 |
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
Sunday, December 6, 2020
Legislature Passes $46.46 Billion
Budget
Jump directly
to CLT's Commentary on the News
|
Most Relevant News Excerpts
(Full news reports follow
Commentary)
|
|
The Transportation
Climate Initiative, put together by 11 Northeast and
Mid-Atlantic states working to reduce pollution, calls for
cutting gasoline and diesel use, which account for about 80%
of regional carbon emissions. The plan will lead to a
wholesale tax on fossil fuel suppliers that will likely be
passed onto consumers.
But Gov. Charlie
Baker, who has championed the plan, recently said he believe
it's important to "reexamine a lot of the assumptions" that
underpinned the agreement.
The plan was based
on traffic data that has since changed, Baker pointed out at
a briefing Monday. "It may be at some point, down the road,
we'll be back to where we were with respect to that," he
said.
In the meantime,
Baker said states are taking another look to determine what
consumers will actually get from the agreement if traffic
congestion is not the problem that it once was, albeit
temporarily, because fewer people are commuting to work in
light of public health restrictions....
Baker hasn't
suggested the state will pull out of the pact or delay its
implementation, but he said he expects to make a decision on
finalizing the state's involvement by the end of the
year....
Massachusetts
drivers already pay 44.9 cents per gallon in state and
federal gas taxes, and other fees, according to the American
Petroleum Institute.
A new report by
the Center for State Policy Analysis at Tufts University
suggests the TCI pact could drive up prices at the gas pumps
by up to 38 cents per gallon. That's much higher than
previous estimates.
The Salem News
Monday, November 30, 2020
Baker rethinks climate initiative
Gov. Charlie
Baker's top environmental official indicated on Monday that
the administration is moving full steam ahead with a
regional effort to put a price on the carbon contained in
motor vehicle fuels.
The governor
himself has sent signals in recent weeks that his
administration was re-evaluating its support for the
so-called transportation climate initiative, or TCI, given
the downturn in driving prompted by the coronavirus
pandemic. But Kathleen Theoharides, his secretary of energy
and environmental affairs, showed no such hesitation during
a virtual panel discussion with Gordon Van Welie, the
operator of the regional power grid, and Neil Chatterjee, a
commissioner of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
“Through this
initiative, we can assure sustained investment in
transportation and give people better, more affordable
transportation options while cutting the pollution that
contributes to global warming,” Theoharides said. “States
will be signing on to the final memorandum of understanding
by the end of this year and we look forward to implementing
the program across the region.” ...
Monday’s panel
discussion, hosted by the New England Power Generators
Association, also yielded some details about a roadmap the
administration is developing to reach net zero carbon
emissions by 2050. The roadmap, which is expected to be
released during the next couple weeks, apparently envisions
situations when new nuclear power plants might need to be
built....
“If the
construction of offshore wind is not achieved at the scale
suggested here in this 2050 roadmap, the construction of new
nuclear in the northeast region may be required to meet the
2050 target,” she said.
Nuclear power
generates no carbon emissions, but it comes with its own
issues (high cost/disposal of radioactive waste) and would
likely face strong opposition across New England. Still, as
of late yesterday, nuclear power accounted for 31 percent of
the region’s power needs, second only to natural gas at 43
percent. Renewables accounted for 16 percent.
The secretary also
said natural gas power plants are not going away any time
soon, largely because the electricity they generate is
needed and because the plants are needed as backup to
renewable forms of energy whose output varies with the
weather and time of day. She said the roadmap assumes no
reduction in natural gas turbines in the region through at
least 2030.
Commonwealth
Magazine
Monday, November 30, 2020
Top Baker aide says full steam ahead with TCI
Theoharides suggests new nuclear power plants may be needed
While COVID-19
pushed TCI to the backburner for the past few months, TCI
has come back into focus as the final Memo of Understanding
is due to come out this month. Out of the 12 states
initially involved, New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu saw the
writing on the wall and backed out last December. Most other
governors involved have also started to pump the brakes, the
latest being our very own Gov. Charlie Baker, who recently
signaled his willingness to reassess the program.
Baker noted,
“We’re living at a point in time right now that’s
dramatically different than the point in time we were living
in when people’s expectations about miles traveled and all
the rest were a lot different.”
A recent poll
conducted by the Fiscal Alliance Foundation found that 60%
of Democratic, 69% of independent and 75% of Republican
voters agreed with Gov. Baker’s new position on TCI.
Baker’s position
is now out of sync with his own appointed Secretary of
Energy and Environmental Affairs, Kathleen Theoharides, who
also serves as the chair of the TCI leadership team. TCI is
facilitated by Georgetown University. On Monday, Theoharides
insisted that she was continuing to pursue joining TCI at
full steam ahead....
Her position is
completely out of touch with the post-COVID-19 world and
points to one of the biggest problems most people have with
the program: unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats should
not have the power of taxation....
Unlike Secretary
Theoharides, Gov. Baker is directly accountable to the
people of Massachusetts. In our current situation, while
many white-collar workers have the luxury of working from
home, the people that do continue to commute are the blue
collar and essential workers that are keeping our economy
moving through this trying time. The last thing we should be
doing to them is adding a regressive TCI gas tax.
TCI is perhaps
best summed up from a participant in a virtual TCI listening
session — a left-wing environmental justice advocate — who
commented that, “It’s taxing poor people, so we can
subsidize rich people’s electric cars.” She hit the nail on
the head. These decisions should be made by our elected
officials, the legislature and the governor, who are all
held accountable by elections, not an overzealous and
unelected climate bureaucrat.
The Boston Herald
Thursday, December 3, 2020
Elected leaders, not bureaucrats, should have tax power
By Paul Diego Craney
When this fiscal
year ends, budget managers expect that it will have
generated about 6 percent less tax revenue for the state
than the last. But almost halfway into fiscal year 2021,
state tax collections are still running ahead of the pace
set in fiscal 2020 and moved even further ahead last month.
The Department of
Revenue said it collected $2.124 billion from Massachusetts
taxpayers in November, $31 million or 1.5 percent more than
what was collected in November 2019, the agency said.
[DOR
News Release] Since the beginning of July,
DOR has collected $11.464 billion in tax receipts for fiscal
2021 -- $142 million or 1.3 percent more than had been
collected during the same time period in fiscal year 2020,
which was before the pandemic....
"Month after
month, state tax revenues seem to defy economic logic," said
Evan Horowitz, executive director of the Center for State
Policy Analysis at Tufts University. "They've held up
surprisingly well since the summer, despite high
unemployment and real hardship. A lot could still go wrong,
but the state is actually on pace to collect over $31
billion in FY21, significantly more than the $27.6 billion
estimate built into the proposed budget."
State House News
Service
Thursday, December 3, 2020
State Tax Revenues Eclipse Total For Last November
A final,
long-overdue annual budget to be voted on Friday proposes to
spend $46.2 billion in the fiscal year that is almost half
over, and Democratic leaders will present Gov. Charlie Baker
with another tough decision for the Republican on how to
respond to an expansion of abortion access in Massachusetts.
The budget, which
was agreed to and filed around 7:30 p.m. Thursday evening,
increases state spending by over 5 percent from last year,
despite accounting for about $2 billion less in tax revenue
due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
To cover the
spending without raising taxes or cutting services, Beacon
Hill leaders are relying heavily on one-time federal
coronavirus relief funding, the state's reserve account, and
a plan to accelerate the remittance of sales taxes from
businesses to the state, netting a one-year boost of $267
million.
The conference
committee also upped the proposed withdrawal from the
state's $3.5 billion "rainy day" fund by about $200 million
from earlier House and Senate versions to $1.7 billion,
according to Senate budget aide. While officials said it
would still leave more than half of the fund for future
years, the committee is recommending a budget that uses $350
million more from reserves than Baker recommended in
October.
The budget
agreement reached Thursday was the second major deal struck
between the House and Senate this week after the Legislature
also agreed to and passed a bill overhauling policing
tactics and oversight....
The budget bill
also notably includes language modeled after legislation
known as the ROE Act, which would codify the right to an
abortion in state statute and make abortions legal for women
after 24 weeks of pregnancy in cases where a doctor has
diagnosed a fatal fetal anomaly....
The state is
currently operating on its third interim budget that Baker
said was intended to run through November. As the month was
ending, a Baker aide said there was actually enough money
authorized for "several days" into December. The governor
will have 10 days to review the budget after it reaches him.
State House News
Service
Thursday, December 3, 2020
Negotiators Push Spending to $46.2 Bil in Budget Accord
Plan Would Drain Half of State's $3.5 Bil Reserve
The Legislature
sent its compromise $46.2 billion budget for the fiscal year
that started five months ago to Gov. Charlie Baker's desk
Friday afternoon, shifting attention to whether the governor
might veto a policy section dealing with abortion access.
