logo
Top Dems still at odds over major rules changes

Top Dems still at odds over major rules changes

Yahoo17-05-2025
BOSTON (SHNS) – Four and a half months into the lawmaking term, House and Senate Democrats still do not agree on their most significant proposed transparency and process reforms — a fact that took center stage Thursday when a question-and-answer session with press morphed into a miniature debate between legislative negotiators.
The conference committee tasked with ironing out differences between the House and Senate joint rules proposals (S 18 / H 2026) met Thursday for the first time in nearly two months. Members voiced optimism about their progress but said many of the biggest ideas in play, like how to alter the traditional bill-reporting deadline, remain unresolved.
They kept the nearly 30-minute meeting open to the press and public for the second straight time, a departure from the all-private deliberations most conference committees have employed in recent years.
And when the half-dozen reporters in attendance approached lead negotiators Sen. Cynthia Creem and Rep. Michael Moran afterward, the complexity of the dispute became clearer.
Over a 15-minute press availability, the duo — each of whom is majority leader of their chamber — regularly disagreed with what the other said, attributed unusual lawmaking actions to verbal agreements between legislators, or suggested in real time they would 'soften' their position.
The exchange revealed ongoing House-Senate tension over lawmaker attendance at committee hearings, and indicated that negotiators remain far apart on some process reforms. Just before diving into his concerns with a senator testifying on a bill remotely, Moran said, 'We may as well rip the Band-Aid off here.'
'To me, what I think is important are the matters of transparency, and we can't agree on them,' Creem told reporters while standing next to Moran. 'How much notice do we give out on a conference committee [report]? How much time do we [allow] for ending the session? When do these things happen? These were important things that I think my constituents wanted.'
Beacon Hill has seen a flurry of joint committee hearings recently as panels begin to hear, and in some cases advance legislation with the term more than one-sixth complete already.
The panels are supposed to be operating under 2019 guidelines until House and Senate negotiators reach an agreement on a new joint rules reform package. But two committee chairs this week muddied the waters as they operated under rules embraced by their respective branches, yet not finalized by the full Legislature.
Rep. Tackey Chan, who chaired a Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure hearing Monday, barred committee member Sen. Jake Oliveira from testifying virtually on his bill.
The Quincy Democrat cited a new House rule stating members of a particular committee 'cannot participate remotely and must be physically present in the hearing room' where that committee is meeting. Oliveira, a Ludlow Democrat, said he had spent the morning meeting with early educators in his western Massachusetts district while also attempting to join the hearing remotely.
'Well, the theatrics of that hearing were pretty interesting,' Moran said. 'And I think it does touch on one of the areas that we're having a little challenge with. And I don't think it's any secret that the House has a couple of things that they'd like to see, one of them being no remote participation.'
Creem, echoing a talking point from Senate President Karen Spilka, said the temporary rules that are in effect make no mention of preventing lawmakers from testifying remotely.
Moran, pressed whether Chan had acted improperly at the hearing, said, 'He had the gavel.'
'He was the one presiding, and he was executing the rules that were given to him by the House,' Moran said. Creem chimed in, 'House rules.'
'Because he had the chairmanship, he was going by the House rules,' Moran continued. 'I do have a little bit of an issue with the idea that he wasn't allowed to testify.'
The Boston Democrat insisted Oliveira was permitted to testify, albeit through written comments.
Moran acknowledged the differing responsibilities and schedules between senators and representatives. Senators, for example, have larger districts, he said. Moran hinted the House will 'soften' its position on remote participation, and he later clarified the House is willing to allow remote testimony from committee members.
But Creem questioned the level and duration of attendance that the House wants to see from lawmakers.
'Obviously, I don't even know what attendance means,' Creem said. 'Does it mean five minutes? Ten minutes? Do you come in the beginning? Do you come in the end?'
Beyond Monday's spat, Moran said the larger issue revolves around participation on joint committees. He cited the Joint Revenue Committee hearing Tuesday, in which he said no Senate members showed up in person, including co-chair Sen. Jamie Eldridge.
'I don't know how you can have a deliberative process where people are having dialogue and have no one show up to a hearing to hear anybody speak. That's a problem for us,' Moran said. 'We're trying to be respectful, we're trying to work through that problem, we feel we need some dialogue from that side. Maybe some of the reasons that bills are not going through conference quickly enough is because those discussions are not happening at the hearing level.'
Creem dismissed attendance as a major sticking point, though she suggested a better scheduling system to avoid overlapping committee hearings.
The Newton Democrat recalled one day when she had four committee hearings on her schedule. She asked whether she satisfied attendance expectations by popping in for five minutes to the hearings.
'If the House wants attendance, then let's get all the dates scheduled when we have the bills for two years. And then, you know, you're on your own,' Creem said. 'There's no reason to this. I don't know whether it's a grudge or what it is. I'm unaware of why that is important.'
Another unusual development this week came when senators on the Joint Committee on Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity voted to advance a quintet of data privacy bills without any participation from the representatives who outnumber them on the panel.
Those bills went to the Senate Ways and Means Committee, the final stop before they can emerge for a vote in the full Senate.
Both branches supported reforms that would bifurcate committee votes, empowering only senators to vote on Senate bills and only representatives to vote on House bills, but the conference committee still has not finished its work on the joint rules package that would put that change in effect.
Creem said Thursday that the Cybersecurity Committee's Senate chair, Michael Moore of Millbury, had an 'agreement' with co-chair Rep. Tricia Farley-Bouvier of Pittsfield that senators would act on the bills they wanted to advance.
'Senator Moore would not have polled that bill out unless his co-chair agreed to it,' Creem said. 'So I want to differentiate between that and what happened [with Oliveira]. There was a meeting of the minds between the two committee chairs, and they were in agreement to do that.'
A reporter asked if Moran and Creem think, absent a final joint rules package, individual committee chairs using their own interpretations or reaching verbal agreements to lay out an untraditional process is a good way for lawmaking to unfold.
'I think you know the answer to that,' Moran replied.
'I think it would be better to have predictability,' Creem added.
Moran said conference committee members have come to agreement on two dozen provisions that were still unresolved at their first meeting, leaving close to 30 other areas with remaining disagreement. He added there are 'a lot of areas where I think we are very close.'
It's not clear when the conference committee will hold its third meeting. Moran said it will likely be open to the public.
WWLP-22News, an NBC affiliate, began broadcasting in March 1953 to provide local news, network, syndicated, and local programming to western Massachusetts. Watch the 22News Digital Edition weekdays at 4 p.m. on WWLP.com.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Chris Matthews says Dems ‘falling into a trap of defending what's indefensible' on crime
Chris Matthews says Dems ‘falling into a trap of defending what's indefensible' on crime

