CLT
UPDATE
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
MTF leads tax-and-spenders' push for
gas tax hike
A special state commission is expected to call for a
9-cent-a-gallon increase in the gas tax and reinstatement of tolls that
had been eliminated in Western Massachusetts and in West Newton,
according to two panel members.
The Transportation Finance Commission, scheduled to act on the proposals
Oct. 18, is also likely to lay the groundwork for new tolls on three
highways in Western Massachusetts by voting to turn over Interstates 84,
291, and 391 to the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, which has the
power to impose tolls, the two members said....
Several panel members said they are likely to back the recommendation,
along with Silveira and another GOP member, Kevin J. Sullivan, a former
top Cabinet official in the Cellucci and Swift administrations.
Silveira declined Friday to provide details of the panel's
recommendations, saying they are still subject to change....
But several members said the commission has concluded the state cannot
adequately fund its highways, mass transit system, and other
transportation infrastructure without a significant infusion of new
revenue.
"With declining federal revenues and the cost of the Central Artery the
state must find additional revenue sources to maintain and expand its
highways and mass transit," said Michael Widmer, president of the
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation and a member of the commission
who supports a gas tax increase....
The group also scheduled a meeting Oct. 18 to vote on final
recommendations.
The Boston Globe
Sunday, October 8, 2006
State panel to call for gas tax hike
Will also seek new road tolls
It’s sad, but true: A political campaign can be the
worst time to introduce serious proposals for solving public problems.
This week, a panel commissioned to make recommendations on the
Commonwealth’s transportation infrastructure will prove that point once
again....
Unfortunately, the commission’s recommendations are leaking out,
including a call for a 9-cent increase in the gas tax, the return of
Mass. Turnpike tolls suspended years ago in Newton and the western part
of the Pike and expansion of the Pike’s responsibility for several
connecting highways....
However unfortunate the timing, the commission’s research and
recommendations deserve a fair hearing and a full discussion. It would
be nice if the candidates would join in.
A MetroWest Daily News editorial
Sunday, October 15, 2006
Gas tax hike has merit
Sometime in early 2007, the Massachusetts secretary of
transportation will approach the corner office with bad news: The new governor
will not have enough money to fulfill all the transit commitments made during
his or her campaign. There'll be no rail connection to New Bedford and Fall
River, no Green Line extension to Medford, no increase in rail service to
Worcester, and not enough money to keep the existing state highway system in
repair. At that point, the governor will regret opposing an increase in the
state gasoline tax....
The 21-cent gasoline excise tax has not been increased since 1991, and inflation
has cut its value by a third. It remains the tax of choice for transportation
improvements because it targets users of a product that the state would like to
see conserved, to limit wear on the roads, improve the environment, and reduce
dependence on foreign producers. The tax needs to be increased just to maintain
the existing highway system.
A Boston Globe editorial
Sunday, October 15, 2006
Gas-tax timidity
Former Massachusetts Transportation Secretary Kevin Sullivan
is calling on a special state panel established to find ways for the state to
pay for road, bridge and transit projects, to reject a proposed 9 cents per
gallon gas tax increase.
Sullivan, a member of the Transportation Finance Commission considering the
increase, yesterday wrote the 12 other commission members in an effort to
convince them to ditch raising the gas tax....
Sullivan said it would be a mistake to send government bureaucrats more money to
spend.
"The bureaucracy will see that (money) and it's like food," Sullivan said. "You
can't lose weight by putting food in front of someone who likes to eat." ...
However, finance commission member Michael Widmer said a gas tax increase is
unavoidable. "I think it a necessary step if we are to maintain our
transportation infrastructure," Widmer said.
Widmer, who also is president of the government fiscal watchdog Massachusetts
Taxpayers Foundation, said he supports efforts to rein in costs but said that
won't eliminate the need for more money.
"The needs are so great and there is inadequate funding to support the most
important expansion projects and maintain our present highways, bridges and mass
transit," Widmer said....
Pointing to the $600 million the gas tax already funnels into the state's
coffers, Sullivan said Massachusetts can afford to tackle its transportation
needs without raising additional funds from drivers.
"There's enough money in the pot for roads and bridges," Sullivan said.
