O'Brien's Shenanigans May Cost State $18 Millionby: TimothyHorriganMon Oct 03, 2011 at 10:56:30 AM EDT |
|
The State Senate met on September 7th for a brief "veto day" session. They voted on 5 Senate bills which had been vetoed by the Governor. 3 vetoes were overridden, 2 were sustained.
The House voted on 2 of those 3 overridden vetoes on September 14th. The veto on SB 88 (the "Ward Bird Bill") was also overridden in the House. SB 57's (a title loan bill's) veto was not voted on at all on September 14th. SB 3's (a retirement system bill's) veto was tabled, which was a constitutionally dubious move- but this is not the shenanigan which I am complaining about. The Senate suspended its rules to pass SB 198, which makes a technical change to the welfare laws, bringing them into line with federal Social Security Law. It will reportedly save the state $2 million a month if passed. |
|
The House couldn't start hearing SB 198 until after its September 14th meeting. O'Brien did arrange to suspend House rules to introduce several new bills on the 14th, even though the Governor did not call a special session- but none of them addressed the problem SB 198 solves.
Here is the scandalous part. Before and after he was elected Speaker, O'Brien has been on a crusade against the family-law system. He created a new committee, the Petitions & Redress Committee, primarily (though not exclusively) to push back against the family courts and the Division of Children, Youth & Families (aka the DCYF.) He is especially irate about the actions of the Marital Masters: these are a small group of court officers whose job is to try to work out child custody and divorce agreements. One of these masters, Philip D. Cross, has become the target of much vitriol because of his involvement in several especially complex and contentious divorce cases. (As far as I can tell, he is actually one of the better marital masters.) In 2010, there was an unsuccessful attempt to remove Master Cross and two judges from office, and similar attempts will be made again in 2012. O'Brien has introduced a non-germane amendment to SB 198 which basically stipulates: Marital Master Contracts. No new marital master contracts shall be entered into by the state and no existing marital master contracts shall be renewed, extended, reinstated, transferred, or modified by the state on or after the effective date of this section. This amendment would take effect immediately on passage of the bill. On its own merits, this amendment would be a bad bill, although restructuring the family court system is an issue worth debating. Eliminating the marital master program altogether is an unwise move; eliminating it abruptly is an even unwiser move. It is also unclear whether it would be constitutional to disavow their contracts like this. (An additional complication is that the Marital Masters are employees of the judicial branch, not independent contractors.) Tacking it onto SB 198 is allowable under the rules, but it is also a scandal. If the House passes SB 198 as is on October 14th, without the amendment, the Governor can sign it immediately. If O'Brien's amendment is passed, the Senate first has to agree to a conference committee. They don't have to do so. Even if the Senate leadership agrees to a conference committee, they probably won't agree to O'Brien's amendment. That presumably delays the passage of SB 198 until at least January 2012. O'Brien's gesture against the Marital Masters will cost the state at least $6 million. If a whole new bill has to be introduced to replace SB 198, it might not pass till June, in which case O'Brien will have cost the state $18 million in all. |