1. State House outrage continues: In unconstitutional "informal session" three state reps meet and pass $443 million spending bill!

Your rights are being taken away.

While the Tea Party movement has been distracted by the corrupt spending habits of Obama and Congress, the Massachusetts Legislature is using a blatantly unconstitutional tactic to push through a mammoth spending bill which diverts federal money for obvious unintended purposes.

On Monday morning the Massachusetts House of Representatives - meeting illegally with just THREE members - passed a huge and controversial $443 million spending bill. The bill uses federal Medicaid money intended as "matching funds for State expenditures for assistance payments for certain social services, and State medical and medical insurance expenditures" - to also pay for pay raises for state employees and nearly half of it to go into the state's general slush fund. The used the so-called "informal session" process (see below) a clearly unconstitutional method of bypassing the proper legislative process.

(The bill includes a provision to divert $11.5 million from the state's new sales tax on alcoholic beverages for a fund that the Commission on Gay Lesbian Bisexual and Transgender Youth could draw from for their homosexual / transgender programs in public schools!)

Appallingly, this was done with the collaboration of both the Democrat and Republican leadership. And as with the Obama bills in Washington, the Boston media is willfully ignoring the unconstitutional nature of the move and is applauding the Legislature for "moving forward."

The biggest high-crime zone in Boston!

One legislator bravely tried to block it, but got rolled over

In that entire building only one legislator, Rep. Karyn Polito (R-Shrewsbury, who is also the Republican candidate for State Treasurer), has been attempting to stop it and force the Legislature to do the right thing.

All last week Polito literally camped out in the House chambers to stop their efforts. On Friday she spent 10 hours in the House chambers. For her efforts, she was chided by the Boston newspapers for being "obstructionist."

Rep. Karyn Polito standing gruard outside the State House!

But as Polito told the press last week,

"A bill of this magnitude should be debated, discussed, and amendable," she said. "Instead, they are pushing this through in a manner that is typical of Beacon Hill culture here. And I am not going to be a rubberstamp for it."

But this morning, the House passed the bill in a 3-member "informal session" almost gaveling it at 10 a.m. and before Polito arrived for the session. At 10:02 am Polito (delayed by traffic) sprinted into the chamber, but was too late.

As State House News reported:

The bill cleared the House with three members present. Rep. Paul Donato (D-Medford) was presiding and Reps. Bradford Hill (R-Ipswich) and Vincent Pedone (D-Worcester) were present. . . . After voting to engross the bill, House leaders moved reconsideration and called that in the negative, effectively preventing any bid for Polito to ask that the vote be reconsidered.

Rep. Brad Hill (R-Ipswich) -- RINO Republican extraordinaire.

Polito's reaction to the sleazy move:

"It shows the deep dysfunction on Beacon Hill," Polito told State House News after the vote. "I have stood up for the taxpayers for a week objecting to this high level of spending in an informal session. The bill contains numerous outside sections, pay raises that are clearly beyond the scope of an informal matter. I asked for debate, I asked for an amendment process, I asked for a roll call, I asked for compromise, and clearly Beacon Hill leadership is not as interested as watching out for taxpayers as I am."

Unbelievable arrogance by elected officials

Even in an election year just weeks before the election, their arrogance is hard to believe. It now goes on to a Senate "informal session" which will happen any day now. After that, the Governor will likely sign it immediately.

The bill in question, bill H5028, would spend parts of recently allocated Federal Medical Assistance Percentages (FMAP) money on pay raises for college professors and sheriff's office employees, and for State Police, and dump $195 million into the states so-called "rainy day" slush fund for future general use.

Is this the way that Congress intends FMAP money to be used?

Massachusetts has arguably among the most corrupt legislatures in America. Even the "good" politicians become part of the problem. This use of unconstitutional "informal sessions" of the Legislature to push through controversial bills is an insult to every citizen in Massachusetts, and has been going on for many years.

The local press cheerng on the process

The Boston Globe and Boston Herald have been basically cheerleaders for pushing bill H5028 through as fast as possible, ignoring the legality of the process. Their articles portrayed Notice the cry that if this money isn't spent, then "State Police gang and drug units are at risk and disabled children are not receiving needed services."

But if these expenditures are so critical, why weren't they included the main state budget? This FMAP money was not guaranteed. Also, some news reports refer to it as simply "stimulus money" rather than Medicaid funding, which is more accurate.

     Boston Globe (9/30): Mass. GOP Rep. again blocks $400M spending bill

     Boston Herald (10/1): Editorial: Stand up and be counted

     Boston Globe (10/2): Polito works to stall $400m bill, drawing criticism

Bill goes on to the Senate . . .

