There were no roll calls in the House or Senate last week.
Beacon Hill Roll Call records local senators’ votes on roll calls pertaining to the Senate version of the state’s $46 billion fiscal year 2021 budget. The House and Senate approved different versions of the budget and a conference committee is working out a compromise version that will eventually be sent to Gov. Charlie Baker.
The Senate, 39 to 0, approved an amendment that would allow low-income applicants and recipients of MassHealth and the Medicare Savings Program to initiate an application for federally-funded SNAP benefits (formerly known as food stamps) at the same time as their application or renewal for MassHealth or the Medicare Savings Program.
Amendment supporters said the goal is to close the “SNAP Gap” and help some 740,000 people on MassHealth who are likely eligible for SNAP but are not taking advantage of it.
“Creating a SNAP/MassHealth common application is a simple and effective way to connect thousands of eligible children, families and seniors with food assistance that they desperately need during these trying times,” said the amendment’s sponsor Sen. Sal DiDomenico, D-Everett. “I am very proud to have bipartisan support from my colleagues on this amendment to help fight hunger here in Massachusetts.”
A “Yes” vote is for the amendment.
Sen. Joanne Comerford — Yes
Sen. Anne Gobi — Yes
Sen. Adam Hinds — Yes
The Senate, 39 to 0, approved an amendment designed to protect tenants during the COVID-19 pandemic. The amendment seals eviction records for defendants in eviction proceedings for non-payment of rent due to the pandemic when the case does not result in a judgment against the defendant or a defendant has made a good faith effort to come to a reasonable agreement.
Other provisions protect tenants’ creditworthiness by prohibiting landlords from providing information related to nonpayment of rent due to COVID-19 to credit reporting agencies; minimize processing and waiting times for applicants for the Residential Assistance for Families in Transition (RAFT) program, which provides short-term financial assistance to low-income families who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless; and create a task force to monitor the implementation of the administration’s COVID-19 Eviction Diversion Initiative and to make policy recommendations whenever necessary.
“The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated housing insecurity,” said Sen. Brendan Crighton, D-Lynn, the sponsor of the amendment. “We are in the middle of a public health and economic crisis that is impacting thousands across the commonwealth. This amendment further strengthens the comprehensive approach taken by the Senate to address housing-related challenges. Protecting vulnerable tenants’ eviction records and credit reports will help ensure that their prospects of obtaining future housing are not jeopardized by this pandemic.”
A “Yes” vote is for the amendment.
Sen. Joanne Comerford — Yes
Sen. Anne Gobi — Yes
Sen. Adam Hinds — Yes
The Senate, 5 to 35, rejected an amendment that would replace a provision, later approved, that would allow abortions after 24 weeks in the case of lethal fetal anomalies and would lower the age from 18 to 16 at which a minor can choose to have an abortion without parental or judicial consent. The amendment would still allow abortions after 24 weeks in the case of lethal fetal anomalies but would keep 18 as the age at which a minor can choose to have an abortion without parental or judicial consent.
“I filed this amendment to find common ground on an incredibly personal and emotional issue,” said the amendment’s sponsor Sen. Patrick O’Connor, R-Weymouth. “I knew trying to find compromise would be an uphill battle, but I wanted to make sure I was on record for the elements of the bill that I felt were appropriate and others, particularly the elimination of parental consent, that I did not support.”
“One of the key components of the (bill) is to remove obstacles for women to access reproductive health services, including abortion,” said Sen. Cindy Creem, D-Newton. “I voted against the amendment … because it placed an undue burden on young women, by requiring judicial consent for a decision that is properly made by the woman herself — in consultation with medical professionals, not lawyers or judges.”
A “Yes” vote favors 18 as the age of consent at which a minor can choose to have an abortion without parental or judicial consent. A “No” vote is for lowering the age to 16.
