|
Help save yourself
— join CLT
today! |
CLT introduction and membership application |
What CLT saves you from the auto excise tax alone |
Ask your friends to join too |
Visit CLT on Facebook |
CLT UPDATE
Saturday, May 10, 2014
What's wrong with this picture?
|
After adding more funding for the Department of
Children and Families, an anti-gang grant program, and global
warming preparedness, the Massachusetts House passed a $36.3 billion
annual budget 148-2 Wednesday night, sending it to the Senate for
its markup.
Over three days of debate, the House dispatched
with 1,175 amendments, and added roughly $144 million to the bill
that hit the House floor Monday with a $36.2 billion bottom line,
according to numbers provided by the House Ways and Means
Committee....
Despite marathon sessions, public debate on the
bill was infrequent, but at times charged with emotion. For the most
part, lawmakers spent the week sitting idly in the House chamber,
privately lobbying for amendments, and waiting for top House
Democrats to produce meaty amendments for approval....
Republican Reps. Marc Lombardo, of Billerica, and
James Lyons, of Andover, were the only members to vote against the
annual spending bill....
Major spending items passed with little debate
and nearly no opposition. Out of view of the public, House leaders
cobbled members’ sundry amendments into nine packages.
The State House News Service
Thursday, May 1, 2014
Mass. House agrees to $36.3 billion fiscal 2015 budget
House Democrats have overwhelmingly approved a
Republican measure to force the Patrick administration to provide a
total accounting of all taxpayer money used to salvage the broken
Obamacare website and fund temporary health insurance coverage to
Bay Staters.
“You can’t help but admit it’s a failure,” said
House Minority Leader Bradley H. Jones Jr. (R-North Reading). “It’s
an abject failure that’s going to cost the taxpayers, whether it’s
the commonwealth of Massachusetts or money from the feds or
rate-payers, tens of millions of dollars that shouldn’t have
happened.”
A majority of House Democrats adopted Jones’
amendment to its budget late Wednesday night to force the Executive
Office of Health and Human Services to review the financial impact
of the failed Massachusetts Health Connector website and provide a
cost analysis of state funds used for temporary insurance coverage.
The bill is heading to the Senate for approval and would then need
to be signed by Gov. Deval Patrick.
The Boston Herald
Friday, May 2, 2014
House Democrats back push for cost tally on Health Connector
The Urban Institute, a Washington think tank,
gives Massachusetts a failing grade in its new study on public
pensions, ranking the state the worst in the nation.
The institute cited low funding levels, as well
as pension plan designs that it says hurt younger workers and fail
to encourage older employees to work longer.
According to the study, Massachusetts receives a
“D” for its plan’s funding ratio, along with numerous other states.
It received an “F” for making required contributions, with three
other states. — New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and North Dakota.
The Boston Globe
Thursday, May 1, 2014
Mass. pension plan ranks worst in US, study finds
House lawmakers have used the loophole in the law
to debate billions in budget dollars behind closed doors, said
Beacon Hill watchdog Barbara Anderson of Citizens for
Limited Taxation.
“Why is it so secret? Why can’t they have those
discussions in public?” Anderson said.
“The legislators will say you can’t have an
honest discussion when the media is watching. I have a problem with
that. I’d have everything out in the open. It’s our government. It’s
the people’s government.
“We have a right to everything.”
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
Legislators get pass on secret meetings
The private room, anchored by a simple oval
conference table and about a dozen high-backed chairs, is where many
House spending pitches for the state’s $36.3 billion budget live or
die — all out of public view.
It’s a symbol of what the House budget process
has become — where efficiency has come at the price of transparency.
The deals cut in Room 348 are so secretive the
public is not allowed to enter or photograph the hallway leading to
the room — even when it’s completely empty. A Herald photographer
who snapped a photo of the vacant room when the House was not in
session was asked to leave after State House staffers said the area
was off-limits.
Because lawmakers are exempt from the state’s
Open Meeting Law, only House members know what is said in Room
348....
Members repeatedly retreated to Room 348 during
last week’s budget debate, where Dempsey, his staff and other
leaders listened to scores of lawmakers plead for local projects to
be included in so-called consolidated amendments — large budget
add-ons grouped by spending category and adopted by the House in
recent years to avoid House floor debate....
After the scrum in Room 348, Dempsey, his staff
and other House leaders retreat to a back office and decide which
proposals will survive. Members are given as little as 30 minutes to
review the final consolidated amendment before the vote.
Dempsey brushed off the lack of public access to
the secret sessions in Room 348, saying, “The reps are the public.
The reps are representing their constituents, and they’re fighting
for their constituents.” ...
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
Special Report: State politicians retreat to secret room to shape
budget
“Perhaps one of the trade-offs for an efficient,
short budget session is less transparency. We believe that the
trade-off is best made in the opposite direction,” said Pam Wilmot,
executive director of Common Cause Massachusetts. “The biggest area
of public policy in the Legislature — the budget — is done behind
closed doors. Much of those discussions are without public access,
and in our book, that’s a problem.”
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
‘Animal House’ speeds up act at expense of debate
The long-held tradition of semi-regular powwows
between the governor, Senate president and speaker of the House are
closed-door affairs where everything from major policy issues to the
Red Sox lineup have proven talking points over the years — but
always under the condition the discussions stay confidential.
The so-called leadership meeting varies in
frequency and topic, but it’s traditionally been a Monday staple on
the calendar and can include key lieutenants of the three leaders.
It’s also an example of the type of closed-door
meetings that can drive important issues on Beacon Hill, where the
state’s three most powerful politicians gather to hash out ideas
beyond earshot of the public.
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
Meetings cue small talk, big deals
No one in Bay State politics may wield as much
power as the speaker of the House, whose ability to reward allies,
punish enemies and determine the direction of billion-dollar policy
has proven key to controlling the 160-member body.
The officeholder is the gatekeeper of Beacon Hill
priorities, often standing between initiatives being adopted into
law or withering on the vine....
The power, however, has also created controversy.
Flaherty, Finneran and DiMasi were all convicted
of criminal charges, from tax evasion to perjury to conspiracy and
extortion, respectively. A cancer-stricken DiMasi sits in a federal
prison. DeLeo has long said he intends to “break the streak.”
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
In Bay State, nothing gets past powerful House leader
State lawmakers operate in a virtual
transparency-free fortress void of public scrutiny where even House
leadership doesn’t share information with junior members, a Herald
review has found.
“The Legislature’s insulation from public purview
is about as tight and high as you can get,” said Gregory W.
Sullivan, former inspector general and research director at Pioneer
Institute. “It’s truly impervious — even to investigative agencies.”
Sullivan said the only agency he couldn’t
subpoena as IG was the state Legislature. And the public doesn’t
fare any better. Massachusetts lawmakers have completely exempted
themselves from following the Open Meeting Law, which requires all
deliberations of a public body to be open to the public, and the
Public Records Law, which gives the public access to documents.
