2021-10-19 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight
2021-10-19 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
I just came from an event offshore wind in my district
so longer than what I thought. Can everybody hear me Right.
Mhm. Good morning and welcome to the Joint Committee on State administration and the regulatory oversights virtual hearing. The committee will recovering bills concerning business regulations, ethics, labor, lobbying state agencies, another missile indians bill. So there's a39 bunch of sort of areas of the bills cover today
1st. Let me welcome the members of the committee from the house side of the Senate side
and a few housekeeping items. First we ask that if you are not speaking, spice yourself on mute and check to draw muted Since everyone will be muted. Please remember 20 yourself you are testifying 2nd. Everyone who signed up will have an opportunity to speak. We ask that you please limit your testimony three minutes and so we can we can size and tried to stay within. He asked one of minutes for your testimony. We would like you to have your your electronic copy of your testimony submitted to us. Mhm. So you you can do it today until I believe friday of this week.
Lastly don't forget that this this111 hearing is live this area on the legislature's website. So if you don't want anybody to hear what
I'll see what you are doing. Make sure what you mute shut down the video. I think when you129 need to.
Mhm. Yeah. Going to begin to testimony with constitutional officers and housing senior members as a sign by order.
I see. So we have signed150 up. We don't have any constitutional officers signed up. So we have we're going to begin with senator back senator Rush Rush Good chair,
Which that's the final bill. Senate 21 10.
Thank you so much. Chair. Pacheco Chair. Cabral Excuse me, Good morning to chair. Pacheco if he175 is here? I don't see um uh and fellow members of the Joint Committee on State Administration and regulatory oversight. Can you hear me? Thank you. I muted
I'm seeing thumbs up from some people and nothing from uh That's that's something fantastic.
Terrific. Um Thank you Mr Chair for taking me out of turn And for the opportunity to testify in support of my bills. Senate 21 10.
Mr. Chair in I volume is down but I don't think it is. Uh I can I can hear you rep Xiarhos is saying you can hear222 me and mr Harrison Mr Chair, can you hear me now? You know Mr Chair, I think the issue might be on your end.
Mhm. Uh Folks give us one second. Yes, I can hear the senator to Mr Chairman, we'll come back to you senator but for some reason we can argue
we go to represent sorrows.
Mhm.
Good morning. Mr Chairman. Can you hear me? Let me see
fun God.
All right, okay. Can you hear us now? Chair. So system you think it's on my on my on my side. Yeah because we can we can handle,
can you hear me? You can hear you but you can't hear us.
Well, that's a good question. How am I going to resolve? That must be a new bet thing. We gotta fix this. Maybe try it. Maybe we're talking but he can't actually hear us. Yeah,301 that is correct. I cannot hear you for some reason, so it might be on my side our I'm going to give me a minute or so. I'm gonna sort of uh log out and try to log back and see if that doesn't. Okay, thank you sir.
Mhm.
Mhm. Yeah,
senator,
can you hear me now sir? I can hear you now. Great, terrific.
Fantastic. Look, technology is interesting, isn't it? Well, hopefully someday soon we will be able to get back to doing these in person safely.
But yes teams can be a challenge teams can be a challenge. Just leave it at that. Okay. Indeed, I will head back to the top uh if it pleases the chair. Yes please.
[SEN RAUSCH:] [SB2110] [HB3202] Fantastic, Good morning, Chair, Cabral uh and to chair Pacheco if he is here. Um and fellow members401 of the Joint Committee on State Administration and regulatory oversight. Thank you for taking me out of turn this morning and for the opportunity to testify in support of my bill410 Senate 21 10 and act closing a loophole in the lobbying law and its House counterpart, House 32 02 filed by representative Minicucci colleagues, we know through our work that professional lobbyists must register with the secretary of the commonwealth and abide by rules designed to uphold the integrity of our legislative process. One of these rules are quite important. One at that says that if a person has been convicted of certain crimes of political corruption, that person is automatically disqualified from registering as a lobbyist442 for a period of 10 years.
These political corruption crimes include bribing officials taking bribes as an official and criminal campaign finance violations, lobbying rules and restrictions like456 the corruption conviction Cool off period I just described exist both to protect the integrity of the legislative process and maintain public confidence in government. Imagine how this confidence would be shaken if someone convicted of graft and bribery turned around and got paid to lobby their former colleagues, our constituents would rightly lose faith in this institution. The problem is this the law on our books arguably applies only to violations of state crimes of political corruption, not federal ones. Under our current state law, if an elected official takes a bribe or kickback and is convicted by their local D. A, they are barred from registering to lobby for 10 years.
However, if they are prosecuted for the same exact conduct by the Department of Justice. Under federal law, arguably the disqualification rule does not apply. This is particularly problematic because the highest profile prosecutions for political corruption often occur on the federal level, not the state one. The bill before you today fixes this loophole by clarifying that the 10 year corruption conviction cooling off rule applies equally to convictions of federal crimes of political corruption, just as it applies to state convictions remedying this loophole in our state lobbying law will preserve public trust in our institutions and the legislative process. I ask for a favorable report out of this committee to make this simple but incredibly important fix. Thank you very much and I'm happy to answer any questions. Any questions from the members of the committee SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
CNN hearing on. Thank you very much. Senator for your testimony this morning. Thank you MR Chair Well into the next signed up and this representative Xiarhos I can't pronounce your name right to what that that's that's close enough. Good morning to you are originally from New Bedford so I should know this.
[XIARHOS:] [HB3252] I'm a new Bedford born and bred. So it's good to see you. Mr Chairman. It's good to see my colleagues. I see my Marine592 Corps family member Representative Schmidt wearing his eagle globe and anchor. I love that salute to you sir. Thank you for taking me out of turn. Uh this is the bill I602 would like to speak about briefly. It's personal to me. It's a real life matter uh and a lot of people may not be aware of it. So I thank you for listening. It's my honor to be here today to testify in favor of House Bill 3252 of which I am the lead sponsor speaking today as a former deputy Chief of police and623 as someone who has served as a police officer for four decades before earning the title of state representative. I believe deeply that we have shared responsibility to support and protect first responders in our state. That's what this640 bill is all about these days when someone suffers a serious personal setback, it's commonplace for their friends and loved ones to set up a public effort to raise money to support them.
We're all familiar with what they called, go fund me accounts and campaigns and similar efforts and I'm660 sure you all have like me given freely of your own money and time when asked to support close friends in the past. One of the situations where this would make the most common sense is when a first responder, a police officer, firefighter paramedic is seriously injured at work. It's only natural that people would want to support these public servants and help them get back on their feet and help their family pay medical bills and other expenses in times of trouble.
But there's a problem under our existing in massachusetts law, it's a violation of the state ethics code for a public employee to accept money from someone else that's given to them because of their position. That's the situation that faced state trooper massachusetts, state trooper john Lennon and his family about one year ago. Trooper Lenin born and raised in born massachusetts. My district was on patrol and he was shocked by a suspect during a traffic stop in high Diana's here on Cape Card last november about a year ago. He was shocked directly as he approached the vehicle, he instinctively put his hand out to defend himself. The bullet went through his hand and into his chest and thank God he was wearing body armor. Thank God he had troopers come to help him and other police officers.
They rushed him to the hospital thankfully, which was only two blocks away and true for Lenin survived. I just spoke with him. He's been out of work for over a year now his hand, his shooting hand is destroyed. So members of the state police academy classes, classmates, they set up a go fund me page and his name and they raised tens of thousands of dollars to support him. But those efforts were called into question because the effort made obvious reference to his role as a state trooper. To my knowledge. No decision was ever made regarding the799 legality of this effort and others like it. But I would like to remove any shadow of the doubt regarding people's ability to support a first responder and their family.
If they are injured in the line813 of duty, That's the purpose of house bill 3252 it would create a specific and purposeful exemption from the state ethics law for efforts to raise money for first responder who was seriously injured in the line of duty. The bill830 is named in to politicians name Lenin Block in honor of trooper Lenin who was just a young man who now faces the uncertainty of going back to work. That is exactly the sort of activity and charitable spirit we should be promoting and embracing especially these days. And I'm hoping that you will please join me in supporting it. And I respectfully urge the members of the committee to issue a favorable report on this bill. Thank you.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. Uh any questions from the members of the committee
CNN urine in. Thank you very much for your testimony. Thank you. Next. I believe it's Representative Khan884
Okay All about representatives. America europe Hogan
Can you hear me okay? Working great.
[REP UYTERHOEVEN:] [HB3372] Thank you. Thank you. Chair Cabral Chair Pacheco and fellow911 members of the committee um, here and I appreciate the property to testify and taking me out of order today. I'm here to testify For H3372 and act to close travel loophole in the state conflict of interest law and to provide for greater transparency and accountability regarding travel gifts. The problem and the solution provided by this bill is simple massachusetts has strong ethics laws that ban public officials like us from accepting any gifts of substantial value from lobbyists. With the exception of the loophole for lobbyists paid travel. This bill addresses our need for good governance ethics and a strong democracy by ensuring that lobbyists and special interest groups are not able to disproportionately influence elected officials through travel gifts as members of the massachusetts, State Health and State Senate.
We have an absolute honor of serving our constituents each and every day when we were elected, we are making a promise to our constituents. I will fight for you and I will represent your voice970 in the legislature in massachusetts.971 As I stated, we have strong ethics laws because we all agree that legislators should not be engaging in conflict of interest. It is why if we grab lunch, coffee or dinner with any registered lobbyists in massachusetts, whether or not they are personal friend, we must be diligent and make sure that they do not offer a gift worth Greater than $50 in one year, and this includes splitting the bill or something as small as buying a cup of coffee. These laws are in place to protect the integrity of our public institutions by limiting how money influences our politics.
Unfortunately, because of this loophole in the law that allows lobbyists to give gifts in the form of travel to elected officials that are worth sometimes as much as as high as $6,000 per year. This bill does two important things. It prevents let register lobbying groups from paying for elected officials, travel and makes record of travel expenditures to the public, so people we serve no whether they're representative has traveled at the expense of lobbying or special interest groups. It's important to close this travel loophole because it is currently being exercised. Legislators have attended conferences on internet regulations with their travel funded by google and facebook.