The Eagle-Tribune
Friday, October 13, 2006
Commission urged to reject gas tax increase;
Former transportation chief says there's enough money
Recently leaked reports indicate the Commonwealth’s
Transportation Finance Commission will recommend a 9 cent hike in the state’s
gas tax, which is used to finance road and bridge projects, to 30 cents per
gallon. Both major-party gubernatorial candidates have insisted that they would
not raise gas taxes. The report released today makes clear that better
transportation planning should precede any search for new revenues.
"How can we commit to a 50 percent increase in the gas tax when we don't know
what the funding gap is?" asks Pioneer's Executive Director, Jim Stergios. "And
we don't know the funding gap because no one has done the hard work of defining
transportation system needs or priorities."
Pioneer Institute
October 15, 2006
Enough About the Gas Tax,
Says New Pioneer Transportation Policy Report
Chip Ford's CLT Commentary
In its "Advances" for this week, The State House News
Service reported that tomorrow the "Transportation Finance Commission"
will meet at the Park Plaza Hotel for a "continuation of discussions" of
the state transit system. "It’s not what was reported in the
papers," commission chairman Stephen Silveira reportedly said,
"referring to press reports that the panel will vote to recommend a
9-cent increase in the gas tax and an increase in tolls."
The Boston Globe reported on Oct. 8 that this
commission would meet again Oct. 18, tomorrow, and "act on the
proposals."
The State House News further reported on Friday that
Silveira, "a transportation expert with ML Strategies consulting firm,"
added: "there was no planned vote on the tolls, but admitted the
possibility of the subject coming up, since commission members aren’t
limited to discussing certain topics."
As soon as we heard about a proposed 9-cents-a-gallon
gas tax hike, CLT fired off a news release on Oct. 9, "Gas
tax increase? Somebody has to be kidding!"
Whether or not the Transportation Finance Commission
votes tomorrow to increase the gas tax by 9-cents-a-gallon and increase
tolls, the usual editorial elites' led the charge over the weekend; the
usual suspects supporting more, more, more revenue. The $600
million the state now pulls in annually from the gas tax still isn't
enough: They want $270 million more every year, which would bring the
total state grab to closing in on a billion dollars.
"The tax needs to be increased just to maintain the
existing highway system," the Boston Globe editorial predictably
concluded on cue.
As if there are only two choices -- higher taxes or
crumbling bridges -- the MetroWest Daily News demanded to know:
"Members of the commission and voters should demand honest answers from
the candidates. If they oppose new taxes, do they favor crumbling
bridges, inadequate highways, limited commuter rail and potholes ever
bigger and more numerous?"
Somebody (we would guess MTF)
leaked the gas tax hike proposal, apparently implying that the
commission was on board – note that the Boston Globe was happy to refer
to a Republican, a former Massachusetts Transportation Secretary
and former mayor of Lawrence, Kevin Sullivan, as a supporter of the
idea. Kevin Sullivan e-mailed us last week, thanking Barbara for
her column against the gas tax (which appeared in the Eagle-Tribune),
and making it clear that he is not on board as a supporter.
"The bureaucracy will see that (money) and it's like food," Sullivan said,
according to the Eagle-Tribune. "You
can't lose weight by putting food in front of someone who likes to eat ...
There's enough money in the pot for roads and bridges."
The Boston Globe apparently had it wrong when it
reported on Oct. 8, "Several panel members said they are likely to back
the recommendation, along with Silveira and another GOP member, Kevin J.
Sullivan."
The Globe was on target though when it came to
identifying the lead advocate for higher taxes and tolls -- the
always-dependable tax-and-spender, Michael J. Widmer, president of the
fat-cat big-business funded so-called
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. The sole purpose of MTF
and Widmer is to provide the cover of false legitimacy, so the state can
take more from our pockets.
"I think it a necessary step if we are to
maintain our transportation infrastructure," Widmer told the
Eagle-Tribune, which reported that he added: "he supports efforts to rein in
costs but said that won't eliminate the need for more money."
Widmer warned, "The needs are so great and there is inadequate funding
to support the most important expansion projects and maintain our
present highways, bridges and mass transit."
This is MTF's standard gimmick: Widmer and MTF
for years, decades, have mentioned in passing a need to eliminate
government waste, "rein in costs," but only as a distraction, as cover.