The lack of transparency even extends among
members in the House chamber, said Sullivan, who served as a state
representative for a 17-year stint that ended in 1992.
“People might be surprised to know that
legislators are in the dark as much as the public,” Sullivan said.
“In many cases, the membership find out the major details of
legislation at the same time as the public — when they are
announced. It’s a small group of people at the very top, such as the
House speaker, that make those decisions.”
The Boston Herald
Thursday, May 8, 2014
So bad even the reps can be left in the dark
Rank-and-file lawmakers trying to push prized
budget pitches are often left to horse trade — agreeing not to fight
for some amendments with the promise of others passing without a
vote — in a secretive process that leaves the public out of the
loop.
One jilted rep said he had his “arms twisted” in
the process. Others say it’s just the way the $36.3 billion state
budget gets done these days in the “Members Only” halls of Beacon
Hill.
“The concern some members have is that if they
don’t play ball with their own leadership then they will get
nothing,” said former Republican state Rep. Daniel B. Winslow of
Norfolk, who left the House last year for the private sector.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, May 8, 2014
Members only: Deal-making silences debate on State House floor
State lawmakers can enact the most fiscally
responsible budget ever in the history of time. But if the details
are known only to them — negotiated in secret, with members given
mere moments to scan through massive bundled amendments before
voting to enshrine them in law — then their work will always come
under a cloud of suspicion, and reasonably so.
The Herald reported yesterday on the back-room
culture that permeates the State House. When the House debates its
budget plan each year, for example, it does so largely within the
confines of a room that is off-limits to the public....
House Speaker Robert DeLeo and his predecessors
(who began this tradition) have pointed out that any individual
representative can demand to have an amendment singled out for
debate on the floor. In practice, this rarely happens. Rocking the
boat is an unlikely path to favored status....
It isn’t just the House — and it isn’t just
during budget deliberations. An analysis by Commonwealth Magazine in
2012 found that the number of roll calls in the House had declined
by 70 percent since the mid-1980s; in the Senate by 50 percent. The
time the two branches spent in session had dropped by half.
Some would argue that’s a good thing. But the
public has reasonable cause for concern. The fact that one party
wields lopsided power over the proceedings is one major obstacle to
openness. The fact that the people’s business is now conducted
largely out of the people’s view is the other.
A Boston Herald editorial
Thursday, May 8, 2014
Closed-door culture
The Patrick administration will invoke emergency
rules — reserved for “an unforeseen crisis” — to sidestep the
state’s procurement laws and award a lucrative, no-bid Obamacare
contract to Minnesota-based Optum to salvage the disastrous state
exchange, the Herald has learned.
Health Connector spokesman Jason Lefferts said
the state is executing the unusual crisis clause “to avoid
substantial harm to the functioning of government ... and since the
health, welfare or safety of citizens of the Commonwealth is
threatened without a functioning (state Obamacare exchange).”
But former state Inspector General Gregory
Sullivan said the Patrick administration is abusing the emergency
language.
“It wasn’t unforeseeable,” said Sullivan, now at
the Pioneer Institute. “It was just denied by the administration for
months. The administration was well aware of the fact that the
Connector project was behind schedule, over-budget and dysfunctional
... I wouldn’t call this an emergency, and I think it should be
competitively procured so everyone has a chance to bid.” ...
At least one [Health Connector] board member told
the Herald the administration is cutting the board out of the
process.
“We’re at the point now where some crucial
decisions need to be made, and either the board has authority on
this, or why do we have a board?” said board member Ian Duncan. “I’m
very concerned about another proposal to spend $100 million of
taxpayer money with no guarantee something will work.” ...
GOP gubernatorial candidate Charlie Baker, the
former CEO of Harvard-Pilgrim, told the Herald the time is past due
for transparency at the Connector.
“It’s terribly disappointing to hear that the
decision to spend tens of millions of dollars on an untested and
unproven two-track system has been made behind closed doors and in
haste by the same people who put us in this mess in the first
place,” he said.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, May 8, 2014
Health Connector cure a bitter pill
Critics decry use of emergency rules
The total cost to implement Obamacare in
Massachusetts surpassed a half-billion dollars yesterday, as the
Health Connector board agreed to seek an additional $121 million in
federal funds to try to rescue the money-hemorrhaging health
exchange.
“This is now Massachusetts’ Big Dig I.T.
project,” said Joshua Archambault, a health care expert at the
Pioneer Institute. “The decision was completely irresponsible to
taxpayers, with very little uncertainty we’re going to get the end
result that we want.”
The board approved a two-track plan yesterday —
invoking an emergency provision to sidestep state procurement laws —
to award a no-bid contract to Minnesota-based Optum. The company
will, in turn, subcontract with hCentive — which it holds a 24
percent stake in, as the Herald first reported yesterday....
For taxpayers, Obamacare in Massachusetts has
been a more-than-half-billion-dollar blunder. It amounts to: $270
million in federal grants to implement the law, an estimated $120
million through the end of the year to keep some Bay Staters on
Commonwealth Care plans, $50 million to pay Optum for easing an
application backlog and between $100 million and $145 million for
the two-track plan.
And that doesn’t include the cost of temporary
Medicaid insurance for Bay Staters, which will be split between the
state and feds.
The Boston Herald
Friday, May 9, 2014
Health Connector costs surpassing $500M
‘I.T.’ version of the Big Dig
Massachusetts Department of
Revenue
May 2, 2014
April Revenue Collections Total $2.736 Billion
[Excerpt]
Year-to-date tax collections so far this fiscal year
total $19.218 billion, up $1.074
billion or 5.9 percent from the same period last year
and $121 million above the year-to-date revised
benchmark.
On a fiscal 2014 year-to-date basis, sales and use tax
collections are $263 million or 6.2 percent higher than the same period a year ago,
$15 million below the revised benchmark. Year-to-date
corporate/business taxes are $283 million or
16.5 percent higher than the same
period a year ago, $162 million above the revised
benchmark. Income tax collections on a year-to-date
basis totaled $11.014 billion or 3.3 percent higher than the same period a year ago
and $5
|
|
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
In a CLT Update a year ago, last May 24 (Senate
passes $34 billion state budget; $1.5 billion increase over current
budget — and no EBT Card reforms) I noted:
The state Senate last night passed
its version of the state budget for the next fiscal
year, $34 billion, an increase of $1.5 billion over and
above the current operating budget for this fiscal year
passed last June. (For last year's [FY2013] budget vote,
see: State House News Service, Jun. 28, 2012, "House,
Senate stamp approval on $32.5 Billion state budget.")
One thousand five hundred million
dollars ($1,500,000,000) more of our money over
what the state budgeted, extracted from us, last year.