They have traveled to meetings about regulating cable tv paid for by cable operators. And legislators have attended conferences on state gambling policy on the dollar of gaming interests. one may argue related legislation would have or would were priorities anyways. But for the sake of our integrity and for ethics, we ought to remove the pressure to return a favor that comes with expensive travel gifts of thousands of dollars. And this is just a few examples of the travel loophole being used by lobbyists to affect our state policy. So I'm honored to serve my constituents in Somerville and I know for a fact that each and every one of you are honored to serve your constituents. Our constituents deserve the very best state legislature and that means making sure1081 that our institutions serve them with a strong ethics and accountability as such. I respectfully urge the committee to favorably report H3372 and I want to thank you all for your time and for hearing my testimony.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you Any questions uh, from the committee members on this particular legislation.
CNN hearing none. Thank you very much for your testimony, appreciate it. Thank you. I believe there are other folks who are going to testify on this same legislation I believe so that uh let me see if Representative Kay khan is on already.
Um,
Representative Khan
my once when twice. I don't see her Mr chair. Well, you will see her. Okay. So we'll, if she does come up, we'll take her at that point in time.
[REP CABRAL:] Um, before we go on for the rest of the1154 testimony on this particular legislation. I think we have a number of folks who have signed up. We have gone through all the legislators or even councillors officers. We have done just a quick clarification. I believe when it comes to gifts from lobbyists, you cannot take not even a cup of coffee. That's my understanding of1178 the present law. So if you go to lunch, you pick up your bill. Well, if you go for coffee, you pick up your coffee. That's my understanding. So you can't split bills either even if it's your friend. Um, so I just wanted to make sure because I thought, uh, it was an implication that we could split the bill. Uh, we can't not even a cup of coffee. Um, so just for clarification on1207 what the existing law right now is on this matter in terms of travel, we can have a discussion about that another time. Uh, because I don't think lobbyists can't pay your travel either.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
So, um, but anyway, we'll continue on with this. We have now signed up
To testify on 30 to 41st person that signed up is Cold Harrison.
[COLE HARRISON:] Uh, thank you. Mr chair, can you hear me? Yes, thank you. I'm Coal Harrison. I'm executive director1246 of massachusetts peace action. We are in favour1250 of the legislation that would have been introduced uh, about closing the loophole on lobbyists paid travel. Um, massachusetts does have strong ethics. I'm sorry. I should introduce my organization.1264 We are a grassroots peace and justice organization, Uh, with 1800 dues paying members in the Commonwealth. We have online reach of 18,000 where the state affiliate of of peace action, which was formed to end nuclear weapons. And we're still working on that as well as to make the US have a more peaceful foreign policy. Um, massachusetts has a strong ethics law, but it doesn't, when it comes to uh lobbyists paid travel.
Um legislators and public officials can take travel paid, paid by lobbyists, they're supposed to disclose it. Um, the disclosure forms are um somewhat difficult to access. So partly the bill calls for these this information to be stored in a online accessible database easily searched so that the public can see with what, what, what travel, what lobbyists paid travel their legislators are taking. And um, we object when legislators and other1333 public officials take gifts of travel and then vote on bills promoted by the same lobby organisations, which has happened multiple times. It's a clear conflict of interest. Uh, and that loophole should be closed. Um, the lobbyists will take legislators or other public officials on a trip. Will show them a good time. They'll put them up in a five star hotel in the beautiful destination and they have the opportunity to form relationships and they thereby gaining unfair influence over public decision making. Uh, so we urge you to support this bill. Thank you Mr Chair. Yeah, thank you. Any questions from the committee members? SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
See you none here and then move on to the next person. I think I took you out of water coal. Okay? It was my own, my own fault, I forgot.1383 No worries. Um,
first person was Eva mostly, uh, Eva,
Eva doesn't look like she's on the last piece action as well. I think she was going to submit in writing. Okay, Jeffrey Klein?
He's teaching up until 11:30 and he was hoping to be caught later. Okay, We'll call the matter. Yeah. Uh, Global Larson
by muted so on mute yourself.
Can you hear me now? Yes, I'm
having trouble that I can't hear.
Oh, I want, you might want to can log off and log on and hopefully you can hear me because I am having no audio at all. Can somebody give me a thumbs up if you can hear me? Thank you very much. I'm going to have to go uh, closed loop here, so to speak or open up. I would say
[NOBLE LARSON:] [HB3240:] Anyway, I'm gonna jump skip ahead a bit. Mr Harrison address some of the issues that I had was going to mention. But anyway, good morning, honourable co chairs and committee members. I thank you for this opportunity to testify in favor of the of H 3240 I believe. Which addresses the issue1484 of travel funded by clients of lobbyists as well as the issues of reporting and transparency. The uh the bill focuses on client funded trips. Now I would like to add that trips that are not funded by clients of lobbyists are quite different and in my view, present no inherent conflict of interest. And these trips constitute the vast majority of trips which legislators report on, which would not be affected by this legislation. Uh the bill also addressed this issue of transparency. The1519 process of checking travel disclosures to see if any travel is paid for by clients of lobbyists who then submit legislation that uh legislators will vote on is exceedingly difficult.
I know because some associates and I have spent many hours over many days trying to determine the incidence of client funded trips is their term, that his clients of lobbyists copies of travel disclosures are maintained officially and1546 at least three different locations. The State Ethics Commission, the Senate clerk's office and the House clerk's office, excuse me finding travel information in the Ethics Commission office. While staff by exceedingly helpful people is painfully slow disclosure information is available in pre computer library fashion in numerous loosely folders. Once the would be researcher identifies documents of interest. A staff member needs to email facsimiles of this information to the researcher moreover? Not all disclosures appear to be reported to the ethics commission staff at the Senate clerk's offices. Also very helpful and willing to provide zip archives of disclosures by email. But the process of transcribing the archive disclosures into a usable format is difficult and tedious. The disclosure is maintained at the house clerk's office, which are quite numerous or in even larger challenge.
Access to these documents is very controlled and an office staff employee must be present at all times, which is understandable as the documents appear to be the originals. A researcher must then transcribe or take photos of the disclosures. The resulting process is exceedingly difficult and time consuming for both researchers and for office staff. In order to qualify for the travel exemption, a legislator must simply assert that the travelling question involves quote an activity which serves the legitimate public purpose. Even in the most favorable light. This qualification stretches the honor system, but the time consuming and cumbersome process to access travel disclosures prevents the necessary transparency. A well organized and searchable online database database that includes all disclosures related to travel as proposed in the bill would much improve transparency and the exclusion of travel funded by clients of lobbyists from the travel exemption would eliminate a significant loophole in lobbying regulation. Thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much. Noble.
Um
Next is Susan Nicholson.
Uh
what will you need to a mute yourself? Okay, great Susan Nicholson, thank you. Can you hear me? Can you hear me? Okay?
[SUSAN NICHOLSON:] [HB3240] Thank you. Chairman, Cabral and members of the committee for the opportunity to speak today on behalf of the bill to close the travel loophole. I want to give you two hypothetical examples to illustrate the problem with the current travel exemption. One suppose the company writes a bill that is very favorable to the company's interests and the hires a lobbyist to influence legislators to advance the bill. When the lobbyist means with the legislator, the lobbyist is actually prevented from handing the legislature a plane ticket worth $2,000 bought with his own funds. And say, here this is for you. I think you'll find the trip very educational and by the way, we hope you'll co sponsor are built. That's strictly forbidden at the moment under the massachusetts conflict of interest1754 law. And for very good reason, state ethics regulations explicitly prohibit legislators from accepting free travel paid for by a lobbyist that is an individual, even if the proposed travel has educational value and might very well serve a legitimate public purpose. I quote from the travel exemption is currently written. An elected official is not prohibited from accepting payment of travel expenses of substantial value provided by any person other than a public agency or a lobbyist.
However, let's vary the example a little bit. Suppose the lobbyists, the individual who's lobbying has already met with the legislator and being an obedient fellow, has refrained from handing out any plane tickets. But suppose this time it's the president of the company that employs the lobbyist who pays a visit to the very same legislator1815 and she offers a legislator the very same trip to be underwritten by the company that both she and the legislature know has written the bill wants the legislature to introduced to introduce and very much wants the bill to pass. Now that second example is perfectly OK under the ethnic commissions travel exemption, but this doesn't make any sense. The two situations present virtually the same risk that the free travel will influence the legislature's judgment regarding the bill, and furthermore, that will be viewed that way by the public, thus undermining the public's confidence and trust. Consequently, if the first example should be1859 prohibited and I think everyone would agree it should be, then the second should also, So the travel exemption in its current form badly needs to be fixed. Enter House 3240.
House 3240 would prohibit prohibit the company paying for the travel. In the second example, as described in that example, the company hires a lobbyist as such. The company would be considered a quote client, a technical term under the mass lobbying law, which applies to a company that hires a client clients are required to file an annual registration statement with the state secretary, So age 30-40 would revise the conflict of interest law to prohibit legislative travel underwritten by organizations registered with the state secretary as clients. If the organization appears on the State Secretary's list for any given year as a client,1916 then that organization cannot underwrite legislative travel. As noble said, our review of most of the large sample of travel disclosures revealed that most trips are taken by legislators are not paid for by clients. So most travel would be unaffected by passage of this1937 bill. But the egregious conflicts of interest that we are concerned about would be prohibited. Thank you.
Okay, thank you. Any questions from the committee members
here and on. CNN Susan, thank you very much for your testimony. I thought1961 the examples you gave for and some clarity to how the law works. Uh, so we appreciate it very much and the clarity is and I think that's important those the general public that following the hearing, the clarity is that you cannot accept anything from any from any lobbyists, regardless of the amount B a cup of coffee. Be1984 a travel ticket. You cannot. That's the clarity. Now, all the other issues uh, should try to highlight interesting. Okay, thank you very much appreciate it
again. No questions. Any questions? No. All right. So, Susan, thank you very much for your time. Your testimony appreciate it very much.
Okay, so let's go back
see if anybody else that have signed up to testify on this bill, if they are now available, that would be, I think coal had mentioned that Jeffrey klein was not available. Right? And also uh sorry to interrupt mr chair, but Representative Khan I see has joined us in the hearing, we're going to take her up next uh and Eva mostly
none of them are available right now. Ok, so let's move on and we do now have firms have Khan I represent. Khan next.
