fund Barnstable’s effort to sewer the Wequaquet Lake and Stewart’s Creek areas are only a precursor of things to come in Falmouth. Naturally, residents are irate especially with the news that once the town makes a commitment to construction, they can’t opt out. Ironically, urine diverting and composting systems would work very well in this setting. In spite of an 8.8 percent subsidy from the ARRA, the efforts to move the $56 million project forward in Barnstable look bleak. I strongly believe that we will face similar obstacles in Falmouth if we do not clearly demonstrate we have fully considered all available options, including some innovative ones. On a regular basis, my office deals with many hardship cases in Falmouth. Let me remind you that the 2000 U.S. Census shows that about 63 percent of the people who work on Cape Cod do so in the retail trades or service industries where the average annual wage was about $20,000. Statistics show that real middle class income has been stagnant for the past decade. One need only consult with the Falmouth Service Center to find out that requests for free food have increased dramatically over that past two years. Sat, 11 Jul 2009 11:42:33 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=83 Cape Cod: Representative Matthew C. Patrick (D-Falmouth) filed a bill this week that would enable cities and towns to acquire funding through bonds to help residents finance two types of improvements in their homes:  energy efficiency improvements and renewable energy improvements.  After loaning the money out, the municipalities would place a betterment charge on the homeowner’s property taxesThe homeowner will get the benefit of low cost financing plus they will be able to take a Federal write off on their income taxes of a percentage of the cost of their betterment as part of their property taxes.  An added benefit is that if they decide to move the new owner will take over the payments Patrick stated, “The high cost of the initial investment is the primary barrier for people seeking to improve the energy usage of their homes.  This bill would put another tool in the tool box of the municipalities to help make Massachusetts less dependent on imported fossil fuels and maintain the affordability of our housing stock Mon, 08 Jun 2009 20:20:27 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=81 Dear State Representative Matthew Patrick: I used to spend a lot of time in Worcester. Over the years, something called the Asian long-horned beetle has been eating the place, one tree at a time. There are parts of Worcester that, once sylvan, now look like the unforested steppes of Europe and Asia. Hence, your crusade against the winter moth down on the Cape (it has already damaged other parts of the state) finds a sympathetic audience here. However, your budget item has drawn the ire of local Republicans, who are now squarely on the side of bugs that eat trees. A whole party that's soft on blight, they're apparently bothered that you want to spend $150,000 to control and eliminate the winter moth on the Cape, and that you've also voted for some tax bills. This occasioned some snark from across the aisle, possibly because, among the brainless carbon-based life-forms indigenous to the Commonwealth, trees generally make more sense -- and are usually much better spoken -- than Republicans, who (to be fair) do have a marginally greater representation in the Legislature. This may have occasioned some jealousy. Don't despair, though. I see a way out. The winter moth came here from Europe. Pitch it to the talk-show crowd as an immigration issue. And as a bonus, having declared the moth an illegal immigrant, you could have some fun putting a bunch of them to work on Mitt Romney's property. Charles P. Pierce cpierce@globe.com Article was first published in Globe Sunday Magazine, May 17th, 2009 Published on this web site with permission of the author, Charles Pierce Tue, 19 May 2009 15:50:51 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=80 This is a very difficult time for state and local governments but we have survived bad times before and we will survive this downturn.  The economic downturn and background budget pressures that have been growing for a decade are placing unprecedented challenges before us. But it is important to remember that we have survived bad times before.   It is equally important to remember the constructive role that government has played in helping us weather past recessions paving the way toward recovery.  In the midst of the current crisis it is easy to forget the essential role that our public systems play in the quality of life we enjoy in Massachusetts.   We must keep in mind that our state and local governments provide the services and infrastructure that we couldn’t create as individuals.  I think most of us would agree that the Commonwealth provides a fairly good life for our citizens.  It’s not well known but Massachusetts leads in most quality of life indicators when compared to other states.  