Commonwealth Magazine reports that there are some sore feelings on the part of new House Ways and Means Chair Jeffrey Sanchez about the Senate’s work on criminal justice reform.
Pointing to the Senate’s failure to include additional funding for a youth anti-violence program in the supplemental budget that’s moving in the Legislature, Representative Sanchez “said he’s tired of hearing the Senate’s rhetoric in support of sweeping criminal justice reforms when it isn’t stepping up to fund programs… that can make a tangible difference today.”
A little backstory: during the annual budget process earlier this year, the Senate was actually proposing more funding for this program than the House was. Then when the bottom fell out on the state’s revenues, the House and Senate reluctantly cut the funding for this program, as they did for quite a few others. The notion that the Senate’s failure to provide more funding in this supplemental budget amounts to a pattern of failing to back up rhetoric with action is, well, unconvincing.
Rep. Sanchez was further irked by the rally the Senate held in support of its criminal justice reform bill last week, noting that it took place “right outside his office.” People familiar with the layout of offices in the State House will observe that the House Ways and Means Committee occupies some very prime real estate just next to the Grand Staircase, where rallies are held almost daily and where the Senate rally happened. Surely he doesn’t think that every rally that takes place there amounts to “vilifying the work of members of the House,” as he said of the Senate’s rally last Thursday. He also reproached the Senate for “presuming the House will be an obstacle to reform.” Hmm. When House leadership says that a vote on a criminal justice reform bill will happen in less than a month’s time but (unlike the Senate) refuses to comment on the topics that might be covered in the bill, I, for one, am hard pressed to rule out even the possibility of a little obstruction.
Let’s hope that the Representative’s call to “find a way to work together and stop this grandstanding” prevails over his present irritation. An end to political grandstanding always begins at home.
I’ve upvoted the thread-starter, and have just one more observation to add.
The House, including the very aggrieved Mr. Sanchez, can take other actions besides “reluctantly” slashing already catastrophically reduced budgets.
The House could, for example, RAISE TAXES. In particular, it could RAISE TAXES ON THE WEALTHY. The “dead on arrival” proposal from Mr. Patrick from a few years ago provides a perfectly reasonable pattern that does not require a constitutional amendment. The House, including Mr. Sanchez, could:
– Increase the personal income tax rate, while increasing the personal exemptions so that the 99% avoids paying personal income tax altogether.
– Increase the “unearned” income tax rate, while increasing the threshold over which it applies. This, also, has the effect of protecting the meager returns earned by retirees while significantly increasing the tax paid by wealthy taxpayers (like our governor).
The list goes on.
I’m weary of the whining and grandstanding from House members who flatly refuse, for whatever reason. to actually DO the job they were elected to perform.
Yes, especially to your last sentence. The House pretty consistently prefers to do nothing and seems resentful of the Senate’s impertinent — legislating!
Was about to say exactly the same thing — these cats use any excuse to avoid doing something.
And the resulting inertia feeds the notion that that the Legislature is irrelevant. If you want big change you go to ballot questions (paid sick days, fair share tax) or you beg “a Leviathan external stakeholder” like Amazon to improve the public good.
Spot on analysis. And even ballot questions don’t force them to do their jobs-as the inertia on Question 4 implementation demonstrates.
I will say the insiders I talk to confirm what we should all suspect. It’s a pretty gutless place, but also one that is easily swayed by phone calls and letters. It has to be those two methods as I tell my fellow millennials, with snail mail being the most effective since the visual “stacks of mail” really sways them.
One Freedom Massachusetts reorganized their grassroots campaign on letter writing from families with transgender relatibes they totally swayed 40-50 fence sitters to move the right way.
They aren’t evil-just very lazy and set in their ways.
Good point about Question 4. It prompts me to further consideration of what the prime animating principle is — it’s an abiding aversion to perceived risk, which generally overlaps with laziness but occasionally prompts lightning fast action instead: e.g., when the SJC ruled that a criminal statute did not cover “upskirting,” a bill was on the Gov’s desk the next day criminalizing upskirting.