Senator from Middlesex, Senator Donoghue
asked unanimous consent to make a brief statement.
Senator Donaghue.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. President, I thank you
and through you to the members.
I rise to make a brief statement regarding an amendment that I
filed that wasn't passed this time,
but I think it's important to talk about,
and I want to call attention to the body about it.
This has to deal with the recovery from opioid crisis.
As we know, we've worked hard over the last two sessions
to prevent addiction and to expand access to treatment.
We have paid less attention, however,
to treatment of patients who are in recovery
trying to build sober lives.
I've heard from treatment providers like the Gavin House,
that things like job training and housing
are the biggest missing pieces from our dealing
with the opioid crisis.
Employment is often a significant part
of the recovery process.
By holding a job, a recovering addict
receives a source of income, a structured schedule,
and improvement of self-esteem.
For all these reasons, employment
has been found to moderate and to the occurrence
and severity of relapse.
But despite these benefits, it can be difficult
for former addicts to find a job,
to have the training and vocational services needed.
This amendment would provide a competitive grant program,
and though we're under constraints
in our budget this year, I understand that the money isn't
there currently.
But it's so important that we support partnerships
between treatment providers, like sober homes
and vocational service providers.
Proposals that involve a social enterprise model
would receive preference for these grants.
I want to mention one in my own district,
Megan's House, a residential treatment provider that
is currently exploring the possibility of opening
a social enterprise of its own, a nonprofit printing shop that
would provide jobs to 30 recovering addicts
and generate revenue to support the House's programs.
It's exactly the kind of project that the proposed grant program
would help get off the ground.
The amendment also creates a second program,
and it's modeled on the Secure Jobs Initiative.
That provides people in recovery who are at risk of homelessness
with both housing, stabilization,
and job training.
Secure Jobs has a strong record of helping vulnerable citizens
turn their lives around, offering wrap-around services,
and this new program would help recovering addicts turn
their lives around as well.
Community action agency--
Mr. President, I'm having diffi--
--are having difficulty hearing the testimony from the Senator.
Could we please keep it down well below a dull roar
or take it outside.
Thank you, Senator.
Senator Donoghue.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Community action agencies would administer the new program.
The final piece of this amendment
would clarify the recovering addicts
are eligible for the state's vocational rehabilitation
program.
Currently, anyone with a disability
that is a substantial handicap to employment
is eligible for the program if he or she can reasonably
be expected to benefit from vocational rehab services.
Treating people in recovery as disabled for this purpose
would be consistent with the American Disabilities
Act, which generally treats past drug use as a covered
disability.
According to the US Employment Opportunity Commission,
persons addicted to drugs, but who are no longer using drugs
illegally, and are receiving treatment for drug addiction,
and who have been rehabilitated successfully
are protected by the ADA from discrimination
on the basis of past drug addiction.
So employment, housing are the foundations
for a healthy, stable, productive life.
Again, I recognize that the strain on our budget this year,
but I want to call this attention.
I think it's a critical part of treating
the opioid crisis and those who are
trying to recover under what I have called the Recover Act.
So I thank you, Mr. President.
I thank the members for indulging
me to speak on this amendment.
Thank you so much.
[AUDIO OUT] annual leadership.
The next amendment is amendment number 372, the Senator
from Middlesex and Worcester.
Senator Eldridge has filed an amendment, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 372 by Mr. Eldridge, Middlesex County
Opioid Assessment.
Senator Eldridge.
Thank you, Mr. President.
This amendment number 372, Middlesex County Opioid
Assessment would provide $25,000 to the Middlesex District
Attorney's Office for a countywide assessment
of opioid prevention, intervention, and treatment
programs.
Mr. President, Middlesex County, like all counties
in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
has been hit hard by the opioid crisis.
According to the Massachusetts Department of Public Health,
the number of opioid-related overdose deaths in Middlesex
County in 2014 was 273.
In 2015 was 354.
And last year was 392, a marked increase.
Given the complex nature of this crisis,
there is need for a comprehensive and collaborative
approach that will allow systems to focus their resources
and approaches to bring a multi-prong evidence-based
fight against this epidemic.
Middlesex County District Attorney Marion Ryan
has been a leader on this, creating a task force
several years ago.
And this amendment will allow the Middlesex County DA's
office to further partner with key stakeholders
with the goal of providing a system, system alignment
framework, and recommendations for action steps
in the form of an opioid prevention and reduction
plan for Middlesex County.
I urge my colleagues to support this important amendment.
Thank you.
Question comes on adoption of Amendment Number 372.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Oppose, no.
The ayes have it and the amendment is adopted.
The next amendment is amendment number 380,
filed by the Senator from Middlesex, Mr.
Barrett, title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 380 by Mr. Barrett, secure jobs.
Senator Humason.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I was hoping that the sponsor of the amendment-- good,
it looks like we're going to get him right now.
Mr. President, I was hoping the sponsor of this Amendment
Number 380 might be able to tell us a little bit about what
the amendment does.
It appears to be a simple swap of the Secure Jobs Program
from one agency to the next, but perhaps he could enlighten us.
Thank you, Mr. President.
From Middlesex, Mr. Barrett on amendment number 380.
Thank you very much, Mr. President,
and I thank my good friend.
This particular amendment doesn't involve any money.
We're moving administration of a program
into the Department of Transitional Assistance
and away from the Department of Housing and Community
Development.
What's involved here is the provision
of job training for homeless individuals,
primarily homeless women or women threatened
with homelessness.
The notion is to make their situations more secure
by focusing on their employment predicament,
and in so doing, ideally strengthening
their claim to local housing.
We found over time, or rather the advocates,
because this is a longstanding program,
the advocates have found over time
that transitional assistance is more interested in the job
training aspects of this particular enterprise
than a housing agency would ordinarily be.
So we're simply moving it into the agency
whose interests are congruent with the program's objectives.
The amendment number 380, all those in favor
signify by saying aye.
Oppose, no.
The ayes have it, and amendment number 380 is adopted.
The next amendment is amendment number 384,
filed by the Senator from Essex, Miss
Lovely, title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 384 by Miss Lovely,
YMCA Youth At Risk Programs.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Oppose, no.
The no's have it, and amendment 384 is not adopted.
389 has been withdrawn.
Amendment number 389 has been withdrawn.
The next amendment is Amendment Number 399,
filed by the Senator from Essex and Middlesex,
Mr. Tarr, a title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 399 by Mr. Tarr, Restoration
of Vets' Operational Funding.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Oppose, no.
The no's have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
Next amendment is amendment number 412.
Senator from Middlesex and Norfolk,
Miss Creem has filed an amendment, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 412 by Miss Creem, Brookline Alzheimer's
Caregiver's Respite Program.
Senate will be in a brief recess.
Number 412 is on hold.
The next amendment is amendment number 422,
filed by the Senator from Essex and Middlesex,
Mr. Tarr, the title of which the clerk will read.
Senator--
[INAUDIBLE]
Number 422 by Mr. Tarr, Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act.
Senator Tarr.
Senate will be in a brief recess.
Senate is in a brief recess.
Number 422.
Thank you, Mr. President, through to the members.
Mr. President, [AUDIO OUT] this budget debate, we
have talked about the fact that one
of the drivers in the increase in the state
budget on any given year, and certainly
over a period of years cumulatively,
is the cost of MassHealth and Medicaid.
And Mr. President, one of the things that we oftentimes hear
is that we are sometimes restricted in our ability
to address some of those costs because there are limitations
placed on us, because it's a Federal partnership
program, from being able to engage in innovative programs.
And Mr. President, the one that comes to mind,
given the shift from those who had previously
been insured privately to the Medicaid roles,
is the issue of a provision that was originally
in one of our health care bills that
suggested that if you had access to private insurance,
you would not be eligible for Medicaid
unless you exhausted your options to obtain
that private insurance.
So this very simple amendment, which
is within the line item of the relevant agency that
looks at these issues, suggest that it
should examine the Federal Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act
and make a determination as to whether there are other waivers
that we could get that would allow us greater flexibility
and enable us to try to bring within reach other cost control
mechanisms with regard to our State's Medicaid programs.
I've cited one.
There certainly could be others.
This is not an extraordinary measure, Mr. President.
This is asking folks that are already
charged with looking at this area of State
and Federal government to more specifically drill down
into this issue.
And Mr. President, I don't know if I
need to bring back the chart.
We're actually currently trying to colorize the charts to make
your viewing experience more pleasurable,
so I don't know if I need to bring it back
or can bring it back at the moment.
But I surely will in the future.
But Mr. President, this is a situation
where one of the cost driving areas of the budget
needs to have more focus.
And before acting, which hopefully we
would be able to act at some point in the near future,
this amendment seeks that we get information,
we understand the desirability of taking that action
and the consequences if we do.
And Mr. President, I suspect that there
may be some hesitation with regard to this amendment,
and I do not understand it.
I see, Mr. President, you're scratching your head as well.
I don't understand it.
You don't understand it.
I am hoping, Mr. President, that we can move forward
with this particular amendment, because it does
make a lot of practical sense, and it is perhaps a simple step
today, but it could lead to some very impactful steps tomorrow.
Mr. President, I hope the amendment is adopted.
I was actually fixing my hair.
And now the question comes on the adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye, oppose no.
The no's have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
The next amendment is number 424 for what [AUDIO OUT]..
I asked for unanimous consent to make a brief statement.
The Senator asks unanimous consent
to make a brief statement.
Are there any objections?
Hearing none.
Senator Lovely.
[AUDIO OUT] kids, also known as the family cap,
excludes benefits to those children conceived while,
or soon after the family began receiving benefits.
In Massachusetts, approximately 9,000 children
are denied benefits due to this cap.
Massachusetts is one of 17 states that have a family cap,
and seven other states repealed similar provisions.
I'm glad to have this opportunity
to bring to light the importance of this matter,
as lifting the cap [INAUDIBLE] Massachusetts families,
including those 9,000 children who are currently
denied benefits.
With that said, we understand the Commonwealth faces
difficult fiscal constraints this fiscal year,
and for this reason I've withdrawn this amendment.
I'd like to thank my colleagues who acknowledged
the importance of lifting the cap on kids
by co-sponsoring this amendment, and a special
thank you to the Senator from Everett
for his leadership as the chief sponsor of the Lift The Cap
For Kids legislation.
Thank you, Mr. President.
What was that amendment number?
That was--
Senator DiDomenico, for what purpose does the gentleman
rise?
[INAUDIBLE]
The gentleman asked unanimous consent
to make a brief statement.
Are there any objections?
Hearing none.
Senator DiDomenico.
Thank you, Mr. President [INAUDIBLE]..
[AUDIO OUT] --we are not doing a lot of legislation.
This is my bill that I filed, and we
are going through the process of the committee structure.
We actually had our hearing recently on this bill,
and we are looking forward to seeing
it go through the rest of the legislative process
for the next few months or so.
This bill is very, very important
for so many kids across our Commonwealth,
and so many families across the Commonwealth.
So I thank the general lady for filing this amendment.
I look forward to her support going forward.
Thank you very much.
Next amendment is amendment number 424,
filed by the Senator from Worcester, Mr. Moore,
the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment Number 424 by Mr. Moore, CANDO.
Senator Humason.
Thank you, Mr. President, [INAUDIBLE]..
[AUDIO OUT] --getting up to talk about this amendment.
Thank you.
Senator from Worcester, Mr. Moore.
Thank you to my colleague.
This amendment provides $50,000 for a new line item
to support what's called CANDO, which is a Center for Autism
and Neural Development Disorders based at the University of Mass
Medical School.
Within Central Massachusetts, in Western Mass.,
there is a significant health disparity
for young people and adults diagnosed with mental health
needs and accompanying complex conditions,
such as autism and intellectual disabilities.
Medical homes have been developed
and are effective means of coordinating
care and controlling medical expenses.
Individuals with both chronic mental health
and neuro-developmental conditions
present with complex clinical issues
that are often beyond the expertise of clinicians
who lack specialized training or experience
with this population.
This center will target these resources
on the individuals who most need the specialized care.
And I would ask when the vote is taken,
you take it by calling the ayes and nays.
The Senator asked that when a vote
is taken, by taken by the call the ayes and nays.
Those joining with him, please rise and be counted.
Sufficient number--
Sufficient number of members haven
risen, the ayes and nays will be ordered.
[AUDIO OUT]
--is really state-of-the-art care for people with autism.
They're really working as a holistic group.
I wish this were happening throughout the whole state,
but they really are to be applauded for what
they're doing at UMass Medical.
I've gone out and seen the work that they're doing,
and they're really coordinating care for families and kids
with autism.
So this is a really worthwhile thing.
I'm glad that you filed this bill.
If we could please subdue the conversations.
Senators are having trouble hearing the testimony.
Thank you, Senator L'Italien.
The clerk will call the role.
405.
Michael J. Barrett.
Yes.
Joseph A. Boncore.
Yes.
Michael D. Brady.
Senator Brady?
William N. Brownsberger.
Yes.
Harriette L. Chandler.
Yes.
Sonia Chang-Diaz.
Yes.
Cynthia Stone Creem.
Yes.
Julian Cyr.
Yes.
Viriato M. deMacedo.
Yes.
Sal N. DiDomenico.
Yes.
Eileen M Donaghue.
Yes.
James B. Eldridge.
Yes.
Ryan C. Fattman.
Jennifer L. Flanagan.
Yes.
Linda Dorcena Forry.
Yes.
Anne M. Gobi.
Yes.
Adam G. Hines.
Yes.
Donald F. Humason, Jr.
Yes.
Patricia D. Jehlen.
Yes.
John F. Keenan.
Yes.
Eric P. Lesser.
Yes.
Jason M. Lewis.
Yes.
Barbara A. L'Italien
Yes.
Joan B. Lovely.
Yes.
Thomas M. McGee.
Yes.
Mark C. Montigny.
Yes.
Michael O. Moore.
Yes.
Patrick M. O'Connor.
Yes.
Kathleen O'Connor Ives.
Yes.
Marc R. Pacheco.
Yes.
Michael J. Rodrigues.
Yes.
Richard J. Ross.
Michael F. Rush.
Yes.
Karen E. Spilka.
Yes.
Bruce E. Tarr.
Yes.
Walter F. Timilty.
Yes.
James T. Welch.
Yes.
Have all members been [AUDIO OUT]
Ryan C. Fattman votes yes.
[AUDIO OUT]
Mr. President, I wish to be recorded.
Richard J. Ross.
Yes.
Senator Brady.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I wish to be recorded.
Michael D. Brady.
Yes.
All members have been recorded.
Number 424, 37 of them voted in the affirmative, none
in the negative.
The amendment is adopted.
Senator's in a brief recess.
--in order.
The Senator from Essex and Middlesex, Senator Tarr,
has filed amendment number 431, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment Number 431 by Mr. Tarr, GIC provider rates.
Senator deMacedo has filed a further amendment
in the hands of the clerk, the title of which the clerk will
read.
Mr. deMacedo has found a further amendment 431.1,
extending the wellness program tax credit.
Question comes on adopting the--
Underline.
I mean the--
Further [INAUDIBLE].
Question comes on adopting the further amendment.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Oppose, no.
The no's have it and the amendment is adopted.
Question now comes on-- the amendment is not adopted.
The Chair misspoke.
The underlying amendment is now before the body.
Question comes on passing the underlying amendment number
431.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Oppose, no.
The no's have it, and the underlying amendment
is not adopted.
The next amendment is amendment number 438,
the Senator from Hampden, New Hampshire, Mr.--
On hold.
And amendment number 438 is now on hold.
The next amendment is amendment number 441,
Senator from Plymouth and Bristol, Mr. Brady,
has filed an amendment, and title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 441 by Mr. Brady, Plymouth County
Children's Advocacy Center.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Oppose, no.
The ayes have it.
The redrafted amendment is adopted.
The next amendment is amendment number 444,
filed by the Senator from Worcester, Mr. Moore,
the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 444 by Mr. Moore, Medicaid,
managed care organizations.
Question now comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Oppose, no.
The ayes have it.