[REP KHAN:] [HB3187] Mhm. Uh thank you. Thank you very much2059 for taking me out of2061 turn. I want to thank you Chair Cabral and chair. Pacheco and distinguished members of2067 the committee. I'm pleased to have this opportunity this morning to testify on my bill, House 3187, an act to establish the Massachusetts Children's Cabinet. Mhm uh and this would really2084 be a formal mechanism to enhance the cross sector collaboration through a Children's Cabinet. And I sincerely appreciate your consideration of this important piece of legislation. So all state agencies and programs2099 that touch the lives of Children and youth should work in a coordinated and comprehensive fashion with an emphasis on providing a continuum of2109 services that benefit the Children from prenatal care through programs uh supporting successful transition to self sufficient adulthood, creating a Children's cabinet is the best method by which the commonwealth can achieve the visions and plans necessary to ensure that programs and services for Children and families are coordinated and delivered to advance the welfare of Children in massachusetts, the existing office of the Child Advocate plays an essential role and has been a great service to the commonwealth.
The Cabinet that this bill would create would establish under the auspices of the governor while the OC. A. Would retain its independent role and subpoena power to investigate serious matters in consultation with the OC. A. The role of the cabinet would bring together all agencies and secretary. It's like housing, education, human services, public safety that work with the Children to address their broad spectrum of needs. The will advise the governor, Legislature and state agencies and department leaders on policy issues affecting Children and youth. The Cabinet will be based in the executive office of the Governor and include the minimum at a minimum, the governor, the secretaries of executive offices of health and human services, education, housing and community development, public safety and labor and workforce development and the Child advocate.
The bill will establish an advisory committee that will meet jointly with the Cabinet twice a year that will include pediatricians and other child serving healthcare professionals, early childhood educators, teachers and school administrators, child2222 welfare professionals, parents, youth, the independent office of the Child Advocate and other relevant experts with attention to diversity reflecting the composition of the child population. And these meetings will also be open to the public and include opportunities for public comment together with all state agencies secretariats, the Office of the Child Advocate and the broader community. The Cabinet would help bring together a shared vision and strong protection of the welfare of the Children of the commonwealth. So thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much. Que con any questions from the committee members?
CNN CNN uh just a quick commentary.
[CABRAL:] Um I find uh this idea interesting. Um I think maybe we should have a larger discussion at some point I believe. Not not that I believe I know years ago used to be an agency that actually coordinated all these services and investigated uh particular state agencies as well if they do not provides the, you know, the services to Children. And that was called The Office for Children in that Office for Children used to be um Mhm. You know, I think pretty powerful place that defended Children's services that advocate and we have Children regardless of which agency was delivering the services directly to that child or to that2332 family. Um Also used to have appointed by the Governor uh statewide Children's Council. Uh and and also regional Children's Councils as well. Um Unfortunately, that was abolished by uh Learning one of Our Governance Administration, Previous Governance Administration. And by the way that offers for Children was established originally by a Republican governor Government Sergeant, and it was then abolished by a Republican Governor. And because the role of the Office for Children was a sort of a dual role, they used to be the ones who actually licensed daycare centers, they care and all of that good stuff. But the other side of the agency was so called the Advocate of the Children.
So they used to do advocacy within the state, the whole state system. And obviously some agencies and some commissioners and some secretary secretaries did not like the idea that we were funding the state agency to keep them. He lied if you will. So they were. Uh so a lot of those other agencies that provide Children services, I did not like the fact that there was an office for Children overseeing their staff at least advocating for Children. I I know we now have the office of the title advocate. I think that's a good beginning to come back is coming back to a full service of overseeing and advocating on behalf of Children and their families. Um So anyway, just a thought for those young enough to remember those things. I do actually, I did work the office for Children time Representative. Kay khan.
[KHAN:] Yes, if it's ok if I take a minute to respond. Um I have to really um say that when I, shortly after I came into the legislature, I worked in on the committee. Uh it was Children families, uh what was called included everything and you2475 were the chair was used to chair that committee. The Committee on Human services, elderly affairs patrons, substance abuse and mental health. Right. And um and I was I served under as on your committee at the time and I was relatively new2491 to the Legislature and I was it was such a pleasure to work with you on all of those issues and it was a lot of issues obviously, and I think that's right, sort of got divided up. Um So I I would love to work with you on this. I I was just, you know, been the the House2508 chair of the Committee on Children, Families and persons2510 with disabilities for2512 12 years. And um I just have worked very very closely with all of the a lot of the agencies and the Child Advocate and I think the Child Advocate,2523 that that office is really a very important office.
I think they do amazing work, but I think that it would be great to kind of work together to see if there's some opportunity to pull. I mean there's just so many um secretary, it's that really are involved with Children and families like housing, for example, it's just one that I'm pointing out the Department of Children's Education, et cetera. So it would be great to really have the conversation about what we could do going forward to possibly recreate a cabinet2557 that um that could work together, you know, as created advisory committee and work with Child Advocate who has so much to uh I think contribute to the discussion. So it would be great to have that opportunity. So thank you very much for bringing that up and mentioning all because you worked very hard. It was very impressive how much you had to handle at the time.
[CABRAL:] Thank you very much. I enjoyed the chair of that committee very much. There were a lot of issues, a lot of things that we did together. All right. We have of Children on behalf of elderly folks and veterans and everybody in between2597 people with disabilities as well. Um I would I mean, I've always even when we created the Office of the Child Advocate, right, I always thought we should actually go a little further than that and try to bring back some aspects of the Office for Children in addition to the Child Advocate. Uh2620 and maybe that we can begin that conversation uh with your with your legislation. Um because the officer at the2630 time, the Office for Children, if you remember any aspect of the Office of Children, it2635 was independent of the Governor's office, right? Was just another, well, commissioner of that, who was appointed by the Governor as well, but in terms of his function was not directly under the Governor's Office per se. It was it was an independent agency and it did have the statewide Children's Council that was also appointed by the Governor upon recommendations folks throughout the state. Um and I thought it2664 was a pretty powerful uh you know, way of coordinating and advocating. We have our Children and their families. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. Thank
you very much for continue to do good work around Children services. That's wonderful, I appreciate that. And I I know you care about those issues very much not only when you served in the committee that I chair, but when you chair the committee on Children and Families uh as well. So thank you very much. Thank you. Okay, so let's move on um
to the next Hill we have a section four of the of the hearing, Part four of the hearing and that's the testimony on S 25 46 filed by senator lovely. And we have
I don't know if the Lovely is on, I am here Mr Chairman Sena Lovely please
[SEN LOVELY:] [SB2546] Thank you. Thank you. Chairs particular Cabral I am here to offer my support for Senate number 2546 and act relative to promote american manufacturing of which I am the lead senate sponsor Despite having quality steel fabricators here in our Commonwealth more than 80% school building projects and a majority of other public construction projects that require fabricated steel Go out of state and our country to foreign businesses. While this does lead to an average of $15 million Massachusetts. That savings comes at a huge loss of more than $100 million dollars in economic activity and a significant impact to our local taxpaying steel fabrication industry Over a five year period. This amounts to $75 million dollars in cost of steel savings but a loss exceeding more than a half a billion dollars billion with the big economic nobody in tax collection to our commonwealth
S 2546 would2803 require municipalities to give preference to us manufacturers when buying steel, iron and other materials for construction and renovation of buildings, manufacturers from Canada and other countries consistently underbid public construction firms due to a favorable tax and economic structure. However, this outsourcing has ultimately discouraged domestic steel fabricators from bidding on most, if not all, public projects. The pandemic has taught us that buying domestic is critical to support and invest in our economy as we build back to the Commonwealth. It is my hope that we can continue to invest in our local businesses by prioritizing these businesses for taxpayer funded projects in the future. I therefore reiterate my support for H2546 especially because the committee's positive consideration. I'm happy to answer any questions and I look2854 forward to testimony from panels in this regard as well. Thank you very much for taking me out of turn.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much. Senator. Any questions from the committee members? No sooner Lovely
CNN hearing none. Thank you very much for your testimony and your leadership on this killed. Let's move on to those web signed up to testify on this particular piece of participation in the first one2880 here on is steve Capone
[STEVEN CAPONE:] [SB2546] Okay? Yes, good morning and thank you trying to get my camera on. It's not working. But okay, so good morning, thank you for this opportunity to testify before your committee today on Senate bill S 25 46 act to promote american manufacturing. My name is steven Capone. I'm an owner and president of Capone Iron Corporation. We proudly fabricate our products in Riley Mass on behalf of the steel fabricators of New England. I would like to express our appreciation to Senator joining Lovely who filed this bill and we're extremely thankful to all other House and Senate members who have2924 added their name to it. Our company2927 Was founded in the 1950s by by our father, Charlie Capone and we are still a family owned business. Capone iron employees. Nearly 90 people who work live, pay taxes and spend locally and our massachusetts, towns and communities throughout New England as a massachusetts employer. I understand the far reach of the economic multiplier. My business and my employees contribute to the local economy. I speak to you today from personal experience
Capone Iron Corporation and my fellow local new England based steel fabricators are under threat massachusetts. Tax dollars meant to pay for publicly funded construction projects are going to foreign steel fabrication companies instead of massachusetts based companies like ours, our state government collects our taxes and through fraud procurement laws allows money to invigorate our own state economy to leave the state and even the country when farmers, steel fabricators are awarded to work in our own backyard In effect we are finding our competition to our own demise and negatively impacting our own communities. This situation has gotten so bad that my company often cannot justify the expense to competitively bid on most public construction projects. These farmers, steel fabrication companies are often subsidized by their governments and or enjoy favourable dollar exchange is with the United States enabling them to repeatedly undercut american fabricators in the bidding process.
In addition, our neighboring governments protect and support their steel fabrication industry in very strong terms by promoting the same by domestic campaigns to to support their own infrastructure and government funded projects. While they come into our country and take our tax dollars out of our communities, we need you, our state government to support this bill and keep our tax dollars here in massachusetts only. You are elected officials can correct the situation. The philosophy is simple. Our tax dollars for publicly funded construction projects need to stay within a3064 domestic communities by the way of the economic multiplier. That reinvestment into our own communities. Will support our local businesses are employees. Our state economy, not the economies of foreign countries. I thank you for your time and would welcome any questions you may have. Please support our3082 presidents by America campaign and Senate Bill S. 25 46 act to promote american manufacturing. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much any questions from the members of the committee.
CNN hearing none. Thank you very much for your testimony steve, thank you. Mr Chair. Next brian Lombardo C. I pronounce that correctly.
