MassPoliticker says the House just passed, by overwhelming numbers, a tax holiday in August, which will cost this state $16 million dollars so people can save $50 if they spend a $1000. Brilliant!
Meanwhile, there’s talk that Representative Donato is stalling the repeal of 1913’s laws that prevent out of state glbt couples from getting married here, something that’s only awaiting the House’s passage before Governor Patrick signs the bill and it becomes law. Not okay.
Other bills the House may skip? The Global Warming Solutions Act – a bill that has the numbers to pass, but just needs to get on the docket – is another bill the Senate passed and the House has yet to do so. It would reduce and cap emissions, making Massachusetts a leader in Global Warming.
If anyone has an objection to the House’s priorities, find your legislators and make a phone call. Also, make sure to give the Speaker’s office a ring. It’s time these bills and measures have the priority in legislation they deserve. GLBT people have waited long enough on 1913, while the environment can’t afford to wait anymore for Global Warming action.
Cross posted at Ryan’s Take.
See: http://www.masslawyersweekly.c…
why he wants to stand in the way of all the tourist dollars just waiting to flow into MA in the form of out-of-staters coming in to marry. Is the state that flush with cash that he can snub free money?
I wrote to Donato last week in regards to the “1913 law”. I expressed my views that it is time to take this law off the books and told him this is a chance for him to gain a little redemption after failing to vote correctly on the same-sex marriage amendment. I also told him if he did not vote to repeal the law, I would work hard to be sure he is not re-elected in the fall.
<
p>He responded via mail dated July 18th. Part of his response:
<
p>Looks to me that his plan was to never let this bill come before the House at all. Let’s see if he is able to follow through.
<
p>I just called DiMasi urging him to take up the vote.
I don’t think most people realize just how dialed in Donato is in the House. He is very, very capable of keeping this thing off the docket and getting away with it, unless we really, really vocal about ensuring there’s a vote on this issue.
<
p>Thanks for letting us know that you called both his office and DiMasi’s. If we can get as many people here talking about their calls, that’ll help us know more… and make sure the public knows that people are concerned, care about and calling on this issue… and knowledge is power.
I’ll put out the word for you.
I didn’t realize it wasn’t brought up for a House vote yet and will definitely give a call on that issue as well.
<
p>And about 1913, there was a BayWindows article that it was going to come up for a vote in the House today. I guess not.
that it has, which probably means that it hasn’t. Though, I certainly hope I’m wrong.
on the topic of same-day voter registration. The bill is up in the air right now and needs people to call about it.
<
p>
Just FYI, from the Speaker’s office, we are well aware of the deadline and the amount of important bills before us to consider and I will pass on the priorities raised here, so thanks for that.
<
p>On the topics raised, all these things are still being considered.
<
p>The Speaker is a strong supporter of gay marriage rights, I think you all probably remember the part he played last year on that one, and believes the so-called 1913 law is outdated and unfair. The Speaker, as always, is talking to members on both sides of this issue all the time and is hopeful to pass the repeal by the end of the session. No date has yet been set for debate but stay tuned.
<
p>The Global Warming Solutions act is also still being seriously considered. There is no doubt Senator Pacheco and others have done their homework and are doing their legwork. But while proponents have drawn a significant amount of attention to this one bill, let’s please not forget just how much the House, Senate and Patrick administration have collectively gotten done on energy reform already this session.
<
p>Because it was priority number one for the Speaker this session and a top priority for the Governor and Senate President, they were able to combine forces quickly and get behind the boldest and broadest energy reform we have seen in decades. The Green Communities Act is, as Congressman Delahunt said at the bill signing last month, a “game changer.” Massachusetts is leading the nation with the new biofuels regs that will soon land on the Governor’s desk. And the Green Jobs bill rolled out by the Governor, Speaker and Senate President – which we also hope to have done this session – will help Massachusetts grow jobs at every part of the economic spectrum in this critically important emerging market.
<
p>All this is on top of the Ocean’s bill, a significant environmental bond bill (being debated in the Chamber next door as I write this … watch us live at http://masslegislature.tv/) and items done by the Patrick administration – Massachusetts joining the Regional Greenhouse Gas Iniative and becoming the first state in the nation to require greenhouse gas analysis and mitigation in major real estate projects.
<
p>Is the Global Warming bill going to be a part of that impressive record of energy reform? Time will tell. But no one, certainly not the supporters of renewable energy, should use that one issue to take away from the significant steps we have collectively taken already this session.
<
p>Hope that view from the Hill helps a bit.
<
p>David Guarino
Communications Director
Speaker DiMasi’s office
Here is a link to an Op Ed, written by David Yas, the Publisher of Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly as to just why an over ride is needed of the veto by Gov. Patrick of funding for autism care:
<
p>http://www.masslawyersweekly.c…
<
p>Any word on this one?