Amendment number 444 is adopted.
The next amendment is amendment number 455,
filed by the Senator from Hampden, Mr.
Welch, title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment Number 455 by Mr. Welch, Nam Vet.
Question comes on adoption amendment.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, no.
The amendment is not adopted.
The next amendment is amendment number 458,
filed by the Senator from Essex and Middlesex,
Mr. Tarr, title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 458 by Mr. Tarr, Employer Contribution
Clarification.
The senator from Bristol and Plymouth--
excuse me, Plymouth and Norfolk, Mr. O'Connor.
On
Thank you, Mr. President.
[AUDIO OUT] amendment be temporarily placed on hold.
Gentleman requests that the amendment be placed on hold.
Senate will be in a brief recess.
--order on amendment number 463, the gentleman
from Norfolk and Plymouth, Mr. Keenan,
has filed an amendment, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment Number 463 by Mr. Keenan,
Utilization of Public Health Benefits by Large Employers.
Senator from Norfolk and Plymouth, Mr. Keenan.
Thank you, Mr. President.
This amendment has been raised in many other ways
in this budget.
We have noticed, obviously, or take
notice of when the Governor entered his budget, that he
introduced an assessment on employers relative to health
insurance coverage.
And we know that something came out of the House
that while not exactly what the Governor introduced,
was something that attempted to address it,
and we're trying to address it here in the State Senate budget
as well.
What this amendment does, it would basically
serve to identify those entities, those employers who
have the greatest number of employees, who are moved over
into the MassHealth plans.
And when we talk about all these assessments covering health
care costs, we need precise data to know exactly what we
are dealing with.
One of the criticisms that we've heard
about the initial assessment that was proposed, about what
was proposed in the House, what's being proposed here
in the Senate is where are the numbers?
Where are the numbers?
What are we dealing with?
What is the scope of the problem?
Well, we can determine that scope,
we can determine what the real numbers are
with this particular amendment.
So it's called the 50 plus amendment.
It would put the obligation to determine this information,
to look at this data within CHIA,
and they would provide a report and we
would be able to use that report as the foundation
for the decisions we make going forward
are the best way to make sure that private employees are not
shifting the cost of health care,
not shifting employees from private insurance coverage
over to public coverage.
So I would urge favorable action on this amendment
for those reasons.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Question on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Oppose, no.
The no's have it.
The amendment is adopted.
The next amendment is number--
Not adopted.
The amendment is not adopted.
Senate will be in a brief recess.
On amendment number 487, the Senator from Middlesex,
Mr. Lewis, has offered an amendment, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment Number 487 by Mr. Lewis, Malden High School Star
Center.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Senator from Middlesex, Mr. Lewis.
--you, Mr. President.
I rise in support of amendment number 487.
This has to do with school-based health centers.
It is funding to support a specific school-based health
center, which would be the Star Center that we hope
to open at Malden High School.
But I do want to use this as an opportunity just
to say a few words about the great value
and benefits of school-based health centers,
for those of my colleagues who may not
be as familiar with them.
There are currently 33 school-based health centers
that are operated in our communities,
mostly in high schools, sometimes in middle schools.
They are operated by 16 sponsoring agencies
that are either hospitals, or community health centers,
or local health departments.
They essentially function as satellite outpatient clinics,
staffed by, most often, nurse practitioners
or physician assistants who are authorized to prescribe,
and they are supervised by a physician
and comply with national standards.
From a recent report that looked at the benefits
of school-based health centers, I just
wanted to share with you a few of them
because it really is quite remarkable.
One of the main things that school-based health centers
typically do is they integrate both physical health
with behavioral health.
And many times, they also provide dental services
as well.
And remember, these are in schools
and in communities where there are typically
many students that are underprivileged,
that have a difficult time accessing health care services.
Many of them are immigrant students, again,
which makes it much more difficult for them
and their families to seek the care they need.
So having the health center right in the school,
open during school hours means that these critical services
are much more accessible.
As a result of that, students take more advantage of them,
and here's just a few of the benefits
from this recent study.
Students using a school-based health center
demonstrated a 50% decrease in absenteeism,
and a 25% decrease in tardiness after receiving mental health
and counseling services.
So that's a very significant impact on their school
attendance rates.
Adolescents with access to a school-based health center
are 10 to 20 times more likely to make
a mental health or a substance abuse visit
than students in a school without access
to a school-based health center, which
means that they're going to make that visit,
they're much more likely to then get the treatment
and counseling that they need.
Students using a school-based health center for mental health
purposes increased their grade point average over time
compared to non-users.
So we're also seeing not just increased improved attendance,
but as you might expect along with that, improved
academic performance as well.
School-based health centers are cost savers
because they help to avoid unnecessary spending
on emergency department visits.
Students are able to get the care when they need it
in school, avoiding more serious and costly emergency department
visits.
Furthermore, analysis has also shown that school-based health
centers reduce teen birth rates, reducing the birth rate
for girls 15 years and under by 23%, and for girls
16 to 19 years old by 8%.
So that is another benefit for school-based health centers
who offer reproductive health services.
So for all these reasons, I want to offer my strong support
for our continued funding for school-based health centers.
I do want to urge the Department of Public Health, which
oversees the school-based health center program, to take
a comprehensive look at the regulations
that we have in place today.
I do think that some of those regulations
are in need of being reviewed and updated.
For example, the regulations today typically
make it difficult for a school-based health center
to be open after school hours.
And in some cases, and in certain communities,
it would be very helpful to have some hours outside of school
time, and that might be an update we want to make.
So I would hope that the Department of Public Health
will work with the existing school-based health
centers and health providers and members of the legislature
to look at some ways to even further update and strengthen
those regulations.
But again, I want to say thank you
for the support in this particular amendment
for hopefully opening a new school-based health
center which will serve the students at Malden High School,
in the community.
It is a very high priority for the Mayor of City of Malden,
and the school community.
Thank you very much, Mr. President.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Oppose, no.
The ayes have it and the amendment is adopted.
The next amendment is an amendment number 490,
filed by the Senator from Norfolk and Plymouth,
Mr. Keenan, the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 490 by Mr. Keenan, information technology
to support the administration of public assistance, health
benefits, and other human service programs.
Senator from Norfolk and Plymouth, Mr. Keenan.
Thank you, Mr President.
We know that IT is the backbone to much of what we do here
in the Commonwealth.
And we've talked today and yesterday,
and we'll talk tomorrow I'm sure,
and we'll have a continuing conversation about the need
to streamline how we do government.
And particularly when it comes time
to how we streamline applications for certain state
benefits.
Well, in order to accomplish those goals, in order
to be more efficient, we have to invest in our infrastructure.
And this particular line item is substantially
below what had been requested in House 1,
and I know that we've got different challenges
and different priorities here.
But I wanted to highlight this issue,
that the investment in this IT is critically important.
More than 50% of the EOHHS routers
are at the end of their life status and end of support,
meaning once they crash, then they're down, they're out,
and new routers become the only option.
So if we don't have the funding in place,
then we're not going to be able to meet those demands.
Also, this is the line item where
there are approximately 20,000 phones across 154 offices,
they're supported through this particular line item.
And these phones, like many of our computers,
are at the end of their life.
So we need to keep investing.
And then the third area are switches.
Approximately 900 switches across the enterprise,
and nearly all of these are at the end of their life.
So we've got to invest.
This is an important line item and I
would ask that there to be favorable action taken on this.
Mr. President, thank you.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Oppose, no.
The no's have it, and the amendment is not adopted.
The next amendment is amendment number 502,
filed by the Senator from Essex and Middlesex,
Mr. Tarr, title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 502 by Mr. Tarr, observation days.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Oppose, no.
The no's have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
The next amendment is amendment number 504,
filed by the Senator from Essex and Middlesex, Miss L'Italien,
the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 504 by Miss L'Italien, Autism Insurance
Resource Center.
Senator from Essex and Middlesex, Miss L'Italien.
Thank you, Mr. President.
[AUDIO OUT] --amendment aimed to put some funding
into the Autism Insurance Resource Center,
which is part of UMass Medical Shriver Center.
After we passed the legislation in 2010
to provide an autism insurance mandate
under the private sector, and then in 2014 for MassHealth.
We have lots of families of kids with autism
that either don't know how to access their insurance benefit,
or are having difficulty accessing.
In other words, they're aware they can access,
but they're still having roadblocks thrown up.
So this group of people-- there are two people that work here,
two full-time staff and field calls
from people who have folks in their family with autism
to try to make sure that they're able to access their insurance
benefit.
I've been told that for the rate of calls that they're covering,
it would take four members at HHS to be able to do this.
So they're actually doing it at a much lower cost.
So I really wanted to speak on behalf of the great work
that the Autism Insurance Resource Center is doing out
in Worcester on behalf of all of us throughout the entire state.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Adoption of amendment 504.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Oppose, no.
The no's have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
The next amendment, filed by the same Senator
from Essex and Middlesex, Miss L'Italien,
amendment number 505, the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 505 by Miss L'Italien,
Alzheimer's public awareness.
Senator L'Italien.
[AUDIO OUT]
[?
Yes, ?] the amendment be held.
The amendment is temporarily laid aside.
Amendment number 507, filed by the Senator
from the Cape and the island, Senator Cyr, title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 507 by Mr. Cyr, comprehensive family planning
services.
Senator from the Cape and the islands, Senator Cyr.
Thank you, Mr. [AUDIO OUT] for many residents
of the Commonwealth, investment in family planning
makes the difference between access
to cancer screenings and birth control or going without.
It is especially important that the State further
invest in these programs because it both saves women's lives
and taxpayer money.
Family planning helps providers offer a wide range
of affordable preventative services,
including critical screenings for breast and cervical cancer,
birth control, and STI screening,
and treatment for both men and women.
This is particularly important given increasing rates
of chlamydia that we are seeing here in the Commonwealth,
especially among younger adults.
These programs are vulnerable--
low income, uninsured, and under insured residents
in the Commonwealth, many of whom
rely on these providers as their primary care source.
In FY16, the DPH program funded more than 151,000 visits
to almost 84,000 patients.
Additionally, these DPH-funded family planning services
saved the State an estimated 1.6 million in FY16.
Without publicly supported family planning services
in Massachusetts, the rates of unintended pregnancy,
unplanned birth, and abortion would be 40% higher,
and the rate of teen pregnancy would
be an estimated 57% higher.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
All those opposed, no.
The amendment is not adopted.
The next amendment is amendment number 508,
filed by the Senator from Worcester and Norfolk,
Mr. Fattman, the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 508 by Mr. Fattman, greater Milford area
substance regional substance abuse and intervention program.
Senator Ross.
[INAUDIBLE]
Amendment number 508 is on hold.
--and Middlesex, Miss L'Italien, title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 509 by Miss L'Italien,
preserving adult day health programs.
Senator L'Italien.
[INAUDIBLE]
Amendment number 509 is now on hold.
The next amendment is amendment number 511,
filed by the Senator from Worcester and Norfolk,
Mr. Fattman, title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 511 by Mr. Fattman, cash assistance
expenditures.
Senator.
Mr. President, I would ask that this amendment should
be temporarily placed on hold.
Amendment number 511 is placed on hold.
The next [AUDIO OUT] is amendment number 517,
filed by the Senator from Essex and Middlesex,
Miss L'Italien, the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 517 by Ms. L'Italien, money management
program and fast teams.
Senator L'Italien.
Mr. President, I ask that this be placed on hold.
Number 517 is placed on hold.
The Senate is in a brief recess.
--order, and we are on amendment number 518, the Senator
from Essex and Middlesex, Miss L'Italien
has filed an amendment that the clerk will read.
Amendment number 518 by Ms. L'Italien,
medication synchronization.
Senator L'Italien.
Thank you, Mr. President, through you to the members.
So this is an amendment that talks about synchronizing
people's prescriptions.
I know from having taken care of my mom
that it was very frustrating to have some prescriptions come
due multiple times in the same month.
Oftentimes I would get calls in the same week
that her prescription was needing to be refilled.
So this is a really interesting idea about synchronizing--
you know, getting everyone synchronized up
on one day per month for their meds to be filled.
And it would be really great for people who are chronically ill,
people who are senior citizens.
Again, I know, I experienced this with my mom,
having to run to the pharmacy multiple times in a month
because the meds weren't synced up in terms of date.
And so that's what this simply tries to do.
I think it's a really interesting idea.
It would allow insurance companies
to allow partial fills just to get you on a synchronized date.
And so that was what the amendment aimed to do.
I suspect we're not going to do this in the budget,
but I hope it's an issue that we do take up because I do
think it makes a lot of sense.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Thank you, Senator.
The question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Oppose, no.
The no's have it, and the amendment is not adopted.
The next amendment is amendment number 519,
the title of which the clerk will read-- oh,
filed by the Senator from Essex and Middlesex, Miss L'Italien.
Amendment number 519 by Ms. L'Italien,
Fail First, Improve Medication Management amendment.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
And all those in favor signify by saying aye.
Oppose, no.
The no's have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
The next amendment is amendment number 534.
The Senate will be in a brief recess.
--on Amendment Number 521.
The senator from the Cape and the Islands, Mr. Cyr,
has filed an amendment, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment Number 521 by Mr. Cyr-- childhood lead poisoning.
Senator [INAUDIBLE] Cape and the Islands [INAUDIBLE]..
Thank you, Mr. President and, through you, to the members.
I think it's no secret for many members of this body
that before joining you, I spent six years working
at the Department of Public Health with some pretty
remarkable public servants.
And one of the biggest issues that we
were looking at for years has been the impact
of lead exposure on children in the commonwealth
and nationally.
Massachusetts a generation ago was a leader on this issue.
We were one of the first states to issue
some of the most strict penalties, fines,
building a robust system to intervene for young people who
became lead poisoned.
But that was in the 1980s and early 1990s,
actually probably when I was one of those children being
tested for blood lead levels under these requirements.
And in the years since, Massachusetts
has simply just not kept up.
We have fallen behind CDC-recommended guidelines
on intervention for childhood lead poisoning.
When we look at lead exposures for children
here in Massachusetts, the primary vector,
the primary exposure pathway is through leaded paint.
We have over 80%--
lead paint existed in our paint until early 1980s.
80%, nearly 80%, of our housing was built before that time.
So most of the homes that are children, in fact, that we are
living in contain lead paint.
The Department of Public Health and local health departments
across the commonwealth have been persistently chipping away
at childhood lead exposure.
But what we've learned as evidence emerges
on lead exposure is that we used to think about
if you had a certain level of exposure, that's really
where we had the intervention.
And the latest research and evidence over the last decade
shows that basically any exposure to lead
is very harmful.
And so this is an amendment that would
seek to both modernize, make tweaks to the statute--
and full disclosure this is something
that I had sunk my teeth into in DPH
and was unable to get it done when I was there.
But really, this would also bring--
so bring Massachusetts into the 21st century with childhood
lead poisoning prevention.
And it would also find resources for us
to address this health and equity.
Essentially, the childhood lead poisoning prevention
is funded through a trust through very minor assessments
on certain professions.
Those have not been raised since they were filed in 1994.
I think that's when I was in first grade.
So it's really time that we step up as a commonwealth.
I don't think we're prepared in this senate budget
to address this, but I really hope
that we make meaningful strides on childhood lead poisoning
prevention.
I really worry that lead exposure is something
that we care about when we see it
in the news of Flint, Michigan but something
that we often forget.
And I think we feel is a problem that we feel we've solved here.
And it is not.
So Mr. President, I do ask unanimous consent
for this amendment to be withdrawn.
Gentleman asks unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment.
Is there an objection?
Hearing no objections, the amendment is withdrawn.
Senator Jehlen, for what purpose does the gentlelady rise?
The senator asks unanimous consent
to make a brief statement.
Are there any objections?
Hearing none, Senator Jehlen.
I just wanted to rise in support of the senator's amendment.
Even though it's not going to be considered now,
I want to say how important it is
for us to begin, again, to pay attention to the lead paint.
I learned about lead paint when my children
were among those who were involved
in the first test of childhood lead levels.
