An Act to Protect Animals in Domestic Violence Cases
and
An Act Relating to Pets and Abuse Prevention

I co-sponsored these two bills to protect the human and animal victims of domestic violence. Animals are regularly caught in the cross-fire of domestic violence; studies have shown that in the majority of domestic violence cases, abusers have injured or killed animals as a way of exerting control over their victims. Many victims will not leave their abuser because they are unable to secure protection for their animals. These bills would allow animals to be included in orders of protection. By ensuring that a pet is safe, this bill can help remove a barrier that can prevent a victim from leaving a violent situation.

An Act Relative to Puppy Mills

I co-sponsored this bill because it would limit the number of animals that can be kept under a kennel license and would also add specific animal welfare standards that must be met. Some breeders are very responsible and treat their animals well but other breeders force breeding dogs to live their entire lives in cages, force them to breed as frequently as possible, and have no regard for their well-being. Those practices are inhumane and should be stopped.

An Act to Reform CORI, Restore Economic Opportunity, and Improve Public Safety

I co-sponsored this bill because the current Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) system prevents thousands of people from getting jobs and housing because of old or irrelevant criminal records. To make Massachusetts stronger and safer, we need a smarter approach to CORI that helps reduce recidivism and end the cycle of crime, homelessness and unemployment. This bill would help make sure that old or irrelevant criminal records do not prevent people from getting jobs and housing by changing procedures for sealing and disseminating CORI records. It reduces the waiting time for sealing criminal records to 7 years after the individual re-enters the community for a felony and 3 years for a misdemeanor. It also establishes fair hiring practices by removing questions about criminal history from initial job applications, permitting criminal background checks for qualified applicants only, and ensuring the relevance and accuracy of the criminal record.

An Act Relative to Gender-Based Discrimination and Hate Crimes

I co-sponsored this bill because thirteen states currently offer non-discrimination protections based on gender identity and expression, but Massachusetts does not. As a result, transgender citizens can, and do, face legal discrimination in employment, housing, credit, public accommodations, and hate crimes. I co-sponsored this bill to make the protection of transgender people from discrimination explicit, uniform, and visible to the general public. This bill would also amend existing hate crime laws to explicitly protect people targeted for violence and harassment.

An Act to Restore Enforcement of Civil Rights

I co-sponsored this bill because it would give Massachusetts residents the right to bring discrimination suits against local or state units of government for policies that have a discriminatory disparate impact based on race or gender. A U.S. Supreme Court case stripped this right away at the federal level in 2001. This bill would renew the Commonwealth’s commitment to these basic issues of fairness.

An Act to Ensure Educator Excellence

I co-sponsored this education bill because it increases teacher excellence through teacher training and mentoring programs.  Research shows that teacher and administrator expertise are the most significant variables in student achievement. This bill improves the “supply chain” for developing the educator workforce by establishing an integrated system of preparation, licensure, recruitment and hiring, induction, supervision and evaluation, professional development, teacher leadership, relicensure, school structure, and school culture. The bill also includes funds that districts can use as supports in their efforts to recruit teachers in subject areas of highest need, including math, science, special education, and the education of limited English proficient students. Finally, this bill provides a comprehensive approach to improving math and science teaching.

An Act to Improve Assessment and Accountability to Ensure Students Acquire 21st Century Skills

I co-sponsored this eduation bill because it deals with the reform of student acheivement measures, in particular MCAS reform.  The Commonwealth has yet to fully realize the goals of the Education Reform Act of 1993, which called for a comprehensive assessment system composed of a variety of instruments and methods. Our current system has its strengths but has also brought unintended consequences such as narrowed curriculum, too much time spent on standardized testing and test preparation, student disengagement, stagnant achievement gaps and rising dropout rates. To build on the strengths of our public schools and close achievement gaps, we need a balanced assessment and accountability system that will promote 21st century skills, educate the whole child, and focus state attention and resources on schools and districts that most need help in their efforts to improve quality and outcomes for every student. The bill retains some MCAS testing but incorporates multiple additional performance measures, reducing the number of hours spent preparing for and taking standardized tests. It also modifies the accountability and intervention processes for teachers and schools.