Then MTF abandons any thought of savings in pursuit of ever more of our
hard-earned money for the state to squander.
MTF has been using this transparent ploy for decades
-- but when has Widmer or his "highly-respected" fat-cat organization
ever achieved any meaningful state savings or prevented legislative
boondoggles? But why should MTF bother, when it's the big bankers
that benefit from more state borrowing? And who makes up much of
its membership? Does it surprise you that they would be the biggest
banking institutions in Massachusetts?
 |
|
Chip Ford |
The Boston Globe
Sunday, October 8, 2006
State panel to call for gas tax hike
Will also seek new road tolls
By Andrea Estes and Frank Phillips, Globe Staff
A special state commission is expected to call for a 9-cent-a-gallon
increase in the gas tax and reinstatement of tolls that had been
eliminated in Western Massachusetts and in West Newton, according to two
panel members.
The Transportation Finance Commission, scheduled to act on the proposals
Oct. 18, is also likely to lay the groundwork for new tolls on three
highways in Western Massachusetts by voting to turn over Interstates 84,
291, and 391 to the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, which has the
power to impose tolls, the two members said.
The commission is expected to recommend that the Turnpike Authority,
which was supposed to be eliminated in 2017, be extended indefinitely,
according to the two members, who spoke on condition of anonymity
because the head of the commission is supposed to speak for the panel.
The commission, created by the Legislature more than two years ago, is
made up of specialists in transportation and business.
Its task is to provide a comprehensive and apolitical evaluation of
Massachusetts transportation over the next three decades, from highways
and bridges to proposed expansions of the commuter rail system.
The panel's call for a gas tax increase comes during a heated
gubernatorial campaign in which Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey, the
GOP nominee, has urged suspension of the current 21-cent-a-gallon state
gas tax.
She has also charged that her Democratic opponent, Deval L. Patrick,
would raise taxes if elected.
Though the proposals would have to be approved by the Legislature, the
panel's recommendations could nonetheless force the candidates to take a
position on the gas tax, injecting a new issue into a campaign that has
been focused on crime, immigration, and Healey's call to lower the state
income tax rate.
Healey faces the awkward political reality that the 13-member commission
is chaired by a Republican and that another member, Boston lawyer Harold
Hestnes, a longtime Republican civic leader, is the driving force behind
the gas tax hike proposal, according to the two members.
The panel's chairman, Stephen J. Silveira, was appointed by Governor
Mitt Romney.
Several panel members said they are likely to back the recommendation,
along with Silveira and another GOP member, Kevin J. Sullivan, a former
top Cabinet official in the Cellucci and Swift administrations.
Silveira declined Friday to provide details of the panel's
recommendations, saying they are still subject to change.
"The situation is still very fluid," he said. "We're talking about a lot
of different options. It's important to wait until the end of the day to
see how they all hang together. "It's inaccurate to talk about each item
in isolation."
But several members said the commission has concluded the state cannot
adequately fund its highways, mass transit system, and other
transportation infrastructure without a significant infusion of new
revenue.
"With declining federal revenues and the cost of the Central Artery the
state must find additional revenue sources to maintain and expand its
highways and mass transit," said Michael Widmer, president of the
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation and a member of the commission
who supports a gas tax increase.
A nine-cent increase would generate up to $270 million a year, members
said. The state gas tax was last increased in 1990. Under the proposal
considered by the commission, the increase would be phased in over five
years.
The commission had planned to have its report out by late last year,
then that deadline was pushed back to the spring. The commission
triggered controversy in April when the Globe reported that Silveira
suggested its recommendations not be issued until after the November
election.
But other members rejected that timetable, saying they believed it was
important that the recommendations and related questions raised by the
panel be part of the campaign debate.
Commission members met last Thursday to narrow their list of
recommendations and ask its staff for a cost analysis of the various
proposals before them.
The group also scheduled a meeting Oct. 18 to vote on final
recommendations.
The commission is still analyzing how much the new tolls would bring in.
The proposed amount of individual tolls has not been decided.
The recommendations, especially the call for a gas tax increase, are
expected to meet strong resistance from legislators, who will be
reluctant to approve legislation that will cost drivers -- both at the
pump and at the toll booth.
"Addressing the kind of transportation problems the state faces will be
very difficult politically," said Widmer. "There are no easy solutions."
