What's in RI's proposed $14.3B budget? Help for primary care, RIPTA funds and 'Taylor Swift tax'

PROVIDENCE – Rhode Island House Democrats have unveiled a new $14.3 billion state budget that seeks to bolster the finances of primary care doctors, hospitals and nursing homes without raising income taxes on the wealthy.
The proposed tax and spending plan for the year starting July 1 would raise Medicaid reimbursement rates to inject, including federal dollars, $45 million into primary care, $38 million into hospitals and $12 million into nursing homes. Funding for primary care practices would come in part from a new health insurance fee estimated to generate $30 million per year.
Although it spares the well-heeled an income tax hike, the House budget resurrects a tax proposed a decade ago on second homes worth more than $1 million, branded the "Taylor Swift tax" after the Watch Hill vacation home of the famous pop star. Proceeds would go to fund the state's low-income housing tax credit.
The budget would inject $15 million into the Rhode Island Public Transit Authority, the same amount of money lawmakers added to the statewide bus system a year ago but less than half of the $33 million the agency says it needs to plug a budget hole and avoid service cuts.
The extra RIPTA funding will come from a 3-cent-per-gallon hike in the gas tax slated to go into effect July 1 and tweaks to the formula that distributes transportation funds. A 1-cent-per-gallon increase in the gas tax is already set to go into effect in July.
The budget, a rewrite of the $14.2 billion tax and spending plan Gov. Dan McKee proposed in January, was quickly passed on an 11-3 vote by the House Finance Committee on June 10, setting it up for a vote before the full House on June 17.
"All our colleagues have heard, the Senate has heard and we decided that we needed to take action now," House Speaker K. Joseph Shekarchi told reporters about the money for primary care. "We've heard that our reimbursement rates are low, and that's the primary cause of the health care shortage. We wanted to address that immediately."
Senate President Valarie Lawson in an email applauded budget investments in healthcare, RIPTA and child care, suggesting it won't have much trouble passing that chamber.
As expected, the House abandoned several of McKee's proposals, including a 50-cent hike in the cigarette tax, buying an office building from Citizens Bank in East Providence and a tax on digital advertising that the governor hoped would pull in $9.5 million next year and $23.5 million annually by 2030.
But the House budget agreed with the governor on other proposals, including a new fee on electric vehicles and charging the state's 5% hotel tax to short-term rentals of whole homes on sites such as Airbnb.
Other budget highlights include:
Truck tolls. The House accepted McKee's plan to turn on the legal-again tolls on tractor trailers in the first half of 2026 and collect an estimated $10 million in state revenue.
Washington Bridge: $22 million in state dollars to match federal funds to build a new westbound Washington Bridge.
Education: The House proposal would spend $16.5 million more on education than McKee proposed and $59 million more than the current-year budget.
Conveyance tax: A 63% increase in the real estate conveyance tax on all home purchases, which doubles for the portion of a sale over $800,000 is proposed with proceeds going to services for homeless Rhode Islanders. The tax increase is projected to raise $8.4 million next year.
Airbnb: Extends the 5% state hotel tax to whole-house rentals, something lawmakers rejected last year but McKee's budget expects will generate $4.7 million per year, with a part of the collections also going to homeless services.
DMV: A $1 hike in the Division of Motor Vehicles "technology fee" to $3.50 per transaction.
Superman Building: The House budget included a provision, already passed as a standalone bill in the Senate, that would exempt the owner of the vacant Industrial Trust Tower in Providence from sales tax on construction materials while claiming a maximum in other state incentives.
Parking: The state's 7% sales tax would be charged to parking, generating $3.2 million per year.
Nicotine pouches: The tax applied to the wholesale cost of tobacco products would be expanded to synthetic nicotine pouches such as Zyn, generating $12 million per year.
Vacation home tax: The "Taylor Swift Tax" would not go into effect until the fiscal year that starts July 1, 2026 and no estimate was provided of how much it would eventually raise.
Longtime advocates of increasing taxes on Rhode Island's highest-earning residents hoped the budget pressure facing the state this year would convince top lawmakers that the time was now right to do it. They proposed a 3% surcharge on income above $625,000, which was estimated to generate $190 million in annual revenue.
And as lawmakers waited for the final details of the budget to be hammered out on June 10, the Working Families Party camped outside the State House with a box truck showing illuminated messages of support for a tax hike, such as, "Save Rhode Island. Tax the Rich."
But Shekarchi told reporters that lawmakers decided against a tax hike, at least until the state knows whether Congress is going to pass a tax cut bill that could slash Medicaid funding and shift more costs to states.
"We don't know what's going to happen in Washington," Shekarchi said. "We don't know what changes are going to be made in the federal tax code. We felt comfortable enough to do the non-owner-occupied taxes over a million dollars at this time, and we will revisit that issue when we have more clarity from Washington."
But Working Families Political Director Zack Mezera said what's happening in Washington is even more reason to make the "1% pay their fair share," not an excuse.
'Today's budget shows that state leadership would rather raise gas taxes for working families than increase taxes on millionaires," Mezera wrote in a news release. "As President Trump and his allies advance destructive cuts that could cause over 240,000 Rhode Islanders to lose Medicaid and hundreds of educators and care workers to lose their jobs, we need bold action to raise revenue now – otherwise working people and small businesses will be paying the price for years."
With $15 million from the budget to fill a $33 million projected shortfall, it looks as though RIPTA is going to need to scale back what it does, but Shekarchi said it would not necessarily mean large layoffs or route cuts.
"I think they need to look at everything," he said. "Maybe it's smaller buses, maybe it's addressing the ride schedule, maybe it's a slight fare increase, maybe it's looking at management positions. That's why we mandated, when we gave them $15 million last year, they do an efficiency study and find out the solutions."
Despite the prospect of having to make painful cuts this summer, RIPTA CEO Christopher Durand said the bus system is "grateful" for the additional permanent state revenue.
"The agency has long needed a consistent funding stream to allow us to better support getting Rhode Islanders to work, school and healthcare," he said in an email. "The last time the agency saw a permanent change in its funding structure was over ten years ago; this is a needed improvement, which we are thankful for."
This article originally appeared on The Providence Journal: RI's proposed $14.3B budget: Primary care; RIPTA; 'Taylor Swift tax'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

