What WE need is a Legislative Budget Office (LBO)

amberpaw   |   Thu, Jul 8, 2010 6:41 AM EST

On the federal level, the Congressional Budget Office costs out all legislation.

In Massachusetts, Beacon Hill does not cost out anything before passing it – neither the Republicans nor the Democrats can put a pricetag on anything they propose to add or to cut; no nonpartisan priceout at all.

All proposed fiscal reform is only braggadoccio without an unbiased, nonpartisan cost analysis.

To Rep. Kaufman’s credit he has filed legislation to establish a nonpartisan, professional Legislative Budget Office session after session.

The same Beacon Hill culture that voted itself out from under the Open Meeting Law and the Freedom of Information Act lets that Legislative Budget Office proposal die – every year.

Legislators would rather pontificate – and blame indigent defense for the costs when new crimes are added and so the number of cases go up – or blame the prisons for their costs when more folks have to be put in prisons.  THIS is the real insanity and NO reform is actually “real” without valid cost analysis.

The Casino boondoggle is a prime example.  NONE of the figures being thrown around by the Casino proponents are, in fact real.  The numbers of jobs are inflated, and basically “pulled out of a hat” for example.

I would like to see a transparent, responsible, professionalized approach to cost analysis on Beacon Hill.  Wouldn’t you?

This post was originally published with Soapblox and contains additional formatting and metadata.
View archived version of this post.


Recommend 0


Discuss

11 Comments . Leave a comment below.

  1. Amber, you are absolutely right.
    (0+ / 0-) View voters

    When I first came to Massachusetts after working in the media and covering the Connecticut Legislature, I couldn't believe there was no legislative budget office in this state.

    In Connecticut, every bill had to be analyzed as to its potential fiscal impact by an independent budget office.  The fiscal impact statement was part of almost every floor debate, as I recall.  In the Massachusetts Legislature, the House and Senate Ways and Means committees supposedly perform that function.  But they aren't independent and I never heard anyone cite a Ways and Means assessment of a bill's fiscal impact.

    dave-from-hvad   @   Tue 4 Dec 7:00 PM

    • Agree
      (0+ / 0-) View voters

      I also am familiar with CT's budget office process, and it is worth emulating.  It also can be a way to prevent last minute amendments because someone can object to their inclusion without a fiscal note.

      ed-poon   @   Tue 4 Dec 7:00 PM

  2. Amber - no problem wigth concept...
    (0+ / 0-) View voters

    ...but couldn't this be made a PART of the Inspector General's responsibility?  Or the Office of the Auditor?

    Instead of the creation of a new department with concomitant new jobs?

    peter-porcupine   @   Tue 4 Dec 7:00 PM

  3. Connaughton is there already...
    (0+ / 0-) View voters

    I was listening to an interview with the GOP's candidate for Auditor Mary Connaughton and she proposed just such a set up to be part of the Auditor's office and responsibility. I think the Democratic candidates should take a look at her proposal and make it their own. I think it would be appealing to voters.

    hlpeary   @   Tue 4 Dec 7:00 PM

  4. Fantastic idea! I'll vote for it.
    (0+ / 0-) View voters

    johnd   @   Tue 4 Dec 7:00 PM

  5. We also need Public Records and Open Meetings laws for the legislature.
    (0+ / 0-) View voters

    From Statehouse news:

    ECO-DEV REORGANIZATION: At 1:45 p.m., the House adopted a Ways and Means amendment to S 2380 relative to economic development reorganization.

    Question came on ordering the bill to third reading.

    Rep. Dempsey thanked the Speaker for his leadership on this issue. We talked about creating a new sector in our economy, gaming, and the need for all of us to work together to look at other sectors like manufacturing, health care, biotech. We need to do as much as we can to improve the business climate. We have spoken to leaders in the business community on a strategy to move Massachusetts forward during a difficult economic time. We create an economic policy council, put together performance measurements for quasi-publics and embrace regional economic development organizations with entry points at the Mass. Office of Business Development. We look at putting together a Mass. Marketing Partnership to coordinate our efforts. This coordinated approach will help us grow our economy. We look at quasi-publics that have been successful, the Community Development Financing Corp and the Economic Stabilization Trust and coordinate those to streamline our approach and we create the Mass Capital Growth Corporation. We look at quasi-publics with similar functions like MassDevelopment and HEFA and try to bring those together to streamline their activities as well. It's hard to embrace tax changes but we embrace several to attract startups and new companies. We change the net operating loss carry-forward from five years to 20 years and create a 3 percent capital gains investment policy and we look at expedited permitting. We will continue to look at other ways to move Massachusetts forward. there are many amendments. I look forward to the debate.

    Bill ordered to third reading at 1:52 p.m.

    The quasi-publics lack any real oversight and accountability. The lege is (once again)  trying to create private developer sub-municipalities, which will have governmental powers over unwilling owners and tenants.

    We're slipping towards government of, by, and for the corporations, and We, The People are too bewildered to stop the slide. Disaster capitalism at its worst.

    empowerment   @   Tue 4 Dec 7:00 PM

  6. A great idea!
    (0+ / 0-) View voters

    lanugo   @   Tue 4 Dec 7:00 PM

« Blue Mass Group Front Page

Add Your Comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Thu 20 Jun 3:22 AM