Thanks for the advocacy AmberPaw, you obviously aren’t alone in your support for Autism funding and there are several strong advocates in the House alone. We are still reviewing the Governor’s vetoes and, as always, looking at what we put forward as priorities in our budget in light of the fiscal realities we face. House Ways and Means staff and members continue to review the vetoes so I can’t say what we might bring up for possible override at this point. Stay tuned.
As a Guardian Ad Litem, I get to see first hand what happens to one of “those kids” who doesn’t get intensive teaching. I started doing “this kind of work” because in fighting for my son, I would say to my husband “What happens to kids who don’t have parents like us to fight for them?”
<
p>It was answering that question that led to my doing child welfare and guardian ad litem work [no path to riches, I assure you].
<
p>My advocacy on these issues [child welfare, autism, etc.] is totally unpaid, on my own, not for any “stake holder”.
<
p>Glad to hear there are other voices with regard to the autism funding! Very good to know.
…if there IS movement on this issue [over ride on veto of Autism funding” please do post or otherwise let me know.
Your office has done a stellar job this year. The energy bill is getting rave reviews and was great work. To me, though, the Global Warming Solutions Act will finish the job, gauranteeing our committment to doing our full part in solving Global Warming.
<
p>I understand that there’s only so much time in the session – and a lot of important bills – but we also have to balance it with the fact that the climate can’t wait. We’re on the tipping point already. So I think this is a unique issue where we can’t just say, “we’ve done some great work this year, so we can get to this bill next year.” The quicker we react, the more likely it’ll be that we can solve global warming before the worst disasters. I’ve been assured that the Global Warming Solutions Act has the votes to pass by a Democratic Representative, but that Rep says we just need to get it on the floor… so, hopefully, we can and we’ll be able to get through it quickly.
<
p>I also know that the Speaker is committed to equality, as well as over 75% of the legislature. Believe me, the GLBT community and its allies really appreciates it! We’re just so close to getting 1913 off the books and we don’t want to wait another year. Furthermore, we don’t want to lose the millions in tourism dollars to California, since they’ll allow anyone to get maried there. Finally, this is perhaps one of the most straight forward bills out there right now, with a debate we’ve already had a million times, so I sincerely think this is another bill that won’t take much time.
<
p>The Speaker’s leadership on issues ranging from equality to Class 3 Gambling to closing loopholes and making corporate taxes fairer will not be forgotten. It truly shows what we can do with Democrats in charge in the Corner Office, Senate and House. It also shows the Speaker’s committment to policies that will benefit this state, not just special interests. I can’t state how strong I support the job the Speaker’s done this year – he’s the best we’ve had in a long, long time. If we can somehow manage to repeal 1913 and pass the Global Warming Solutions Act, I personally believe the Speaker’s role in government this year will go down as one of the most effective years of any Speaker, ever. So let’s get it done!
Thanks Ryan for your comments, much appreciated.
David,
<
p>Thanks for your input, it is nice to know that the leadership on the Hill is paying attention to the discussions of the little people. A critical bill that has not received a lot of attention is House Docket #5027, a home rule petition that will establish Chinese and Vietnamese bilingual ballots at all election levels in the city of Boston. While this is currently in effect at the municipal election level, due to a 2005 Department of Justice mandate, this enfranchising provision does not cover state and federal elections and will expire at the end of this year. Right now the bill is languishing in Chairman Scaccia’s Rules Committee, waiting to be taken up and discharged.
<
p>This legislation, which mandates that ballots and candidate names be translated into Vietnamese and transliterated (converted to Chinese characters) into Chinese, is crucial for ensuring that members of these groups, especially the elderly, can vote without the assistance, and sometimes improper influence, of others. Since any legislation has to be in effect 90 days prior to an election, this will unfortunately not have an effect on the upcoming primaries. There is still time to get this passed, so that the tens of thousands of Boston residents who will be directly impacted by this can vote free and clear in November.
<
p>Given the fact that the Speaker is committed to enfranchising voters, not to mention the obvious fact that Chinatown is a large and vital part of his district, I am sure that he will not let this important legislation slip through the cracks. To do so would be to undermine that most fundamental aspect of democracy, the right to vote. We all know that the Speaker would never stand for that.
This is another important and complex issue so thank you Bay State Buckeye for your advocacy and I will pass along your thoughts. The Speaker met briefly with a group of constituents advocating on this issue on Monday – and they happened upon Governor Patrick too, who was coming into our office for a meeting, so their advocacy hit both branches in one afternoon. We are still looking at this bill at this point but I can tell you Speaker is aware of the concerns and is doing everything he can to address this issue in the best possible way.
<
p>Shove it.