An Act to Establish Election Day Registration

I co-sponsored this bill because it would increase voter participation in elections and eliminate the current 21 day deadline for registration and allow citizens to register to vote at their polling place on Election Day. This would provide a critical safeguard for everyone’s right to vote.

An Act Among States to Enact the National Popular Vote

I co-sponsored this bill because it would reform the Electoral College system for presidential elections.  This bill would put Massachusetts in a compact that guarantees that the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states and the District of Columbia wins the presidency. Under the National Popular Vote compact, states agree to give all of their electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote, thereby guaranteeing the popular vote winner a supermajority in the Electoral College. The agreement would take effect only when identical legislation has been enacted by states collectively possessing a majority of the Electoral College votes – that is, 270 of the 538 electoral votes – roughly equal to half of the population.

An Act to Improve Recycling Rates in the Commonwealth

I co-sponsored this bill because it expands the existing Bottle Bill to include $0.05 deposits on non-carbonated beverage containers such as those containing water, sports drinks, juices, and iced teas. The original bill, first developed in 1982, applies only to soda and beer containers and has become outdated as non-carbonated beverages have become increasingly popular. Today, less than 60 percent of all containers sold are redeemable, and this percentage is expected to decline further. Under this bill, the unreturned deposit receipts would be placed in a dedicated fund known as the Clean Environment Fund to be used for programs and projects in the management of solid waste and for environmental protection.

An Act for a Competitive Economy through Safer Alternatives to Toxic Chemicals

Over the last several years, scientific evidence has increasingly linked toxic chemicals to higher rates of learning and developmental disabilities and chronic diseases such as cancer, ALS, and Parkinson’s Disease. I co-sponsored this important piece of legislation because it creates a flexible program in Massachusetts to replace commonly used toxic chemicals with safer alternatives where feasible. Businesses and other users will be able to develop their own substitution plans or can apply for waivers if safer alternatives are not economically or technically feasible. When a safer alternative is not currently available, the bill would stimulate research and development into new technologies and solutions. The program will be funded by a fee placed on wholesalers or distributors selling products containing toxic chemicals to entities in Massachusetts.

An Act Relative to Sustainable Water Resources

I co-sponsored this bill because it requires the Department of Environmental Protection to adopt regulations establishing standards for restoring and maintaining stream flow in rivers and streams. When streams get too low, there is a negative impact on both water quality and the aquatic habitat.  Massachusetts currently has over 160 “flow-impaired” rivers and streams, more than any other state in New England. The bill also update’s the state’s dam safety statute, allows for municipal water banking, and sets up a Water Infrastructure Finance Commission to address the financial issues facing cities and towns as they attempt to update aging water infrastructure.

An Act to Promote Energy Efficient Lighting, Conserve Energy, Regulate Outdoor Night Lighting, and Reduce Light (aka the Dark Skies Bill)

Light pollution poses many problems: energy is wasted by light escaping into the sky, poorly designed lighting causes harsh glare that can blind and distract drivers, and reduces enjoyment of the night sky. I co-sponsored this bill because it will reduce light pollution in the Commonwealth by requiring state- and municipally-funded projects to use fully-shielded exterior lighting (which does not emanate light upward) in new or replacement installations and to install that lighting only where it is needed. Existing lighting would not be affected, and waivers may be used in other special circumstances such as when other compelling safety interests may occur.

