 |
Post Office Box 1147
▪
Marblehead, Massachusetts 01945
▪ (781) 639-9709
“Every Tax is a Pay Cut ... A Tax Cut is a Pay Raise”
47 years as “The Voice of Massachusetts Taxpayers”
— and
their Institutional Memory — |
|
CLT UPDATE
Monday, December 6, 2021
Piling One Absurdity
Atop Another
Jump directly
to CLT's Commentary on the News
|
Most Relevant News
Excerpts
(Full news reports follow Commentary)
|
|
State tax collectors
hauled in $2.416 billion last month, keeping the
recent trend of above-benchmark receipts going as
the November total exceeded Baker administration
expectations by almost 9 percent.
The Department of
Revenue said that preliminary revenue collections
for November 2021 were $289 million or 13.6 percent
greater than actual collections in November 2020 and
$192 million or 8.7 percent above the
administration's monthly benchmark amount.
Revenue Commissioner
Geoffrey Snyder said that last month's collections
increased in most major tax types -- including
withholding, sales and use tax, and the "all other"
category -- in comparison to November 2020....
Now five months into
fiscal year 2022, the state has collected
approximately $13.612 billion from residents,
workers and businesses, which is $2.145 billion or
18.7 percent more than collections in the same
period of fiscal 2021 and $914 million or 7.2
percent more than what DOR expected to have
collected at this point in the year.
Fiscal year 2021
produced a surplus of roughly $5 billion, the last
of which will be redeployed by Beacon Hill when Gov.
Charlie Baker signs the $4 billion American Rescue
Plan Act and surplus spending bill that the
Legislature finalized Friday.
State
House News Service
Friday, December 3, 2021
State Tax Collections
Continue Rapid Pace in November
Massachusetts
Department of Revenue (DOR) Commissioner Geoffrey
Snyder today announced that preliminary revenue
collections for November 2021 totaled $2.416
billion, which is $289 million or 13.6% more than
actual collections in November 2020, and $192
million or 8.7% more than benchmark.
FY2022 year-to-date
collections totaled approximately $13.612 billion,
which is $2.145 billion or 18.7% more than
collections in the same period of FY2021, and $914
million or 7.2% more than year-to-date benchmark.
Massachusetts Department of Revenue
Friday, November 3, 2021
November Revenue Collections Total
$2.416 Billion
Monthly collections up $289 million or 13.6% vs.
November 2020 actual;
$192 million above benchmark
Gov. Charlie Baker, a
two-term Republican who at his peak was one of the
most popular governors in the country, will not seek
a third term, throwing wide open the 2022 race for
the state's top political office after close to two
years of managing through a global pandemic.
Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito,
who was widely considered to be the heir to the
Baker political legacy, has also decided against a
run for governor in 2022, dramatically reshaping the
contest on the Republican side and, perhaps,
clearing a path for Attorney General Maura Healey to
enter the race on the Democratic side.
"After several months
of discussion with our families, we have decided not
to seek re-election in 2022. This was an extremely
difficult decision for us. We love the work, and we
especially respect and admire the people of this
wonderful Commonwealth. Serving as Governor and
Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts has been the
most challenging and fulfilling jobs we've ever had.
We will forever be grateful to the people of this
state for giving us this great honor," Baker and
Polito said in a joint statement....
Republican Geoff Diehl,
a former state lawmaker, has already entered the
race for his party's nomination with the endorsement
of former President Donald Trump, and three
Democrats -- Harvard professor Danielle Allen,
former state Sen. Ben Downing, and Sen. Sonia
Chang-Diaz -- are also running.
State
House News Service
Wednesday, December 1, 2021
Baker and Polito Both Pass on
2022 Guv Race
Campaign for Corner Office Wide Open with 11 Months
to Go
Massachusetts Governor
Charlie Baker, the Republican who maintained the
enduring support of his blue-state constituents
through boom times, the Trump presidency, and the
COVID-19 pandemic, will not seek a third term in
2022, he said Wednesday.
A moderate who has kept
his distance from the controversies of the national
Republican Party and cast himself as a thrifty and
thoughtful manager, Baker, 65, would have entered
the race as its front-runner. His decision means he
will forgo a shot at history: No Massachusetts
governor has served three consecutive four-year
terms.
In a joint statement
with Lieutenant Governor Karyn Polito, Baker said a
campaign would have been “a distraction” from
managing the COVID-19 pandemic — work that “cannot
and should not be about politics and the next
election.”
“We want to focus on
recovery, not on the grudge matches political
campaigns can devolve into,” Baker and Polito said.
The
Boston Globe
Wednesday, December 1, 2021
Governor Charlie Baker will not
seek reelection
Sabato’s Crystal Ball
updated its election forecast on Wednesday.
In light of news that
incumbent Massachusetts governor Charlie Baker (and
lieutenant governor Karyn Polito) won’t run again
next year, the organization says that the 2022
Massachusetts gubernatorial election now favors the
Democratic Party.
The old rating for the
race was “likely Republican,” because Baker was
expected to run and win. Now, the site says that
it’s “likely Democratic.”
At this point in the
race, the frontrunner on the Republican side is
former state representative Geoff Diehl (R-Whitman),
who has been endorsed by former President Donald
Trump. On the Democratic side, it’s unclear who
holds that post — and many people, including
attorney general Maura Healey and former Boston
mayor Marty Walsh, may be interested in running.
The New
Boston Post
Thursday, December 2, 2021
Democrats Now Favored In Massachusetts Race For
Governor, Election Forecaster Says
A
Democrat had not won the
Fourth Essex District in Massachusetts since 1858 —
until last night.
Democrat Jamie Belsito
of Topsfield defeated Rowley Republican selectman
Robert Snow in a special election on Tuesday,
November 30, according to Ipswich Local News. The
race took place to fill the seat vacated by former
state representative Brad Hill (R-Ipswich), who
stepped down in September to take a job as a a
commissioner with the Massachusetts Gaming
Commission.
Belsito got 55.4
percent of the vote while Snow got 44.6 percent. It
was a low turnout election, with about 15 percent of
voters showing up.
Belsito primaried U.S.
Representative Seth Moulton (D-Salem) last year and
got 12.2 percent of the vote to his 78 percent.
Now, the Democratic
Party has 130 state representatives, the Republican
Party has 29, and there is one unenrolled.
The New
Boston Post
Wednesday, December 1, 2021
Democrat Wins Fourth Essex District For The First
Time Since 1858
Democrats pried one
more legislative seat from Republicans as
Topsfield's Jamie Belsito defeated Rowley Republican
Robert Snow on Tuesday in another low-turnout
special election.
A women's health
advocate, Belsito is poised to fill the seat held
for more than two decades by Ipswich Republican Brad
Hill, who resigned from the House of Representatives
to join the Massachusetts Gaming Commission. The win
enables Democrats to further bulk up their
supermajority status on Beacon Hill....
It's been a tough
stretch for Massachusetts Republicans, who in recent
years have lost Senate seats formerly held by
Republicans from Fitchburg, Plymouth, Westfield, and
Wrentham and House seats previously represented by
Republicans from Barnstable, North Attleborough, and
Taunton.
State
House News Service
Wednesday, December 1, 2021
Mass. Dems Grab Another
Legislative Seat From Republicans
Collecting the required
80,239 voter signatures proved an insurmountable
hurdle for all but three campaigns, eliminating from
contention potential ballot questions that would
have legalized the sale of consumer fireworks,
reversed the state's decades-long ban on happy hour,
and imposed new restrictions on hospital CEO
compensation.
Proposals to update
alcohol licensing limits, rewrite worker status and
benefits for app-based drivers, and impose spending
limits on dental insurers remain on track to make
next year's ballot, though it will not be clear how
many signatures each petitioner filed until
Secretary of State William Galvin's office counts
the submissions in the coming weeks....
Wendy Wakeman, who
worked on the campaign pushing a voter
identification ballot question and two others, told
the News Service that its supporters "did fail to
get enough signatures to make the ballot."
While Wakeman said
she is "disappointed" in the outcome, she expressed
hope that the focus on the ballot question could
push the topic onto the Legislature's agenda.
"Whatever did happen
in 2020, it's clear that there are a lot of people
who have lost faith in the integrity of the voting
system, of the American vote, and it seems as though
voter ID is one very simple way to begin to restore
confidence in elections," Wakeman said....
A third question on
which Wakeman worked, which sought to hamstring the
state's participation in the Transportation Climate
Initiative, is effectively moot and will not advance
after Gov. Charlie Baker last month pulled the plug
on the plans....
Both other campaigns
that submitted signatures to Galvin's office used
paid signature-gatherers. [Massachusetts
Package Store Association] Executive Director
Robert Mellion said his group hired Signature Drive
at a rate of $5 to $8 per signature, while the
Coalition for Independent Work did not provide
details about the paid vendor it used....
The dental benefits question seeks to apply a profit
limit on dental insurance companies similar to those
in place on medical insurers, according to Mouhab
Rizkallah, chairman of the ballot question
committee.
Rizkallah said the campaign paid more than $500,000
on signature-gatherers and submitted 104,000
validated signatures with Galvin's office.
Galvin's staff will
process submissions in the coming weeks and count
signatures. Later this month, officials will publish
a list of which met the requirement of at least
80,239 signatures and transmit the petitions to the
Legislature.
State
House News Service
Wednesday, December 1, 2021
Deadline Whittles Ballot
Question Field to Three Campaigns
Voter ID, Happy Hour Initiatives Don't Make Cut
The final version of a
bill spending billions in federal aid was revealed
late Wednesday, long after dark. By Thursday
morning, the $4 billion package emerged in a nearly
empty chamber of the Massachusetts House of
Representatives, where it was approved without an
audible “yea” or “nay.” Four minutes later, the
session was over.
The moves ushered the
long-sought bill to the Senate and inched it closer
to the governor’s desk — but with no formal remarks,
just six of 159 representatives on hand, and the
public still physically locked out of the building.
The sweeping spending
legislation promises hundreds of millions of dollars
for everything from housing to workforce training to
Massachusetts’ health care system. It also offers
the potential of transformational change for
industries and communities walloped by the COVID-19
pandemic, lawmakers say.