The House voted
147-10 to accept the budget that emerged Thursday from
negotiations that began Nov. 23 and the Senate then accepted
the budget unanimously. By the time lawmakers left Beacon
Hill or logged off their computers for what one negotiator
said was a much-needed weekend, the spending plan was out of
the Legislature's hands and into the governor's for a review
that can last up to 10 days.
"The $46 billion
budget agreement that is before you today relies on a series
of one-time revenue options to close a $3.6 billion
shortfall while making targeted investments into key
elements including education, housing, food security, and
combating domestic violence and substance addiction," House
Ways and Means Chair Rep. Aaron Michlewitz said. "We were
able to confront all these challenges and all without any
additional federal stimulus package, that we will still
gladly accept when Washington decides to get its act
together."
In the Senate,
Minority Leader Bruce Tarr questioned why the withdrawal
from the state reserve account had grown to $1.7 billion
during conference talks. Senate Ways and Means Chair Sen.
Michael Rodrigues explained that the increase was to fund
programs that help people through the pandemic and said he
thinks the increase did not compromise the budget's
prudence....
While legislative
leaders like Rodrigues have been referring to the budget as
a $46.2 billion spending bill, the bill text itself notes
the total appropriation is for almost $46.46 billion. The
discrepancy, according to a Senate budget official, has to
do with accounting practices and whether certain budget
transfers, like a transfer of funds to MassHealth from the
Medical Assistance Trust Fund, are counted toward the bottom
line.
State House News
Service
Friday, December 4, 2020
House, Senate Send Baker $46.2 Billion Budget
The House and
Senate made quick work on Friday of passing a $46.2 billion
state budget for fiscal 2021, sending it to Gov. Charlie
Baker’s desk, despite some controversy over a provision
expanding abortion access.
The vote came more
than five months into the fiscal year, as lawmakers took
extra time to monitor the effects of COVID-19 on the state
economy.
The budget passed
in a rare Friday afternoon session. The House voted to
approve the conference committee report in a 147 to 10 vote.
The Senate approved it unanimously.
The House vote
occurred just after 1 p.m. – which, under legislative rules,
was the earliest time lawmakers could hold a vote on a
conference committee report released the prior evening. The
Senate vote followed immediately after....
The “no” votes in
the House included Rep. Russell Holmes, a Boston Democrat,
and nine Republican lawmakers. In interviews, several
dissenting lawmakers cited the abortion provision, and House
policy on earmarks.
Rep. Peter Durant,
a Spencer Republican, said he does not believe lawmakers
should be loading up the budget with local earmarks in a
time of crisis. And, he said, he does not think the budget
should have included the abortion provision. Durant said
lawmakers extended the legislative session specifically to
deal with the budget and adding the abortion amendment
“seems a little bit underhanded to me.”
Rep. Nicholas
Boldyga, a Southwick Republican, also voted against the
budget because he thinks the abortion policy should have
been done as a separate standalone bill. “This was a vote in
a lame duck session. We should have been focusing on getting
people back to work. They made it about abortion,” he said.
Holmes also
opposed the way the abortion amendment was introduced, and
he criticized House leaders for allowing earmarks favored by
House leaders, but not earmarks he proposed for black and
Latino communities. “You’re going to reject new revenue but
cut my earmarks for communities that need it badly,” Holmes
said.
In the Senate,
lawmakers did not discuss the abortion provision. Senate
Ways and Means chair Michael Rodrigues, a Westport Democrat,
said the bill “balances prudent use of available resources
and the need to maintain and increase critical services
during a public health and economic crisis.” ...
Senate Minority
Leader Bruce Tarr, a Gloucester Republican, questioned
Rodrigues about draws from the rainy day fund and praised
the budget for not raising taxes or fees. Tarr said he
believes it was “important we confine ourselves with regard
to public policy.” But he did not mention the abortion
provision and went on to praise his own policy initiative,
also included in the budget, which would require the use of
ignition interlocks for first time drunk driving offenders.
In addition to
laying out spending for the fiscal year that ends June 30,
the budget bill includes several policy changes.
With the MBTA
planning major service cuts, the budget requires state
officials to direct federal stimulus money or
higher-than-expected revenues toward preventing these cuts.
It would let hemp be sold for the first time in marijuana
dispensaries, potentially allowing for the sale of a wider
range of hemp-derived products. It would increase welfare
grants for the first time in decades. And it would prohibit
evictions while someone’s application for rental assistance
is pending.
CommonWealth
Magazine
Friday, December 4, 2020
Lawmakers swiftly pass delayed FY21 budget bill
Some controversy in House over abortion expansion
The lame duck
logjam broke open this week, and from it spilled the
possibility that compromise, in these blustery days of
December, might be at least a fraction as contagious as
COVID-19.
With daily cases
of the deadly coronavirus reaching new heights and hospital
beds getting filled at a troubling pace, the Legislature
began to showcase why it was, exactly, that they voted back
in July to ignore decades of precedent and extend its
session by not one or two but more than five months.
The first domino
to fall was perhaps the hardest to tip over, despite all the
wind at its back in July. As real gusts whipped up and down
the coast on Monday, House and Senate Democrats struck a
deal to reform how police in Massachusetts must conduct
themselves on the job, and how the police will be policed
moving forward....
The annual state
budget is a different breed of bill, and was the second box
to get checked this week.
Unlike the more
than four months it took to negotiate a compromise policing
bill, it took almost a month to the day for the House and
Senate to move the fiscal 2021 from a House Ways and Means
draft, released two days after the election, to a final
budget on its way to the governor's desk.
Of course, that
budget is still five months late by non-pandemic standards.
But who's counting anymore, except maybe the bond rating
agencies.
The final budget
now in Baker's hands for review proposes to spend more than
$46.2 billion in a year during which lawmakers have been
girding for the financial worst, but not yet seeing it.
Revenues continue to outperform 2019 in spite of the
pandemic, and rather than make real tough choices about
where to spend, the conference committee simply upped its
draw on reserves by $200 million to $1.7 billion, using
about 48 percent of the "rainy day" account.
State House News
Service
Friday, December 4, 2020
Weekly Roundup - The First One Can Be the Hardest
There will be
nothing traditional about this December for Gov. Charlie
Baker. As the statewide public health emergency intensifies,
putting increased demands on the governor and his entire
administration, the Legislature is poised to flood the
governor's team with the most far-reaching, important and
complicated bills of this two-year session.
Lawmakers this
week dumped on his desk a major overhaul of policing (S
2963) that differs substantially from the plan he offered as
well as a $46.2 billion state budget (H 5164) that includes
113 outside sections and proposes to spend $700 million more
than Baker sought when he filed a revised budget bill in
October.
As COVID-19 cases
shatter previous records with clusters breaking out all over
the state, legislators are also trying to close deals on
economic development, climate change, health care and
transportation spending bills that they failed to reach
agreements on before a biannual mid-summer deadline.
Lawmakers instead are trying to tackle those matters during
remote, lame-duck sessions that are expected to run through
December and into early January....
The late-arriving
budget also means the governor will need to juggle its
review with the start this month of deliberations over a
consensus tax revenue estimate for the fiscal 2022 budget
cycle, which Baker must kick off by filing his spending plan
next month.
The governor's
team is also at an important juncture on a regional effort
to extract carbon emissions reductions from the
transportation sector and his own administration's roadmap
to achieve sharp emissions cuts in Massachusetts by 2050 --
which could be released at any time and will inform the
setting this month of a 2030 emissions reduction target.
State House News
Service
Friday, December 4, 2020
Advances - Week of Dec. 6, 2020
|
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
Something strange is happening inside the
Baker administration. We all recognize how reluctant Gov. Baker is
in taking a position on — well, anything
whatsoever until he can tell which way the wind is blowing or is unable
to avoid it. No sooner had he indicated having second thoughts
about jumping headlong into his signature Transportation Climate
Initiative (TCI) boondoggle when "Global Warming" Czarina Kathleen
Theoharides, also known as his putative Secretary of Energy and
Environmental Affairs, announced her own plans to the contrary.
CommonWealth Magazine reported on Monday ("Top Baker aide says full
steam ahead with TCI"):
Gov. Charlie
Baker's top environmental official indicated on Monday that the
administration is moving full steam ahead with a regional effort to
put a price on the carbon contained in motor vehicle fuels.
The governor
himself has sent signals in recent weeks that his administration was
re-evaluating its support for the so-called transportation climate
initiative, or TCI, given the downturn in driving prompted by the
coronavirus pandemic. But Kathleen Theoharides, his secretary
of energy and environmental affairs, showed no such hesitation
during a virtual panel discussion with Gordon Van Welie, the
operator of the regional power grid, and Neil Chatterjee, a
commissioner of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
“Through this
initiative, we can assure sustained investment in transportation and
give people better, more affordable transportation options while
cutting the pollution that contributes to global warming,”
Theoharides said. “States will be signing on to the final
memorandum of understanding by the end of this year and we look
forward to implementing the program across the region.”
