 |
Post Office Box 1147
▪
Marblehead, Massachusetts 01945
▪ (781) 639-9709
“Every Tax is a Pay Cut ... A Tax Cut is a Pay Raise”
46 years as “The Voice of Massachusetts Taxpayers”
— and
their Institutional Memory — |
|
CLT UPDATE
Friday, May 1, 2020
Crisis of Democracy Infects the
House
Jump directly
to CLT's Commentary on the News
|
A day after House Democrats
released a revised version of temporary rules for remote,
formal sessions, House Minority Leader Brad Jones says he
still has concerns about the document and might block it
from advancing in an informal session scheduled for
Wednesday.
The new rules were designed to
allay a concern raised by some members about the threshold
of support needed to force a roll call vote. The revision
put the threshold back at 10 percent (or about 15 members)
instead of 25 percent (or about 40 members).
The reversal came after Jones
called the threshold a "big problem" on Tuesday. While he
acknowledged on Wednesday that one of his major concerns had
been addressed, the North Reading Republican continues to
have concerns regarding the limit on how many times a member
can be recognized, a 10 a.m. deadline to sign up to debate,
and the inability for members to know how long a recess, or
break, might last.
"I might block it," he said on
Wednesday morning, referring to the temporary rules. "We
have to kind of find some way of doing something more on
this debate thing, because I think it just presents a real
problem."
State House News
Service
Wednesday, April 29, 2020 @ 10:55 AM
Minority Leader Might Still Block House Rules
House Republicans attended
Wednesday's informal session in larger numbers than usual as
that branch weighs a temporary emergency order allowing for
remote, formal sessions (H 4676), and Democrats put the
session into a recess.
House Minority Leader Brad
Jones filed an amendment requiring the emergency rules to
lapse after the enactment of H 4593, a Gov. Charlie Baker
bill that would enable the Treasury to borrow an unspecified
amount this fiscal year and pay it back by the end of the
next fiscal year.
While it appears Republicans
might win a standing vote on the amendment, Jones said he
does not think Democrats want to move forward with the
change.
The North Reading Republican
said he also floated another idea about creating a time
reserve that could be allocated to people during debates.
State House News
Service
Wednesday, April 29, 2020 @ 12:34 PM
Republicans Pressing for Emergency Rules Changes
After it drew objections,
Massachusetts House leaders retreated Tuesday from a plan to
raise the threshold required for recorded votes during
remote, formal sessions that they hope to begin holding
Thursday to process important bills during the COVID-19
pandemic.
With certain bills requiring
recorded roll call votes, such as critical borrowing
legislation tied to impacts from the unfolding pandemic, the
House is set on Wednesday to consider a package of 20
temporary emergency rules. If adopted, the House then plans
to launch a rare experiment: holding formal sessions during
which representatives would be allowed to participate by
using their phones instead of actually attending sessions at
the largely closed State House.
The House has 158 members, and
a small number of them, representing the leadership of both
major parties, will attempt to orchestrate these
livestreamed sessions from within the chamber, while wearing
masks, social distancing, and listening to remote remarks
that will be amplified on the PA system. It's a stark
departure from decades of deliberations that have largely
turned on face-to-face conversations, and an untested
process that no one is sure about.
During a teleconference caucus
Tuesday, House Democrats discussed a draft plan that would
have raised the threshold to secure a roll call vote from 10
to 25 percent, or roughly 15 members to 40 members,
depending on the number of representatives participating.
House Minority Leader Brad Jones called that a "big problem"
and Rep. Mike Connolly of Cambridge also objected.
Later, after the caucus, House
Speaker Robert DeLeo issued a statement saying that House
members had "expressed their preference for the current
threshold for roll call votes – understanding it could
potentially slow down the process."
State House News
Service
Wednesday, April 29, 2020
House Dems Back Away From Recorded Vote Change
Critical Borrowing Bill on Thursday Agenda
An attempt by House Democrats
to push through emergency rules allowing for remote formal
sessions stalled out after Republican action ended
Wednesday's House session -- a move that drew a strong
rebuke from the House speaker and an equally strong rebuttal
from the House GOP leader.
House Minority Leader Brad
Jones' move derailed House Speaker Robert DeLeo's plans to
hold a remote formal session on Thursday to advance a Gov.
Charlie Baker borrowing bill to tide the state through
pandemic-related revenue shortfalls. After disagreements
reached a tipping point, Jones objected and ended the
session for the day by doubting the presence of a quorum,
which was not present in the House.
"It was an inability to reach a
further consensus on some modifications to the order and a
continuing concern with a part of my members that the order
took too much away from their ability to debate," Jones
said, explaining why he ended the session....
After Wednesday's session
ended, DeLeo said Jones' action could "imperil the state's
cash flow, require cuts to services for vulnerable
populations during a public health crisis, and harm the
state's bond rating, which will only add to the future cost
of borrowing."
"Today, Republicans blocked a
set of emergency procedures aimed at allowing the House to
hold formal sessions while keeping members, staff, and the
public safe during the COVID-19 pandemic," DeLeo said in a
statement, adding that Baker "has told leaders of both
parties that it is time sensitive and critical to the
state's finances."
Rep. Paul Donato (D-Medford)
chaired Wednesday's session and said he was "bewildered"
that Republicans blocked the rules from moving forward.
Donato said lawmakers will meet again on Thursday to
consider the rules....
"This is an unparalleled
example of both recklessness and fiscal irresponsibility; a
partisan political move meant to enhance their power at the
expense of the taxpayer and the safety of the public," DeLeo
said.
After the session, Jones said
he could only point to one change in the order specifically
geared towards his requests: allowing both the House speaker
and minority leader to have a staff member present on the
chamber floor.
Jones repeatedly told the News
Service on Wednesday that he might block the bill if House
leadership did not address his caucus' concerns regarding
the limit on how many times a member can be recognized, a 10
a.m. deadline to sign up to debate, and the inability for
members to know how long a recess, or break, might last.
In an attempt to limit the
duration of the emergency rules, Jones filed an amendment
that would add a sunset clause rendering the emergency rules
moot after the House enacted the borrowing bill.
"We'll even take your crappy
order that you're ramming down people's throats and we'll
get that bill done. And then we'll come back and we'll use
that interim time to try to see if we can each come to
consensus," Jones told reporters on Wednesday, explaining
his logic. "They decided against that."
Prior to taking up the Jones
amendment, House Democrats started to amass in the chamber
during an extended recess after Republican members had
started to gather. At one point in the session, a News
Service reporter counted around 24 House members in the
Chamber, a majority of them Democrats.
"The Republican action today,
which forced us to call in Members to the Chamber, is in
direct conflict with the Baker Administration's guidance on
physical distancing and puts at risk House Members, staff,
and the public at large," DeLeo said.
Late Wednesday, Jones issued a
lengthy statement calling DeLeo's comments "untruthful" and
alleging that the emergency rules "seem to be about placing
more power into the hands of the Speaker's office." ...
While the only action on the
rules during Wednesday's informal session revolved around
the sunset amendment, much of the concern felt by the
Republican caucus stems from the debate outline laid out in
the emergency rules.
The House rejected the sunset
amendment but Democrats said that vote was voided after
Jones's motion doubting the presence of a quorum ended
Wednesday's session.
Rep. David Vieira (R-Falmouth)
said a "reasonable compromise" would be to allocate a period
of time to the speaker and minority leader and allow them to
yield time to their members to debate.
"The difficult part is making
sure the emergency rules preserve the rights of Members of
the House, which in turn preserve the rights of the 43,000+
constituents we represent," Vieira wrote in a Facebook post.