The House last week passed its FY2015 budget of
$36.3 billion
— an increase of $2.3 billion over last
year's spending hike.
That's Two thousand three hundred million
dollars ($2,300,000,000) more of our money they plan to
spend over last year's spending increase
—
thanks in part to last year's massive tax hikes.
Here's one example of how our money is being
spent in the coming fiscal year. The State House News Service
(May 2, 2014, Weekly Roundup – "Failure and Fault") reported:
One of the fiercest debates of the
week came in response to Rep. Jim Lyons’ proposal to ban
in-state tuition for non-legal residents and stop a
practice Gov. Patrick put in place of offering the
reduced tuition rates to certain qualifying immigrants
given “deferred status” under a relatively new federal
immigration policy.
In the end Lyons’ fight was in vain, but once upon a
time DeLeo might have agreed with the conservative
Republican. DeLeo in 2006 joined with 96 of his House
colleagues to reject a bill that would have offered
in-state tuition to qualifying undocumented immigrants,
and in doing so broke with House Speaker Sal DiMasi who
supported the bill. Times they are a changing.
The House proposes spending $2.3 billion more,
but —
even with those tax hikes
—
revenue is up 'only' $1.074 billion over this time last year. Can
you do this within your family budget?
The road is already and again being paved for
another "unavoidable" tax hike ahead. As we've asserted for years,
decades, "We don't have a revenue problem
— we
have a spending problem!"
All that spending ignores the
ticking time
bomb as legislators whistle past the graveyard. Massachusetts
was recently ranked
worst state in the nation for funding of its government employee
pension system. The study by the liberal think tank, the Urban
Institute, gave our state an “F” for making required contributions:
The state’s
pension system, which covers Commonwealth employees and
teachers, was 60.6 percent funded in early 2013. That
compares with an average of 74 percent funding across
all US states, according to the institute.
“Over the years, they’ve dug a pretty deep funding hole,
and that’s getting worse,’’ said Richard Johnson, the
project’s lead researcher.
All that excessive, wasteful spending but the
hole of irresponsibility keeps being dug deeper.
Who do you suppose will be required to bail out
this looming disaster if it's not confronted now? (Hint:
It won't be the pols who created it.)
Talk about bottomless holes, PatrickCare has
finally admittedly crashed and burned
—
after wasting $500 million of taxpayers' money. What was once the
national model for ObamaCare has again reached that dubious
distinction Massachusetts has recently so often achieved:
"Worst of any state in the nation."
Former state Inspector General Greg Sullivan, now at Pioneer
Institute, was right that the Patrick administration is abusing the
emergency power.
“It wasn’t
unforeseeable. It was just denied by the administration
for months. The administration was well aware of the
fact that the Connector project was behind schedule,
over-budget and dysfunctional ... I wouldn’t call this
an emergency, and I think it should be competitively
procured so everyone has a chance to bid.”
Gov. Patrick "will
invoke emergency rules — reserved for 'an unforeseen crisis' — to
sidestep the state’s procurement laws and award a lucrative, no-bid
Obamacare contract" in an attempt to salvage this endless fiasco.
Apparently he's discovered he too "has a pen and a cell phone," like
his Chicago alter ego, Barack Obama.
The Boston Herald ran a great investigative
series this week into how the sausage is made on Bacon Hill these
days. Barbara spoke at length with the reporter, and her overall
take was that things have been both better in the distant past, and
worse under recent House speakers. As the Boston Herald noted:
Flaherty, Finneran and DiMasi were
all convicted of criminal charges, from tax evasion to
perjury to conspiracy and extortion, respectively. A
cancer-stricken DiMasi sits in a federal prison. DeLeo
has long said he intends to “break the streak.”
Barbara was referring to when things were better
in the distant past: when there were more Republican legislators,
who teamed up with conservative Democrat legislators, like Greg
Sullivan (now at Pioneer Institute), demanding more open debate and
supporting tax limitation. She was quoted only on our longstanding
annoyance that the budget conference committee isn’t open, but she
sees more responsiveness from the present House leadership; House
Ways & Means Committee Chairman Brian Dempsey is friendly on both
Prop 2½ and the initiative petition process in general, which will
be valuable when state Sen. Stan Rosenberg becomes the next Senate
President.
And a few Republican amendments, like the one to
“force the Patrick administration to provide a total accounting of
all taxpayer money used to salvage the broken Obamacare website and
fund temporary health insurance coverage" did pass. More money was
put into the government employee pension liability system this year
too. These explain why most Republican legislators voted for the
final budget, even though the total costs are obviously far too high
(and still contain that extra income tax revenue by refusing to
honor the voters' 2000 decision our income tax rollback ballot
question).
I've included the Herald series below for your
enlightenment below, if you choose to delve deeper into 'what's
wrong with this picture.'
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford |
|
|
|
|
|
The State House News Service
Thursday, May 1, 2014
Mass. House agrees to $36.3 billion fiscal 2015 budget
By Andy Metzger
After adding more funding for the Department of Children and
Families, an anti-gang grant program, and global warming
preparedness, the Massachusetts House passed a $36.3 billion annual
budget 148-2 Wednesday night, sending it to the Senate for its
markup.
Over three days of debate, the House dispatched with 1,175
amendments, and added roughly $144 million to the bill that hit the
House floor Monday with a $36.2 billion bottom line, according to
numbers provided by the House Ways and Means Committee.
The Senate usually debates its annual budget proposal in May, with a
conference committee then named to produce a consensus spending plan
in time for the July 1 start to fiscal 2015. Gov. Deval Patrick will
have an opportunity to veto items in the budget and send others back
with amendments before signing it. Patrick in 2007 signed his first
budget, a $26.8 billion bill, and this summer’s budget will be his
last.
The House budget lopped off taxes on candy and soda as well as an
expansion of the state’s bottle deposit law that Patrick had
included in his budget proposal. The version that cleared the House
around midnight Wednesday night also included a two-month tax
amnesty program, legalized direct sales of wine and gave vineyards
the right to offer customers samples of their wine.
Despite marathon sessions, public debate on the bill was infrequent,
but at times charged with emotion. For the most part, lawmakers
spent the week sitting idly in the House chamber, privately lobbying
for amendments, and waiting for top House Democrats to produce meaty
amendments for approval.
Amendments added to the bill created various beneficiaries. Speaker
Pro Tem Patricia Haddad, of Somerset, won a one-time payment for her
community to make up for the planned closure of the Brayton Point
power plant and the accompanying loss of property taxes. Rep. Shawn
Dooley, of Norfolk, won additional prison mitigation for his
district, which has a disproportionate share of correctional
facilities. Rep. Anne Gobi, of Spencer, secured additional funding
for the state’s beehive inspection program.