Her positive
remarks follow much more cautious comments by the governor last
week, when he said the forecasts on which TCI was based needed to be
re-examined given the way transportation patterns have changed
during the coronavirus pandemic. “If you pursue a price on
carbon associated with transportation, what do you get for that
price on carbon in a world that looks a lot different now, and
potentially will stay a lot different for the next several years,
relative to the one we thought we were living in a couple years
ago?” Baker said last Monday.
If this is not a possible insurrection
within the administration then the question is "Who is not telling the
truth?" Obviously both cannot be truthful.
Our TCI-opposition ally Paul D. Craney from
MassFiscal aptly observed in his Boston Herald op-ed column on Thursday
("Elected leaders, not
bureaucrats, should have tax power"):
While
COVID-19 pushed TCI to the backburner for the past few months, TCI
has come back into focus as the final Memo of Understanding is due
to come out this month. Out of the 12 states initially
involved, New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu saw the writing on the
wall and backed out last December. Most other governors
involved have also started to pump the brakes, the latest being our
very own Gov. Charlie Baker, who recently signaled his willingness
to reassess the program.
Baker
noted, “We’re living at a point in time right now that’s
dramatically different than the point in time we were living in when
people’s expectations about miles traveled and all the rest were a
lot different.”
A
recent poll conducted by the Fiscal Alliance Foundation found that
60% of Democratic, 69% of independent and 75% of Republican voters
agreed with Gov. Baker’s new position on TCI.
Baker’s position is now out of sync with his own appointed Secretary
of Energy and Environmental Affairs, Kathleen Theoharides, who also
serves as the chair of the TCI leadership team. TCI is
facilitated by Georgetown University. On Monday, Theoharides
insisted that she was continuing to pursue joining TCI at full steam
ahead....
Her
position is completely out of touch with the post-COVID-19 world and
points to one of the biggest problems most people have with the
program: unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats should not have the
power of taxation....
Unlike Secretary Theoharides, Gov. Baker is directly accountable to
the people of Massachusetts. In our current situation, while
many white-collar workers have the luxury of working from home, the
people that do continue to commute are the blue collar and essential
workers that are keeping our economy moving through this trying
time. The last thing we should be doing to them is adding a
regressive TCI gas tax.
TCI
is perhaps best summed up from a participant in a virtual TCI
listening session — a left-wing environmental justice advocate — who
commented that, “It’s taxing poor people, so we can subsidize rich
people’s electric cars.” She hit the nail on the head.
These decisions should be made by our elected officials, the
legislature and the governor, who are all held accountable by
elections, not an overzealous and unelected climate bureaucrat.
The State House News Service reported on Thursday ("State
Tax Revenues Eclipse Total For Last November"):
When this fiscal year ends, budget
managers expect that it will have generated about 6
percent less tax revenue for the state than the last.
But almost halfway into fiscal year 2021, state tax
collections are still running ahead of the pace set in
fiscal 2020 and moved even further ahead last month.
The Department of Revenue said it
collected $2.124 billion from Massachusetts taxpayers in
November, $31 million or 1.5 percent more than what was
collected in November 2019, the agency said. [DOR
News Release] Since the beginning of July, DOR
has collected $11.464 billion in tax receipts for fiscal
2021 —
$142 million or 1.3 percent more than had been collected
during the same time period in fiscal year 2020, which
was before the pandemic....
"Month after month, state tax
revenues seem to defy economic logic," said Evan
Horowitz, executive director of the Center for State
Policy Analysis at Tufts University. "They've held up
surprisingly well since the summer, despite high
unemployment and real hardship. A lot could still go
wrong, but the state is actually on pace to collect over
$31 billion in FY21, significantly more than the $27.6
billion estimate built into the proposed budget."
Defying economic logic is an understatement
in these times. After nine months of economic lockdown this
continued raking in of tax revenues is more like inexplicable. In
its
news release of December 3 the Department of Revenue reported:
FY2021 year-to-date
collections totaled approximately $11.464 billion, which is $142
million or 1.3% more than collections in the same period of FY2020.
Not reflected in the total is approximately $2.334 billion in
deferred personal income tax payments and refunds processed in July
and August. As indicated in our October revenue release, these
payments and refunds have been recorded as FY2020 collections
pursuant to legislation and are not shown in FY2021 year-to-date
collections.
“November revenue
performance was driven mostly by increases in withholding, regular
sales tax, and corporate and business taxes. These increases
were partly offset by decreases in non-withheld income tax, meals
tax, and ‘all other’ tax,” said Commissioner Snyder. The
increase in withholding reflects unemployment insurance benefits and
timing factors. DOR will continue to monitor these revenue
categories closely in the coming months.”
Deferred tax payments of $2.334 billion
which the DOR took in during July and August were not included in the
$11.464 billion FY2021 (this year's) running total so far. Thus
that doesn't explain tax collections this fiscal year (July 2020-June
2021) exceeding last fiscal year's (July 2019-June 2020). Last
fiscal year experienced 7-8 months being Wuhan Chinese pandemic-free
before the lockdowns were imposed. Every month so far in this
fiscal year (July-December and counting) has been under the lockdowns,
so how has revenue increased?
Talking about this fiscal year (FY2021
— July 2020-June 2021), the House and
Senate this week finally passed the budget that was due not later than
last June. While it's being widely reported as spending $46.2
billion, the State House News Service reported on Friday that it
actually proposes spending almost $260 million more than advertised ("House,
Senate Send Baker $46.2 Billion Budget"):
While
legislative leaders like Rodrigues have been referring to the budget
as a $46.2 billion spending bill, the bill text itself notes the
total appropriation is for almost $46.46 billion. The
discrepancy, according to a Senate budget official, has to do with
accounting practices and whether certain budget transfers, like a
transfer of funds to MassHealth from the Medical Assistance Trust
Fund, are counted toward the bottom line.
If "the total appropriation is for almost
$46.46 billion" then "the bottom line" for spending, the proposed
budget, is $46.46 billion — notwithstanding
"accounting practices" and "certain budget practices." Why get
dodgy and slippery about a 'mere' $260 million?
In its Friday Weekly Roundup the State
House News Service noted:
The final budget now in
Baker's hands for review proposes to spend more than $46.2 billion
in a year during which lawmakers have been girding for the financial
worst, but not yet seeing it. Revenues continue to outperform
2019 in spite of the pandemic, and rather than make real tough
choices about where to spend, the conference committee simply upped
its draw on reserves by $200 million to $1.7 billion, using about 48
percent of the "rainy day" account.
Hey, if you've got
it spend it! That's the Beacon Hill way and even a
pandemic can't shut it down.
The proposed budget was raced through both
chambers for the traditional rubber-stamp on Friday
— of all days the usual start of the pols'
long weekends — but not without a tad of
controversy and opposition.
CommonWealth Magazine reported on Friday ("Lawmakers swiftly
pass delayed FY21 budget bill — Some
controversy in House over abortion expansion"):
The
budget passed in a rare Friday afternoon session. The House
voted to approve the conference committee report in a 147 to 10
vote. The Senate approved it unanimously.
The
House vote occurred just after 1 p.m. – which, under legislative
rules, was the earliest time lawmakers could hold a vote on a
conference committee report released the prior evening. The
Senate vote followed immediately after....
The
“no” votes in the House included Rep. Russell Holmes, a Boston
Democrat, and nine Republican lawmakers. In interviews,
several dissenting lawmakers cited the abortion provision, and House
policy on earmarks.
Rep.
Peter Durant, a Spencer Republican, said he does not believe
lawmakers should be loading up the budget with local earmarks in a
time of crisis. And, he said, he does not think the budget
should have included the abortion provision. Durant said
lawmakers extended the legislative session specifically to deal with
the budget and adding the abortion amendment “seems a little bit
underhanded to me.”
Rep.
Nicholas Boldyga, a Southwick Republican, also voted against the
budget because he thinks the abortion policy should have been done
as a separate standalone bill. “This was a vote in a lame duck
session. We should have been focusing on getting people back
to work. They made it about abortion,” he said.
Holmes also opposed the way the abortion amendment was introduced,
and he criticized House leaders for allowing earmarks favored by
House leaders, but not earmarks he proposed for black and Latino
communities. “You’re going to reject new revenue but cut my
earmarks for communities that need it badly,” Holmes said.
In
the Senate, lawmakers did not discuss the abortion provision.