Removing the tolls was accomplished with great fanfare in the 1990s,
under the administration of Governor William F. Weld.
The Massachusetts Turnpike tolls from Exit 1 in West Stockbridge to Exit
6 at I-291 just outside of Springfield were eliminated shortly after
Weld took control of the Turnpike Authority in 1996.
That year, Weld removed the tollbooth at Route 16 in West Newton,
eliminating the toll between Weston and Allston-Brighton.
Locked in a fierce battle to unseat US Senator John F. Kerry, Weld led
television cameras and a demolition crew to the toll plaza and told the
workers, "You men ready? Let it rip."
But tolls and taxes are not the only recommendations likely to stir
controversy.
The commission is also expected to recommend sweeping changes in pension
and medical benefits for MBTA employees and retirees, according to two
commission members.
The panel is looking to revamp the current system, which allows MBTA
workers to retire with a full pension sooner than other state employees.
Early retirees also receive better health insurance benefits than other
state workers, two commission members said.
Other states are also having problems maintaining their transportation
systems; 16 are considering toll increases and seven are considering
implementing tolls for the first time, according to transportation
specialists.
"The interstate system needs major overhauls across the country and the
federal government isn't keeping pace with the need," said Widmer.
"With hybrid vehicles and cars with better gas mileage, over the long
term Massachusetts, like other states, will need to depend on tolls to
replace the gas tax as a major funding source," he said.
Return to top
The MetroWest Daily News
Sunday, October 15, 2006
A MetroWest Daily News editorial
Gas tax hike has merit
It’s sad, but true: A political campaign can be the worst time to
introduce serious proposals for solving public problems. This week, a
panel commissioned to make recommendations on the Commonwealth’s
transportation infrastructure will prove that point once again.
The commission, created by the Legislature more than two years ago,
includes Republicans and Democrats appointed by the governor and
legislative leaders, chosen for their expertise in transportation and
business.
Its task was to prepare a comprehensive evaluation of the state’s
railroads, highways and bridges and a plan for maintaining and expanding
them over the next three decades. The commission initially intended to
release its report late last year, a deadline that was pushed back to
last spring, then to this fall. It is scheduled to vote on its final
recommendations Wednesday.
Unfortunately, the commission’s recommendations are leaking out,
including a call for a 9-cent increase in the gas tax, the return of
Mass. Turnpike tolls suspended years ago in Newton and the western part
of the Pike and expansion of the Pike’s responsibility for several
connecting highways.
Because its report is coming out just three weeks before an election,
candidates are already rejecting it. Republican Kerry Healey, who has
proposed suspending collection of the current 21-cent a gallon gas tax,
vows to hold to her no-new-taxes pledge. Independent Christy Mihos, who
has made removal of Pike tolls a signature issue, is denouncing any move
to bring them back. Democrat Deval Patrick said he wouldn’t approve a
gas tax increase and tried to blame the "Romney-Healey administration"
for the report.
Such positions, necessitated by political calculation, may render the
commission’s report impotent before it is even issued. But they do
nothing to address the problem at hand.
Members of the commission and voters should demand honest answers from
the candidates. If they oppose new taxes, do they favor crumbling
bridges, inadequate highways, limited commuter rail and potholes ever
bigger and more numerous? If not, how do they propose to pay for
maintaining the states transportation infrastructure?
We have our own issues with the recommendations we’ve heard so far,
beginning with the inequity of making MetroWest commuters, who are most
dependent on the Turnpike, pay to maintain roads others use for free.
That includes the Central Artery, now depressed at huge expense to the
Commonwealth but a free ride for thousands of commuters south of Boston.
We also question the efficiency of tolls as a revenue source. Collecting
tolls can cost up to 70 percent of what they bring in, while it costs
next to nothing to collect gasoline taxes.
However unfortunate the timing, the commission’s research and
recommendations deserve a fair hearing and a full discussion. It would
be nice if the candidates would join in.
Return to top
The Boston Globe
Sunday, October 15, 2006
A Boston Globe editorial
Gas-tax timidity
Sometime in early 2007, the Massachusetts secretary of transportation
will approach the corner office with bad news: The new governor will not
have enough money to fulfill all the transit commitments made during his
or her campaign. There'll be no rail connection to New Bedford and Fall
River, no Green Line extension to Medford, no increase in rail service
to Worcester, and not enough money to keep the existing state highway
system in repair. At that point, the governor will regret opposing an
increase in the state gasoline tax.