But for a plan with
massive implications, such swift movement, like
Thursday’s, was by design.
After missing a
self-imposed deadline to reach a deal on the bill —
and starting a seven-week recess on Nov. 17 — Senate
and House leaders spent two weeks unknotting
differing versions of the package behind closed
doors, all while Governor Charlie Baker and
community leaders fretted about the need to quickly
reach a compromise.
After they announced
they did Tuesday night, the bill itself didn’t
formally emerge until nearly 24 hours later after
legislators needed the day to smooth out its
language. The bill officially made it to the House
clerk’s office at 7:56 p.m., on Wednesday — four
minutes before a deadline for so-called conference
committee reports to be able to be considered the
next day.
With lawmakers on
recess, their calendar includes only informal
sessions, where no roll calls are taken and
unanimous voice votes are required, and are often
done quickly, for a bill to move.
So, about 15 hours
after the final package had been released, it
emerged shortly into a 10-minute-long House session
on Thursday. The House gallery — still closed to the
public with the rest of State House after 600-plus
days — was empty, save for a toddler in pink
overalls teetering about with a House court officer
in tow. Some of the half-dozen state representatives
dotting the chamber were engrossed in their
smartphones.
The House approved the
compromise with an unrecorded voice vote and no
speeches on the floor. The Senate is expected to
take up the bill on Friday, when a few procedural
votes in both chambers will finally usher it to
Baker....
“I think people wanted
to get it done quickly and not necessarily worry
about discussions on the floor about it,” state
Representative Aaron Michlewitz, the House’s lead
negotiator on the bill, said of Thursday’s
session....
Informal sessions are
typically reserved for “non-controversial
housekeeping items,” argued Paul Craney, a spokesman
for the conservative Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance,
not to pass a multibillion-dollar spending package.
And with such hulking
legislation — it spans 163 pages and 3,679 lines,
and includes hundreds of earmarks — advocates argue
that giving the public the time to examine how the
money is spent during each step of the legislative
process is crucial.
The
Boston Globe
Thursday, December 2, 2021
Revealed in dark of night
and passed hours later in nearly empty chamber,
Mass. House moves $4 billion bill toward governor
The long-awaited
compromise over how to spend ARPA and fiscal 2021
surplus funds came together this week in a manner
that the saw the bottom line of the final bill grow
by about $180 million beyond what the House and
Senate had initially proposed to spend.
The growth of the bill
was due, in part, to a decision by top Democrats to
accept hundreds of earmarks sprinkled throughout the
respective bills passed by House and Senate
lawmakers. Senior officials in both branches said
all earmarks from both bills were included in the
final package.
"COVID had far reaching
implications on not just every sector of our
economy, but every sector of the commonwealth. Every
city and towns faced dramatic impacts from COVID and
while not every earmark may say COVID in it, or be
described as COVID relief, there are a lot of things
in this bill that will help build back recovery in
those communities. The people that know that best in
each of those communities are the people who
represent them," House Ways and Means Chairman Aaron
Michlewitz said.
Michlewitz said in most
cases the bill reflects the higher value for
earmarks included in both bills, estimating the
total value of earmarks to be in the range of $200
million to $300 million. He said many of the
earmarks were funded with state tax surplus dollars,
and not ARPA funding.
Examples of earmarks
include $150,000 to remodel the historic Lexington
Depot community building to improve public access
for the 250th anniversary of the Battle of
Lexington, $300,000 for the Boch Center to make
capital improvements to safely reopen the Wang and
Shubert Theaters in Boston, $250,000 to help the
town of Belmont design a new skating rink, and
$85,000 for the Brookline Chamber of Commerce to
expand its Discover Brookline website.
One of the larger
earmarks is $50 million for the MBTA to make
economic development improvements to transit
stations in Norfolk County, which also happens to be
where House Speaker Ron Mariano, of Quincy, resides.
Earlier this week,
Mariano said the earmarking in the bill might wind
up being the reason the House and Senate are able to
pass this final bill during in an informal session,
rather than wait until January when they could hold
a roll call....
Paul Craney, a
spokesman for the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance,
called the earmarking an "insult to the taxpayers."
"Lawmakers are
basically treating COVID-19 relief money as just
another budget for their pork pet projects that will
be funded next year during an election year. The
biggest missed opportunity in this ARPA bill is the
unemployment insurance fund for businesses," he
said....
Craney said the $500
million investment is "not even close to enough."
"The best way to reinvigorate the economy is by
letting small business flourish and hire more
people, but instead it's going for a pier in Hull
and a turf field at Brad Jones's high school," he
said.
Craney was referring to
the $150,000 earmark in the bill to rebuild the
public boat ramp at the A Street pier in Hull, and
$100,000 to replace the turf field carpet at the
Arthur Kenney field in North Reading, part of House
Minority Leader Brad Jones's district.
State
House News Service
Thursday, December 2, 2021
No Compromise
Needed: Lawmakers Pack All Pet Projects Into $4B
Bill
Opt For Expansive View Of What's Possible With
Federal Recovery Funds
Gov. Charlie Baker has
built a dedicated team in his administration and
their loyalty will be put to the test over the year
ahead now that the governor has revealed that he's
leaving the office for good after 2022. A brain
drain from the administration looms as a new threat
for the governor as he focuses on the important work
ahead in 2022 and members of his team begin to think
about what they will do for work come 2023.
Baker himself also
faces new considerations in dealing with Democratic
legislative leaders, who are now mindful of his new
lame duck status and the changed dynamic of dealing
with a governor who will not be on next year's
ballot and no longer needs to weigh political
considerations when making decisions in his day job.
The governor starts the
week with legislation he has long desired finally on
his desk. The House and Senate on Friday shipped to
Baker a $4 billion spending bill (H 4269) that
exhausts the state's bulging fiscal 2021 budget
surplus and allocates a chunk of the federal
economic recovery aid awarded to Massachusetts under
the American Rescue Plan Act.
A bill-signing could be
in the works, and everyone is on the lookout for
vetoes, especially since lawmakers loaded the
legislation up with pet projects in their districts.
State
House News Service
Friday, December 3, 2021
Advances - Week of Dec. 5, 2021
Lawmakers have just a
month left to overcome a disagreement about how to
update an animal welfare law before it kicks into
effect, and if they fail to meet that deadline, they
could unleash a nearly eggless period that one
industry leader forecast would be "temporary chaos."
The House and Senate
have each already voted in favor of changes to a
voter-approved law setting new standards for
egg-laying hens, but a six-member conference
committee has not reached agreement on a handful of
details in the bill, delaying the proposal's
passage.
The effects of inaction
could be enormous, even if they are temporary.
Bill Bell, general
manager of the New England Brown Egg Council,
estimated that "over 90 percent" of the eggs
currently available in Massachusetts will no longer
be legal for sale starting Jan. 1 if the
voter-approved initiative petition takes effect
without changes.
With both industry
interests and animal rights groups aligned in
support, Bell said he thought "this would be done a
month ago." ...
In June, the Senate
approved a bill altering the ballot law to allow one
square foot of space per bird in aviaries that allow
sufficient vertical movement. The legislation (S
2481) drew no opposition and sailed through on an
unrecorded voice vote.
The House voted 156-1
in October on its version of the bill (H 4194),
which targets similar cage-free standard changes but
also moves enforcement from the attorney general to
the Department of Agricultural Resources and delays
by one year the Jan. 1, 2022 start date for a ban on
the sale of pork derived from cruelly enclosed pigs.
Each branch dug in
behind its bill, and legislative leaders named a
six-member conference committee on Oct. 13 to hash
out the differences.
State
House News Service
Tuesday, November 30, 2021
Egg Supply In Peril If
Voter Law Kicks In |
|
The State House News Service reported on Friday ("State
Tax Collections Continue Rapid Pace in November"):
State tax collectors hauled
in $2.416 billion last month, keeping the recent
trend of above-benchmark receipts going as the
November total exceeded Baker administration
expectations by almost 9 percent.
The Department of
Revenue said that preliminary revenue
collections for November 2021 were $289 million
or 13.6 percent greater than actual collections
in November 2020 and $192 million or 8.7
percent above the administration's monthly
benchmark amount.
Revenue Commissioner
Geoffrey Snyder said that last month's
collections increased in most major tax types --
including withholding, sales and use tax, and
the "all other" category -- in comparison to
November 2020....
Now five months into fiscal
year 2022, the state has collected approximately
$13.612 billion from residents, workers and
businesses, which is $2.145 billion or 18.7
percent more than collections in the same period
of fiscal 2021 and $914 million or 7.2 percent
more than what DOR expected to have collected at
this point in the year.
Fiscal year 2021
produced a surplus of roughly $5 billion, the
last of which will be redeployed by Beacon Hill
when Gov. Charlie Baker signs the $4 billion
American Rescue Plan Act and surplus spending
bill that the Legislature finalized Friday.
For state government the
good times just keep rolling along. Not so much for taxpayers
who are pulling the freight train for Bacon Hill. These
billions upon billions in surplus revenue pouring in are being
immediately squandered on more state spending and increased
bureaucracy, creating dependencies that will need to be supported
forevermore. As Ronald Reagan so memorably noted:
"No government
ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government
programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a
government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll
ever see on this earth!"
When the bonanza balloon
bursts — and it will
— revenue for that embedded spending
will need to come from somewhere else —
and we all know where that somewhere else is. The pockets of
the hard-working, productive taxpayers of Massachusetts as always,
just as Willie Sutton the bank robber replied when asked why he robs
banks: "Because that's where the money is!"
Gov. Charlie Baker and
Lieutenant Governor Karyn Polito broke the suspense
on Wednesday and announced neither was interested in running for
governor next year.
"Baker
would have been a formidable opponent for the major contenders who
have so far declared their candidacies." The Boston Globe reported.
"Polls during his tenure have found that Baker is more popular with
Massachusetts Democrats and independents than with Republicans, and
his overall approval ratings make him the envy of most of his 49
colleagues across the United States."
The State House News
Service noted who's running to replace Baker or Polito as the
state's next chief executive — a list
that's now certain to enlarge with the list of unannounced potential
candidates already growing now that Baker is out of the way:
Republican
Geoff Diehl, a former state lawmaker, has already entered the
race for his party's nomination with the endorsement of former
President Donald Trump, and three Democrats
—
Harvard professor Danielle Allen, former state Sen. Ben Downing,
and Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz
—
are also running.