Senate Ways and Means chair Michael Rodrigues, a Westport Democrat,
said the bill “balances prudent use of available resources and the
need to maintain and increase critical services during a public
health and economic crisis.” ...
Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr, a Gloucester Republican,
questioned Rodrigues about draws from the rainy day fund and praised
the budget for not raising taxes or fees. Tarr said he
believes it was “important we confine ourselves with regard to
public policy.” But he did not mention the abortion provision
and went on to praise his own policy initiative, also included in
the budget, which would require the use of ignition interlocks for
first time drunk driving offenders.
In
addition to laying out spending for the fiscal year that ends June
30, the budget bill includes several policy changes.
With
the MBTA planning major service cuts, the budget requires state
officials to direct federal stimulus money or higher-than-expected
revenues toward preventing these cuts. It would let hemp be
sold for the first time in marijuana dispensaries, potentially
allowing for the sale of a wider range of hemp-derived products.
It would increase welfare grants for the first time in decades.
And it would prohibit evictions while someone’s application for
rental assistance is pending.
It doesn't matter how much time the
Legislature gives itself to get something big done, it always comes down
to the eleventh hour when major legislation comes out of hiding and is
slammed through with a single up-or-down vote without many if any having
even a clue of most if anything they're voting on. This too has become the
Beacon Hill way. The cultivation of rank-and-file legislators as
if
mushrooms (kept in the dark and well-fertilized) passes as
representative government where and when tolerated.
In its Weekly Roundup on Friday the State
House News Service closed with its "STORY OF THE WEEK: Two conference
committees done, four to go." The News Service noted:
The first domino
to fall was perhaps the hardest to tip over, despite all the wind at
its back in July. As real gusts whipped up and down the coast
on Monday, House and Senate Democrats struck a deal to reform how
police in Massachusetts must conduct themselves on the job, and how
the police will be policed moving forward.
The compromise
bill, sparked by the death of George Floyd and the ensuing protests
over police violence against Black people, would create a new Peace
Officer Standards and Training Commission to certify all law
enforcement in Massachusetts, and to decertify police that violate
their duty to serve and protect.
How long will it take for this Legislature
to bang through the other four major bills, if the conference committees
ever get around to agreeing on four compromises? (The stealth
attack on Proposition 2½ is in the Transportation
Bond Committee; giving Gov. Baker unrestrained power to impose TCI is in
the Climate Change Committee.) Though nobody but those in the
committees supposedly know anything happening in the secret meetings, I
suspect necessary compromises have been reached — now it's all about
timing. This will either happen quickly now
— or be carried over to next year.
For those who are interested in or
intrigued by my "Tale of Two Commonwealths," I've followed up last
week's initial installment with an update. You'll find it beneath
the Full News Reports that follow.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
Full News Reports Follow
(excerpted above) |
|
The
Salem News
Monday, November 30, 2020
Baker rethinks climate initiative
Plan based on traffic data that has since changed
By Christian M. Wade
With traffic congestion dramatically reduced amid the
coronavirus pandemic, the Baker administration is taking
another look at a regional plan to tackle emissions that
could lead to higher gas prices.
The Transportation Climate Initiative, put together by 11
Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states working to reduce
pollution, calls for cutting gasoline and diesel use, which
account for about 80% of regional carbon emissions. The plan
will lead to a wholesale tax on fossil fuel suppliers that
will likely be passed onto consumers.
But Gov. Charlie Baker, who has championed the plan,
recently said he believe it's important to "reexamine a lot
of the assumptions" that underpinned the agreement.
The plan was based on traffic data that has since changed,
Baker pointed out at a briefing Monday. "It may be at some
point, down the road, we'll be back to where we were with
respect to that," he said.
In the meantime, Baker said states are taking another look
to determine what consumers will actually get from the
agreement if traffic congestion is not the problem that it
once was, albeit temporarily, because fewer people are
commuting to work in light of public health restrictions.
"If you pursue a price on carbon associated with
transportation, what do you get for that price on carbon in
a world that looks a lot different now?" he said.
Baker hasn't suggested the state will pull out of the pact
or delay its implementation, but he said he expects to make
a decision on finalizing the state's involvement by the end
of the year.
The plan drawn up before the pandemic called for fuel
suppliers who haul across state lines to pay taxes on excess
carbon emissions based on limits that still must be set.
Baker championed the approach as a way to alleviate
traffic-choked roads and tackle climate change.
The Baker administration estimates the pact could generate
up to $500 million a year for clean transportation programs
from the sale of carbon allowances once it goes into effect
in 2022.
Other governors voiced concerns about the pact even before
the COVID-19 outbreak. New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, a
Republican, has said his state won't be joining the pact.
Vermont Gov. Phil Scott, also a Republican, has vowed to
veto any carbon tax.
Environmental groups and transit advocates, on the other
hand, say the initiative is essential for Massachusetts to
meet its dual goals of reducing emissions and alleviating
congestion. Proponents expect higher prices at the pumps
will encourage people to use their vehicles less frequently
or rely on public transit to get to work.
Massachusetts drivers already pay 44.9 cents per gallon in
state and federal gas taxes, and other fees, according to
the American Petroleum Institute.
A new report by the Center for State Policy Analysis at
Tufts University suggests the TCI pact could drive up prices
at the gas pumps by up to 38 cents per gallon. That's much
higher than previous estimates.
Critics, including the conservative Massachusetts Fiscal
Alliance Foundation, argue the pact will drive up energy
costs for businesses and consumers, hurting the economy.
— Christian M. Wade covers
the Massachusetts Statehouse for The Salem News and its
sister newspapers and websites.
Commonwealth
Magazine
Monday, November 30, 2020
Top Baker aide says full steam ahead with TCI
Theoharides suggests new nuclear power plants may be needed
By Bruce Mohl
Gov. Charlie Baker's top environmental official indicated on
Monday that the administration is moving full steam ahead
with a regional effort to put a price on the carbon
contained in motor vehicle fuels.
The governor himself has sent signals in recent weeks that
his administration was re-evaluating its support for the
so-called transportation climate initiative, or TCI, given
the downturn in driving prompted by the coronavirus
pandemic. But Kathleen Theoharides, his secretary of energy
and environmental affairs, showed no such hesitation during
a virtual panel discussion with Gordon Van Welie, the
operator of the regional power grid, and Neil Chatterjee, a
commissioner of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
“Through this initiative, we can assure sustained investment
in transportation and give people better, more affordable
transportation options while cutting the pollution that
contributes to global warming,” Theoharides said. “States
will be signing on to the final memorandum of understanding
by the end of this year and we look forward to implementing
the program across the region.”
Her positive remarks follow much more cautious comments by
the governor last week, when he said the forecasts on which
TCI was based needed to be re-examined given the way
transportation patterns have changed during the coronavirus
pandemic. “If you pursue a price on carbon associated with
transportation, what do you get for that price on carbon in
a world that looks a lot different now, and potentially will
stay a lot different for the next several years, relative to
the one we thought we were living in a couple years ago?”
Baker said last Monday.
Monday’s panel discussion, hosted by the New England Power
Generators Association, also yielded some details about a
roadmap the administration is developing to reach net zero
carbon emissions by 2050. The roadmap, which is expected to
be released during the next couple weeks, apparently
envisions situations when new nuclear power plants might
need to be built.
Theoharides said the road map relies heavily on the
development of offshore wind resources. She at one point
said 15 gigawatts of offshore wind is needed at a minimum,
apparently by 2050, but noted only a small fraction of that
amount (1,600 megawatts) had been procured so far and none
built. Indeed, a final federal regulatory decision on the
state’s first major wind farm, Vineyard Wind, is not due
until January.
“If the construction of offshore wind is not achieved at the
scale suggested here in this 2050 roadmap, the construction
of new nuclear in the northeast region may be required to
meet the 2050 target,” she said.
Nuclear power generates no carbon emissions, but it comes
with its own issues (high cost/disposal of radioactive
waste) and would likely face strong opposition across New
England. Still, as of late yesterday, nuclear power
accounted for 31 percent of the region’s power needs, second
only to natural gas at 43 percent. Renewables accounted for
16 percent.
The secretary also said natural gas power plants are not
going away any time soon, largely because the electricity
they generate is needed and because the plants are needed as
backup to renewable forms of energy whose output varies with
the weather and time of day. She said the roadmap assumes no
reduction in natural gas turbines in the region through at
least 2030.
Theoharides also seemed to suggest the Baker administration
would support carbon pricing at the federal level and, if
that was politically unattainable, at least consider
supporting it on a regional basis. She said political
division in Washington, even with the election of Democrat
Joe Biden, probably means the nation will not embrace carbon
pricing or a national cap and trade system any time soon.
She indicated a regional approach to carbon pricing would be
the next best approach.