New York Post

41 minutes ago

• New York Post

Michael Goodwin: Hochul's snubbing of Mamdani will only help boost Cuomo's campaign

The observation that politics often makes for strange bedfellows is now offering an extra-strange New York example. It features an unlikely gift from Gov. Hochul to her predecessor and perpetual tormentor, Andrew Cuomo. Although she was his running mate and Lt. Governor for two terms, they were barely speaking by the time Cuomo was forced out of Albany nearly four years ago. Advertisement To this day, their mutual loathing is palpable. So how then to explain that Hochul threw Cuomo a huge last-minute lifeline in his race for mayor? To be sure, an obvious reason is to help herself in her re-election quest next year. But the immediate impact is a boost for Cuomo in his bid for City Hall. Advertisement You would assume the last thing she wants is to see him sitting in City Hall next year, badgering her and settling scores when she's running for re-election. Yet that could be the result of her move. Here's the scenario: Cuomo is in a tightening race to be the Democrats' nominee, with Election Day this Tuesday. 'Affordability crisis' He leads in the polls but his chief rival, Queens Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani, has been gaining and the early-voting turnout has surged among young people, the core of Mamdani's hard-left base. Moreover, with the city using the ranked-choice voting system, Mamdani has an extra advantage and could ultimately get the votes of four additional lefty candidates in the race through a series of cross endorsements. Advertisement Hochul's shocking help to Cuomo came in response to a question about Mamdani's radical economic platform, which consists of a bunch of free giveaways —buses, child care, etc. All of it would be funded by imposing even higher income taxes on the top 1 percent of New York City residents and hiking the corporate tax. It's part of the progressive playbook he's been selling for months, and his climb in the polls has encouraged other candidates to promote their own expensive wish lists and tax proposals. Advertisement Hochul has been silent all along, but suddenly, and very late in the game, she decided to throw cold water on the proposals that are the heart of Mamdani's eat-the-rich campaign. Asked in a TV interview if she backed his tax plans, the Democratic governor flatly replied, 'No.' 'I'm not raising taxes at a time where affordability is the big issue,' she said. 'I don't want to lose any more people to Palm Beach. We've lost enough . . . so let's be smart about this.' Whoa, Nellie. Hochul's answer was clearly prepared in advance, with her adopting Mamdani's theme of an 'affordability crisis' and turning it on its head to use it as a reason not to implement his agenda. In doing so, she effectively kills his proposals because he would need her and the Democratic-controlled Legislature's approval to put his taxes into law. Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters And given the timing, her answer could be intended to blunt his late surge by signaling to his supporters his ideas are dead on arrival in Albany. Advertisement Her answer also reveals the outline of Hochul's 2026 campaign. She's effectively taken tax hikes off the table, and if she were to flip-flop next year, she'd be toast. So her answer on Mamdani is as much about her own campaign as his. Dems 'alarmed' Besides, as troubling as Cuomo would be in City Hall, even worse would be the charismatic 33-year-old Mamdani, pushing her and the Legislature even further left. There's also the added baggage of his long trail of antisemitism at a time when Israel is fighting for its survival on several fronts and Dems already are home to Jew-hating Reps Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib. Having Mamdani, a Muslim, as the mayor of the city with the world's largest Jewish population has some top Dems worried that his election would further damage the party's troubled brand. Advertisement Politico reports that Third Way, a center-left Dem think tank, is 'alarmed' by how Mamdani's positions on Israel and other issues, past and present, would be a feast for Republicans in New York and nationally. The outlet cites a Third Way memo that describes 'defunding the police, closing jails, banning