Healey,
the popular Democratic prosecutor, is also weighing a bid and
could be more inclined to enter the fray with Baker out of the
running. She has previously said she hoped to make a decision
about her political future this fall.
A growing movement among
the "moderate" wing of the Republican party already is seeking
gubernatorial candidates to take on Geoff Diehl in the primary
election. On the quickly crowding race for governor already
forming, in its Weekly Roundup on Friday the State House News
Service included:
For now, Diehl has a clear path to
the Republican nomination, but his former House colleague and
Taunton Mayor Shaunna O'Connell is taking a look at her chances,
and former U.S. Attorney Andrew Lelling, according to the Boston
Herald, may fancy himself to fill the moderate lane left open by
Baker.
On the Democratic side, Attorney General Maura Healey is now
under the microscope. If she runs, she would enter as the
prohibitive favorite, even in a field that already counts three
candidates. Baker's decision undoubtedly makes hers easier if
she truly is interested in being governor, but Healey would only
say "soon" this week on her own decision as she preferred to let
Baker have his turn through the news cycle.
If Healey
doesn't run, and maybe even if she does, former Boston mayor and
current U.S. Labor Secretary Marty Walsh is said to be sizing up
his chances to return to the State House in the top job.
Sprinkle in other potential candidates like Boston City
Councilor Annissa Essaibi George and the field could get large
quickly.
Unfortunately, as reported
by the New Boston Post on Thursday, at
University of Virginia's Center for Politics (Larry) Sabato's
Crystal Ball immediately flipped the upcoming race for Massachusetts
governor from "Likely Republican" to "Likely Democrat."
It'd be painful for
Massachusetts to go through another Deval Patrick Democrat interim
between Republicans Mitt Romney and Charlie Baker
— or would anyone even notice?
The New Boston Post reported on Wednesday ("Democrat
Wins Fourth Essex District For The First Time Since 1858"):
A Democrat had not won the
Fourth Essex District in Massachusetts since
1858 — until last night.
Democrat Jamie Belsito of
Topsfield defeated Rowley Republican selectman
Robert Snow in a special election on Tuesday,
November 30, according to Ipswich Local News.
The race took place to fill the seat vacated by
former state representative Brad Hill
(R-Ipswich), who stepped down in September to
take a job as a a commissioner with the
Massachusetts Gaming Commission....
Now, the Democratic Party
has 130 state representatives, the Republican
Party has 29, and there is one unenrolled.
The State House News Service added ("Mass.
Dems Grab Another Legislative Seat From Republicans"):
. . . It's been a
tough stretch for Massachusetts Republicans, who
in recent years have lost Senate seats formerly
held by Republicans from Fitchburg, Plymouth,
Westfield, and Wrentham and House seats
previously represented by Republicans from
Barnstable, North Attleborough, and Taunton.
There are now twenty-nine Republicans in the House, three in the
state Senate — out of 200 members of the Massachusetts Legislature.
There are zero Republicans in the 11-member Massachusetts U.S.
Congressional delegation, House and Senate combined. Democrats
make up 32 percent of registered voters in Massachusetts, unenrolled
account for 59 percent. Just ten percent of the registered
voters in Massachusetts are Republicans.
In a
Boston Globe report on Saturday ("Baker
and Polito’s decision to exit is another blow to the struggling
Massachusetts GOP") Emma Platoff summed it up aptly in her final
paragraph: "Dan Winslow, a former Republican state
representative and legal counsel to Romney who believes that with
the right messenger, GOP principles can win the state, put it in
optimistic terms: 'The value of being at a low point is that things
are looking up.'”
The
Massachusetts House blew through $4 Billion in spending in ten
minutes during the middle of Wednesday night during an "informal
session" held in a virtually empty chamber.
The Boston Globe reported on Thursday ("Revealed
in dark of night and passed hours later in nearly empty
chamber,Mass. House moves $4 billion bill toward governor"):
The final version of a bill
spending billions in federal aid was revealed
late Wednesday, long after dark. By Thursday
morning, the $4 billion package emerged in a
nearly empty chamber of the Massachusetts House
of Representatives, where it was approved
without an audible “yea” or “nay.” Four minutes
later, the session was over.
The moves ushered the
long-sought bill to the Senate and inched it
closer to the governor’s desk — but with no
formal remarks, just six of 159 representatives
on hand, and the public still physically locked
out of the building.
The sweeping spending
legislation promises hundreds of millions of
dollars for everything from housing to workforce
training to Massachusetts’ health care system.
It also offers the potential of transformational
change for industries and communities walloped
by the COVID-19 pandemic, lawmakers say.
But for a plan with massive
implications, such swift movement, like
Thursday’s, was by design.
After missing a
self-imposed deadline to reach a deal on the
bill — and starting a seven-week recess on Nov.
17 — Senate and House leaders spent two weeks
unknotting differing versions of the package
behind closed doors, all while Governor Charlie
Baker and community leaders fretted about the
need to quickly reach a compromise.
After they announced they
did Tuesday night, the bill itself didn’t
formally emerge until nearly 24 hours later
after legislators needed the day to smooth out
its language. The bill officially made it to the
House clerk’s office at 7:56 p.m., on Wednesday
— four minutes before a deadline for so-called
conference committee reports to be able to be
considered the next day.
With lawmakers on recess,
their calendar includes only informal sessions,
where no roll calls are taken and unanimous
voice votes are required, and are often done
quickly, for a bill to move.
So, about 15 hours after
the final package had been released, it emerged
shortly into a 10-minute-long House session on
Thursday. The House gallery — still closed to
the public with the rest of State House after
600-plus days — was empty, save for a toddler in
pink overalls teetering about with a House court
officer in tow. Some of the half-dozen state
representatives dotting the chamber were
engrossed in their smartphones.
The House approved the
compromise with an unrecorded voice vote and no
speeches on the floor. The Senate is expected to
take up the bill on Friday, when a few
procedural votes in both chambers will finally
usher it to Baker....
“I think people wanted to
get it done quickly and not necessarily worry
about discussions on the floor about it,” state
Representative Aaron Michlewitz, the House’s
lead negotiator on the bill, said of Thursday’s
session....
Informal sessions are
typically reserved for “non-controversial
housekeeping items,” argued Paul Craney, a
spokesman for the conservative Massachusetts
Fiscal Alliance, not to pass a
multibillion-dollar spending package.
And with such hulking
legislation — it spans 163 pages and 3,679
lines, and includes hundreds of earmarks —
advocates argue that giving the public the time
to examine how the money is spent during each
step of the legislative process is crucial.
State House News
Service further explained ("No
Compromise Needed: Lawmakers Pack All Pet Projects
Into $4B Bill—Opt For
Expansive View Of What's Possible With Federal
Recovery Funds"):
The long-awaited compromise
over how to spend ARPA and fiscal 2021 surplus
funds came together this week in a manner that
the saw the bottom line of the final bill grow
by about $180 million beyond what the House and
Senate had initially proposed to spend.
The growth of the bill was
due, in part, to a decision by top Democrats to
accept hundreds of earmarks sprinkled throughout
the respective bills passed by House and Senate
lawmakers. Senior officials in both branches
said all earmarks from both bills were included
in the final package.
"COVID had far reaching
implications on not just every sector of our
economy, but every sector of the commonwealth.
Every city and towns faced dramatic impacts from
COVID and while not every earmark may say COVID
in it, or be described as COVID relief, there
are a lot of things in this bill that will help
build back recovery in those communities. The
people that know that best in each of those
communities are the people who represent them,"
House Ways and Means Chairman Aaron Michlewitz
said.
Michlewitz said in most
cases the bill reflects the higher value for
earmarks included in both bills, estimating the
total value of earmarks to be in the range of
$200 million to $300 million. He said many of
the earmarks were funded with state tax surplus
dollars, and not ARPA funding.
Examples of earmarks
include $150,000 to remodel the historic
Lexington Depot community building to improve
public access for the 250th anniversary of the
Battle of Lexington, $300,000 for the Boch
Center to make capital improvements to safely
reopen the Wang and Shubert Theaters in Boston,
$250,000 to help the town of Belmont design a
new skating rink, and $85,000 for the Brookline
Chamber of Commerce to expand its Discover
Brookline website.
One of the larger earmarks
is $50 million for the MBTA to make economic
development improvements to transit stations in
Norfolk County, which also happens to be where
House Speaker Ron Mariano, of Quincy, resides.
Earlier this week, Mariano
said the earmarking in the bill might wind up
being the reason the House and Senate are able
to pass this final bill during in an informal
session, rather than wait until January when
they could hold a roll call....
Paul Craney, a spokesman
for the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, called
the earmarking an "insult to the taxpayers."
"Lawmakers are basically
treating COVID-19 relief money as just another
budget for their pork pet projects that will be
funded next year during an election year. The
biggest missed opportunity in this ARPA bill is
the unemployment insurance fund for businesses,"
he said....
Craney said the $500
million investment is "not even close to
enough." "The best way to reinvigorate the
economy is by letting small business flourish
and hire more people, but instead it's going for
a pier in Hull and a turf field at Brad Jones's
high school," he said.
Craney was referring to the
$150,000 earmark in the bill to rebuild the
public boat ramp at the A Street pier in Hull,
and $100,000 to replace the turf field carpet at
the Arthur Kenney field in North Reading, part
of House Minority Leader Brad Jones's district.
Had even just one
legislator objected to passage during that late-night "informal
session" the $4 Billion bill could not have passed. None
objected, because there was something special in it to buy off each
one of them. That's just how legislating is done in "The Great
and General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts."
Honestly, you just can't
make this stuff up. How dysfunctional is the Legislature?
When you can't buy eggs soon you'll know who to blame.
The State House News Service reported last Tuesday
("Egg Supply In Peril If Voter Law Kicks In"):
Lawmakers have just a month
left to overcome a disagreement about how to
update an animal welfare law before it kicks
into effect, and if they fail to meet that
deadline, they could unleash a nearly eggless
period that one industry leader forecast would
be "temporary chaos."