An Act to Promote Community Preservation

This Community Preservation Act (CPA) was signed into law in 2000. The CPA is a tool to help communities preserve open space and historic sites, and create affordable housing and recreational facilities. I co-sponsored this bill because it would improve the CPA in three ways. First, the bill would increase the annual minimum CPA trust fund match to 75%. The statewide CPA Trust Fund matches locally-raised revenues. From 2001 to 2007, each CPA community received a 100% match of its locally-raised revenue. Beginning in October 2008, however, the CPA match rate fell to 67% for many communities and is projected to drop again to 35% in 2009. For this partnership to be successful, the state has to maintain its commitment. Second, the bill would encourage more towns to participate in the CPA by allowing communities to combine a traditional 1% CPA property tax surcharge with up to 2% of other municipal revenue. By relying less on the local property tax surcharge, cities and less affluent communities would be more likely to adopt the CPA. A third critical element of this bill would clarify the allowable uses for CPA funds so that communities can rehabilitate existing outdoor parks and other recreational resources. Currently, rehabilitation projects are restricted to recreational resources that were acquired or created with CPA funds. This has been extremely limiting in many communities, including larger, urban communities with less open space to protect but many older parks in need of capital rehabilitation.

Ensuring Access to Health Care

An Act Relative to Benefits for Autism

I co-sponsored this important piece of legislation to require health insurers in Massachusetts to provide coverage for the diagnosis and treatment of Autism Spectrum Disorder. The Center for Disease Control estimates that 1 in 150 children have autism. These children require extensive services from medical professionals. Early intervention is critical to gain maximum benefit from existing therapies. Most private health insurance plans do not provide coverage for Applied Behavioral Analysis and other autism-related services. Access to care is crucial not only to the quality of life for an individual with autism and their family, but also benefits society as a whole as the long-term cost implications related to lack of treatment are daunting.

An Act Strengthening Health Reform

I co-sponsored this legislation because it addresses gaps in health care coverage by making the Commonwealth’s health care programs – Commonwealth Care, MassHealth, and the Health Safety Net – consistent, cost-effective, and comprehensive. This bill is supported by a broad coalition of health care consumers, patients, community organizations, businesses, labor unions, doctors, hospitals, health plans, and community health centers. The bill is comprehensive and has a lot of elements, including prohibiting lifetime caps in all health insurance plans, making the Health Safety Net retroactive coverage consistent for all eligible patients, and granting more flexibility to the Office of Medicaid to provide the most cost-effective health care to elderly and disabled legal immigrants.

An Act to Assure Continuity of Health Coverage for Children

I co-sponsored this bill because it establishes 12 month continuous eligibility for children under SCHIP and Medicaid. The federal government allows states to establish 12 month continuous eligibility under these programs, meaning that once a child is deemed eligible for SCHIP or Medicaid, they maintain that eligibility for 12 months regardless of whether their family’s income changes. Twenty-nine states have implemented this policy already. It would improve state government efficiency and lower administration costs, and is good for kids and doctors.

Ensuring Quality Health Care

An Act to Improve the Delivery of Healthcare

I co-sponsored this bill because it seeks to reduce medical errors and infections in hospitals through the use of “checklists of care,” a series of steps to be regularly taken by teams of healthcare providers to decrease patient harm. The World Health Organization recently endorsed a checklist to prevent surgical errors. A study found that rates of surgical complications and deaths decreased by 36% after the checklist was adopted. A consortium of hospitals across Michigan implemented a checklist to prevent infections. Bloodstream infection rates fell by two-thirds within 3 months and the average I.C.U. cut its infection rate to zero. Over 18 months, 1,500 lives and nearly $200 million were saved. I co-sponsored this piece of legislation to save healthcare dollars, and much more importantly, to save lives.

An Act to Eliminate Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities in the Commonwealth

I co-sponsored this bill because Massachusetts residents of color face disproportionately higher rates of chronic illness than residents of the state as a whole. For example, asthma mortality rates are four times higher among Latinos than white people, and black people have the highest percentage of low birth weight babies in the state. This bill would create a secretariat level Office of Health Equity to lead a statewide agenda to eliminate health disparities.

Ensuring Affordable Health Care

An Act Relative to Data-Mining

I co-sponsored this bill which would prevent pharmaceutical companies from buying doctors’ prescribing records from pharmacies for targeted marketing purposes. This current practice negatively affects public health because marketing based on prescriber data often involves biased and inaccurate information about health risks, and encourages the prescription of new drugs that might be riskier to patients than already established treatments. The practice also negatively affects health care costs, as marketing is a key factor in the skyrocketing costs of prescription drugs and the increased usage of expensive brand-name medicines.