State House News
Service
Wednesday, April 29, 2020
Pandemic Rules Trigger Fight in Mass. House
DeLeo Says GOP Action Put Reps, Staff at Risk
House Democrats and Republicans
met for more than five hours but were unable Thursday to
compromise on emergency rules or pass legislation
authorizing short-term borrowing to ensure that government
services are funded during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The House gaveled in at 10 a.m.
and more than five hours later rejected, for the second
straight day, a Republican proposal that would sunset rules
allowing members to participate in sessions remotely after
consideration of the borrowing bill. House Democrats want to
put the temporary rules in place throughout the state of
emergency, or for the rest of the year.
Earlier in the session, Rep.
Sean Garballey, an Arlington Democrat, objected to an
attempt by House Minority Leader Brad Jones to take up the
borrowing bill proposed by Gov. Charlie Baker and return to
the disputed rules later. Republican Rep. David Vieira said
it was a "real shame" the bill was not allowed to advance.
House Speaker Robert DeLeo
hoped the full House would hold its first remote session on
Thursday, but has run into trouble coming up with a rules
plan that Republicans will let pass during an informal
session when any one member is able to stop any bill or
bring a session to an end by doubting the presence of a
quorum, as Jones did on Wednesday, and again on Thursday.
Republicans have suggested
passing the borrowing bill on to the Senate during an
informal session to give the legislation some momentum while
work continues on internal House rules. House Democrats
appear intent on passing the rules first....
There were about three dozen
people in the House Thursday, well above the 10-person limit
called for in Gov. Baker's order aimed at stemming the
spread of COVID-19.
Jones said he is not
encouraging his caucus to attend informal sessions and
recognizes Baker's limit on gatherings, from which the
Legislature is exempt.
"I specifically told my members
I'm not requesting that they come in. They are free to come
in or not come in," Jones said. "I appreciate Gov. Baker's
order in people gatherings over 10 but last time I went to
the grocery store ... there was a lot more than 10 people."
...
Assistant Majority Leader
Joseph Wagner of Chicopee watched Thursday's House session
online and said he views the emergency rules proposed by
Democratic leadership as fair to all members, including
House Republicans.
"I think it's a little
frustrating at this point. I thought it would be resolved
today," Wagner said.
The Chicopee Democrat allowed
that the proposed rules structure of having people sign up
to debate and getting only one chance to speak would be more
limiting than during normal times, but he said "these are
uncharted waters and unprecedented times." ...
Wagner said he wasn't sure how
a Rep. Jones proposal to give the speaker and minority
leader each a block of speaking time to yield to members of
their caucuses would be fair.
"Their agenda, which serves a
minority number of members, disadvantages the majority and
on that basis it doesn't make a lot of sense. Why should
somebody who represents 40,000 people in Plymouth gain an
advantage over someone representing a similar number of
people in Chicopee?"
After the session, Jones
expressed optimism about negotiations. Thursday's
conversations were a "helpful back and forth that I hope
will continue tomorrow and over the weekend to allow us to
get to a place that we can move forward on the order."
"Obviously, it's the clear
preference of the leadership that we get the order done
first," Jones told the News Service. "That being said, there
were some helpful, and I'll even go as far as to say
hopeful, discussions about maybe some modifications to the
order that might lead us to a consensus that people can live
with or tolerate, even if they don't necessarily completely
like it."
Second Assistant Majority
Leader Rep. Paul Donato said negotiations "were very close"
and hopes that House Speaker Robert DeLeo and Jones might
come to an agreement in the next few days. "We're ready to
start the formal session as soon as we can get this out of
the way," Donato told reporters.
The House and Senate both plan
to meet again on Monday.
State House News
Service
Thursday, April 30, 2020
House Leaders Take Partisan Impasse on Rules Into Weekend
Borrow Bill on Hold Amid Quarrel Over Remote Sessions
House Speaker Robert DeLeo is
making preparations to call Democrats back to Beacon Hill to
pass a package of emergency rules over the objection of
Republican lawmakers in what would be a last-resort measure
to force through the changes needed to allow members to vote
on legislation remotely, a House source familiar with the
planning told the News Service....
The House has an informal
session scheduled for Monday when leaders will try again to
pass the new rules with a limited number of members present.
"If that fails, the speaker is
preparing to look at a formal session to approve the rules
package, consistent with public health and social
distancing," the source said Friday.
Evidence that the speaker might
be serious and trying to send a message to House Republicans
was evident Friday on the marble floors of the State House.
Tape markings had been laid out
on the floors outside the chamber six feet apart to inform
proper social distancing etiquette. The tape marks snaked
from the entrance to the House chamber, down the third-floor
hallway toward the governor's office, and down the large
marble staircase to Nurse's Hall.
State House News
Service
Friday, May 1, 2020
DeLeo Considering Calling Members Back to Pass Rules
With the House scrambling this
week to put in place emergency rules for remote voting,
Senate leaders say they have a short-term plan to pass a
borrowing authorization bill filed by Gov. Charlie Baker,
but will take their time putting together a more complete
plan for formal sessions.
Senate Majority Leader Cynthia
Creem will lead a bipartisan group of seven senators to
craft a plan that would allow the Senate to begin holding
formal sessions, with recorded roll call votes, by early
June.
In the meantime, Creem told the
News Service that Senate President Karen Spilka devised a
plan to pass the governor's borrowing bill, which requires a
roll call vote, as soon as it clears the House. The plan
would allow for three options for senators to cast a vote,
including in person or by proxy through another senator.
"That is for that particular
vote. But then we anticipate going into a different mode,"
Creem said.
Baker filed the borrowing bill
(H 4593) in late March to authorize Treasurer Deb Goldberg
to borrow money as a bridge to July to ensure that as a
result of the decision to postpone the income tax filing
deadline from April 15 to July 15 that the state had
sufficient cash on hand to meet its obligations.
The House had hoped to pass the
bill on Thursday, but leaders so far have been unable to
push through a broader package of rules to allow members to
vote without coming into the chamber. House Republicans on
Wednesday blocked the rules over concerns about the process
for debating future bills, and Democrats rejected a
Republican amendment that would have allowed just the
borrowing bill to pass for now.
If and when the House passes
the bill, Creem said the Senate will be ready and has
already talked the process through with Minority Leader
Bruce Tarr.
State House News
Service
Thursday, April 30, 2020
Senate Eyes Return to Formal Sessions in June
Creem: Branch Has Options to Pass Borrowing Bill
Nearly 900,000 Massachusetts
workers, representing almost a quarter of the state's entire
labor force, have filed new claims for unemployment benefits
since mid-March as the COVID-19 pandemic and the widespread
shutdowns it prompted continue to exert an economic toll.
Labor officials on Thursday
reported 3.8 million initial standard unemployment insurance
claims submitted nationwide between April 19 and April 25
and more than 70,000 in Massachusetts, the sixth straight
week of elevated demand. Service industries such as
restaurants and hotels have been hit particularly hard.
Over the past six weeks with
the outbreak in full force, more than 30 million Americans
have filed new applications for jobless aid in a historic
surge. Massachusetts recorded more than 720,000 initial
claims for unemployment insurance in the same span.
The state is also more than a
week into offering aid to a range of applicants, including
gig workers and the self-employed, who did not qualify for
benefits until Congress expanded eligibility in the
so-called CARES Act last month.
From April 19 to April 25, the
Baker administration received 171,598 claims for that
program, known as Pandemic Unemployment Assistance, the
state Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development
said in a Thursday press release.
The office had said last week
that it received more than 200,000 applications in the first
three days. A spokesman could not be reached to clarify the
difference between applications reported last week and
claims reported in Thursday's update....
Ongoing claims, which refer to
those who seek continuing weeks of benefits, totaled 527,538
in Massachusetts last week, a roughly 14 percent increase
over the previous week....
The record level of need has
dented the state's trust fund used to pay out support. On
March 1, the Massachusetts unemployment insurance trust fund
had a balance of about $1.63 billion, and that was down more
than half to $748 million on April 16, according to U.S.
