The House rules won't change this legislative year
I give those who pushed for reasonable house rule changes great credit for trying to make Beacon Hill more transparent. Our own Ms. Robinson and other newbies and a few old timers didn'y garner enough support for key changes. DeLeo has a firm grip on the House and he's the major reason why things don't get done.
From Commonwealth Magazine.
posted by Jim Pillsbury @ 9:54 AM
9 Comments
9 Comments:
we may have lost the war but nice to see that our new legislator was part of the battle
I agree.
How do we make sure that this happens at some point in the not too distant future? I am concerned about the absolute control Speaker DeLeo has over the reps. Not saying he is bad, as I personally think he has done a good job. However I do believe that old saying that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely so want to make sure that there are checks and balances and transparency from the Speaker.
this opportunity only comes every 2 legislative years. The best we can hope for is he will retire or be forced out via a scandal like his three predecessors.
And while the Senate seems to get it with the banning of non-disclosure agreements, often used in sensitive sexual-harassment cases, the House has refused to get on the train. Bad for all those interns I'd say.
I am sure there is a scandal somewhere in his past but how exactly do we find out about it?
It would be interesting to know if MK Feeney had won, would she have joined in with the frosh legislators in pushing for transparency changes or would she have just played ball with the old guard.
Not just MK Feeney, but also the others who ran for this seat. I suspect MK would have been on the right side of this issue, but not sure about those others. It is not the Speaker we should be focused on. It is the process that allows the Speaker to have the type of control he currently has. Whether you like DeLeo or not is not the question. The question is do you agree with the process in place that prevents just about anyone from being able to oppose or disagree with him without facing ostracism
To Anon above, I'm not sure Ms. Feenney would have been on the right side. She has already been part of the political system and assume she'd just go for the business as usual approach up there on the hill. She worked for Governor Patrick for years. She even worked for Governor Romney but seems to be less transparent about revealing that fact. What would the voters who blindly vote Democrat have had to say about that?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home