[statecom-discuss] Fwd: Legislative wheels turn out of view

[Tom Flittie]

So, if not now then for the near future, a ballot referendum question;
Should the Open Meeting Law apply to Massachusetts State Legislative bodies?

Tom Flittie

On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 4:37 AM, gary hicks <gooberthink06 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> yup ------------------ surprise, surprise!!!
>
> gary hicks <dailyplanet20032003 at yahoo.com> wrote: Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008
> 00:21:13 -0700 (PDT)
> From: gary hicks <dailyplanet20032003 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Legislative wheels turn out of view
> To: gary hicks <gooberthink06 at yahoo.com>
>
>     THIS STORY HAS BEEN FORMATTED FOR EASY PRINTING
>            Legislative wheels turn out of view      Boston Globe
>  Community activist Carl Nilsson stood outside the House chamber late one
> night this month and spoke  with any elected representative who would stop.
> He asked them to vote against a last-minute corporate tax amendment, one
> that was heavily influenced by lobbyists and business groups.      Matt
> Viser      April 25, 2008  -->   Legislative wheels turn out of view Biggest
> decisions made secretly on Beacon Hill By Matt Viser, Globe Staff  |  April
> 25, 2008
>  Community activist Carl Nilsson stood outside the House chamber late one
> night this month and spoke with any elected representative who would stop.
> He asked them to vote against a last-minute  corporate tax amendment, one
> that was heavily influenced by lobbyists and business groups.
>  But nothing Nilsson said would matter. Behind closed doors, the decision
> had already been made by a handful of influential lawmakers. By 9 p.m., the
> five-page, highly technical amendment carried easily on a voice vote, with
> little public debate.
>  It demonstrated how the wheels of government turn on Beacon Hill. Most
> important decisions take place behind closed doors, including those on some
> of the weightiest topics in recent months: legalizing casinos, levying new
> taxes, and formulating the $28 billion state budget. In an increasingly
> common practice, even committee votes are frequently taken via Blackberry
> and e-mail, with the results released later.
>  And because the Legislature exempted itself decades ago from the state's
> open-meeting and public records laws, lawmakers often deliberate in private
> and keep key documents - schedules,  e-mails, even some voting records -
> hidden from public view.
>  Democrats, who control the House and Senate, frequently hold closed-door
> party caucuses to hash out policy details; by the time legislation reaches
> public view, ready for a vote, the results are typically predetermined.
>  In the case of the vote Nilsson was watching, the action had serious
> financial consequences that were unknown that night to many legislators: The
> Department of Revenue now estimates that the amendment could open the door
> for up to $200 million in annual tax breaks for large corporations that set
> up overseas operations.
>  "It was very frustrating," said Nilsson, campaign director of Neighbor to
> Neighbor, a nonprofit organization that advocates for low-income families
> statewide. "Doing these things in the dead of night makes it harder to have
> a public discussion and for legislators to understand what they're voting
>  for."
>  It's hardly surprising or new that Massachusetts politics includes hidden
> agendas and backroom deals, a practice that has been in play since John
> Hancock became the state's first governor in 1780. But as Massachusetts has
> once again become virtually a one-party state, there are fewer challenges to
> open up the process or questions directed at the handful of powerful
> legislative leaders who dictate the flow of legislation. Some of the means
> of centralizing authority put in place by former House speaker Thomas M.
> Finneran have continued under the current speaker, Salvatore F. DiMasi.
>  "I'm troubled by the current process," said Representative James B.
> Eldridge, an Acton Democrat. "There is a lot of peer pressure that inhibits
> members from taking their votes to the House floor, and [unless it's backed
> by leadership] you don't have a snowball's chance in hell of it passing.
> Institutionally, the House has grown comfortable with the current system,
> and  it needs to become more open."
>  The opaque practices continue despite a pledge by DiMasi when he became
> speaker in 2004. He told colleagues that he would empower rank-and-file
> legislators, encourage more public policy debate in committees, and "open
> the windows of this institution and let the light of the 21st century in."
>  DiMasi declined requests for an interview, but his spokesman released a
> statement, pointing to efforts to increase openness by improving the
> Legislature's website and broadcasting 150 hours of committee hearings and
> floor debate online, "giving the public an unprecedented seat in the hearing
> room."
>  "Under Speaker DiMasi, the House has become inarguably more open and