Her office Monday night said the Baker administration does
not support an economy-wide price on carbon. Theoharides
indicated she is opposed to an idea put forward by Van Welie
and Chatterjee that would place a price on the carbon used
to produce electricity, in part because that would drive up
the price of electricity at a time when the state and the
region as a whole want to use electricity to decarbonize the
transportation and building sectors.
“We feel very strongly that adding another carbon price on
to the electricity system will increase the cost of
electricity relative to other fuels, not only burdening
residents with larger electric bills but also making our own
efforts to electrify even more challenging,” she said.
The question of carbon pricing has come to the fore as many
of the key players involved with the region’s electricity
markets are trying to find ways to promote the growth of
renewables through competitive markets. So far, those
markets have had little success in incorporating renewables,
and the New England states have procured offshore wind and
hydro-electricity on their own through utilities. Baker and
the governors of four other New England states have
criticized the regional grid operator, ISO New England, for
failing to address the problem.
Chatterjee said carbon pricing would allow the existing
competitive electricity markets to operate more efficiently.
“Carbon pricing is a fuel neutral, transparent, and
market-based approach that can be harmonized with the
markets we oversee,” said Chatterjee, a Republican who was
recently demoted from the chairmanship of the commission by
President Trump.
Van Welie also backs what he calls net carbon pricing for
electricity production as a way to allow wholesale
electricity markets to incorporate renewables more easily.
“We don’t think that it would be a massive increase in
electricity prices,” he said.
Dan Dolan, the president of the New England Power Generators
Association, the sponsor of the event, said in a telephone
interview that he was heartened by the comments of
Theoharides, Chatterjee, and Van Welie in support of using
competitive wholesale markets to move toward a clean energy
future. He also said he was surprised at their openness to
discussing carbon pricing.
Joe Kelliher a former chairman of the Federal Regulatory
Commission, was the moderator for the panel discussion. He
ended the session by saying he was surprised at how cordial
it had been.
The Boston
Herald
Thursday, December 3, 2020
Elected leaders, not bureaucrats, should have tax power
By Paul Diego Craney
Do you remember our warning that TCI = TAX? The
Transportation and Climate Initiative is a multi-state
initiative pushing to implement a carbon cap-and-tax system
on transportation fuels. That’s a fancy way of saying it’s a
gas and diesel tax. TCI put out initial predictions of an up
to 17 cents per gallon price increase per gallon of gas,
while two separate third-party studies conducted by the
Beacon Hill Institute and the Center for State Policy
Analysis at Tufts claim the increase will look more like 38
cents per gallon, with little to no significant carbon
emissions reductions.
While COVID-19 pushed TCI to the backburner for the past few
months, TCI has come back into focus as the final Memo of
Understanding is due to come out this month. Out of the 12
states initially involved, New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu
saw the writing on the wall and backed out last December.
Most other governors involved have also started to pump the
brakes, the latest being our very own Gov. Charlie Baker,
who recently signaled his willingness to reassess the
program.
Baker noted, “We’re living at a point in time right now
that’s dramatically different than the point in time we were
living in when people’s expectations about miles traveled
and all the rest were a lot different.”
A recent poll conducted by the Fiscal Alliance Foundation
found that 60% of Democratic, 69% of independent and 75% of
Republican voters agreed with Gov. Baker’s new position on
TCI.
Baker’s position is now out of sync with his own appointed
Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs, Kathleen
Theoharides, who also serves as the chair of the TCI
leadership team. TCI is facilitated by Georgetown
University. On Monday, Theoharides insisted that she was
continuing to pursue joining TCI at full steam ahead.
Her position is completely out of touch with the
post-COVID-19 world and points to one of the biggest
problems most people have with the program: unelected and
unaccountable bureaucrats should not have the power of
taxation.
Theoharides went on to say that she supports TCI because it
puts a price on carbon for the transportation sector, but
doesn’t want to pursue putting a new price on carbon for
electricity. She said, “We feel very strongly that adding
another carbon price on to the electricity system will
increase the cost of electricity relative to other fuels,
not only burdening residents with larger electric bills but
also making our own efforts to electrify even more
challenging.” If that logic seems inconsistent to you,
you’re not alone.
The state Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs
continued to tell her audience that if not enough wind power
comes online over the next decade, the state will need
nuclear power to make up for the shortfall needed to keep up
with demand and also be on track to hit arbitrary state
emissions reductions goals. While that may sound reasonable,
keep in mind that no one at the State House is publicly
discussing building nuclear power plants. We hope decisions
of that magnitude would come from elected lawmakers, who are
best situated to gauge the mood of their constituents for
building new nuclear power stations.
Unlike Secretary Theoharides, Gov. Baker is directly
accountable to the people of Massachusetts. In our current
situation, while many white-collar workers have the luxury
of working from home, the people that do continue to commute
are the blue collar and essential workers that are keeping
our economy moving through this trying time. The last thing
we should be doing to them is adding a regressive TCI gas
tax.
TCI is perhaps best summed up from a participant in a
virtual TCI listening session — a left-wing environmental
justice advocate — who commented that, “It’s taxing poor
people, so we can subsidize rich people’s electric cars.”
She hit the nail on the head. These decisions should be made
by our elected officials, the legislature and the governor,
who are all held accountable by elections, not an
overzealous and unelected climate bureaucrat.
— Paul Diego Craney is on
the board and is the spokesperson of the Massachusetts
Fiscal Alliance.
State House
News Service
Thursday, December 3, 2020
State Tax Revenues Eclipse Total For Last November
By Colin A. Young
When this fiscal year ends, budget managers expect that it
will have generated about 6 percent less tax revenue for the
state than the last. But almost halfway into fiscal year
2021, state tax collections are still running ahead of the
pace set in fiscal 2020 and moved even further ahead last
month.
The Department of Revenue said it collected $2.124 billion
from Massachusetts taxpayers in November, $31 million or 1.5
percent more than what was collected in November 2019, the
agency said.
[DOR
News Release] Since the beginning of July,
DOR has collected $11.464 billion in tax receipts for fiscal
2021 -- $142 million or 1.3 percent more than had been
collected during the same time period in fiscal year 2020,
which was before the pandemic.
"November revenue performance was driven mostly by increases
in withholding, regular sales tax, and corporate and
business taxes. These increases were partly offset by
decreases in non-withheld income tax, meals tax, and 'all
other' tax," Revenue Commissioner Geoffrey Snyder said. "The
increase in withholding reflects unemployment insurance
benefits and timing factors. DOR will continue to monitor
these revenue categories closely in the coming months."
November's tax haul is among the smallest of the calendar
year and DOR said the month typically generates about 6.5
percent of the state's annual revenue.
By the end of June 2021, Snyder and DOR expect state tax
revenues will land somewhere between $25.918 billion and
$28.387 billion. The governor's revised fiscal 2021 budget,
which was used as a starting point for the roughly $46
billion spending plan the Legislature appears prepared to
pass Friday, was built on a revised tax revenue estimate of
$27.592 billion, which would represent a drop of 6.7 percent
from fiscal 2020 collections.
"Month after month, state tax revenues seem to defy economic
logic," said Evan Horowitz, executive director of the Center
for State Policy Analysis at Tufts University. "They've held
up surprisingly well since the summer, despite high
unemployment and real hardship. A lot could still go wrong,
but the state is actually on pace to collect over $31
billion in FY21, significantly more than the $27.6 billion
estimate built into the proposed budget."
State House
News Service
Thursday, December 3, 2020
Negotiators Push Spending to $46.2 Bil in Budget Accord
Plan Would Drain Half of State's $3.5 Bil Reserve
By Matt Murphy
A final, long-overdue annual budget to be voted on Friday
proposes to spend $46.2 billion in the fiscal year that is
almost half over, and Democratic leaders will present Gov.
Charlie Baker with another tough decision for the Republican
on how to respond to an expansion of abortion access in
Massachusetts.
The budget, which was agreed to and filed around 7:30 p.m.
Thursday evening, increases state spending by over 5 percent
from last year, despite accounting for about $2 billion less
in tax revenue due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
To cover the spending without raising taxes or cutting
services, Beacon Hill leaders are relying heavily on
one-time federal coronavirus relief funding, the state's
reserve account, and a plan to accelerate the remittance of
sales taxes from businesses to the state, netting a one-year
boost of $267 million.
The conference committee also upped the proposed withdrawal
from the state's $3.5 billion "rainy day" fund by about $200
million from earlier House and Senate versions to $1.7
billion, according to Senate budget aide. While officials
said it would still leave more than half of the fund for
future years, the committee is recommending a budget that
uses $350 million more from reserves than Baker recommended
in October.