The House and Senate have
each already voted in favor of changes to a
voter-approved law setting new standards for
egg-laying hens, but a six-member conference
committee has not reached agreement on a handful
of details in the bill, delaying the proposal's
passage.
The effects of inaction
could be enormous, even if they are temporary.
Bill Bell, general manager
of the New England Brown Egg Council, estimated
that "over 90 percent" of the eggs currently
available in Massachusetts will no longer be
legal for sale starting Jan. 1 if the
voter-approved initiative petition takes effect
without changes.
With both industry
interests and animal rights groups aligned in
support, Bell said he thought "this would be
done a month ago." ...
In June, the Senate
approved a bill altering the ballot law to allow
one square foot of space per bird in aviaries
that allow sufficient vertical movement. The
legislation (S 2481) drew no opposition and
sailed through on an unrecorded voice vote.
The House voted 156-1 in
October on its version of the bill (H 4194),
which targets similar cage-free standard changes
but also moves enforcement from the attorney
general to the Department of Agricultural
Resources and delays by one year the Jan. 1,
2022 start date for a ban on the sale of pork
derived from cruelly enclosed pigs.
Each branch dug in behind
its bill, and legislative leaders named a
six-member conference committee on Oct. 13 to
hash out the differences.
It looks like you'll soon
need to make runs up to New Hampshire to grab an omelet or pick up a
dozen eggs as well as everything else the "Live Free or Die" state
offers, tax-free on top of available.
This is what Bay State
citizens get from the phony "full-time" "Best Legislature Money Can
Buy." We're into December for god sake and they can't get even
something ridiculous like this settled? I've known for
most of my life that in Massachusetts "everything that isn't banned
is mandatory" — but outlawing eggs
through sheer incompetence is taking that dictum to a new level of
absurdity.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
State House News
Service
Friday, December 3, 2021
State Tax Collections Continue Rapid Pace in November
By Colin A. Young
State tax collectors hauled in $2.416 billion last month,
keeping the recent trend of above-benchmark receipts going
as the November total exceeded Baker administration
expectations by almost 9 percent.
The Department of Revenue said that preliminary revenue
collections for November 2021 were $289 million or 13.6
percent greater than actual collections in November 2020 and
$192 million or 8.7 percent above the administration's
monthly benchmark amount.
Revenue Commissioner Geoffrey Snyder said that last month's
collections increased in most major tax types -- including
withholding, sales and use tax, and the "all other" category
-- in comparison to November 2020.
"The increase in withholding is likely related to
improvements in labor market conditions. The sales and use
tax increase in part reflects continued strength in retail
sales and the easing of COVID-19 restrictions. The increase
in 'all other' tax is primarily attributable to estate tax,
a category that tends to fluctuate, as well as room
occupancy excise," Snyder said.
November is "among the lower months for revenue collection,
because neither individual nor business taxpayers make
significant estimated payments during the month," DOR said.
The month typically brings in about 6.5 percent of the
state's annual tax revenue.
Now five months into fiscal year 2022, the state has
collected approximately $13.612 billion from residents,
workers and businesses, which is $2.145 billion or 18.7
percent more than collections in the same period of fiscal
2021 and $914 million or 7.2 percent more than what DOR
expected to have collected at this point in the year.
Fiscal year 2021 produced a surplus of roughly $5 billion,
the last of which will be redeployed by Beacon Hill when
Gov. Charlie Baker signs the $4 billion American Rescue Plan
Act and surplus spending bill that the Legislature finalized
Friday.
Massachusetts Department of
Revenue
Friday, November 3, 2021
News Release
November Revenue Collections Total $2.416 Billion
Monthly collections up $289 million or 13.6% vs. November
2020 actual;
$192 million above benchmark
Massachusetts Department of Revenue (DOR) Commissioner
Geoffrey Snyder today announced that preliminary revenue
collections for November 2021 totaled $2.416 billion, which
is $289 million or 13.6% more than actual collections in
November 2020, and $192 million or 8.7% more than benchmark.
[1]
FY2022 year-to-date collections totaled approximately
$13.612 billion, which is $2.145 billion or 18.7% more than
collections in the same period of FY2021, and $914 million
or 7.2% more than year-to-date benchmark.
“November 2021 revenue collections increased in most of the
major tax types in comparison to November 2020 collections,
including withholding, sales and use tax, and ‘all other’
tax,” said Commissioner Snyder. “The increase in withholding
is likely related to improvements in labor market
conditions. The sales and use tax increase in part reflects
continued strength in retail sales and the easing of
COVID-19 restrictions. The increase in “all other” tax is
primarily attributable to estate tax, a category that tends
to fluctuate, as well as room occupancy excise.”
In general, November is among the smaller months for revenue
collection because neither individual nor business taxpayers
make significant estimated payments during the month.
Historically, roughly 6.5% of annual revenue, on average,
has been received during November.
Given the brief period covered in the report, November and
year-to-date results should not be used as predictors for
the remainder of the fiscal year.
Details:
• Income tax collections for November were $1.355 billion,
$16 million or 1.2% above benchmark, and $81 million or 6.4%
more than November 2020.
• Withholding tax collections for November totaled $1.317
billion, $3 million or 0.2% above benchmark, and $62 million
or 4.9% more than November 2020.
• Income tax estimated payments totaled $41 million for
November, $9 million or 28.1% more than benchmark, and $5
million or 12.7% more than November 2020.
• Income tax returns and bills totaled $62 million for
November, $13 million or 27.6% more than benchmark, and $10
million or 20.4% more than November 2020.
• Income tax cash refunds in November totaled $64 million in
outflows, $9 million or 16.3% above benchmark, but $4
million or 6.5% less than November 2020.
• Sales and use tax collections for November totaled $772
million, $153 million or 24.7% above benchmark, and $184
million or 31.2% more than November 2020.
• Meals tax collections, a sub-set of sales and use tax,
totaled $133 million, $45 million or 51.2% above benchmark,
and $57 million or 74.5% more than November 2020.
• Corporate and business tax collections for the month
totaled $49 million, $6 million or 11.0% below benchmark,
and $4 million or 7.2% less than November 2020.
• “All other” tax collections for November totaled $240
million, $30 million or 14.1% above benchmark, and $28
million or 13.2% more than November 2020.
[1] With the recent enactment of the
FY2022 budget, monthly revenue benchmarks were developed for
the August 2021 through June 2022 period only.
State House News
Service
Wednesday, December 1, 2021
Baker and Polito Both Pass on 2022 Guv Race
Campaign for Corner Office Wide Open with 11 Months to Go
By Matt Murphy
Gov. Charlie Baker, a two-term Republican who at his peak
was one of the most popular governors in the country, will
not seek a third term, throwing wide open the 2022 race for
the state's top political office after close to two years of
managing through a global pandemic.
Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito, who was widely considered to be the
heir to the Baker political legacy, has also decided against
a run for governor in 2022, dramatically reshaping the
contest on the Republican side and, perhaps, clearing a path
for Attorney General Maura Healey to enter the race on the
Democratic side.
"After several months of discussion with our families, we
have decided not to seek re-election in 2022. This was an
extremely difficult decision for us. We love the work, and
we especially respect and admire the people of this
wonderful Commonwealth. Serving as Governor and Lieutenant
Governor of Massachusetts has been the most challenging and
fulfilling jobs we've ever had. We will forever be grateful
to the people of this state for giving us this great honor,"
Baker and Polito said in a joint statement.
Baker began telling friends and allies of his decision over
the past 24 hours, and informed his Cabinet during a meeting
Wednesday morning. The governor and lieutenant governor, in
their statement, cited the need to focus on building an
economic recovery as Massachusetts emerges from the worst of
the COVID-19 pandemic.
"We have a great deal of work to do to put the pandemic
behind us, keep our kids in school, and keep our communities
and economy moving forward. That work cannot and should not
be about politics and the next election. If we were to run,
it would be a distraction that would potentially get in the
way of many of the things we should be working on for
everyone in Massachusetts. We want to focus on recovery, not
on the grudge matches political campaigns can devolve into,"
Baker and Polito said.
Republican Geoff Diehl, a former state lawmaker, has already
entered the race for his party's nomination with the
endorsement of former President Donald Trump, and three
Democrats -- Harvard professor Danielle Allen, former state
Sen. Ben Downing, and Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz -- are also
running.
Healey, the popular Democratic prosecutor, is also weighing
a bid and could be more inclined to enter the fray with
Baker out of the running. She has previously said she hoped
to make a decision about her political future this fall.
In addition to the polarized political environment, both
Baker and Polito said the pandemic helped them realize the
importance of taking time for family and friends after the
grind of eight years leading the state.
"Done right, these jobs require an extraordinary amount of
time and attention, and we love doing them. But we both want
to be there with Lauren and Steve and our children for the
moments, big and small, that our families will experience
going forward," the pair said.
Recent polling has suggested that Baker could fair well in
hypothetical matchups against the Democrats running or
thinking about running, but he would also face a potentially
bruising Republican primary as his relationship with the
base of his party has frayed in the Trump era.
Baker did not support Trump during either of the former
president's runs for the White House, and Baker's approval
ratings are stronger among Democrats and independents than
with voters in his own party.
Though it has been suggested in some political circles that
Baker could run as an independent in 2022, the governor has
brushed that notion aside, professing a belief in his brand
of Republicanism molded under his political mentors former
Govs. Bill Weld and Paul Cellucci.
"We are determined to continue to put aside the partisan
playbook that dominates so much of our political landscape –
to form governing partnerships with our colleagues in local
government, the Legislature, and the Congressional
delegation. That bipartisan approach, where we listen as
much as we talk, where we focus our energies on finding
areas of agreement and not disagreement, and where we avoid
the public sniping and grandstanding that defines much of
our political discourse, allows us to make meaningful
progress on many important issues," Baker and Polito said.
Baker would have been the first governor in recent memory to
run for three terms. The last governor to serve three
four-year terms was Democrat Michael Dukakis, though his
terms were non-consecutive.
The Boston
Globe
Wednesday, December 1, 2021
Governor Charlie Baker will not seek reelection
By Emma Platoff and Matt Stout
Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker, the Republican who
maintained the enduring support of his blue-state
constituents through boom times, the Trump presidency, and
the COVID-19 pandemic, will not seek a third term in 2022,
he said Wednesday.