private healthcare and operating city-owned grocery stores as positions American voters would find beyond the pale.' They got that right. Advertisement At the same time, it's worth noting that Hochul's rejection of new taxes also amounts to a reversal of her tenure so far. Although she's lately been prattling about 'putting money in people's pockets,' the happy talk follows years of hikes in fees and taxes on New Yorkers to feed the budget beast she's created. As the cost of living in New York continues to soar, she's responsible for policies that have been driving a record number of New Yorkers out of the city and state, including to Palm Beach, Fla. Recall that during her tight race against GOP nominee Lee Zeldin in 2022, Hochul at one point demanded that he and other Republicans 'Just jump on a bus and head down to Florida where you belong, OK?,' before adding: 'You are not New Yorkers.' Advertisement The fact that the GOP is toothless in both Albany and City Hall has allowed her party to continually jack up the outrageously high costs of government and be tougher on cops than on criminals. Hochul's role in the disaster are certain to be the centerpiece of the GOP campaign against her next year, especially with New York moving rightward. In the 2024 election, the Empire State had the biggest swing of any blue state toward President Trump, who carried 43 percent of the vote, against just 37 percent in 2020. Vulnerable Hochul has made herself vulnerable with her implementation of congestion pricing, along with other taxes that are examples of her own drunken-sailor budgeting. The fact that several tax measures were designed to fund the always-broke MTA is no excuse because she controls the agency and has done zero to reform its wasteful ways. Her only answer has been to throw more money at it. Still, her response to Mamdani suggests she belatedly realizes there is validity and votes in the argument that the city and state have reached a tax-and-spend breaking point. As I noted recently, just 6,000 wealthy families in a city of 8.5 million people pay 48 percent of Gotham's personal income tax, which raises about $16 billion a year. These families are the geese who lay the golden eggs for both City Hall and Albany, and with the quality of life declining as the cost of living soars, the last thing the politicians should be doing is giving people new reasons to leave. In Hochul's case, it's relatively easy for her to say no to Mamdani, whose plans definitely would make the problems worse. The real test is whether she has any ideas that could stop the exodus already happening on her watch.

The Hill

44 minutes ago

• The Hill

Fetterman offers support for Trump decision to bomb Iran

Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) is offering support for President Trump's decision to bomb Iran, standing out from a number of other Democrats who have criticized the military action. 'As I've long maintained, this was the correct move by @POTUS,' Fetterman wrote in a post on X that linked to a statement from Trump announcing the decision. 'Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities,' Fetterman continued. I'm grateful for and salute the finest military in the world.' Fetterman since Hamas launched an attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023 has been a vocal supporter of Israel, and has at times criticized his own party over the Middle East. His remarks in the immediate aftermath of the bombing campaign, as a result, are unsurprising. But they stood apart from other Democrats who criticized Trump's decision as unconstitutional. For example, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) criticized Trump for vowing to bring peace to the Middle East but failing, saying he had 'misled the country about his intensions.' 'The risk of war has now dramatically increased, and I pray for the safety of our troops in the region who have been put in harm's way,' Jeffries wrote in a statement. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) both criticized the strikes as unconstitutional. Fetterman, however, tied himself to Trump by retweeting the president's Truth Social message announcing the attacks on the three nuclear sites in Iran. 'We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan,' Trump posted on Truth Social.