Treasury Data.
Gov. Charlie Baker sought a
$1.2 billion loan from the federal government in early
April, writing that he believes Massachusetts will need
injections of $900 million to cover costs in May and $300
million for June.
State House News
Service
Thursday, April 30, 2020
Nearly Quarter of Labor Force Has Filed Jobless Claims
70,000 New Weekly Claims Filed in Massachusetts
Ballot question campaigns will
be able to collect the 13,000-plus signatures they need over
the coming weeks electronically under a new court judgment
agreed to by Secretary of State William Galvin.
In a resolution partly
mirroring relief already granted to legislative and
Congressional candidates, the Supreme Judicial Court issued
judgment late Wednesday allowing proponents of four
initiative petitions to solicit digital signatures rather
than pen-on-paper versions to limit COVID-19 transmission
risks.
All four campaigns and Galvin
agreed to the resolution by the deadline the court set,
averting a full hearing.
The judgment, reached on
Wednesday and acquired by the News Service, extends
e-signature permission the state's highest court on April 17
gave candidates for office to the four initiative petitions
still in the running to make November's ballot.
Backers of the proposed laws --
authorizing ranked-choice voting, increasing nursing home
funding, allowing beer and wine sales at food stores, and
increasing access to automobile telematic repair data --
will be allowed to post PDF files of signature-gathering
forms online for distribution, under the judgment written by
Justice Barbara Lenk.
Voters who wish to place the
questions on the statewide general election ballot can print
the form and sign it by hand, then mail or email it back to
the campaigns, or they can apply an electronic signature
directly. E-signatures cannot be typed under the court's
order.
Interested parties cannot be
required to submit personal information beyond their name,
address and municipality to access the digital forms, and
any third-party electronic signature providers used cannot
retain any personal information of voters.
While the previous Goldstein
decision slashed the signature-gathering threshold for many
candidates by 50 percent, ballot question campaigns will
still need to collect the full 13,347 signatures required
and submit them to local election officials by June 17 and
to Galvin's office by July 1.
State House News
Service
Thursday, April 30, 2020
Accord Clears Way for E-Signatures on Ballot Questions
Judge Lenks Spells Out Rules in New Judgment
State stimulus checks would
flow to certain immigrant taxpayers who are ineligible for
similar payments through a federal program, under bills
recently filed in the Massachusetts House and Senate.
Filed by Sen. Jamie Eldridge
and Rep. Christine Barber, the bills would direct the state
Department of Revenue to issue stimulus checks -- $1,200 for
an individual, plus more for dependent children and subject
to reductions over set income thresholds -- to people who
paid Massachusetts taxes in 2019 using Individual Taxpayer
Identification Numbers, and were ineligible for similar
federal rebates under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and
Economic Security relief package.
The Internal Revenue Service
assigns Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITIN) to
people who are required to pay taxes but are not eligible
for Social Security numbers, including some who do not have
lawful immigration status in the U.S.
Eldridge, an Acton Democrat,
said towns he represents like Marlborough, Hudson and
Maynard have large immigrant communities, and that he'd
heard from undocumented constituents who have lost work
during the COVID-19 pandemic but aren't eligible for
unemployment or public benefits and did not receive federal
stimulus payments.
He called the legislation
"really an issue of fairness."
State House News
Service
Wednesday, April 29, 2020
Immigrant Stimulus Check Bills Draw Support
Immigrants with Tax ID Numbers Would Qualify
|
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
What a running political
drama is occurring at the State House.
It began with an unmitigated and brazen
power grab by House Speaker Robert DeLeo and his lieutenants among the
Democrats' council of war. What could have been a relatively
simple process of legislating remotely has turned into an unnecessary
circus when DeLeo and his Democrat flock decided to write new rules that
if in effect will for all intent excluded any Republican participation.
First the new rules as presented on Tuesday
would have increased the number of votes to require a roll call on any
future legislation, from 10% to 25% — from
15 members to 40 members. There are only 31 Republican members in
the House of Representatives, and Democrat sheep can be counted on to
march in lockstep with the Speaker. No roll call votes means no
legislator would ever be held accountable for their vote because nobody
would ever know how they voted. Late Tuesday night
— confronted by unanimous Republican
opposition and negative publicity — and unable to
defend the indefensible, this scheme was unceremoniously dropped.
House Republicans still have legitimate
concerns, among others: a limit on how many times a member can be
recognized; a 10 a.m. deadline to sign up to debate, and; the inability
for members to know how long a recess, or break, might last.
In an attempt to put a limit on the
duration of the emergency rules, Minority Leader Brad Jones filed an amendment
that would add a sunset clause rendering the emergency rules
moot after the House enacted a critical borrowing bill
to keep the state running: "(H
4593) that Republican Gov. Charlie Baker filed and said is
needed to 'protect the state's budgetary and cash balances
during the ongoing emergency' and 'to relieve pressure on
the taxpayers of Massachusetts.'"
"We'll even take your crappy
order that you're ramming down people's throats and we'll
get that bill done," Jones declared on Wednesday. "And
then we'll come back and we'll use that interim time to try
to see if we can each come to consensus."
The Republican leader's proposed amendment
was shot down.
"Never let a crisis go to waste."
There are only 31 Republicans in the House,
but still that is too many for DeLeo and the Democrats. This new
rule would mute and emasculate them, turn control completely over to the
majority.
Assistant Majority Leader Joseph Wagner
(D-Chicopee) asserted that he wasn't sure how a Rep. Jones proposal to
give the speaker and minority leader each a block of speaking time to
yield to members of their caucuses would be fair, the State House News
Service reported.
Wagner added: "Their agenda, which
serves a minority number of members, disadvantages the majority and on
that basis it doesn't make a lot of sense. Why should somebody who
represents 40,000 people in Plymouth gain an advantage over someone
representing a similar number of people in Chicopee?"
Wagner said he views the emergency rules
proposed by Democratic leadership as fair to all members, including
House Republicans.
"Their agenda, which serves a minority
number of members, disadvantages the majority and on that basis it
doesn't make a lot of sense. Why should somebody who represents 40,000
people in Plymouth gain an advantage over someone representing a similar
number of people in Chicopee?"
"The House gaveled in at 10 a.m. yesterday
and more than five hours later rejected, for the second straight day, a
Republican proposal that would sunset rules allowing members to
participate in sessions remotely after consideration of the borrowing
bill," the News Service reported. "House Democrats want to put the
temporary rules in place throughout the state of emergency, or for the
rest of the year."
DeLeo and his Democrat supermajority want
the new rules to potentially be in effect for the rest of the year.
Republicans want a date certain when the new rules expire.
DeLeo is standing fast, refusing to bend.
He's preparing to ram through the new rules by brute force without any
Republican support if they don't comply on Monday.
Who will blink first?
Read or download the latest proposed new House Rules
The wave of unemployment resulting from the
governor's shutdown of the state continues to rise. According to
the State House News Service:
●
Nearly 900,000 Massachusetts workers, representing
almost a quarter of the state's entire labor force,
have filed new claims for unemployment benefits
since mid-March as the COVID-19 pandemic and the
widespread shutdowns it prompted continue to exert
an economic toll.
●
Labor officials on Thursday reported 3.8 million
initial standard unemployment insurance claims
submitted nationwide between April 19 and April 25
and more than 70,000 in Massachusetts, the sixth
straight week of elevated demand.
●
The record level of need has dented the state's
trust fund used to pay out support. On March 1, the
Massachusetts unemployment insurance trust fund had
a balance of about $1.63 billion, and that was down
more than half to $748 million on April 16,
according to U.S. Treasury Data.
●
Gov. Charlie Baker sought a $1.2 billion loan from
the federal government in early April, writing that
he believes Massachusetts will need injections of
$900 million to cover costs in May and $300 million
for June.
