Citizens for Limited Taxation & Government
18 Tremont Street #608 * Boston, MA 02108
Phone: (617) 248-0022 * E-Mail: cltg@cltg.org
Visit our web-page at: http://cltg.org

--------------------------------------------------------------------

*** CLT&G Update ***
Saturday, April 19, 1997

Massachusetts House of Geldings Passes Budget

Happy Patriots Day, Patriots!

After reading today's Boston Globe report (see below), I can't help but wonder why we have a state House of “Representatives” that numbers 160 members. Why do we pay each a minimum base salary of $46,410 a year with additional bonus pay to “leadership” members and 31 committee chairmen (of between $7,500 and $22,500)?

Apparently we're paying House Speaker Tom Finneran ($81,410), and his right-hand yes-man, Ways and Means Committee Chairman Paul Haley ($71,410) to make all the decisions; most of the remaining 158 members just do what they're told.

Aren't we wasting an awful lot of money on a bunch of court eunuchs?

We might as well stop deluding ourselves, believing that we're being represented, and just reduce the number of members in the House to two, Finneran and Haley. Let the two make all the decisions they're making now anyway, and use the $50-plus million House budget to fill the “rainy day” stabilization fund. Then maybe we can get our taxes reduced.

Isn't it frustrating, even somewhat embarrassing, to learn that our alleged “representatives” have been transformed into little more than geldings licking at their master's hand? And that master sure isn't any of us!

Chip Ford
Co-director
* * *

Boston Globe
Saturday, April 19, 1997
Page 1

Finneran clamps down on debate:
Late-night sessions, budget rancor now only a memory
By Don Aucoin and Frank Phillips
Globe Staff

It was Wednesday evening, the third day of the most tightly controlled Massachusetts budget debate in memory, and Representative Douglas W. Stoddart had had enough.

Taking the microphone - one of the rare occasions when it was surrendered by House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran - the Natick Republican exclaimed: “Mr. Speaker! It's been about 32 hours since we had any debate here! I know we're all good friends here, but my understanding of democracy is that it's supposed to be loud, raucous, and controversial. So let's have some debate!”

But Stoddart's plea went unheeded.

There was nothing loud, raucous or controversial about budget deliberations this week on Beacon Hill. Traditionally filled with color and contention, the budget process this year made State House observers envy those who spent the week watching paint dry.

Finneran, a Mattapan Democrat, wanted it that way. He changed the old rules, enforced a degree of discipline that friend and foe alike described as unprecedented, and disposed of 875 amendments to the $18 billion state budget in four sessions that never ran later than 10 p.m.

“It was a major cultural change,” he said in an interview yesterday. “My worry coming into budget week was that we might slip out of control, but there was no feeding frenzy at all. The citizens now know that their money is being treated very judiciously and prudently.”

Many legislators agree with Finneran. But others say that the budget deliberations were a one-man show starring the speaker that rendered representatives voiceless during the most important business the Legislature conducts all year.

Legislators were hard-pressed to cite important public issues that Finneran kept bottled up. Mostly, the amendments were to earmark spending for favored programs. But some critics nevertheless called it a troubling precedent.

“It's a disturbing trend if it continues over the next two or three years, because dissent is healthy; it enables us to avoid errors and mistakes,” Stoddart said.

One night, outside the House chamber, Paul Fitzgerald, executive director of Common Cause, asked rhetorically: “Do you hear a lot of public policy being discussed in there, or do you just hear a lot of line items? People say it's efficient, but who ever said democracy was supposed to be efficient?”

Barbara Anderson of Citizens for Limited Taxation and Government, Beacon Hill observer for two decades, was more emphatic. “It's just pathetic,” she declared.

In a reference to former House Speaker Thomas McGee, who ruled with an iron hand from 1975 to 1984, she added: “This really went further than anything I've ever seen before, even during the McGee years, with people being told what they could put in for amendments.”

Indeed, virtually all of the House's business this week was transacted behind the scenes, even though members theoretically had a chance to shine for the TV cameras.

There were only a handful of debates all week, and lawmakers were seldom even recorded on roll call votes. A typical scene was of legislators chatting in the aisles or slumped in their seats while Finneran, on the rostrum, rattled off these words at warp speed: “All those in favor, say aye; all those opposed say no; the nos have it; the amendment is not adopted.” Or:

“The ayes have it; the amendment is adopted.” Usually, nary an aye nor a nay had been uttered from the floor.

That approach is not new; many routine items have always been thrashed out beforehand. If every budget item were debated and subjected to a roll-call vote, the House would still be considering the budget at Christmastime, six months after the fiscal year begins.

But Finneran and his leadership team exerted unusual control in other ways. For instance, legislators said, committee chairs were told to discourage members from proposing amendments to the budget and from speaking on amendments they did file.

Behind the scenes, Finneran and his leadership demonstrated a willingness to play hardball. One Democratic lawmaker was told by a member of Finneran's leadership team that if he got behind one of Finneran's pet issues, the member's own amendment would sail through.

Stoddart said clear instructions came not to “spot” members by pushing for roll-call votes on controversial issues that might prove troublesome at reelection time next year.

The result, in the view of Representative Paul Caron, a Springfield Democrat, was that “we're not getting a public discussion of the issues.”

“I know the intention is to work out agreements and not air our dirty laundry, but I'm sorry, conflict is part of legislation,” said Caron. “There are pros and there are cons; that's why we have debate.”

Finneran insisted yesterday that he took no steps to kill debate. “I wanted to keep the bottom line intact, but anybody who wants to fight the fight, there's the microphone,” he said.

[ . . . ]

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

If you are on the CLT&G / CPR98 e-mailing list and you want to be removed, please do the following:
Send a message to: cpr98-request@world.std.com
Type the word: < unsubscribe > in the body of your message with *NO* other information Leave the subject field BLANK
(DO *NOT* try to send a message to: cpr98@world.std.com or your message will bounce and have no effect)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *