Heroux Responds Yet Again

Representative Paul Heroux (D-Attleboro) who voted to override the Governor’s veto thusly voting to raise taxes, responds again to Red Mass Group.

What a joke this statement is… “Does it really matter how one votes on every section of a law, if the main part of the law is a tax hike, and you vote for final passage Representative Heroux?”

You attacked Rep Cutler for voting for the gas tax index after he voted against the gas tax so by what you do, rather than say, you do seem to find that sections of the law matter. The GOP attacked Rep Bill Bowles for voting for a tax hike before he voted against the final budget that contained that tax hike.

In April you singeled no Dem out by name. In July you singeled out Dems by name. You do not seem to know what the word highlight means. I don’t often see someone dig their heels in so bad when they are proven to be mistaken on a matter. You named Dem names in July but not April.

And if you put so much pride in conservative values you are not thinking of the people, you are thinking of the ideology. Reps represent diverse communities and those Reps who do their best to represent in a diverse way, like I do, are thinking of the people, not the ideology.

Rep. Heroux, it’s not me making outlandish claims as to what has happened it is you.  I see things pretty black and white.  Under our constitutional form of government, a vote to override a veto is a vote for the underlying legislation.  It is as simple as that.

As to Cutler and Bowles.  Yes, if you know that a bill is going to pass and vote to put a provision in that bill, even if you don’t vote for the final bill you’ve voted to support that provision.  So yes, Josh Cutler, in addition to voting to override the Governor’s veto, thus for higher taxes, did vote to index the gas tax to inflation.  That was a vote for infinite tax increases.  And yes Bill Bowles voted for higher taxes on a specific roll call, even though he voted against final passage of a bill.

You know who agreed with that sentiment.  The voters of YOUR district who voted him out of office because of it.  You might think of that next time you say you vote how your district wants.  Because your exact district has shown a propensity to vote out those that raise their taxes.

About Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno

  • MerrimackMan

    I suppose you could give Rep. Bowles some kudos for voting against a final passage, but that doesn’t erase from memory the fact that he supported a tax on a separate vote.

    It’s kind of like those Republican Senators that would vote to add pork to a bill they knew would pass, and then vote against final passage. They still should be held accountable for participating in the pork-fest in DC.

    Rob’s point is that whenever you vote to raise taxes (or anything else), one ought to be responsible for one’s votes. There are probably some legitimate circumstances or reasons for why someone would vote to raise taxes, but I’ve yet to hear any in regards to the most recent episode of tax hikes. And we all know Beacon Hill collects enough taxes as it is. Wasn’t that the basis of Rep. Zlotnik’s No New Tax pledge, which went out the window very quickly?

    It seems to me the argument going around is that even if the veto was sustained, and the override unsuccessful, the leadership wanted tax hikes, and they would get them. There is some truth to this argument. If the Legislature came up with a package that provided the sort of higher taxes looked for by the Governor (which would have been more substantial), the Leadership would have only needed 81 votes instead of the 107 votes to override the Governor’s veto. A much easier task indeed.

    However, it seems to me that the Governor’s plans for tax hikes, weren’t really getting off the ground. As a result, it was entirely possible that had the Legislature been unable to override the Governor’s veto, there wasn’t a plan that could get passed by the Legislature that would have been signed by the Governor. Instead of settling for a crappy set of higher taxes, we could have had NO new taxes at all.

    However, while Rep. Heroux deserves some criticism for giving into new taxes. He shouldn’t be singled out anymore than the other 157 Democrats, and 1 Republican that voted for the higher taxes. That one Repubican is leaving very soon, so his vote may be under some suspicious circumstances, but even if Rep. Heroux and the other 12 flip-floppers voted against this package, the override would have happened, and we would still have higher taxes today. We would have needed another 8 Democrats to flip-floper from FOR to AGAINST taxes.

    All the more reason I say, we need 54 Republicans (and better yet, 81) in the State House. You simply can’t count on the Democrats on Beacon Hill to buck their leadership.

    The Exceptions Are:

    Jim Miceli (D-Wilmington)

    Dennis Rosa (D-Leominster)

    Thomas Stanley (D-Waltham)

  • This is hilarious!  You have literally turned a sitting rep in a dog fight for his seat into a below-average Internet troll!

    Keep whacking away. Every minute he or his staff takes to respond to you is a minus he can’t spend raising money or knocking doors.

    Seriously, we have a real clown show up on Beacon Hill, and Heroux is putting himself right in the center ring.

    I hope Jeff B. is seeing this.