Page 20 THE REVERE ADVOCATE – FRIDAY, JUNE 2, 2023 By Bob Katzen If you have any questions about this week’s report, e-mail us at bob@beaconhillrollcall.com or call us at (617) 720-1562 GET A FREE SUBSCRIPTION TO MASSTERLIST – Join more than 25,000 people, from movers and shakers to political junkies and interested citizens, who start their weekday morning with MASSterList—the popular newsletter that chronicles news and informed analysis about what’s going on up on Beacon Hill, in Massachusetts politics, policy, media and infl uence. The stories are drawn from major news organizations as well as specialized publications selected by MASSterlist’s new editor, Erin Tiernan, with help from Matt Murphy. Both are pros, with a wealth of experience, who introduce each article in their own clever way. MASSterlist will be e-mailed to you FREE every Monday through Friday morning and will give you a leg up on what’s happening in the blood sport of Bay State politics. For more information and to get your free subscription, go to: https://lp.constantcontactpages. com/su/aPTLucK THE HOUSE AND SENATE: Beacon Hill Roll Call records local senators’ votes on roll calls from the week of May 22-26. All Senate roll calls are on proposed amendments to the Senate version of a $55.9 billion fi scal 2024 state budget. There were no roll call votes in the House last week. Of the 1,049 amendments fi led by senators, only 31 came to a roll call vote. Many others were simply approved or rejected one at a time on voice votes, some with debate and some without debate. To move things along even faster, the Senate also did its usual “bundling” of many amendments. Instead of acting on each amendment one at a time, hundreds of the proposed amendments are bundled and put into two piles—one pile that will be approved and the other that will be rejected, without a roll call, on voice votes where it is impossible to tell which way a senator votes. Senate President Karen Spilka, or the senator who is fi lling in for her at the podium, orchestrates the approval and rejection of the bundled amendments with a simple: “All those in favor say ‘aye,’ those opposed say ‘no.’ The ayes have it and the amendments are approved.” Or: “All those in favor say ‘aye,’ those opposed say ‘no.’ The no’s have it and the amendments are rejected.” Senators don’t actually vote yes or no, and, in fact, they don’t say a word. The outcome was predetermined earlier behind closed doors. SENATE APPROVES $55.9 BILLION FISCAL 2024 BUDGET (S 3) Senate 40-0, approved a $55.9 billion fi scal 2024 state budget after adding an estimated $82.2 million in spending during four days of debate. The House has already approved a diff erent version and a House-Senate conference committee will eventually craft a plan that will be presented to the House and Senate for consideration and sent to the governor. “I am so proud that this chamber voted resoundingly for a transformative budget built on the simple American Exterior and Window Corporation principle that our success as a commonwealth is tied to the success of every single person who calls Massachusetts home,” said Senate President Karen Spilka (D-Ashland). “Massachusetts will be competitive so long as people from all over the world can come here to fulfi ll their dreams – whether by going back to school, advancing their career, starting a business or fi nding affordable housing and childcare to raise a family. At a time when our world-class educational institutions are more needed now than ever, this budget adds a new chapter in Massachusetts’ storied tradition of making education accessible to all through our Student Opportunity Plan.” “In my fi ve years as chair of Ways and Means, I’ve never experienced a smoother or more democratic process than the fi scal year 2024 budget the Senate just approved here today,” said Sen. Mike Rodrigues (D-Westport). “The chamber focused on an overarching goal to meet, and in many cases exceed, the pressing needs of our communities, and the commonwealth at large. This budget is a forward-thinking and responsive proposal that greatly facilitates our long-term economic health and expands access to opportunities to reinvigorate and reinvest in our workforce economy, lessen the wealthincome divide and empower our communities as we build an inclusive post-pandemic future that equitably benefi ts all. (A “Yes” vote is for the budget.) Sen. Lydia Edwards Yes Contact us for all of your home improvement projects and necessities Telephone: 617-699-1782 Toll Free: 1-888-744-1756 Email: info@americanexteriorandwindow.com All estimates, consultations or inspections Insured and Registered Complete Financing IN-STATE TUITION RATES FOR ILLEGAL/UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS (S 3) Senate 3-37, rejected an amendment that would strike a section of the budget that would allow undocumented/illegal immigrants to qualify for the lower in-state tuition rate if they attended high school here for at least three years and graduated, or completed a GED. They would also be required to provide a college or university with a valid social security number or taxpayer identifi cation number, an affi davit indicating they applied for citizenship or legal permanent residence, or plan to do so once eligible, and proof they registered for selective service if applicable. “Extending in-state tuition to our undocumented students is not only a matter of fairness but a crucial step towards achieving educational equity and eff ectively addressing our workforce shortages,” said Sen. Pavel Pavano (D-Lawrence). “It is imperative that we tap into the potential of all our citizens