
Question 1 debate: Auditing the Massachusetts Legislature
Question 1 debate: Auditing the Massachusetts Legislature
Or *** yes on question one, former Massachusetts State House member Jay Kaufman, he represented the Lexington area, 15th Middlesex district from 1995 to 2018 and arguing for *** no vote is Suzanne Bump. She was the Massachusetts Auditor from 2011 to 2023. And here’s how this is going to work. It’s *** friendly, if competitive conversation, there will be no opening statements. Ah, each person will have about *** minute to make *** brief concluding statement at the end. I’m not going to use *** clock, but I’m going to ask people to keep responses to shorter than *** minute when possible. And I’ll be posing questions to both sides and I’ll play traffic cop when necessary. I think we’re ready to start. Representative Jay Kaufman. Welcome. Thank you so much for having us and Suzanne Bump, former state auditor. Welcome to you as well. Thank you. Glad to be. So I want to just dive in with the question itself. Jay Kaufman. I’ll start with you. The auditor’s role historically is focused on looking at executive branch agencies. We heard that from Simon Rios, an example, Department of Children and families or veteran services. Right. So why seek now this explicit power to audit the legislature? Well, I think I want to start where I think Suzanne and I might agree more than disagree. Um I think there’s *** general consensus that the legis legislature is seriously dysfunctional and we have the lowest ranking in terms of transparency, accountability, um even productivity. So, and the public is beginning to understand that, which is, I think what accounts for the fact that there’s enormous support for this. Uh The so much of what’s done on Beacon Hill right now is done in secrecy. And very specifically, I wanna point to one thing that I think the auditor probably will try to uh take account of. There is *** fund of about $4.5 million that’s controlled by the speaker and the senate president that is given to members uh in response to and reaction to an appreciation of their loyalty and withheld from members who don’t sort of get the get with the program of follow the leader. So there’s *** system of rewards and punishment that reinforces the, the overpower, the overpowering uh role of the speaker and senate president. And in turn the disempowering of individual members and in turn their constituents. And you’re suggesting that uh of *** yes vote would uh allow the state auditor to be able to, for example, look explicitly at how that money is getting used very briefly one sentence please. I’ll give you one word. Yes. Ok. Thank you. And Suzanne Bump, why do you object to giving, to specifying this is what the ballot question would say. Specifying that the auditor has the authority to audit the legislature. I think that no one can argue with the goal of transparency in government of the examples that you gave of uh improving veteran services by finding deficiencies in the way the agency is operating or uh deficiencies in the way Children are being protected by at DC F. Um Those are, are uh those are examples of how audits can make government work better. Uh The power that the current auditor is seeking is power that no other uh auditor across the country uh possesses for good constitutional reasons uh that were outlined um *** moment ago by uh Simone Rios. Uh every constitutional lawyer that has looked at this has come to that same conclusion. Um In addition to the constitutional, I’m gonna stop you there. And this is *** genuine question of understanding. Is it fully clear that nobody elsewhere in the country uh possesses the power that uh that Delio seeks or that it’s possible that no one does. My understanding is that some of this remains unclear and that the State Attorney General would have to provide some clarity if the ballot measure pa passed even afterward. The there is no, I will repeat there is no state auditor who has the authority that Diana De Zoglio is seeking, um, there are auditors who audit the legislature, their legislatures purely on for financial reasons. *** financial accounting, but the Massachusetts State auditor doesn’t do financial auditing. Uh, we do what’s called performance auditing, which is, uh, uh, auditing of *** type that looks at agencies, uh, compliance with the laws and the standards and the rules that govern, uh, their behavior to make sure that the taxpayers and, uh, are getting their money’s worth and to ensure that agencies are meeting their mission and to do so, uh, we follow *** set of rules, rules that are established by the federal government, the federal, uh government Accountability Office, the so called yellow book guides, the, uh, conduct of performance audits audits. And when you look, put aside, put aside the constitutional issues, when you look at simply how audits are supposed to be conducted, you will see that auditing the legislature in the way that auditors is. Aglio wants to do is way outside the rules that by law and her initiative petition doesn’t change this by law. She must follow. Let me bring this back to former representative Jay Kaufman. And again, we’re here on wburs morning edition. We’re talking about question one which would specify that the state auditor has the power to audit the legislature. So, uh, Jay KF, uh, in your answer to the question, I’m about to ask you feel free to respond to the things that you’ve just heard from former auditor Suzanne Bump. You said the issue here is transparency with this legislature, um especially given concerns that opponents have about this violating the separation of powers between the legislature and the auditor. The who is in the executive branch of government? Why is this the way to go at it? Why not go at it other ways to increase uh transparency in the legislature? Ok. First of all, I disagree that every constitutional, uh, attorney feels that this is unconstitutional. I think there’s considerably divided opinion on that matter. And even the review by the attorney general seemed to suggest that because had there been an agreement that this was unconstitutional, she would have ruled it off the ballot. Although she did say that, uh if it passed, she would then have to look at the constitutional limitations. There is absolutely *** question about it, but it’s not an, you can’t make an affirmative statement that is unconstitutional. We just don’t know. And ultimately, I think it’s going to be left to the SJC to make that determination, right? Um With regard to your question, I think we’ve got to be *** little bit careful about just bowing at the altar of separation of powers. We have *** twin fundamental principle of governance which is checks and balances. And at the moment, uh the legislative leadership, uh I call it legislative authority more than leadership, um, is unchecked in many of its regards. And I think that this is uh question one gives us an opportunity to begin the process of providing *** check on, on what right now has been unmitigated power on the part of those two people. And by the way that power has grown in the years since uh the two of us have gotten to know each other. We both served in the in the house. It was ***, it is *** storied institution and it is not the institution that Suzanne you began to serve in *** while ago or even that I began to serve in because of the accumulation of power on the part of the speaker, the accumulation of secrecy on the part of the institution and the inability of the public to know what the representatives they sent to. Beacon Hill are doing so understood. Uh Even if it were *** way, what about the part of my question that asks you if it’s the right way. Um At the moment, it is the right way. Yes. I mean, I don’t, we don’t know of any other way. I think the goal my goal would be to see comes the uh question pass on November 5th and November 6th. We begin the conversation that you’re suggesting, what else about our legislative function and about the balance of power is awry. And what other changes do we need to make? This is an opening Salvo. If you will, in that much deeper conversation, I would welcome the opportunity you know, I think I’d love to do it with Suzanne to come back here on November 6th and begin *** process of taking *** look at what’s gone wrong and how do we fix it? So, again, back to you former state auditor Suzanne Bump over the years that maybe arguably the centuries, we’ve had *** number of conversations about the fact that the law needs to be *** living that when things change, sometimes the law needs to change. Uh Former Representative Jay Kaufman has just argued that even during the two of your tenure as elected officials, the legislature has changed, why not adapt the law to use *** new lever for transparency? It still does not change the fact that um opinion, which is what we are sharing now. And I’m not even, I’m not even disagreeing with uh with my former government colleague Jay Jay Kaufman. Um in some of the things that he’s saying about the, the legislature and the lack of trans transparency. Um but these are opinions and opinion has no place in *** government audit government, *** government audits are um are, are fact finding um instruments you follow *** set of rules that determines for instance, who can conduct an audit. And frankly, Diana De Zoglio um cannot be involved in an audit of the legislature because for one thing she has been so recently, *** member of the legislature is that it’s *** rule, it’s *** rule. What is the length of that time. Um, it would vary, it would be, but I think it’s so when I was Secretary of Labor, um, uh, and then moved into the auditor’s office for an audit cycle, *** period of three years, I had nothing to do with audits of the agencies that were under my, my purview. Um I had completely separated myself to remind listeners, uh, Diana De Zoli was *** US, excuse me, *** Massachusetts state senator. And prior to that, *** representative and, and during that, during that three years, I was not, I had nothing to do and nothing to say about what was happening at the Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development. Diana not only ran on the ba on the basis of her um criticisms of the legislature, but she continues to offer those opinions about the legislature which then quest calls into question her ability to be objective in any analysis of the legislature. So there’s, there’s one strike against her um in accordance with the rules at, uh at that require and, and required the state auditor to sign off to, to fill out *** form ascertaining that there is no conflict of uh of interest. Um Then there’s *** question of um of what you’re going to audit audits as the rules, federal rules set forth are conducted of executive programs that are authorized by the legislature um that have uh standards um and regulations that agencies are supposed to follow, the legislature does not operate under any such, uh, regulations. Um, so there is, if you’re, if you’re doing compliance, there is no standard against which to evaluate them because they can act in the legislature because they can act in *** completely discretionary manner. I wanna come back to your first part for just *** second. I’m gonna asked you to give me *** one sentence answer on this. Uh, if the auditor were not Diana Dezago, take the person out of it, could there be *** way that this could be appropriate? I think that it could. And in fact, I had, um, I had just *** sentence, please. It could. Ok, thanks. Can I, can I, can I jump in? Um, first of all, I think, um, it is my understanding, at least that the Auditor’s office, current Auditor’s office has been developing this question, um, and has gotten guidance from them about the role that the auditor might play from the Gao. So general accounting, general accounting office. So, in any event, um, I think it’s pretty clear that the, I mean, the Suzanne has just agreed that there are some issues, there’s some fundamental issues here and whether or not Diana is the best spokesperson for that issue, we, the voters are going to get *** chance to weigh in on whether or not there ought to be this checks and balances on the legislature. The GAO thing. You, you cringed at that. Yeah, because I have spoken to the head of the GAO, I had sat on his domestic, um, working group when I was in the auditor’s office, uh, advising him on state audit, uh, practice. And I had also spoken to the Legal Council and they are both of the opinion that the, uh, auditor has no authority to, uh, and should have no business auditing the discretionary functions of