[BRIAN LOMBARDOZZI:] [SB2546] Yes you did. Mr Chair. Hello, thank you to the chair and members of the committee. Um my name is brian Lombardo Z. I am3121 the vice president for state government affairs for the Alliance for american Manufacturing and I'm here to urge you all to support S 25 46 act to promote american manufacturing. The Alliance for american manufacturing is a labor management partnership uh set up by the United Steelworkers Union and some of the leading manufacturers in the steel and other primary materials sectors. Together we work across the country in states as well as federally and sometimes in the international arena to promote policies that benefit both the american worker and the company is doing businesses here in the United States.3158 I've submitted a longer statement for the record, but I just want to highlight three things this morning. First massachusetts state agencies are already accustomed to applying these sorts of domestic preferences through the buy America preferences that our president through federal transportation funding that flows the state of massachusetts.
So this is already something that is very well understood by contracting officers and bidders on public projects. And this is why we are asking the state to apply what they do with federal tax dollars in the exact same way to the state tax dollars that massachusetts residents are paying secondly, I'd like to highlight that over the last decade. I have worked with our industry partners. United Steelworkers, members of the labour movement, as well as environmental community across the country to assure that when states3205 are looking at their own infrastructure spending, that they are using this domestic preference in the same way consistently in the3212 way our federal government does this. Just in the past year, we have seen the state of new york adopt and expand uh domestic preference for iron steel. Uh texas actually unanimously passed something earlier this year to expand their domestic preferences. New Jersey also adopted this as well. Uh they've joined with states like Illinois indiana Maryland, Ohio pennsylvania West Virginia and others By making sure that there's domestic preferences similar to those in 2546 on their books and making sure that their state tax dollars are being reinvested here in the United States. Thirdly, uh, massachusetts really should put its purchasing power where it's public policy is uh it should be no surprise and I'm sure you're all very aware of the challenging economic situation.
We find ourselves in um trying to create jobs and make3263 sure that our supply chains or whole here in the United States and, you know, unlike our foreign competitors in places like china India Russia, US manufacturers are heavily regulated and don't rely on subsidies from the government to make them more competitive massachusetts procurement policies should not be divorced from public policies. Taxpayer dollars should not reward companies that have moved their operation investment dollars and jobs away to foreign countries that lack completely disregard reasonable environmental and3292 workplace safety regulations. With these sensible changes enacted into law, massachusetts will continue actually without them. You'll continue a path of sending these these hard earned tax dollars overseas to support jobs outside of massachusetts and the United States. Our manufacturers and workers are anxiously watching, hoping that you'll support these common sense necessary fixes to the existing state law. Please vote in favour of 25-46 and tell these manufacturers and workers you support their jobs, their businesses and their communities. Thank you very much.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you very much brian um any questions from the committee?
Thank you brian your testimony we have next dr robert cuomo
can you hear me? Yes. Ok very good
3346 [ROBERT CUOMO:] [SB2546] thank you very much. Mr chairman and thank you very much. Senator Lovely for the opportunity to speak before your committee this morning. My name is robert J cuomo and I am the president of the cuomo consulting group, a firm which specializes in analyzing the economic impact3361 of government policies. The first of my testimony this morning is3366 that buying domestic as opposed to foreign,3368 provides very substantial benefits to the domestic economy but I'm going to do is put some numbers on the face of what brian and steven is so eloquently stated before me. Now we can explain this entire process of economic growth from supporting domestic firms by easily understood what we call economic multiplier analysis simply stated what this says is that for every $1 of domestic spending That will give rise to a minimum of $1.50 in total economic benefits is the initial spending will give rise to additional spending in subsequent rounds.
Now, how does this apply to purchasing domestic as opposed to foreign fabricated steel? A good example is considered a public investment or infrastructure projects such as the building of a public school. There are currently millions of dollars of public school construction projects on the horizon Because on average, foreign fabricated steel projects can be undertaken at a 15% lower costs than domestic fabricated steel projects. A public infrastructure project would cost $115 million $100 million dollars if performed by a foreign steel fabricators. Now it's tempting to get the savings because you say $15 million $75 million. No, although that's tempting. There is no economic benefit whatsoever to purchasing foreign steel, having projects done by foreign manufacturers, all the benefits would accrue to the foreign entity, none to the US, nothing to3469 set about how we're becoming dependent upon foreign fabricators for our infrastructure needs. Now, if the project, the way we're going to contemplate undertaking by domestic steel fabricator, strong economic benefits would accrue to the domestic economy.
If you assume an economic multiplier of $1 and 1.5 and that's a very conservative estimate, have been as high as four or $550 million spent domestically will ultimately give rise to $575 million in spending in the domestic economy over that five year period. After the fact in 75 million in savings from foreign fabricated steel, the net economic benefit to the domestic economy is $500 million five-year period that occurs every five years. In addition, given the shrinking manufacturing employment in the massachusetts economy, supporting domestic steel fabricators will shore up manufacturing employment. The manufacturing sector in Massachusetts has been under disarray and really fading3533 away very quickly since 19, actually since 2001 We have lost 151,000 manufacturing jobs in the Commonwealth. The $500 million 10,000 manufacturing jobs Every five years.
So every five years you gain 10,000 manufacturing jobs. If you purchase domestically. In addition, jobs will be created in downstream industries such as restaurants, leisure and hospitality and travel as you quite know, we've been transitioning from manufacturing to services very strongly. So we need to support the manufacturing sector. So in general, what I would say is that in addition to the spending benefits from purchasing domestically, supporting domestic fabricated steel manufacturers will generate substantial income and sales tax revenue for the Commonwealth which we can use to support all sorts of very important public investment and private projects. In conclusion, supporting domestic steel fabricators in performing public projects is a win win for everyone workers, companies and the government. I would be happy to answer any questions you might have. I will submit this testimony but you have any questions whatsoever. Would be more than happy to address them. Thank you very much for your time this morning.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you Mr cuomo any questions from the committee? Yeah, I see none. But please do you have that electronic version that you can submit to us? I certainly want to. I will do that. Thank you appreciate that. That goes for every other person who has testified. If you have written, if you're written testimony electronic available, please submit that electronically to the committee. You have until friday to do so. Uh
Katherine flaherty,
[CATHERINE FLAHERTY:] [SB2546] thank you. Mr Chairman um uh Chairman Cabral Chairman. Pacheco members of the committee. I'm also here to support Senate 2546 uh an act to promote american manufacturer. Um And thank you. Senator Lovely for filing this bill. Um My name is Kathy flaherty,3665 I have served as the executive director for sf Feeney the steel fabricators of new England for the past 13 years, you've already heard from Senator lovely. And Stephen Capone about the problem of um public construction projects, projects going to foreign competitors. But from an association um standpoint, I wanted you to know that our members are mostly family owned businesses that provide good paying jobs and benefits to thousands of families in massachusetts. Our members are not big steel companies, they buy steel from the mills, then modify the steel to meet the project specifications by cutting, drilling or painting and then the steel workers take it from there and installed it. However, as you heard earlier, the steel fabricators need your help. Um as you heard from Senator lovely, 80% of public school construction projects have been awarded to foreign steel fabricators every year.
They3723 take more and more of our work and during my tenure I have watched our member numbers dwindle in many steel fabricators go out of business. Our public construction dollars have strengthened foreign fabricators to the detriment of our industry. The suffering will only continue to get worse as we come out of the pandemic. And as to our new economy, the steel fabrication industry is at3747 great risk and we believe other manufacturing industries are facing the same predicament to help mitigate this inequity sf Feeney is asking for policy changes requirement requiring that domestic businesses are given preference over foreign companies3763 that do not pay taxes here, hire people here or contribute to our economy as to 546 would require cities and towns to give preference to us manufacturers when buying steel iron and other materials for new buildings and renovations. Many states and the federal government have already passed laws to address this program problem. We hope our legislators in massachusetts will do the same. Thank you for listening to our concerns and I'd be happy to answer any questions you have. I apologize for my voice.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. Catherine, appreciate it, appreciate your testimony. Any questions from the committee
hearing on. Let's move on to the next person max but how? That's how
3814 max3814 potential
our csollany.
Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, Mark Delaney. Legislative agent for SF any, I don't,3831 I'll be very brief. I don't have any testament. Mahoney to offer to enhance what's been said. Uh, my real purpose here is to answer questions. Uh, also as counsel to SF3843 any, I helped draft the legislation. So if the committee members have any questions, that's what I'm here for. We appreciate your patience and listening to us. And uh, we're hopeful that the committee will give this fill a favorable report. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. Mark Any questions for Mark from the members of the committee.
[CABRAL:] Okay. We might not have any today, but probably in the near future when we take another look at the bills that we before the committee. Um, and see how can we have a conversation around this issue. Um, I know, uh, when, when I chair the committee on bonding, when we did, we did a bonding to bills the new cars for the team. Uh we put what we, I write as the chair of that committee put in language that the the assembly of those cars had to be done not only in the United States but in massachusetts. So today you have a plant have a plant at um uh in Springfield, precisely doing that because of that language that we put in in that bill in the state throughout the legislative process and its law obviously. So there are precedents in other areas. It's something that would be the Collins of a conversation and see if all this uh at work. Well thank3946 you Mark and thank you for those who testified. I'm going back to um SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
to
see if max is available out. Hello, hear me next. Hello, can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you okay, great, thank you very much for taking me back.
Um good morning and thank you to the chair and members of the committee for the opportunity to testify today in support of s 25 46. My name is max Wachtel and I'm the director of Government relations and sustainability for the American3980 Institute of Steel Construction. We are non partisan non for profit technical institutes and trade association That has been a leading advocate, entrusted resource for the American structural steel industry since 1921. Ai SG represents nearly 1000 domestic structural steel fabricators, 16 of which are located within the state of Massachusetts and who employ nearly 550 of your state citizens. This bill an act to promote american4003 manufacturing is a common sense proposal. In line with the successes of numerous other states and municipalities to invest public dollars back to the tax paying public, buy american policies, create good paying jobs here at home, expand the tax base and will improve the quality of life for massachusetts residents.
However, in the absence of a policy in Massachusetts, damage has been done over the last decade, we have seen our fabricator membership losses in the New England states occurred 20% more frequently than the national average. This is caused by unfair competition from across our borders than materially harm Massachusetts companies the public wants by America. According to a 2021 Reuters poll, nearly two thirds of americans want their government to buy goods made in America. Government spending should not promote a race to the bottom on pricing. Rather policy should be deliberate in raising up and supporting those tax paying constituents, improving their quality of life and expanding the tax base in a self4058 reinforcing cycle of american prosperity. And despite rumors to the contrary, the U. S. Steel fabrication industry is ready and willing to deliver.