While everyone is focused on this battle
for democracy — watching the shiny object
over there — the Senate's leading
"progressive" is pushing a bill to reward "certain immigrant taxpayers
who are ineligible for similar payments through a federal program, under
bills (S-2659
/
HD-5036) recently filed in the Massachusetts House and Senate" with
their own state stimulus checks.
The bills filed by Sen. Jamie Eldridge
(D-Acton) and Rep. Christine Barber (D-Somerville) would "direct the
state Department of Revenue to issue stimulus checks
— $1,200 for an individual, plus more for
dependent children and subject to reductions over set income thresholds
— to people who paid Massachusetts taxes in
2019 using Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers, and were
ineligible for similar federal rebates under the Coronavirus Aid,
Relief, and Economic Security relief package . . . including some who do
not have lawful immigration status in the U.S."
An estimate of the cost is $58 million for
an estimated 57,000 Massachusetts residents living in households with an
ITIN filer.
Sen. Eldridge called it "really an issue of
fairness."
Rep. Barber noted that California has
created a similar program to provide payments for immigrants ineligible
for the federal stimulus.
One bit of encouraging news for democracy
in Massachusetts was delivered again by the state Supreme Judicial
Court, when it issued judgment late Wednesday allowing proponents of
four initiative petitions to solicit digital signatures rather than
pen-on-paper versions to limit COVID-19 transmission risks. The
ruling "extends e-signature permission
the
state's highest court on April 17 gave candidates for office to the
four initiative petitions still in the running to make November's
ballot."
The State House News Service reported:
"Backers of the proposed laws — authorizing
ranked-choice voting, increasing nursing home funding, allowing beer and
wine sales at food stores, and increasing access to automobile telematic
repair data — will be allowed to post PDF
files of signature-gathering forms online for distribution, under the
judgment written by Justice Barbara Lenk."
The ongoing drama on Beacon Hill
— the attempted overturn of representative
democracy in Massachusetts — is the most
radical assault by the Democrat supermajority on the legislative process
that I can recall. The united, unwavering Republican defense of
representative government is gratifying. I'm actually quite proud
of them for standing up to the mob and the madness!
Read or download the latest proposed new House Rules
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
State House
News Service
Wednesday, April 29, 2020 @ 10:55 AM
Minority Leader Might Still Block House Rules
By Chris Van Buskirk
A day after House Democrats released a revised version of
temporary rules for remote, formal sessions, House Minority
Leader Brad Jones says he still has concerns about the
document and might block it from advancing in an informal
session scheduled for Wednesday.
The new rules were designed to allay a concern raised by
some members about the threshold of support needed to force
a roll call vote. The revision put the threshold back at 10
percent (or about 15 members) instead of 25 percent (or
about 40 members).
The reversal came after Jones called the threshold a "big
problem" on Tuesday. While he acknowledged on Wednesday that
one of his major concerns had been addressed, the North
Reading Republican continues to have concerns regarding the
limit on how many times a member can be recognized, a 10
a.m. deadline to sign up to debate, and the inability for
members to know how long a recess, or break, might last.
"I might block it," he said on Wednesday morning, referring
to the temporary rules. "We have to kind of find some way of
doing something more on this debate thing, because I think
it just presents a real problem."
The crux of the problem, Jones said, could surface during
debate on an amendment. If a member files an amendment,
presents it to the chamber remotely or in-person, and then
other people speak on it, the original member can't offer a
rebuttal or clarification.
"We haven't suffered from an overabundance of debate in
recent years and that argument can cut both ways: 'Well,
what are you worried about because nobody debates anyways,'"
he said. "But why do you have to have such an arcane rule."
As for the compressed timeline, the draft version was sent
to members on Monday night with both parties caucusing
Tuesday afternoon. And although a revised version did appear
Tuesday night, Jones said more time is needed to parse
through the rules.
"I mean, I think if this had been a process that had been
out there longer we might be at a point of greater consensus
today," he said. "It would make more sense to me to say, try
to get [the rules] done this week."
Jones said the borrowing authorization bill House leaders
want to vote on Thursday could wait until next week. - Chris
Van Buskirk/SHNS | 4/29/20 10:55 AM
State House
News Service
Wednesday, April 29, 2020 @ 12:34 PM
Republicans Pressing for Emergency Rules Changes
By Chris Van Buskirk
[Coverage Developing] House Republicans attended Wednesday's
informal session in larger numbers than usual as that branch
weighs a temporary emergency order allowing for remote,
formal sessions (H 4676), and Democrats put the session into
a recess.
House Minority Leader Brad Jones filed an amendment
requiring the emergency rules to lapse after the enactment
of H 4593, a Gov. Charlie Baker bill that would enable the
Treasury to borrow an unspecified amount this fiscal year
and pay it back by the end of the next fiscal year.
While it appears Republicans might win a standing vote on
the amendment, Jones said he does not think Democrats want
to move forward with the change.
The North Reading Republican said he also floated another
idea about creating a time reserve that could be allocated
to people during debates.
"We'll wait to see if there is any willingness to move," he
told the News Service. "Quite frankly, I was just talking to
the chair of the rules committee about my idea on the [time
reserve] and I've talked to some of my members, and I think
if we can work on something, that we could get a resolution
to this today."
At least eight Republican lawmakers were in the chamber for
Wednesday morning's session. - Chris Van Buskirk/SHNS |
4/29/20 12:34 PM
State House
News Service
Wednesday, April 29, 2020
House Dems Back Away From Recorded Vote Change
Critical Borrowing Bill on Thursday Agenda
By Michael P. Norton
After it drew objections, Massachusetts House leaders
retreated Tuesday from a plan to raise the threshold
required for recorded votes during remote, formal sessions
that they hope to begin holding Thursday to process
important bills during the COVID-19 pandemic.
With certain bills requiring recorded roll call votes, such
as critical borrowing legislation tied to impacts from the
unfolding pandemic, the House is set on Wednesday to
consider a package of 20 temporary emergency rules. If
adopted, the House then plans to launch a rare experiment:
holding formal sessions during which representatives would
be allowed to participate by using their phones instead of
actually attending sessions at the largely closed State
House.
The House has 158 members, and a small number of them,
representing the leadership of both major parties, will
attempt to orchestrate these livestreamed sessions from
within the chamber, while wearing masks, social distancing,
and listening to remote remarks that will be amplified on
the PA system. It's a stark departure from decades of
deliberations that have largely turned on face-to-face
conversations, and an untested process that no one is sure
about.
During a teleconference caucus Tuesday, House Democrats
discussed a draft plan that would have raised the threshold
to secure a roll call vote from 10 to 25 percent, or roughly
15 members to 40 members, depending on the number of
representatives participating. House Minority Leader Brad
Jones called that a "big problem" and Rep. Mike Connolly of
Cambridge also objected.
Later, after the caucus, House Speaker Robert DeLeo issued a
statement saying that House members had "expressed their
preference for the current threshold for roll call votes –
understanding it could potentially slow down the process."
DeLeo said the higher threshold had been included "out of
consideration for those Members and staff who would be
required to be physically in the House Chamber." An official
explained he was referring to potential impacts from lengthy
pandemic sessions while experimenting with an entirely new
process.
"We believe that these updated emergency rules and
procedures will enable us to pass legislation essential to
the preservation of public health, safety, and convenience
as we confront this crisis," DeLeo said.
Connolly called remote sessions a "remarkable and
unprecedented step and totally necessary in response to this
ongoing public health emergency" and said that such sessions
"should allow us to continue working to address the many
challenges and hardships our constituents are now facing."