A scattering of new policy proposals were also included in the bill,
which would need to make it into the final version passed into law
before taking effect. Rep. Shaunna O’Connell won inclusion of a
requirement that the state’s Open Checkbook website report
settlement payments paid by the state. A successful Rep. Bill Straus
amendment changes the penalty for assaulting a public transit
employee, which is currently between 90 days and 1.5 years, removing
the minimum sentence and increasing the maximum sentence to 2.5
years. Rep. Denise Provost won unanimous support for restricting
train transport of ethanol and requiring the development of an
emergency management plan.
Republican Reps. Marc Lombardo, of Billerica, and James Lyons, of
Andover, were the only members to vote against the annual spending
bill.
Having successfully added a delinquent taxpayer amnesty program and
failed in an attempt to commit future state funds for local aid to
cities and towns, House Minority Leader Brad Jones said he was
pleased with the final product.
“While if left to the devices of House Republicans, the budget
passed by the House of Representatives would certainly have some
different priorities, the fiscal plan advanced by the Legislature,
and free from tax increases, represents an increased level of
commitment to Massachusetts taxpayers and communities,” the North
Reading Republican said in a statement.
House Speaker Robert DeLeo who began the week by calling for the
resignation of the Department of Children and Families chief,
praised the “fiscally-prudent” budget for setting DCF on a better
track.
“We propose strong measures to care for the state’s most vulnerable
residents, including increased oversight and resources for the
Department of Children and Families and funding to improve mental
health and substance abuse programs,” the Winthrop Democrat said in
a statement.
The three-day budget deliberations featured a heated debate over the
nature of the legislative branch and whether it should be used to
override a court decision in a child custody case currently in the
news media spotlight. Discussion of whether to outlaw the granting
of an in-state tuition rate to undocumented immigrants also occupied
the attention of the 160-member chamber on Tuesday.
Both of those proposals failed to pass. Lawmakers voted 100-45 to
study the proposal to ban in-state rates for undocumented
immigrants.
On Wednesday, examples of bipartisanship as well as intraparty
disagreement were on display. O’Connell, an often unabashed champion
of conservative issues such as stricter eligibility requirements for
public benefits, praised a Democratic move to change one of her
amendments.
After proposing to allow parents of newborns to call 911 for a
no-questions-asked adoption, the Taunton Republican said she agreed
with Democratic Rep. Garrett Bradley that the issue should be
studied before being implemented.
Bradley said lawmakers are unclear whether the expansion of the Baby
Safe Haven law would require child seats in police cruisers or other
considerations. The move to study the issue rather than approve it
drew a sharp rebuke from Democrat Rep. Christopher Fallon.
“Is there a reason . . . why the majority party cannot endorse this
kind of amendment?” asked Fallon, his voice thundering through the
chamber. Fallon who lost a bid for an open Senate seat this year is
not running for re-election.
Major spending items passed with little debate and nearly no
opposition. Out of view of the public, House leaders cobbled
members’ sundry amendments into nine packages. Tuesday was also a
filing deadline for nomination papers, which meant amid the budget
debate lawmakers found out whether they will face a challenge in
their re-election bids this fall.
The so-called consolidated amendments added about $16 million for
education and local aid; $3 million for administration,
constitutional officers and transportation; $6 million for energy
and the environment; $18 million for social service and veterans; $7
million for housing, mental health and disabilities; $10 million for
public health; $43 million for health and humans services and elder
affairs; and $18 million for labor and economic development.
Members went on record in support of all those major amendments
except for labor and economic development, which passed on a voice
vote late Wednesday.
The economic development and labor language includes a variety of
earmarks for civic and cultural organizations, including $400,000
each for the Urban Leagues of eastern Massachusetts and Springfield,
$100,000 for the New England Public Radio Foundation, $200,000 for a
Methuen rail trail, and $15,000 for Westfield on Weekends Inc.
The Boston Herald
Friday, May 2, 2014
House Democrats back push for cost tally on Health Connector
By Chris Cassidy
House Democrats have overwhelmingly approved a Republican measure to
force the Patrick administration to provide a total accounting of
all taxpayer money used to salvage the broken Obamacare website and
fund temporary health insurance coverage to Bay Staters.
“You can’t help but admit it’s a failure,” said House Minority
Leader Bradley H. Jones Jr. (R-North Reading). “It’s an abject
failure that’s going to cost the taxpayers, whether it’s the
commonwealth of Massachusetts or money from the feds or rate-payers,
tens of millions of dollars that shouldn’t have happened.”
A majority of House Democrats adopted Jones’ amendment to its budget
late Wednesday night to force the Executive Office of Health and
Human Services to review the financial impact of the failed
Massachusetts Health Connector website and provide a cost analysis
of state funds used for temporary insurance coverage. The bill is
heading to the Senate for approval and would then need to be signed
by Gov. Deval Patrick.
The rare bipartisan moment came on the same day that Connector
officials, including Web czar Sarah Iselin and Executive Director
Jean Yang, met with Obama administration officials in Washington,
D.C., to discuss the option of a federal takeover of the mangled
website. The Health Connector board is slated to meet May 8 to
consider a full or partial takeover by either the federal or another
state system.
Connector spokesman Jason Lefferts called the meeting “a good and
productive discussion.”
“We anticipate the requested information will be provided sooner
than July by the administration in response to requests from the
Legislature,” he said of Jones’ amendment.
The Boston Globe
Thursday, May 1, 2014
Mass. pension plan ranks worst in US, study finds
By Beth Healy
The Urban Institute, a Washington think tank, gives Massachusetts a
failing grade in its new study on public pensions, ranking the state
the worst in the nation.
The institute cited low funding levels, as well as pension plan
designs that it says hurt younger workers and fail to encourage
older employees to work longer.
According to the study, Massachusetts receives a “D” for its plan’s
funding ratio, along with numerous other states. It received an “F”
for making required contributions, with three other states. — New
Jersey, Pennsylvania, and North Dakota.
The state’s pension system, which covers Commonwealth employees and
teachers, was 60.6 percent funded in early 2013. That compares with
an average of 74 percent funding across all US states, according to
the institute.
“Over the years, they’ve dug a pretty deep funding hole, and that’s
getting worse,’’ said Richard Johnson, the project’s lead
researcher. Even as Massachusetts has made reforms to its pension
plans, most recently in 2012, Johnson said the state still “pushes
older workers out the door but doesn’t attract younger workers.’’
Nick Favorito, executive director of the Massachusetts State
Retirement Board, said the report does not reflect recent
commitments to improve the funding levels.
Earlier this year, the Patrick administration and leaders of the
Legislature agreed to boost funding for the state pension plan over
the next three years and beyond, with a goal of fully covering
retirement obligations by 2036.
Under the plan, the state would increase its annual contribution to
the fund by 10 percent a year for fiscal 2015 through 2017. After
three years, the increases would be 7 percent annually.
