Off and running! Go get 'em, Linc!

How is it possible you are going to dig deeper into the public's pockets? New additional taxes on items is crazy such as food and medication.

You speak of strategy and business. It's time to run government like a business. When companies are having trouble with a revenue vs budget mandate they may try to incur additional expenses to their customers but that only goes so far. Customers will move to a different company, or in the state's analogy they move out of the state.

At some point a company needs to reorganize to trim overlap, such as the cities and towns to start merging governmental units and shared responsibilities.

Next a company will ask workers to take on additional work and trim staff or do away with revenue negative projects, and while the current administration has reduced the state workforce it's still massive compared to the # of people in RI and if the State is right-sized then cities are far too over staffed for the population.

These things need to be controlled. Not additional taxes on people not able to pay their bills now.

I'd have expected something better then this for a 1st attempt to wow the voting public. With ideas like this you'll fit right into the Democratic RI Statehouse just fine. Tax them till they leave should be the bumper sticker!

Congratulations on your announcement, Senator.

We voters Love to complain that politicians simply tout political truisms (e.g. "Education is important") without being forthcoming with actual proposals. I was lucky enough to be at your announcement and found your specifics on policy ideas extremely refreshing. Thanks for your candor, and I look forward to participating in your campaign!

Glad to see you in the running.

Although you've given your opponents plenty of fodder for their cannons with the sales tax concept, I think you are approaching the problem realistically and coherently.

Good luck!

I have been following your career for some time now. Since you took over from your father and followed in his strong environmental footsteps. I graduated from URI in environmental sciences in 1982. My father introduced me to your father in Providence shortly after I graduated. I admired his environmental viewpoints, his was a voice of reason and restraint, at a time when there was an all out assault on our natural resources. I feel that you are also a voice of reason. I will see you take the oath of office in November.

Thank you all for your comments and support!

Allow me to respond directly to Scott Nerney: I appreciate your thoughts and concerns on the economic situation in Rhode Island.  I ask that you review the entire blog entry which includes a number of ways to address the economic future of RI. I stressed I will oppose any changes to our taxes without first reforming our spending, particularly the mandates. We have to make choices if we are going to be the master of our economic destiny in this state.  To deal with this enormous jobs and budget crisis, we need honest leadership that isn’t afraid to tell the truth to people.

There are three keys to dealing with Rhode Island's budget woes.  

First: the state must control government spending and be more efficient. Second: I pledge to be a champion of the property taxpayer.  The insidious property tax dampens exactly what we want to encourage - good schools, home ownership and business growth.  Third: I want to generate new state revenue from economic growth, not by raising taxes and fees. With growth comes revenue through increased sales and income.

We have to honestly confront the immediate gap between the revenue we take in as a state government, and what we need to spend to support the services we provide, particularly our schools and state colleges. We have to make choices if we are going to be the master of our economic destiny in this state. The most important objective is to develop a strategy that ends the spiral downward, where problems are pushed from the state level, to cities and towns and ultimately to the doorsteps of property taxpayers. We need to confront the challenges we face with honest determination, and end the political bickering. 

Mr Chafee,

Let me see if I understand you correctly. You are going to be a champion of the property taxholder. But a good majority of the middle and lower classes do not own property - so you don't care about them? Instead of being a champion of all voters you're going to increase the burden of those who can least afford it. My family's income is 60,000.00 per year. We barely afford rent, daycare, and utlilities. We don't have cable or expensive cell phones. We drive 10-year old vehilces and we still have trouble some days buying food and clothing for our two year old. And you want to increase my taxes by taxing food and clothing? Are you serious? I understand the importance of education but make no mistake there are still things we could cut as part of our "education spending" that would not harm the quality of education. I don't even want to hear about the possiblity of raising taxes until all cutting has been done. If the legislature knows that you are open to increasing taxes, they won't allow any cuts. You just allowed the general assembly to simply hold out until you allow the tax increase. Thanks a lot. You won't be getting my vote with that mindset.

When students graduate from URI, RIC, & Brown they are faced with an ugly truth, unless they are in the health care or tourism/service fields they will be hard pressed to find a job in this state. How many potential tax payers do we lose every year because there are no jobs for them to occupy?

While I would love to stay and eagerly support the platform you have laid out, Mr. Chafee, especially the human rights and ecological stances you put forward, I am in a dire financial situation and have been mostly applying out of state. To boost our economy we need people like myself, a masters degree holder, to stay and help pay into the system. I *want* to pay taxes but I have no job.

We absolutely need to support new and varied businesses with new opportunities for college degree and above holders.

