Home care aides provide vital care to thousands of Marylanders who have difficulty with daily tasks because of their age, a disability, or a health condition. These workers help their clients with a wide variety of critical daily tasks, such as bathing, dressing, and eating. This care enables many to remain in their homes rather than moving to a nursing home or other institution.
As Maryland’s population ages, home care is likely to become increasingly important for the health of older Marylanders and people with disabilities, as well as for our state economy. Because Medicaid pays for more than half of all home care services delivered nationwide, state policies have an important role in determining the kind and quality of home care services available.
Unfortunately, Maryland recently limited the ways aging adults and Marylanders with disabilities can obtain Medicaid-funded home care services by canceling its independent provider program. This program allowed people who receive home care services to exercise a significant degree of control over their own care, and canceling it is likely to harm both Medicaid participants and home care aides. Although the state initially projected that this program would become dramatically more costly as a result of changes in federal labor regulations, an analysis by the Maryland Center on Economic Policy shows that these costs would be relatively small. To ensure quality care for older Marylanders and Marylanders with disabilities, the state should reinstate the independent provider program.As Maryland’s population ages, home care is likely to become increasingly important for the health of older Marylanders and people with disabilities, as well as for our state economy. Because Medicaid pays for more than half of all home care services delivered nationwide, state policies have an important role in determining the kind and quality of home care services available.
Economists consistently find that a well-educated workforce and a high-quality transportation system are among the bedrock elements upon which a prosperous state economy is built. Providing everyone with access to the education and training they need to reach their full potential boosts the productivity of individual workers and strengthens the overall economy. A well-functioning transportation system likewise strengthens the economy, allowing goods and people to move quickly and reliably to the places they need to be. (For a more detailed discussion of the impacts of state investments in education and transportation, see MassBudget’s report on these issues.)
While the economic importance of high-quality transportation infrastructure and public education are widely recognized, some fear that raising taxes to fund such investments could lead to high-income taxpayers leaving the state—particularly if tax increases are focused heavily on these high-income households. Fortunately, because there is wide variation in tax rates among the 50 states, economists have ample data with which to study this question. The most thorough studies have found consistently that tax rates influence the residence decisions of only a very small share of such households. Instead, high-income people—like other people—overwhelmingly choose where to live based on work and business opportunities, family and social connections, and the draw of an agreeable climate. The vast majority do not make their residence decision based on state tax rates. In this policy brief we examine the evidence on the likely migration effects of raising income taxes on high-income households—those with taxable annual income above $1 million—and the impacts on net state revenue.
A high-quality transportation system is important for our quality of life and the strength of our economy.1 Our state and federal governments work together to fund the construction and maintenance of our roads, bridges, rails, and public transit systems. In the coming months Congress is expected to debate proposals that could destabilize this partnership. This fact sheet examines the extent to which the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) and transit agencies across the state rely on federal sources of revenue for their operations and capital investment. It describes the federal grants that are most vulnerable to near-term budget cuts and how larger sums of federal transportation funding could face cuts after 2020.
In general, most federal transportation funding to Massachusetts is more vulnerable to budget cuts in the longer term than the short term. Most immediately, federal cuts could eliminate or curtail some programs that have awarded grants to Massachusetts in the past for transportation improvements and expansions, especially for public transit and rail. Over the longer term, a lack of sustainable revenue for the federal transportation trust fund imperils the larger federal support provided for Massachusetts investment in highways, transit and other construction and repair projects.
This report summarizes findings from the Hawai‘i Appleseed Center for Law & Economic Justice and QMark Research poll conducted in 2016 that revealed that nearly half of Hawai‘i families are living paycheck to paycheck.
It also found that six out of seven survey respondents support the concept a tax credits that let working families keep more of what they earn. In Hawai‘i, there are many working families who are doing their best, but could use assistance. A Working Family Credit is one way to help them. Read the full report.