Dr. Needleman took their baby teeth
and compared them with other children
and found that the levels of lead
affected children's behavior and children's achievement.
Later on, one of my children had to be
treated for lead poisoning.
And I had had several experiences--
[GAVEL KNOCK]
[INAUDIBLE]
This gentleman is having a problem in hearing [INAUDIBLE]..
Subdue your conversations in the chamber.
Thank you, Senator.
Senator Jehlen.
I'm being inspired by the gentleman's previous remarks
about his own life, and I'm telling you
that I have lived in a neighborhood where
all of the children were exposed to lead
not only from automobiles and paint
but from a smelter in our neighborhood.
So all of the children were exposed
to dangerous levels of lead.
We've made a lot of progress.
But I think that you still know that even in school, children
are exposed to lead from the water.
And there is still a predominance
of lead paint unremoved in low income communities.
So I'm going to tie this to the achievement gap
and say that if we want children to be raised healthy
and to have the IQ and the achievement
that we want them to have, we need to take lead paint,
not lead, seriously.
We need new resources.
DPH in the last 17 years has been cut by almost 20%
in real terms.
They don't have the resources they need to identify children
at risk, properties that are damaging to children,
and to give the resources to help the children, to the help
the property owners remediate, and the children to recover.
So Mr. President, those new resources
are identified in this amendment,
which updates from 1993--
how many years ago was that?
Almost 25 years ago.
Updates the fees and fines from almost 25 years
ago in a modest, modest increase for violators
and for people involved in transfer of real estate--
very, very modest, something like $10 increase in a license.
So Mr. Chairman, I know that this is not
going to be taken up today, but I
want to put down a marker that we should take it up
at the nearest possible opportunity.
Thank you, Mr. President.
For what purpose does the gentlelady rise?
So can I ask [INAUDIBLE]?
Senator Chang-Diaz has asked unanimous consent
to make a brief statement.
Are there any objections?
Hearing none, Senator Chang-Diaz.
Thank you, Mr. President and, through you, to the members.
I also rise to speak on the same topic.
I understand then the reasoning for withdrawing
of the amendment by the gentleman from the Cape
and the Islands.
But I wanted to throw my most strongly felt support
behind the content of this amendment.
What the lack of urgency with which we
are acting in Massachusetts on this issue is outrageous.
It is a moral outrage.
Just over a year ago--
two years ago--
Flint, Michigan was on everyone's minds,
everyone's lips.
It burst onto the world stage, and we
watched in horror and many months
since then, watched in horror as bottled water
had to be shipped into Flint for everything
from bathing to drinking to doing the dishes.
And we all wondered self-righteously
as the fingers were pointed this way and that in Michigan,
why didn't they do anything to prevent that
at the local level?
Why didn't they do anything to prevent that
at the state level?
Where was the public sector to protect those children?
We are doing the same thing here in Massachusetts.
If you look, Reuters did a piece of investigative journalism
a little over a year ago in which
they looked at public health data across the country.
And they found over 3,000 localities
in which the blood, the lead levels in children's blood
was double what it was in Flint, Michigan
at the height of the lead crisis in Flint, Michigan.
And I'm sorry to tell on my colleagues
here that when you look at the map of Reuters' findings,
you'll see plenty of communities in Massachusetts in red
on that map, where our lead levels in our children
are worse than double what they found in Flint, Michigan.
What are we going to say when the news cameras are trained
on us or when our children look at us
and say, what did you do to prevent this?
Mr. President, if we have not acted on this issue
before we take up the budget next year,
I will be roll calling this amendment.
Mr. President?
Senator Lewis, for what purpose does the gentleman arise?
I, too, would like unanimous consent to make
a brief statement, please.
Senator [INAUDIBLE] unanimous consent make a brief statement.
Are there any objections?
Hearing none, Senator Lewis.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I also feel that I need to chime in along with my colleagues
on this issue.
As the chair of the Public Health Committee,
I am well aware, and we all need to be well aware,
as has been said so eloquently by the previous speakers
that the issue of lead poisoning and the harmful health
impacts it can have on our children
is not limited to Flint, Michigan.
In other places outside of Massachusetts,
it's very much a concern that we have here in the commonwealth.
In 2014, approximately 5,000 children
in Massachusetts under the age of four years old
had a blood lead level which is above the recommended
maximum by the CDC--
5,000 children.
And one of the problems that we have is not only
are these assessments too low and have not been updated,
as the senator from the Cayman Islands
rightly pointed out since 1994, but we also
have a blood lead level in Massachusetts, which
has also not been adjusted.
And it said at 25 micrograms per deciliter,
whereas the CDC is at five.
And the current best research we have does
demonstrate and suggest that we really need to update that.
So this is a critical public health issue.
It does demand more attention.
I think it's a good thing that a number of us
have made a point of speaking about it on the floor
of this senate today.
I am disappointed that we unfortunately cannot take up
this amendment in this current budget.
But again, I would urge us to take this issue very seriously
and look at a number of strategies
to address the risk of lead poisoning,
including increasing the fees that fund the DPH fund
as well as the level that was set
as a safe maximum level and also homeowner tax
credits and other incentives for homeowners to do deleading.
So again, want to just raise the--
make sure we really do give this issue the serious attention
that it deserves.
Thank you, Mr. President.
For the edification of the members,
Amendment Number 521 has been withdrawn,
but I greatly appreciate the activism and the statements.
And for what it's worth, this temporary chair
sitting here with the gavel currently
strongly agrees with the statements made.
Thank you.
The next amendment is Amendment Number 520
filed by the senator from Hampden and Hampshire,
Mr. Lesser, title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment Number 520 by Mr. Lesser--
epiphrine bulk purchase program.
Senator from Hampden and Hampshire, Mr. Lesser.
Mr. President, through you to the members,
I rise today in support of Amendment 520,
the epinephrine bulk purchase program.
Mr. President, two years ago, this senate
adopted a similar amendment to fund the bulk purchase
of naloxone because at the time, the maker
of that lifesaving, anti-overdose drug
was price gouging and making the purchase of Narcan
nearly unaffordable for first responders on the front lines
of the opioid epidemic crisis.
Unfortunately today, we find ourselves
in a similar circumstance.
The drug maker, Mylan, is doing the same thing with EpiPens.
Last August, the steep increase in the price of the EpiPen,
a lifesaving injection device for people
with severe allergies, sparked outrage
among consumers who worry that parents
won't be able to afford the pens for children heading back
to school.
With a quick stab to the thigh, the EpiPen
dispenses epinephrine, a drug that reverses swelling, closing
of the airways, and other symptoms
of a severe allergic reaction to bee stings, peanuts,
and other allergens.
Mylan, the pharmaceutical company,
acquired this decades-old product in 2007,
nearly 10 years ago, when the pharmacies paid less than $100
for a two-pen set.
And since then, they've been steadily raising
the wholesale price.
In 2009, a pharmacy paid $103.50 for an EpiPen set.
By July of 2013, the price was up to $264.50,
and it rose 75% to $461 by last May.
This May, the price spiked again to $608.61.
This is an unconscionable price increase
of a lifesaving drug that has been on the market for decades.
There is no reason for this price increase.
And it is hurting our citizens.
And it is endangering health in our communities.
One example, Naomi Shulman of Northampton
has a 12-year-old daughter, who is allergic to cashews.
She keeps EpiPens at home and at school.
Last year, Ms. Shulman's out-of-pocket copayment
for an EpiPen two-pack was $100--
reasonable.
But because EpiPens may expire year after year,
she has to go back to buy them again.
And she has to send them to her daughter's camp
and to other places--
her school, her afterschool activities.
And her cost for that same, two EpiPen set went to $400
after it was only $100 a year before.
The New York Times reported that for the first time in 10 years,
Ms. Shulman said, she briefly considered
forgoing the purchase but didn't want to risk it.
It's wrong, frankly, for a mother
to have to even begin to consider
putting her child at risk because she can't
afford an EpiPen medication that frankly is not
a new technology.
It's been around for a long time and was a fraction
of the cost just a year before.
In addition, western Massachusetts schools,
where I come from, have been reported
to have among the highest levels of EpiPen administration
rates out of all Massachusetts school regions.
Part of this is because of the rural nature of our schools.
People are outdoors more.
And we have lower incomes in other areas of the state.
We're more reliant on public purchasing of these drugs.
Epinephrine, or EpiPens, can be administered
to save lives in several life threatening situations.
This is not just about a minor allergy.
It prevents allergy attacks.
It prevents allergy attacks and asthma attacks from bee stings.
It can prevent someone from going into a cardiac arrest
if they have an allergic reaction.
I'd also point out the number of children suffering
from these allergies in the commonwealth continues
to climb.
More than 10,000 Massachusetts school students
had prescriptions for EpiPens in 2011 to 2012 school year.
And that number is going up.
That's the last year for which we have solid data.
This amendment will create a self-sustaining financial
vehicle to ensure the program can be fully financed
and that the epinephrine doses available to those schools
and first responders are made available to those who need it.
It uses the private sector.
Just like Costco or Walmart, it uses the purchasing
to buy-- the states' market power
to purchase EpiPens in bulk.
So we could finally stand up for our citizens
against greedy pharmaceutical companies that, quite frankly,
are skyrocketing the costs of this drug
with no legitimate intellectual property or patent
or market reason.
Again the price was $100 just a few years ago.
The fund would come from three main sources.
We don't appropriate funds in this bill.
We set up a vehicle for cities and towns
to begin to donate and to pool their purchasing
power to bring the price down.
Here is where the funds would come from.
First payments, voluntary payments, from cities and towns
to purchase the EpiPen doses like we do with Narcan.
Revenue allocated, if we choose, in the annual budget.
We don't do it in this amendment,
but we can at a future time.
It would also be possible to collect
public and private sources, such as gifts or donations
or bless their heart, maybe Mylan themself,
and the pharmaceutical company themself,
could volunteer to put some doses or some money
into this fund.
The program, again, builds on the success
of what we learned in the Narcan bulk purchase program.
And I would recognize the language
we put in the senate ways.
It means draft budget proposal that we're all
debating right now to enhance bulk purchasing
of pharmaceutical drugs of public health concern.
The Narcan program, which has now
been in effect for two years using this bulk purchase
formula, has saved 1,500 lives just in the first half of 2016.
This is information coming from our Massachusetts public health
commissioner.
Narcan is a life-saving drug that can reverse opiate doses.
The distribution mechanism for Narcan and for EpiPen
is actually very similar.
It's a lot of institutional purchasers and applications--
ambulances, fire departments, school counselors,
school nurses.
So there's actually a lot we've learned from the administration
of the Narcan program that can be applied to EpiPens to reduce
the price of EpiPens.
Bulk purchasing allows the state government
to negotiate drug prices directly with the manufacturer.
Again, using our purchasing power
as a private sector market participant
to get the best price for our tax payers and for our citizens
that we deserve.
What has happened with EpiPens in this country,
quite frankly, Mr. President, is unconscionable.
These are unprecedented price increases
with no legitimate explanation or justification.
We have an obligation, if the federal government will not
act, to control the price of these pharmaceutical drugs,
which are essential to our children's
health, our commonwealth.
And this chamber and this body has an obligation
to stand up to this and use the power we
have to protect our citizens and make sure that our families can
afford EpiPens.
These are EpiPens, something that's
been around for a long time.
Essential to prevent a child from going into cardiac arrest.
We should be ashamed of ourselves
that we would allow these types of price increases
to happen without us acting, without us doing something.
So I appreciate the support of this chamber.
I appreciate the support of our leadership on this amendment.
And I urge a favorable decision.
Thank you, Mr. President.
The senator from Bristol and Plymouth, Mr.--
[AUDIO OUT]
--proud to cosponsor of the amendment with Senator Lesser.
I'll leave out a lot of the details
because I think he's done it fine justice
and just speak generally to the pretty pervasive practice
of price gouging by the pharmaceutical industry.
The only folks in the room that will roll their eyes at that
are folks that lobby for the pharmaceutical industry
because 85% of those polled say, they're sick and tired of it
and expect their politicians to do something.
Let me tell you why I sound a little frustrated because I've
worked with some of you for so many years now that I've
had friends of mine, some that agree and some that disagree,
say, why do you even bother?
That's pretty sad when we spend much of our time listening
to constituents who feel insecure about their health
care.
You know all the reasons why.
I don't need to spend as much time talking
about this as I perhaps am accused of from time to time.
But you can spend all day long pointing fingers and saying,
what's Trump going to do to us?
What are we going to do in Massachusetts to offset
this and that the other thing?
Well, let me tell you as someone perhaps
more than anyone in this building.
And again, maybe that's a sign that we
ought to have self-imposed term limits.
But I've been around a while.
And I had the great privilege but also the great frustration
of first chairing health care.
So I spent several years crafting policy
with people who cared about access to health care.
And at the time, one of the things that I was primarily
responsible for was the creation of a program called
the Senior Pharmacy Program.
It then evolved into a bigger insurance program
called Prescription Advantage.
I thought it was wonderful.
I'm a health care guy.
I'm a policy person.
My job is to serve seniors and the disabled and folks that
couldn't afford expensive drugs.
And by the way, this is at a time
when the drugs were a lot less expensive than they are today,
even if you could compare apples to apples
and correct for the consumer price
index and all the other wonderful calculations that go
on in the economy of markets.
So funny thing happened.
After chairing health care, I went
to chair Ways and Means, which means
you find out just how much--
how expensive the damage that you
can do by crafting policy that increases access when
it comes to the side of the ledger
where you have to pay for it.
So I now empathize with those behind me
and to my right that have to actually calculate
the necessary but expensive policy that we crafted, engaged
in, and hopefully pass here.
Nothing has confounded me more, except I figured it out.
It's actually very simple.
And I'll give you that conclusion
at the end of what I hope will only be another few minutes.
Nothing has been found to be more how everybody says,
they're unhappy with health care.
And they're paying too much and they're not getting enough it.
And if you really want to get sophisticated and compare it
all over the world, stop spending
all of your time bragging about how great health
care in this country is.
Absolutely.
If you need a heart transplant tonight,
do it here in Massachusetts.
But if you compare statistics of mortality and morbidity,
and you compare outcomes, and you look at really maintenance
health and the health and welfare of a population,
don't spend a whole lot of time suggesting that we've somehow
made American health care great again because it's
pretty sad when you look at what we
spend relative to what we get.
So how does that relate to this?
Way back, many years ago, I sat in a final conference committee
at Ways and Means.
And I had a little simple amendment.
It was referred to as Amendment 271.
Pretty harmless.
It was basically the first page of economics 101,
not even in college.
This is something people learn in high school.
If you buy something in bulk, you usually get a better deal.
So if the state police are going out to buy 100 police cars,
they don't go to 100 different dealers
and say, let me overpay you.
They say, we've got a deal for you.
We want to buy 100 of your cars, but you're going
to give us a wholesale price.
Well, we found a way to do that in America
at one point when we had some honest politicians, who
crafted a Veterans Affairs plan to buy drugs in bulk.
Then a funny thing happened.
Politics got more and more corrupted by special interests
over the decades.
And even when we passed Prescription D, one
of the biggest entitlements ever that
should have been a great celebration.
But it was a giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry.
Go into a fifth grade class, and teach them Junior Achievement.
Try to describe to the fifth graders
how a law gets written to say, you're
going to buy billions and billions and billions
of dollars in drugs, but you can't negotiate as a buyer.
By the way, only government would
fall for that kind of deal because nobody spending
a nickel, a nickel would fall for that.
But if you spend billions of dollars and it's somebody
else's money-- all of us who pay taxes and those we represent--
funny thing happens.
Written into the law by the lobbyist
for the pharmaceutical manufacturer of America.
By the way, he was a congressman,
and then the little door turned a little, and he stepped out.
And he made a couple of million bucks almost the next day
after he served in Congress and helped write the plan.
I won't bother naming his name because he's moved on.
But I do like to publicly expose things.
So let's take Mylan for an example.
Guess who the CEO of Mylan is?