According to our 2021 1st quarter business barometer survey, nearly half of our members steel fabricators are significantly operating at under capacity over half of our respondents4076 said that they have the ability to increase capacity up to 15% another quarter so they could increase even higher. Lastly, you may not think that environmentalism has anything to do with by America, but when it comes to steal, they are closely intertwined among the seven largest steel producing countries in the world. American produced steel has the lowest carbon footprint and the lowest energy intensity. Choosing american steel, an american manufacturing bypassing strong buy american legislation will go hand in hand with the state of massachusetts. Carbon emission reduction goals on behalf of the american Institute of Steel Construction and the massachusetts steel fabrication community. I urge you to support this important piece of legislation. Thank you
any questions from the committee. Uh thank you very much for your testimony max Uh concludes this section of this part of the hearing. We're going on to part five and that's a testimony on Senate 2073.
Uh that's an act to relative to messages time zones. Very interesting. Okay, we have ah is senator keanu uh on um now we're going to go to the list of individuals that have signed4155 on and we are a little behind schedule here but about 15. 15 minutes behind schedule. We're gonna start with tom Ems Weiler. Yes. Mr Chair, can you hear me? Yeah. Okay, great.
Thank you for having me ah to the chairs and members of the joint committee. My name is Tom Tyler and I'm from Quincy, I'm here to request your support for S 2073 which would extend our observance of summertime from eight months a year to year round. In addition to losing those4194 miserably early dark afternoons, we'd also see health benefits from losing sleepy monday every spring a dangerous Day where we give millions of people jet leg. A few years ago this legislature created the Special Commission on the Commonwealth Time Zone. I was honored to serve on the commission. We met throughout 2017. A report was issued in November 2017 By a vote of 9-1. The Commission endorsed a careful deliberate regional move of Massachusetts and other states to observe Atlantic standard time year round effectively the same as having daylight saving time year round for eight months a year.
There would be no change As 2073 would have us join with other states to petition the US Department of Transportation to allow us to move to Atlantic standard time. Our commission found4243 that atlantic standard time could encourage residents to dine out and shot Moore extra daylight could also save energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions without the need for artificial light, eliminating the spring forward change could also reduce heart attacks, car accidents, workplace accidents and cyber loafing regarding school start times. It's true that if we adopt this change in a vacuum, we'd have kids walking to school in the dark. My wife and I have two small Children in elementary school, I would never suggest making a change that puts them or any other Children in harm's way. We learned that pediatric sleep experts including4277 dr Judith and of boston Children's hospital who served on this commission recommended that4282 school not start until 8 30 am well after an atlantic standard time Sunrise. It has 2073, even includes a provision directing the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to Kamina Task Force to study the lack of time change, hold hearings and issue a report for how to make this transition work for students, teachers and families. The support for adopting this idea in our commonwealth is overwhelming. It's hard to understand what could be blocking this bill.
I know in new Hampshire, the new Hampshire association of broadcasters has succeeded in killing their states bill each of the last two legislative sessions because they say New England's move to atlantic time will be detrimental to their business model. So I'd like to very, very briefly review the business environment for media companies in Arizona as you might know. Arizona is on one4325 time zone year round. Channel 15 in phoenix, the abc affiliate is owned4330 by E W. Scripps company scripts net income in 2020 was $154 million. Channel 12 in Phoenix. The NBC affiliate is owned by Techno incorporated Techniques income and net income in 2020 was $482 million dollars And Channel five in Phoenix. The CBS affiliate is owned by MEREDITH Corporation. MEREDITH is wrapping up the sale of its TV Division to great television for $2.7 billion. Members of the joint commission, Members of the joint committee. I implore you not to let one special interest block a change desired by an overwhelming number of your constituents. I appreciate the joint committee holding this hearing and for the opportunity to testify. Our commission met throughout 2017. Study the issue and recommended that4371 we make this change as 2073 would get us there. Thank you. And I'm happy to take any questions. Any questions from4378 the members of the committee
so far. No questions. Ah Tom thanks very much for your work on that commission and and for testifying today. It's a,
I would say it's an intriguing idea. Um uh
you have been actually have more sunlight.
I don't get us there. Mr chair.
Uh but thank you very much appreciate your work4412 the commission and also testifying this morning. Thank you. We have next sarah but there.
Good morning. Yeah. Good morning. Yeah, my name is sailor dale. I'm speaking in support of bill at 2073 and act relative to Massachusetts. Time zones. Massachusetts belongs in the atlantic kind zone. Look at a map, boston's latitude and longitude is around 42.35 North 71.54444 degrees west. We are so far east in the eastern time zone. We are better situation one time zone over in the atlantic time zone. Almost nobody likes4458 having the sunset at 4:15 PM. This It will be much better if we could have the sunset at 5:15 instead. Falcone situation in december, puts on nine hours of light from about 7 15 to 4 15. This light is much better utilized From about 8 15 to 5 15. Having this out of daylight in the afternoon would be a huge benefit when there is light after people get4489 out of home and work and school, they are much more likely to get exercise and to go shopping. Traffic safety is better on daylight saving times.
Yeah, people burned more calories and daylight saving times. This would help to mitigate childhood obesity, falling back to standard time is detrimental. Depression rates rise. Criminal activities increase, losing the hour of sleep in the springtime for about a week afterwards. Traffic,4523 academic Spanx, heart attacks and strokes go up. Medical Ayers increase. Our sleep patterns are swept in workplace injuries, increase in workplace productivity, increases All this research is spelled out in the 2017 Massachusetts study and scott Yates, who's going to test the fight after me. He also has additional links to this research
on the kids going to school and the dog issue. It still is the Eastern time zone and out of daylight and the states like michigan and other states back for west. These kids have been going to school in the dog the entire lives in the wintertime. They are just fine.
The tv industry also likes for us to stay at home and watch tv and and therefore your sunsets. This is not thinking in terms of people's health. Obviously we want to go in sync with surrounding states and that's what this act is set out to do. It works with surrounding states. States like maine, new Hampshire and Rhode island. And if all other states wait for other states to go first, this will never happen. So let us let these four states show our lead and have other states follow us. They want this to
and when states go forth and do this. This can also lead to potentially a change in the federal legislation, likely daylight act and4623 the Sunshine Protection Act.
We have a work around to the uniform time act of 1966 by going to the Atlantic standard time. Let's do this. Thank you. Thank you very much. Any questions from the members of4640 the committee.
Next we have scott Yates.
[SCOTT YATES:] Hi, can you hear me okay? Yeah. Thanks Mr Chair and thanks to tom and Sarah who did a great job and thanks for having me. My name is scott Yates. I'm the head of the international movement known as lock the clock. Otherwise known as me doing this as a hobby writing a blog in my spare time. I've been at it for about seven years now and I appreciate you having me from outside of massachusetts. But I want to say, I want to have most of my comments about how great massachusetts has been on this issue. Um, you may not know that the history of DST has strong roots in massachusetts. It was Lincoln Filene who thought that if we had daylight saving time, it would be better because more people would have time to shop if it was daylight if there's more daylight after work. And so he proposed4695 it. He actually came up with the name daylight saving time, which was different than the name that they were proposing over in europe. And he couldn't get it done. It was World War One that actually made it start to happen. But the name stock. And um, and, and then we were stuck with daylight saving time after that. Excuse me.
Uh, Fast forward to this commission that Tom was on uh, and that did such good work in 2017. I have to tell you, I testify in states all over the country. And I referred4724 to that study all the time because it was so comprehensive. It was so well done and was very clear that permanent daylight saving time is a terrific choice for most states. I have to tell you there is a little bit of opposition out there. That is saying that we should be going on permanent standard time. I actually support that point of view for some states, especially states that are on the western edge of their time zones. I haven't had any success pushing that point of view. Even states like Kansas and Nebraska and South Dakota, North Dakota, all of which have testified in, they all say that all of the people want permanent daylight time. So we'll have to see how that shakes out for them. It's kind of a question for massachusetts is no question at all. You got, you know, as the other one. Others have testified. Uh, massachusetts is perfectly inappropriately put in the atlantic time zone. And so passing, this will be a great thing for massachusetts. It will also be a great thing for4778 the federal legislation that would make it4780 possible for the whole.
There's two bills being considered now uh, in the federal level, I'm talking to the staff of the sponsors on both of those. One of them would allow states to go into permanent daylight time and then the other one would just put every, every state, put the whole country into permanent daylight time all at once. That's the bill that has a little bit more traction. Ed Markey is a senator at Markey is a big supporter of that. It's hard to imagine an issue that senator Markey and senator rubio of florida would agree on. Uh, this is one and they both supported very strongly and so that's a good sign for that. The house bill actually has a little bit more traction though. It just got a new sponsor just yesterday, Ro Khanna who is from Silicon Valley. I will tell you4825 the computer the programmers of the world hate having to program the time change in. And so this would be a big step forward for them also. So uh you know, congratulations to massachusetts for all the great work that4837 you have done on this4838 issue. It's really help the case all around the country. Uh favorable recommendation from this committee and a favorable move forward uh with this bill will help massachusetts. It will help4849 around the country. And it will just as senator Markey says it will just have the corners of your mouth turn up in a little bit of a smile and that's a good thing. Mhm. And I'm happy to take any questions. Thank you very much for your testimony. Any questions from the committee?
[XIARHOS:] Yes. Mr. Chairman. Just a comment. Yes. Yes. Representative please. Thank you. I find it fascinating. You know, this is new to me. I'm only in my ninth month of being a state representative. So I don't know all the past history but I wanted to complement scott and the others well presented. And I'm going to take a very4892 good look at this. Thank you. Mr Chairman.