An Act to establish the Massachusetts Health Care Trust (aka Single Payer Health Care)

I co-sponsored this legslation which would create “Single-payer” health care so that health care funds would be administered by one payer, rather than the current system of multiple insurance companies. This bill would make the Massachusetts government the single payer of health care for residents in our state. Too many health care dollars currently go to administrative expenses, and with health care costs continuously rising, I believe we need to consider every option available to us to ensure that every person has access to quality health care.

Please check back soon for Labor and Workforce legislative updates.

The Senate on Tuesday, May 18, approved legislation to help spur economic growth by providing small businesses the immediate health care cost relief they need to retain and create jobs and start hiring again, Sen. Ken Donnelly announced today. The comprehensive bill requires insurers to offer affordable health plans, reduces premium fluctuations and promotes wellness programs for small businesses.

“Many small business owners have talked to me about the difficulties in providing health insurance for their employees.  This bill will provide rate relief, rate stabilization, and predictability for small businesses, so they can continue to provide insurance and expand their businesses, supporting our economic recovery,” said Sen. Donnelly.  “At the same time, I helped ensure that hospitals’ contributions were assessed in a fair manner, so we don’t accidentally hurt one industry while helping another.”

The legislation delivers an estimated premium relief of 10 to 15 percent with the possibility of more for small businesses to save and reinvest in themselves and their workforce. It also establishes standardized transparency measures for comparing provider prices and requires annual public reporting to collect important financial information for ongoing policy discussions about long-term system reform.

“Small businesses are the job producers in Massachusetts, and they have been suffocating under the mounting costs of health care,” Senate President Therese Murray (D-Plymouth) said.

Senator Richard T. Moore (D-Uxbridge), Senate chair of the Joint Committee on Health Care Financing, said: “This bill necessitates systemic change, and will continue to lead Massachusetts on a path toward stable, economically practical, and accessible levels of care.”

The bill requires insurance carriers to file premium rates with the Division of Insurance (DOI) prior to their effective date for review and gives insurers the option of filing rates under an Efficiency Guarantee.  The Guarantee ensures that at least 90 percent of their premium dollars will be spent on actual care and not administrative costs, such as marketing, salaries or profit margins. If carriers choose not to file rates with the Guarantee, they would be subject to a DOI review to determine if premium increases exceed medical inflation, which would not be allowed.

The bill also controls year-to-year rate volatility that leads to 30- to 40-percent increases in health care premiums for some small businesses. The cost-spiking practice of measuring the age of employees in five-year increments would be eliminated, replaced with a yearly measurement of age to smooth out the annual increases as an employee group ages.

Additionally, the legislation provides more affordable health care products to small business employers by requiring carriers in the small group market to offer at least one reduced network plan with premiums 10 percent lower than those for a full network plan.

Finally, the bill requires hospitals and other large health care providers with healthy reserves and a profit margin (revenues that exceed patient care expenses) over 2.5 percent for the past two years to make a one-time, shared-sacrifice contribution to help alleviate rising health costs for small businesses and bridge the gap to long-term system reform. No funding will be transferred to the state.  The Division of Insurance will work with the institutions to ensure that every dollar is targeted to premium relief, with refunds going to small businesses over a two-year period.  This $100 million contribution from the provider community would reduce small business health insurance costs by an additional 2.5 percent.

Other provisions in the bill:

• Authorize small businesses to group together and purchase health care plans at lower prices;

• Prohibit anti-competitive contract provisions between insurance carriers and health providers that restrict product innovation or tie reimbursement rates to those received by other providers; and

• Establish a Mandated Benefit Expert Review process whereby the Division of Health Care Finance and Policy must conduct a comprehensive review of the cost, public health impact and clinical efficacy of all existing mandated benefits every four years.

The bill now goes to the House of Representatives.

