BOSTON -- In the face of a Legislature packed with Democrats,
Republican governors in this state often find it tough to block legislation with the threat of a veto pen.
But acting Gov. Jane Swift pulled off such a move last week
after warning that she would veto any plan to delay a voter-approved drop in the income tax, even though it would
save the state $200 million.
A majority of the House and Senate members favored delaying
the tax cut as a way to help fill a nearly $1.4 billion budget gap. But House Speaker Tom Finneran and Senate President
Tom Birmingham dropped the plan after polling showed it didn't have the two-thirds majority
needed to override Swift's veto.
Now it looks like the Legislature will send Swift a
long-overdue, $22 billion-plus budget this week that will include $650 million in cuts from spending plans proposed by
the House and Senate earlier this year. And the state's income tax will drop from 5.6 percent to 5.3 percent
in January on a schedule approved by voters last November.
Marblehead's Barbara Anderson said her group,
Citizens for Limited Taxation, lobbied heavily in the past two weeks to
protect the income tax cut. CLT has been pushing for it during the past decade, and they aren't about to give up the fight
now. And Anderson said CLT will continue the battle because she expects the reduction in the income tax, which is
slated to drop to 5 percent in 2003, could be in danger during next year's budget talks, too.
"It's been a full court press for us," Anderson said. "If
(the tax cut) did get frozen, it would never, ever thaw out. And our members know that."
Anderson's group found a number of allies among the
Democrats, many of whom didn't want to overturn something supported by a majority of voters in last November's election.
"I think they would have said, 'There they go again, raising
my taxes,'" said Rep. Ted Speliotis, D-Danvers. "We haven't shown them in the past six months that we're willing to cut
anything."
Other lawmakers said that when people learn what kind of
budget cuts will result from the shortfall, they might be willing to support a freeze in the tax cut.
"It's clearly going to result in deeper cuts," Rep. John
Slattery, D-Peabody, said of the shortfall. "I think if we had delayed the tax cut and (used more surplus money) we probably
could have handled that without making severe cuts."
Return to top
The Boston Globe
Tuesday, November 20, 2001
House and Senate budget writers are planning to work late
tonight finalizing $650 million in budget cuts, which are expected to scale back treatment for the mentally ill and for
preventive care, and force an increase in fees at state universities.
The Legislature's budget, which is 142 days late, will
modestly reduce or freeze funding at last year's levels in almost every area except a few, such as K-12 education and
Medicaid. It will probably eliminate a proposed $80 million aid package for hospitals; $40 million from
higher education accounts; $30 million for highway repair; $20 million from the
state court system; and funding for substance abuse and AIDS awareness.
Senators and representatives will get a simple yes-or-no
vote on the final budget compromise. They may have as little as 12 hours overnight to review it before voting
tomorrow, the last day of the legislative session.
"This is hardly the improvement in the budget process that
we all hoped for this year," said Ken White, executive director of Common Cause Massachusetts. "Instead of seven days of
all-night sessions in the open, we've had five months of unknown hours behind closed doors,
to be capped off with a quick and dirty overnight consideration of the budget."
The House and Senate approved preliminary budgets for fiscal
2002 last spring, before state revenues plunged, leaving the state with a $1.4 billion deficit.
Acting Governor Jane Swift filed her own recovery budget
proposal yesterday that would cut $710 million in spending and tap $365 million from state reserves. House and Senate
leaders say they'll ignore her plan and pursue their own, but Swift said the Legislature still
might not produce a final budget document before the session ends.
Swift's $22.5 billion proposed spending plan slashes
payments to the state's pension plan by $134 million and uses all of the state's $280 million annual settlement payment from
the tobacco companies. It makes deep cuts to administrative accounts, eliminates paid
internships in state government, and would take $62 million from health and human services.
Her budget includes $23 million for the voter-approved Clean
Elections Law, which means that she would free up money already set aside for the law but not appropriate any new
funds. House and Senate leaders are not expected to provide any money at all
for the public campaign finance system.
The legislative agreement will not include a delay to the
voter-approved tax cut, which Swift threatened to veto but which some lawmakers were backing as a way to save $200 million
worth of state programs. A group of liberal lawmakers is moving to keep that option open in
the House when members meet Dec. 5 to take up Swift's budget vetoes.
State Representative James Marzilli, an Arlington Democrat,
said lawmakers should have all of the alternatives available to them after they see the severity of this year's budget cuts.
Tomorrow, he said, he will ask a majority of House members to allow consideration of the
tax delay on Dec. 5.
Return to top
JOINT RULES OF THE
SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
[As adopted as temporary rules by the Senate on January 6, 1999
and by the House of Representatives on January 6, 1999.]
Committees of Conference.
11A ... The report of said committee of conference shall
consist of the matters of difference so referred and so identified, showing the amounts appropriated therefor by each
of the said branches and other matters in disagreement and the position of each branch with respect
thereto, and shall state said committee's recommendations with respect to the matters so
referred. Matters on which there exists no disagreement between the branches shall not be
disturbed by the committee on conference.
NOTES OF RULINGS ON THE JOINT RULES
RULE 11A -- That a report on the committee on conference of the
General Appropriations Bill was improperly before the House for the reason that detailed information relative to the
differences between the two branches was not made available. McGEE, H. 1984, pp.
1125,1126.
Return to top
Transcript of the debate from
State House News Service
House Session - Monday, Nov. 19, 2001
CONVENES: The House convened at 11:05 am, Speaker Finneran presiding. Chaplain Quinn offered a prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
[...]