Sen. Joanne Comerford — No
Sen. Anne Gobi — No
Sen. Adam Hinds — No
Several tax-related bills were shipped off to a study committee where bills are never actually studied and are essentially defeated. It is another way to kill a bill instead of holding a vote on the bill itself. Here are some of the bills that will die in study:
This proposed bill would have doubled the excise tax on beer, alcohol and wine, and use the revenue to create a comprehensive Substance Use Treatment Fund under the state Department of Public Health.
“Massachusetts has one of the lowest alcohol taxes in the nation, and because excise taxes erode with inflation, their value is 40 percent less than in 1979, when they were last adjusted,” said the bill’s sponsor Rep. Kay Khan, D-Newton, who plans to refile the bill next year. “Through this legislation, the commonwealth would be able to provide significant assistance in paying for substance use treatment and prevention programs that we literally cannot afford to shortchange.”
This bill would enact a tax deduction for the school fees that parents must often pay for their public school children, as well as for trash pick-up and disposal fees.
Supporters said most public schools levy a variety of fees on their students, including fees to park vehicles in school lots, to enroll in full-day kindergarten, to ride the school bus, to participate in after-school sports and to join clubs and other extracurricular activities.
“(The bill) was originally filed in response to a number of parents who approached me with their concerns about the high costs associated with having their children participate in certain after-school activities or to ride the school bus,” said the measure’s sponsor Rep. Dave Linsky, D-Natick. “This legislation will benefit those who need it most — the middle class. It is my belief that the burden of all of these fees defeats the purpose of a well-rounded public school education and widens the divide between affluent and less affluent parents. Particularly at a time when many of these fees escalate on a yearly basis, the relief that this bill would provide to families is increasingly pressing.”
The proposed bill would repeal a current state law that sets a tax revenue growth limit for each fiscal year that is calculated based on the growth in total wages and salaries of the state’s residents. That law would be replaced with a new one that would establish a state expenditure growth limit for each fiscal year that would be calculated based on the growth in inflation under the Consumer Price Index and the percentage change in Massachusetts’ population. If tax revenues exceed expenditures, the excess revenue would be put in a temporary holding fund and any balance remaining in the fund at the end of the fiscal year would be refunded to taxpayers. If expenditures exceed tax revenues, the excess expenditures would be reduced until they no longer exceed the revenue.
Republican Minority Leader Brad Jones, R-North Reading, said he intends to refile his bill in the 2021 session.
“(This) is a taxpayer-friendly bill that would establish fiscally sound parameters for state expenditure growth to help ensure the commonwealth is spending tax dollars responsibly,” Jones said. “While I’m disappointed the bill was placed in a study order, I understand why the committee might be reluctant to move forward with the proposed changes at this time, given the continued fiscal uncertainty created by the global COVID-19 pandemic.”
Under this bill, protective facial coverings, including face shields and masks, would be exempt from the state’s 6.25 percent sales tax.
“This bill would exempt non-medical facial coverings from our state sales tax, as we already do for clothing, including scarves and bandanas,” said the bill’s sponsor Rep. Josh Cutler, D-Duxbury. “In addition to reducing the cost to the consumer, this will encourage the growing cottage industry of non-medical mask makers. We don’t want local crafters to run afoul of the tax collector or be discouraged from making more masks.”
Cutler said he intends to refile the bill next year.
These three bills were filed by Rep. Jack Lewis, D-Framingham. The first (H 2534) would exempt seniors over 65 who are at or below the federal poverty guideline income of $12,760 from the motor vehicle excise tax. The second one (H 2533) would exempt veterans with an income of less than $12,760 from the same excise tax. The third would allow cities and towns to create a property tax cap for seniors over 65 if their single income is $50,000 or less or their married income is $60,000 or less, and if they have assets of $75,000 or less not including the primary residence and one motor vehicle registered to the applicant.
Rep. Lewis did not respond to repeated attempts by Beacon Hill Roll Call asking him to comment on each bill and indicate whether he plans to file them again next year.