For example, we rank in the top five in levels of education because we have more high school and college graduates than most other states.  We rank in the top five in terms of income.  We have a lower divorce rate, lower unwed mother rate and lower teen pregnancy rate than most other states.  We provide more care for our needy citizens.  We also have one of the more healthy populations in the country and more than 93% of us have health insurance. Yet when you compare our total state and local tax burden as a percentage of our income, we rank only 24th in the nation in 2008.  Why use total tax burden as a percentage of income?  It’s a fairer gauge because we earn a lot more than most other states.  Using a per capita tax ranking is like putting a light weight in a boxing ring with a heavy weight.  Comparing us to the southern states is not fair to them because they earn less and pay a larger percentage of their income in taxes greatly reducing their spending power.  In addition, our sales tax is the 44th lowest of all states and the current gas tax is ranked even lower and hasn’t gone up in 16 years.  Wed, 29 Apr 2009 23:08:24 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=79 Rep. Patrick's testimony before the Cape Cod Commission 3/30/09 Regardless of all the planning, regulations and laws, a good deal of any project's potential approval is left up to the judgment and subject to the prejudices of you, the people on the Commission. In the end, most of our elected and appointed boards' decisions are subject to the perspectives of the people on the them and the frame of mind they have been given by local media and adopted as their own before really hearing the other side fully with an open mind. Framing the issue in a negative light is exactly what the right wing does on talk radio. They made us believe that "liberal" is a bad word and that all Democrats are all "tax and spend" Democrats. That's framing issue and if you read, "Don't Think of an Elephant" you will get a better picture of it. Nothing has received more negative framing than Cape Wind. One needs only to look at the Cape Cod Times editorial today to be reminded of their constant drum beat of opposition for seven years. Early on the Cape Cod Times framed the issue for most Cape Codders in terms of "Industrial Wind Farm" in "pristine" water, "land grab" etc. They and other anti wind farm groups appealed to base emotions with fictional information and grossly distorted depictions of the prospective wind farm to arouse opposition. The wind farm has gone through the CCC's EIR right along with the State's and the Fed's EIRs and 13 other entities. They have found nothing damaging to the environment or the economy that cannot be mitigated. The review has lasted seven years and taken longer to approve than most nuclear power plants. This current issue is over the cables and the irony is the CCC just approved putting down more cables to Nantucket. Tue, 31 Mar 2009 14:25:52 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=78 “It’s what they do,” said Governor Patrick in a fitting response to a question from the press about what he thought of the critical comments made by Republican leaders regarding the proposed gas tax. The Republicans want you to believe that the Governor and Democratic legislators are too lazy to look for efficiencies in government and will tax you because it’s easy to do. It’s not easy. It’s a lot more difficult to raise taxes than it is to cut budgets even in what people think is a liberal legislature, which it isn’t. The majority of the Democrats in the legislature consider themselves fiscally conservative and even liberals don’t casually suggest taxes. Senate Minority Leader Richard Tisei is showing his party’s desperation with his broad brushed critique of the Governor and Democrats in the legislature. He’s only got four Republican colleagues in the Senate and sixteen in the House. The extreme example is the pill popping, multi-millionaire, right wing, radio entertainer Rush Limbaugh who proudly says he wants President Obama to fail when he knows full well that he is saying he wants America to fail. The irony is he accused Democrats of being unpatriotic or worse for disagreeing with the former President but I never recall hearing a Democrat say they wanted the President to fail. As Robert F. Kennedy said, “The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of Country.” You may disagree with the President but nobody says they want him to fail, except for rightwing prima-donnas. Wed, 11 Mar 2009 15:42:19 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=77 The radio propaganda machine is in full gear cranking people up with misinformation about the Governor’s position on the gas tax. Good for them because they forced me to make my position public and provide facts instead of hyperbole. First let’s consider if we need a gas tax. Do we want to maintain our roads and bridges? Do we want more mass transportation? I think we do and most people