The woman who runs it happens to have a daddy, and his name's
Senator Joe Manchin.
What a coincidence.
What a coincidence how we can't get good drug policy
in Washington because the whole place is wired.
And by the way, most of the lobbying and political money
that has gone to corrupting the pharmaceutical industry price--
or ended up causing price gouging, most of it honestly,
if you look at all of the government analysis--
excuse me, all of the nongovernmental analysis
by nonprofits who care about campaign finance,
a majority has actually gone to the Republican
Party in Congress.
But before you think I'm making a partisan statement, a very
significant, almost equal amount,
has gone to the Democratic Party leaders.
So there is one reason why we are overpaying
for drugs and one reason why we are overpaying for health care
generally.
And you can wait for the Congress to solve health care.
Now everybody's relying on the US Senate.
Until and unless we take on cost-- and the reason
I'm saying this is because I participated
in almost every commission and committee, chaired
the committees, participated in hundreds of hours of debate,
and almost every time, cost control was left out.
I remember one former Senate president had their staff come
to me and say, oh, we're going to do x, y,
and z on this, but we're not taking on cost control.
Oh, but we're going to appoint a commission,
and they're going to come up with some wonderful things.
And then we appoint a commission.
They come up with not too much.
Then they come up with plenty, and we don't adhere to it.
And guess what the one thing we didn't take on was?
The biggest cost driver-- double digit increase
pharmaceutical prices.
You know we don't take it on.
It's a sacred cow.
They employ thousands of people in Massachusetts.
I have friends in this building that say to me, why
do you feel this way?
Wait a minute.
Stop.
My brother's a cell biologist.
I think that one of the most unbelievable industries
in Massachusetts, not because it employs so many people--
that's great--
because it saves lives.
I buy all that.
The biotech industry is a lifesaver.
That doesn't mean that we have a right to take taxpayer dollars
and overpay for drugs.
And it doesn't mean that we have a right
to pick the flavor of the month and say, here's a $100 million
a year for you.
That doesn't mean I don't respect the work.
That doesn't mean I don't think that we should be doing things
to help the industry thrive, not because it's an industry.
It employs people, but because it does save lives.
I'm going to close with this, Madam President,
and just say, it is unbelievable to me
that in every other product we buy as individuals
and even as a government, we actually say,
if you buy more of something, you can get a better deal.
And that little section I told you
about, Section 271, wouldn't you know,
at the end of a conference committee, the budget
almost fell apart because a speaker
at the house at the time killed Section 271 and then went on
and worked for the biotech industry.
That's OK if that's what all of us think is OK.
I don't think it's OK.
I think that we are overpaying for drugs.
This is just one example.
But we are overpaying because it's a very, very difficult
thing to take on because the first thing they say
is we're doing God's work.
We're saving lives.
I agree.
But you're going to kill investment.
No, we're not.
That price gouging by EpiPen-- and by the way,
please don't be fooled by those that say,
that's an aberration because last year when I filed a bill
and had a hearing at health care finance that was stifled
on the House side, we were just saying, listen,
we just want to make sure that certain drugs that
are lifesaving, the Department of Public Health
has some rights to keep prices within reason.
And we just want transparency to know how much of it's
really spent on research versus all
the glitzy, funny sales things.
You can always tell when they're in the doctor's office.
You know what's going on.
So let me end Mr. President--
Madam President, by saying I'm pleased that the gentleman
filed it.
The reason I decided to expand the conversation beyond just
this bulk purchasing is I firmly believe
there is a-- we should stop telling people
we're going to take on cost if the first place we do not look
is how we are overpaying for drugs
and how bulk purchasing at a federal level and a state level
is either nonexistent in the case of Medicare
a prescription part D. It's just unbelievable.
It literally is like a politician
trying to help his friend saying, please overpay
so those lobbyists and those contributors can make money.
It's that simple.
Think about it.
You're buying billions and billions and billions
of dollars in drugs, and the law says,
you can't negotiate a best price.
And the Veterans Administration can.
But we can't, not here on the state level,
not on the federal level.
So I hope that when we take on this broader issue
that we look at all cost.
That doesn't mean we shouldn't pay lots
for drugs that save lives.
Based on the investment and based on the costs
and based on the market, but also remember--
and I promise this is my last line, Madame President--
remember that when you put your capital
into a regulated business that happens to save or take lives
if mistakes are made, you don't have the right to price gouge.
You have a right to make a fair profit.
You have a right.
But it's regulated.
And if you don't like it, for those that do all the time,
every time they come before the hearing,
I feel bad for whomever is delivering it.
You know some of the players.
It's like they have cue cards, and they like,
and if you do this, it will kill investment.
And you will take little babies' lives.
Give me a break.
It's sad, and it's pathetic.
Let's just make sure when you regulate a business,
when you regulate a business and when
you're in a capitalist system, you
should get what you pay for.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you.
Senator from Hampden and Hampshire, Mr. Lesser.
[AUDIO OUT] Thank you very much to my friend
from New Bedford for his words.
I would like to close this debate with an open letter
to the Mylan CEO, Heather Bresch.
This was authored by a constituent of mine, Dr. Mark
Kenton, who's an emergency room physician at Mercy Medical
Center in Springfield.
If my colleagues would be so patient,
I think it merits reading the entire letter.
We'll do it pretty quickly, but given the severity
of this issue, I think this letter merits
a reading for the chamber.
It was an open letter to the Mylan CEO, Heather Bresch.
It says, "In light of recent news regarding EpiPens,
I would like to give you an opportunity
to justify your pay increase from $2,453,456 in 2007
to $18,931,068 in 2015.
In that time, the wholesale cost of an EpiPen
has gone from $56.64 to $31.82.
By the way, the cost of a one millimeter [?
amp ?] of epinephrine is $4.49.
So I give you the opportunity to justify
the increase in the cost of an EpiPen
as well as the increase in your salary.
I know you must have an explanation.
As a practicing emergency medicine physician,
I have cared for nearly 50,000 patients in my career.
As a team, my nursing staff techs, medical assistants,
physicians assistants are all trained to save lives.
We frequently care for acute anaphylactic and allergic
reactions.
So while I know you must have an explanation of my question,
here are some things I know you do not know.
You do not know the look on a patient's face
when they are struggling to breathe after a bee sting.
You do not know the fear a patient has when their lips
and tongues are so swollen there is barely
an airway to care for.
You have never heard the sound of a [?
stridor ?] when air can barely make its way to the lungs.
You have never seen the look of a parent
when their child is unresponsive.
You have never had to debate whether you
need to give epinephrine to a patient
in an anaphylactic shock who has underlying
cardiac disease with the knowledge
that the drug may save their life
but could cause a heart attack.
You have never attempted to intubate
a patient in respiratory failure after a bee sting.
You have never watched your own child, while on vacation, eat
a peanut butter sandwich, which they have done so many times
before, but break out into a severe rash
and receive a prescription for an EpiPen,
only to be told that the pharmacy doesn't
accept your insurance.
And you have to pay $500 out-of-pocket
for a potential life-saving medicine.
You have never performed CPR on a child.
You have never told a parent that their child is dead.
These are things that you do not know.
However, I do.
I have done them."
This is Dr. Kenton, not myself.
"We do.
My team has done them.
So please, Ms. Bresch, justify your increase
of 461% for a medication that costs $4.49 to the point
that patients and families who may not have insurance
have to make a decision that could lead to their child's
death.
Justify your pay increase of 671%.
Justify your greed.
This is sincerely, Mark A Kenton, DO of Mercy Medical
Center in Springfield."
Madame President, in honor of Dr. Kenton,
in honor of the men and women every single day who
work to protect our children, in honor of the 10,000 school
children who use EpiPens every single day
and rely on them in our schools in the commonwealth,
I ask that when this vote is recorded,
it is done so with a tallying of the yeas and the nays.
The senator from Hampden and Hampshire
has asked that when a vote is taken,
it be taken by a call of the yeas and nays.
The members joining with him, please rise and be counted.
A sufficient number, Madame President.
A sufficient number have risen.
The yeas and nays will be ordered.
And the clerk will call the roll.
[AUDIO OUT]
Just a moment.
The senator--
We can't-- roll call's been--
I'm sorry.
[AUDIO OUT]
Joseph A. Boncore.
Yea.
Yes.
Michael D. Brady.
William N. Brownsberger.
Yes.
Harriete L. Chandler.
Sonia Chang-Diaz.
Yes.
Cynthia Stone Creem.
Yes.
Julian Cur.
Yes.
Viriato M. deMacedo.
Yes.
Sal N. DiDomenico.
Yes.
Eileen M. Donoghue.
Yes.
James B. Eldridge.
Yes.
Ryan C. Fattman.
Yes.
Jennifer L. Flanagan.
Yes.
Linda Dorcena Forry.
Anne M. Gobi.
Yes.
Adam G. Hinds.
Yes.
Donald F. Humason, Jr.
Yes.
Patricia D. Jehlen.
Brian A. Joyce.
Oh, jeebus.
John F. Keenan.
Yes.
[AUDIO OUT]
Eric P. [AUDIO OUT]
[LAUGHTER]
[AUDIO OUT]
Jason M. Lewis.
Yes.
Barbara A. L'Italien.
Yes.
Joan B. Lovely.
Yes.
Thomas M. McGee.
Yes.
Mark C. Montigny.
Yes.
Hello.
Michael O. Moore.
Yes.
Patrick M. O'Connor.
Yes.
Yes Kathleen O'Connor Ives.
Yes.
Mark R. Pacheco.
Yes.
Michael J. Rodrigues.
Yes.
Stanley C. Rosenberg.
Yes.
Richard J. Ross.
Yes.
Michael F. Rush.
Yes.
Karen E. Spilka.
Yes.
Bruce E. Tarr.
Yes.
Walter F. Timilty.
Yes.
James T. Welch.
Yes.
That a Freudian slip?
[AUDIO OUT]
Michael J. Barrett votes yes.
Senator from second Middlesex Senator Senator Jehlen.
Patricia D. Jehlen votes yes.
And Senator from Worseter, Senator [INAUDIBLE]..
[AUDIO OUT]
Yes.
And the senator from Plymouth and Bristol, Mr. Brady.
[INAUDIBLE]
Michael D. Brady votes yes.
So the--
[AUDIO OUT]
Madame President, I wish to be recorded.
Linda Dorcena Forry.
Yes.
That everybody, [?
Mike. ?]
That's it.
[AUDIO OUT]
38 in the affirmative.
None in the negative.
The amendment is adopted.
Thank you.
The senator from Suffolk and Middlesex,
for what reason are you [? stand?
?]
[AUDIO OUT]
--the eloquent remarks and moving letter
offered by the senator from Hampden
be printed in the record.
[INAUDIBLE] gentleman asks unanimous consent
to ask that the statement of the senator be put into the record.
Is there any objection?
Thank you.
[GAVEL KNOCK]
OK, the ne--
524.
Amendment Number 524.
The senator from Plymouth and Bristol, Senator Pacheco,
has offered--
has [INAUDIBLE] amendment, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment Number 524 by Mr. Pacheco,
Department of Mental Health.
Senator, yes.
Question comes on adoption [INAUDIBLE]..
All those in favor, say, aye.
Oppose, no.
The ayes have it, and the amendment is adopted.
Amendment Number 527 is on hold.
Amendment Number 529 is on hold.
And number-- where's 30 [INAUDIBLE]??
Amendment Number 533 is on hold.
The next amendment is a Amendment Number 534.
The senator from Essex and Middlesex, Mr. Tarr,
has filed an amendment, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment Number 534 by Mr. Tarr, CIG--
GIC, Provider rate cap and balance billing protections.
The senator from Essex and Middlesex, Mr. Tarr.
Well, well, well, Madam President.
It's been a while since we've had an opportunity
to look at some documents from the minority print shop
and from the minority innovation chamber.
But Madam President, if I can start, I'd like to take a look
and remind us all to take a look at the balance of imbalance.
And Madame President, you recall from this chart
that there are a number of things
that are contributing to the internal imbalance
of the current budget.
One of them, Madame President, is right here.
Madame President--
[GAVEL KNOCKING]
Please give this gentleman your attention.
You may not have seen his chart, and this
is another opportunity.
Thank you, Madame President.
I'd love the opportunity to unveil some new charts.
And that's why I want to make sure that people
are paying attention.
I know the gentleman from Lynn may
want to take a brief recess to come over.
He's straining to be able to see this.
I'm happy to bring it closer to him.
I know that he can see the red ink.
He's familiar with that but I'm talking about, Madam President,
the green side of the chart at the moment.
So one of the things that's contributing
to the internal imbalance that we're trying to deal with
is right here.
And it's the subject of the present amendment, titled GIC
provider caps.
And for those of you that do not have the opportunity
to see this as clearly as you might,
the value of this amendment savings for the budget
is $39 million.
So when we talk about some of the missed opportunities
that we have not yet captured, Madam President--
and it is wonderful to see you upon the rostrum.
And I'd be happy to bring this--
I will bring this to the rostrum if you need to see it.
But Madam President, $39 million is a serious opportunity
for savings at a time when we all
understand the budgetary constraints that we face
and the current imbalance that's reflected by this chart.
Now Madame President, let's take a look
at what's been happening with the cost of our Medicaid
programs to put that $39 million into context.
Believe it or not, Madam President,
if you look at the highlighted line at the top of this chart,
it's actually blue.
But you may not be able to see the color from a distance.
I know the gentlelady from Worcester
is coming over-- just will show that to you.
Good one.
Thank you.
I agree.
It's a good one.
So Madam President, the top line on this chart
represents increase in Medicaid spending.
The increase and the rate of increase, Madame President,
is alarming.
Now if you look at the line right below the top line,
you'll see that that's enrollment.
And you'll notice that there's a kink in the enrollment chart.
And that's because when there were problems with the health
connector, folks were pushed into the Medicaid program
as a last resort so that they would not lose their health
insurance coverage entirely.
Now since that happened and since the connector has
been remediated by the present administration,
there was actually a redetermination of eligibility
for a number of those folks.
I know the gentlelady from Salem is taking a picture of this.
I'd be happy to bring this over, and perhaps we
can even photocopy it for you later because it's
an important chart.
So the reason that you see that change in the rapid increase
in enrollment is largely the redetermination
and determination of ineligibility
of folks that were put into MassHealth in order
to compensate for the displacement
from the connector.
So that has been remedied.
But you will also notice since that time
when that started to occur in 2015, the rate of spending
has continued to go up.
Now you've heard just a short time ago--
or actually it was yesterday--
how soon time goes by.
But you remember yesterday, the chairman
of the Committee on Ways and Means
accurately pointed out that this account is roughly 40%
of the state budget.
So if you have something that's 40% of the state budget,
it's got this rate of increase, and we have the opportunity
to save $40 million, we need to consider it seriously.
So here's what this amendment does, Madam President.
It suggests that we will set a cap on the amount
that providers are paid for treating and addressing
those who are in the GIC.
And that cap is 160% of what Medicare would
pay for that same patient.
Now just to be clear, we know that historically Medicaid
has oftentimes not covered the cost even of the service that's
being provided.
But that has historically been offset in [? payer ?] [?
mix ?] by Medicare, which historically paid for more than
the dollar cost.
But lately that's gone down.
But it's still a reasonable benchmark
of what actual cost is.
And so now we're talking about 160% of that.
And the consequence of imposing that reasonable cap
is saving about $40 million.
Now here's what's interesting, Madam President,
is that many folks might say-- and we thought about this
as well--
that if we impose this kind of a cap
will the insurers or the providers
rather then try to charge the patient for the difference.
That's a practice known as balance billing.
And we prohibit that in other areas of state health care law.
And we would do that in this amendment
so that a provider could not say that we're
going to take what we get for Medicaid
and charge the patient the difference.
That is prohibited in this amendment.
And to put this even further in context, Madam President,
let's look at just one more chart, relative to health care
spending.
You all may recall that we passed, a number of years
ago, a so-called Health Care Cost Containment Law.
You remember that, Madam President.
I remember you were an astute student of that.