The Hill

an hour ago

• The Hill

Republicans line up behind Trump after strike on Iran — with few detractors

Republicans on Capitol Hill quickly lined up behind President Trump after he announced that the U.S. conducted a strike on three Iranian nuclear facilities, a strong show of support for the White House with few detractors inside the GOP. Trump announced on Truth Social just before 8 p.m. EDT on Saturday that the U.S. 'completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran,' including Fordow, the nuclear site hidden in a mountain south of Tehran. He is scheduled to address the nation from the White House at 10 p.m. Republican leaders in the House and Senate backed the action, which had become a debate of sorts in Washington — especially among GOP — since Israel struck Iranian nuclear facilities earlier this month in what it called a 'pre-emptive' attack. 'The military operations in Iran should serve as a clear reminder to our adversaries and allies that President Trump means what he says,' Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) wrote in a statement on X. 'The President gave Iran's leader every opportunity to make a deal, but Iran refused to commit to a nuclear disarmament agreement. President Trump has been consistent and clear that a nuclear-armed Iran will not be tolerated. That posture has now been enforced with strength, precision, and clarity.' 'The President's decisive action prevents the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism, which chants 'Death to America,' from obtaining the most lethal weapon on the planet,' he added. 'This is America First policy in action. God bless our brave men and women in uniform – the most lethal fighting force on the planet – as we pray for their safe return home. May God bless America.' Johnson was briefed on the strike beforehand, a source familiar with the matter told The Hill. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) wrote in a statement with X: 'I stand with President Trump.' 'The regime in Iran, which has committed itself to bringing 'death to America' and wiping Israel off the map, has rejected all diplomatic pathways to peace. The mullahs' misguided pursuit of nuclear weapons must be stopped,' he said. 'As we take action tonight to ensure a nuclear weapon remains out of reach for Iran, I stand with President Trump and pray for the American troops and personnel in harm's way.' Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rick Crawford (R-Ark.), similarly, backed Trump after the strike and applauded him for making the 'right call.' 'Iran has waged a war of terror against the United States for 46 years. We could never allow Iran to get nuclear weapons. God bless our brave troops. President Trump made the right call and the ayatollahs should recall his warning not to target Americans,' Cotton wrote on X. 'As I have said multiple times recently, I regret that Iran has brought the world to this point,' Crawford echoed in a statement. 'That said, I am thankful President Trump understood that the red line — articulated by President of both parties for decades — was real. The United States and our allies, including Israel, are making it clear that the world would never accept Iran's development of a nuclear weapon.' While the majority of Republicans backed Trump in the wake of the strike, there were some GOP detractors on Capitol Hill. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who has been advocating for the U.S. to avoid intervention in the Israel-Iran conflict, wrote on X minutes after Trump announced the offensive: 'This is not Constitutional.' Massie helped lead a bipartisan war powers resolution to prohibit U.S. involvement in the Middle East dispute. Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) suggested that the move was unconstitutional. 'While President Trump's decision may prove just, it's hard to conceive a rationale that's Constitutional. I look forward to his remarks tonight,' he wrote on X. Trump's decision to strike a trio of Iranian nuclear sites came after a week of debate on Capitol Hill over whether the U.S. should take action in Iran after Israel launched an attack on Iran, prompting a back-and-forth between the two countries. Trump on Thursday said he would decide whether to take action within the next two weeks. 'Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiation that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go in the next two weeks,' Trump said in the statement read by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt. The big question had been whether the U.S. would deploy a large bomb known as a 'bunker buster' to strike the Fordow facility, which is underground. While some lawmakers advocated for the move, others — including some of the president's most vocal supporters on the right-flank — pushed against the U.S. directly getting involved in the conflict. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), for example, said 'Me and my district support President Trump and his MAGA agenda, it's what we voted for in November, and foreign wars weren't a part of it.' On Saturday night, she offered prayers for the safety of U.S. troops and Americans in the Middle East. 'Let us pray that we are not attacked by terrorists on our homeland after our border was open for the past 4 years and over 2 Million gotaways came in.🙏 Let us pray for peace. 🙏,' she added. But across the GOP conferences on Capitol Hill, Republicans were quick to back the move by the president. 'Our commander-in-chief has made a deliberate —and correct— decision to eliminate the existential threat posed by the Iranian regime,' Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) wrote in a statement on X. 'We now have very serious choices ahead to provide security for our citizens and our allies and stability for the middle-east. Well-done to our military personnel. You're the best!' House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.), the No. 3 House Republican, said Trump 'was right then, and he is right today: NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE.' 'A nuclear Iran posed a threat to the Middle East and to the world. @POTUS has been consistent that this dangerous regime should NEVER possess a nuclear weapon,' he added in a statement on X.