The governor will be forewarned of this shortfall if he or she reads the
reports of a special commission, established by the Legislature in 2002.
It probably won't finish its work before the election, but the report
should be out when the new governor is forming an administration in
November and December. A Globe report that the commission might
recommend a 9-cent increase in the gasoline tax prompted hasty
opposition from all four gubernatorial candidates last week.
The commission will not recommend a single source of new revenue but
will lay out a range of choices. These include restoring tolls on the
western section of the Massachusetts Turnpike and in West Newton. Maybe
a case can be made for such a step, but people in the western part of
the state have been shortchanged on transportation spending. Tolls
should be restored there only if it is essential to maintain that
section of the turnpike.
A decade or two ago, the state could depend on the federal government to
pay a substantial share of both highway and transit projects.
Massachusetts is in contention for a 60 percent federal contribution to
connect the two sections of the Silver Line in Boston, but after that
federal aid will flow feebly to the state. Massachusetts is on its own
for the next major round of transit expansions.
The 21-cent gasoline excise tax has not been increased since 1991, and
inflation has cut its value by a third. It remains the tax of choice for
transportation improvements because it targets users of a product that
the state would like to see conserved, to limit wear on the roads,
improve the environment, and reduce dependence on foreign producers. The
tax needs to be increased just to maintain the existing highway system.
Democrat Deval Patrick and independent Christy Mihos want to extend rail
service to New Bedford and Fall River. Republican Kerry Healey backs the
Romney transportation plan, which includes the Worcester expansion and
the Green Line extension. Green-Rainbow candidate Grace Ross wants to
improve regional public transit. It's easy to talk of big plans during a
campaign. The realities of governance will demand lesser ambitions -- or
more money.
Return to top
The Eagle-Tribune
Friday, October 13, 2006
Commission urged to reject gas tax increase;
Former transportation chief says there's enough money
By Edward Mason, Staff writer
Former Massachusetts Transportation Secretary Kevin Sullivan is calling
on a special state panel established to find ways for the state to pay
for road, bridge and transit projects, to reject a proposed 9 cents per
gallon gas tax increase.
Sullivan, a member of the Transportation Finance Commission considering
the increase, yesterday wrote the 12 other commission members in an
effort to convince them to ditch raising the gas tax.
Sullivan, a former Lawrence mayor who served as transportation secretary
in the Cellucci administration, wrote that the state should first look
at cutting costs and making the agencies that oversee transportation
projects more efficient.
"I'm very opposed to raising the gas tax," Sullivan said in an
interview. "Unless you talk about controlling expenses, you'll never get
where you're going."
The panel is considering raising the gas tax by 9 cents over five years,
eventually taking in about $270 million a year. That is on top of the
$600 million the 21 cents per gallon gas tax took in during fiscal year
2006.
Sullivan said it would be a mistake to send government bureaucrats more
money to spend.
"The bureaucracy will see that (money) and it's like food," Sullivan
said. "You can't lose weight by putting food in front of someone who
likes to eat."
The Transportation Finance Commission was established two years ago by
the Legislature to assess how the state can afford its ongoing bridge,
highway and public transit projects. The commission is expected to issue
its recommendations in November.
Stephen Silviera, the commission chairman, said raising the gas tax is
but one option the commission has discussed over the past two years. The
commission also is considering ways of increasing efficiencies such as
transferring responsibility for some western Massachusetts highways to
the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority.
The state gas tax has not been increased since 1990. Silviera, a Romney
appointee to the commission who is a vice president with Boston lobbying
firm MLStrategies, said the 9 cents figure was not arbitrary. It
represents what the gas tax would be if adjusted for 16 years of
inflation.
It is not clear whether the commission members support boosting the gas
tax. Silviera said he hasn't decided whether he supports a gas tax
increase, and says he has not gauged the depth of support on the
commission. Several other commission members did not return phone calls.
Silviera said a vote on raising the gas tax is not on the panel's agenda
for its next meeting on Oct. 18.
The commission's final report is expected at the end of November.