to maintain our state’s competitive edge in the economy. Now is the time to rally behind this long-overdue policy change and guarantee that every aspiring student, irrespective of their immigration status, will actively contribute to the growth and prosperity of our commonwealth.” “In-state tuition for undocumented immigrants is an example of one of the upside-down priorities found in the Senate budget,” said Sen. Ryan Fattman (R-Sutton) who sponsored the amendment to remove the lower tuition provision. “Prioritizing the needs of our citizens of the commonwealth should be the focus of the Senate, including providing tax relief to legal residents, adequately funding our schools including help with surging special education costs and investing in our small businesses and infrastructure. Our residents are leaving the state because it’s expensive and our elected leaders have the wrong priorities.” “The Senate’s fiscal year 2024 budget focuses on expanding access to higher education—not restricting it,” said Sen. Jo Comerford (D-Northampton). “The data is clear: Students who attend Massachusetts public colleges and universities remain in the commonwealth after graduation, where they contribute to our economy and society. We must not obstruct any student seeking to fulfi ll their academic, personal and professional potential.” Some senators said this new policy should not be rushed through the Legislature in the form of a budget amendment but should be the subject of a separate bill that has to go through the entire legislative process including public hearings. (Please note what a “Yes” and “No” vote mean. The amendment was on striking the section that provides lower rates. Therfore, a “Yes” vote is for striking the section that off ers the lower tuition and therefore is against the lower tuition. A “No” vote is against striking the section and favors the lower tuition.) Sen. Lydia Edwards No TAX REVENUE FROM MILLIONAIRE’S TAX (S 3) Senate 5-34, rejected an amendment that would remove a section in the budget that exempts tax revenue generated from the recently voter-approved Millionaire Tax from counting toward the allowable state tax revenue limitations, under Chapter 62F, which provides that whenever revenue collections in a fi scal year exceed an annual cap tied to wage and salary growth, the excess is returned to taxpayers. Last year, $3 billion in refunds were returned to taxpayers when the law was triggered for just the second time since its passage in 1986. The revenue from the Millionaire Tax is deposited into the new Education and Transportation Stabilization Fund. “It’s refreshing to see some lawmakers put the interests of the taxpayers at the forefront,” said Paul Craney, a spokesperson for the Mass Fiscal Alliance which supported the amendment to remove the section. “Senate Republicans came to today’s debate well prepared. They passionately spoke out in favor of their ideas to protect the taxpayers and preserve the very popular taxpayer protection voter approved law known as 62F. Senate Democrats want to break the will of the voters by excluding the new millionaire’s tax revenue from the total calculation for rebates back to the taxpayers from 62F. That goes against the will of the voters as the law is written and today’s debate by Senate Republicans made that point very clearly.” Sen. Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester), the sponsor of the amendment, did not respond to repeated requests by Beacon Hill Roll Call asking him to comment on his amendment. Amendment opponents said the amendment will put the new revenue in jeopardy and argued this new revenue is earmarked for education and transportation and must be protected and treated diff erently than other tax revenue. Senate Ways and Means Chair Sen. Mike Rodrigues (D-Westport) did not respond to repeated requests by Beacon Hill Roll Call asking him to comment on his opposition to the amendment. (Please note what a “Yes” and “No” vote mean. The amendment was on striking the section that exempts tax revenue generated from the recently voter-approved Millionaire Tax from counting toward the allowable state tax revenue limitations. A “Yes” vote is for the amendment that favors tax revenue generated from the recently voter-approved Millionaire Tax counting toward the allowable state tax revenue limitations. A “No” vote is against the amendment and supports exempting the revenue from the allowable state tax revenue limitations.) Sen. Lydia Edwards No $575 MILLION RESERVE FUND FOR TAX RELIEF (S 3) Senate 4-35, rejected an amendment that would create a reserve fund of $575 million to fund future tax relief. Amendment supporters said this will ensure that a minimum of $575 million is set aside and protected until the House, Senate and governor in the coming weeks can agree on the amount of money that will be returned to taxpayers this year. They noted several proposals with various amounts of tax relief are currently on the table and eventually one will be approved and this reserve fund creation will ensure the money is there for the tax cuts. Sen. Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester), the sponsor of the amendment, did not respond to repeated requests by Beacon Hill Roll Call asking him to comment on his amendment. Amendment opponents said there is already a section in the budget that sets this money aside, a statement that amendment supporters disagree with and argued that the budget does not prevent the $575 million from being spent on something other than tax relief. Senate Ways and Means Chair Sen. Mike Rodrigues (D-Westport) BEACON | SEE Page 22
21 Publizr Home