Comments on: Final Action on 2010 Budget

By: Jim Lenkauskas

Jim Lenkauskas — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:39:55 +0000

Term Limits would be great, But don’t hold your breathe. You see the Legislature would NEVER aprove it, and even if it was put on the ballot they would ignore the results. They pass legislation in the wee hours of the night that exempt them from any kind of accountablility to the tax payer. The Gov in this state is an empty suite, Not just Deval but any of the previous Rep Gov because Beacon Hill has a veto proof majority and Until the Massachusetts tax payers wake up and vote to restore equilibrium we are at there mercy.

By: Bradford Pratt

Bradford Pratt — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:26:01 +0000

I agree with Spencer. This speaks to the big Govt small Govt debate. Everyone in the real world is being told to do more with less but in the unreal world of politics they make token and veiled changes that do not add up to much so they can keep the cushy gig. Two words: term limits!

By: Will Brownsberger

Will Brownsberger — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 11:50:41 +0000

For the latest twist, see today's Globe. The Governor kept his veto low profile -- releasing it late on Friday and not posting the details in any convenient location on his website. Here's a link to the veto message (obtained in hard copy form from the clerk's office) -- can't quarrel with some of the vetos, but especially disappointed to see the cuts to housing and elder care.

By: Spencer Robinson

Spencer Robinson — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 23:43:08 +0000

Re: Rep Kaufman-you must be kidding me! He’s a committee chair and that entitles him to hire 4 more staff members in addition to his own financial stipend? Has it been that long since you’ve worked in the real world? Who in the private sector hasn’t spear headed projects and committees without expectation of 4 hires and a pay increase to boot? You guys kill me. You feign empathy, vote self interest and think nobody is watching you do it.

By: Will Brownsberger

Will Brownsberger — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 16:27:50 +0000

Rep. Kauffman is a committee chair. I think that the overall course of action this spring outlined in the series of pieces under http://willbrownsberger.com/index.php/archives/category/reform-budget represents real change. And the legislature’s budget is down considerably. I’ll see what information I can get on how that translates into headcount.

By: Spencer Robinson

Spencer Robinson — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 12:32:45 +0000

I think you would agree you are responsible for your vote. You voted to restore funding to House, the Senate and the Trial Court to avoid layoffs. What is the criteria you used to make that decision? If you are able to conduct your daily business with the assistance of a single aide, doesn’t it make sense to ask the question: “Does Rep. Kaufman require a staff of 5 which costs the taxpayers an estimated $234,000 per year in payroll and benefits?” There has been much rhetoric about “shared sacrifice” and “reform” but once again the actions of our elected officials speak to patronage and business as usual.

By: Will Brownsberger

Will Brownsberger — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 03:14:40 +0000

I have a very good knowledge of the part I personally manage! I have exactly one aide who makes in the low 30s and is worth several times that.

By: Spencer Robinson

Spencer Robinson — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 16:24:34 +0000

I am not satisfied with your response. Detailed answers to my questions would indicate you have a good knowledge of what your department’s personnel expenses are. Pardon my analogy but this is akin to a business operator being unable to tell me how many people he has employed. Our state government should be shedding payroll expense before making cuts to programs considered worthwhile by your constituents (see elder services blog above).

By: Will Brownsberger

Will Brownsberger — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 10:19:52 +0000

Fair questions, Spencer. I have not seen answers to them myself. However, I can report that even with the additional money in the supp budget, planned expenditures for the operations of the House in 2010 are down 23% from 2009 and are actually down 6% from 2006.

By: Will Brownsberger

Will Brownsberger — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 10:02:53 +0000

Even though I advocated for additional elder services spending, I don’t feel that it is remotely fair to suggest that seniors were treated as a low priority. We are spending roughly $300 million on elder services and $2 billion on elder health care. By contrast, the zoos, even after this restoration, are receiving only $5 million, a 30% cut from last year, with a mandate to achieve even greater independence in future years. Besides, senior citizens go to the zoo too!

By: Spencer Robinson

Spencer Robinson — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 08:18:34 +0000

I noticed many of the line items in the supplementary budget were to restore funding to avoid employee layoffs. Of particular interest to me was line item 0000-9600 which funds the operations of the House of Representatives ($1mil). How many staffers have been laid off? What is the head count of administrative personnel associated with the House of Reps operation?

By: Mary Cummings

Mary Cummings — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 02:57:03 +0000

I do care about animals and I don’t know what their fates would be without the $2.5 million but I am more concerned about our elderly citizens. Can you explain how they fell below the zoos on the priority list?