<
p>Look, I’m not saying that writing bills or building consensus for bills is easy*. It seems to me that the small handful of bills passed and one not passed yet are significant in what they accomplish. But, they shouldn’t have taken an entire legislative session to get done, and there’s no reason why our 200 talented legislators couldn’t have worked on more things at once.
<
p>These environmental issues are game changers. We need to get them done. They’re both high priority and high urgency. Not getting the Global Warming Solutions Act up for a vote in this session will represent a massive failure of Speaker DiMasi.
<
p> * The act of voting is easy, given how little time the Lege actually spends in front o’ the Cod voting.
<
p>
<
p>Get the 1919 law up for a vote too. In many senses, that’s even easier. The bill is straightforward, requires no funding and no regulating, and even (gasp!) makes the Commonwealth’s legal code that much simpler.
Not enough coffee yet?
<
p>I agree with your sentiment and urgency; would like to see better diplomacy.
<
p>On the other hand, the expression “shove it” is kind of quaint so maybe not as aggressive as it feels to me. Was it much in use before the 1977 Johnny Paycheck song?
<
p>On the other (other) hand, the association with “Take this Job and Shove it” suggests resignation and storming away, rather than a call to action.
<
p>Stephanie
(not enough coffee yet)
he stoms away
and I knew I was being mildly caustic [but really… shove it isn’t terribly caustic, is it].
<
p>I try not to be caustic with “regular” BMGers. David Guarino isn’t a regular, or even an occasional poster in the traditional sense. He’s here “on the job” and frankly, anybody on the job who takes a “we’ve done a lot, so lay off of us” approach on climate change deserves a caustic response. The Massachusetts Legislature hasn’t done enough, and there’s plenty of public sentiment to do more. A large part of the reason why more hasn’t gotten done lies squarely at the feet of DiMasi.
<
p>Come on BMG and ask for support in accomplishing a good green thing? You got it. Comes on BMG and tries to use a little bit of good climate change work as cover for not doing nearly enough? Shove it. Go back to the work of the people passing quality legislation to improve our lives, and don’t make it sound like you didn’t have enough time to get it done. It’s that important — make the time.
Hey Stomv
<
p>I’ll take the caustic, that comes with the territory here, especially for a non-regular who works in the Speaker’s office. I know what I’m in for when I post and for every kind comment like Ryan’s or others, I’ll get this. That’s the world of blogs, where people can say whatever they’d like from the comfortable blanket of anonymity. That’s the game and, rather than think up a fake name and just write nice things about my boss and what we are doing, I decided to jump in as myself from time to time to give you our take on things. The shots are well expected.
<
p>But please don’t mistake what I was trying to say. I wasn’t trying to say ‘lay off.’ I was trying to say we have had great accomplishments on energy reform this year and they should not be overshadowed by one bill that is still working its way through the process. If that’s not the way it came across, I need to spend more time on my posts. But that was the goal.
<
p>Shoving off… for now.
Guarino
since you’re an employee of the speaker and working here on his behalf. but regarding those of us who are not here on official business and do post anonymously, you need to understand that anonymity isn’t just a cover for rudeness (although it can be). it is a real safety mechanism. since you are new here, may i suggest that you get to know the posters and their reasons for being anonymous before pouncing on them. unless, of course, your goal is to offend rather than debate. i say this to you in good faith.
Absolutely not meant as a knock. Please don’t take it as such and thanks for understanding why I am posting as myself. I do see why people would want anonymity and I do understand why some people say things they wouldn’t otherwise say because they are anonymous. That’s the great thing about blogs.
…and no member of my “nuclear” or extended family works for the State, or “the city”, etc. I have the luxury, as a result, of being able to say, “If I cannot sign my name, I should not be saying this.”
<
p>I can also understand that my freedom in this regard is not universal.
Thanks for your posts, David. I don’t think anyone would deny the importance of the energy bill and what it’s doing to create the infrastructure for a greener economy in Massachusetts. Because of the Speaker’s work on the energy bill we even put him at the head of the class in our 2007 mid-term scorecard.
<
p>However, it did in fact sound like you were saying that since the legislature had already passed the energy bill that you can take a break and not worry about the Global Warming Solutions Act. And that would be true if the energy bill achieved the emissions reductions we’re looking for in the Global Warming Solutions Act. But it doesn’t. According to the administration, it would only achieve 5% reductions and doesn’t touch the transportation sector, which is a major contributor. And that’s no where near good enough.
<
p>The Speaker’s got it right that we need a three-pronged approach to global warming, but the Global Warming Solutions Act needs to be one of those prongs. This is the pressing issue of our generation; if we don’t get it right, we all lose. Other bloggers here are right in saying that we don’t have time to pat ourselves on the back for doing such a great job on one piece of the energy/climate change puzzle while other pieces remain undone. Other states are out in front of us on an emissions cap (CT just passed one–with a Republican governor, I might add). We continue to hear that the only reason the Global Warming Solutions Act isn’t moving is because we’ve already done the energy bill, and that’s not quite good enough.