New York Post

time12 minutes ago

  • New York Post

Chris Matthews says Dems ‘falling into a trap of defending what's indefensible' on crime

Former MSNBC host Chris Matthews said Wednesday that the Democratic Party was 'falling into a trap of defending what's indefensible' in reacting to President Donald Trump's plan to address crime in Washington D.C. MSNBC 'Morning Joe' co-host Mika Brzezinski asked Matthews about the politics of Trump's announcement, describing it as a political win for the president before adding, 'I think that the Democrats need to go beyond saying, 'No, look at the data, crime is going down.' I feel that is exactly the wrong response politically, even if it's true.' Trump announced on Monday that he was activating approximately 800 National Guard troops and taking control of the Metropolitan Police Department to tackle crime in D.C. Matthews criticized Trump for the Jan. 6 riots but said the move was about the president showing strength, before explaining that he lives in D.C. and that homelessness and graffiti were evident despite it being a beautiful city. 'Trump looks at the city visually like a real estate agent. He wants to beautify the city like he's doing at the White House with that ridiculous ballroom he's putting in and getting rid of the Rose Garden. That's Trump work,' Matthews said. 'But I think it shows strength… I think this is a strength move against the big cities who are in a difficult situation on crime. And the murder rate, you can't keep saying violent crime is down with the murder rates up. To the average person, the murders are about life and death. You don't brag about a rising murder rate. And the Democrats are, I agree with you, Mika, they're falling into the trap of defending what's indefensible,' he added. Ex-MSNBC host Chris Matthews said Wednesday that the Democratic Party is falling into a trap against President Donald Trump's plan to send the National Guard to Washington, D.C. AFP via Getty Images Brzezinksi agreed and said it was a 'trap.' 'Yes, it's a trap. If it's not a winner politically to say, 'Oh, you're wrong, look at the data,' because you know if one violent crime happens in a very heavily populated part of the city, people hear about it and it's visceral. They don't want it. And they'll gravitate to the person who appears to be doing something about it,' she continued. Matthews made an appearance on 'Morning Joe' claiming 'the Democrats need to go beyond saying, 'No, look at the data, crime is going down.' MSNBC Matthews recently praised Trump for his political skill during an interview on Charlie Rose's podcast. 'He's very good at knowing your condition, your worries, your insecurities. I mean, he'd be a great bully in a grade school, a Catholic high school or grade school. I mean, he'd be the scariest bully because he'd know everybody's weakness. But he's really good at the moment. I mean, he's out there watching television and keeping up, and, 'Is this the right thing to do, what we're doing right now?'' he told Rose. 'Biden couldn't do that in a million years, not a million years,' Matthews added.