> transparent to the public," said the spokesman, David Guarino.
>  Through a spokesman, Senate President Therese Murray also pointed to the
> online broadcasts of floor debates as evidence of openness.
>  Governor Deval Patrick, who ran against the  "culture on Beacon Hill" and
> vowed to bring new levels of transparency to government, declined to
> comment. Patrick has denied several requests for records, including a
> request from the Associated Press in February for copies of his e-mails and
> other electronic communications.
>  If crafting law is like making sausage, the process at the State House
> makes everything appear to come out like a prepackaged Fenway Frank.
>  During the highly contentious casino debate, for example, lawmakers spent
> 13 hours in committee hearings, sustaining themselves on Gatorade and
> crackers as they listened to anyone who wanted to testify.
>  But when it came time for deliberations among committee members, there
> were none. To cast votes, most e-mailed and phoned them in, some not even
> bothering to show up at the State House.
>  For John Leschen, a 41-year-old historic preservation contractor from
> Plympton, this was the first time he had confronted State House  procedures,
> and he expressed disappointment.
>  Leschen traveled several times to Beacon Hill, meeting with legislators
> and sitting through hours of hearings, to oppose the governor's plan to
> license three resort casinos. He was impressed with the amount of time
> legislators spent on the issue and the knowledge they had amassed, but said
> it was all for naught.
>  "It was primarily for show," said Leschen. "These things happened the next
> day through e-mail, a quick debate, and a couple of votes."
>  Legislators say e-mail voting is fairly common, particularly on routine
> matters, and it can come in handy in moving legislation along quickly. But
> it also means that lawmakers, who earn nearly $60,000 in annual base pay to
> represent their districts, can avoid airing their views in a public forum.
>  "In a perfect world, we'd all be there, and we'd all speak great
> thoughts," said Representative  Daniel E. Bosley, a North Adams Democrat and
> cochairman of the committee that voted on the casino legislation. "But not
> everyone can be there, and . . . it's a good thing people are given options
> to vote."
>  The e-mail voting is used only in legislative committees, which is where
> lengthy policy discussions typically take place, and not when issues reach
> the House and Senate floors, where votes are publicly displayed using red
> and green lights on an overhead board.
>  There are a variety of other policies that shield lawmakers from public
> scrutiny or questioning. Photography and video equipment, for example, are,
> in most cases, banned from the House and Senate chambers. There is a rope
> line that keeps reporters, photographers, lobbyists, and other members of
> the public away from the House doors after crucial votes. If legislators
> want to answer questions, they can walk over to the rope to address the
> crowd. If they don't, they can slip out a back  door.
>  Several of the House procedures "definitely have a way of making the
> process neater and smoother, but it's completely legitimate to question
> whether democracy is well served," said Representative Jay Kaufman, a
> Lexington Democrat. "If there were more debate, we would be in session
> longer, and it would be harder for a body of 160 members to follow. But it's
> definitely marked by less debate."
>  Years ago, the Legislature routinely debated for weeks over the budget,
> with spirited floor fights over individual line items. But when Finneran
> became speaker, House leaders made several changes that made the process
> quicker and more orderly by consolidating power.
>  When House members begin debate next week on how $28 billion in taxpayer
> money should be distributed, they will retreat to a spacious lounge blocked
> off from the public by a security guard and there decide which budget
> amendments make the cut.
>  Members have submitted about  1,500 amendments, but which ones get through
> is largely determined by the chairman of House Ways and Means, Robert A.
> DeLeo, Democrat of Winthrop.
>  In theory, lawmakers can appeal on the House floor. But by that time, most
> decisions have been made. "It really is a sad state of affairs in how we
> deal with this," said House minority leader Bradley H. Jones Jr. . "It's not
> good for democracy."
>  Matt Viser can be reached at maviser at globe.com.
>
>
>
>    (c) Copyright    var crYear = new Date();
> document.write(crYear.getFullYear());2008 The New York Times Company
>
>       '); //-->=0)document.write(unescape('%3C')+'\!-'+'-'); //-->
> PT_AC_Iterate();
>
> ---------------------------------
> Be a better friend, newshound, and  know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it
> now.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it
> now.
> _______________________________________________
> statecom-discuss mailing list
> statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>