February 12, 2015

Mid-year cuts to State budget “Doubly Devastating” says CLA leader Faye Rachlin

Massachusetts House passes Gov. Charlie Baker’s budget fix without debate

[[{\”type\”:\”media\”,\”view_mode\”:\”media_large\”,\”fid\”:\”307\”,\”attributes\”:{\”alt\”:\”\”,\”class\”:\”media-image\”,\”height\”:\”360\”,\”typeof\”:\”foaf:Image\”,\”width\”:\”480\”}}]]

By Shira Schoenberg | sschoenberg@repub.com 
Follow on Twitter 

on February 11, 2015 at 4:42 PM, updated February 11, 2015 at 4:49 PM

BOSTON — With no debate, the Democratic-controlled Massachusetts House on Wednesday voted 153 to 1 to adopt a bill filling a budget gap for fiscal year 2015.

The bill, drafted by the House Ways and Means Committee, made few changes to a plan proposed by Gov. Charlie Baker, a Republican.

\”We as a committee felt that it was very important to act quickly on this recommendation,\” said Rep. Brian Dempsey, D-Haverhill, chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means. \”The longer we wait to make any kind of adjustment, the more difficult and challenging it becomes.\”

The bill will now go to the Senate Committee on Ways and Means.

State Sen. Karen Spilka, D-Ashland, who chairs the Senate Committee on Ways and Means, could not immediately be reached. The Senate plans to take up the bill on Thursday.

Baker last week proposed a mix of spending cuts and new revenue to close a mid-year budget gap pegged at $768 million. Most of the new revenues – $179 million – and some of the spending cuts – $103 million – require legislative approval.

The biggest difference between the House bill and Baker’s proposal is the House removed language that Baker requested that would have given the Executive Office of Health and Human Services the unilateral authority to restructure MassHealth benefits to the extent allowed by federal law. Advocates representing seniors, health care workers and others opposed the change out of concern that it will lead to reductions in MassHealth benefits.

The House also restored $10 million in proposed cuts to county sheriffs and $2 million for public defenders, both accounts that are already running deficits.

Other than that, the bill does everything Baker wanted it to – it allows for the use of $131 million in excess capital gains tax money to fill the budget gap; creates a one-time corporate tax amnesty program; and cuts $40 million in transportation funding and another approximately $40 million from non-executive branch agencies. The Legislature itself will take a $1.79 million cut.

Baker, in a statement, thanked House Speaker Robert DeLeo, D-Winthrop, and the House for acting quickly on his plan. \”We look forward to swift action by members of the Senate and to working closely with both houses in the future on a commitment to craft a fiscally responsible and sustainable budget plan for next year that continues to protect local aid and Massachusetts taxpayers,\” Baker said.

There were seven amendments that individual House members were going to propose. But after meeting in a closed-door Democratic caucus, members pulled all of those amendments, and none of them came up on the House floor.

Rep. William \”Smitty\” Pignatelli, D-Lenox, said DeLeo told Democrats that he wants to keep the bill \”as simple and straightforward as possible.\”

\”We have to deal with this, and we can’t be piling money back on,\” Pignatelli said. \”The money’s not there.\”

Pignatelli said House members recognize that there is a major budget gap and there are no easy solutions.

The only House member to vote against the bill was Rep. Denise Provost, D-Somerville.

House Minority Leader Bradley Jones, R-North Reading, said House members became convinced that Baker’s solution \”was reasonable and balanced and appropriate and necessary.\”

Dempsey said during remarks on the House floor that lawmakers looked for alternative ways to fill the gap, but the only possible solution was to take money from the state’s rainy day fund, which could hurt Massachusetts’ bond rating. Dempsey said even with the cuts, most agencies remain funded at levels above fiscal year 2014.

\”None of these are necessarily desirable, but it is necessary, because the alternative to not going forward with the governor’s proposal is to dip into that rainy day fund, which is so important to the bond rating agencies,\” Dempsey said.

Many of the cuts Baker made – a large number of which he was able to do without legislative approval – were from programs that have not yet started or positions that are unfilled.

But some advocates are still upset by the cuts. The Massachusetts Legal Assistance Corporation is lobbying the Legislature not to adopt a $268,500 cut to civil legal services for low-income people. The 1.8 percent reduction is in line with the reductions throughout state government. The programs funded by the corporation provide free legal aid to poor people in civil disputes such as eviction, child custody cases and denial of federal benefits.

Faye Rachlin, deputy director of Community Legal Aid, which provides civil legal aid to western and central Massachusetts, said the cut would amount to $75,000 from her agency’s $7.5 million budget. Rachlin said the organization already took a hit in recent years since its other source of funding – interest on money held in escrow by lawyers – decreased when interest rates dropped during the recession.

\”Any cut in our funding is doubly devastating because we lost other funding during the recession,\” Rachlin said. \”We’re hoping to climb out of where the recession put us.\”

Rachlin said the cut would upset the organization’s balanced budget. \”Cuts translate to less staff and less service to poor people and elderly people throughout the state,\” she said.

An amendment by Rep. Ruth Balser, D-Newton, to restore funding for civil legal aid was among those that were pulled.