Meeting without a quorum, the House and Senate have passed
important bills responding to pandemic impacts on voice
votes and with the unanimous consent of the few lawmakers
who attend sessions. But borrowing bills, land takings and
veto overrides are among the measures that require the kind
of recorded, roll call votes only permitted during formal
sessions, and the emergency rules could facilitate more
legislative activity.
Budget Challenges
The bill House leaders want to take up in the first remote
session Thursday is a House Ways and Means report on
legislation (H 4593) filed by Gov. Charlie Baker to enable
the Treasury to borrow an unspecified amount this fiscal
year and pay it back by the end of next fiscal year.
House leaders opted against holding a public hearing on the
bill, so public discussion of the bill has been limited.
It's unclear how much of the borrowing is tied to impacts of
postponing the annual tax-filing deadline from April 15 to
July 15 and to what extent policymakers are depending on
borrowing to plug a big hole in the fiscal 2020 state budget
revenue base created by forced economic shutdowns that are
now scheduled to run until at least May 18.
In his filing letter to lawmakers, Baker said the emergency
bill's passage is needed "to protect the state's budgetary
and cash balances during a public health emergency." An
administration aide, asked about fiscal 2020 budget
balancing plans, referenced the borrowing bill and federal
pandemic relief aid.
Baker announced plans to shift the tax-filing deadline on
March 27, after many people had already filed but before the
traditional pre-deadline rush.
House and Senate Democrats seven weeks into the state of
emergency have not outlined a budget proposal for fiscal
2021, which begins in two months. A senior state education
official told the Board of Education on Tuesday that he was
aware of informal talks about the branches joining together
on a joint budget plan, though it's unclear if that will
occur. The emergency rules require the House Ways and Means
Committee to report an annual budget bill by July 1, 2020.
Economists told lawmakers this month that state tax
revenues, a major source of aid to cities and towns, may run
more than $4 billion below projections in fiscal 2021, which
begins July 1. Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation President
Eileen McAnneny forecast "unprecedented strain" on the state
budget.
State tax collections for the first half of April in
Massachusetts totaled $877 million, down $293 million or 25
percent compared to the same period last year. The state's
full-month receipts in April 2019 totaled $4.323 billion,
and the big current question is how far tax receipts will
fall this month, and over the last three full months of
fiscal 2020.
The state has $3.5 billion saved up in its savings account,
and Senate President Karen Spilka said Tuesday that she's
hopeful that the state can get through the final two months
of fiscal 2020 without tapping those reserves or making cuts
to spending. By "making some changes and using Medicaid
funds," the former Ways and Means chairwoman said, state
budget officials may be able to wait until fiscal 2021 to
start using the reserve money.
Local Aid Levels Unknown
This is a time of year when local government officials
usually have a good understanding of expected state aid and
are working to finalize local budgets, which pay for
schools, police and firefighting. A special new law gives
municipalities budgeting flexibility, but local aid levels
remain a big unknown.
The federal government has steered substantial new funding
to state and local governments in the $2.2 trillion CARES
Act, and there's a push in Congress for additional aid to
states hit hard by the pandemic and struggling with
cratering tax bases.
Without significant federal relief, the state and its cities
and towns may face a crushing financial blow, Geoff
Beckwith, president of the Massachusetts Municipal
Association, told the News Service. "There's no local
official that's seen anything like this in their lifetime,"
he said.
Another federal stimulus bill this year is the "last best
hope" to throw a lifeline to government operations in
Massachusetts, said Beckwith, who noted mayors and governors
from across the country are pleading for Washington to act,
with the National Governors Association seeking a $500
billion package.
"We would want that to be used to protect local aid,"
Beckwith said, warning against budget cuts that could damage
progress in public education or hinder the capabilities of
first responders. "We're very hopeful that the federal
government will step in." The $3.5 billion in state savings
"can be a shock absorber," he said, "but the magnitude of
the problem looks to be almost twice as large as the
stabilization fund."
McAnneny, of the business-backed taxpayers foundation, says
the CARES Act is "insufficient to mitigate the economic
impacts of the pandemic." In her testimony earlier this
month, McAnneny highlighted the role that federal funds can
play by pointing the $7.4 billion in American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act funds that the federal government delivered
to Massachusetts between fiscal 2009 and fiscal 2013 after
the Great Recession.
State House
News Service
Wednesday, April 29, 2020
Pandemic Rules Trigger Fight in Mass. House
DeLeo Says GOP Action Put Reps, Staff at Risk
By Chris Van Buskirk
An attempt by House Democrats to push through emergency
rules allowing for remote formal sessions stalled out after
Republican action ended Wednesday's House session -- a move
that drew a strong rebuke from the House speaker and an
equally strong rebuttal from the House GOP leader.
House Minority Leader Brad Jones' move derailed House
Speaker Robert DeLeo's plans to hold a remote formal session
on Thursday to advance a Gov. Charlie Baker borrowing bill
to tide the state through pandemic-related revenue
shortfalls. After disagreements reached a tipping point,
Jones objected and ended the session for the day by doubting
the presence of a quorum, which was not present in the
House.
"It was an inability to reach a further consensus on some
modifications to the order and a continuing concern with a
part of my members that the order took too much away from
their ability to debate," Jones said, explaining why he
ended the session.
The bill House leaders wanted to take up on Thursday is a
House Ways and Means report on legislation (H 4593) that
allows the Treasury to borrow an unspecified amount this
fiscal year and pay it back by the end of the next fiscal
year. Baker previously said the legislation is needed "to
protect the state's budgetary and cash balances during a
public health emergency."
After Wednesday's session ended, DeLeo said Jones' action
could "imperil the state's cash flow, require cuts to
services for vulnerable populations during a public health
crisis, and harm the state's bond rating, which will only
add to the future cost of borrowing."
"Today, Republicans blocked a set of emergency procedures
aimed at allowing the House to hold formal sessions while
keeping members, staff, and the public safe during the
COVID-19 pandemic," DeLeo said in a statement, adding that
Baker "has told leaders of both parties that it is time
sensitive and critical to the state's finances."
Rep. Paul Donato (D-Medford) chaired Wednesday's session and
said he was "bewildered" that Republicans blocked the rules
from moving forward. Donato said lawmakers will meet again
on Thursday to consider the rules.
Rules Committee Chairman William Galvin sent a first draft
of the proposed temporary emergency rules to members Monday
for consideration and both parties held caucuses Tuesday
afternoon. Democrats and Republicans alike raised concerns
with a 25 percent threshold to secure a roll call vote and
proposed limits on debate. House Democrats eventually backed
away from the plan to raise the roll call requirement,
leaving it at the 10 percent required under current House
rules.
DeLeo, in his statement on Wednesday, said the Baker
administration and Jones were briefed extensively on the
rules changes and said several of the House Republicans'
recommendations were incorporated.
"This is an unparalleled example of both recklessness and
fiscal irresponsibility; a partisan political move meant to
enhance their power at the expense of the taxpayer and the
safety of the public," DeLeo said.
After the session, Jones said he could only point to one
change in the order specifically geared towards his
requests: allowing both the House speaker and minority
leader to have a staff member present on the chamber floor.
Jones repeatedly told the News Service on Wednesday that he
might block the bill if House leadership did not address his
caucus' concerns regarding the limit on how many times a
member can be recognized, a 10 a.m. deadline to sign up to
debate, and the inability for members to know how long a
recess, or break, might last.
In an attempt to limit the duration of the emergency rules,
Jones filed an amendment that would add a sunset clause
rendering the emergency rules moot after the House enacted
the borrowing bill.
"We'll even take your crappy order that you're ramming down
people's throats and we'll get that bill done. And then
we'll come back and we'll use that interim time to try to
see if we can each come to consensus," Jones told reporters
on Wednesday, explaining his logic. "They decided against
that."
Prior to taking up the Jones amendment, House Democrats
started to amass in the chamber during an extended recess
after Republican members had started to gather. At one point
in the session, a News Service reporter counted around 24
House members in the Chamber, a majority of them Democrats.