A moderate who has kept his distance from the controversies
of the national Republican Party and cast himself as a
thrifty and thoughtful manager, Baker, 65, would have
entered the race as its front-runner. His decision means he
will forgo a shot at history: No Massachusetts governor has
served three consecutive four-year terms.
In a joint statement with Lieutenant Governor Karyn Polito,
Baker said a campaign would have been “a distraction” from
managing the COVID-19 pandemic — work that “cannot and
should not be about politics and the next election.”
“We want to focus on recovery, not on the grudge matches
political campaigns can devolve into,” Baker and Polito
said.
Polito will also not seek reelection, they said in the
statement, and an adviser said she will not run for governor
in 2022.
The two Republicans nodded to the importance of spending
time with family and friends, a priority they said the
pandemic has highlighted.
“Done right, these jobs require an extraordinary amount of
time and attention, and we love doing them,” Baker and
Polito said. “But we both want to be there with Lauren and
Steve and our children for the moments, big and small, that
our families will experience going forward.”
Baker, who had been holding fundraisers in preparation for a
possible campaign, huddled with his family over the weekend
following the Thanksgiving holiday, during which he decided
to not pursue another gubernatorial campaign, according to
one person with knowledge of the discussions.
“He put his family first,” the person said.
With less than a year before Election Day, Baker’s choice
leaves the race wide open, and it may make way for many more
major candidates than the three Democrats and one Republican
who have already jumped into the gubernatorial race. The
state’s political klieg lights will shine most brightly on
Attorney General Maura Healey, a Democrat.
Baker allies frame his tenure as a success that would have
earned him another term. They praise him for his
responsiveness to local needs and willingness to compromise
with Democrats, who dominate the Legislature.
While he has led the state to great economic heights,
longstanding racial inequities persist, disparities that the
announced Democratic contenders — state Senator Sonia Chang-Díaz,
former state senator Ben Downing, and Harvard professor
Danielle Allen — have highlighted.
Critics cast Baker as an incrementalist who has lacked a
vision equal to the gnawing problems in the state, a
plodding bureaucrat without the will to harness
Massachusetts’ vast resources — and, worst of all, a leader
whose management failures have led to preventable death.
They cite a tragedy at the Holyoke Soldiers’ Home — where a
COVID-19 outbreak killed 76 veterans, one of the highest
death tolls of any senior-care facility in the country — as
evidence that a governor who pitches himself as an able
manager has at times mismanaged, with devastating results.
They also point to the scandal at the state Registry of
Motor Vehicles, where officials had ignored tens of
thousands of alerts that Massachusetts drivers had broken
driving laws, including by driving drunk, in other states.
Baker said he had not known about the problem before a
deadly 2019 crash in New Hampshire pushed it into public
view.
For his part, the governor has long projected a steady, even
keel, avoiding partisan spitting matches and distancing
himself from controversial members of his party, including
former president Donald Trump. A baseball cap spotted in his
office over the years, which reads “JUST FIX IT,” seems to
neatly sum up his pragmatic approach.
Veto-proof Democratic majorities in both chambers of the
Legislature have forced him to reach across the aisle, his
politics often hewing closer to the centrist Democratic
leanings of the Massachusetts House than the conservative
planks of his own state party’s platform.
Baker would have been a formidable opponent for the major
contenders who have so far declared their candidacies. Polls
during his tenure have found that Baker is more popular with
Massachusetts Democrats and independents than with
Republicans, and his overall approval ratings make him the
envy of most of his 49 colleagues across the United States.
Under Baker, polling has consistently shown residents
believe Massachusetts is headed in the right direction.
Before the pandemic, the state economy was in good shape,
with unemployment under 3 percent. And Baker has been
credited with improving some of the state’s most beleaguered
agencies, including reducing wait times at the RMV and
lowering caseloads at the the Department of Children and
Families, which nonetheless has struggled this year to
quickly find enough foster homes for children in its care.
Baker’s second term has been upended by the pandemic, which
hit Massachusetts earlier than much of the rest of the
country, spreading rapidly after such events as a late
February 2020 Biogen conference. After Baker declared a
state of emergency that spring, the state’s unemployment
rate shot up above 16 percent. It has declined significantly
in the last few months, though it remains above its
pre-pandemic low. Now, the state is a national leader in
vaccination rates. Massachusetts still has one of the
country’s higher death rates from COVID.
Baker has been attacked from all sides for his handling of
the pandemic — those on the right who said he did too much
to lock the state down, those on the left who said he did
too little — and there have been occasional bristly moments
with Democratic legislative leaders, notably earlier this
year, when limited doses of the vaccine and a flubbed
website earned Baker perhaps his most biting criticism since
taking office.
But he has for the most part maintained his good standing in
the eyes of the vast majority of voters, and after some
early hiccups, the state improved its vaccine rollout,
quieting some of the governor’s harshest critics.
“You’re doing a hell of a job,” President Biden told Baker
in May.
A graduate of Harvard College and Northwestern’s business
school, Baker was a wunderkind secretary of health and human
services and later budget chief in the William F. Weld
Cabinet, where Weld called him the administration’s “heart
and soul.”
He left state government after eight years and joined
Harvard Pilgrim Health Care as president and CEO in 1999.
Soon after he took charge, the insurer was in such a
catastrophic financial situation it was put into state
receivership. But Baker helped nurse it back to fiscal
health and made it the top-rated insurer in the country.
He left the private sector to seek the governor’s office for
the first time in 2010, the same year the
stick-it-to-the-establishment Tea Party movement helped
Republicans take control of the US House of Representatives.
In that gubernatorial race, he struck a now-unfamiliar angry
tone, asking voters whether they’d “had enough” of incumbent
Deval Patrick.
They hadn’t; Patrick won.
But Baker rebounded from the loss, rebranding himself as a
cheerier candidate who showed up to listen. In 2014,
pitching the campaign slogan, “Let’s be Great,
Massachusetts!” he squeaked into office with 40,000 more
votes than Democrat Martha Coakley, the slimmest margin in
decades.
Shortly after taking office in 2015, Baker led the state
through a historic series of snowstorms, making himself a
consistent presence in the news and scoring early political
points. His approval ratings rose, reaching 70 percent that
April, and have rarely flagged since.
He sailed to reelection in 2018, easily beating Democrat Jay
Gonzalez, who unsuccessfully tried to tie Baker to Trump.
Gonzalez, like the 2022 Democratic hopefuls, called Baker a
“status quo governor” who lacked the vision to push the
state to its full potential. But voters, overwhelmingly
approving of the state’s direction, delivered Baker and
Polito a decisive mandate, with 67 percent of the vote.
During his two terms, Baker has had opportunities and
enjoyed success previous governors did not. Baker has
reshaped the state’s Supreme Judicial Court, having had the
chance to appoint all seven of its justices. In making
selections, Baker prioritized diversity and life experience,
molding what legal experts have described as a centrist
court reflective of his own pragmatic approach.
He has made it a priority to address the opioid epidemic and
pushed to bring the nation’s first large-scale offshore wind
farm to federal waters south of Martha’s Vineyard. Baker
also made major changes lauded by advocates at Bridgewater
State Hospital, where prison guards had used seclusion and
restraints at more than 100 times the rate of other state
mental health facilities.
Under Baker’s tenure, the state has also seen horrific
failures, including during the pandemic.
A Boston Globe Spotlight Team investigation found that Baker
and a top deputy played crucial roles in the leadup to the
tragedy at Holyoke Soldiers’ Home, where dozens of veterans
died. Bennett Walsh, who the Globe found was an unqualified,
politically connected hire to head the facility, was
indicted on criminal neglect charges for his role in the
deadly outbreak, as was former medical director David
Clinton. Both pleaded not guilty and in November, a Hampden
County judge dismissed all criminal charges. Baker has
downplayed his role in hiring Walsh, saying initially that
he never interviewed him for the position, and then
reversing himself: “I forgot,” he said.
Baker came into office at a particularly challenging time
for the state’s child welfare agency, which was reeling from
the case of Jeremiah Oliver, a toddler who was found dead on
the side of a highway, months after state workers who were
monitoring his parents had lost track of him. During Baker’s
second term, the agency’s budget had grown by hundreds of
millions of dollars and caseloads had dropped. Still,
especially as case workers emerge from the pandemic, the
agency is stressed as perhaps never before, struggling to
find placements for at-risk kids.
Before he made his gubernatorial decision, Baker already had
several people hoping to succeed him.
Each of the three Democrats who have declared for governor
has their strengths — Allen, the Harvard professor, sterling
academic credentials; Downing, the former lawmaker, a base
in Western Massachusetts; Chang-Díaz, who serves in the
Massachusetts Senate, the boisterous support of
hyper-engaged progressive activists — but none enjoys the
name recognition of another potential entrant.
Healey, who was first elected attorney general in 2014, has
a nearly $3.3 million war chest and a national reputation
that would make her a formidable candidate.
Healey has said “we’ll know more in the fall” about her
future political moves, but has yet to publicly detail her
plans.
On the Republican side, conservative Geoff Diehl, a former
state lawmaker who lost a Senate bid to Elizabeth Warren in
2018 and has been critical of the governor, declared well
before Baker’s decision.
Diehl has support in more conservative pockets of the party,
and the endorsement of Trump, but even if he secures the GOP
nomination, he faces longshot odds in blue Massachusetts.
Indeed, the moderate throughline that vaulted Baker to power
in a state dominated by Democrats may be his most lasting
legacy. In their joint statement, Baker and Polito listed
off numerous accomplishments of their two terms, but also
preached the power of their “bipartisan approach, where we
listen as much as we talk, where we focus our energies on
finding areas of agreement and not disagreement, and where
we avoid the public sniping and grandstanding that defines
much of our political discourse.”
It’s a strategy for which Baker hopes to be remembered.
In December of 2018, as he was finishing his first term, the
governor was asked what he hoped his political exit story
would say, to fill in the blank of a sentence that began,
“Charles Duane Baker Jr, who . . .”
Baker listed several key efforts including fighting the
opioid epidemic and investing in energy and transportation.