BUDGET DEBATE RULES: Question came on adopting an order from Rep. Rogers of Norwood delineating the ground rules for the House's consideration of the fiscal 2002 budget conference committee report.
REP. MARINI offered an amendment to the order.
Rep. Marini said I would like to thank the Speaker for working with us on crafting an order that deals with the situation we are facing and I thank him for protecting the local aid budgets here.
This conference committee order is unprecedented. They are now allowed to reconcile differences and also to reduce items on which we agreed. So even if the House and Senate agreed on line items, they can take up the matter and reduce it.
That is not the traditional role of the conference committee. They are now crafting a new budget based on a shortfall of $1.3-1.5 billion.
So when the Senate passed their budget on June 13 until Sept. 11 we had a traditional conference where the House defended the House and the Senate conferees defended their position. Some were irreconcilable.
Then we all know what happened on Sept. 11. After the attack, the economy slowed down dramatically faster than we had predicted, creating this budgetary problem we now face. Had we already enacted our budget, as we ought to have done, we would still be here today talking about adjustments that need to be made to account for this reduction in revenues.
The differences would be done like other bills are done, brought to the floor of the House, debated, amended, voted on.
Unless this amendment is adopted we are forfeiting our right to offer our opinion about a program, community or budgetary approach. There may be people here -- I doubt it -- who think taxes should be raised, rather than cuts made. There may be people here who feel that the $650 million in cuts are not the same priorities they would favor -- they have other ideas. There may be people who want to spend more tobacco money and cut a little less. There may be some who want to cut a little more.
Whatever your position, your district sent you here to represent them in the process. Your opinion is important. None of us have a monopoly on good ideas. There are other good ideas out there that haven't been heard and won't be part of the conference committee report.
On Wednesday, we will have a simple up and down vote on the traditional conference committee report -- but it will be a whole new budget from the one that took us a week to hammer out last May and do over a thousand amendments to. We had at least the opportunity to express the priorities of our districts. At least you can take this podium and express what you think.
Let us not turn this whole process over to two men to decide the whole budget. There's no need. If we decide to do this, we may not finish this on Wednesday, we go through the weekend. But that's why we are here.
These are the most important decisions of this year -- maybe of this decade. The foundation we set is important for the budgets of upcoming years. So it is important that you have a voice in that process. And you can if you want to.
By adopting this, you will reserve the ability to file amendments to express your opinion. You will be able to return to your districts with your heads held high. Vote yes on this.
Rep. Marini requested a roll call vote and there was support.
REP. FLYNN said I'm prepared to stay here until it freezes over but my point is I always thought that under the House rules, when a conference committee is reporting out a report that all amendments are beyond the scope of the measure. So how can those rules be changed at this stage?
In the chair, Rep. DiMasi said there is a section that says a House may amend these in the form submitted. So the question though valid is not timely since debate has already taken place. So the point of inquiry is inappropriate at the time.
REP. MARINI said I would like to know if a conference committee reconciles only matters that are different between the branches. Is that not the rule?
REP. DIMASI said the point is correct but the special order goes beyond the committee report.
REP. MARINI said I would say that we are making a new procedure that would change the rules for these particular bills regarding what a committee of conference may do and accordingly what this body may do with said report. Is that not correct?
REP. DIMASI said we are suspending the rules by adopting a special order that will handle the budget bill in a manner different from what we usually do.
REP. TRAVIS said based on your last two rulings, would it be fair to say that the conference committee cannot take up non-budgetary matters or are we opening this up to anything in the universe?
REP. DIMASI said we are opening it up to also include S 2107, H 4490, S 1901, and H 4101.
REP. HYNES said I hope the order is adopted and the amendment rejected.
REP. MARINI said has the Senate adopted any portion of this order? Are we concurring with something they've already done?
REP. DIMASI said the Senate has not sent us anything. This is just about the joint rules.
REP. HYNES said Rep. Marini said the world has changed since Sept. 11 and that clearly is the fact for 44 states that have come together to recognize that one consequence of the attacks was to reduce revenue streams. For that reason, we are in a situation two days before Thanksgiving, asked to pass an amendment to the joint rules. We are changing our rules to allow the committee to present to us a report that will recognize the changed fiscal reality pursuant to Sept. 11. So we ask them to reduce expenditures below what the House or Senate had adopted and to consider matters that were in the past not conference-able.
The leader [Minority Leader Marini] believes that takes us out of the loop. In fact, it still allows us to vote the conference committee up or down. You have that right.
But think with me just a moment, the conclusion if we follow the leader's desire. He would bring us all back to the last week in April. Each of us would get up and debate the whole budget again. And then it goes back to the Senate and then guess what -- another conference committee.
I appreciate his concerns. This process has not been a good one. But the reality is we must come to closure. We must put a budget on her desk. And I would suggest that she has not followed the law. She was supposed to adjust her budget once she recognizes that the revenues are insufficient. But that's an aside. I'm just suggesting that even her comments demand that this body take action. We will be able to have a stake in the budget but to embark on the leader's map would accomplish nothing. Back in '89 and '90, one of the reasons there was chaos was that we allowed ourselves to come to anarchy. We formulated budget plans that paralyzed the body.
REP. HYNES CONTINUED: We have a process this year that allows us to form a committee to dethrone the differences. If you dislike that, by all means vote against it. But don't suggest that we should open the budget again.
ON A ROLL CALL VOTE, 128-23, MARINI AMENDMENT REJECTED
The House adopted the order on voice vote.