"The Republican action today, which forced us to call in
Members to the Chamber, is in direct conflict with the Baker
Administration's guidance on physical distancing and puts at
risk House Members, staff, and the public at large," DeLeo
said.
Late Wednesday, Jones issued a lengthy statement calling
DeLeo's comments "untruthful" and alleging that the
emergency rules "seem to be about placing more power into
the hands of the Speaker's office."
"I am shocked and disappointed at the Speaker's overreaction
to what transpired at today's session, and want to
vigorously refute any suggestion that the Republican caucus
is in any way jeopardizing the state's finances or putting
people's health and safety at risk," Jones said. "The
safety of staff and members is of paramount importance to
me. I worked directly with members of the Speaker's
Leadership team and we were very close today to reaching an
agreement to allow for remote voting. I at no time took
action that should have derailed that progress. We all have
a job to do as elected officials but that should not require
accountability and transparency to suffer more than it
already has under this pandemic."
Jones also suggested new rules were not even necessary to
send the borrowing bill to the Senate Wednesday.
"The Speaker chose to prioritize the rules proposal over
consideration of the bill, which we could easily and without
opposition have engrossed and sent to the Senate today while
trying to hammer out a longer term, more balanced order," he
wrote.
While the only action on the rules during Wednesday's
informal session revolved around the sunset amendment, much
of the concern felt by the Republican caucus stems from the
debate outline laid out in the emergency rules.
The House rejected the sunset amendment but Democrats said
that vote was voided after Jones's motion doubting the
presence of a quorum ended Wednesday's session.
Rep. David Vieira (R-Falmouth) said a "reasonable
compromise" would be to allocate a period of time to the
speaker and minority leader and allow them to yield time to
their members to debate.
"The difficult part is making sure the emergency rules
preserve the rights of Members of the House, which in turn
preserve the rights of the 43,000+ constituents we
represent," Vieira wrote in a Facebook post.
State House
News Service
Thursday, April 30, 2020
House Leaders Take Partisan Impasse on Rules Into Weekend
Borrow Bill on Hold Amid Quarrel Over Remote Sessions
By Chris Van Buskirk and Michael P. Norton
House Democrats and Republicans met for more than five hours
but were unable Thursday to compromise on emergency rules or
pass legislation authorizing short-term borrowing to ensure
that government services are funded during the COVID-19
pandemic.
The House gaveled in at 10 a.m. and more than five hours
later rejected, for the second straight day, a Republican
proposal that would sunset rules allowing members to
participate in sessions remotely after consideration of the
borrowing bill. House Democrats want to put the temporary
rules in place throughout the state of emergency, or for the
rest of the year.
Earlier in the session, Rep. Sean Garballey, an Arlington
Democrat, objected to an attempt by House Minority Leader
Brad Jones to take up the borrowing bill proposed by Gov.
Charlie Baker and return to the disputed rules later.
Republican Rep. David Vieira said it was a "real shame" the
bill was not allowed to advance.
House Speaker Robert DeLeo hoped the full House would hold
its first remote session on Thursday, but has run into
trouble coming up with a rules plan that Republicans will
let pass during an informal session when any one member is
able to stop any bill or bring a session to an end by
doubting the presence of a quorum, as Jones did on
Wednesday, and again on Thursday.
Republicans have suggested passing the borrowing bill on to
the Senate during an informal session to give the
legislation some momentum while work continues on internal
House rules. House Democrats appear intent on passing the
rules first.
Ultimately, the borrowing bill will need roll call votes in
each branch. The House is not currently set up to do that
but Senate leaders think they will be able to do so soon,
while they work on plans to resume formal sessions sometime
in June.
The borrowing bill is intended to safeguard the state's cash
flow, but Baker administration and state Treasury officials
have not said whether there is any deadline for passage of
the bill, or consequences for not passing it.
There were about three dozen people in the House Thursday,
well above the 10-person limit called for in Gov. Baker's
order aimed at stemming the spread of COVID-19.
Jones said he is not encouraging his caucus to attend
informal sessions and recognizes Baker's limit on
gatherings, from which the Legislature is exempt.
"I specifically told my members I'm not requesting that they
come in. They are free to come in or not come in," Jones
said. "I appreciate Gov. Baker's order in people gatherings
over 10 but last time I went to the grocery store ... there
was a lot more than 10 people."
Assistant Majority Leader Joseph Wagner of Chicopee watched
Thursday's House session online and said he views the
emergency rules proposed by Democratic leadership as fair to
all members, including House Republicans.
"I think it's a little frustrating at this point. I thought
it would be resolved today," Wagner said.
The Chicopee Democrat allowed that the proposed rules
structure of having people sign up to debate and getting
only one chance to speak would be more limiting than during
normal times, but he said "these are uncharted waters and
unprecedented times."
"There necessarily has to be guidelines that provide more
structure than might otherwise be the case, but they apply
equally to every member," he said.
Wagner said he wasn't sure how a Rep. Jones proposal to give
the speaker and minority leader each a block of speaking
time to yield to members of their caucuses would be fair.
"Their agenda, which serves a minority number of members,
disadvantages the majority and on that basis it doesn't make
a lot of sense. Why should somebody who represents 40,000
people in Plymouth gain an advantage over someone
representing a similar number of people in Chicopee?"
After the session, Jones expressed optimism about
negotiations. Thursday's conversations were a "helpful back
and forth that I hope will continue tomorrow and over the
weekend to allow us to get to a place that we can move
forward on the order."
"Obviously, it's the clear preference of the leadership that
we get the order done first," Jones told the News Service.
"That being said, there were some helpful, and I'll even go
as far as to say hopeful, discussions about maybe some
modifications to the order that might lead us to a consensus
that people can live with or tolerate, even if they don't
necessarily completely like it."
Second Assistant Majority Leader Rep. Paul Donato said
negotiations "were very close" and hopes that House Speaker
Robert DeLeo and Jones might come to an agreement in the
next few days. "We're ready to start the formal session as
soon as we can get this out of the way," Donato told
reporters.
The House and Senate both plan to meet again on Monday.
— Matt Murphy contributed
reporting
State House
News Service
Friday, May 1, 2020
DeLeo Considering Calling Members Back to Pass Rules
By Matt Murphy
House Speaker Robert DeLeo is making preparations to call
Democrats back to Beacon Hill to pass a package of emergency
rules over the objection of Republican lawmakers in what
would be a last-resort measure to force through the changes
needed to allow members to vote on legislation remotely, a
House source familiar with the planning told the News
Service.
House Minority Leader Brad Jones twice this week blocked the
rules package from advancing, raising minority party
concerns over the new process that would be used during the
COVID-19 pandemic for debating legislation that requires
roll call votes, including the annual state budget.
Jones said Thursday evening that there had been a "helpful
back and forth" with Democratic leadership that he hoped
would continue into the weekend, but DeLeo is making sure he
is prepared in the event that is not the case.
The House has an informal session scheduled for Monday when
leaders will try again to pass the new rules with a limited
number of members present.
"If that fails, the speaker is preparing to look at a formal
session to approve the rules package, consistent with public
health and social distancing," the source said Friday.
Evidence that the speaker might be serious and trying to
send a message to House Republicans was evident Friday on
the marble floors of the State House.
Tape markings had been laid out on the floors outside the
chamber six feet apart to inform proper social distancing
etiquette. The tape marks snaked from the entrance to the
House chamber, down the third-floor hallway toward the
governor's office, and down the large marble staircase to
Nurse's Hall.
State House
News Service
Thursday, April 30, 2020
Senate Eyes Return to Formal Sessions in June
Creem: Branch Has Options to Pass Borrowing Bill
By Matt Murphy
With the House scrambling this week to put in place
emergency rules for remote voting, Senate leaders say they
have a short-term plan to pass a borrowing authorization
bill filed by Gov. Charlie Baker, but will take their time
putting together a more complete plan for formal sessions.
