News

“Question 4 lets voters decide where driver’s licenses fit in this broader picture, weighing issues like the safety of our transportation system and the impact on immigrants’ daily lives,” the cSPA report states.

“It’s probably a better way to think about it. [Looking at all taxes rather than just income taxes] is the more comprehensive view,” said Evan Horowitz, executive director of cSPA.

Executive Director Evan Horowitz joined Adam Reilly on GBH News’ Talking Politics to share what he found on Questions 3 and 4.

“But I don’t think the history of [one-party rule] is quite that sanguine,” Horowitz said. "So don’t expect kumbaya governance.”

Evan Horowitz, the executive director of the Tufts center, said while many millionaires might be experiencing one-time events, a major part of the money collected from the amendment would still come from consistent, extremely high earners.

According to a study by Tufts University’s Center for State Policy Analysis, the change would produce $1.3 billion of added revenue and effect fewer than one in every 175 households.

Fact-checking a debate on Question 1 with Evan Horowitz, executive director of the Center for State Policy Analysis at Tufts University.

"...the RMV already handles cases of people who are eligible to drive but not vote – including lawful immigrants with green cards and new drivers under 18. The same approach could be adapted for unauthorized immigrants."

The Tufts University Center for State Policy Analysis estimates that the surtax would apply to around 0.6% of Massachusetts households in any given year and would raise about $1.3 billion of revenue in 2023.