In terms of plan design, the Urban Institute singles out
Massachusetts police and fire employees as having the worst plans in
the country.
It says the plans offer little incentive for older workers to stay
on the job instead of retiring and beginning to collect benefits at
an earlier age. Many retirement benefit systems, including the
Social Security system, offer larger payments for participants who
start drawing checks at later ages.
The institute also criticized Massachusetts plans because young
workers must be employed by the state for 10 years before earning
any pension benefits beyond their own contributions and modest
interest on those savings.
Carolyn Ryan, assistant director of policy and research at the
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, who reviewed the report, said it
makes sense to require a waiting period before people qualify for a
pension.
“The Urban Institute gives us a demerit for our 10-year investing
requirement. We disagree with that,’’ Ryan said.
However, both she and Michael Widmer, who is president of the
Boston-based foundation, agreed that the plan was not geared to
today’s workers, who are likely to change jobs frequently over the
course of their careers.
“It’s a quandary,’’ Widmer said. “Essentially, you have a plan that
doesn’t really reflect the reality of modern employment.’’
A 401(k)-type retirement savings plan might be one way to fix that,
they said. But that option raises the inevitable problem of who will
support the pensions of older workers.
“The criteria used by the Urban Institute unfortunately tell an
incomplete story, particularly for a state like ours with a
traditional defined benefit plan,’’ Favorito said in a statement.
“In fact, recent pension reform measures —which have been widely
recognized to be both fiscally responsible and fair to workers —
actually result in a lower grade for the Commonwealth using the
Urban Institute’s methodology.’’
Another difficulty for young workers in Massachusetts and some other
states, the Urban Institute pointed out, is that those employees do
not participate in the Social Security system. Instead, they
contribute 9 percent to 11 percent of their earnings to the pension
plan — and that money is returned to them, with interest, if they
leave before 10 years.
That means they would not earn investment returns on the money upon
withdrawing it, said Jon Carlisle, a spokesman for state Treasurer
Steve Grossman. They also would not have lost money if the market
declined. The interest rate is currently 3 percent.
“These plans aren’t working well for young workers who won’t spend
their entire career in government,’’ said Johnson, of the Urban
Institute.
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
Legislators get pass on secret meetings
By Erin Smith
State lawmakers are elected by the people and collect a
taxpayer-funded paycheck, but when it comes to doing business,
Beacon Hill legislators are free to meet out of the public eye.
The state’s Open Meeting Law, which requires government agencies to
meet in public with very few exceptions, completely exempts state
lawmakers.
While the boards, committees and commissions established by the
Legislature must be open to the public, the Legislature itself gets
a free pass because it isn’t considered a “public body,” according
to state law, and past attempts to change that have failed.
House lawmakers have used the loophole in the law to debate billions
in budget dollars behind closed doors, said Beacon Hill watchdog
Barbara Anderson of Citizens for Limited Taxation.
“Why is it so secret? Why can’t they have those discussions in
public?” Anderson said.
“The legislators will say you can’t have an honest discussion when
the media is watching. I have a problem with that. I’d have
everything out in the open. It’s our government. It’s the people’s
government.
“We have a right to everything.”
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
Special Report: State politicians retreat to secret room to shape
budget
By Erin Smith and Matt Stout
A parade of bright-eyed teens marched to the third floor of the
State House last week chanting, “Youth united will never be
defeated!” — and then they slammed into the hard reality of how
business is done on Beacon Hill.
One girl in a striped shirt and hoop earrings shouted, “Youth jobs!”
and pumped her fist in the fight for more state funding to put teens
to work.
“You’re being heard. You’re making a difference,” state Rep. Thomas
P. Conroy (D-Wayland) told the makeshift pep rally outside the House
chambers.
But only a handful of lawmakers milled around the House floor.
Unbeknownst to the teens, dozens of reps were crammed into Room 348,
a small office tucked down the House’s “Members Only” hallway. The
lawmakers were secretly hashing out deals on how budget money should
be doled out.
The private room, anchored by a simple oval conference table and
about a dozen high-backed chairs, is where many House spending
pitches for the state’s $36.3 billion budget live or die — all out
of public view.
It’s a symbol of what the House budget process has become — where
efficiency has come at the price of transparency.
The deals cut in Room 348 are so secretive the public is not allowed
to enter or photograph the hallway leading to the room — even when
it’s completely empty. A Herald photographer who snapped a photo of
the vacant room when the House was not in session was asked to leave
after State House staffers said the area was off-limits.
Because lawmakers are exempt from the state’s Open Meeting Law, only
House members know what is said in Room 348. Several past and
current lawmakers — both Democrats and Republicans — described a
hectic scene in the room as rank-and-file members pitch pet projects
to the budget’s main gatekeepers, including the House Ways and Means
Committee chairman, a seat now held by state Rep. Brian Dempsey
(D-Haverhill).
Members repeatedly retreated to Room 348 during last week’s budget
debate, where Dempsey, his staff and other leaders listened to
scores of lawmakers plead for local projects to be included in
so-called consolidated amendments — large budget add-ons grouped by
spending category and adopted by the House in recent years to avoid
House floor debate.
“It’s a feeding frenzy,” said state Rep. Christopher Fallon
(D-Malden). “It’s a little more refined, a little less barbaric.
Dempsey’s a patient guy, but I think the result is pretty much the
same. Debate is certainly restricted, no doubt about it.”
After the scrum in Room 348, Dempsey, his staff and other House
leaders retreat to a back office and decide which proposals will
survive. Members are given as little as 30 minutes to review the
final consolidated amendment before the vote.
Dempsey brushed off the lack of public access to the secret sessions
in Room 348, saying, “The reps are the public. The reps are
representing their constituents, and they’re fighting for their
constituents.”
House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo defended the process in a statement to
the Herald.
“Any member can choose to debate any amendment individually,” DeLeo
said. “I’m proud of the budget we passed.”
But Democratic lawmakers rarely oppose the decisions reached in Room
348.
Neither Conroy nor the other 42 lawmakers who supported more funding
for teen jobs requested a public debate or vote on the measure.
Conroy wouldn’t say what was said in Room 348 about the teens’
appeal for more money — or what back room deal may have killed it.
He did raise the possibility teen jobs funding could be increased
from $8 million to $12 million in a supplemental budget next year.
“I’m not going to say promises were made. I’m not going to put
anyone in a difficult position, but discussions were had on that
topic,” said Conroy, chairman of the Joint Committee on Labor and
Workforce Development and a state treasurer candidate. “It’s not a
matter of transparency. These discussions are ongoing. They don’t
need to happen on the floor of the House. If we did that, we might
be in session talking about the budget for six months.”
Dylan Lazerow of the Youth Jobs Coalition wasn’t impressed.
“It seems almost comical to call some of this democratic,” he said.
“It’s certainly frustrating. The teenagers that you see in the State
House now understand a little bit more about the budget process.