[CABRAL:] Well being in Cape Cod would be even better. Right. Yeah. about being being east at 4:00. I agree. We especially here on Cape Cod. Thank you. Uh but I mean, I actually, I'm aware of, uh, the, uh, of the study and it, I followed, You know, all the news articles around that issue back in 17 18. Um, let me uh, ask a question. The atlantic4936 time right? Was applied to massachusetts. What it would line us up4943 with the sun, right? There is
[YATES:] yes, yes. I mean, there's you get into uh, your question. Thank you for the question and thank you. Mr uh, your question. I've been at this issue for a long time and it's very easy to suddenly go down quite a deep rabbit hole because you get into the question of, you know, what is time itself. And, and the short answer is, time is really just an agreement among people. We can no longer use the system of saying my flight takes off when the sun is two hands over the horizon. Like we need to have a system of being able to agree on what the4987 time is. And so in general, the time zones were set up so that noone would be about when the sun is straight overhead. And so, uh, massachusetts being so far east, the eastern time zone is a ridiculously wide time zone. It's crazy that boston and Indianapolis are in the same time zone, their more than 1000 miles away. And so this would, uh, you know, fix that the Eastern time zone isn't going to be changing. That said, I think there's a pretty decent chance that with, with the federal legislation that all of the eastern time zone will essentially want to move into the atlantic time zone. And so other parts of the eastern time zone will be a little bit off center to what will be appropriately the time zone for, for massachusetts. So I don't know if that answers your question directly, but it's, uh, was
[CABRAL:] for massachusetts, the atlantic time to line5045 up with the sun meaning, which is just explained known, it's a critical, I remember as a little kid in this town that I, um, lived there used to be, uh, be at the center of town. Okay. This volcanic volcanic rock with various signs of the time and5069 it was based on sun. So when the sun created a little shadow, their unit was one o'clock at two o'clock at three o'clock. Um, so when you all line up with the sun, that's how it's going to happen. Right. Um, if the time zone itself is lined up with the sun. So,
um, Mr chair and scott. If I could, I looked it up while we were talking, it looks like solar noon. Today is at 12 29. So we're right on, we're right on the bubble. And that's nice because that gives us options. And so we could think about, you know, do we want to be on one permanent time. And if so, do we want to be on the time? We're on eight months a year or the time we're on four months a year. And the crazy thing and scott has talked a lot with the standard time advocates who are just maybe opposed or not opposed to this, depending on what state you're talking about is if we had year round standard time, the son of Ayers in boston at 401 A. M. I know there's a lot of joggers out there, but that's really early, especially when you consider will start getting light at 3:30 AM I just don't think that's the way we live in 2020.
Okay. Just I'm just trying to um,
it's really uh daylight savings, right? It puts you ahead of the sun, isn't that right? That's right. And the most important thing for me personally,5152 the movement is called block the clock, hashtag lock the clock. And the reason we call5156 it that is whatever time5158 we pick we're going to there's pluses and minuses to whatever. However we are lined with the way5163 that the sun flows around the world when we changed5166 the clock in september as Sara was talking about. That's the thing that is actually deadly. You know, like, like we have laws that say you can't have lawn darts because you know like5176 one kid got injured 30 years ago. There are dozens of people who die in5182 traffic accidents and heart attacks, there actually is a study that came out just last year5186 that in that morning that a few days after the spring forward time change, the admittance. People getting admitted to the hospital for everything goes up. Like people with kidney problems have kittens or kidney problems in those few days after that spring for a time change, Having the government go in and robbed an hour of your5203 sleep in the middle of the night on the weekend is deadly. And so that's the thing we need to fix. And then the question of what time zone we land in. There's, there's pluses and minuses. But luckily for massachusetts, there's not a lot of places minuses, atlantic time is the right time zone to be in. And so that's why you're perfectly positioned, both politically and geographically
interesting. I financing with tom5228 was referring to that technically we spend uh, eight months, right. If he was atlantic time would be eight months rather than the four months on Eastern standard. Right,
fascinating. Yes, that's right. Yes. We would stay on that that on that time zone because they also to further what you're talking about when the sun is overhead. What time is noon? It barely spoke about 11 30 to noon in standard time and about one hour later from 12 30 to 1 in the daylight time, but we do get, but people generally don't notice when the sun is overhead. What they notice. Moore is when the sun rises and sets and that's really what is the important thing about getting that out of light in the afternoon, when people, most people wanted.
Right, okay, fascinating. We have to convince Wall street, don't we? They don't like to see the right. Yeah. Uh, if you'd like me to respond Mr chairman, I'm5291 happy to, uh, I think the only business interests that really is a, for the only Wall Street business interests that's really aligned against this is the broadcast industry. Uh, as Sara was saying, they like it when everybody is not outside being having their own physical activity, they want everybody inside sitting on the couch, especially the sports broadcasters ESPN, I found out actually killed the bill in Connecticut. Um, and so, uh, so that's the only big business interests aligned against it? Most of the other big business is actually in favour. I mean, obviously the golf industry, the recreation industry, they're all in favor. Um, I haven't, because I do this as a hobby. If I did this as a job, I would spend time reaching out to like the insurance industry and, and uh, you know, other industries that lose work, workplace accidents go up, that sort of thing. So if I had the time I would spend time reaching out to those kinds of groups and saying, hey, why don't you support this? Now? We know now we know why the patriots game in Foxboro usually start for All right. Exactly. It's already nighttime.
Sorry, I just, I need to throw in that game, you know? Yeah, it's hard.5365 Oh, well, we all friends of the pages of around here. Right. So, um, anyway, so thank you very much fascinating topic. Sorry, I took a little longer talking about this issue, but because I find that fascinating and most people can look at that clock. That was really the sun telling us more or less what time it was given. Day So it's very, very interesting. Thank you very much. Thank you If I can help in any way in the future, please let me know. We do have someone it was back on that would like to testify.
He was not around when we call them. I think that's a Jeff klein, isn't Jeff Jeffrey?
Yeah, can you hear me? Yes, I can Jeffrey ahead. My apologies. Uh, you know, I was teaching a class that ended 11:30 and I couldn't get just for the committee, the committee's references because this is testimony back to Uh, to house 30 to 40. That's right, That's right. Um, so, and I also apologise, of course I didn't hear what was already testified to. So I apologize if I'm repeating, but I live in Dorchester. I'm a retired local union president and I care a lot about democracy in our political system. And to me as to, I think most people, uh, the undue influence of money in our political system is something that undercuts democracy and for that reason, I think, and justifiably we have from some pretty strict ethics rules about what legislators can or cannot accept in terms of money from constituents or or lobbyists or special interests.
But unfortunately, there is a big loophole in our state ethics law That allows, although you can't accept the gift of $50 in cash as a legislator, you can accept the gift of potentially many5511 thousands of dollars from party with an interest in legislation at the State house uh for travel. And uh you know, a lot of travel, a lot of representatives travel to conferences and cultural events and so on, which are mostly harmless. And the bill that we're supporting, I'm speaking in favour of would not affect that kind of travel, but travel that's underwritten by parties with an interest in legislation at the State House, Or lobbyists or clients of lobbyists, uh when they pay for travel, uh not just $50, but sometimes worth many thousands of dollars. This creates an inherent conflict of interest when those same parties come to a legislator and asked them to vote for against. Mhm pending bill.
So, closing the travel loophole would uh would accomplish a number of things, uh although it would leave untouched the relatively benign kind of travel, it would uh close the loophole that allows lobbyists and clients of lobbyists to fund travel by legislators when they potentially have matters before the State House at the same time. Uh I think this is a, you know, an obvious reform that would increase transparency and you know, confidence in good government and less than the influence of money and lobbyists at our State House. So I would urge uh I would urge the committee to recommend uh favorably this uh legislation and for the House and Senate to adopt it. It would it would be a move to a greater transparency in our government and remove the appearance of the actual presence of conflict of interest at the State House and increased confidence in our among our citizens that their government is that they're legislators are acting out of principal and interest for their constituents and not influenced by money from lobbyists and clients of lobbyists.
Thank you very much, Jeff any questions from the committee,
you mean on CNN, thank you very much for your testimony. If you have written testimony, please submit to the committee electronically. I tried it and Section six or part six of the hearing Testimony on S5677 2066 In the House 30 200. Uh We have two individuals signed up. I don't know if represented Markey or uh Senator Heights and is online. If not we're gonna move on to those who signed up. Uh The first person is Joanne Sullivan really. Sullivan Good morning.
[JOANNE SULLIVAN:] I do. Yes. Great, thank you. Mr chair and members of the committee. Um we really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you here this morning and actually it's moved into afternoon so this afternoon and we do have written testimony that will expand upon what we have to say this morning. But I did, we did want to provide some brief comments for you. As you said, my name is Joanne Haley, Sullivan I'm the executive director of the massachusetts Organization of Educational collaborative. Um and with me is Katherine cooper, who will be speaking following my testimony. So, um, we're here to support, ask your support of S two oh 66 and age 3200 and act to support educational collaborative. And these bills are both refiles of bills that were um reported favorably out of the committee last session and we respectfully request that you endorse them again. Um the just to give you a little bit of a frame of reference for all of this, we represent the 25 public educational collaborative across the commonwealth. We range from the Cape out to Western Mass and all the way in between.
And we have um, we have a combined membership of 248 school districts across the commonwealth. So most, but not all school districts participate in educational collaborative. And our purpose is to work together so that we are able to more efficiently and effectively provide programs and services for students within our, within our school districts and for the staff to provide professional development for them. We provide transportation services regionally across our memberships, et cetera. So we have a variety of, of uh, of services that we provide back out to our school districts and we truly work as an extension of those school districts. So they are our members, they are our boards, they decide what it is that we do. So here in lies the problem. So we are, we5828 have a regional approach and yet there is a component of the ethics law that really has created a significant hardship for us because under the current law, we are not able to hire any staff that are currently employed within any of5845 our member districts.
So while we're trying to provide the needed special education services and sometimes we need to5852 provide those services during the summer or after school or in the evenings or provide professional development training for our school districts and for this, educators within those districts, we can't bring in the experts that are currently employed within those districts to work for us under the current ethics law, that really has created a barrier for us in terms of meeting student needs and meeting the needs of our districts. And I just want to emphasize that particularly given the staffing shortages that we're seeing across the state right now, it's even more urgent that this bill get passed because it's, we are really um in almost a crisis state in terms of being able to accept new students into our programs. And we are strongly urging that this committee consider um reporting favourably out again this this session and just to say that we have worked on a friendly amendment that we are submitting and it's at the end of our written testimony that will be setting sending.