An Act Relative to the Failure to Remove Existing Poles

I am the lead sponsor on this bill to address the problem of telephone companies’ widespread practice of leaving old, unused telephone poles up after installing a replacement pole. This practice creates a public safety problem as the old poles deteriorate and fall down, and it also creates a problem of aesthetics. Telephone and distribution companies are already required by state law to remove the old poles within a certain amount of time (90 or 180 days, depending on the project), but there is no penalty for noncompliance. Thus, this bill creates a $200 per pole per day penalty, payable to the municipality where the pole is located.  This bill has the support of every State Representative in my district and they, as well as many other members of the House and Senate, are cosponsors to my bill.

If passed, this bill would also provide a potential source of revenue to towns, because they would be able to collect the fines imposed on the telephone companies.

The Lexington Minuteman - April 15, 2010

http://www.wickedlocal.com/lexington/news/x1042533746/Lexington-survey-shows-slow-progress-on-removal-of-double-poles

Lexington — A recent survey of double utility poles in Lexington, completed by the town’s ad hoc Electric Utility Committee, shows that despite some progress, utility companies are lagging behind on promises to take down the superfluous poles.

Massachusetts state law requires utility companies to remove an existing pole within 90 days of installation of a new pole on the site, except in cases of lengthy commercial or industrial construction projects, where companies have six months to remove the offending pole. There is currently no penalty for violating these requirements, however.

According to the Electric Utility Committee’s March survey, 104, or 75 percent, of the 138 double poles in Lexington are in violation of the law.

“There are still double poles in the system that were there seven years ago,” said Paul Chernick, chairman of the Electric Utility Committee. “They are supposed to be gone in three months.”

Chernick said the sluggish response aggravates him in part because Lexington is supposed to be the “leading edge” of an effort by the utilities to demonstrate their new approach to removing double poles. In 2003, the utilities began a pilot program in Lexington to test a new tracking system called Pole Lifetime Management (PLM).

PLM isn’t working, according to Chernick.

His committee’s survey shows that 42, or 30 percent, of the 138 double poles they documented do not appear in the PLM database.

Pole position

Verizon owns the poles in Lexington. As a result, Verizon takes the lead in coordinating efforts to remove utilities from the poles.

Verizon spokesman Phil Santoro said the public doesn’t understand that double poles don’t result primarily from car accidents or age, but from NSTAR’s process of upgrading electrical service and from street and sidewalk reconstruction.

Each pole has up to four utilities attached to them, Santoro said. At the top is electric, then telephone, then the town’s fire alarm system, and then cable. Poles may also hold wires for streetlights and pegs for flags and banners.

Removing a double pole requires each co-locator to come out separately and move their wires from the old to the new pole, Santoro said. That requires coordinating schedules since only one entity can work at a time.

“It can sometimes be done in 90 days, but typically it takes longer,” Santoro said.

NSTAR spokesman Michael Durand confirmed that electrical upgrades are driving most of the new double poles.

“New equipment does require new poles,” Durand said, who said the company upgraded the service when usage monitoring suggested that was needed. “The new equipment is often larger or heavier — or both.”

Pending legislation

Double poles are not just a Lexington phenomenon. Arlington has approximately 780 double poles, according to the Arlington Utility Pole Committee. Winchester is currently in the process of surveying its double poles.

“It’s a problem when you have an historic or scenic site, and the utilities leave a double pole there for years,” Chernick said. “It makes the community look derelict.”

Concerned residents like Chernick and his committee have helped to drive action at the State House.

Legislation drafted by Sen. Ken Donnelly, D-Arlington, and supported by Sen. Susan Fargo, D-Lincoln, Rep. Jay Kaufman, D-Lexington, and 14 other legislators, would impose fines on the utility companies for continued noncompliance.

In its current form, the bill would impose a fine of $200 a day — to be paid to the municipality where the pole is located — on utility companies that fail to remove an existing pole within 90 days. For commercial or industrial construction projects expected to take more than one year, the fine would be imposed after six months.

Were the legislation in place today, with 104 double poles in Lexington that are 90 days or older, according to the Electric Utility Committee’s March survey, the $200 per pole fine would translate to roughly $20,800 per day in fines levied upon Verizon to be paid to the town of Lexington.