This bill has now gone to the Senate informal session. In Tuesday morning's Senate informal session (seven Sanators attending)  it was temporarily postponed. But it is expected to "pass" by the end of the week and be signed by the Governor! (Unless it can be stopped -- see below.)

2. "Informal sessions" -- an unconstitutional sham on citizens.

It begs the eternal question: Do only corrupt people run for the Legislature? Or do they become corrupt when they get there?

The Massachusetts Constitution specifically requires a majority of the House or Senate to conduct business.

Article XXXIII. A majority of the members of each branch of the general court shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business, but a less number may adjourn from day to day, and compel the attendance of absent members. All the provisions of the existing constitution inconsistent with the provisions herein contained are hereby annulled.

This is not difficult math. The House has 160 members, so you need 81 House members to conduct business. The Senate has 40 members, so you need 21 Senators to conduct business legally.

But when it suits them, the Legislature simply ignores that requirement and meets with as few as two members in the chamber. They then proceed to pass laws with a "gentleman's agreement" that no one present will ask for a quorum count, so they pretend there is a quorum. They call these "informal sessions" and carry on as if they were legitimate. The elected officials and media all play along with this.

Legislators love "informal sessions"

Massachusetts legislators love informal sessions because:

(1) They can pass pet bills and controversial bills that otherwise would get stalled if the entire Legislature looked them over.

(2) They push things through quickly and avoid dealing with amendments and uncomfortable debate.

(3) They can avoid having their votes recorded since there are no roll call votes in informal sessions (any recorded votes would reveal there was no quorum).

(4) They're lazy. The majority of legislators who aren't interested in the particular bills that day don't have to show up, and no one back home knows they've been skipping votes.

As part of the "gentleman's agreement", if a House or Senate member wants to stop an informal session, he just stands and says "I doubt the presence of a quorum" and the meeting is gaveled to an end. In other words, the Legislature understands that informal sessions are technically illegal. This happens rarely because it's considered "not going along." It's what Rep. Karyn Polito did all last week (see above) and it made them pretty upset.

In addition, the Legislature exempts itself from the state's Open Meeting Laws. Unlike every other public body in Massachusetts, the public is banned from taking photos or videos of the Legislature in session. Thus, to study the "informal sessions" you have to go there yourself and take notes.

A sleazy way of doing the people's business

Besides the fact that it's a corrupt way to legislate, the obvious problems with this include:

• The constitution doesn't allow for pretend quorums. There must be an ACTUAL quorum.
   
• Even corporations are required to record attendees of board meetings. Who ever heard of an official body meeting without recording the names of the members present?
   
• Would they hold up to a court challenge? They are compromising the entire legislative process. Are these laws actually legal if the Governor signs them?

But in fact, far more bills are "passed" this way by the Massachusetts Legislature than through legitimate means.

It's actually done quite openly with the kind of shameless chutzpah one sees in Massachusetts. These "informal sessions" they are actually scheduled and publicized in advance in State House News. There are several of them every month. You can go and watch them from the visitors' balcony, though of course unlike legal sessions they're not televised (and all photos and videos of the proceedings are prohibited).

Examples of abuses using "informal sessions"

As we said, few people are aware that far more bills are passed into "law" through informal sessions than through lawful, legitimate means. Many such bills are include pet projects for state legislators, special favors to benefit a particular person or state employee, and requests from a city or town. Others are controversial or unpopular bills that could not get through the normal process - thus bypassing debate, amendments, roll calls, and public scrutiny.

Just a few (of many) examples of controversial bills that became law via informal sessions:

• In late 2008 the legislature passed a law via informal sessions (including a Senate session with just two Senators) on breastfeeding in public which imposes a $500 fine for criticizing a woman breastfeeding in public. The bill had stalled in normal sessions. It's now state law.
   
• The "Move Over Law" was passed by two Senators and six Representatives in December, 2008. It imposes a $100 fine for not moving over if there's an emergency vehicle on the side of the road. It's a poorly written law and as a result a high percentage of cases have been thrown out of court by judges. It was rushed through informal sessions after proponents weren't able to get it passed normally.

There's at least one every week. Most informal sessions are more mundane, but still very problematic. Here's from a recent State News Report of the Senate's Sept. 2 informal session where three senators were passing laws:

SENATE SESSION - THURSDAY, SEPT. 2, 2010

CONVENES: The Senate convened at 11:09 a.m., Sen. Ken Donnelly presiding and Sens. Fargo and Hedlund attending. Members and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance.

RESOLUTIONS: The Senate adopted resolutions filed by Sens. Fargo and Spilka.

PETITION REFERRAL: The Senate referred a Moore, Tarr, Binienda and Peterson petition regarding marine vessels to the Transportation Committee.