He also reflected on a broader success. “And who
demonstrated time and time again that it’s possible in
politics and in public life to find common ground and to
avoid the cheap nitpicking that so dominates partisan
politics.”
Baker paused for a moment, then asked: “How’s that?”
— Joshua Miller of the Globe
staff contributed to this report.
State House News
Service
Wednesday, December 1, 2021
Mass. Dems Grab Another Legislative Seat From Republicans
Topsfield's Belsito Breaks Through in Disappearing House
District
By Michael P. Norton
Democrats pried one more legislative seat from Republicans
as Topsfield's Jamie Belsito defeated Rowley Republican
Robert Snow on Tuesday in another low-turnout special
election.
A women's health advocate, Belsito is poised to fill the
seat held for more than two decades by Ipswich Republican
Brad Hill, who resigned from the House of Representatives to
join the Massachusetts Gaming Commission. The win enables
Democrats to further bulk up their supermajority status on
Beacon Hill.
The final unofficial tally across the six-town Fourth Essex
District was 2,504 to 2,016, according to Ipswich Local
News.
The district was carved up during this year's redistricting
process. Belsito will serve the remaining 13 months of
Hill's term, but in next year's elections, her Topsfield
address appears to fall in the 13th Essex District, a seat
now held by Danvers Democrat Rep. Sally Kerans.
"I plan on getting right to work ensuring that the voices of
this district are heard," Belsito wrote on Facebook on
Tuesday night. "I will continue being a strong advocate when
it comes to those issues that are affecting all of us:
continued economic recovery, improving education and access
to health, and protecting our environment and waterways."
It's been a tough stretch for Massachusetts Republicans, who
in recent years have lost Senate seats formerly held by
Republicans from Fitchburg, Plymouth, Westfield, and
Wrentham and House seats previously represented by
Republicans from Barnstable, North Attleborough, and
Taunton.
While Democrats have their own divisions within their party,
the split in Massachusetts among Trump Republicans and more
moderate members of the party appears to be taking its toll
as Republicans have been unable to protect their limited
turf in recent elections.
A former intern for the late U.S. Rep. Joe Moakley, Belsito
is the founder and policy director of the Maternal Mental
Health Leadership Alliance and a Massachusetts chapter board
member of the March of Dimes. She earned a bachelor's degree
from Salem State College and describes herself as "the
granddaughter of a Syrian immigrant and daughter of a hard
working union floor layer."
In 2020, Belsito ran against Congressman Seth Moulton, who
easily outpolled her in the Sixth Congressional District
primary contest.
In addition to her work to destigmatize postpartum
depression, she lists among her priorities funding to
address social, racial and cultural barriers for pregnant
and new families, access to health care as a "human right,"
and funding for public K-12 and higher education.
The only other scheduled legislative special election is
coming up on Dec. 14. Republicans do not have a candidate in
that race, where two Democrats -- Revere School Committee
member Anthony D'Ambrosio and Boston City Councilor Lydia
Edwards -- are competing to succeed former Sen. Joseph
Boncore of Winthrop, who resigned mid-term to take the top
job at the Massachusetts Biotechnology Council.
State House News
Service
Wednesday, December 1, 2021
Deadline Whittles Ballot Question Field to Three Campaigns
Voter ID, Happy Hour Initiatives Don't Make Cut
By Chris Lisinski
A Republican-backed proposal to implement voter
identification requirements will not appear on the ballot in
2022 after the effort's supporters and campaigns behind 11
other initiative petitions failed to gather enough
signatures by a Wednesday deadline.
Collecting the required 80,239 voter signatures proved an
insurmountable hurdle for all but three campaigns,
eliminating from contention potential ballot questions that
would have legalized the sale of consumer fireworks,
reversed the state's decades-long ban on happy hour, and
imposed new restrictions on hospital CEO compensation.
Proposals to update alcohol licensing limits, rewrite worker
status and benefits for app-based drivers, and impose
spending limits on dental insurers remain on track to make
next year's ballot, though it will not be clear how many
signatures each petitioner filed until Secretary of State
William Galvin's office counts the submissions in the coming
weeks.
The gig economy giants backing the app-based driver question
submitted signatures for two different versions of their
proposal, keeping both in the mix heading into the next
phase of the biennial initiative petition process.
Wendy Wakeman, who worked on the campaign pushing a voter
identification ballot question and two others, told the News
Service that its supporters "did fail to get enough
signatures to make the ballot."
While Wakeman said she is "disappointed" in the outcome, she
expressed hope that the focus on the ballot question could
push the topic onto the Legislature's agenda.
"Whatever did happen in 2020, it's clear that there are a
lot of people who have lost faith in the integrity of the
voting system, of the American vote, and it seems as though
voter ID is one very simple way to begin to restore
confidence in elections," Wakeman said.
Opponents of the question have argued that reported
instances of voter fraud are rare and warned that an
identification requirement could create an additional
obstacle to the ballot box.
"Many older persons who are very good voters have been
persuaded or have chosen to give up other forms of ID, such
as a driver's license. The idea that they would be precluded
from voting is absurd," Galvin, a Democrat and the state's
top elections official, said in September.
In July, MassGOP Chair Jim Lyons told supporters the party
was "actively building a statewide infrastructure consisting
of Republican activists" who would work to put ballot
questions dealing with voter ID, newborn care, and critical
race theory education before voters next year.
The race education question and the newborn care question,
which was filed in response to last year's expansion of
state abortion access laws, failed Attorney General Maura
Healey's constitutional review.
A judge later issued a preliminary injunction allowing
sponsors of the newborn proposal to collect signatures.
Wakeman, who also served as an administrator for that
campaign, said volunteers collected about 100,000 signatures
but only got a bit more than 75,000 certified, falling short
of the amount necessary to take another step toward the
November 2022 ballot.
Wakeman said Bernadette Lyons, who chairs the Massachusetts
Newborn Protection Coalition and is the wife of the MassGOP
chair, filed a motion with the court seeking to keep the
ballot question alive.
"The hope for that is slim, but the hope is that we're able
to continue the conversation with the Supreme Judicial Court
over whether or not Maura Healey was justified in her ruling
or not," Wakeman said. "We believe that the question was
simple and straightforward and that her ruling made it
impossible for us to receive the correct amount of
signatures."
A third question on which Wakeman worked, which sought to
hamstring the state's participation in the Transportation
Climate Initiative, is effectively moot and will not advance
after Gov. Charlie Baker last month pulled the plug on the
plans.
With the field of 2022 ballot questions whittled down to
just three topics, voters have a clearer sense of which
issues will generate substantial debate -- and even more
spending -- over the next year.
The app-based driver ballot question will build on an
intense and expensive campaign cycle in California, where
Uber, Lyft and DoorDash last year collectively spent more
than $200 million successfully advocating for a similar
measure known as Proposition 22.
Those three companies and Instacart are funding the
Coalition for Independent Work pushing the Massachusetts
ballot question, which would declare all app-based drivers
to be independent contractors and not employees -- a status
that Healey alleges is a violation of existing state law --
and offer them access to some new benefits such as a pay
floor and paid sick leave.
Officials for the coalition said they filed about 130,000
signatures for each of two versions of the question with
local elections officials for certification, though it was
unclear Wednesday how many the campaign then submitted to
Galvin's office.
Members of the vocal opposition effort, which include U.S.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren and organized labor leaders, argue
that the companies are trying to rewrite state law to
support their business models at the expense of workers.
Another question on track for the ballot could feature major
industry implications. The Massachusetts Package Store
Association said it submitted more than 109,000 certified
signatures on its question, which would double the number of
alcohol licenses a single company could hold but keep a cap
in place.
The dental benefits question seeks to apply a profit limit
on dental insurance companies similar to those in place on
medical insurers, according to Mouhab Rizkallah, chairman of
the ballot question committee.
Rizkallah, who would only answer questions via email, said
medical insurers must pay at least 88 percent of the revenue
they collect from premiums toward patient care but that a
similar requirement does not exist for dental insurance
providers, meaning that "patients have to fight for
coverage, and often quit due to exhaustion."
The proposal would require dental insurers to spend at least
83 percent of their dollars on "dental expenses and quality
improvements, as opposed to administrative expenses,"
according to its text.
Rizkallah said the campaign paid more than $500,000 on
signature-gatherers and submitted 104,000 validated
signatures with Galvin's office.
"We are confident that this protective legislation will pass
in Massachusetts, and it will then ricochet across the
nation," Rizkallah wrote.
Rizkallah is an orthodontist himself who owns and operates
six "The Braces Places" locations in the state. Separate
from the ballot question, he is facing a lawsuit from
Healey, who alleged in February that Rizkallah kept children
in braces for longer than necessary to submit false claims
to MassHealth. Healey expanded her complaint in June to
include allegations that Rizkallah illegally charged
MassHealth patients for missed or canceled appointments.
Asked about the lawsuit and its impact on the ballot
question, Rizkallah replied that he has filed and won four
lawsuits against MassHealth over their practices and said he
retains support from industry experts and leaders.
"I am a change-maker, and I have political enemies, and I
have deep political wounds," Rizkallah wrote in an email.
"But I live a purpose-driven life...I prefer deep political
wounds in exchange for healthcare impacts for humanity,
rather than personal comfort and irrelevance."
Both other campaigns that submitted signatures to Galvin's
office used paid signature-gatherers. MPSA Executive
Director Robert Mellion said his group hired Signature Drive
at a rate of $5 to $8 per signature, while the Coalition for
Independent Work did not provide details about the paid
vendor it used.
Galvin's staff will process submissions in the coming weeks
and count signatures. Later this month, officials will
publish a list of which met the requirement of at least
80,239 signatures and transmit the petitions to the
Legislature.
Lawmakers will then have until May 4, 2022 to act on each of
the proposed laws. If they decline to do so, each campaign
will need to collect another 13,374 signatures by July 6,
2022 to put the question before voters that November.
The Boston
Globe
Thursday, December 2, 2021
Revealed in dark of night and passed hours later in nearly
empty chamber,
Mass. House moves $4 billion bill toward governor
By Matt Stout
The final version of a bill spending billions in federal aid
was revealed late Wednesday, long after dark. By Thursday
morning, the $4 billion package emerged in a nearly empty
chamber of the Massachusetts House of Representatives, where
it was approved without an audible “yea” or “nay.” Four
minutes later, the session was over.