Maybe one day they’ll become elected and make it a more transparent
process.”
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
‘Animal House’ speeds up act at expense of debate
By Erin Smith
Gone are the “Animal House” days when drunken House lawmakers
stumbled through all-night budget sessions, but the chamber has
sacrificed transparency in a bid to maintain order, a Herald review
has found.
“Perhaps one of the trade-offs for an efficient, short budget
session is less transparency. We believe that the trade-off is best
made in the opposite direction,” said Pam Wilmot, executive director
of Common Cause Massachusetts. “The biggest area of public policy in
the Legislature — the budget — is done behind closed doors. Much of
those discussions are without public access, and in our book, that’s
a problem.”
House leaders cracked down following a boozy, marathon budget debate
in April 2000 in which House members drank and slept as former
disgraced House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi — a state representative
at the time — called for “order in the Animal House” and members
chanted, “Toga! Toga! Toga!”
“It was clearly somewhat of an embarrassment for the House,” said
Assistant Minority Leader George N. Peterson Jr. (R-Grafton), a
rank-and-file member at the time. “It was an interesting time, but
at least we got the chance to debate amendments.”
While budget amendments are now posted online, debate has eroded,
said Peterson, who recalled more debate in past years with no
restrictions — unlike this year when a majority of the House voted
to bar any amendments on local aid, school funding and EBT reform.
“The process is much neater, much cleaner, much quicker, but I would
not say better than when we debated each amendment individually,”
Peterson said. “A $15 billion budget could take five days. Now we’re
doing a $36 billion budget in three days with nearly 1,200
amendments.”
Maurice Cunningham, a political science professor at the University
of Massachusetts Boston, said the House stopped pulling all-nighters
following the 2000 scandal.
“That was a reform that was important because over the years,
leadership in the House and Senate really used those sessions to
their own advantage,” Cunningham said. “They would keep people up
all night long. People would nod off and go back to their offices
and then the legislation would go through in the dark of night.”
Wilmot said at least the public could watch, if they could stay
awake.
“There was some benefits to having a longer budget process. It
opened the door to some abuse by some members, but it also opened
the door to more participation and less closed-door sessions,” she
said.
When House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo oversaw his first budget debate,
the secretive discussions moved out of the private Room 348 to a
sidebar on the House floor — where the public could see but not hear
the debate, Wilmot said.
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Brian Dempsey told the
Herald that process was “distracting” and soon lawmakers were back
haggling in Room 348 again.
“It was moving more towards transparency,” Wilmot said. “We hoped it
would go a little further, but it didn’t seem to.”
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
Meetings cue small talk, big deals
By Matt Stout
The long-held tradition of semi-regular powwows between the
governor, Senate president and speaker of the House are closed-door
affairs where everything from major policy issues to the Red Sox
lineup have proven talking points over the years — but always under
the condition the discussions stay confidential.
The so-called leadership meeting varies in frequency and topic, but
it’s traditionally been a Monday staple on the calendar and can
include key lieutenants of the three leaders.
It’s also an example of the type of closed-door meetings that can
drive important issues on Beacon Hill, where the state’s three most
powerful politicians gather to hash out ideas beyond earshot of the
public.
For example, Thomas Birmingham, the former Senate president from
1996 to 2002 and chairman of the Senate Ways and Means Committee
before that, said the meetings helped keep legislative leaders and
Gov. Bill Weld “unified” on key parts of their education overhaul of
the 1990s.
“Education was partly two wheels of the bicycle. One was the money,
one was the standards. Our agreement to hold the line on (standards)
was helpful,” Birmingham said. “Sometimes we really did hammer out
details of controversial legislation.”
For GOP-led administrations and Democratic-dominated legislatures —
the meetings gained regular traction under Weld, a Republican — the
sessions also proved a relationship-builder, where they would
discuss their families, hobbies and sports.
Birmingham and Weld created a regular $1 “bet” challenging the other
to use a rare word in interviews and get the media to print it.
One time, it was “struthious,” or ostrich-like. When Birmingham
emerged from the leadership meeting and was asked by reporters what
was discussed, he said the state shouldn’t take a “struthious”
approach to federal budget cuts. It made it into a story, and
Birmingham got his buck.
Former Gov. Paul Cellucci would sometimes “talk about movies he’s
seen over the weekend,” recalled former Gov. Jane Swift, who first
served as Cellucci’s lieutenant governor and later acting governor.
“That’s the beauty of the meetings, they were confidential,” Swift
said. “Any participant would raise any issue they wanted to.
Obviously decisions have to be made. I think one of the reasons that
we have gridlock in Washington is because folks don’t have private
meetings to talk about potential solutions.”
Senate President Therese Murray said the meetings are used to share
legislative plans and talk big-ticket issues. Speaker Robert A.
DeLeo said it allows them to speak “personally.”
But they weren’t for everybody. Former Gov. Michael Dukakis said he
rarely held the “three-cornered” meeting and over his final five
years in office, he “never” had them. Instead, he’d call Senate
President William Bulger or, in the late 1980s, Speaker George
Keverian, and set up less-formal discussions, sometimes two to three
times a week.
“Generally speaking, some of the best work I did was with these
individual meetings,” Dukakis said. “It isn’t that I was keeping
information from the other side. There was always a certain amount
of tension between the House and Senate, even though Democrats
controlled both branches. I felt I could work much more effectively
with them on an individual basis.”
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, May 7, 2014
In Bay State, nothing gets past powerful House leader
By Matt Stout
No one in Bay State politics may wield as much power as the speaker
of the House, whose ability to reward allies, punish enemies and
determine the direction of billion-dollar policy has proven key to
controlling the 160-member body.
The officeholder is the gatekeeper of Beacon Hill priorities, often
standing between initiatives being adopted into law or withering on
the vine.
Case in point: Gov. Deval Patrick’s push for expanded gaming only
took hold when Speaker of the House Robert A. DeLeo took power,
giving the governor an ally he didn’t have in former Speaker
Salvatore F. DiMasi, a casino opponent.
More recently, Patrick resisted calls to accept the resignation of
Olga Roche, the embattled head of the state Department of Children
and Families, until it was DeLeo who demanded it, with Senate
President Therese Murray and Attorney General Martha Coakley quickly
following suit.
“I think governors are lame ducks the day they are elected” compared
to the power of the speaker, said Boston University professor Fred
Bayles, who’s directed the school’s State House journalism program
since 2004, a time that’s seen Thomas M. Finneran, DiMasi and DeLeo
all hold the House reins.
It’s a position that demands a strong hand to check the vastly
different priorities of the House membership.
“You need a speaker that is willing to lead. What’s the point of
having the job if you don’t utilize the power that comes with it?”
said Michael P. Walsh, a Westfield State University adjunct
professor and former state representative who served under former
Speaker George Keverian, whose hands-off style has been criticized
for allowing the House to lose direction. Later, Walsh served under
former Speaker Charles F. Flaherty, who gave his chairs “broad
latitude” but also reined them in, Walsh said.
