THE SAUGUS ADVOCATE – FRIDAY, JULY 16, 2021 Page 21 BHRC | FROM PAGE 18 just 16 minutes to review a 38-page supplemental budget and a separate election reprecincting proposal. That is simply not enough time to properly review and understand these bills.” “The Republican caucus has conFRANK’S Housepainting (781) 289-0698 • Exterior • Ceiling Dr. • Power Wash • Paper Removal • Carpentry FREE ESTIMATES — Fully Insured “Proper prep makes all the difference” – F. Ferrera • Interior sistently pushed for greater transparency during the rules debate of the House because the more information the public has access to the better,” said Rep. Todd Smola (R-Warren). “Having a two-hour window to read and comprehend legislation before it is voted out of committee is not asking for the world. This would help members digest bills and make informed decisions on what is before the House. Poll windows continue to shrink, and this practice contributes to the lack of transparent government for the people’s elected representatives.” Opponents of the amendment did not off er any arguments during debate on the House fl oor. This is one of the amendments on which Beacon Hill Roll Call made repeated requests to reach several representatives in the House Democratic leadership for a comment on why they voted against it. Representatives not responding include Reps. Bill Galvin, Claire Cronin, Kate Hogan, Mike Moran, Peake and Joe Wagner. (A “Yes” vote is for giving two hours to vote. A “No” vote is against giving two hours). Rep. Jessica Giannino No Rep. Donald Wong Yes POST HOW REPRESENTATIVES VOTED ON BILLS IN COMMITTEE (H 3930) House 38-121 and 41-117, rejected two similar amendments that would require that committees make public how each legislator on the committee voted on whether or not to favorably report a bill to the House. This would replace a section of the proposed rules that would only post the names of legislators who voted against the bill and list the aggregate vote tally without names, of members voting in the affi rmative or not voting. “The public has a right to know where their legislators stand on the issues being debated in committee, and it makes absolutely no sense to identify by name only those members who vote no at an executive session or on a poll,” said Rep. Brad Jones, sponsor of one of the amendments. “When we vote in the House chamber, our individual votes are displayed for all to see, and legislative committees should be held to the same standard by providing full disclosure of where each member stands on a given issue.” “I believe every resident of Massachusetts has the right to hold their elected state representative accountable,” said Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven (D-Somerville), the sponsor of the other amendment. “Under current rules, there is no accountability on the votes we take in committee. This amendment ensures that every vote taken in committee is available to the public, including when bills are sent to study.” Rep. Joe Wagner (D-Chicopee) opposed the listing of which representatives vote yes or did not vote. “The names of votes of those voting in the negative being there for everyone to see is suffi cient in terms of transparency,” said Wagner during the debate on the House floor. “I have always been concerned, and I’ve chaired committees for about 20 years, and I have been always concerned that when we take votes in committee, the votes that we take to advance legislation does not refl ect necessarily, when an affi rmative vote is taken, the support for the matter as it is before the committee.” Wagner continued, “So for example, there are points at which members will vote affi rmatively to move a matter from a committee because they support the idea conceptually of a particular piece of policy or legislation. But with that support affi rmatively, if that was a fi nal form that the legislation may take. And so I think that where a vote in the negative is very clear, a vote in the affi rmative is less clear. And there are interest groups and there are people frankly who may have agendas and would use a vote in the affi rmative, if a member’s name were attached in that way, to try and discredit a member perhaps or potentially misconstrue a member’s position on a particular issue.” (Both roll calls are listed. On both roll calls, A “Yes” vote is for the amendment. A “No” vote is against it.) Rep. Jessica Giannino No/No Rep. Donald Wong Yes/Yes EXTEND THE EMERGENCY RULES FOR COVID-19 (H 3929) House 130-30, approved a mea~ HELP WANTED ~ Bilingual Italian or Spanish speaking woman wanted for senior citizen. Light housekeeping, preparing dinner. Salary Negotiable. Call 617-387-4444 Hours: 12:00 - 4:00 PM n sure that would extend until October 1, 2021, the emergency rules under which the House has been operating since the COVID-19 pandemic began more than a year ago. There was no debate on the proposal. House Speaker Ron Mariano (D-Quincy) told reporters his team wanted to keep temporary rules in place “until we were sure the pandemic was over.” “The House of Representatives has been operating under emergency rules throughout the COVID-19 pandemic in response to the many public health and safety issues surrounding the coronavirus, and those temporary rules should be allowed to expire as planned on July 15,” Rep. Brad Jones told Beacon Hill Roll Call. “Now that more than four million Massachusetts residents are fully vaccinated, and the rest of the state has opened up, I cannot see any valid reason why the House should continue to operate under a different standard than the rest of the commonwealth.” (A “Yes” vote is for extending the emergency rules. A “No” vote is against the extension). Rep. Jessica Giannino Yes Rep. Donald Wong No HOW LONG WAS LAST WEEK’S SESSION? Beacon Hill Roll Call tracks the length of time that the House and Senate were in session each week. Many legislators say that legislative sessions are only one aspect of the Legislature’s job and that a lot of important work is done outside of the House and Senate chambers. They note that their jobs also involve committee work, research, constituent work and other matters that are important to their districts. Critics say that the Legislature does not meet regularly or long enough to debate and vote in public view on the thousands of pieces of legislation that have been fi led. They note that the infrequency and brief length of sessions are misguided and lead to irresponsible late-night sessions and a mad rush to act on dozens of bills in the days immediately preceding the end of an annual session. During the week of July 5-9, the House met for a total of 15 hours and 45 minutes while the Senate met for a total of three hours and 19 minutes, Mon. July 5 No House session No Senate session Tues. July 6 House 11:02 a.m. to 1:21 p.m. Senate 11:21 a.m. to 11:26 a.m. Wed. July 7 House 11:00 a.m. to 6:40 p.m. No Senate session Thurs. July 8 House 11:00 a.m. to 1:39 p.m. Senate 1:16 p.m. to 1:34 p.m. Fri. July 9 House 1:01 p.m. to 4:08 p.m. Senate 1:16 p.m. to 4:12 p.m. Bob Katzen welcomes feedback at bob@beaconhillrollcall.com
22 Publizr Home