Six-state review
Year-to-date revenues for the first four months of FY2003 were above their FY2002 level in most New England states. Hit hard by dramatically diminished tax receipts and/or increased spending pressures, all six states closed FY2002 with deficits that had to be eliminated by end-of-the-year fiscal measures. The improved revenue collections for the first four months of FY2003 were welcome. General revenues were up in Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Sales tax receipts, driven in large part by car purchases induced by manufacturers' offers of zero percent financing, were up in Connecticut, Maine, Rhode Island, and Vermont; meals and rooms tax receipts were up in New Hampshire. Personal income tax collections were mixed; although higher in Maine and Vermont, they were down slightly in Rhode Island and sharply in Connecticut and Massachusetts.
Taking charge: should New England increase its reliance on user charges?
New England relies less on user charges for its state and local revenues than any other region of the country. As a result, some policymakers maintain that increases in user charges would correct an "imbalance" in the region’s revenue mix. However, the national mix of state and local revenues is not necessarily the best mix for the states of New England. The degree to which a state should rely on u. ser charges depends on the priorities of its policymakers among competing principles of taxation, the conditions under which each principle favors user charges over taxes, and the extent to which these conditions exist within the state. Since each state has its own distinctive values and traits, the role of user charges in financing state and local government should vary across states. ; This article explores the conditions under which user charges compare favorably to taxes according to the principles of efficiency, equity, and exportability. The author finds that, given conditions peculiar to New England, the region’s low dependence on user charges makes sense in terms of ~11 three principles. Moreover, in several instances where New England states do rely heavily on user charges to finance a particular public service, circumstances favor user charge financing.
PLEASURE, POWER, AND THE PURSUIT OF COMMUNISM: SOVIET YOUTH AND STATE-SPONSORED POPULAR CULTURE DURING THE EARLY COLD WAR, 1945-1968
art, with certain students accused of “showing political immaturity, failing to understand the Party’s positions on art.” This episode constituted part of a broader crackdown on abstract art by the Khrushchev administration from late 1962, precipitated the the Soviet leader’s derision of such art forms in December 1962 at the Manege exhibit. Such instances demonstrate the limitations of the top-level promotion of youth grassroots initiative, as the Khrushchev leadership reigned in youth autonomy when it threatened to go beyond the boundaries of the permissible. The dates cited above have particular resonance, since both 1957-58 and 1962-63 represent two periods when those at the top of the Party hierarchy moved away from pursuing a more pluralistic, tolerant policy course, due to anxiety inspired by both sharpening Cold War hostilities and domestic developments. In these periods, official rhetoric censured what it labeled as 639 TsAOPIM, f. 635, op. 13, d. 546, ll. 56-57. This is likely related to criticism of the Party associated with the fallout from the Secret Speech and the Hungary invasion. For more, see Polly Jones, “From the Secret Speech to the Burial of Stalin: Real and Ideal Responses to De-Stalinization,” in Jones ed., The Dilemmas, 41-63. 640 TsAOPIM, f. 6083, op. 1, d. 52, ll. 166-67. 641 Susan E. Reid, “In the Name of the People: The Manege Affair Revisited,” Kritika 6.4 (Fall 2005): 673716. 642 On these anxieties, see Dobson, Khrushchev’s Cold Summer, 156-88.