agree with me after remembering what happened to the price of gasoline just last year. We have already seen how the price of gas can become unaffordable in a matter of months and eventually, it will happen again and again with more and more frequency. There is no question that we must be prepared for it by encouraging people to get out of their big inefficient cars and get onto mass transportation whether it is the MBTA or our local Regional Transportation Authorities. Some people will be living in such rural circumstances that they will never have access to mass transportation. In those cases we should be able to provide incentives so they can afford fuel efficient cars. Thu, 12 Feb 2009 14:53:35 -0500 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=76 Some body has to ask the Sandwich Selectmen if they expect citizens who do not live in their town to continue to pay their tax bills and whether it's worth keeping the plant open if just one family will have a member suffer and perhaps die from an illness created by the pollution coming from the plant. I know it's a tough economic hit for the town but there is no rationale to keep a power plant running that can't compete. I would rather just contribute to their annual $2 million tax bill than to keep the Canal Power Plant running at an annual cost of about $100 million. It's just plain illogical. Good Capitalists know that the way ISO NE was allowing that plant to operate even though it couldn't compete economically, was the equivelent of nationallizing the power plant. Sandwich has had a good thing going for a long, long time but they need to deal with economic realities. If Mirant doesn't install new combined cycle gas turbines, it is very likely they will shut the plant down. That is a fact. The SEMA issue caught my attention roughly four years ago at an Energy Committee hearing. I learned for the first time that the Canal Electric plant, one of the dirtiest power plants in New England, was being kept running even though it couldn't compete on a cost efficiency basis. The Independent System Operator of New England (ISO NE) ordered that it be kept running at less than 20 percent capacity for reliability purposes. They deemed it would protect the grid from failure if two of the 345 KV power lines went out at the same time even though the chances of that happening are extremely remote. It's only happened once in the history of the system when there was a fire at the Canal Power Plant in 2004. The power plant operation out of economic merit, in ISO NE code words, costs all of southeastern Massachusetts about $19 million a month at the peak oil costs this past summer. This is on top of electric rates that are the highest in the continental U.S. The total from 2005 through 2008 is more than 350 million dollars. Fri, 23 Jan 2009 12:00:33 -0500 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=75 ELECTION RESULTS NOVEMBER 4TH 2008 Well, the election has been over for quite some time now and it’s time I updated my website with some reflections about it.  Hopefully, you know that I won convincingly by almost 60% of the voters that voted.  There were a considerable amount of blank votes which I’ll talk about later.  What’s interesting is I won in every precinct for the first time.  Even in Cotuit, Osterville and New Seabury.  These are precincts that I have traditionally lost every time when I’ve had opposition.  Those precincts crushed me by a two to one margin the first time I ran for re-election in a significantly changed district that took away traditional precincts of the Third Barnstable like Buzzards Bay in Bourne, the southeastern precincts in Sandwich and three northern precincts in Mashpee.  That was the year that Romney won.  I later heard that he won in Osterville, a traditional Republican precinct, by a greater percentage than anywhere else in the Commonwealth.  That was also the year Cape Wind was introduced and I was the sole Cape Cod based legislator, state or federal that supported it as long as there were no environmental impacts that could not be resolved.  My opponent, a former JAG officer for the Coast Guard, came out of nowhere to almost win.  He ran hyping his veteran status, which he thought would help him during the beginning of the Iraq war after September 11th, but mostly in opposition to the Cape Wind which would explain why the Osterville, Cotuit and New Seabury precincts buried me because they border Nantucket Sound where the wind farm will be located.  