the legislature. So we’re close to our end time now. So, here’s what I’m gonna do. I’m gonna give you each about 45 seconds to sort of make up some, make some, not make up, that would be different, make some closing remarks. Uh, uh, actually Suzanne Bump, I’ll let you go 1st. 45 seconds tops. Please go ahead. Uh, not only is Diana personally, um, excluded from, uh, auditing the legislature but because the legislature under law can make its own rules, there are no objective standards by which she, the operation of the legislature can be evaluated, unlike other state agencies who are delivering services or otherwise spending, um, taxpayer, taxpayer dollars. Um, you could audit the legislature, were you to confine yourself to those things that the legislature is subject to such as inventory controls? Um, but if you are going to be looking at legislative, um, leadership appointments and who gets to sit in what offices that is totally, totally off limits on the leg, completely, *** matter of opinion and the auditor has no business opining on the legislature. Thank you, Jay Kaufman. So I don’t disagree with some elements of that. But the, the bottom line for me is that given what we know and what we don’t know about legislative accounts and legislative functions. I think it would be irresponsible for us, the citizens to not have *** better indication of what’s, what’s happening there. And an audit will be, will begin to do that. It’s about taxpayer dollars and it’s about taxpayer trust and it, it is independent of the personality of Diana De Zoe or Suzanne Bump or anybody else. Um That might hold that office. It’s just that. Now let me quote end by quoting the Globe editorial on this. The Massachusetts legislature is secretive, unproductive and unaccountable question one aims to let to let the state auditor shine some light on this. Thank you. And it’s simply the right thing to do. State Representative Jay Kaufman, former representative, former state auditor Suzanne Bump. Thanks to both of you. Thank you. And next up question too, it’ll eliminate the mcas as *** graduation requirement in the state. Tune into W CV B channel five tonight at five for *** look and then join us tomorrow at nine here on morning edition to hear representatives argue the yes and no sides. Thanks for joining us on 90.9 wburs morning edition
Advertisement
Question 1 debate: Auditing the Massachusetts Legislature
Should Massachusetts voters grant the State Auditor permission to probe the legislature? Suzanne Bump, a former state auditor, and former state Rep. Jay Kaufman debated that question on 90.9 WBUR Tuesday, which was streamed by WCVB NewsCenter 5.”I think there’s a general consensus that the legislature is seriously dysfunctional. We have the lowest ranking in terms of transparency, accountability, even productivity. The public is beginning to understand that, which is, I think, what accounts for the fact that there’s enormous support for this,” Kaufman said during the debate. “So much of what’s done on Beacon Hill right now is done in secrecy.””The power that the current auditor is seeking is power that no other auditor across the country possesses for good constitutional reasons,” said Bump. “Every constitutional lawyer that has looked at this has come to that same conclusion.” “I disagree that every constitutional attorney feels that this is unconstitutional. I think there’s considerable divided opinion on that matter,” Kaufman later said. “Even review by the attorney general seemed to suggest that because had there been an agreement that this was unconstitutional, she would have ruled it off the ballot.”When NewsCenter 5’s Sharman Sacchetti recently interviewed DiZoglio about the ballot question, the current auditor said she’s looking to shine a light under the golden dome. She argued that more than 100 audits dating back to the 1800s support her position, but Bump said those examples are financial and not the sort of performance audits done in the modern era.”This is not an FBI investigation. It’s just an audit. And every other state Legislature complies nationwide,” DiZoglio said.Summary: A yes vote would specify that the State Auditor, which is part of the executive branch, has the authority to audit the Legislature. A no vote would make no change to the auditor’s legal authority, which does not currently permit the office to probe the legislature. Background:The fight over Auditor Diana DiZoglio’s desire to look into the legislature began after she announced her plan in an interview with 5 Investigates.A few weeks later, she told WCVB’s On The Record that she started the audit regardless of an ongoing dispute about her authority to do so. House Speaker Ron Mariano rejected DiZoglio’s plan as “unconstitutional” and said she was overreaching her authority. Senate President Karen Spilka also repeatedly argued that an audit was both unnecessary and beyond the scope of DiZoglio’s authority.Attorney General Andrea Campbell issued a decision in which she sided with the legislative leaders. Debate: Bump, who preceded DiZoglio in the auditor’s office, conceded during the debate that “it could” be potentially appropriate for an auditor to probe the legislature but that DiZoglio, a former state senator and representative, was not the appropriate person to run that effort.”Diana not only ran on a debate on the basis of her criticisms of the legislature, but she continues to offer those opinions about the legislature, which then calls into question her ability to be objective in any analysis,” said Bump. “I think it’s pretty clear, I mean, Suzanne has just agreed that there are some fundamental issues here and whether or not Diana is the best spokesperson for that issue, we, the voters, are going to get a chance to weigh in on whether or not there ought to be these checks and balances on the legislature,” said Kaufman.Additionally, Bump argued that any audit would have no yardstick against which the legislature can be measured.”Audits, as the federal rules set forth, are conducted of executive programs that are authorized by the legislature that have standards and regulations that agencies are supposed to follow,” said Bump. “The legislature does not operate under any such regulations. So if you’re doing compliance, there is no standard against which to evaluate them.”
Should Massachusetts voters grant the State Auditor permission to probe the legislature? Suzanne Bump, a former state auditor, and former state Rep. Jay Kaufman debated that question on 90.9 WBUR Tuesday, which was streamed by WCVB NewsCenter 5.
“I think there’s a general consensus that the legislature is seriously dysfunctional. We have the lowest ranking in terms of transparency, accountability, even productivity. The public is beginning to understand that, which is, I think, what accounts for the fact that there’s enormous support for this,” Kaufman said during the debate. “So much of what’s done on Beacon Hill right now is done in secrecy.”
Advertisement
“The power that the current auditor is seeking is power that no other auditor across the country possesses for good constitutional reasons,” said Bump. “Every constitutional lawyer that has looked at this has come to that same conclusion.”
“I disagree that every constitutional attorney feels that this is unconstitutional. I think there’s considerable divided opinion on that matter,” Kaufman later said. “Even review by the attorney general seemed to suggest that because had there been an agreement that this was unconstitutional, she would have ruled it off the ballot.”
When NewsCenter 5’s Sharman Sacchetti recently interviewed DiZoglio about the ballot question, the current auditor said she’s looking to shine a light under the golden dome. She argued that more than 100 audits dating back to the 1800s support her position, but Bump said those examples are financial and not the sort of performance audits done in the modern era.
“This is not an FBI investigation. It’s just an audit. And every other state Legislature complies nationwide,” DiZoglio said.
Summary:
A yes vote would specify that the State Auditor, which is part of the executive branch, has the authority to audit the Legislature. A no vote would make no change to the auditor’s legal authority, which does not currently permit the office to probe the legislature.
Background:
The fight over Auditor Diana DiZoglio’s desire to look into the legislature began after she announced her plan in an interview with 5 Investigates.
A few weeks later, she told WCVB’s On The Record that she started the audit regardless of an ongoing dispute about her authority to do so. House Speaker Ron Mariano rejected DiZoglio’s plan as “unconstitutional” and said she was overreaching her authority. Senate President Karen Spilka also repeatedly argued that an audit was both unnecessary and beyond the scope of DiZoglio’s authority.
Attorney General Andrea Campbell issued a decision in which she sided with the legislative leaders.
Debate:
Bump, who preceded DiZoglio in the auditor’s office, conceded during the debate that “it could” be potentially appropriate for an auditor to probe the legislature but that DiZoglio, a former state senator and representative, was not the appropriate person to run that effort.
“Diana not only ran on a debate on the basis of her criticisms of the legislature, but she continues to offer those opinions about the legislature, which then calls into question her ability to be objective in any analysis,” said Bump.
“I think it’s pretty clear, I mean, Suzanne has just agreed that there are some fundamental issues here and whether or not Diana is the best spokesperson for that issue, we, the voters, are going to get a chance to weigh in on whether or not there ought to be these checks and balances on the legislature,” said Kaufman.
Additionally, Bump argued that any audit would have no yardstick against which the legislature can be measured.
“Audits, as the federal rules set forth, are conducted of executive programs that are authorized by the legislature that have standards and regulations that agencies are supposed to follow,” said Bump. “The legislature does not operate under any such regulations. So if you’re doing compliance, there is no standard against which to evaluate them.”