But that amendment is really was developed in collaboration with the state ethics Commission so that we are trying to be sure that we're putting um the right um the equitable playing field for anyone that's applying for these positions within our collaborative so that they're able to have an equitable opportunity to receive those positions. But at the same time if we could take away the barrier that currently exists, it would go a long way towards allowing us to serve our students and our districts better. So we request again that that you support our bill and I'm going to turn it over to Catherine if that's okay with any, with all with the chair um in order for her to give a little more detail um in our testimony and we'll be happy to take any questions you might have Catherine Cooper. Good morning everybody. Can you hear me? Great, thank you.
[CATHERINE COOPER:] My name is Katherine Cooper and I am the executive director of the Southeastern Mass Educational Collaborative and the chair of the Legislative committee. I would like to thank the co chairs Cabral and Pacheco and members of5979 the joint committee for giving us the opportunity to testify today and also, Representative Markey and Senator Heinz was sponsoring age 3200 and S 2066 Educational collaborative served some of the commonwealth most vulnerable students, often with service schedules that go beyond the typical school Day or school year. As Joanne mentioned, we are, we are often asked to provide services in the evenings, on weekends in the summer, but we were only able to do6009 so if we are able to hire staff with the appropriate credentials and experience to work with these students as public educational entities. The current ethics regulations prevent us from considering anyone for higher if they also work in one of our members school districts. So for example, if I need to hire a school nurse to work in one of my summer programs, I cannot hire any school nurse who works for any of the districts in my membership area during the school year And that includes my membership area, includes the cities of new Bedford, Fall River and eight other surrounding towns. In addition, many collaborative, including mine, provide extensive professional development programs for teachers and staff across our regions.
If I want to hire someone with expertise in a certain area to provide an afternoon or evening training to other teachers, I cannot hire anyone with such knowledge if they happen to work in any of my 10 member school districts. My membership area is bordered to the east by the atlantic ocean and to the south by Rhode island. So if I try to hire qualified staff who have massachusetts credentials for any part time or per diem work, I have to try to attract people from as far as taught in or north. This was extremely difficult before the pandemic and now it is virtually impossible.6090 One of my sister collaborative in the western part of the state has 37 member school districts, so they haven't even wider geographical area from which they are prohibited from hiring part time or per diem staff or faculty trainer if they also work in any of those 37 districts. Mass General laws 26 8 22 68 A section 20 as written, puts us in the position of having to choose between providing services for high needs, special education students with the most qualified staff or following a regulation that we believe was not intended to create this type of situation when it was written.
There is precedent for an exemption in this law for a similar situation where DDS and other agencies under HHS are allowed to hire respite staff for weekends or holidays and so forth, who also work in the state run group homes. We respectfully6147 ask that you6148 provide us with6149 a similar remedy so that we can continue to provide the very best services for students6153 and training for our public school teachers. We were we would request that you report out S6160 2066 and age 30 200 out favorably and support the passage of this act to support our educational collaborative. Thank you any thank you very much for your6172 testimony Catherine. Um Any questions from the committee?
[CABRAL:] No questions from the committee. Okay. Uh oh, and you have mentioned that you on your electronic testimony, if you're going to submit to us, you have an amendment proposed language um if you want to share that with us what that is, because I have spoken I believe with Catherine some time ago, um and on this issue and obviously um my recommendation of time was to work with the Ethics Commission, see if um how can we get around this, How can we do this in a6219 way that it's transparent about that because this law, this ethics will applies not6228 only situations like yours, but applies in other situations, like we had a similar situation within the city councilor uh which was working for the school system. Uh a school said, well, one of the school systems in the city um and couldn't find a resolution uh therefore, um but whatever the city councils get paid new Bedford is not worth keeping that job versus the other job. So he gave up his elective office, because we couldn't really find the resolution because what's going to set precedent other situations. Um So, if we can find a resolution and if you want to talk to that some to that language to see if um if not we can talk can have a meeting another and a lot of time as well about that.
[SULLIVAN:] Sure. I I actually thank you for the question and I actually was just while you were talking, I was bringing the amendment up, but um to summarize the amendment, it speaks to um the need for us to have transparency around hiring any of these individuals. So for example, um disclosure to the member school committees and approval of the superintendent of the school district. We would be hiring the individual from and conversely, if we were hiring from a school district to us, we would have that disclosure that it would be revealed to our board. And so that was one of the big issues, was that it be a fair and equitable process for people to apply. We would post the position, We would be sure that it was widely circulated and that we would um we would disclose publicly that this was in fact happening that we were hiring within those um individuals. That that was the language that the ethics that we worked with the ethics commission on in order to try to put some put some guard rails around the work that we were doing.
Um so that that's what we did.6356 I will also tell you that there are already existing laws within the collaborative legislation that exists that6364 put some barriers around that as well. For example, we can't hire members of our own boards to um they cannot work for the collaborative. So for example, if our board is made up of school committee members, we cannot hire any member of that board to serve. Um, so that that they were given an inside track, so to6385 speak. I believe that's the component of the ethics law that we need to be concerned about here. And conversely if we had superintendents that were our boards, we wouldn't be able to hire them to work for the collaborative because they would be the people in the decision making role on the other side. I think that that was, that was one aspect the other is that are full board has all hiring and firing authority within6410 collaborative as executive directors, we do not have that capacity. And so the entire board which would be made up of a representative of each school district would be there to make those decisions about hiring and firing. So another safeguard that's already in place, separate from this law that already exists. Um, in the way that it's written, does that clarify?
[CABRAL:] I, and I first spoke with Catherine our as some,6441 I not, I would have, I don't want to put it in a way that was a negative thing. Um, some concerns about some transparency, I mean, and if we're going to change this law, it has to be in a way that there is a process in place. Uh, and there is that transparency in place. So, um, so there is no inside tracking and there is no double dipping if you will and all that good stuff, uh, you know, if we have all kinds of, we all have to sort of kind of follow a lot of this6481 ethic laws ourselves. So, um, so it's important that everybody, especially when public money is involved, when special, when public money is involved. I believe it's it's the right thing to do. So I'm glad you have some language to share with us. Um, that will uh, I think make the deliberations of the committee probably better on this piece of legislation uh as it is written, I have concerns, uh, maybe this uh, this uh uh, this, you know, possible amendment might be able to fix the problem.
Thank you.
[COOPER:] The amendment was developed in collaboration with the legal team at the ethics Commission. So, um, you know,6531 they have reviewed it as well. Uh, we'll check with them and please do, please do. We've had, we've had many conversations with them and6541 to say if that language doesn't feel like it6545 meets the standard were not completely tied to the language has written. I think we're very open to having the conversations most importantly, we want to try to resolve this in a way that allows us to most effectively provide services to our students and we will work with this committee and anyone else in terms of trying to make that happen as best we can.
[CABRAL:] I I understand that. And if we can be helpful to make facilitate that, we'll work with you obviously. I mean, as you know, we those of us who are legislators, you know, we have uh the Ethics6580 Commissioner's always on our shoulder right now. I'm not saying that strong, rightly so. Right. Uh So if we have to to follow, I think the problem in the sense of the public realm, right? Everybody needs to follow the same process. Don't I think it's best for for them. It's best for us is best for the general public, but he's upfront is transparent and then and then people can make, you know, whatever judgments I want to make up for that, they will probably still make some judgments, but Oh, but at least we know what our conscience is clear.
Yeah. All right. All right, thank6622 you very much. Thank you. Thank you and thank you for your question, appreciate6626 it. Okay, at some point in the future will be in touch with you again. Great, thank you. Okay, we move on to the next But the Hearing of Senate Bill 21 12. Uh and we all have one person that signed on to testify and as transparent.
6649 Hi,6649 good afternoon, Chairman. Cabral Can you hear me? Ok? Yes, very
[JOHN PARADIS:] [SB211] good. Thank you. Thank you. Chairman. Uh for this opportunity to speak to the committee once again today. Uh My name is6661 john parody. I'm a retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel, a member of numerous veteran organizations and a former employee of the United States Department of Veterans Affairs. I also served as the deputy Superintendent of the Soldiers Home in Holyoke. I am a6675 member of the Holyoke Soldiers Home Coalition and today I serve as the designated spokesperson for the coalition Um in the aftermath of the COVID-19 outbreak at the soldiers home. Our coalition comprised of former health care administrators, leaders of veterans service organizations and family members of veterans who died of Covid 19 at the Soldiers Home. And Holyoke came together Call for major reforms for how our Commonwealth manages the Holmes and I am before you today to speak about Senate 211 to enact relative to the Secretary of Veterans Services. Our coalition is neither in opposition nor in support of the legislation at least as currently crafted and we believe it should be referred to the Joint Committee on Veterans and Federal Affairs for closer examination and discussion as advocates for improved6729 care for our veterans at the two state veteran Holmes
We do want to be clear however, that any restructuring of6734 the Department of Veterans Services would influence the Holyoke and Chelsea veteran Holmes And so we urge caution with how any new reporting structure would affect the health and well being of veterans in our commonwealth. Rather at this time, we do not see how elevating6750 the position of DVs secretary to a cabinet level agency will improve the delivery of health care for veterans.6758 Instead, we emphatically support house Bill 3804, an act to establish a commission to determine whether the executive office of Health and human services should be separated into agencies with each being administered by a cabinet level secretary. We believe that such a study is necessary and should examine the structure of the entire executive office of health and human services and within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and its outbreak at the soldiers home and holyoke. The current problem as we see it, is that the Department of Veterans Services is not the appropriate oversight agency to run a health care institution.
That being the two state veteran Holmes Holyoke and Chelsea. Um We understand that there is a discussion and a supposition if you will, that if DVs had been a cabinet level secretariat, that DVS would have been able to prevent the widespread covid 19 outbreak From happening at the soldiers home in Holyoke in the spring of 2020. We we disagree with that speculation, it's our position that DVS has clearly demonstrated its inability to manage and provide oversight of the two veteran Holmes since it lacks the staff, the expertise, the resources, the competencies, the experience to provide these essential functions to a health care6838 facility. Um I would furthermore say that our coalition believes that are concerned with Senate 2112 is that we would still have one person, an assistant6849 secretary of veteran Holmes oversee the management of the two. Holmes this in our opinion, doesn't streamline the line of authority response to the pandemic, made clear that there are too many layers between the Superintendent of the Soldiers home in Holyoke and the Governor. This legislation would6866 still have the Superintendent going through the assistant secretary to a secretary and then to the governor. Also, We asked the question that there are approximately 80 employees in the Department of Veterans Services. Would this justify its own6882 cabinet level secretariat?