Senate Majority Leader Cynthia Creem will lead a bipartisan
group of seven senators to craft a plan that would allow the
Senate to begin holding formal sessions, with recorded roll
call votes, by early June.
In the meantime, Creem told the News Service that Senate
President Karen Spilka devised a plan to pass the governor's
borrowing bill, which requires a roll call vote, as soon as
it clears the House. The plan would allow for three options
for senators to cast a vote, including in person or by proxy
through another senator.
"That is for that particular vote. But then we anticipate
going into a different mode," Creem said.
Baker filed the borrowing bill (H 4593) in late March to
authorize Treasurer Deb Goldberg to borrow money as a bridge
to July to ensure that as a result of the decision to
postpone the income tax filing deadline from April 15 to
July 15 that the state had sufficient cash on hand to meet
its obligations.
The House had hoped to pass the bill on Thursday, but
leaders so far have been unable to push through a broader
package of rules to allow members to vote without coming
into the chamber. House Republicans on Wednesday blocked the
rules over concerns about the process for debating future
bills, and Democrats rejected a Republican amendment that
would have allowed just the borrowing bill to pass for now.
If and when the House passes the bill, Creem said the Senate
will be ready and has already talked the process through
with Minority Leader Bruce Tarr.
"We need to take that up very soon after the House does,"
Creem said.
For senators who wish to vote in person, Creem said they
will be allowed to enter the chamber one at a time and
wearing a mask to cast their vote.
The second option would be for senators to remain in their
offices and have a court officer verify their presence and
record their vote. This is a process that has been used for
senators who are ill or pregnant, and will require a change
in the Senate's rules to extend it to the current
coronavirus emergency.
The third option for senators who don't wish to come to the
State House at all will be to vote by proxy through another
senator. To use this option, a senator would send a letter
to the clerk indicating how they would like to vote, and a
senator who is physically present in the chamber would
announce that vote during the roll call.
Figuring out how to conduct formal sessions in the future,
however, will take some more time, Creem said.
Spilka tapped Creem to lead a working group to develop a
process for voting, admitting amendments and other
procedures taken for granted when all senators, staff and
clerks can be in the same room. Creem will be joined by
Sens. Brendan Crighton of Lynn, Sal DiDomenico of Everett,
Patricia Jehlen of Somerville, Joan Lovely of Salem, James
Welch of Springfield and Tarr of Gloucester.
Creem said the committee represents diversity in age, sex
and geography, as well as health considerations.
"We're worried about the staff as well as senators so we
have to be sure the Senate is operating in a safe and secure
way," Creem said. "It may be remotely. It may be partly
remote. I don't have an opinion."
One thing that might have to go, Creem said, are late-night
sessions, because members who live far away aren't going be
staying in Boston hotels.
"There's lots and lots to think about, what's right and safe
for everybody. We have to do the right thing, and we can't
say one thing and do something different like the vice
president who didn't wear a mask," Creem said, referring to
Vice President Mike Pence.
Creem said she reached out to the committee members
Wednesday to set up an initial Zoom call to start the
discussion later this week or early next week.
The timeline for final recommendations, she said, would
depend in part on whether Baker starts to relax some of the
social distancing guidelines and business closures after May
18.
"Our expectation is that we could start these formal
sessions the beginning of June," Creem said.
The Newton Democrat said she was unaware of any other bills
Democrats were looking to pass that had opposition, but said
if something came up another one-time solution could be
used. The Legislature has managed to pass some legislation
informally, including an eviction and foreclosure moratorium
that required a conference committee.
State House
News Service
Thursday, April 30, 2020
Nearly Quarter of Labor Force Has Filed Jobless Claims
70,000 New Weekly Claims Filed in Massachusetts
By Chris Lisinski
Nearly 900,000 Massachusetts workers, representing almost a
quarter of the state's entire labor force, have filed new
claims for unemployment benefits since mid-March as the
COVID-19 pandemic and the widespread shutdowns it prompted
continue to exert an economic toll.
Labor officials on Thursday reported 3.8 million initial
standard unemployment insurance claims submitted nationwide
between April 19 and April 25 and more than 70,000 in
Massachusetts, the sixth straight week of elevated demand.
Service industries such as restaurants and hotels have been
hit particularly hard.
Over the past six weeks with the outbreak in full force,
more than 30 million Americans have filed new applications
for jobless aid in a historic surge. Massachusetts recorded
more than 720,000 initial claims for unemployment insurance
in the same span.
The state is also more than a week into offering aid to a
range of applicants, including gig workers and the
self-employed, who did not qualify for benefits until
Congress expanded eligibility in the so-called CARES Act
last month.
From April 19 to April 25, the Baker administration received
171,598 claims for that program, known as Pandemic
Unemployment Assistance, the state Executive Office of Labor
and Workforce Development said in a Thursday press release.
The office had said last week that it received more than
200,000 applications in the first three days. A spokesman
could not be reached to clarify the difference between
applications reported last week and claims reported in
Thursday's update.
Many laid off workers are waiting to see when the government
will begin easing restrictions that have left non-essential
workplaces unable to open their doors to employees,
customers or the public. The timing hinges on the success of
efforts to bring the ongoing public health crisis under
control.
Between unemployment insurance and the expanded PUA program,
Massachusetts received 893,607 new claims between March 15
and April 25, the administration said.
Those new claims alone are about 24 percent of the state's
adjusted labor force as counted in March, which totaled
3,740,600 workers, according to state data.
Combined with the roughly 2.9 percent seasonally adjusted
unemployment rate observed before the start of the outbreak,
some experts such as the Pioneer Institute's Greg Sullivan
have projected that roughly one in four Massachusetts
workers are now out of jobs.
Ongoing claims, which refer to those who seek continuing
weeks of benefits, totaled 527,538 in Massachusetts last
week, a roughly 14 percent increase over the previous week.
Industries most vulnerable to the economic cliff-plunge have
been restaurants, hospitality and retail, according to state
data. Among the more than half million workers who sought
ongoing benefits last week, the Baker administration
reported that 93,168 were in food and accommodation, 69,333
were in retail trade and 66,202 were in health and social
assistance.
Worker Adjustment and Retraining (WARN) Act reports, which
employers must file if they close facilities or units
affecting at least 50 employees or either lay off or cut
hours for a significant enough part of their workforce,
offer an anecdotal snapshot supporting that trend. Many of
the WARN reports filed with the state in last week's updatee
came from restaurants such as Friendly's or other
tourism-related businesses.
Four Boston hotels -- The Ritz-Carlton Boston,
InterContinental Hotel Boston, Westin Boston Waterfront and
the operator of the Boston Park Plaza Hotel -- each reported
layoffs some time in the past six weeks affecting 200 or
more employees.
The largest total in the most recent WARN update was from
Boston University, which listed 1,633 employees affected by
layoffs between March 17 and April 7. Colin Riley, a
spokesman for the university, told the News Service that the
report referred only to student workers in jobs at the
school.
"They are all students who held part-time positions at the
university," Riley said. "These were positions where the
students were unable to work remotely."
All were given two weeks' pay ahead of their layoffs, Riley
said, while those in federal work-study programs will
continue to receive paychecks through the end of the
semester. He added that there have been no layoffs of
full-time BU faculty.
The state Department of Unemployment Assistance is paying
standard benefits to about 450,000 people and PUA assistance
to about 150,000 as of Thursday. Since March 15, the office
said in its press release, it has paid more than $2.3
billion out to almost 700,000 total claimants across both
programs.