The budget agreement reached Thursday was the second major
deal struck between the House and Senate this week after the
Legislature also agreed to and passed a bill overhauling
policing tactics and oversight. It also came as new cases of
COVID-19 are surging, sparking worries of another shutdown
of parts of the economy, which would impact state revenues
and the budget, both in terms of tax collections and demand
for services.
Gov. Baker said Wednesday he had no immediate plans for
further pandemic restrictions or business closures, and
state revenue officials reported Thursday that with November
tax collections factored in the state had collected $142
million, or 1.3 percent, more over the first five months of
the fiscal year than in 2019.
The budget bill also notably includes language modeled after
legislation known as the ROE Act, which would codify the
right to an abortion in state statute and make abortions
legal for women after 24 weeks of pregnancy in cases where a
doctor has diagnosed a fatal fetal anomaly.
The abortion language was added to the budget after Speaker
Robert DeLeo and Senate President Karen Spilka committed to
addressing the issue in response to the death of Supreme
Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg and the confirmation to
the high court of Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who was
appointed by President Donald Trump.
The provision would also lower the age above which a woman
can seek the procedure without parental or court approval
from 18 to 16. Baker has not said specifically what he
thinks of the budget provisions, but in the past has said he
supports existing state laws on abortion, but not
"late-term" abortions.
The abortion access piece is one notable exception to calls
from Democratic leaders to limit outside policy sections in
the budget, but it is not the only one.
The conference committee budget also extends mail-in voting
authority for all state and municipal elections through
March 31, which is a shorter window from what was in the
Senate version of the budget.
The compromise also directs the MBTA to revisit proposed
cuts to services should additional federal relief money
become available, but dropped a proposal drafted by Sen.
Joseph Boncore to establish a new structure of higher fees
for transportation network companies like Uber and Lyft.
On the spending side, a Senate budget staffer said the
compromise negotiated between House Ways and Means Chairman
Aaron Michlewitz and Senate Ways and Means Chair Michael
Rodrigues was able to accommodate much of the spending
prioritized in each branch.
The accord includes a $50 million investment in the Rental
Assistance for Families in Transition program, which
represents a $33 million increase over fiscal year 2020 at a
time when housing security is a great concern. The
conference budget also increases funding for the emergency
food assistance program by $10 million over last year, to a
total of $30 million and doubles the Healthy Incentives food
program to $13 million.
Other notable new investments include a $15 million
Community Empowerment and Reinvestment grant program for
communities disproportionately hurt by the criminal justice
system, $30 million to subsidize child care and a $25
million reserve for early education providers to buy
COVID-19 supplies and provide staff with incentive pay.
The fiscal year began on July 1, but the Legislature and
Gov. Baker delayed major budget decisions over the summer
and fall while watching federal economic stimulus talks, the
trajectory of the COVID-19 pandemic and its impact on state
finances. Lawmakers extended their formal session, in part,
to be able deal with the budget this fall.
The state is currently operating on its third interim budget
that Baker said was intended to run through November. As the
month was ending, a Baker aide said there was actually
enough money authorized for "several days" into December.
The governor will have 10 days to review the budget after it
reaches him.
The agreement means Beacon Hill can soon turn its attention
to fiscal 2022 budget planning, with Baker required to file
his budget proposal by late January. The outlook for that
spending plan depends largely on how things go over the next
seven months, including whether Washington can deliver
fiscal relief to the states and the success of efforts to
control COVID-19 and distribute a vaccine.
If additional federal aid arrives or fiscal 2020 tax
collections continue to beat projections, state officials
may be able to minimize their withdrawals from state
reserves. But if not, raising taxes and cutting services may
be on the table since this year's budget is built on so much
one-time revenue.
State House
News Service
Friday, December 4, 2020
House, Senate Send Baker $46.2 Billion Budget
By Colin A. Young
The Legislature sent its compromise $46.2 billion budget for
the fiscal year that started five months ago to Gov. Charlie
Baker's desk Friday afternoon, shifting attention to whether
the governor might veto a policy section dealing with
abortion access.
The House voted 147-10 to accept the budget that emerged
Thursday from negotiations that began Nov. 23 and the Senate
then accepted the budget unanimously. By the time lawmakers
left Beacon Hill or logged off their computers for what one
negotiator said was a much-needed weekend, the spending plan
was out of the Legislature's hands and into the governor's
for a review that can last up to 10 days.
"The $46 billion budget agreement that is before you today
relies on a series of one-time revenue options to close a
$3.6 billion shortfall while making targeted investments
into key elements including education, housing, food
security, and combating domestic violence and substance
addiction," House Ways and Means Chair Rep. Aaron Michlewitz
said. "We were able to confront all these challenges and all
without any additional federal stimulus package, that we
will still gladly accept when Washington decides to get its
act together."
In the Senate, Minority Leader Bruce Tarr questioned why the
withdrawal from the state reserve account had grown to $1.7
billion during conference talks. Senate Ways and Means Chair
Sen. Michael Rodrigues explained that the increase was to
fund programs that help people through the pandemic and said
he thinks the increase did not compromise the budget's
prudence.
Rodrigues also told senators Friday that, because of work
Treasurer Deborah Goldberg's office did to refinance
existing state debt, the budget calls for $2.48 billion in
debt service, a savings of $140 million from the previous
year's budget.
The budget contains numerous policy sections, including one
that codifies the right to an abortion in state law and
expands access to abortions in certain cases. Baker has said
previously that he supports existing state laws on abortion,
but not "late-term" abortions.
While legislative leaders like Rodrigues have been referring
to the budget as a $46.2 billion spending bill, the bill
text itself notes the total appropriation is for almost
$46.46 billion. The discrepancy, according to a Senate
budget official, has to do with accounting practices and
whether certain budget transfers, like a transfer of funds
to MassHealth from the Medical Assistance Trust Fund, are
counted toward the bottom line.
CommonWealth
Magazine
Friday, December 4, 2020
Lawmakers swiftly pass delayed FY21 budget bill
Some controversy in House over abortion expansion
By Shira Schoenberg
The House and Senate made quick work on Friday of passing a
$46.2 billion state budget for fiscal 2021, sending it to
Gov. Charlie Baker’s desk, despite some controversy over a
provision expanding abortion access.
The vote came more than five months into the fiscal year, as
lawmakers took extra time to monitor the effects of COVID-19
on the state economy.
The budget passed in a rare Friday afternoon session. The
House voted to approve the conference committee report in a
147 to 10 vote. The Senate approved it unanimously.
The House vote occurred just after 1 p.m. – which, under
legislative rules, was the earliest time lawmakers could
hold a vote on a conference committee report released the
prior evening. The Senate vote followed immediately after.
Baker will have 10 days in which to act on the bill. He can
veto individual line items or return them to the Legislature
with proposed amendments.
The budget relies on one-time revenue – federal money,
excess capital gains tax money, a timing change in sales tax
collections, and a $1.7 billion withdrawal from the rainy
day fund – to close an estimated $3.6 billion shortfall due
to anticipated lower tax collections.
The only one who spoke on the House floor was Rep. Aaron
Michlewitz, a Boston Democrat who chairs the House Ways and
Means Committee. Michlewitz touted the budget as “one for
the history books.” While he said it may be the latest
full-year fiscal budget in history, he also called it “one
of the most remarkable” because of the challenges inherent
in drafting a budget during a global pandemic that
temporarily shuttered the economy. Michlewitz stressed
investments made in education, housing, food insecurity, and
addressing domestic violence and substance use disorders.
The budget also includes a provision that would let women as
young as 16 obtain abortions without parental or judicial
consent and would expand access to abortion when a fetus is
older than 24 weeks in cases of a “lethal fetal anomaly.”
The language affirms broadly a woman’s right to an abortion
in Massachusetts. Michlewitz said this is necessary because
after liberal justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was replaced on
the US Supreme Court by conservative justice Amy Coney
Barrett, “these rights are in jeopardy.”
The “no” votes in the House included Rep. Russell Holmes, a
Boston Democrat, and nine Republican lawmakers. In
interviews, several dissenting lawmakers cited the abortion
provision, and House policy on earmarks.
Rep. Peter Durant, a Spencer Republican, said he does not
believe lawmakers should be loading up the budget with local
earmarks in a time of crisis. And, he said, he does not
think the budget should have included the abortion
provision. Durant said lawmakers extended the legislative
session specifically to deal with the budget and adding the
abortion amendment “seems a little bit underhanded to me.”
Rep. Nicholas Boldyga, a Southwick Republican, also voted
against the budget because he thinks the abortion policy
should have been done as a separate standalone bill. “This
was a vote in a lame duck session. We should have been
focusing on getting people back to work. They made it about
abortion,” he said.
Holmes also opposed the way the abortion amendment was
introduced, and he criticized House leaders for allowing
earmarks favored by House leaders, but not earmarks he
proposed for black and Latino communities. “You’re going to
reject new revenue but cut my earmarks for communities that
need it badly,” Holmes said.