DeLeo, observers say, has struck a balance, allowing his chairs
decision-making but also strongly defining priorities.
“Throughout my speakership, I have sought to keep an open-door
policy, to listen to members, to empower the House chairs and to
forge consensus,” DeLeo said in a statement.
The power, however, has also created controversy.
Flaherty, Finneran and DiMasi were all convicted of criminal
charges, from tax evasion to perjury to conspiracy and extortion,
respectively. A cancer-stricken DiMasi sits in a federal prison.
DeLeo has long said he intends to “break the streak.”
The Boston Herald
Thursday, May 8, 2014
So bad even the reps can be left in the dark
By Erin Smith
State lawmakers operate in a virtual transparency-free fortress void
of public scrutiny where even House leadership doesn’t share
information with junior members, a Herald review has found.
“The Legislature’s insulation from public purview is about as tight
and high as you can get,” said Gregory W. Sullivan, former inspector
general and research director at Pioneer Institute. “It’s truly
impervious — even to investigative agencies.”
Sullivan said the only agency he couldn’t subpoena as IG was the
state Legislature. And the public doesn’t fare any better.
Massachusetts lawmakers have completely exempted themselves from
following the Open Meeting Law, which requires all deliberations of
a public body to be open to the public, and the Public Records Law,
which gives the public access to documents.
The lack of transparency even extends among members in the House
chamber, said Sullivan, who served as a state representative for a
17-year stint that ended in 1992.
“People might be surprised to know that legislators are in the dark
as much as the public,” Sullivan said. “In many cases, the
membership find out the major details of legislation at the same
time as the public — when they are announced. It’s a small group of
people at the very top, such as the House speaker, that make those
decisions.”
But legislators in some states are more open to public scrutiny,
according to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, which
tracks transparency. In New Jersey, for instance, the Sunshine Law
on the books applies to local government bodies as well as the state
Legislature. Florida amended its state Constitution in 1993 to
expand public records and meeting laws to the Legislature, the press
organization reports.
State Rep. Thomas Stanley (D-Waltham) had little success when he
drafted a bill in 2011 to make lawmakers subject to the state’s Open
Meeting Law. The bill was ordered to be studied and passed around to
several committees, where it ultimately died. Stanley didn’t return
repeated calls on what happened behind the scenes to kill his bill.
“I don’t understand the logic and practical value of having the
Legislature immune from Open Meeting Law requirements,” Sullivan
said. “For legislators that say it would stunt their discussion —
that argument could apply to virtually every agency. There’s an
overriding value in my mind for letting the general public and
reporters have access to keep everybody honest.”
The Boston Herald
Thursday, May 8, 2014
Members only: Deal-making silences debate on State House floor
By Matt Stout and Erin Smith
Rank-and-file lawmakers trying to push prized budget pitches are
often left to horse trade — agreeing not to fight for some
amendments with the promise of others passing without a vote — in a
secretive process that leaves the public out of the loop.
One jilted rep said he had his “arms twisted” in the process. Others
say it’s just the way the $36.3 billion state budget gets done these
days in the “Members Only” halls of Beacon Hill.
“The concern some members have is that if they don’t play ball with
their own leadership then they will get nothing,” said former
Republican state Rep. Daniel B. Winslow of Norfolk, who left the
House last year for the private sector. “With Republicans you can’t
kill us, because we’re already dead. We have the ability to push
issues to the floor. Very rarely will members of the Democratic
Party force votes on the House floor.”
Of the 1,175 amendments filed by lawmakers in this year’s budget,
112, or roughly 10 percent, were withdrawn. Just 57 were adopted on
the floor and a measly 16 were outright rejected, a sign of how few
are actually pushed for debate in the public’s view.
The remaining proposals were melded into so-called consolidated
amendments — large budget add-ons grouped by spending category. But
despite being labeled as “included” in the House’s online tally, the
language of many doesn’t make the final version, and the proposals
are essentially left for dead.
Some lawmakers do use the opportunity to make a stink on amendments
they themselves pulled. State Rep. Angelo M. Scaccia (D-Readville)
said from the House floor last week that he got his “arms twisted”
to drop amendments that would have limited the state’s film tax
credits and tax exemptions for wealthy nonprofits. He then spent
several minutes arguing for their merits.
State Rep. Brian S. Dempsey, the Haverhill Democrat who chairs the
House Ways and Means Committee, said Scaccia was “joking” with his
comment. Scaccia didn’t return messages left over the last several
days seeking comment.
“I wouldn’t call it horse trading as much as I would call it members
have priorities,” Dempsey said, noting the numbers of amendments
swelled this year, from 897 and 878 the previous two years,
respectively. “Throughout the process everyone recognizes you don’t
get every amendment because of financial reasons. ... They’ll
suggest, ‘These two are important to me. These are six or seven that
are not priorities.’ ”
Trade-offs do happen. State Rep. Shaunna O’Connell, a Taunton
Republican, said she told leadership that she intended to argue all
of her 23 amendments on the floor, including two aimed at better
transparency.
One, she told the Herald, would put accounting of the millions in
settlements the state reaches each year on the state’s Open
Checkbook website, and another allowing the state pension officials
to oversee vendors and contract compliance of any pension plan that
takes in public money — a bill targeted at the MBTA pension, which
lost $25 million in suspected investment fraud but, as a privately
run entity, has fought disclosure.
After talking with her about them at the rostrum on the House floor,
leadership agreed they wanted those passed, O’Connell said, and
asked her to table a portion of the others, to which she agreed.
And she’s not alone.
“I’ve seen every single member of the Legislature horse trade,” said
House Minority Leader Bradley H. Jones Jr. “And horse trading goes
right up until the governor’s budget, contacting the governor’s
office, saying, ‘Please sign this, please sign this. If you don’t
veto this, we won’t bring it up on an override.’ All of that
happens.”
The Boston Herald
Thursday, May 8, 2014
A Boston Herald editorial
Closed-door culture
State lawmakers can enact the most fiscally responsible budget ever
in the history of time. But if the details are known only to them —
negotiated in secret, with members given mere moments to scan
through massive bundled amendments before voting to enshrine them in
law — then their work will always come under a cloud of suspicion,
and reasonably so.
The Herald reported yesterday on the back-room culture that
permeates the State House. When the House debates its budget plan
each year, for example, it does so largely within the confines of a
room that is off-limits to the public.
Room 348 is where reps’ budgetary dreams go to die — or if they make
a strong case, to survive the final budget vote. It’s the exclusive
decision of House leaders, and it’s all handled without benefit of
cameras or reporters to record what’s happening.
