"This is just another pathetic attempt to
ensure that the speaker has votes. So far this has been their M.O. There hasn't been a
budget yet where they haven't tried to line the pockets of the speaker's cronies."
State Rep. Christopher Hodgkins (D-Lee)
The Boston Globe
Apr. 12, 2000
Move to boost lawmakers' pay faulted
Following the vote, the West Newbury Democrat said
she does support the three-year phased-in tax cut, but as the assistant vice chairwoman of
the House Ways and Means Committee, [state Rep. Harriett L. Stanley] could not vote for
it.
"I'm a member of Ways and Means
leadership," she said. "Voting for a tax cut is a whole different matter."
The (Lawrence) Eagle-Tribune
Apr. 11, 2000
Stanley reneges on tax cut vote
The Boston Globe
Wednesday, April 12, 2000
Move to boost lawmakers' pay faulted
By Michael Crowley, Globe Staff
House lawmakers yesterday plowed through hundreds of
amendments to the proposed Fiscal 2001 $21.7 billion budget, while critics denounced a
quiet effort to raise many legislators' salaries.
Representative Christopher Hodgkins (D-Lee) said he
was appalled, but not surprised, by the amendment, which would raise the pay of Beacon
Hill leaders and other legislators by $7,500.
"This is just another pathetic attempt to ensure
that the speaker has votes," said Hodgkins. "So far this has been their M.O.
There hasn't been a budget yet where they haven't tried to line the pockets of the
speaker's cronies."
The amendment, one of more than 1,400 filed, would
boost the salaries of several House and Senate committee chairmen, vice chairmen, and
ranking Republican committee members.
The amendment was filed by Representative Anthony P.
Giglio, a Medford Democrat who is not seeking reelection. It was reportedly uncertain
whether House Speaker Thomas Finneran would support the measure, which was not expected to
be considered last night.
More than 100 legislators could be eligible for
raises, said Ken White, executive director of Common Cause Massachusetts. He said the
proposal was poorly timed, coming after a 1998 ballot initiative tying legislators' base
pay of $46,410 to inflation.
"The voters settled this 18 months ago, yet it
doesn't seem to be good enough for some members of the Legislature," White said.
"I hope this goes nowhere."
Other legislators said yesterday the timing was
especially bad because some committee chairmen do less work than ever, especially under
Finneran's tight control of the House.
Lawmakers noted there has been a glut of amendments
this year, in part because members frustrated with legislative inaction have turned to the
budget to get ideas passed.
The increases would come as the House budget proposes
to boost legislators' travel allowances and constituent service accounts to help them
comply with new spending limits under a voter-passed Clean Election law.
House leaders yesterday took up mostly minor
amendments -- many of them efforts by lawmakers to win funding for local projects.
Lobbyists from businesses, unions, and public-interest
groups hovered outside the House chamber, glued to cell phones as they tried to discern --
with little luck -- when the House might take up their measures. The House was expected to
debate the budget throughout the week.
The Eagle-Tribune
(Lawrence, Mass.)
Tuesday, April 11, 2000
Stanley reneges on tax cut vote
By Nancy C. Rodriguez
Eagle-Tribune Writer
BOSTON -- What a difference a weekend makes.
Three days after announcing her support for Gov. A.
Paul Cellucci's plan to cut the state income tax to 5 percent, state Rep. Harriett L.
Stanley voted against the idea.
The vote came yesterday during the first day of House
budget deliberations. The tax proposal died 124-32, with nearly all House Democrats voting
to kill the tax cut.
Following the vote, the West Newbury Democrat said she
does support the three-year phased-in tax cut, but as the assistant vice chairwoman of the
House Ways and Means Committee, she could not vote for it.
"I'm a member of Ways and Means leadership,"
she said. "Voting for a tax cut is a whole different matter."
Rep. Stanley said the vote was a trade-off so she
could vote present -- a neutral stand -- on a plan to weaken the state's special education
law.
House leaders want to bring the state's special
education standards in line with the rest of the country. Supporters say it will help
control special education costs, but critics say it will force thousands of special needs
students out of special education.
The change has the heavy backing of House Speaker
Thomas M. Finneran, D-Mattapan, who wields the power to appoint committee leadership slots
such as the post Rep. Stanley holds.
"I think the special education stuff is not in
the best interest of my district. You can only do that so many times during the
budget," she said. "Here I am third in command on Ways and Means and I'm voting
against the budget."
At a Greater Newburyport Chamber of Commerce and
Industry breakfast last week, Rep. Stanley spoke in favor of Gov. Cellucci's proposal.
Following the event she reiterated her stand to The Eagle-Tribune, saying:
"I have always been in favor of the tax cut. To be anything but for a tax cut implies
the state budget is lean and mean and it is neither of those."
She also called it a "credibility issue,"
referring to the state Legislature's promise in 1989 to drop the rate back down to 5
percent once the state's financial woes had to been handled. The tax rate reached a high
of 6.25 percent, and has been dropped to 5.85 percent.
State Republican Party leaders were taken back by Rep.
Stanley's vote, especially after reading her comments in the newspaper last week. State
Republicans are backing the tax rollback with Citizens for
Limited Taxation. Without House support, or backing in the Senate, the
proposal will likely head to the ballot in November.
"She's the poster child for political
hypocrisy," said John C. Brockelman, state GOP executive director. "In just a
mere three days she went from valiant tax cutter to Dukakis tax hike defender. I've never
seen a conversion happen so quickly."
State Sen. Bruce E. Tarr, R-Gloucester, who supports
the cut and was at the breakfast, was just as surprised by Rep. Stanley's vote.
"Holy cow. How could she do that?" asked
Sen. Tarr. "That's really weird. This is contortionist on her part."