From Commonwealth Magazine... House plays follow the leader

Massive vote switch shows how lawmakers do what DeLeo wants

Bruce Mohl Feb 12, 2019

ON JANUARY 30, in the midst of a debate over the rules to govern the legislative process on Beacon Hill, a vote took place that revealed a lot about the way the House runs.
The vote was on a technical issue dealing with the way bills are handled as the legislative session comes to an end, when time runs short and political brinkmanship is the name of the game. Rep. Bradley Jones Jr. of North Reading, the Republican minority leader, spoke in favor of the amendment and asked for a roll call vote.

Rep. Thomas Petrolati, Democrat of Ludlow, who was presiding over the session, allotted three minutes for the roll call and punched in no votes for himself and House Speaker Robert DeLeo. A wave of no votes quickly filled the electronic voting board in the House chamber, but then a video of the proceedings captures Petrolati realizing something was wrong. “It’s a yes?” he asks. “Switch’em. Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.”
Suddenly, the no votes of Petrolati and DeLeo were switched to yes votes and then at least 63 other Democrats (and one unenrolled lawmaker, Rep. Susannah Whipps of Athol) followed suit, switching their votes from no to yes. As Bob Katzen of Beacon Hill Roll Call reports in an exquisitely detailed report, it was a case of follow the leader.

“To the reader and viewer, this appears that these 63 Democrats simply watched how DeLeo and Petrolati voted and blindly followed their lead and voted no. And then switched to yes when DeLeo and Petrolati switched to yes,” Katzen reported. “Did these 63 even know what they were voting on? Did they care? What would cause them to switch their votes other than they decided to follow the ‘suggestion’ of the speaker?” Katzen sent emails soliciting comments on what happened to each lawmaker in the chamber that night, but only a handful responded. DeLeo and Petrolati said nothing.
Rep. Lindsay Sabadosa of Northampton told Katzen she voted yes initially and stood by her vote. “I was as surprised as many watching from the gallery that many changed their vote after the speaker’s vote was cast,” she said. “As a first-year representative at my first formal session, I had not witnessed something like that before.”
Rep. Russell Holmes of Boston, a leading DeLeo critic, said the vote captured how Beacon Hill works. “Welcome to the House of Representatives,” he told Katzen. “This is exactly how the House runs itself and the members should be ashamed. The speaker is like a shepherd leading a flock of sheep.”
The vote switching fits a narrative of the House as an institution where power is concentrated at the top – in the speaker’s hands.
“Historically, it wasn’t always this way,” said Phillip Sego, a former Sierra Club lobbyist who recently authored a withering critique of the concentration of power in the House in December. “Nevertheless, in the past 40 years, speakers have become increasingly autocratic….Each successive House speaker has exploited the potential, under the state constitution, to amass tremendous (and despotic) power to the office.”
According to Sego, the means of amassing power is the leverage a speaker holds over members through his ability to appoint selected lawmakers to leadership positions that come with stipends. Sego said committee appointments, aides, and office space are also used to entice lawmakers to the speaker’s side.
“Various representatives trade their fealty for positions of authority,” Sego said. “Those who oppose the Speaker (or who simply annoy him) will get terrible committee assignments, one staffer, and cramped, dank offices hidden away in the State House basement. These committees do little, have few bills, and have no authority. Meanwhile, powerful committee chairs get additional staff, nice offices, and the opportunity to hobnob with leadership members.”