The moves ushered the long-sought bill to the Senate and
inched it closer to the governor’s desk — but with no formal
remarks, just six of 159 representatives on hand, and the
public still physically locked out of the building.
The sweeping spending legislation promises hundreds of
millions of dollars for everything from housing to workforce
training to Massachusetts’ health care system. It also
offers the potential of transformational change for
industries and communities walloped by the COVID-19
pandemic, lawmakers say.
But for a plan with massive implications, such swift
movement, like Thursday’s, was by design.
After missing a self-imposed deadline to reach a deal on the
bill — and starting a seven-week recess on Nov. 17 — Senate
and House leaders spent two weeks unknotting differing
versions of the package behind closed doors, all while
Governor Charlie Baker and community leaders fretted about
the need to quickly reach a compromise.
After they announced they did Tuesday night, the bill itself
didn’t formally emerge until nearly 24 hours later after
legislators needed the day to smooth out its language. The
bill officially made it to the House clerk’s office at 7:56
p.m., on Wednesday — four minutes before a deadline for
so-called conference committee reports to be able to be
considered the next day.
With lawmakers on recess, their calendar includes only
informal sessions, where no roll calls are taken and
unanimous voice votes are required, and are often done
quickly, for a bill to move.
So, about 15 hours after the final package had been
released, it emerged shortly into a 10-minute-long House
session on Thursday. The House gallery — still closed to the
public with the rest of State House after 600-plus days —
was empty, save for a toddler in pink overalls teetering
about with a House court officer in tow. Some of the
half-dozen state representatives dotting the chamber were
engrossed in their smartphones.
The House approved the compromise with an unrecorded voice
vote and no speeches on the floor. The Senate is expected to
take up the bill on Friday, when a few procedural votes in
both chambers will finally usher it to Baker.
While uncommon to move major legislation through an informal
session, legislators said Thursday that the bill’s
debate-less passage isn’t indicative of the process that’s
consumed it.
For months, lawmakers touted a deliberate approach over
Baker’s prodding to move quickly, holding a half-dozen
hearings about how to spend the $4.9 billion of
once-in-a-generation federal stimulus aid on which the bill
is largely built.
Both the House and Senate passed their versions unanimously
in full, formal sessions, using funds both from the federal
American Rescue Plan Act and a $1.5 billion state surplus.
Much of what the chambers passed remained in the final
compromise version, lawmakers say, though it grew $180
million beyond what either chamber had initially approved.
Conference committee reports are not subject to amendments.
“I think people wanted to get it done quickly and not
necessarily worry about discussions on the floor about it,”
state Representative Aaron Michlewitz, the House’s lead
negotiator on the bill, said of Thursday’s session. “We
brought everyone to the table who wanted to be at the table
during the discussion. It’s bipartisan, it has a lot of good
things in there.”
Even in moving the bill without the full legislative bodies
present, said state Senator Michael J. Rodrigues, “I don’t
think anything is lost.”
“If there’s anything lost in the media, it’s really the
governor’s news that is going to trump it,” the Westport
Democrat said, referring to Baker’s announcement Wednesday
that he won’t seek reelection next year.
Not all agree.
Informal sessions are typically reserved for
“non-controversial housekeeping items,” argued Paul Craney,
a spokesman for the conservative Massachusetts Fiscal
Alliance, not to pass a multibillion-dollar spending
package.
And with such hulking legislation — it spans 163 pages and
3,679 lines, and includes hundreds of earmarks — advocates
argue that giving the public the time to examine how the
money is spent during each step of the legislative process
is crucial.
While the House and Senate largely agreed on what areas
should receive funding, they repeatedly disagreed on how
much, prompting various shifts in totals within the
compromise. And even in instances where they appeared to be
in agreement, such as dedicating $100 million for port work
geared toward the offshore wind industry, change proved to
be unavoidable. Funding on that item dropped to $90 million
in the final version.
“Ultimately, the only version of the bill that matters is
the final version,” said Justin Silverman, the executive
director of the New England First Amendment Coalition. “And
even if there was some opportunity for the public to be a
part of the process, to see some of the deliberations and
debate over certain amendments, all that matters now is:
What is in the final bill? What made the final cut, and what
didn’t?”
A lot did. The bill promises to pump $400 million for mental
and behavioral health, in part to help recruit more workers
to that field, and dedicates more than a half-billion
dollars for housing, including to help spur more first-time
homeownership in what is a rapidly growing state.
Huge buckets of funding also will flow to local and regional
public health systems, the state’s hospitals, and schools to
upgrade HVAC systems. Funds were set aside for bonuses of at
least $500 for low-income essential workers.
The package also is littered with earmarks big and small. It
carves out $6.5 million to help Boston address the
humanitarian crisis at intersection of Massachusetts Avenue
and Melnea Cass Boulevard, including $5 million for “post
treatment supportive housing.” The city of Lynn will get
$2.5 million to help improve the water quality at King’s
Beach, which on many summer days remains unsafe for
swimming. Another $5 million is reserved to help pay down
debt service obligations at the Edward M. Kennedy Institute.
There are also line items as small as $50,000 for
renovations to Townsend’s town common gazebo, $100,000 “to
nourish and restore” beach dunes in Edgartown, and $125,000
to help restore a 90-year-old cemetery chapel in Wakefield.
“The more resources we can pull in from the state the less
we have to pass on to the citizens,” said Connor Read, the
town administrator of Easton, which is in line to receive $2
million toward a $9.2 million project to build three plants
for treating the town’s water for toxic “forever chemicals”
known as PFAS.
“This is going to be an exceptionally expensive endeavor for
all of us [in Massachusetts] in the coming decades,” he
said.
The Senate ultimately opted to wait until Friday before
taking up the compromise, in part to give senators “a full
day to look at it,” said Rodrigues, the chamber’s top
negotiator on the legislation.
Rodrigues said he plans to speak about the bill on the
Senate floor. He said he also intends to be brief.
State House News
Service
Thursday, December 2, 2021
No Compromise Needed: Lawmakers Pack All Pet Projects Into
$4B Bill
Opt For Expansive View Of What's Possible With Federal
Recovery Funds
By Matt Murphy
For Boston University climate scientist Michael Walsh, the
$4 billion COVID-19 relief spending package that's on the
cusp of being sent to Gov. Charlie Baker's desk could be a
huge windfall.
Walsh, a researcher and environmental engineer with the
Institute for Sustainable Energy, set up a corporation --
Michael Jay Walsh LLC -- this past July, registered in
Somerville. It now stands to receive $150,000 for the
purpose of studying the consumer impact of a transition to
thermal energy in Massachusetts.
The money was earmarked for Walsh by Sen. Michael Barrett, a
Lexington Democrat, who said he interviewed Walsh at length,
and was impressed by the work he did as a lead researcher on
the Carbon Free Boston report. It is one of hundreds of
earmarks tucked into the plan to spend American Rescue Plan
Act funding that lawmakers aim to put on Baker's desk by the
end of the week.
The long-awaited compromise over how to spend ARPA and
fiscal 2021 surplus funds came together this week in a
manner that the saw the bottom line of the final bill grow
by about $180 million beyond what the House and Senate had
initially proposed to spend.
The growth of the bill was due, in part, to a decision by
top Democrats to accept hundreds of earmarks sprinkled
throughout the respective bills passed by House and Senate
lawmakers. Senior officials in both branches said all
earmarks from both bills were included in the final package.
"COVID had far reaching implications on not just every
sector of our economy, but every sector of the commonwealth.
Every city and towns faced dramatic impacts from COVID and
while not every earmark may say COVID in it, or be described
as COVID relief, there are a lot of things in this bill that
will help build back recovery in those communities. The
people that know that best in each of those communities are
the people who represent them," House Ways and Means
Chairman Aaron Michlewitz said.
Michlewitz said in most cases the bill reflects the higher
value for earmarks included in both bills, estimating the
total value of earmarks to be in the range of $200 million
to $300 million. He said many of the earmarks were funded
with state tax surplus dollars, and not ARPA funding.
Examples of earmarks include $150,000 to remodel the
historic Lexington Depot community building to improve
public access for the 250th anniversary of the Battle of
Lexington, $300,000 for the Boch Center to make capital
improvements to safely reopen the Wang and Shubert Theaters
in Boston, $250,000 to help the town of Belmont design a new
skating rink, and $85,000 for the Brookline Chamber of
Commerce to expand its Discover Brookline website.
One of the larger earmarks is $50 million for the MBTA to
make economic development improvements to transit stations
in Norfolk County, which also happens to be where House
Speaker Ron Mariano, of Quincy, resides.
Earlier this week, Mariano said the earmarking in the bill
might wind up being the reason the House and Senate are able
to pass this final bill during in an informal session,
rather than wait until January when they could hold a roll
call. The House advanced the conference committee report
without objection on Thursday, and the Senate will try to do
the same Friday.
"One of the things we did by combining the budget and the
ARPA money is there are some earmarks in there that everyone
wants to see happen, so I think there's enough in there to
get everybody on board," the speaker said, adding, "We don't
really anticipate anyone falling on their sword."
While the final earmarked total was not immediately
available, the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation previously
counted 415 earmarks added by the Senate worth $122.9
million in new spending, while the House spread $154.4
million in new spending through its bill with 411
amendments. While there was some overlap between the two
bills, MTF said many were unique to each branch.
Some have questioned the propriety of spending COVID-19
recovery dollars on such local projects, particularly after
cities and towns received their own direct ARPA aid. But
others argue that this is exactly how Congress intended ARPA
money to be spent.
Barrett said the money he earmarked for Walsh to study the
consumer impact of transitioning to heat pumps goes hand in
hand with the $5 million he secured for the Clean Energy
Center to hire a research team to analyze the design and
operation of networked geothermal demonstration projects
approved by the Department of Public Utilities.
He said he worried that if he had just proposed putting the
study out to bid it could get lost in the upheaval of a
Cabinet "exodus" if Baker decided, which he did on
Wednesday, not to seek a third term.