And we're trying to get that chart ready right here.
And what that chart demonstrates is
that if we set a reasonable benchmark
for the cost of health care, which we did in the law
that we passed, but you have no teeth in the law
to actually act if providers exceed the benchmark,
then you have achieved less than the full potential of that law.
Some of us at the time predicted that would happen.
Now it is.
So Madam President, this is a significant situation
that needs to be addressed.
And in fact, if we look at the benchmark of 3.6% that
was established for health care, you
can see that we continue to exceed it.
So let me just go back and recap.
We have a health care law that sets benchmarks.
We have exceeded them.
If we don't try to control them, we
are going to continue to have serious problems balancing
the budget which can result in either having
to do supplemental budgets if money is available to do them
for other important things, or we're
going to have to reduce other spending
priorities by the amount that we have not saved.
So Madam President this amendment,
while it only deals with one particular element of health
care providers and the issue relating to those that serve
and are serving clients of the GIC, or insureds of the GIC,
this represents a significant step
in an account that affects 40% of the state budget.
Now there are going to be those that
say these providers, in many cases,
are hospitals that are spread throughout the state.
And it's important that we maintain networks of hospitals.
And that is true.
But Madam President, if we do not
begin to take action to control costs
in a reasonable, measured way then Madam President,
there will not be the resources available to be
able to compensate those providers on a whole host
of things because we will be continuing to exceed and run
away from the cost containment benchmarks
that we have established.
So Madam President, the current amendment--
just to go back, I know that there's
been a lot of fascination with our charts
but just to refocus--
the current amendment says that GIC providers
will be paid 160%--
160% of Medicare pay rates and that they'll
be prohibited from charging GIC members the difference
between those provider rates and what they would otherwise
charge.
Madam President, I'm not sure how
we could justify not doing something that
seems so straightforward and is so necessary,
not only for the internal balance
of this budget but to begin to address the account that
is 40% of the state budget and in any given year
can go up by hundreds of millions of dollars.
So Madam President, I can review the charts again.
I have several more if you would like to see them.
We invite people to come to Minority
Crescent at your leisure, and we'd
be happy to share them with you.
I know that earlier we actually had a request from the press
for a chart that was not yet ready to be shared.
We're making that ready.
And we'll announce the unveiling of it
so that the media can share with it as well.
Because you know there's been a tremendous amount of interest.
But Madam President, I hope the amendment is adopted.
And I hope we'll take this action
to be able to address an issue that impacts literally
every single other item in the budget
if we spend dollars in this area that could
be redirected to other places.
Thank the gentlemen, for sharing his information with us.
The question comes in adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The no's have it.
The next item is item number 537.
The same-- isn't that the same thing we just did?
No.
Different amendment.
OK.
[AUDIO OUT] has more information from us.
Senator from Essex and Middlesex, Mr. Tarr,
has filed an amendment, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 537 by Mr. Tarr, GIC funding.
[AUDIO OUT]
Yes, the gentleman from--
the senator from Essex and Middlesex, Mr.--
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
[AUDIO OUT]
Isn't it?
OK.
So apparently there was no interest or not
insufficient interest in saving 39 million dollars.
And I mentioned that there's a consequence to that.
And this amendment reflects that.
This is the amount in this amendment
that Medicaid is underfunded currently in the budget.
And that number, Madam President, is--
currently we have about $1.7 billion dollars.
And it should be $1.724 billion.
These are the numbers that we're talking about right here.
And if this is not included in the budget by the time
it gets signed by the governor, that
means that we will be short by that amount of money.
And as we've talked about in the past, if we
don't have these sums of money, they
have to come from somewhere.
That could mean a [?
9C ?] cut if it's done on an emergency basis.
It could mean that we have to do a supplemental budget
if supplemental budgets are available,
given the current revenue trend.
Or it could mean that we have to readjust the budget
and take all of the wonderful shiny things
that we've added to this budget like the expansions
of new programs and sacrifice them because we
need to fund Medicaid.
It is an obligation in many cases
to some of the most vulnerable people in the Commonwealth
that we must provide health care for.
And it's also a moral obligation.
So we can continue to look at those charts
and say, yeah, we should do something about it.
But as long as we don't, this is the consequence.
This is the consequence right now.
The consequence on a going forward basis is $40 million.
I hope that we will not continue to be complacent about this.
I hope that we will stop making statements
to each other about how we really should deal with this,
and put it off to another day.
Because this problem grows, and compounds, and gets worse.
And when it does, it affects everything--
everything-- in the budget.
I'm not using these charts to be overly dramatic.
I'm not indulging your time to make a point
for the sake of making a point.
I'm saying it because we all have an obligation
to address this issue.
This is one way to do it.
We're happy to entertain others here in Minority Crescent.
Haven't seen any yet.
I would hope that we'll continue to focus on this.
I suspect this amendment that is currently
before us probably won't pass.
And the reason it won't pass is because we'll
be told that there are insufficient funds
to add this amount of money in the budget.
And I would remind everybody, this is Medicaid.
This is for some of the poorest people in Massachusetts.
And if we don't change this account,
there will not be enough money in it
to pay for their health care.
We could do things differently.
And some day we're going to have to.
I hoped that day was now.
Maybe it's not.
But for the sake of everyone in this chamber
and people throughout this commonwealth,
I hope that day is soon.
Madam President, I hope the amendment is adopted.
A petition comes in adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The no's have it.
The next item is item number 544.
And the senator from Suffolk, senator Forry.
[AUDIO OUT] -- amendment, the title of which the clerk will
call.
Amendment number 544 by Ms. Forry, Louis D Brown Peace
institute and Women Survivors of Homicide.
Should I do a recess?
[AUDIO OUT] She
Keep going, keep going.
The question comes on the adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The next item, item number 546.
The senator from Berkshire, Hampshire, Franklin,
and Hamden, Mr. Hinds, has filed an amendment the title of which
the clerk will read.
Amendment number 546 by Mr. Hinds, Veterans, Homelessness,
Service Centers.
Does he want to go?
Keep going.
OK.
The question comes in adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
And the amendment is adopted.
The next item is item number 547.
The senator from Worcester, Senator Moore,
has filed an amendment the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 547 by Mr. Moore, YWCAs.
Yes?
Senator Tarr?
Madam President [INAUDIBLE]?
Thank you.
[AUDIO OUT] is in a brief recess.
The senator from Worcester, Senator Moore,
has filed an item, item number 547.
The title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 547 by Mr. Moore, YWCAs.
The question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The no's have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
Number 548 is on hold.
Number 549, the senator from Berkshire, Hampshire, Franklin,
and Hamdon, Senator Hinds has filed an amendment the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 549 by Mr. Hinds, Veterans Outreach
Centers.
Yes, Senator Tarr.
Madame President, [INAUDIBLE] members, Madam President,
this amendment involves veterans outreach centers,
a subject very important to a number of us.
It has apparently been through the redraftitron,
so I'm hoping that we can understand exactly what it says
and what it does in its redrafted form
from its sponsor.
Thank you, Madam President.
Senator from Berkshire, Hampshire, Franklin,
and Hamdon, senator Hinds.
Madam President, [AUDIO OUT] members,
I do appreciate the opportunity to speak further on this.
This is an important amendment, as you
point out, and particularly given the ceremonies
that we've participated in today related to our veterans.
And this is for Soldier On, providing
traditional housing and supportive services
to veterans since 1994.
And they do so in a different number of facilities
throughout Western Massachusetts.
And they provide extensive treatment for our veterans
and provide important housing opportunities.
What the redrafting considers is making sure
that we have direct and very clear
reporting from the recipient, and also institute a five year
plan.
And so that these investments are tracked very carefully.
Thank you, Madam President.
[AUDIO OUT] adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
And the amendment is adopted.
Amendment number 550--
is on hold.
550's on hold?
Yeah.
This says no.
Just say it's on hold.
Reject-- adopt it.
Adopt it.
Amendment number 551 is on hold.
553 is on hold.
Amendment 559 is on hold.
[AUDIO OUT] The amendment number 560,
the senator from Bristol and Plymouth Mr. Montigny
has filed an amendment the title of which the clerk will call.
Amendment number 560 by Mr. Montigny, Combating VIP
Syndrome to Protect Health Care Integrity and Quality.
Yes, the senator from Essex and Middlesex, Mr. Tarr.
Thank you, Madam President.
I note that the sponsor of this amendment is one of the VIPs
here in the Senate chamber.
But I'm hoping that he will provide us
with some further information about this amendment.
I could sit down.
This will be a long one now.
Senator from-- [AUDIO OUT]
-- from Bristol and Plymouth, Mr. Montigny.
Madam President, I would be happy to-- and I do
intend to be brief, contrary to popular belief.
Because the Senate passed this last year.
And I'm very thankful to the Chair Ways and Means
and the staff for working with us to do it again this year.
It's always disappointing when we do something
that we think is right.
And it doesn't survive conference.
But I've been there.
It's tough particularly on some of this more intense policy
when the Senate gets into a conference committee.
I'm hopeful that the second strike will work.
Because I think if--
and again in a budget it's tough because both branches
have thousands of priorities.
I mean we have 1,000 amendments alone,
never mind the number of line items and outside sections.
But I'll tell you why I think this is very, very important.
It's called VIP Syndrome.
You may have read about it over the years.
Because some of the cases are so outrageous
that it almost writes itself.
And perhaps that's why somebody long ago and much brighter
than I named it VIP Syndrome.
But it makes perfect sense.
Here's what it says.
The sanctity of human life is equal.
When you go to a hospital and you need treatment,
every single person in this country
should be treated the same.
I'll tell you why I think this is particularly gross.
We have some of the best hospitals in this country,
but let me tell you are not without sin.
Some of them have decided that it
makes more sense to make lots of money off select patients.
It's almost like a starstruck concierge medicine.
It's almost like saying every day our mission is to serve
everyone and then-- wink, wink-- if you happen to be a prince
from somewhere off in the Middle East--
I won't name the country--
they happen to be in the news almost
as we speak in the last few days.
But if you happen to print money then
you can fly over here in a very big private corporate jet.
You can even have nurses and doctors actually
that will contract from some of these hospitals
fly over with you.
And then you get to stay--
as this royal prince did-- stay in a two penthouse
suite that might be the size of, I don't know.
It's probably the size of the top floor of the Prudential
Center for all I know.
That isn't even what concerns me,
although that in and of itself is something
that perhaps in a regulated nonprofit
we ought to be passing judgment on, but we're not today.
We're simply saying that if the Department of Public Health
has policies that protect the lives of patients and health
care providers, that those policies will not be knowingly
violated just to play to somebody who
might be able to donate extra money to the foundation
or buy a wing.
And that's what we're talking about here.
And the reason I said it's gross is
because the irony is that no one in this room, as far as I know,
very few people we will ever represent
and almost no one who runs or lobbies for these hospitals
can afford to spend the kind of money
that some of the folks that are in this VIP Syndrome can spend.
So it's amazing that there are actually
hospitals in this country and in this state--
the most egregious example recently
was Brigham and Womens.
It was in the paper.
I wouldn't out such a wonderful charity if it hadn't
been such a very public case.
And what happened was the Saudi--
excuse me, the royal family member
came in from one of the countries afar,
and was put off--
think of that, those are the words--
put off by the protective gear that some
of the best doctors and nurses in the country were wearing.
The reason why this story became known
to us and to the media, and the reason why this Senate reacted
last year and the support has been so strong again this year
isn't because we want to take shots.
Because we know that if tomorrow something happened,
we would want to be treated equally in these hospitals
frankly.
They are the best in the world.
But amazing that you could knowingly violate policies.
Now remember, even if you're not deeply troubled--
and I know you are because I've talked to some of you about it.
Even if you're not deeply troubled
with the effect on patients, it was doctors and nurses,
some of the best in the world, who said I'm supposed to.
And in this case, it was a person with a drug resistant
disease.
If there's any reason why a doctor or a nurse
or a caregiver ought to be wearing protective gear,
it's that.
And this arrogant, exceedingly wealthy person
basically said, it puts me off that they're
treating me with this.
I don't know, Maybe they thought the gowns
were Halloween costumes.
I don't get it.
Because it's so otherworldly when you read it,
you think like, how does this really happen.
Does it really happen?
But it was confirmed by some of the best doctors and nurses
in the world that were grieved by it that it was going on.
Another example-- very, very public--
was literally giving a patient who happens to just print money
a different colored blanket so everybody
could know this is the VIP.
So sort of like instead of the red carpet,
it's the red blanket.
I know some of you probably think this can't really
go on here in Boston.
It did go on.
And it was widely reported and investigated.
And the only thing that the DPH didn't have the ability
to do at the time was to properly find
the grieving authority.
So Mr. President, I'm pleased that this
is a yes again this year.
And I hope that everybody will support the bill.
Thank you, Madam President.
Amendment--
-- So Mr. President, I'm pleased that this is a yes again this
year.
And I hope that everybody will support the bill.
Thank you, Madam President.
Amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
And the amendment is adopted.
That same gentleman has a bill 562, it's on hold.
Amendment number 563, the senator from Suffolk, Senator
Forry, has filed an amendment the title of which
the clerk will read.
Amendment number 563 by Ms. Forry, [INAUDIBLE]
Integrative Care Partnership Program.
Senator Tarr?
The senator from Essex and Middlesex.
Thank you, Madam President, [INAUDIBLE] members.
Madam President, it's been a while
since we have heard from this particular senator
and how the chamber benefits from--
[AUDIO OUT]
--is called to order.
Item number-- amendment number 568.
The senator from Essex and Middlesex Mr. Tarr
has filed an amendment the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 568 by Mr. Tarr, Conservation Land Tax
Credit.
Senator from Essex and Middlesex, Mr. Tarr.
Why, thank you, Madam President, and [? through the ?] members,
Madam President, this amendment is something that seeks
to strengthen even further one of the most important land
conservation tools that we have had, I would suggest,
in the history of the Commonwealth.
And that is the Land Conservation Tax Credit
which is given to those who donate property
that is then reserved for open space and preservation
programs.
And Madam President, this is an expansion of that program,
both in the total amount that's available for the credit,
and in other amendments we like to look at the actual amount
per project that is available.
Because we know land costs are increasing.
We're trying to modernize the land tax credit.
This is something I know there's a tremendous amount of interest
in in the chamber.
And I hope that the amendment is adopted.
Thank you.
Yes.
The senator from Essex, Senator O'Connor Ives.
Thank you, Madam President and [?
through ?] you to the members.
I thank the senator from Gloucester
for filing this laudable amendment.
I actually focused the entire topic of my Commonwealth
conversation on the issue of conservation land tax credits
because I am loathe to support most tax credits.
We can't lump them all in the same category,
because this is one of the most uniquely and clearly created
tax credits that is in the public interest.
So we can't lump them all together.
We all know that open space is so
valuable in the Commonwealth for recreational opportunities,
habitat protection.
And we know that land is very valuable.
The Commonwealth can't be in the business
of spending a lot of money to conserve valuable land.
This is a product that's in demand
for the residents of Massachusetts.
Unfortunately, there's a long waiting list
where farmers and other landowners
want to do the right thing and put protective easements
on their properties.
In return, they get a tax credit.
It's a successful program but there's an arbitrary cap
that needs to be updated.
And with this amendment, it would be updated so
that the current cap of $2 million,
which goes away in an instant because of the demand,
it would be incrementally increased to $5 million
to at least attempt to conserve more land
and respond to folks that are feeling development pressures
when they actually want to put conservation restriction
on their land.
So this is a successful program that deserves updating.
And I do hope that the amendment passes.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you.
The question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The no's have it.
And the amendment is not adopted.
Item number 570, amendment number 570,
the senator from Cape and the Islands
has filed an amendment, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 570 by Mr. Cyr, Establishing
Competitive Internet Access Through Barnstable, Dukes,
and Nantucket counties.
Yes, the senator from the Cape and Islands, Mr. Cyr.
Thank you, Madam President and through you to the members.
I rise and speak in support of amendment 570.