House Speaker Robert DeLeo and his predecessors (who began this
tradition) have pointed out that any individual representative can
demand to have an amendment singled out for debate on the floor. In
practice, this rarely happens. Rocking the boat is an unlikely path
to favored status.
We’d prefer not to go back to the “Animal House” days, when the
combination of all-night budget sessions and frat-house behavior
colored budget deliberations, or to the era when every one of the
hundreds of budget amendments was treated to its own floor debate
and the process stretched on for weeks. But there has to be a happy
medium.
It isn’t just the House — and it isn’t just during budget
deliberations. An analysis by Commonwealth Magazine in 2012 found
that the number of roll calls in the House had declined by 70
percent since the mid-1980s; in the Senate by 50 percent. The time
the two branches spent in session had dropped by half.
Some would argue that’s a good thing. But the public has reasonable
cause for concern. The fact that one party wields lopsided power
over the proceedings is one major obstacle to openness. The fact
that the people’s business is now conducted largely out of the
people’s view is the other.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, May 8, 2014
Health Connector cure a bitter pill
Critics decry use of emergency rules
By Chris Cassidy
The Patrick administration will invoke emergency rules — reserved
for “an unforeseen crisis” — to sidestep the state’s procurement
laws and award a lucrative, no-bid Obamacare contract to
Minnesota-based Optum to salvage the disastrous state exchange, the
Herald has learned.
Health Connector spokesman Jason Lefferts said the state is
executing the unusual crisis clause “to avoid substantial harm to
the functioning of government ... and since the health, welfare or
safety of citizens of the Commonwealth is threatened without a
functioning (state Obamacare exchange).”
But former state Inspector General Gregory Sullivan said the Patrick
administration is abusing the emergency language.
“It wasn’t unforeseeable,” said Sullivan, now at the Pioneer
Institute. “It was just denied by the administration for months. The
administration was well aware of the fact that the Connector project
was behind schedule, over-budget and dysfunctional ... I wouldn’t
call this an emergency, and I think it should be competitively
procured so everyone has a chance to bid.”
The state plans to sign the contract with Optum without a bid
process or approval from the Health Connector board. Optum will
subcontract with Virginia-based hCentive, which is developing
“off-the-shelf” software for a new state site.
But in another twist, Optum revealed to the Herald it holds a 24
percent stake in hCentive, making the no-bid deal even sweeter. An
Optum spokesman said it disclosed its hCentive stake to state
officials.
A message to hCentive was not returned.
State officials will present the new $100 million “dual-track” plan
during the Health Connector’s board meeting today.
But the Connector will get around obtaining a vote of approval from
its board because the state’s Information Technology Division will
technically be signing the contract.
At least one board member told the Herald the administration is
cutting the board out of the process.
“We’re at the point now where some crucial decisions need to be
made, and either the board has authority on this, or why do we have
a board?” said board member Ian Duncan. “I’m very concerned about
another proposal to spend $100 million of taxpayer money with no
guarantee something will work.”
But board member Jonathan Gruber, who supports the plan, said the
board has been kept informed and critics will have a chance to be
heard.
“If someone at the board meeting really feels like this is a
problem, then speaking their mind about it would be much more
influential than a 9-1 vote,” he said.
GOP gubernatorial candidate Charlie Baker, the former CEO of
Harvard-Pilgrim, told the Herald the time is past due for
transparency at the Connector.
“It’s terribly disappointing to hear that the decision to spend tens
of millions of dollars on an untested and unproven two-track system
has been made behind closed doors and in haste by the same people
who put us in this mess in the first place,” he said.
The Boston Herald
Friday, May 9, 2014
Health Connector costs surpassing $500M
‘I.T.’ version of the Big Dig
By Chris Cassidy
The total cost to implement Obamacare in Massachusetts surpassed a
half-billion dollars yesterday, as the Health Connector board agreed
to seek an additional $121 million in federal funds to try to rescue
the money-hemorrhaging health exchange.
“This is now Massachusetts’ Big Dig I.T. project,” said Joshua
Archambault, a health care expert at the Pioneer Institute. “The
decision was completely irresponsible to taxpayers, with very little
uncertainty we’re going to get the end result that we want.”
The board approved a two-track plan yesterday — invoking an
emergency provision to sidestep state procurement laws — to award a
no-bid contract to Minnesota-based Optum. The company will, in turn,
subcontract with hCentive — which it holds a 24 percent stake in, as
the Herald first reported yesterday.
Connector officials insisted the exchange is so broken they had no
choice.
“The reality is, this is it,” said Sarah Iselin, the state’s
Obamacare czar. “When we look at what we can reasonably do for the
fall, this is it. I wish we had more choices, but we don’t. We’re
making the best of a really lousy situation.”
Federal taxpayers will be asked to shell out the cost of pursuing a
“dual track” of simultaneously implementing software to build a new
state exchange and joining the federal Healthcare.gov as a fallback
plan.
Only board member George Gonser Jr. voted no, arguing it could make
insurance more expensive.
“We all know there’s an incredible impact on the carriers, and ...
these costs trickle down to users and subscribers and small
businesses,” he said.
The health plans this week warned that some Bay Staters may lose
their plans this fall as carriers struggle to comply with the
state’s two-track plan.
The Massachusetts Association of Health Plans sent letters to board
members hours before yesterday’s meeting urging them to delay action
and cautioning that “health reform efforts ... are in serious
jeopardy.”
Iselin, a Blue Cross/Blue Shield executive, said the Connector is
working with the carriers and understands their predicament.
For taxpayers, Obamacare in Massachusetts has been a
more-than-half-billion-dollar blunder. It amounts to: $270 million
in federal grants to implement the law, an estimated $120 million
through the end of the year to keep some Bay Staters on Commonwealth
Care plans, $50 million to pay Optum for easing an application
backlog and between $100 million and $145 million for the two-track
plan.
And that doesn’t include the cost of temporary Medicaid insurance
for Bay Staters, which will be split between the state and feds.
The state could save some money if it doesn’t have to pay CGI, which
developed the initial site, but the two sides are in ongoing
negotiations about the fate of the system code.
Publicly, state officials — including Gov. Deval Patrick — have
blamed the debacle largely on CGI.
But documents obtained by the Herald and interviews with project
staffers in February revealed infighting among top Patrick
administration officials and an obsession with building “the
absolute Rolls-Royce of any health exchange” that helped doom a
website plagued with delays since March 2012.
Ironically, officials at the Colorado health exchange, where
hCentive was hailed for its work by Iselin yesterday, announced this
week it had signed up 129,000 residents for insurance since Oct. 1,
attributing the feat to CGI for delivering on a “realistic plan.”
|
| |
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
Citizens for Limited Taxation ▪
PO Box 1147 ▪ Marblehead, MA 01945
▪ 508-915-3665
BACK TO CLT
HOMEPAGE
|