Dems claim early win on California gerrymandering
Dems claim early win on California gerrymandering

Politico

time13 minutes ago

  • Politico

Dems claim early win on California gerrymandering

DRIVING THE DAY: Democratic leaders today told Playbook they have the votes needed to send Californians a ballot measure asking them to redraw congressional districts. Spokespeople for Gov. Gavin Newsom and Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas expressed confidence that lawmakers will register their approval next week. More on that dynamic below. ABOUT-FACE: California Democrats who had reservations about abruptly redrawing the state's congressional map seem to have stuffed those feelings down. Lawmakers in the Assembly and Senate have rapidly gotten on board with Gov. Gavin Newsom's plan to create five new blue seats through gerrymandering in response to a Trump-induced effort to do the same in Texas with GOP districts. Those who aren't into the proposal have at least stopped saying so publicly — a show of unity that reflects how Sacramento is now at the epicenter of a national battle. Lawmakers are lining up behind a plan that has buy-in from the highest levels of the Democratic Party, with Rep. Zoe Lofgren saying last week that every California House Democrat supports it. The governor, Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas and Senate President Pro Tem Mike McGuire need almost overwhelming support to get the new map out of the Capitol by their Aug. 22 deadline. Two-thirds of members have to approve the plan within five days of returning from recess on Monday. Rivas' office said there's 'high confidence' Assembly Democrats have the votes to make that happen, as we first reported for POLITICO Pro subscribers. 'There is strong and broad support among our members to give voters a chance to fight back and do something about Trump's unchecked power,' said Nick Miller, a Rivas spokesperson, in a statement. The speed with which the Legislature has rallied around the plan is remarkable given that some lawmakers were vocally opposed less than a month ago. Assembly Progressive Caucus chair Alex Lee told POLITICO in mid-July the gerrymandering effort amounted to 'trying to save democracy by destroying democracy.' Lee has since pulled back on his criticism, although he still hasn't endorsed redrawing the state's maps. He said in a statement to Playbook the 'best case scenario is for all mid-decade gerrymandering efforts to fail.' 'Independent redistricting in California is an important model for the nation,' Lee said. 'The people of California are the only ones who can decide to suspend that and bring back gerrymandering to the state.' Playbook asked more than a dozen Democrats about the political redistricting effort, with lawmakers repeating common refrains — Texas brought the fight to California, and state leaders can't sit idly by and let Trump destroy democracy by cheating. 'On first glance, it's easy to say we're not for partisan line drawing, because we're not,' said Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, a Los Angeles Democrat. 'But that's not a fully nuanced description of what's happening here. What we are actually engaged in is in a battle for democracy and for decency and for political and policy norms.' They also emphasized their support for independent redistricting, saying the state will resume its commission in 2030. A trigger making the new map contingent on Texas approving one of their own is meant to assuage concerns about a Democratic takeover of a nonpartisan process. Shifting the onus onto voters in November is also part of this argument. 'The voters are going to have an opportunity here, right?' said Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel, a San Fernando Valley Democrat. 'That is fundamentally as democratic as you can get.' IT'S WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON. This is California Playbook PM, a POLITICO newsletter that serves as an afternoon temperature check on California politics and a look at what our policy reporters are watching. Got tips or suggestions? Shoot an email to lholden@ WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW TODAY COMMON CAUSE EXPLAINS ITSELF: Common Cause, the good government group that walked back its opposition to California's redistricting effort on Tuesday, explained on Wednesday the rationale behind its decision to reverse years of universal opposition to partisan gerrymandering, which Newsom touted as a victory. 