This is an amendment that shall be near and dear
to many of the interests of the so-called Hinterland caucus,
those of us who don't live within the sort
of glorious greater Boston proximity
and are still working to get ourselves
into the 21st century.
And this is about Open Cape, which provides a [? mid ?] [?
mile ?] backbone of top notch fiber optic network with
tremendous capacity across Cape Cod.
And this network, to put it in perspective,
this network has the capacity to funnel the entire world's
internet traffic through it multiple times over,
if you can imagine having that go
up and down our beautiful Cape Cod peninsula.
So this proposal with its seed money
would help link customers to Open Cape's fiber
optic network, consequently expanding the nonprofit's user
base and fee base, and finally providing a viable alternative
to Comcast on Cape Cod.
On Cape Cod, we've only got one choice when it
comes to high speed internet.
Altogether, the Commonwealth has invested $5 million
in Open Cape.
And including federal and county investments
with private partners, over $40 million
has been sent to build out this network.
And so given the quality of Open Cape's existing infrastructure,
its potential, and the investments that have already
been made there is no reason why we should still
have to kowtow to the de facto monopoly
that we have in Comcast.
So Madam President, I do appreciate the time
to speak on this.
And I ask for unanimous consent to withdraw this amendment.
To unanimous consent to withdraw the item.
Any opposition?
The item is withdrawn.
Thank you.
Amendment number 585.
The senator from Worcester, Hamdon, Hampshire,
and Middlesex, Ms. Gobi, has filed an amendment the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 585 by Ms. Gobi, Rural Design Center.
[AUDIO OUT]
--brief recess.
[AUDIO OUT]
--senators in order, number 585 is on hold.
592 is on hold.
Amendment number 595 the senator from Worcester and Middlesex,
Ms. Flanagan, has filed an amendment the title of which
the clerk will read.
Amendment number 595 by Ms. Flanagan, Johnny Appleseed
Trail Association.
Yes, the senator from Essex, Mr. Tarr.
Thank you, Madam President, and through you the members.
It's been a while since we've reflected
on the great legacy of Johnny Appleseed in this chamber.
And there is no one better to refresh
our memory of that legacy than the gentle lady who
sponsored this amendment.
So I'm hoping that we can hear from her about it right now.
Thank you, Madam President.
Senator from Worcester and Middlesex, Ms. Flanagan.
Thank you, Madam President, and through you to the members.
This amendment requests an increase
of $85,000 that would aid the tourism throughout North
Central Massachusetts for those of us
that call it Johnny Appleseed country.
The Johnny Appleseed Trail Association
is a visitor information program created by the North Central
Mass Chamber of Commerce who has strong roots in the community
activities and specialties.
Twice a year, the Johnny Appleseed Trail Association
Organization publishes the Johnny Appleseed Trail Guide
which includes information about hospitality locations
and activities oriented businesses
throughout North Central Mass.
I'm sorry we cannot hear the senator and talking about
Johnny Appleseed.
So if everybody would please take their comments outside.
Yes.
Continue [AUDIO OUT]
Thank you, Madam President.
I've never been told I couldn't be heard before.
It's essentially the handbook for things
to do while visiting North Central Massachusetts.
There's also a comprehensive website.
This is imperative to tourism in North Central Mass
and is a great supporter of our businesses up there.
So I ask that this amendment be adopted.
Thank you.
The question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it and the amendment is adopted.
596 is on hold.
[AUDIO OUT] --601.
The senator from Essex and Middlesex, Ms. L'Italien,
has filed an amendment the title of which the clerk will call.
Amendment number 601 by Ms L'Italien,
Lawrence Partnership.
Senator from Essex and Middlesex, Ms. L'Italien.
Thank you, Madam President.
This amendment was filed to try to secure some money, $50,000,
for the Lawrence Partnership, a group that's
been in existence--
it was actually founded by my predecessor in the Senate
Senator Feingold working in conjunction
with higher ed, the business community, and a whole host
of people that provide the backbone of services
in the city of Lawrence.
What they're doing is they're providing economic development
work.
They're providing streetscape improvement loans.
They're really trying to model what Lowell did.
Lowell's did a wonderful job.
Lawrence is trying to catch up.
And so this is an earmark to try to help Lawrence with $50,000.
This was [?
9C'd ?] last year.
I'm hopeful that this will survive this year so
that Lawrence can continue to do the good work that they're
doing working together to promote the city.
Thank you, Madam President.
I have to call-- wait, I have to say, oh,
do you want to speak on this?
Let me call it [AUDIO OUT] --comes
on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
And the amendment is adopted.
Yes, the senator from Essex and Middlesex Senator Tarr,
a new chart?
Madam President, it has been a fruitful and very energetic
afternoon.
And so that we may possibly have the [AUDIO OUT]
I move the Senate be in a brief recess.
Senate's in a brief recess.
[AUDIO OUT]
-- Senator from Worcester has moved that the Senate rule 38A
be suspended so that the Senate may meet beyond the hour
of 8:00 PM, and that the motion be made without the requirement
of a roll call.
Is there an objection?
The chair hears none.
The question comes on suspension of Senate rule 38A.
All those in favor, aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
And the Senate can proceed to its business
beyond the hours of 8:00 PM.
Thank you.
Now the senator from Essex, Mr. Tarr.
Madam President, I am so relieved that we've
adopted that order just in case we have
to go past 8:00 PM tonight.
But in the interim, Madam President,
I move pursuant to Rule 13B that there be a Republican caucus
until the hour of 7:00 PM.
And for the edification of the members,
there will be charts available for viewing in the minority
leader's office if people would like to peruse them
over the next hour.
Thank you.
[AUDIO OUT] -- moves for a viewing of his charts.
[AUDIO OUT]
We can proceed with the business of the Senate.
And the First Amendment pending is amendment number 601,
offered by the senator from Essex and Middlesex,
Ms. L'Italien.
Yeah, we are already did that [INAUDIBLE]..
The title of which the clerk will
read, except the chair has been informed 601
was disposed of earlier.
602, offered by the same senator, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 602 by Ms. L'Italien [SPEAKING LATIN]
The senator from Essex, Mr. Tarr.
Thank you very much, Mr. President.
And I'm looking forward hopefully
to an explanation from the gentle lady
from the upper Merrimack Valley about this bilingual amendment.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Thank you, Mr. President and through you the members.
So this is an earmark for $25,000.
It's for a group called [SPEAKING LATIN],,
which means E for all.
And it's Entrepreneurship for All.
And it's the first entrepreneurship program
in the country aimed at Spanish speaking folks.
And there are close to 80% Spanish speaking
folks in Lawrence now.
And so the idea was to spin off the very popular
Lowell-based Entrepreneurship for All program.
And what they do is they've created 145 full and part time
jobs over the last three years.
They generated $3.5 million in annual revenue in 2015.
People pitch their product as an entrepreneur.
And if they win, they are backed and they
are helped through the process.
And I know of one woman who is running
a very successful travel agency that started through E for All.
So it's a really exciting thing to see
Latinos understand that they can be small businessmen.
They can control their own destiny.
And it provides the guidance for this.
So this is something very near and dear to my heart.
We did include this in the budget last year.
It was [?
9C'd. ?] So I'm grateful for the opportunity to try to place
this into the budget again.
Thank you.
[INAUDIBLE] on the adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
The same senator offers amendment number 603, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 603 by Ms. L'Italien, Beyond Soccer.
Ms. L'Italien.
Thank you [AUDIO OUT].
Beyond Soccer, this is an earmark
to fund Beyond Soccer for $15,000.
What Beyond Soccer does is it uses
soccer as the vehicle in Lawrence
to provide kids with structure, training, after school
programming, assistance with applications for high school
or for college.
They run a program that started just based in Lawrence.
And they now participate in travel leagues
throughout Northeast Massachusetts.
They also do summer camps, summer leagues,
and they really provide very needed support
for kids and structure and something recreational
to do in the city of Lawrence.
The average length of player participation
in this organization is four years.
Many of their now college bound alumni
have been involved since it was founded in 2011.
And many of them are actually playing
high school and college soccer.
So it's a wonderful program, not just for the athletics,
but again for the structure and for the opportunity
to help kids in a holistic way.
So I thank you for the opportunity
to talk about Beyond Soccer.
The question comes on the adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
Number 606 offered by the senator
from Essex, Ms. Lovely, the title
with which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 606 by Ms. Lovely, Regional Tourism
Council Grants.
The question comes on the adoption
of the redrafted amendment.
The senator from Essex, Mr. Tarr.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I think we all have an appreciation
of how important tourism is as an industry
in the Commonwealth.
And I know that we all understand
the importance of properly funding
these particular grants.
And clearly the gentle lady from Salem
understands that and is causing us, hopefully, here
to take some positive action.
So I'm hoping that we can get an explanation from her
on exactly what this particular amendment does
to support tourism councils in the Commonwealth.
The senator from Essex, Ms. Lovely.
President, could I ask for a brief recess.
Senate will be in a very brief recess.
[AUDIO OUT]
Chair recognizes the senator from Essex, Ms. Lovely.
Thank you, Mr. President.
This amendment requires the Regional Tourism Council
funding distributed by the Tourism Trust Fund
to be dispersed by September 1 of each year.
I urge support of this amendment.
It ensures that Regional Tourism Councils receive their funding
in a predictable manner so they can plan and invest
so as to maximize their investment
in the Commonwealth's tourism industries.
For these reasons I ask for a call of the yays and nays.
The lady asks for a vote on the matter to be taken,
to be take by a call of the yays and nays.
[INAUDIBLE] rise and be counted.
A sufficient number having risen when the vote is taken,
it will be taken by a call of the ayes and nays, which
appears to be right now.
The clerk will call the roll.
[AUDIO OUT]
Stanley C Rosenburg.
Yes.
Michael J Barrett.
I don't know.
Joseph A Boncore.
Yes.
Michael D Brady.
Yes.
William N Brownsberger .
Yeah.
Yes.
Harriet L Chandler.
Yes.
Sonia Chang-Diaz.
Yes.
Cynthia Stone Creem.
Yes.
Julian Cyr.
Yes.
Viriato M. deMacedo.
Yes.
Sal N. Dimenico.
Eileen M Donahue.
Yes.
James B. Eldridge.
Yes.
Yes Ryan C. Fattman.
Yes.
Jennifer L Flanagan.
Yes.
Linda Dorcena Forry.
Anne M Gobi.
Adam G Hinds.
Yes.
Donald F. Humason Jr.
Yes.
Patricia D. Jehlen.
Yes.
John F. Keenan.
Yes.
Eric P. Lesser.
Yes.
Jason M. Lewis.
Yes.
Barbara A. L'Italien.
Yes.
Joan B. Lovely.
Yes.
Thomas N. McGee.
Yes.
Yes, Mark C. Montigny.
Yeah.
Yes.
Michael O. Moore.
Yes.
Patrick M. O'Connor.
Yes.
Kathleen O'Connor Ives.
Yes.
Marc R. Pacheco.
Yes.
Michael J. Rodrigues.
Yes.
Richard J. Ross.
Yes.
Michael F. Rush.
Yes.
Karen E. Spilka.
Yes.
Bruce E. Tarr.
Yes.
Walter F. Timilty.
Yes.
James T. Welch.
Yes.
Have all the members been recorded?
[AUDIO OUT]
Michael J Barrett votes yes.
Senator from Middlesex and Sussex, Mr. Di Dimenico.
Sal N Di Dimenico votes yes.
The senator from Suffolk, Ms. Forry.
Mr President, I wish to be recorded.
Linda Dorcena Forry.
Yes.
Just Gobi.
[AUDIO OUT]
Worcestor, Hamdon, Hampshire, and Middlesex, Ms. Gobi.
606.
Mr President, have I been recorded?
You have not.
I would like to be recorded in the affirmative please.
Anne M Gobi votes yes.
[AUDIO OUT]
-- on this matter, 38 having voted in the affirmative,
none in the negative, the amendment is adopted.
The next amendment is offered by the senator from Essex, Ms.
Lovely.
The title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 607 by Ms. Lovely, Essex National Heritage
Area.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The no's have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
Number 608 is offered by the senator
from the Berkshires, Mr. Hinds.
The title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 608 by Mr. Hinds, Western Mass
Entrepreneurship Programming.
Question comes on adoption of the redrafted amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
Number 609 is offered by the senator from Essex, Ms. Lovely.
The title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 609 by Ms. Lovely, Artists Row.
The question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
And the amendment is adopted.
Number 610 is offered by the same Senate.
The title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 610 by Ms. Lovely, Peabody Salem Trolley
Study.
The question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
611 is offered by the same senator.
The title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 611 by Ms. Lovely, Peabody Fire
and Police Memorial.
The question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
Number 612 by the same senator.
The title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 612 by Ms. Lovely, Peabody's Centennial
Celebration.
The question comes on adoption of the amendment.
The senator from Essex Mr. Tarr.
Madam President, [INAUDIBLE]---- President,
I am hoping that we can hear a little bit about the Peabody
Centennial Celebration, particularly because many of us
may like to attend.
It is a wonderful community.
And I'm hoping we can hear a little bit more
about our opportunity to participate in celebrating
its very existence.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Thank you.
Appreciate the suffix being amended
as you moved through that.
The Chair recognizes the senator from Essex Ms. Lovely.
Thank you, Mr. President.
This amendment provides $25,000 to the city of Peabody
for its Centennial Celebration.
Over 100 years ago in 1916, residents
of what was originally South Danvers
voted in favor of becoming the city of Peabody.
The city is named for George Peabody, widely known
as the father of modern philanthropy.
To commemorate its history, the Peabody Centennial Committee
planned five major events to mark this historic occasion--
a family festival at Brooksby Farm, a Stars and Stripes
concert held in July, a Grand Centennial Parade
held last October, a Centennial party held this past January,
and a Centennial Grand Ball recently celebrated last month.
These events not only helped celebrate
the history of the city, but they also
generated commerce in the city for many
of its local businesses.
I do have to tell the gentleman from Gloucester
that all five events have already taken place.
So my apologies that you're not going to be
able to attend any of them.
I hope the amendment is adopted.
Thank you, Mr. President.
The question comes in adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it, and the amendment is adopted.
The next is 613, offered by the Senator
from the Berkshires, Mr. Hines.
A redrafted amendment, the title to which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 613 by Mr. Hines, Berkshire Blueprint 2.0.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
The senator from Essex, Ms. Lovely
offers number 614, the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 614 by Ms. Lovely, GAR Hall.
The question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say--
Mr. Tar, please rise and ask a question.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Through you to the members, I'm hoping
that GAR Hall may still be open so that we can come and visit
it.
And I'm hoping that the gentle lady from Salem
can explain that for us.
Thank you, Mr. President.
The senator from Essex, Ms. Lovely.
Thank you, Mr. President.
The John H. Chipman, Jr. Post Number 89,
as it is formally called by the Grand Army of the Republic,
is one of the oldest buildings in Beverly.
Built in 1868, the Grand Army of the Republic Hall's
historic reputation and role in the community
was originally a Baptist church.
Over the past century and a half,
the Hall has taken on several roles.
The GAR Hall currently serves as a meeting place
for several local clubs and organizations, including
the Beverly Recreation Department, Senior Citizens'
Club, and youth dance classes.
[SIDE CONVERSATIONS]
The local veteran service office is also located in the building
at 8 Dane Street, providing assistance and resources
to Beverly veterans.
In 2010, the GAR Hall received $50,000
in state funding for repairs to the building roof.
However, further rehabilitation is needed, particularly
to the building's interior.
The Hall is of immense importance to the Beverly
community, and my support for the amendment cannot be
overstated.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Hope the amendment is adopted.
Question comes in adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
Number 615 is offered by the same senator, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 615 by Ms. Lovely, Beverly infrastructure
grants.
The senator from Essex, Mr. Tar.
Well, well, well, Mr. President.
The gentle lady from Salem is clearly on a roll
here this evening.
And so that we can further understand the magic of what's
going on here, I'm hoping that we
can get an explanation of amendment number 615,
which relates to the fine city of Beverly.