In response to the commenter that said we need to cut back on workers: Companies have cut back on employees so they are already doing the work of 3 or more. They offer salaries instead of hourly wages so they can get around wage laws demanding longer and longer days. There is only so much one can squeeze a balloon before it bursts. Workers have a right to a home life and a weekend to rest. Without these, families break apart.

Again, thank you all for your comments. Heather's comments are very timely. The issue of "brain drain" is very important. This state has excellent higher education intuitions and we must work to ensure these graduates have options to live and work in Rhode Island. The first priority is to level the playing field with our neighboring states: Rhode Island's tax structure must be equitable, and ideally more favorable to tax-paying individuals and businesses, than our neighboring states. As soon as we can create an atmosphere of competitive taxation, I am confident that many of Rhode Island's unique resources are poised to take off with new development, jobs and inevitable economic growth for the region. Rhode Island's unique resources include but are not limited to the new train station in Warwick, and developing new green maritime-related industries at Quonset.

In response to Beth, everyone must remember Senator Chafee will oppose any increases to our taxes without first reforming our spending, particularly the costly, and unfunded mandates on cities and towns. The Senator's plan is to address the mandates first, and cut government spending, and then review the idea of a two-tier sales tax if necessary.

Delighted to see you running as an independent, Linc. We need consensus-builders who transcend party lines. All of our security systems in this country have been breached -- military (911 and would-be individual suicide bombers), savings and investments (financial collapse), homes (mortgage foreclosures and decline in property values), jobs (lay-offs, hours reduced to part-time with no benefits), health care costs. People are afraid and are lashing out in anger and playing the blame game. We need to restore a sense of security through creative restructuring of our communities and then extend that security to people beyond our borders. Look to the Massachusetts health care system as a model for Rhode Island. Massachusetts residents have health care security, which is one reason they don't want to pay for a national health care plan.

I have heard that you are very interested in developing Quonset as an industrial park but draw the line at a deep water port at Quonset? Is this true?

In response to Bob Candon, thank you for asking - I'm opposed to a deep water port because of the large amount of filling of the Bay required to accommodate dock space.

Best of luck to you, Senator Chafee.

I would like to point out that I, too, was skeptical of adding a sales tax to essential items like food and clothing, but upon closer observation, we're talking one penny per dollar spent on these items. If you observe the "Issues" page on this site, you'll notice a comparison that really puts things into perspective. When you spend $100 on food, for example, you have to pay $1 extra. If, over the course of a year, you spend maybe $5000 on things covered by the second-tier sales tax, you would pay the state an additional $50. The state, however, would have an additional $90 million dollars to put towards being fiscally disciplined.

Let me put it this way: it will be impossible for the country or the state to work its way out of deficit and debt without raising taxes at all. The important thing is which taxes are raised and how taxes are balanced to encourage growth and job creation without bankrupting the state. I trust that Sen. Chafee will be fiscally disciplined as governor, trimming excess spending and unnecessary services, while still making sure that the government operates in a financially sustainable manner.

As for championing keeping taxes low for property owners, I believe what he is saying is that towns and cities are operating in the red and will need to increase income in some way. That could come from the state or it could come from increased property taxes. If it comes from the state, you're looking at increased sales tax and/or income tax (Sen. Chafee seems to support the former without commenting on the latter). If it comes from the increased property taxes, that means the people who own property -- homeowners or landlords -- are paying more. Make no mistake about it: landlords are not going to hesitate to pass the increased taxes on to their renters.

Senator, would encourage vocational training in the industries you want to bring to the state? For example, you mentioned the biotech and natural energy industries -- would you create incentives for students looking for a career in a blue-collar field to receive training specific to these industries? (Assuming, of course, you can create the proper economic environment for bringing those industries to the state.)

Mr Chafee,
I continue to follow your opinions and direction as I make decisions on our next Governor. I'm curious what happened between your quote in January and the past couple of months?

"I want to generate new state revenue from economic growth, not by raising taxes and fees."

The 1% fee on untaxed items seems quite opposite of your original platform. If the state unemployment was no longer 12.2% and was a more reasonable 5% how much additional state revenue would that bring into the state coffers? Not that one could quickly do that, but in all honesty that's the absolute best way to raise revenue while fighting the legislature to cut expenses.

I'm inclined to support Lincoln Chafee for Governor although, I'd like some clarification on his proposals for pension reform.

I know he's inclined to support a transition to a FERS type of system, but what of the vested teachers, state and municipal employees that are currently vested? They've been paying into the current system for 10, 15, or 20 years or more.

Does the rug get pulled out from under them after a career of dedicated service and payments into the current system?

Thank you all for your continued comments. In response to Robert, I will not support any change to benefits to current state retirees or people who have already put in a number of years. I believe promises were made to those people and they must be kept. I will only support changing benefits to new hires.