SICK LEAVE BANK: The Senate adopted a Ways and Means substitute amendment to H 4575 establishing a sick leave bank for Meridyth L. Reith, an employee of the Department of Environment Protection and ordered the bill as amended to third reading, then engrossed it.

BILLERICA CIVIL SERVICE: The Senate ordered to third reading and engrossed H 4391 exempting certain clerical positions from the civil service law in the town of Billerica.

MILFORD ALCOHOL: The Senate ordered to third reading and engrossed H 4937 to authorize the town of Milford to grant a license for the sale of all alcoholic beverages not to be drunk on the premises

Obviously our legislators are too lazy to be bothered with most of the business we elected them to attend to, and are willing to let others push their bills through unchallenged.

As we are seeing, the scary part is that this illegal practice is also used to pass hugely important bills. It MUST be stopped.
 

3. Media, public officials, all in the tank on informal sessions.

Everybody goes along. It's an eerie kind of conspiracy against the public,  bolstering of the longstanding repution of corruption in Massachusetts politics.

Last year, soon after the "Move Over" law was passed in informal sessions, MassResistance went up and down the halls and pressed the media, public officials, and others about whether informal sessions are legal and constitutional.

As we last year, here are some of the answers we got:

• Legislators. We had already asked a number of legislators who told us, basically, that they thought it was legal (but couldn't demonstrate exactly how). Scott Brown - then a state senator - told us that since the House and Senate rules allowed it, it must be legal, despite our observations of what the Constitution says.
   
• House and Senate Clerks' offices.  We went to the Senate Clerk's office. We were told repeatedly that "the Senate assumes there's a quorum unless somebody asks for a count." At the House Clerk's office we were told that "that's just the way they've done things." None of them would address the constitutional issue.
   
• News reporters covering the State House. The head of the Boston Globe State House bureau also told us that "it's just the way they do things." He didn't claim that we were wrong, but was not interested in pursuing it further. State House News Service had no explanation, they said. The Associated Press reporter told us that the Legislature can rescind rules when they want to. When we informed him that they can't rescind the Constitution, he just stared blankly and walked away.
  
  Finally, we asked Hillary Chabot of the Boston Herald State House bureau. She seemed mildly interested, but was leaving for the Obama Inauguration. She said she might look into it when she got back. (She never did.)
   
• Lawyers, etc. We've talked to lots of lawyers and even a constitutional law professor. All of them basically agreed that we were right - but none of them are willing to say anything publicly.

It's time for the people to take this into their own hands. (What is the Tea Party all about? Upholding the Constitution!)

4. You can take action NOW to help stop this!

Are you angry enough yet? People must demand that this be stopped immediately and the constitution be upheld. We're not in the mood for waiting months while a liberal, activist court mulls it over or while the state attorneys ponder what's politically expedient. It's time for the people to take action.


HERE ARE SOME THINGS YOU CAN DO RIGHT NOW:


1. The first step is that this must finally be be brought out in the open. Call the media and demand that they report the truth - that "informal sessions" are unconstitutional and illegal. The media is fairly insulated and don't hear from the public enough. It's time they did. Don't take no for an answer. The code of silence on this must stop.

   State House News: 617-722-2439   news@statehousenews.com

   Boston Globe city desk: 617-929-3100   localnews@globe.com

   Boston Herald city desk: 1-800-759-2489  citydesk@bostonherald.com

   Associated Press:  617-357-8100  apboston@ap.org

Also call as many Boston radio talk shows as you can. (We tried to get WRKO host Tom Finneran - former Speaker of the House - to comment on this, but their screener wouldn't allow the subject to be discussed. Maybe you'll have better luck!)


2. The second step is that legislators must feel the pressure to stop this immediately. Call your Mass. State Senator (right away!) and State Representative and tell them NOT to allow the Medicaid bill (or any bill) to be passed in an "informal session". Even one legislator can stop them by demanding a quorum count.

     Contact info for Mass. State Senators

     Contact info Mass. State Representatives

     Find out who is your state senator and state rep


3. The third step is to make sure that good candidates for office pledge not to ever allow this.
Demand that candidates for state senator and state representative candidates running in the Nov. 2 general election pledge not to allow any informal sessions. We intend to publish a list of state candidates who have made this pledge.

(If you can, please let us know how things go!)

Good people must stop this!

Donate to MassResistance!
Our funding comes from people like you
Better yet - become a monthly donor (email us back to get set up)!

Donations can also be mailed to: MassResistance, PO Box 1612, Waltham, MA 02454
ALL donations are confidential. MassResistance does not sell or lend any of its lists.

Contact us if you want to get involved.

Also, check out the MassResistance blog (for even more in-depth coverage)!