<
p>If the Speaker has other reasons for holding back the Global Warming Solutions Act, I’d love to hear them. But passing the energy bill, as great a first step as it is, isn’t a reason.
<
p>Regards,
Megan Amundson
Political Director
Mass League of Environmental Voters
I’m certainly not anonymous. My nickname isn’t my legal name, but anybody on this site can figure out my legal name, what I look like, and precisely where I live and my telephone number, as well as contact me by email. At least, they can if they spend enough time to click through the links and understand the layout of the page.
<
p>So, spare me the “blanket of anonymity” line. People have every right to remain anonymous, for any reason they like. I choose to not be anonymous, even if that means I get the occasional rude phone call on my answering machine at home.*
<
p>Thanks for the response.
<
p>
<
p> * (I’ve gotten two)
I get you’re angry, and I get that we need a carrot/stick approach, but when we have the Speaker’s chief aide on the site, answering many, many comments, that represents the fact that he’s listening. Telling him to ‘shove it’ and fighting with him isn’t going to help get the Global Warming Solutions Act passed. I think other methods are much more effective than essentially name-calling on an internet forum that only a tiny percentage of Massachusetts reads. I’m not trying to say there’s no room for the stick approach, but I am trying to say that this wasn’t an effective use of it. Or at least you bashed a little too hard.
<
p>We’re all losing patience. The climate can’t wait. But we have the votes for this thing to pass – of that, I’m very confident. This then becomes a matter of priority. If Beacon Hill realizes that climate change is one of our state’s biggest and most important priorities, we’ll pass this bill, now. I have every expectation that the Speaker’s office will make the right call on this one, and do all in its power to make sure this bill comes up for a vote, because it’s an issue that the people – and especially party activists – care about.
you catch more flies with honey than vinegar.
<
p>But the opposite of love isn’t hate, it’s indifference. His comments amounted to indifference — we get a pass on note getting this bill done because we got that bill done.
<
p>I’m not buying what he’s selling. As I wrote, if you as a legislator or staffer come asking for help on an issue, I got your back. But, come with weak excuses about why you’re not getting the people’s business done, and I’m going to respond negatively. Frankly, I’d be surprised if the Global Warming bill comes up for a vote this time ’round. After all, the constituency is broad [most want the state to take more action w.r.t. climate change] but not deep [there’s few votes to be had or lost by taking up or not taking up this particular bill].
<
p>Conversely, I do expect the 1913 bill to be taken up, because the GLBT(&friends) community has done a fantastic job of targeting their efforts to specific bills, specific issues, and specific legislative races. The proof is in the pudding: equality issues have made far more progress in the past five years in the Commonwealth than any other two issues combined, bar none. I salute and support that — in no way am I attempting to pit enviros vs. homos, so to speak. In fact, I not only tip my hat, I show up to equality rallies and remind my legislator that equality is important (as I know Rye encourages his legislators w.r.t. the environment).
<
p>[/rant]
Thanks for posting here, reaching out, and actually addressing some of our concerns and issues!
<
p>And as to your statement…
<
p>
<
p>it could probably be solved if you were to post on here a bit more frequently. And it would be nice to have an ongoing dialogue with the Speaker’s office and the larger progressive online Mass. community [in addition to all of our calls, letters, and emails that we normally put through of course;)].
Debate the repeal, filibuster, discuss, extend the time for interested parties to speak… Occupy the final days to considre the repeal of this law.
<
p>As we know, the vetos were a pitance. Irregardless (as Ryan would say), the waning time will be spent on a topic that won’t cost me money, whereas a plethora of overrides, will.
in fact sales tax elimination should be a priority.
<
p>how can any self respecting progressive support a regressive tax?
tax holiday? not a progressive ideal. I wouldn’t say having a 5% or less tax on a $1000 computer, or HD TV, is something anti-progressive. In general, I don’t favor sales taxes, but we’re already pretty good in having no sales tax on food and clothes. I’d go further than that, but in any event, having a balanced budget is imporant and this will cost the state over $15 million.
<
p>That said, it’s also something that’s extremely gimmicky. One of the most important progressive ideals is having a government that works for its people, not the other way around. That’s why we push for fair elections, control over money in politics, etc. So wasting times on policies that hurt our budget and aren’t going to contribute in a positive way to government is anti-progressive.
<
p>Now, if you want to push to swamp most of our regressive sales and property taxes for a progressive income tax, that’s about as progressive as it gets. And I’d love a diary on that!