The senator from Essex, Ms. Lovely.
This amendment addresses the intersection
of Enid Street at Dodge Street and Laurel Street in Beverly.
The intersection has witnessed 45 crashes over the past four
years, making it a high crash intersection by Mass DOT
standards.
In January of 2017, Mass DOT released a road safety audit
for Enid Street, which is Route 1A at Dodge street and Laurel
Street, and a key objective of the safety audit
was to identify both the short term and long term safety
improvements that can be made at the subject intersection
and incorporate potential improvements.
The funding would help implement recommendations from the audit,
and I hope the amendment is adopted.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Question comes on the adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed no.
The amendment is adopted.
And the next is 616, offered by the senator
from the Berkshires, Mr. Hines.
The title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 616 by Mr. Hines, regional tourism
councils.
The question comes on the amendment.
The senator from the Berkshires, Mr. Hines.
President, thank you, and through you, to the members.
I wanted to take a moment to speak
about the value of investing in our regional tourism councils
and tourism in general.
It is the case right now, if we were to ask any one of you
here, if we were to invest $4.2 million
for the return of $1.3 billion in tax revenue and $20 billion
in direct spending, would you take it?
And the answer would typically be yes.
And yet we often find that currently the administration
is withholding considerable amounts of money
from our regional tourism councils.
And it's creating a situation where a lot of our councils
are losing market share and losing
in competition at the moment when
we should be spending more.
And so I just wanted to go on the record
in emphasizing the value of our tourism councils
and the investment that needs to take place.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Senator from Plymouth and Barnstable, Mr. deMacedo.
Thank you, Mr. President.
And I just want to thank the gentleman
from Western Massachusetts--
Pittsfield, correct-- for his advocacy on this.
I appreciate all the efforts.
This is a very important amendment.
I appreciate the work that you've done.
Our regional tourism councils around the Commonwealth
do an amazing job of getting the message out
from a unique perspective.
They understand that this is a very diverse state
and what is interesting in Cape Cod is very different than what
is interesting in Western Massachusetts
or in the Johnny Appleseed area or many other parts
of this state.
And these regional tourism councils are able to focus,
and they are able to leverage this money with matching
dollars, private sector dollars, so we are getting
a bigger bang for the buck.
So I want to support this amendment.
I thank the gentleman for bringing it up.
[INAUDIBLE] Island's Mr. Cyr.
President, and through you to the members,
I rise in support of this amendment,
and thank my colleague from the Hinterlands caucus.
It will be no surprise to folks I
spoke about the importance of our tourism
economy and small businesses earlier today.
I just want to reiterate what my colleague from Pittsfield
and colleague from Plymouth mentioned about how, really,
this is the third largest sector in our economy
here in Massachusetts.
And in a $40 billion budget, in a robust commonwealth,
I think we really need to make sure
that we're continuing to promote tourism and be competitive.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Question comes on the adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed no.
The nos have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
Number 617 is offered by the senator
from Essex, Mr. Tarr, the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment 617 by Mr. Tarr, independent contractor
in the creative economy.
The senator from Essex, Mr. Tarr.
So Mr. President, I request unanimous consent
to withdraw the pending amendment.
Is there objection?
The chair hears none.
The amendment is withdrawn.
Number 618 offered by the same senator, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 618 by Mr. Tarr, a creative economy master
plan.
The senator from Essex, Mr. Tarr.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Mr. President, as you and I and many others
have discussed in the past, one of the emerging sectors
of our economy and one of the ones
that holds the most promise even as it delivers currently
benefits for employment and economic sustainability
is the creative economy.
And so, Mr. President, to properly focus
the attention and the resources of state government
on facilitating the growth in the creative economy,
this amendment would require a master plan
to be created and maintained.
And one that would focus specifically
on the many cultural districts that we've
created throughout the Commonwealth
as nodes of growth, but also, Mr. President,
to look at other areas of the Commonwealth
where there is tremendous opportunity
to be able to have increased participation
in the creative economy.
And particularly, Mr. President, perhaps
in some areas where there might not
be the other kinds of industrial infrastructure
to facilitate economic growth.
And this particular sector offers great hope,
because it does not require some of those same types
of infrastructure.
So Mr. President, I know that we are all
supportive of this particular idea
and this particular amendment, and Mr. President,
I hope the amendment is adopted.
Question [INAUDIBLE] the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed no.
The nos have it today, but not necessarily in the future.
Number 619 offered by the same senator, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment Number 619 by Mr. Tarr,
promoting savings for first time home buyers.
Question comes on the amendment, the senator
from Essex, Mr. Tarr.
Thank you, Mr. President.
This is an amendment that reflects legislation
that we've also been filing over the last couple of years,
recognizing the fact that one of the greatest
hurdles to homeownership is trying, for first time buyers,
to have the resources to be able to make a down payment,
to be able to pay for purchase money insurance, otherwise
known as PMI.
And Mr. President, to be able to allow
folks to gather the resources for that
and to have a tax benefit in order to do that,
this particular amendment creates a tax deferred program
allowing, Mr. President, the accumulation
of savings of up to $2,500 for that purpose.
So Mr. President, we all know how important
it is for folks to be able to purchase their first home.
We all know how hard they work to be able to accomplish that.
And Mr. President, this particular amendment
allows an account to be created and for that
account to be tax exempt for the purposes of developing
those resources.
I hope the amendment is adopted.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The nos have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
We're on number 620, offered by the senator from Suffolk
and Middlesex, Mr. Boncore, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 620 by Mr. Boncore, housing authority
subsidy.
Question comes on the amendment, the senator
from Suffolk, Mr. Boncore.
[INAUDIBLE]
The gentleman asks unanimous consent
to withdraw the amendment.
Is there an objection?
The chair hears none.
It is so ordered.
Amendment 621 is offered by the senator from Essex
and Middlesex, Mr. Tarr, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 621 by Mr. Tarr,
encouraging cultural council funding.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The nos have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
622 is offered by the senator from Middlesex, Mr. Barrett,
the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 622 by Mr. Barrett, Waltham CDC housing
clinic.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
Number 623 is offered by the senator from Middlesex
and Worcester, Mr. Eldridge, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 623 by Mr. Eldridge, Metro West Food
and Music Festival.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it, and the amendment is adopted.
Amendment number 624 is held.
Number 625 is offered by the senator
from Middlesex, Mr. Barrett, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 625 by Mr. Barrett, Waltham Community Day
Center.
The question comes on the amendment, the senator
from Essex, Mr. Tarr.
Thank you, Mr. President.
[INAUDIBLE] gentleman from Lexington
for bringing our attention to the fine community of Waltham
in the next two amendments, Mr. President, number 625
and number 626.
In the first instance with reference to the community
day center, in the next instance with regard
to the tourism council.
So Mr. President, we are, I think,
all glad to learn a little bit more about Waltham.
And I'm hoping that the gentleman might
be able to, for the purposes of economy,
give us an explanation of the next two amendments.
The first one relative to the community day
center and the following relative to the tourism
council.
He is always articulate, Mr. President.
And we look forward to his articulation on Waltham.
The senator from Middlesex, Mr. Barrett.
Thank you President the minority leader
has an admirable focus on efficiency here.
I appreciate it.
The first of the three amendments
that would appropriate an additional sum of money
to permit one clinician to be hired
by a day program for homeless citizens of Waltham.
That's what the community day center is.
Most of the fundraising they've done completely on their own
from neighbors and interested citizens.
But in this particular case, we would
appropriate a modest sum of money
for one part-time clinician.
Perhaps I'll move on to the other two amendments.
The tourism council, I want to commend everyone's attention
here to a wonderful Waltham event
that my wife and I attended two weeks ago that this
would support.
It's the Steampunk Festival, Victoriana,
an extraordinary display in terms of costuming
and wares and culture and music.
The Waltham Steampunk Festival is
the only one in Massachusetts.
It really does draw people to our downtown,
helps the local businesses, fuels the local restaurants.
And here we would appropriate, as we
have in several past years, $75,000
to help the Waltham Tourism Council run the Steampunk
Festival.
I'll go on to the next amendment if that's appropriate.
So here, we have another town in my district, the second largest
community, the town of Chelmsford.
Chelmsford has a downtown in desperate need
of redesigning, especially with regard to pedestrian footpaths,
bike paths.
The Bruce Freeman rail trail needs
to be rerouted a little bit into the middle of town
so as to make access to the rail trail
accessible to those who are otherwise
on foot in the town center.
This amount of money, $200,000, would
enable the redesign of signage throughout the downtown area
for Chelmsford.
This is the first leg in a multi-part redesign
to make the area more environmentally friendly
and to create shopping opportunities for pedestrians
that don't currently exist.
I thank the good gentlemen for asking for these explanations.
Number 625, all those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
Same senator offers amendment number
626, the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 626 by Mr. Barrett, Waltham Tourism
Council.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
Number 627, offered by the same senator.
[INAUDIBLE] 627, offered by Mr. Barrett,
Chelmsford signage and way finding.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
Number 628 is offered by the senator from Middlesex
and Worcester, Mr. Eldridge, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 628 by Mr. Eldridge, new lease
for homeless families.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The nos have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
Amendment number 629 is offered by the senator
from Essex, Mr. Tarr, the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 629 by Mr. Tarr,
providing a safe harbor for contractors of services.
Mr. President?
The senator from Essex, Mr. Tarr.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Mr. President, I move that the Senate be in a brief recess.
Senate will be in a very brief recess.
The senator from Essex, Mr. Tarr.
Members, Mr. President, one of the things
that we have not talked about a lot
yet in the debate over the last day or so, and certainly today,
is the issue of trying to give the ability of those
who would like to get a start in business
to be able to be independent contractors
so that they can actually work for themselves
and realize part of the American dream in doing that.
That's one side of the equation, Mr. President.
The other side of the equation is
trying to respond to a number of emerging businesses,
business sectors in the Commonwealth,
like the life sciences, like the high tech sector,
which could use independent contractors to be able
in their own right to be able to expand and grow
without having to hire employees,
particularly at the early stages of their development, when
it may not be possible or feasible for them
to have employees.
So Mr. President, just to revisit history a little
bit here.
In 1990, we adopted a three prong test
to distinguish independent contractors from more
traditional employees.
In 2004, there was a sweeping public construction reform bill
that significantly narrowed the definition of who
would be considered an independent contractor.
So here's the key issue, Mr. President.
Prior to that change, you would be considered
to be an independent contractor if you
are free from control and direction in connection
with the performance of a service,
and the service is performed outside of the usual course
of business for the employer, or the individual is customarily
engaged in an independently established trade, occupation,
profession, or business of the same nature
as that involved in the service performed.
The 2004 amendment, Mr. President,
and I know you remember this, requires individuals
to meet all three of those criteria
to be considered an independent contractor.
And the result of that change is that many people who
have historically been considered and treated
as independent contractors are now
considered regular employees by the Department of Revenue.
That change, Mr. President, and the way
it deals with those individuals has had a negative impact
on many small businesses, because those individuals are
now subject to certain employer requirements that
are cumbersome and may be stifling
to the growth or the even ability
to have that kind of business and that kind of employment.
Now Mr. President, this is not a foreign subject
in this chamber.
We have discussed it time and again,
and usually someone will rise and say, yes, we
need to get to that.
And yes, I'm sure this is the year we're going to get to it.
And year after year after year, it doesn't happen.
And Mr. President, the idea of reforming this particular area
of the law has had support and has
had some very distinct champions in this chamber,
including the gentleman from Fall River who
has worked arduously over the years
to try to find a way to bring our law back into alignment
with commercial reality and allow folks to be
able to move forward and create these employment
opportunities for themselves and to help businesses who need
people with these types of skills have access to them
so that they can grow in the Commonwealth as well.
Mr. President, this is a reform that can directly impact
the growth in our economy.
And you might remember, Mr. President,
that we talked earlier in this debate about the budget
about one of the issues is-- while we have unemployment that
is very, very low, we do not have the kind of wage growth
that you would normally have in an economic recovery
of this nature.
And part of the reason for that, Mr. President,
is that we don't allow folks who could
be independent contractors to flourish and to be
able to increase the amount of income that they can earn.
And in our own self-interest, Mr. President,
that they can then pay taxes on and then
we can use for the priorities like the ones in this budget.
So Mr. President, I hope the amendment is adopted.
The senator from--
From Middlesex.
--Middlesex, Mr. Lewis.
Thank you, Mr. President, and through you to the members.
I appreciate the issue that the minority leader has
raised before us this evening.
It is a very important issue.
It is one that we have had some discussion in this body before.
And there are a number of senators
who have put forward various proposals related to the issue.
I'm proud to be serving as the new chair of the Labor
and Workforce Development Committee.
And as such, this is an issue that
comes before the Labor Committee and is one
that we are very committed to understanding
all aspects of the issue, working hard
to get our arms around it, talking to all
the different stakeholders.
I know there are members of the body who,
including the minority leader, who have spent a lot of time
on this issue in the past.
And we look forward to working with you.
It is a complicated issue, and I think
there are several different facets to it.
There is the issue that is being raised in this amendment, which
is those individuals who do want to be classified
as an independent contractor but may not be able to do so.
There's the opposite issue which is
people who are being misclassified
as independent contractors when they really should
be classified as employees.
And there are some enforcement issues with that,
and we are in discussions with the attorney
general about that.
And then I would suggest there's a third category, which
is a lot of new employers in the innovation or gig economy
and how those workers are treated,
whether they are all independent contractors or employees.
And that that is a complicated area as well.
So there's a lot of different aspects to this,
and I want to assure the minority
leader and our other colleagues who
have an interest in this issue and have worked
on it, that the Labor and Workforce Development
Committee plans to look very closely at all aspects of this,
including the specific issue raised in this amendment
by the minority leader, and intends to bring together
all of the interested stakeholders
to look for a way to move forward,
and hopefully, an acceptable compromise.
Thank you.
Mr. President.
[INAUDIBLE] from Essex, Mr. Tarr.
I appreciate the gentleman's comments.
I did want to point out that I was
remiss in not mentioning what this amendment actually does.
And what it does, Mr. President, is allow the second prong
of the three part test that I articulated
to be satisfied in four different ways, all of which
are very practical.
And I will not read them, Mr. President,
except to say that this is a modification
of the independent contractor law.
It does not eliminate it.
It does not repeal it.
It merely seeks to bring it into conformity
with actual commercial practice and reality.
I appreciate the gentleman's comments.
I hope he can appreciate just a tinge of skepticism I have,
having had similar declarations in the chamber
on many, many occasions.
But I know that he is new to this,
and I believe he does deserve an opportunity
to address it in the fashion that he has explained,
which would be a very productive way to address this issue.
I look forward to working with him.
But I do hope that next year when
we return to this chamber for this wonderfully scintillating
budget exercise that we will not need to revisit
this particular issue.
Thank you, Mr. President.
The question comes on the adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The nos have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
Number 630 has been withdrawn.
634 is offered by the senator from Norfolk and Plymouth,
Mr. Keenan, the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 634 by Mr. Keenan, Germantown Neighborhood
Center.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The nos have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
Number 635 is offered by the same senator, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 635 by Mr. Keenan,
Quincy Asian Resources, Inc.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The nos have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
Number 636 is offered by the senator from Norfolk
and Plymouth, Mr. Keenan, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 636 by Mr. Keenan,
preservation of the resting place of US presidents.
The senator from Norfolk and Plymouth, Mr.--
Thank you, Mr. President, and through you to the members.
This amendment, excuse me, is for a piece
of our American history.
And I know that the good senator from West Roxbury
will appreciate this.
And many of the senators who were in the Commonwealth
conversation tour had the opportunity
to go to the United First Parish Church
in Quincy, which is the church of presidents.
And you probably observed the architecture.
That was Alexander Paris, who designed Quincy Market.
You probably observed the great cornice work
that was done in the ceiling.
That's a spectacular building.
But what you may not have known is
that there is no sprinkler system in that building.
This important piece of American history,
where two presidents and their wives are buried,
which is the cornerstone of the national park
site in the city of Quincy.