"I had never understood the money to be intended for
something intimately related to the pandemic itself,"
Barrett said. "This is the sort of initiative that you
imagine being undertaken in the middle of a crisis like the
one we're experiencing with the climate."
Paul Craney, a spokesman for the Massachusetts Fiscal
Alliance, called the earmarking an "insult to the
taxpayers."
"Lawmakers are basically treating COVID-19 relief money as
just another budget for their pork pet projects that will be
funded next year during an election year. The biggest missed
opportunity in this ARPA bill is the unemployment insurance
fund for businesses," he said.
The final bill allocates $500 million to help fortify the
fund used to pay unemployment benefits, but employers are
potentially on the hook to repay billions more over the next
20 years to cover the debt racked up during the height of
the pandemic. Baker proposed to use $1 billion from the
federal pot for UI relief.
Craney said the $500 million investment is "not even close
to enough." "The best way to reinvigorate the economy is by
letting small business flourish and hire more people, but
instead it's going for a pier in Hull and a turf field at
Brad Jones's high school," he said.
Craney was referring to the $150,000 earmark in the bill to
rebuild the public boat ramp at the A Street pier in Hull,
and $100,000 to replace the turf field carpet at the Arthur
Kenney field in North Reading, part of House Minority Leader
Brad Jones's district.
Baker's approach to the bill, if and when it does reach his
desk, remains a giant question mark. The governor has in the
past attempted to veto all earmarks from annual budget
bills, especially during lean times. The Legislature,
however, typically has the votes to override him.
Rep. Sheila Harrington, a Groton Republican, said
representatives were asked to submit their top priorities
during the development of the House bill, but not everyone
got everything they wanted.
One earmark Harrington sought and didn't get in the House
bill was $50,000 for a gazebo in the Townsend common, but
Sen. John Cronin was able to secure the money in the
Senate's version, and it was included in the compromise.
Harrington said she understands how setting aside money in a
COVID-19 relief bill for a gazebo might look out of place,
but she said her rural communities don't have community
health centers or other pandemic infrastructure to direct
money toward. Additionally, she said the gazebo is a
historic structure that must be restored in a precise, but
expansive, manner.
"It's a big thing for that community. I can see how people
maybe wouldn't think it should be a priority, but it wasn't
as big a ticket item as some other earmarks," she said.
Massachusetts Municipal Association President Geoff Beckwith
said he wasn't concerned about the decision to allow
earmarking in the bill.
"I think the magnitude of earmarking seems pretty reasonable
in terms of the scope of the entire legislation," Beckwith
said.
Beckwith also said spending on local parks, or gazebos, is
not inconsistent with the desire of Congress to use some of
the money to create outdoor spaces where people could gather
more safely as a community. He said many of these projects
would never get done without federal money because of local
budget constraints.
"It's not just about a particular structure. It's about
making sure the community has structures in place that
reduce isolation during a public health crisis," Beckwith
said. "What the earmarking does is say, 'Hey, we want our
community to be included in this way,' that spells it out."
State House News
Service
Friday, December 3, 2021
Advances - Week of Dec. 5, 2021
By Michael P. Norton
Gov. Charlie Baker has built a dedicated team in his
administration and their loyalty will be put to the test
over the year ahead now that the governor has revealed that
he's leaving the office for good after 2022. A brain drain
from the administration looms as a new threat for the
governor as he focuses on the important work ahead in 2022
and members of his team begin to think about what they will
do for work come 2023.
Baker himself also faces new considerations in dealing with
Democratic legislative leaders, who are now mindful of his
new lame duck status and the changed dynamic of dealing with
a governor who will not be on next year's ballot and no
longer needs to weigh political considerations when making
decisions in his day job.
The governor starts the week with legislation he has long
desired finally on his desk. The House and Senate on Friday
shipped to Baker a $4 billion spending bill (H 4269) that
exhausts the state's bulging fiscal 2021 budget surplus and
allocates a chunk of the federal economic recovery aid
awarded to Massachusetts under the American Rescue Plan Act.
A bill-signing could be in the works, and everyone is on the
lookout for vetoes, especially since lawmakers loaded the
legislation up with pet projects in their districts.
The governor is readying his final state budget proposal for
release in January, following a planned Dec. 21 gathering to
hear about revenue forecasts for fiscal 2023.
Baker's big decision this week shifts the spotlight to
Attorney General Maura Healey, who would enter the
governor's race field as a strong contender but one who is
mindful of a string of previous AGs who ran for governor and
came up short.
Beacon Hill Republicans, and others from Baker's moderate
wing of that party, are under pressure now to decide whether
to come up with a new candidate or get behind former Rep.
Geoff Diehl, whose support for President Donald Trump could
serve up headwinds for Republican legislative candidates in
2022 elections.
State House News
Service
Tuesday, November 30, 2021
Egg Supply In Peril If Voter Law Kicks In
Jan. 1 Deadline Looms For Accord On Bills That Passed In
June, October
By Chris Lisinski
Lawmakers have just a month left to overcome a disagreement
about how to update an animal welfare law before it kicks
into effect, and if they fail to meet that deadline, they
could unleash a nearly eggless period that one industry
leader forecast would be "temporary chaos."
The House and Senate have each already voted in favor of
changes to a voter-approved law setting new standards for
egg-laying hens, but a six-member conference committee has
not reached agreement on a handful of details in the bill,
delaying the proposal's passage.
The effects of inaction could be enormous, even if they are
temporary.
Bill Bell, general manager of the New England Brown Egg
Council, estimated that "over 90 percent" of the eggs
currently available in Massachusetts will no longer be legal
for sale starting Jan. 1 if the voter-approved initiative
petition takes effect without changes.
With both industry interests and animal rights groups
aligned in support, Bell said he thought "this would be done
a month ago."
"Our folks and the stores have gone ahead on the assumption
that it will be resolved before Jan. 1 and signed by the
governor. If not, then we're back to a chaotic situation
where stores would have to be taking (eggs) off their
shelves," Bell told the News Service. "We're worried about
temporary chaos."
In 2016, Massachusetts voters overwhelmingly approved a
ballot question imposing new standards on the treatment of
animals used to produce eggs, pork and veal. That law, which
requires each hen enclosure to have at least 1.5 square feet
of floor space per bird, will take effect on Jan. 1, 2022.
Sales of eggs produced by hens in smaller enclosures --
regardless of whether they are in Massachusetts or another
state -- will be prohibited here when the new regulations
start.
In the time between the ballot vote and its effective date,
however, the industry has shifted. Massachusetts is now
approaching a regulatory cliff, beyond which its standards
would suddenly be stricter than most other states and few
suppliers would be in compliance.
Manufacturers and animal rights advocates have coalesced in
recent years around aviary systems that stack birds
vertically, allowing for more humane hen treatment with less
floor space.
Accordingly, Bell said, national organizations that certify
cage-free eggs are using one square foot per hen -- not the
1.5 square feet per hen the Massachusetts law would impose
-- as the standard, and most suppliers work with the lower
target in mind.
"There are no certification programs for 1.5 square feet per
hen. That would become the issue," Bell said. "Eggs are
going in now that are totally accepted in every state, and
suddenly, by result of the conference committee not coming
to agreement, they would be not in compliance in
Massachusetts."
In June, the Senate approved a bill altering the ballot law
to allow one square foot of space per bird in aviaries that
allow sufficient vertical movement. The legislation (S 2481)
drew no opposition and sailed through on an unrecorded voice
vote.
The House voted 156-1 in October on its version of the bill
(H 4194), which targets similar cage-free standard changes
but also moves enforcement from the attorney general to the
Department of Agricultural Resources and delays by one year
the Jan. 1, 2022 start date for a ban on the sale of pork
derived from cruelly enclosed pigs.
Each branch dug in behind its bill, and legislative leaders
named a six-member conference committee on Oct. 13 to hash
out the differences.
House Speaker Ronald Mariano said Tuesday that his chamber's
appointees are still waiting for a response to their most
recent proposal for final legislation.
"They're still talking," Mariano told the News Service after
an event in Quincy. "We sent over a proposal just before we
left that we thought would be a compromise and we're waiting
to hear."
The committee's Senate chair, Sen. Jason Lewis, said in a
statement that lawmakers are "in active discussions to reach
agreement on the egg-laying hen legislation as soon as
possible."
"We fully recognize the time-sensitive nature of this issue,
and the importance of avoiding any disruption in the
Massachusetts egg supply," Lewis, a Winchester Democrat,
said in a statement.
Another one of the Senate negotiators, Sen. Becca Rausch of
Needham, declined to comment on specifics about the ongoing
negotiations but voiced concern that failing to find
resolution could cause the price of eggs to "skyrocket."
"I don't want Massachusetts families to have to pay upwards
of $5 per dozen of eggs come Jan. 1," Rausch, a Democrat who
chairs the Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture
Committee, said in an interview. "That will be unaffordable
to droves of Bay Staters."
Rausch and Lewis are negotiating alongside Senate Minority
Leader Bruce Tarr, Democrat Reps. Carolyn Dykema and Daniel
Cahill, and Republican Rep. Norman Orrall.
If they reach an agreement, they will need to ensure it can
secure unanimous support in both chambers. The Legislature
is meeting only in informal sessions, where a single
member's objection can stall a bill's passage, until Jan. 5.
The issue has also brought together onetime opponents. Egg
industry leaders and animal welfare organizations faced off
during the 2016 ballot question campaign, but the
Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals, the Animal Rescue League of Boston and the Animal
Legal Defense Fund have worked alongside Bell in support of
the pending legislation.
"The coalition of animal protection organizations supporting
the upgrade to hen welfare law, passed as Question 3,
continue to advocate for the vital increased protections for
egg-laying hens in these bills that provide them more humane
housing, ensure they cannot be confined in a cruel manner,
and expand these protections to even more hens," said Animal
Rescue League of Boston Advocacy Director Allison Blanck.
"We remain hopeful that the conference committee is able to
report an agreement as soon as possible so that the
legislation can be signed into law."
For Bell's group, which does not deal with pork products,
either the House or Senate version of the bill is good
enough as long as lawmakers can "get it done very quickly."
"We really have no preference other than we need to be able
to stock the shelves with legal eggs," he said.
— Matt Murphy contributed
reporting. |
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
|