If the commission backs a gas tax increase, that doesn't mean it will be
implemented. Any tax increase needs to be approved by the Legislature.
And it would have to overcome an anticipated gubernatorial veto. Both
gubernatorial candidates, Democrat Deval Patrick and Republican Lt. Gov.
Kerry Healey, oppose an increase in the gas tax.
However, finance commission member Michael Widmer said a gas tax
increase is unavoidable. "I think it a necessary step if we are to
maintain our transportation infrastructure," Widmer said.
Widmer, who also is president of the government fiscal watchdog
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, said he supports efforts to rein in
costs but said that won't eliminate the need for more money.
"The needs are so great and there is inadequate funding to support the
most important expansion projects and maintain our present highways,
bridges and mass transit," Widmer said.
Pointing to the $600 million the gas tax already funnels into the
state's coffers, Sullivan said Massachusetts can afford to tackle its
transportation needs without raising additional funds from drivers.
"There's enough money in the pot for roads and bridges," Sullivan said.
Return to top
Pioneer Institute
October 15, 2006
Enough About
the Gas Tax,
Says New Pioneer Transportation Policy Report
Recent Debate on Tax Hike Distracts From Vital
Transportation Planning Needs
BOSTON –A new Pioneer policy brief calls the recent furor over the gas
tax a "distraction" from the important work of determining the state’s
transportation needs. It calls for any decision to seek new revenues to
be driven by an integrated transportation plan that emphasizes
maintenance and economic growth.
Recently leaked reports indicate the Commonwealth’s Transportation
Finance Commission will recommend a 9 cent hike in the state’s gas tax,
which is used to finance road and bridge projects, to 30 cents per
gallon. Both major-party gubernatorial candidates have insisted that
they would not raise gas taxes. The report released today makes clear
that better transportation planning should precede any search for new
revenues.
"How can we commit to a 50 percent increase in the gas tax when we don't
know what the funding gap is?" asks Pioneer's Executive Director, Jim
Stergios. "And we don't know the funding gap because no one has done the
hard work of defining transportation system needs or priorities."
The Pioneer report, "Beyond the Gas Tax: Defining Transportation Needs,
Emphasizing Economic Growth, and Maintaining Our Assets," by Pioneer
Research Director Steve Poftak, urges the Transportation Finance
Commission to prioritize projects over the next 20 years based on
criteria that stress economic growth and include maintenance costs. The
resources needed to build, operate, and maintain projects can only be
determined after addressing key questions related to our long-term
transportation infrastructure needs.
State transportation planning is currently dominated by various
agencies, such as the MBTA, Massport, and the Turnpike Authority. This
fragmented process results in planning decisions that take into account
only the needs of one mode, rather than the transportation system as a
whole. The process also directs resources according to politics and
litigation, rather than utilizing transportation to induce economic
growth to benefit the entire state.
The report proposes measures that would improve a project’s rating based
on pro-growth zoning and permitting decisions. Under the current
criteria, a proposal to build an Orange Line station at Assembly Square
in Somerville is rated "high priority" for economic and land use impacts
not because it would attract 1100 new riders, but because it is in a
"state-designated revitalization area."
Similarly, the planned restoration of trolley service to the Arborway
branch of the Green Line is close to the front of the current project
queue even though it would substitute for an existing bus line, was
estimated in 2003 to cost about $72 million to build, and is estimated
to add only 200 riders per day.
Poftak also recommends basing cost estimates on a project’s lifecycle,
rather than initial construction costs, and assigning higher priority to
project maintenance.
To ensure comprehensive, integrated transportation planning – and
accountability – the report calls for acceleration of the move, begun
with passage of the 2004 Transportation Reform Bill, toward a strong
Secretary of Transportation with oversight of almost all state
transportation activities.
Steve Poftak is director of research and director of the Shamie Center
for Better Government at Pioneer. Previously, he worked in the
Commonwealth’s Executive Office for Administration and Finance, where he
managed a $1.3 billion capital budget, including transportation
spending.
Pioneer Institute is an independent, non-profit public policy research
institute. Pioneer generates and markets practical, new, peer-reviewed
public policy ideas that advance individual freedom and responsibility,
economic opportunity, social mobility, and limited government.
Return to top
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes
only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
|