The senator from Suffolk, Ms. Forry.
For what purpose does the lady rise?
I'm having difficulty hearing the gentleman at the podium.
Thank you.
The--
[INTERPOSING VOICES]
So in any event, this money would
allow them to update the electrical system.
The city of Quincy has spent hundreds of thousands
of dollars in bringing the utilities to that building
as they renovate the park outside, which many of you saw.
The church itself has invested hundreds of thousands
of dollars in the structure.
They sold silver in order to do all that work.
And this is just a small amount of money
that would allow them to upgrade the electrical to then
tie into a sprinkler system for the building.
So we're preserving an important piece of our American heritage.
And I would urge passage of the amendment.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
The same senator offers number 637, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 637 by Mr. Keenan, Holbrook town
facilities.
Question comes on the adoption of the amendment, the senator
from Essex, Mr. Tarr.
Mr. President, I want to thank the sponsor of the next two
amendments, also, for the one that was just approved.
One of the most fascinating things
that happened this year as we went on our statewide listening
tour was to visit the site that was the subject
of the last amendment.
It's a moving place, and it was inspiring to be
able to visit it.
And I appreciate his bringing us to that location.
But he also has other interests, Mr. President.
And they include Holbrook and Squantum Point Park.
And so, Mr. President, I'm hoping
we can hear about both of those, again for economy,
before we take them up.
Thank you, Mr. President.
The senator from Norfolk and Plymouth, Mr. Keenan.
Thank you, Mr. President.
On the Holbrook town facilities amendment,
this isn't an awful lot of money.
And Holbrook has leveraged money that they've
received in the past to update their town hall.
It's an historic town hall.
It's got some great potential in it.
They've been able to use, with very little money,
use town labor and really do a remarkable job
in upgrading their town hall.
And this would help them continue with those efforts.
As far as Squantum Point Park, this
is a really important piece of the transportation
infrastructure on the South Shore.
We, as many of you may know, are undergoing some improvements
on the red line and reconstruction
of some of the stations.
And in particular, the [?
Walleson ?] train station is going to be closed
for, perhaps, up to 20 months.
And Squantum Point Park has a pier.
And has, in the past, run a ferry, for instance,
from Quincy to Deer Island during the construction
of the treatment plant out there.
So this money is part of our continuing efforts
to bring permanent ferry service to Squantum Point Park.
We have had ferry service.
We had it last summer.
We shall have it this summer.
We're looking to have it in the fall.
And this will allow us to make sure
that the pier is in working order
so that we can continue our efforts to expand that service.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I've urged favorable [INAUDIBLE]..
We are now on Amendment number 637.
The question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
It's adopted.
638, offered by the same senator, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 638 by Mr. Keenan, Squantum Point Park
and Pier.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
Number 638-- that was 638.
639 is offered by the senator from Middlesex, Ms. Donoghue,
the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 639 by Ms. Donoghue, Massachusetts Office
of International Trade and Investment.
The senator from Essex, Mr. Tarr.
Well, well, well, Mr. President, this particular amendment
comes to us from one of the most prolific writers of budget
amendments, practically in the history of the Senate.
And we've heard very little thus far from her
in this debate, Mr. President.
But this is an amendment that deals with international trade,
and that's something that's of great interest to a lot of us.
And I know that she has been a champion
of this form of trade and many others in the Commonwealth.
So I'm hoping that we can hear about her latest initiative
to bolster international trade.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Senator from Middlesex?
Yes, a brief recess.
[BANGS GAVEL]
--objection, we will temporarily hold Amendment number 639.
We're now on Amendment number 640,
offered by the senator from Suffolk,
Ms. Forry, the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 640 by Ms. Forry, New England Center
for Arts and Technology.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The nos have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
Next is offered by--
number 641 is offered by the senator from Middlesex
and Worcester, Mr. Eldridge, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 641 by Mr. Eldridge, Abrasive Housing
Voucher program.
Question comes on the adoption of the amendment, the senator
from Middlesex, Mr. Eldridge.
Thank you, Mr. President.
This amendment number 641 would increase
funding for the alternative housing voucher program, AHVP,
by $2 million.
The Senate over the past couple of years
has taken the lead on increasing the funding for the Alternative
Housing Voucher Program.
want to thank the Chairwoman of Ways and Means
for proposing an increase in the Senate Ways and Means
budget of $5.5 million, which would
be an increase over the $4.6 million
that the program received last year.
Just the funding that's in the budget
will allow approximately 100 more disabled individuals
to secure affordable housing throughout Massachusetts.
So I want to thank her for that.
I think we also have to recognize,
Mr. President, though, that we continue
to have a housing crisis.
It is becoming more and more difficult, particularly
for disabled individuals, to find affordable housing.
And this is a program that has made
a dramatic difference for the disability community
throughout Massachusetts.
If we were to pass this increase of $2 million,
we would be able to provide housing for approximately 150
more people, and that would allow them
not only more dignity, but more likely access to finding a job,
getting services, and having a better quality of life.
This has been a priority of the disability community
for the past several years.
Again, I'm very proud that the Senate has taken the lead
on increasing over this past couple of years,
and I'm hoping we can see our way to a $2 million
increase above the Senate Ways and Means proposal.
So I urge my colleagues to support this Amendment number
641.
Thank you very much, Mr. President.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The nos have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
642 is offered by the senator from Middlesex, Ms. Donoghue,
the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 642 by Ms. Donoghue, military base
promotion.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The nos have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
Number 643 is on hold.
Number 644, offered by the senator from Middlesex
and Worcester, Mr. Eldridge, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 644 by Mr. Eldridge, Levi Weatherby Farm
Restoration.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
The senator from Essex, Mr. Tarr.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I'm hoping we can hear about the Levi Weatherby Farm.
This sounds like a very interesting project.
And I guess I've now learned I have
to ask, when will this be opened,
so that we can visit it.
And I hope the answer isn't that it closed.
And so, Mr. President, I look forward
to the gentleman's explanation.
[INAUDIBLE] From Middlesex and Worcester, Mr. Eldridge.
[INAUDIBLE] for his interest.
He's always welcome to come to the town of Boxborough.
The house is open.
However, it has a leaky roof, so it might not
be best to come at this time.
The earmark would provide $50,000 for the Levi Weatherby
Farm located in Boxborough, one of the more rural
and historical towns in the district I represent,
which has longstanding agricultural roots.
The farm house was actually built in 1784,
and for over 200 years, it was actively engaged in farming.
It's one of the few 18th century farm houses
that remain in New England with the surrounding land intact.
The farmhouse is now, of course, uninhabited.
But it needs improvements including major water--
it has problems including major water and wind
damage, rotting beams, partial chimney
and foundation collapse.
Again, reiterating my concern of the two
of us visiting the farmhouse at this time.
And therefore, I urge my colleagues
to support this earmark to repair the farmhouse
so it can be available for the public.
Thank you.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
Number 646, a redraft of amendment
offered by the senator from Suffolk and Middlesex,
Mr. Boncore, the title of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 646 by Mr. Boncore, public housing reform.
The senator from Suffolk and Middlesex, Mr. Boncore.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I rise in support of Amendment 646,
which would add $300,000 to the state's housing reform line
item for the purposes of an IT platform
to develop a centralized waiting list.
This is in reaction to the 2014 housing reform,
which holds a special place for me,
because it was the first matter that brought me
to the state house as chair of my local housing authority.
The first time I got to meet my now colleague, the gentleman
from Acton, who spearheaded the housing reform in the Senate.
What the reform set out to do was
modernize housing authorities.
Part of that modernization was to put an online application
and to develop and implement a centralized waiting list
to help with the burdens that all of our local housing
authorities in each of our districts
has with a very long waiting list.
Center of the online waiting list
would allow certain other, smaller, local housing
authorities to see where there was availability
in other communities.
The DHUD had one year to implement that process.
Here we are three years later from the promulgation
of that law, and DHUD has not been
able to fund this platform for a centralized waiting list.
This $300,000 earmark within the housing reform line item
would go specifically to the development of IT platform
for a centralized waiting list.
It's well long overdue.
And I hope the amendment is adopted.
Thank you, Mr. President.
The senator from Essex, Mr. Tarr.
I want to thank the gentleman who just
took a seat for this amendment.
It's important that we continue with these reforms.
And developing a centralized list
and a centralized application process
is a very important part of that.
And so Mr. President, I appreciate this amendment.
I hope that it's adopted.
And Mr. President, I move that when
we take a vote on this matter, it
be taken by calling the yeas and nays.
[INAUDIBLE] taken, it will be taken
by a call of the ayes and nays.
[INAUDIBLE]
Barrett?
Yes.
Joseph A. Boncure?
Yes.
Michael D. Brady?
William M. Brownsberger?
Yes.
Harriette L. Chandler?
Yes.
Sonia Chang-Diaz?
Yes.
Cynthia Stone Creem?
Yes.
Julian Cyr?
Yes.
Viriato M. deMacedo?
Yes.
Sal N. DiDomenico?
Yes.
Eileen M. Donoghue?
Yes.
James B. Eldridge?
Yes.
Ryan C. Fattman?
Yes.
Jennifer L. Flanagan?
Yes.
Linda Dorcena Forry?
Yes.
Anne M. Gobi?
Yes.
Adam G. Hinds?
Yes.
Donald F. Humason, Junior?
Yes.
Patricia D. Jehlen?
Yes.
Yes John F. Keenan?
Yes.
Eric P. Lesser?
Yes.
Jason M. Lewis?
Yes.
Barbara A. L'Italien Joan B. Lovely?
Yes.
Thomas M. McGee?
Yes.
Mark C. Montigny?
Yes.
Michael O. Moore?
Yes.
Patrick M. O'Connor?
Yes.
Kathleen O'Connor Ives?
Yes.
Marc R. Pacheco?
Yes.
Michael J. Rodrigues?
Yes.
Richard J. Ross?
Yes.
Michael F. Rush?
Yes.
Karen E. Spilka?
Yes.
Bruce E. Tarr?
Yes.
Walter F. Timilty?
Yes.
James T. Welch?
Yes.
[INAUDIBLE]
Yep.
[INAUDIBLE] President, I'd like to share a point [INAUDIBLE]..
Michael D. Brady votes yes.
Essex and Middlesex, Ms. L'Italien?
Yes.
She said yes.
She has to [INAUDIBLE].
[INAUDIBLE]
Barbara A. L'Italien?
[INAUDIBLE]
Yes.
The amendment is adopted.
Amendment number 647 is offered by the senator from Middlesex
and Worcester, Mr. Eldridge, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 648 by Mr. Eldridge,
Westboro 300th anniversary.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The nos have it.
The amendment is not adopted.
Number 648 is offered by the senator
from Suffolk, Mr. Rush, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 648 by Mr. Rush, Riverside Theater Works
[?
Mack. ?]
The senator from Plymouth and Barnstable, Mr. deMacedo.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I was hoping that the gentleman from West Roxbury
might be able to take this opportunity
to share with us a little bit about the Riverside Theater
Works.
Apparently we had the Mother Brook
and then we had the Norwood Regional.
You might be able to share with us a little bit about Riverside
Theater Works.
Senator from Norfolk and Suffolk, Mr. Rush.
Thank you, Mr. President, and through you to the members.
And I appreciate my good friend, the gentleman from Plymouth
with a lot of inquiries about the Norfolk and Suffolk
district.
We'll bring him back out for a tour at any time.
This is a great, great program here.
And this actually is located in Boston's neighborhood
of Hyde Park.
And is directly on the border of my district
and the gentlewoman from Dorchester's district.
So we share this facility here.
And Riverside Theater Works is a very rare, inner city community
theater located in Hyde Park.
It's a 14,000 square foot facility, features 156 feet
opera venue, a dance studio rehearsal space, a scene shop,
a lounge, and several meeting and rehearsal rooms,
mostly based towards the youth of the community
for the idea of bringing the arts locally.
So the venue host shows recitals.
There are fundraisers, community gatherings,
and it's a key attraction and really
a connector for the entire neighborhood.
The vision of Riverside, initially,
was that this neighborhood, this section of the city of Boston
was not getting enough exposure to the arts.
So a group of volunteers decided to form this nonprofit
in this phenomenally historic building, which is currently
in a private-public partnership with Boston College
to renovate the theater.
This amendment provides assistance to the theater
so they can continue to help build a very diverse community
to experience the arts in the height of Hyde
Park in the city of Boston.
And Mr. President, I hope that the amendment is adopted.
Thank you.
[INAUDIBLE] adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
And the amendment is adopted.
We have a new draft, yes, and [INAUDIBLE]..
The next amendment, number 651, offered by the senator
from Suffolk, Ms. Chang-Diaz, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 651 by Ms. Chang-Diaz, home base.
The senator from Plymouth and Barnstable, Mr. deMacedo.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I was hoping that Senator Diaz might be able to--
Chang-Diaz-- might be able to share with us a little bit
of what this amendment does, as we've
co-sponsored another amendment on the same topic.
You violated the rules.
I did.
I'm sorry.
The senator from Suffolk, Ms. Chang-Diaz, Mr. President,
and through you, to the gentleman
from Plymouth and Barnstable, as well as
the rest of the membership.
And I have so enjoyed finding myself
in the position of teammate with him on the issue of home base.
This amendment in particular would
remove the aggregate, the $300,000 aggregate cap,
on the amount of resources that the home base program
may use to serve families that are in domestic violence
or substance abuse shelters or are currently residing
in sober living programs.
Home base, as the gentleman from Plymouth and Barnstable
knows, but for the benefit of others who might not know,
Home Base is a program that offers families
an alternative to shelter by providing stabilization
services and financial assistance
in order to obtain and retain housing
so that folks are stably housed, instead
of yo-yoing back and forth between shelter, housing,
shelter, housing, or circumstances worse
than shelter.
It helps families to pay rent, utility bills, security
deposits, and other expenses that
allow a family to stay stable in a current home with some case
management services.
And it uses our state resources more efficiently
by reducing the overall cost of assistance
to address homelessness.
In last year's budget, Mr. President,
we did a pilot that was capped at $300,000,
to try out serving domestic violence and substance abuse
clients who are otherwise served through programs at EOHHS
through this program for the purposes of their housing
stability needs.
Because after all, of course, homeless families
are homeless, regardless of whether they're
being served through HHS programs or DHCD's emergency
assistance programs.
So the language in this amendment
simply removes that cap and thus would
reduce the long wait list for these programs,
ease the cost burdens on our emergency shelter system,
and also provide the program administrators
a home base with some flexibility and agility
to best serve the population that they're seeing show up.
I hope that the amendment passes.
Question on the adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
Number 652 and 653 are on hold.
Amendment number 654 is authored by the senator
from Worcester, Miss Chandler, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Amendment number 654 by Miss Chandler Framingham Downtown
Renaissance.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
The senator from Plymouth and Barnstable, Mr. deMacedo.
Thank you, Mr. President I was hoping
I might take this opportunity to ask the gentle lady
from Worcester what's this Framingham Downtown Renaissance
amendment does for the edification
of my other colleagues.
The chair recognizes the senator [AUDIO OUT]
The $5,000 for the Framingham downtown Renaissance.
Framingham is the next big town, big city--
it's a city now--
to Worcester.
And this funding would support the revitalization efforts
of the downtown Framingham area.
Downtown development provides an economic boost
to our communities, which are more than just the town
itself, but all the towns in between.
To get to Boston, one goes through Framingham.
We are hoping to draw more and more attention to Worcester
and to Framingham from the Boston area.
Smart investors like this offer our municipalities
the opportunity to grow and to succeed.
So for these reasons, I ask that you vote yes for this.
Question comes on adoption of the amendment.
All those in favor say, aye.
Opposed, no.
The ayes have it.
The amendment is adopted.
The next is offered by the same senator, the title
of which the clerk will read.
Number 655.
Amendment number 655.
And Miss Chandler-- Long Term Care Insurance Deadline
Adjustment.
The question comes on adoption of that amendment.
The senator from Essex, Mr. Tarr.
[INAUDIBLE] brief recess.
Recess.