Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Another bad story for the House

By

Phantom voting?

Is someone keeping a scorecard on the negative stories that are coming out about the House and its members in the last few months?

Can someone with experience in the chamber explain how easy or hard it might be to eliminate this from happening?

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. Why not?  On the casino vote, tow House members “Accidentally” voted incorrectly.  Voting the wrong way, phantom voting…what’s a couple here and there between friends?

    • …often the lights of empty desks went green on the wall…as the buttons were pushed “for them”.  So often I was the only “civilian” watching…that was back before DiMasi was speaker, in 2003, 2004, 2005….I don’t go watch anymore.

      <

      p>What debate?  What votes?

      • The excuse is always, Oooh!  We’re in our office!  In a hearing!  We’re just 20 feet away!  On my way over!  Pleeeeezze just push the button for me!  Just this once!

        <

        p>We will set aside the desirability of somebody voting when they didn’t listed to the debate.

        <

        p>IF a legislator misses a vote in such a fashion, they can ask the chair to allow unanimous consent to be recorded on the roll call they missed – so THAT excuse is bogus.

        <

        p>It is fraud, plain and simple.

        <

        p>Be interesting to do a FOIA request, and match up Rep. Murphy’s per diem requests with his known absences from town, eh?

  2. Just a quick note on this story…

    <

    p>The rules expressly prohibit members from voting for another member. They are available on our website here – http://www.mass.gov/legis/ht02…

    <

    p>Our office sent a note to the members reminding them of the rules and asking for strict compliance. The Speaker will address it directly with members again in the next caucus. We are looking into what happened in this case but this shouldn’t be happening and the Speaker expects members will follow all House rules.

    <

    p>David Guarino
    Communications Director for Speaker DiMasi

        • If the Speaker were enforcing the rules as you say, then the “phantom voting” would never have happened.  

          • or maybe he just didn’t know about it. You know, the point of anything “phantom” is a little discretion, you know? Otherwise, how could anything like this be successful? Seriously, the ratings would suck.  

                • …but not on the chamber, not multiple perspectives that are panning the room, roving, so no one knows for sure they are – or are not – in view….I used to really keep an eye on those rostrum conferences and moving knots when the issues I cared about were in play.  

                  <

                  p>Now almost NOTHING is publicly in play, everything happens either in “room 348” or in someone’s office.  

    • David, Your link slapped me with a “File not found.”  Could you point us in the correct direction to these rules?  TIA.  

    • Ya killin’ him having dialogue here. Your press release and other related material speak for itself. These web savvy bloggers can find the information that you just repeated.. Stop wasting tax payer’s money and spoon feeding this special interest group.

      <

      p>You Will Never Win Here. Sal should know better.

      <

      p>Even Angelo Scaccia must be tellin’ him. “Sal, whydafugyagutahtoaktodempeeple?.”

    • I can’t get money from the bank, listen to my voice mail or go online and call somebody a Five Start Surrender Monkey without entering a code first.

      <

      p>I understand the State House is an old building and, well, the state hasn’t been big over the years in spending to maintain infrastructure. But if you couldn’t vote unless you checked in or logged on, it would pretty much eliminate this, no?

      <

      p>Is it really just as simple as walking around pushing other people’s buttons?  

  3. Things won’t change as long as Sal DiMasi is Speaker. His priority is playing a game of “King of the Hill” with the Governor, as he scouts the horizon for a lucrative opportunity in the private sector. Cooperation and getting things done are not his chief concerns. The betting on Beacon Hill is that he will be out in a year, so ordinary mechanisms of accountability will not work while he hangs on.  

  4. And Had a reason to make another rep look bad.
    What if pushed his button every so often when he was away and then see that the newspaper gets tipped off.

    <

    p>And then I laugh as the rep says “I never asked anyone to do that”.

    • …and archive it.  We could watch.  There could be video replay.  This would show the Speaker is serious, as I believe him to be, about having the rules followed.

      <

      p>Bringing back full cable coverage of all formal sessions would place everyone above even the APPEARANCE of irregularities regarding votes.  

      <

      p>Thanks for your post, David.  But I truly believe the BEST way to nip any bad habits and eradicate any problems would be BRING BACK FULL CABLE COVERAGE, MULTIPLE CAMERA of all formal sessions.

      <

      p>This would protect the members, strengthen democracy and show a firm commitment to openness and civic engagement by Speaker DiMasi.

      • Oh, right. We don’t like sal now. We could look the other way when Sal first did this because we liked him. And Festa, and Mazilli, and Rushing.
        Now we don’t like him and our friends who he helped are gone.

        <

        p>Right you are AmberPaw.
        We need it back on tv.  

        • …and I have been advocating for retention and repair [back in 2004 when there was continuous cable coverage – in the basic cable package – you may be too young to remember, Ernie]  The I began to argue for return of cable consistently.  When I was in the hospital after an auto accident getting a hip replacement I watched that State House cable nonstop!  So Nyah!!!  Then “they” never knew WHO might be watching.

          <

          p>I say the more of us who can watch, or might be watching, the better.  

          <

          p>And I have said that for years.  

          <

          p>But this story. I believe, really high lights why having video coverage, with multiple angles of vision, not digital streaming [which is hard to copy, and only viewable with something like good expensive broad band and a good computer or laptop] IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR CABLE VIDEO COVERAGE any TV can get in the basic package.

          <

          p>So your vinegar-flavored comment is so way out and way off I used part of my lunch hour to reply.

          • I have only read your first sentence. I haven’t finished yet.

            <

            p>I have meaning to mention the switch in TV coverage. It’s outrageous.

            <

            p>The do gooders, (not you) should ahve been all over this. But sal used ther good will by taking care of people like those I mentioned so nobody would complain when throws a blanket over the formal sessions.

            <

            p>Now let me go back and finish your comment.

            • Then I kept up the updates.  You know everyone “agreed” but nothing happened – and yes I wrote to my own legislators, of course.  But maybe no legislator liked having the public see how inattentive, rude, and disorganized the chambers [esp. the House] often looked… no one listening to the person at the podium, lapel grabbing, all the rest of it.

              <

              p>But democracy was better served by cable coverage, no question in my mind.

              <

              p>Too bad each town doesn’t send observers, so that there are folk in the gallery from every formal session, from every county.

              <

              p>”Legislators behave differently when their constituents are watching” is a great quote from the book “Lobbying on a Shoe String” and I personally believe it to be an accurate statement.

              <

              p>These days, usually, not one “civilian” is watching, just the employees of legislators and paid lobbyists.  Not optimal to be sure.

      • WGBH never paaned the actual chamber while they were in formal session…..and it was never on live…you had to watch that at 1 AM.

  5. and vote for another eligible voter, with or without his consent, I could get slapped with as much as five years in jail and/or a $10,000 fine.

    <

    p>Why not hold the voting legislators to the same standard as the voting public?

Archives