In the Senate, lawmakers did not discuss the abortion
provision. Senate Ways and Means chair Michael Rodrigues, a
Westport Democrat, said the bill “balances prudent use of
available resources and the need to maintain and increase
critical services during a public health and economic
crisis.”
Rodrigues stressed investments in education, mental health,
public health, transportation, and racial justice. “We made
a choice to invest in programs and services that help the
most vulnerable residents and respond to sectors that have
been greatly impacted by the COVID pandemic during this
great time of need,” he said.
Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr, a Gloucester Republican,
questioned Rodrigues about draws from the rainy day fund and
praised the budget for not raising taxes or fees. Tarr said
he believes it was “important we confine ourselves with
regard to public policy.” But he did not mention the
abortion provision and went on to praise his own policy
initiative, also included in the budget, which would require
the use of ignition interlocks for first time drunk driving
offenders.
In addition to laying out spending for the fiscal year that
ends June 30, the budget bill includes several policy
changes.
With the MBTA planning major service cuts, the budget
requires state officials to direct federal stimulus money or
higher-than-expected revenues toward preventing these cuts.
It would let hemp be sold for the first time in marijuana
dispensaries, potentially allowing for the sale of a wider
range of hemp-derived products. It would increase welfare
grants for the first time in decades. And it would prohibit
evictions while someone’s application for rental assistance
is pending.
State House
News Service
Friday, December 4, 2020
Weekly Roundup - The First One Can Be the Hardest
Recap and analysis of the week in state government
By Matt Murphy
The lame duck logjam broke open this week, and from it
spilled the possibility that compromise, in these blustery
days of December, might be at least a fraction as contagious
as COVID-19.
With daily cases of the deadly coronavirus reaching new
heights and hospital beds getting filled at a troubling
pace, the Legislature began to showcase why it was, exactly,
that they voted back in July to ignore decades of precedent
and extend its session by not one or two but more than five
months.
The first domino to fall was perhaps the hardest to tip
over, despite all the wind at its back in July. As real
gusts whipped up and down the coast on Monday, House and
Senate Democrats struck a deal to reform how police in
Massachusetts must conduct themselves on the job, and how
the police will be policed moving forward.
The compromise bill, sparked by the death of George Floyd
and the ensuing protests over police violence against Black
people, would create a new Peace Officer Standards and
Training Commission to certify all law enforcement in
Massachusetts, and to decertify police that violate their
duty to serve and protect.
The bill would limit the use of chokeholds and no-knock
warrants, and strip police officers of their qualified
immunity protection from civil lawsuits if their
certification gets revoked for misconduct.
But this bill was no slam dunk with lawmakers, and Gov.
Charlie Baker remains a powerful wildcard. Not a single
Republican backed the policing reform bill, and Speaker
Robert DeLeo could not whip a veto-proof majority, with the
92-67 vote in the House a nailbiter by Beacon Hill
standards.
The margins put Baker in the unusual position of actually
having considerable leverage as he weighs how to approach
the issue over the coming days and weeks. On the one hand,
Baker wants a new POST Commission with the authority to
certify and decertify police, and legislative leaders know
that.
But because of the complexity of the legislation and its
attempts to take on issues like qualified immunity,
Democratic leaders may be forced to negotiate amendments
with the governor unless they're willing to risk a veto that
would push off action to next year.
The annual state budget is a different breed of bill, and
was the second box to get checked this week.
Unlike the more than four months it took to negotiate a
compromise policing bill, it took almost a month to the day
for the House and Senate to move the fiscal 2021 from a
House Ways and Means draft, released two days after the
election, to a final budget on its way to the governor's
desk.
Of course, that budget is still five months late by
non-pandemic standards. But who's counting anymore, except
maybe the bond rating agencies.
The final budget now in Baker's hands for review proposes to
spend more than $46.2 billion in a year during which
lawmakers have been girding for the financial worst, but not
yet seeing it. Revenues continue to outperform 2019 in spite
of the pandemic, and rather than make real tough choices
about where to spend, the conference committee simply upped
its draw on reserves by $200 million to $1.7 billion, using
about 48 percent of the "rainy day" account.
How that will be received by Baker, who recommended using
considerably less in reserves, remains to be seen, as does
his reaction to a controversial expansion of abortion access
that would make abortions after 24 weeks legal in cases of
diagnosed fatal fetal anomalies.
Other policy changes included in the budget include an
acceleration of sales tax collections opposed by retailers
and other small businesses and the authorized use of
ignition interlock devices for first-time drunk driving
offenders.
But along with developments on the legislative front, there
was also "light at the end of the tunnel" in the fight
against COVID-19 as Gov. Baker said he expects the first
doses of the Pfizer vaccine to begin arriving in
Massachusetts by mid-December.
The state expects 300,000 doses to arrive by the end of the
year, with health care workers, residents of long-term care
facilities and seniors or those with underlying health
conditions expected to be among the first to get access.
The full plan for vaccine distribution is expected to be
detailed by the administration next week after it was
submitted to the Centers for Disease Control this week for
review, but Baker said it could be April before the general
public can start rolling up their sleeves for the shot.
"It would probably be Q2 before just Joe Q or Jane Q Citizen
would have access to a vaccine," Baker said.
But the vaccine can't arrive fast enough. The second surge
is worsening, and there are signs that the fears harbored by
public health officials over Thanksgiving travel and
gatherings may be coming to life.
Boston Mayor Marty Walsh had thought the infection rate in
his city might be trending in the right direction until
early this week when the data began to point to a surge
within the surge.
"It could be the first signs of what the Thanksgiving
holiday brought," Walsh said Tuesday, detailing how Boston
had clocked 407 new cases on the day, or more than twice the
daily average.
Statewide records would also continue to fall throughout the
week, with Thursday's 6,477 new reported cases the most of
any time during the pandemic, and statewide hospital
capacity dipping below 25 percent. Baker went to Worcester
to mark the readiness of the first field hospital to open
since the spring at the DCU Center, and said another one is
being prepped for Lowell. The state is also thinking about
how to fortify outdoor testing sites against a New England
winter.
But despite the gathering storm, Baker dismissed as "rumor
mongering" another statewide lockdown and he said at this
point he has no plans for further restrictions or forced
business closures.
In fact, the Cannabis Control Commission greenlighted a
completely new business this week - recreational marijuana
home delivery. The CCC risked a lawsuit by saying yes to two
new types of licenses for either dispensaries to deliver
their product, or for independent business owners to buy
direct from wholesalers and venture out on their own.
The one service that likely won't be able to escape
shutdowns is public transit.
The MassINC Polling Institute released the findings of a new
poll Thursday showing, unsurprisingly, that people don't
like the idea of drastic service reductions to balance the
transit agency's books.
The survey also found people don't believe the T will ever
restore the cuts if and when its finances improve. Well,
that got under the skin of the Baker administration, which
criticized the pollster for not asking people how they would
propose to pay for transit that's not being used, and
insisted the cuts were temporary.
But the 66 percent of people saying the state should just
tap its budget for more money weren't alone in thinking the
MBTA should reconsider its plan. The MBTA Advisory Board
said the agency was being unnecessarily cautious in its
budget projections for next year, and could eliminate the
need for widespread service cuts with just a little positive
thinking.
The advisory board's own budget analysis suggested the
financial hole facing the T could be 20 percent smaller than
the worst-case scenario being planned for, negating the need
to end weekend commuter rail service or cut 25 bus routes
and all ferry services.
"The Advisory Board's view is that risk of permanent loss of
ridership, increased congestion, and other negative effects
of service cuts to people and communities is too high a
price to pay right now, just as a vaccine is on the
horizon," the board wrote.
MBTA officials, however, are forging ahead with their plan
and a vote on Dec. 14, and alternatives don't seem to be in
their line of vision.
"The vast majority of MBTA service will continue, the
proposed service changes are not permanent, and the MBTA
will periodically realign service as feasible to match
current and future ridership patterns when durable revenue
is available for pay for such service," MBTA General Manager
Steve Poftak said in a statement.
Whether people believe him is another question.
STORY OF THE WEEK: Two conference committees done, four to
go.
State House
News Service
Friday, December 4, 2020
Advances - Week of Dec. 6, 2020
There will be nothing traditional about this December for
Gov. Charlie Baker. As the statewide public health emergency
intensifies, putting increased demands on the governor and
his entire administration, the Legislature is poised to
flood the governor's team with the most far-reaching,
important and complicated bills of this two-year session.
Lawmakers this week dumped on his desk a major overhaul of
policing (S 2963) that differs substantially from the plan
he offered as well as a $46.2 billion state budget (H 5164)
that includes 113 outside sections and proposes to spend
$700 million more than Baker sought when he filed a revised
budget bill in October.
