TCI Regional Policy Design Stakeholder Submissions

I support all plans to reduce and eliminate all forms of toxic pollution that enter the air we breathe and the water we drinki. To me it is an issue not of climate change but the protection of the air we breathe and the water we drink and that trumps all issues involved. It is a fact that pollution of the air and water causes many illnesses and in too many cases death. so everything we can to eliminate all forms of pollution to our water and air

The recent gas tax initiative is in violation of Federal and State laws regarding the intended use of gas taxes. RGGI and TCI are multi-state "agreements" that have never received U. S. Congressional approval as required under Article 1, section 10 of the US Constitution (Compact Clause). This also has never been regionally approved. There should be court challenges if this ever does come to agreement. The Initiatives do NOT comply with legal use of carbon/gas taxes, in that they are to be used "... solely for the cost of ... highway and bridge construction and maintenance ... etc. (Maine Constitution Article IX, Section 19: Limitation on expenditure of motor vehicle and motor vehicle fuel revenues.) Why this discussion and these initiatives have reared their ugly heads is easy to understand. Just one more set of illegal, back-door taxes to more greatly subsidize an even more costly "green" agenda whether it's legal or not. Increasing fuel taxes is not legal nor acceptable. The states (especially Maine) must start to apply already collected taxes judiciously and where intended. This is just one more big tax and spend scheme. It completely fails to follow the rule of law and/or Constitutional tests.

I am appalled at the extremely regressive taxation bill being considered to replenish state coffers-- known as a carbon tax initiative. An across the board, regressive tax on such an essential and democratized commodity such as gasoline is a cruel punishment to inflict on Massachusetts motorists. Utilizing the climate change debate to pad patronage hiring and close budget gaps is truly an outrage. The fact that all of the states in the northeast are considering this as a monopolistic venture to prevent border competition is even more horrific. Thank you for the consideration.

really, why don't you redistribute the taxes you've raped from the Mass population instead...how about cutting the pensions at UMASS...how about clawing back the pensions of those troopers who stole from the state, or, maybe privatize the MBTA.........Gov Bake, you are sham.....no vote for you next time around...

I concur with my friends who oppose any attempt at revenue increases, i.e. taxes, without MA House approval. I will let my legislators know my thoughts on this also. Furthermore, spending some time in California, with their exorbitant gas taxes, and other "penalties" for owning combustible engine vehicles, I see these moves as nothing more than crushing expenses to everyone, which particularly hit lower income more (gasoline tops $4/gallon, a very large increase vis a vis current MA gas taxes.

Tax credits, desirability for EV, and cost reductions as the market finds ways to deliver at lower costs are doing much to reduce vehicle emissions. Though it doesn't matter what taxes or carbon exchange fees you charge, the average worker can not afford an EV yet.

If you want to focus your energies, somewhere, help India, China and other fast growing economies to reduce their carbon emissions. MA is flatulence in the breeze compared to the real global polluters. or you could try the US agriculture/meat industries. And let the MA House focus on taxes.

Thank you,

Chris Grande

I am against this tax as the government has demonstrated that they cannot manage a budget. Taxpayer are already paying for Federal Flood Insurance and Beach replenishment. Instead of always increases taxes find budgets cuts. IE. why do tax payers fund federal flood insurance for millionaire's second homes. Why is the federal government in the business of ensuring second beach homes. Obama Care, Medicare pricing is based on income,same policy should be implemented for Flood Insurance. And if no bath houses, parking or public assess( ie the north end of LBI) stop having tax payers pay. Use that saving for Climate Change.

I am excited to see a high-impact, regional approach to tackling carbon emissions moving forward.