Sun, 18 Jan 2009 14:10:56 -0500 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=74 Rep. Patrick sweeps all endorsements, Cape Cod Times, Enterprise and the Barnstable Patriot all endorse the 4th term legislator Cape Cod Times says, "Patrick for House, Experience, strength of character give incumbent the edge." “...Patrick is a good mix, in background and philosophy, for the 3rd Barnstable District. He’s a hands-on guy (a former plumber and contractor) who has learned to make use of the convoluted legislative rules. When a complicated bill to close corporate tax loopholes was nearly dead on Beacon Hill, Patrick helped convene a caucus and methodically organized the effort to revive it. He argued that about 1,200 corporations that post $100 million to $1 billion in sales each year in Massachusetts pay the minimum corporate excise tax of $456, and the average Massachusetts family pays $2,700 in state taxes. The bill, which returns $200 million to state coffers, is now law. Patrick’s signature environmental credentials have grown over the years; this year, he successfully added four or five provisions to the Green communities Act. A longtime advocate for reducing toxic pollutants at the Canal power plant, Patrick is now trying to convince state regulators that its costs far outweigh its benefits. He has teamed up with state Sen. Robert O’Leary and other legislators from southeastern Massachusetts to request a hearing on the Plant. “We believe that it is irrational to throw $200 million a year at a supposed reliability problem because there is a slight risk that the Cape and Islands will lose two lines at the same time. What we have is a base load plant acting as a peak demand plant and we can’t afford it,” the legislators wrote. In April, Patrick and O’Leary cited the plant’s inefficient operation as one reason the average electric rates in the region are higher than the average rate in every state except Hawaii. This proactive stand resonates with Cape voters, who have repeatedly shown that the environment is an important issue with them. He’s not a glad-hander and told us, “I don’t worry about pleasing everybody.” He hasn’t pleased us with his pro windfarm stance, but on balance his eight years of service and seniority at the Statehouse are worth endorsing. Which leads us to one of our more important criteria for recommending a candidate: strength of character. Patrick is not afraid to take unpopular positions, and his sense of duty, humility and courage under fire set him apart. Patrick is a sincere, principled and intelligent man…” The Enterprise says, Matt Patrick Deserves Reelection  "... Matt Patrick has served his district and the state well since he was elected in 2000.  He is known as a constructive and productive leader on alternative energy issues and he is quietly dogged on legislation to help taxpayers wherever possible.  He successfully led the fight to close the corporate tax loopholes that allowed companies operating in different states to shift their income reporting to the state with the more favorable tax code for them...He also plays a thoughtful and legislatively creative role in matters ranging from health care to homeowner insurance to rising energy costs..." The Barnstable Patriot says, "...In his dealings with the leadership, Patrick has been something of a maverick, but an atypical one who actually has something to show for his independence..." Sun, 26 Oct 2008 19:17:21 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=73 You're invited to meet Rep. Matt Patrick with the founder and CEO of Cape Air, Dan Wolf Date: Friday evening, October 17th. Time: 5:30 Where: Cotuit Grocery, 737 Main Street, Cotuit Please join us to hear how Dan’s opinion of Cape Wind evolved over time. Refreshments will be served. Paid for by the committee to Re-elect Matt Patrick, Ken Braga Treasurer, POB 3252 Waquoit, MA 02536, 508-540-6308 To learn more or to contribute got to www.mattpatrick.org Sat, 04 Oct 2008 09:03:10 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=72 Boston: State Representative Matthew Patrick, Senator Robert O’Leary, and other legislators from the southeastern part of the state sent a letter today requesting a hearing regarding the high cost to continue the operation of the Mirant Canal Plant. The letter asks the Chairs of Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy to, “conduct a hearing as soon as possible into the operation out of merit of the Canal Power Plant.” The letter states, “We believe that it is irrational to throw $200 million a year at a supposed reliability problem because there is a slight risk that the Cape and islands will lose two lines at the same time. What we have is a base load plant acting as a peak demand plant and we can’t afford it.” In April Rep Patrick, Senator O’Leary sent a letter to the public utilities Commissioner Timothy Wolf. The letter cited the plant's operation as one reason the average electric rates in the southeastern part of the state are higher than the average rate in every state except Hawaii. Mon, 22 Sep 2008 15:55:36 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=71 Chapter 6, The Passion of Matt Patrick It’s a rough game, underneath the backslaps and the handshakes and the big noble speeches . . . Allen Drury, ADVISE AND CONSENT The Community Counseling Service–generated letter to “John Q. Prospect” claimed that the Alliance had “gained support from all the local politicians” and had “developed a strong base of influential republican and democratic