As COVID-19 cases shatter previous records with clusters
breaking out all over the state, legislators are also trying
to close deals on economic development, climate change,
health care and transportation spending bills that they
failed to reach agreements on before a biannual mid-summer
deadline. Lawmakers instead are trying to tackle those
matters during remote, lame-duck sessions that are expected
to run through December and into early January.
Baker and his team may soon need to scrutinize those bills
while his administration is busy setting up field hospitals,
advancing a COVID-19 vaccine distribution effort, and
mulling potential new responses to virus caseloads that are
exploding to levels not seen earlier in the pandemic.
The late-arriving budget also means the governor will need
to juggle its review with the start this month of
deliberations over a consensus tax revenue estimate for the
fiscal 2022 budget cycle, which Baker must kick off by
filing his spending plan next month.
The governor's team is also at an important juncture on a
regional effort to extract carbon emissions reductions from
the transportation sector and his own administration's
roadmap to achieve sharp emissions cuts in Massachusetts by
2050 -- which could be released at any time and will inform
the setting this month of a 2030 emissions reduction target.
Activists say the proposal is critical to addressing one of
the greatest current leadership challenges: slowing the
devastating impacts of a warming climate and rising sea
levels.
In one area - appointments to the Supreme Judicial Court -
Baker appears to have finished his work for a while. Justice
Dalila Argaez Wendlandt was sworn in Friday and could be
joined on the high court next week by Judge Serge Georges,
who would round out a seven-member court made up entirely of
Baker appointees. — Michael
P. Norton
A Tale of Two Commonwealths
Massachusetts and Kentucky are two of the four states that
term themselves commonwealths; the other two are
Pennsylvania and Virginia.
My state senator here, Mike
Wilson the majority whip, sent a questionnaire to his
constituents asking about the General Assembly's first order
of business when they come back into session in January
— reining in tyrannical
Democrat Gov. Andy Beshear.
As
I related to you last week:
The Kentucky legislature [General Assembly] convenes in
regular session on the first Tuesday after the first
Monday in January for 60 days in even-numbered years
(long session) and for 30 days in odd-numbered years
(short session). It
convenes in special sessions at the call of the
governor. The Kentucky Constitution mandates
that a regular session be completed no later than April
15 in even-numbered years and March 30 in odd-numbered
years.
Since March the legislature has
been out of session for the year, neutered, so the Democrat
governor has been running wild with impunity and power lust,
unwilling to recall the legislature. The Republican
supermajority in both the House and Senate intends to strip
away that unbridled power in their first week back in
session in January.
I warned Sen. Wilson to be
cautious, pointing out my experience with a full-time
legislature. While it is critical that the General
Assembly find a means to intervene in such an unforeseen
situation as Kentuckians now suffer, create a balance of
power, I advised they be careful not to create an
unanticipated monster — a
full-time legislature that will become as, if not more,
dominating than an unrestrained governor. I agreed
that restriction of the governor’s self-assumed and
unilateral, unchecked power must be reined in quickly,
whether by statute, constitutional amendment, or both.
But I admitted to reservations
—
there must be strictly defined rules for addressing a
specific situation, accompanied by strictly defined rules
for terminating the special session. I suggested a
special session be automatically triggered after a short
period of time following a governor's declaration of
emergency — such as 15-30 days
after the declaration. The triggered emergency session
should have a short lifespan with a specific termination
date
— a week, two at the most. If the governor
oversteps the legislature's special session response the
trigger is again pulled automatically, legislators return
and begin impeachment procedures.
Louisville, Kentucky
November 20, 2020
Osborne: Bill to curb Beshear's COVID-19 powers could
pass in first week of 2021 session
By Joe
Sonka | Louisville Courier Journal
Kentucky House Speaker David Osborne indicated Friday it
is possible a bill amending the governor's emergency
COVID-19 powers could pass in the first week of the
upcoming legislative session, which begins Jan. 5.
Osborne
made the comments at a press conference Friday at the
Capitol where he and other House majority
leaders outlined their priorities for the session, where
Republicans will have a dominant 75-25 supermajority.
Along
with passing a one-year budget, the Republican
legislators identified one of those top priorities as
passing legislation to amend KRS Chapter 39A — the
statute used by Gov. Andy Beshear to pass numerous
executive orders to address COVID-19 through his
emergency powers.
The Kentucky Supreme Court ruled last week Beshear
did have the authority to enact COVID-19 restrictions
using his emergency powers under this statute, which the
governor
used again on Wednesday to close most K-12 schools
to in-person classes through the end of the year and
restrict certain gatherings for the next three weeks.
Noting
that Republicans have prefiled multiple bills to scale
back the governor's emergency powers since this summer,
Osborne said four months ago they "put together a
working group that would try to find consensus among
those bills."
Osborne
said such a bill could make it through both chambers in
the first week of the 2021 legislative session, should
Republicans find agreement on one bill.
"We
will pass that when it's ready, and if that is the first
week, then that will be the first week," Osborne
said. "If it's not ready the first week, it won't be."
The
current Kentucky General Assembly schedule calls for the
first part of the 2021 short session to last from
Tuesday to Friday in the first week of January, then
take a break until the first Tuesday of February and end
March 30.
While a
bill cannot pass through both chambers in just four
days, the legislature could add the following Saturday
in January in order to pass bills that first week, which
happened as recently as the 2017 session.
Kentucky House Speaker David Osborne indicated Friday it
is possible a bill amending the governor's emergency
COVID-19 powers could pass in the first week of the
upcoming legislative session, which begins Jan. 5.
Noting
that Republicans have prefiled multiple bills to scale
back the governor's emergency powers since this summer,
Osborne said four months ago they "put together a
working group that would try to find consensus among
those bills."
Osborne
said such a bill could make it through both chambers in
the first week of the 2021 legislative session, should
Republicans find agreement on one bill.
"We
will pass that when it's ready, and if that is the first
week, then that will be the first week," Osborne
said. "If it's not ready the first week, it won't be."
The
current Kentucky General Assembly schedule calls for the
first part of the 2021 short session to last from
Tuesday to Friday in the first week of January, then
take a break until the first Tuesday of February and end
March 30.
While a
bill cannot pass through both chambers in just four
days, the legislature could add the following Saturday
in January in order to pass bills that first week,
which happened as recently as the 2017 session.
If the
General Assembly does pass a law restricting Beshear's
executive power in the first week of the session,
Beshear would have to veto it within 10 days or it would
become law.
However, if Beshear does veto such a bill, the
legislature could immediately override the veto once
they are back in session in February.
If such
legislation has an emergency clause, it would go into
effect immediately after it becomes law. Otherwise, it
wouldn't go into effect until the summer.
Osborne
said the purpose of the working group is "looking at
building the best long-term policy that will affect this
governor, the next governor, hopefully the next 20
governors. Our goal is to pass good long-term policy
that will stand the test of time."
The
speaker said the legislature when initially passing the
emergency powers statute likely had short-term crises in
mind, not envisioning a pandemic that could give a
governor such broad powers over the span of eight
months.
"These
emergency powers ... were contemplated to consider
natural disasters, terrorist attacks, things that would
be limited in either geographic area or a limited time,"
Osborne said. "I think now we see there is a need to
consider the long-term implications to provide some
clarity." Five bills and one proposed constitutional
amendment have been prefiled to limit the governor's
emergency powers under the statute, with the first one
filed in July by Rep. Savannah Maddox, R-Dry Ridge, now
up to eight co-sponsors.
The
bills would limit the duration in which Beshear's orders
under the statute would last — ranging from 15 to 30
days — and call for their expiration unless the
legislature gives its approval, even if that means
calling a special session to do so.
Laura
Lee Goins, the spokeswoman for GOP House leadership,
told The Courier Journal the working group is "an
informal group of legislators" that includes "those who
have prefiled bills on the topic and other folks."
Kentucky Democratic Party spokeswoman Marisa McNee
issued a statement criticizing the Republican House
leadership for complaining about Beshear's orders
without detailing a plan of their own to combat
COVID-19.
"Their
press conference this morning is just one more low point
in their pathetic grab for power," McNee stated. "Rather
than come up with solutions for the past nine months,
too many Kentucky Republican leaders have spread
misinformation, engaged in petty partisan politics, and
pushed their own selfish agendas. Kentuckians deserve
leaders, like Governor Beshear, who are going to step up
and do the hard work to keep us all safe."
In his
press conference Thursday, Beshear also countered
Republican critics by
saying they had no plan of their own to protect
Kentuckians from the pandemic and "would choose
surrender," leading to the loss of more lives.
https://eu.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/2020/11/20/bill-curb-beshears-covid-19-powers-could-pass-first-week-2021/6356197002/ |
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
|