If DVs was elevated to a secretariat level cabinet position, we ask another basic question, will this come with a much greater budget and staffing level for DVs to properly perform a health care oversight function. Would this not amount to a duplication of service at significant cost to the commonwealth, taxpayer? And certainly when you already6910 have a Department of Public Health in summation, our coalition supports the creation of a commission to study the Executive Office of Health and Human Services. We also believe that the commission should address the proper alignment of the two state veteran Holmes And it's our6926 emphatic conclusion that the Soldiers Home in Holyoke and the Soldiers home in Chelsea would be better served and be6933 better managed by day to day health care experts with direct oversight by health care agency, which in our state6940 is the department of Public health and with a clear reporting lines and with governance that includes representation from the veteran community, it is obligated to serve. Thank you. Chairman, Cabral and with that I'm happy to address any questions or talk or speak to any of these points in our position.
6957 Thank you very much. Any6959 questions from the committee.
Yes sir. If I may. Mr Chairman we saw just really a compliment. Thank you for your service sir. Good to see you john um someone like you has the credibility to speak on issues like this and God bless you for serving. I'm so sorry about what happened and we need to do whatever we can uh to make sure it never happens again. So thank you for your testimony. Thank you Representative, you're very welcome. Thank you for your your family service to our country and for your continued service to our commonwealth. Thank you. Uh anybody any other members of the committee? I have any questions or statements or comment. Um It's not just quickly joined uh
[CABRAL:] terms of jurisdiction. This bill is in the right committee. Um it is the responsibility of the State Administration Committee, the committee. State administration, whenever there are any proposals made by a member of the7028 legislature or by the governor himself to restructure any state agencies ceo and he State Department state Office people. It is uh this committee's jurisdiction of the committee just because the other one is veteran services. It doesn't mean that's the appropriate committee. So um actually sometimes it depends on how um, the title of the bill might be7056 that sometimes the clerk sends it to a different committee, but to actually, there is a bill7060 in the committee on Homeland and veterans, uh, restructures the department billions should be in this committee. It is the jurisdiction of the expertise of this committee to do precisely that. Um, now, in terms of just very quickly, in terms of, I don't and I'm not saying where it should7082 be, Howitt should be, but your reference to the public of Public Health, the Department of Public Health as far as I know, does not supervise direct state services. Um, so I don't know if that's the right one either. So that's the reason why we need to look at this whole any restructuring.
I would have to be carefully looked at the problem of public health is a department that coordinate supervisors, puts out regulations around public7118 health as a whole. That most of that then is carried out by somebody else carry out by local departments of Public health. And uh, and, and, and if there are services that they provide, they don't provide them usually directly they contract out. Right? So I'm not a place. I'm not saying that it is not, I'm saying, I'm not sure it will be. Uh, you have to have a further analysis of that. Um, uh, here some of your concerns around just by changing titles and whatever doesn't mean they're going to get better services. I I understand that as well, but thank you for your testimony and uh your continued advocacy to make soldiers Holmes a better place for those who reside there and provide the right services for them and protect them. Obviously we do have a lot of work to do uh in this area. As you know, there are only two sources Holmes uh and the growth in veterans in particular, they might need services actually it's outside of those areas. The greatest growth that we have seen is actually southeastern massachusetts and keep caught. Uh and we do not have a socialist home in this in our area. Um so there's a7201 lot of work to be done in7202 this area. I think a lot of conversations they need to go on and but I appreciate your the testimony, caring about these issues.
[PARADIS:] Thank you Chairman Cabral If I if I could, I would just say that we've we've looked at the Department of Public Health with great detail and I've had many conversations and discussions with folks within state government and folks have worked with D. PH and that there is a bureau of hospitals as you know, with four state hospitals providing very specialist care for a very for a population with very acute and chronic needs much7241 like the veteran population at two soldiers Holmes with veterans with Alzheimer's dementia, cognitive impairments, not to mention service connected disabilities. So um that is why were we think that is a better fit administratively to be in that system of care, that environment of care and why we feel strongly that DPH chain of command would be more suited to an oversight role with to health care facilities that provides services for veterans.
[CABRAL:] I I understand, I understand uh your the way you are looking at it, it could be, I'm not saying that it isn't, it could be uh I mean there are other state agencies oversee facility that provides services such as the Department of Mental Health example. Um I'm not, I'm saying is7298 there are other agencies that provide that kind of oversight to uh so train services in this sense of very kids services if it is D. E. P. A. To the right place and it's the ph right, but I think it needs further analysis and further conversations.7320
Yes sir. Okay, thank you very much, john again, anybody else any questions? Any comments if not we're gonna move on to the last two, one of the last items here and
and it is uh uh someone who signed up to testify on the bill on the Children's Cabinet that was filed by Representative Khan Uh so that's bill h. 31 87 and we have Greg Hagen signed up to testify please.
Good afternoon everyone. Thank you so much for the opportunity to speak to the committee today in support of House Bill 31 87 an act to establish a massachusetts Children cabinet and thank you all for hanging in were representative Khan and I appear to be book ending this hearing and I'm happy to play um the red sox analogy this week actually be cleanup.7377 Uh my7379 name is Greg Hagen, I'm a practicing pediatrician at the Cambridge Health Alliance. I'm an associate professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School, past president of the American Academy of Pediatrics chapter here in massachusetts and former chief of pediatrics at the Cambridge Health Alliance. Over the past few years I've worked closely with the massachusetts child and adolescent health initiative, a multi stakeholder group of professionals from very disciplines concerned with child, family, health7407 and well being7408 and with the specific goal of improving the mass health programs so that more effectively meet the needs7414 of Children and families in their communities. So why is this bill so important for7420 kids and families? Many state agencies and programs touched the lives of Children and families, but there's often a lack of effective communication and coordination among these various entities.
This is of course no one's fault. We all want our kids and grandkids to succeed and everyone can agree that the future of the commonwealth depends on the health and well being of today's Children but it's an old story legacy systems and programs and government and society at large have evolved in ways that can often overlook or undervalue the needs of Children and youth and after this to the complexities of how the federal state and local governments are structured and the frequent result is an inconsistent focus on the needs7462 of Children as well as a general under resourcing of service is critical to the optimal support of health for Children. Youth and families, roughly half of states in the United States. Um I already have a Children's Cabinet or some7477 similar entity to address these challenges, Vermont Rhode island florida Georgia, Maryland.
House Bill 31 87 would address these challenges here in the Commonwealth. Children's Cabinet, established within the executive office of the Governor would consist of the leadership of the relevant state agencies with input from an advisory group that would include pediatricians, other health care, professional serving Children, early childhood educators, teachers, school administrators, welfare, a welfare professionals and critically the committee would include the voices of Children, youth and parents and I hope it goes without saying that this advisory group would need to reflect the rich diversity of Children and families in the commonwealth.7518 A robust Children's Cabinet would ensure that programs and services for Children and families are coordinated to effectively advance the health and welfare of Children. This would be achieved by developing guidelines and policy recommendations.
A coordinated agenda for Children. If you will, the Cabinet would facilitate interdepartmental collaboration programming implementation in order that services designed for Children and families are planned, managed, delivered in a holistic and integrated manner so as to improve Children's health safety, economic stability, Self sufficiency, quality of life. And yes, we would be using7557 the commonwealth resources more efficiently if we could coordinate more effectively. Finally the Children's cabinet would assure that measures to support child health could evolve over time to meet the change the changing needs of Children and families in the commonwealth. So if the commonwealth is to thrive in the coming decades, we need to be much more attentive to these challenges facing Children and families. So please thank you very much. I hope that we can move the bill forward and7587 anything that I can7588 do to support or help. Please never hesitate.
Dollar thank you. Thank you very much for your testimony.7595 Any questions or comments and uh yes. Mr Chairman please. Yes please. Uh Sir, this is steven Xiarhos from Cape Card. I'm a rookie representative. I just wanted7607 to say thank you. Your background is incredible. Think of the lies that you've touched and saved. We appreciate that. My quick question is is there an age that we're saying a child, is it you know from kindergarten to college or is it tell me about the age group that we're looking at. Well I think we start earlier than Kindergarten because we really want to start the day those Children arrive in our nurseries so from birth very much and the way that pediatricians think about this is typically we think about our purview as extending through college. So most kids complete college. 21 22. Um we work as a multi stakeholder groups. So there are others in the group that may uh sliced at 18. But I think it's important to recognize that um across that age span there has historically been this fragmentation and that's what I'm and our group I would very much hope that Children's cabinet could overcome. Mhm. Thank you sir. Thank you. Mr Chairman. Thank you very much anybody else like to question if not, thank you very much for your testimony. Thank you first. Quickly issues the reason why this is before our committee is to create a new the government state agency if you will or state group just to make the point that I made to the previous person to testify about the bill reference to the vision uh a veteran services. Well, thank you very much. Uh this ends effectively. Anyone was on the list to testify. We do have a number of other bills that are before us testimony as well which no wonder asylum to testify. But I want to point out that anyone can still spend written testimony electronically or letters of support. Oh that is a proposition. Very particular bill to7740 the committee until this friday. And I'm gonna just read out the number of the bills the bill numbers of those that No one test uh signed up to testify. This house 31 14 House 31 20 House 31 21. House 31 25.
House 31 29. House 31 31. House 31 40 for House 31 26. House 31 71, House 31 72. House 31 73 House 32
um, House 31 on one House 30 - three. House 32 34. House 32 36. House 30 to 45 House 30 to 46
that was 36 sorry, House 30 to 47. House 30 to 48. House 30 to 49. I was 30 to 50 I was 40 43 7 2024 7 2036 2015 2051
2054 7. Well, it's 70 Um, Senate 2071
7 2087 2098 98. Sena 21 16 and 7 21 18. We also heard today public the public hearing today. Anyone would like to submit any any testimonial letters of support or oppose. So when you're one of these bills being heard today, please submit it electronically to the committee on friday. Now, is there anyone I also would like to testify in favor of opposed to any legislation before us today?
Garry nine CNN Thank you. Thank you to the members of the committee for being so patient and cooperative percent the super tarring right and petition. Um Today this public hearing. So this concludes our public hearing. I'm looking for a motion to adjourn some old. Second 2nd 2nd. All those in favor say, aye. All those oppose, say nay.
Uh, thank you very much. See you guys soon. Yes. Stay safe7897 and healthy, everybody. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Well done. Amen.
Uh,
yeah.
Um, mhm. Mhm.
© InstaTrac 2025