supporters in the State House and in Congress.” Politically, it did look as though project opponents had everything sewn up. Even Mitt Romney, close to Republican financier Richard J. Egan, had signed on to the cause. In early 2002, Romney announced he would stand for the fall gubernatorial election. Gordon sent Romney a campaign donation and attended a fund-raiser. When he approached Romney to talk about the project, the candidate openly admitted that he’d already made a campaign promise to oppose Gordon’s project. “I never go back on my promises,” Romney told Gordon. Read the rest by going to my website at www.mattpatrick.org . Then look for "On the Issues" in the column on the left and scroll down to Chapter 6 of Cape Wind, The Passion of Matt Patrick.  The book is now out in paperback for $15.00 and I encourage you to read it. The St. Petersburg Times said, "...enough political intribue to keep a John Grisham fan happy..."  The Boston Globe chimed in, "yes, this book is lots of fun..."  Boston Magazine called it a, "a page turner..." and the New York Times Sunday Book Review made it an "Editors Choice." The Wall Street Journal said of the book it is, "a ripe subject, populated with the sort of people who would be among the first to count themselves as friends of the earth but the last to accept an environmentally friendly energy source if it meant the slightest cloud on their ocean views." One of the best reviews came from Robert Sullivan of the New York Times Sunday Book Review who said, "A great summer beach read about longtime summer beach communities, "Cape Wind" describes ho the alliance managed to raise $4 million in one ballroom meeting at the Wianno Club, where the 'grass-roots' campaign against the 'industrial complex' of offshore 'Cuisinarts' was kicked off by Douglas Yearley, a copper minin executive whose company was fined for killing birds in an acid runoff mishap in 2000, among other infractions." You can also find out about the ongoing exploits of the people in the book at author Wendy Williams' website www.capewindbook.com       Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:58:05 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=70 Boston: Representative Patrick’s office (D-Falmouth) announced today that he successfully established funding in the State’s Environmental and Capital Bond Bills for the 3rd Barnstable District. Rep. Patrick secured funding for an alternative sewage treatment demonstration project. The project will evaluate the potential use of urine diverting toilets and composting toilets as a means of cost effectively reducing nitrogen loading. Rep Patrick stated, “This project has far reaching implications for Cape Cod towns that are exploring expensive options for conventional sewage treatment. This project will hopefully demonstrate an appropriate technology for sewage treatment that is less expensive by at least a factor of ten and just as effective as conventional sewage treatment.” Patrick continued, “If this proves viable we will be able to clean up our salt ponds and estuaries much more quickly than currently anticipated which for for conventional sewage treatment is 20-30 years.” Fri, 25 Jul 2008 15:03:48 -0400 http://www.mattpatrick.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=69 The Falmouth Board of Selectmen voted to support Representative Patrick's amendment to the Environmental Bond Bill by a 3 to 2 margin with chairman Mustafa breaking the tie vote. Two Murphys objected but Pat Flynn and Brent Putnam remained unconvinced by their argument. Flynn spoke forcefully for the need to be open to new technologies that could save taxpayers money. Two conservation Commission members who happened to be in the audience also spoke strongly in favor. Maureen Harlow Hawkes and Courtney Bird Jr. expressed their approval of the concepts and displeasure with the arguments against supporting the amendment offered by Carey Murphy and Kevin Murphy. The Enterprise stepped to the plate by strongly editorializing in favor of the amendment last Friday (July 11, 2008) in a piece entitled "Closed-Minded On Alternatives". The editorial led off by saying, "It is discouraging that two of Falmouth's selectmen voted no to Representative Patrick's request that the board support a study of the use of urine separating toilets in Barnstable County." If that weren't enought, Sunday's Globe (July 13, 2008) in the Ideas Section an article on the new technologies appeared entitled "Waste? Not." The lead paragraph in that article said, "In a World of rapidly diminishing resources, there's one we tend to overlook. It's easy to produce and extremely abundant. But instead of viewing it as an embarassment of riches, we're more likely to see it as just an embarrassment." Here is the link to the article. http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2008/07/13/waste_not/ In a brief paper Representative Patrick outlined his reasons for seeking the funding which can be seen below. Mon, 14 Jul 2008 15:44:35 -0400