Weekly benefits max out at $823. Massachusetts is
responsible for standard unemployment insurance using
premiums paid by employers, while the federal government
will reimburse the costs of both PUA benefits and the
additional $600 per week all recipients get as part of the
so-called CARES Act.
The record level of need has dented the state's trust fund
used to pay out support. On March 1, the Massachusetts
unemployment insurance trust fund had a balance of about
$1.63 billion, and that was down more than half to $748
million on April 16, according to U.S. Treasury Data.
Gov. Charlie Baker sought a $1.2 billion loan from the
federal government in early April, writing that he believes
Massachusetts will need injections of $900 million to cover
costs in May and $300 million for June.
State House
News Service
Thursday, April 30, 2020
Accord Clears Way for E-Signatures on Ballot Questions
Judge Lenks Spells Out Rules in New Judgment
By Chris Lisinski
Ballot question campaigns will be able to collect the
13,000-plus signatures they need over the coming weeks
electronically under a new court judgment agreed to by
Secretary of State William Galvin.
In a resolution partly mirroring relief already granted to
legislative and Congressional candidates, the Supreme
Judicial Court issued judgment late Wednesday allowing
proponents of four initiative petitions to solicit digital
signatures rather than pen-on-paper versions to limit
COVID-19 transmission risks.
All four campaigns and Galvin agreed to the resolution by
the deadline the court set, averting a full hearing.
The judgment, reached on Wednesday and acquired by the News
Service, extends e-signature permission the state's highest
court on April 17 gave candidates for office to the four
initiative petitions still in the running to make November's
ballot.
Backers of the proposed laws -- authorizing ranked-choice
voting, increasing nursing home funding, allowing beer and
wine sales at food stores, and increasing access to
automobile telematic repair data -- will be allowed to post
PDF files of signature-gathering forms online for
distribution, under the judgment written by Justice Barbara
Lenk.
Voters who wish to place the questions on the statewide
general election ballot can print the form and sign it by
hand, then mail or email it back to the campaigns, or they
can apply an electronic signature directly. E-signatures
cannot be typed under the court's order.
Interested parties cannot be required to submit personal
information beyond their name, address and municipality to
access the digital forms, and any third-party electronic
signature providers used cannot retain any personal
information of voters.
While the previous Goldstein decision slashed the
signature-gathering threshold for many candidates by 50
percent, ballot question campaigns will still need to
collect the full 13,347 signatures required and submit them
to local election officials by June 17 and to Galvin's
office by July 1.
The campaigns hoping to put proposed laws before voters in
November filed an emergency petition with the state's
highest court on Monday seeking assistance. At the time,
they said the secretary had been engaged in talks about
relief but that the time-sensitive nature of the problem
warranted immediate action.
According to the initiative petition process laid out in the
state constitution, the proposals are pending in the
Legislature until May 5, where the branches can take them up
to avoid a ballot question.
If lawmakers do not act, which appears to be the likeliest
outcome, campaigns must collect more signatures to place the
topics before voters.
Attorneys for the proposals described the situation they
face amid the pandemic as a "Catch-22" in their original
filing.
"Either (they) risk their health and the health of voters to
satisfy unjustifiable and unachievable ballot restrictions
and participate in democracy or protect their health and
give up their fundamental right to access the ballot," they
wrote.
State House
News Service
Wednesday, April 29, 2020
Immigrant Stimulus Check Bills Draw Support
Immigrants with Tax ID Numbers Would Qualify
By Katie Lannan
State stimulus checks would flow to certain immigrant
taxpayers who are ineligible for similar payments through a
federal program, under bills recently filed in the
Massachusetts House and Senate.
Filed by Sen. Jamie Eldridge and Rep. Christine Barber, the
bills would direct the state Department of Revenue to issue
stimulus checks -- $1,200 for an individual, plus more for
dependent children and subject to reductions over set income
thresholds -- to people who paid Massachusetts taxes in 2019
using Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers, and were
ineligible for similar federal rebates under the Coronavirus
Aid, Relief, and Economic Security relief package.
The Internal Revenue Service assigns Individual Taxpayer
Identification Numbers (ITIN) to people who are required to
pay taxes but are not eligible for Social Security numbers,
including some who do not have lawful immigration status in
the U.S.
Eldridge, an Acton Democrat, said towns he represents like
Marlborough, Hudson and Maynard have large immigrant
communities, and that he'd heard from undocumented
constituents who have lost work during the COVID-19 pandemic
but aren't eligible for unemployment or public benefits and
did not receive federal stimulus payments.
He called the legislation "really an issue of fairness."
"There's always discussion around undocumented immigrants
and are they paying taxes," Eldridge told the News Service.
"They all pay the taxes that consumers do, but in
particular, these individuals, they would have had to file
with an ITIN number, a number they can request from the IRS
if they don't have a Social Security number. Most do not
have legal immigration status, but they've been paying taxes
for years in hopes of immigration reform."
The Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center pegged the cost
of providing cash benefits to ITIN filers, in an amount
equal to the federal stimulus they'd receive if eligible, at
$58 million. An estimated 57,000 Massachusetts residents
live in households with an ITIN filer, according to the
center.
Barber, in a recent Somerville Media Center interview, said
she filed the bill to help "that group of immigrants who
have been working, who have paid into the system, but
haven't been able to get the assistance that they really
need as well."
She said California created a similar program to provide
payments for immigrants ineligible for the federal stimulus.
"The way we can find them and connect with them, similar to
the stimulus payment, is through their ITIN number, because
they have paid taxes so we have a record of them in the tax
system," she said. "It would be just a subset of immigrants
but it is people who are paying taxes and who are in our
community."
Eldridge said the legislation would also benefit "mixed
status families," where one spouse is a U.S. citizen but the
other does not have a Social Security number.
"I talk regularly to food pantries in the district, and
they're definitely seeing an increased need, and some of
that need is coming from immigrant families that have often
had non-traditional jobs because of their legal status," he
said. "It's a particular crisis within a lot of immigrant
communities, but it's kind of a silent crisis."
Eldridge's bill (S 2659) also includes language requiring
the Executive Office of Administration and Finance to
"distribute $10 million to organizations serving immigrants
within 90 days." His bill is now before the Joint Committee
on Revenue for review.
Barber's bill (HD 5036), which has 41 cosponsors, was
referred to the House Rules Committee on April 27.
Since Gov. Charlie Baker declared a state of emergency on
March 10 and social distancing became the norm, the House
and Senate have been meeting in only informal sessions,
where bills need the consent of all lawmakers present to
advance. The House plans to begin holding remote formal
sessions later this week if it is able to finalize rules
permitting members to call in rather than being physically
present in the chamber.
Immigrant advocates have been pressing legislators this
session to take action on their priority bills, including
proposals that would make driver's licenses available to
undocumented immigrants and that would restrict state and
local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.
Despite the advocacy, Democratic legislative leaders have
not brought the bills to the floor for a vote in either
branch.
Eldridge is the Senate sponsor of the immigration
enforcement bill, which supporters refer to as the Safe
Communities Act. The lead House sponsors of that bill, Reps.
Ruth Balser and Liz Miranda, were the first of 25 lawmakers
to sign on to Eldridge's stimulus bill.
In February, when legislative committees faced a deadline to
report out most bills, the Public Safety and Homeland
Security Committee gave itself until May 1 -- this Friday --
to make a decision on the immigration enforcement bill.
With pandemic-related matters now taking up most of the
Legislature's attention, some committees have been filing
additional extension orders to give themselves more time on
already-extended bills.
"Clearly sort of bigger policy issues on every front are not
happening now, whether it's climate change or reproductive
rights or immigration policy," Eldridge said. "I would like
us to start taking up those bills as well, but obviously
right now, with passing bills in informal session, sometimes
it can limit what we can pass."
|
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
▪ (781) 639-9709
BACK TO CLT
HOMEPAGE
|