Senate bill 1482, originally filed in January 2009, is currently in committee until July 14, according to Donnelly’s office.
 

- Emily Costello

An Act Relative to Dual Membership and Regular Compensation

I am the lead sponsor on this important bill because it would provide a more equitable pension benefit calculation for individuals with membership in more than one public retirement system. A public retiree’s benefit is calculated based on the average of his or her highest three years of compensation. However, the current formula leaves the system susceptible to abuse by those with dual membership because it allows the pension benefit to be calculated by adding the compensation of all positions held during the highest three year period. This means that an individual might accept a second job for three years simply to boost his or her pension benefit. To close this loophole, this bill changes the benefit calculation so that the pension benefit is calculated for each position separately. This new calculation would not punish an individual who worked two career public sector jobs, but would only remove the incentive to artificially increase one’s pension by accepting a short-term second position.

An Act Relative to the Annual Allowance for Widows and Widowers of Certain Public Employees

As we take steps to reform the pension system and correct abuses at the top, it is important to consider those who have seen their minimal pension benefits eaten away by a rising cost of living. I am the lead sponsor on this bill because it increases certain survivor pension benefits that have failed to keep up with inflation over the last several years. Option (d) survivors are the spouses of active employees who died from a non-work related cause before retiring. Currently, they receive a minimum annual pension benefit of only $3,000 – an amount that has not been increased since 1990. This bill would raise the minimum benefit to $6,000 annually for these Option (d) survivors.

Section 101 survivors are the spouses of accidental disability retirees who retired before November 1996 and died of a cause unrelated to their disability. They currently receive a survivor’s pension benefit of $6,000 that took effect 15 years ago in 1994. This bill would increase the minimum benefit to $9,000 annually.

An Act to Establish Minimum Standards for Special Care Units for Dementia

More than 120,000 people in Massachusetts have Alzheimer’s.  I co-sponsored this bill because it would create minimum care standards in special care units. Alzheimer’s disease requires unique care relative to proper staff training, care techniques, dementia specific activities, physical design, lighting, etc. Nursing homes have increasingly developed these dementia specific special care units, but with no baseline set of standards. Forty-four states have measures in place regarding dementia care units, but there are no minimum quality care standards for dementia special care units in Massachusetts. Therefore quality is fragmented throughout the system. I co-sponsored this bill to make sure that residents with dementia receive appropriate, consistent care.

An Act to Increase the Personal Care Allowance for Residents of Long Term Care Facilities

The Personal Needs Allowance (PNA) is the amount of personal income a MassHealth recipient who is living in a nursing facility, licensed chronic hospital, licensed rest home, or approved public medical institution, is allowed to retain each month in order to pay for personal effects, including clothing and other services for daily life not covered by the facility.  I co-sponsored this legislation because it increases the PNA for MassHealth recipients residing in long term care facilities from $60.00 to $72.80.

An Act Relative to Updating the Public Health Laws

I co-sponsored this bill because it would revoke archaic and unconstitutional statutes that could jeopardize women’s health and well-being if they were ever enforced again. One is a pre-Roe v. Wade statute banning abortion, and another outlaws birth control for unmarried couples. I co-sponsored this bill to help bring the laws governing reproductive health care in line with the Commonwealth’s commitment to promoting public health and improving access to medical care.

An Act Relative to Consent and Counseling for Certain Minors

I co-sponsored this bill because it would update the consent and counseling criteria to better support young women seeking abortions. The present-day statute narrowly defines who can give consent, imposing unnecessary barriers for pregnant teenagers who need timely access to medical care. This bill would ensure that the law reflects the family structures that exist in the Commonwealth today, so that a foster parent or legal guardian is also able to give the consent to fulfill the legal requirement.

An Act Relative to Providing Health Education in Schools

I co-sponsored this bill because it makes explicit that health education (including sex education) is a core subject for which the Commonwealth must maintain academic standards to help local school districts meet students’ educational needs. The bill would require that the guidelines be age appropriate, medically accurate, and reflect the range of health issues facing young people today while creating a system to identify the current gaps in health education across the Commonwealth.