'Common Cause has not shifted. The landscape has,' Virginia Kase Solomón, president and CEO of Common Cause, said of the group's decision to not oppose mid-cycle redistricting from states like California provided they meet certain fairness criteria. In a social media post, Newsom praised Common Cause, who championed the state's independent redistricting commission, for recognizing 'what's at stake.' Solomón appeared to interpret that post as an indication that Newsom has 'committed to adhering to our criteria.' Common Cause's fairness criteria include promises to keep mid-cycle redistricting 'proportional' in response to Trump's nationwide redistricting push. Common Cause said it's polling the public on redistricting issues and plans to release their findings soon. Solomón said the group's internal polling suggested voters still have an appetite for nonpartisan maps, despite mid-cycle redistricting efforts from both parties. 'There is renewed energy to fight for fair maps,' she said. 'People don't want to see a situation where every two years maps are being drawn or politicians are conveniently trying to draw maps that serve them best.' — Aaron Pellish IN OTHER NEWS VOTE DELAYED: California energy regulators today delayed a vote to postpone a planned tightening of rules for oil refineries, including a potential profit cap and restrictions on refinery maintenance schedules, our Noah Baustin reports for POLITICO Pro subscribers. The California Energy Commission said it would postpone a scheduled vote on the regulatory delays as part of a larger effort to stave off gasoline price spikes in the wake of two California refineries' announced plans to shutter. Officials said they needed more time to consider the two resolutions, which would delay a planned profit cap on refiners and not move forward with rules regulating refineries' maintenance and turnaround work. CUTTING THE CUTS: An influential group of House Republicans has invited a chief architect of the hard-right push for deep Medicaid spending cuts to brief congressional aides Thursday, our Benjamin Guggenheim and Meredith Lee Hill report. Brian Blase, president of the Paragon Health Institute, will address a staff briefing on health care reform hosted by the Republican Study Committee, according to an invitation obtained by POLITICO. The RSC, composed of 189 House conservatives, has been a key force pushing for a follow-on to Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' that was signed into law last month. The group has invited several conservative experts to address staffers in recent weeks though it has yet to endorse any specific health care policies for any forthcoming package. Those staff-level meetings continue as House GOP leaders try to plot a way forward amid skepticism over whether another sprawling domestic policy bill is even possible given the difficulties Republicans had coming to agreement over the first one. WHAT WE'RE READING TODAY — Los Angeles residents have been receiving fliers backed by Airbnb about the region's budget crisis, potential layoffs and possible cuts to public services, as well as expanding short-term rentals, an effort that Airbnb has been pushing for years. (Los Angeles Times) — At least eight federal immigration judges in the Bay Area have been terminated since Trump took office, creating a culture of fear as some who were dismissed have said they felt pressure to fall in line with the president's directives. (The San Francisco Chronicle) — A San Francisco startup has been pitching the idea of using humanoid robots in the military to officials in the Trump administration. (SF Standard) AROUND THE STATE — One of California's largest agricultural employers plans to shutter a Central Valley farm by the end of the year. (Los Angeles Times) — Workers have begun the demolition of the former Sacramento Bee offices as developers put forward plans for housing projects. (The Sacramento Bee) — compiled by Juliann Ventura

Midterm Preview, Media Lies, and Summer of Sydney
Midterm Preview, Media Lies, and Summer of Sydney

Fox News

time13 minutes ago

  • Fox News

Midterm Preview, Media Lies, and Summer of Sydney

First, Ben dives into the early midterm battlegrounds — as Marsha Blackburn, Nancy Mace, and Roy Cooper jump into key races — and explains why Republicans cannot afford to coast despite a favorable Senate map. Then, Brit Hume joins to dissect the media's Russiagate failures, the ethics disaster of Jim Acosta's AI 'interview,' and the corrosive role of anonymous sources in Washington journalism. Finally, culture writer Kat Rosenfield discusses everything from the internet's public shaming culture to whether romance can survive in the age of apps. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store