State Rep. Stephen Kulik added his name to those of top legislators critical of Gov. Charlie Baker’s nearly $100 million in discretionary budget cuts as unnecessary now for the pain they will cause.
“There really isn’t a budgetary reason to make these cuts at this time,” said Kulik, who is vice chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. November revenues are down $150 million from what was projected, he acknowledged, but four months into the budget year, overall revenues are off by only $20 million, and December is typically a good month for economic activity.
House Speaker Robert DeLeo said on Twitter Tuesday that lawmakers were considering filing a supplemental spending bill that would “help the neediest among us.” Senate President Stanley Rosenberg said in response to DeLeo’s post that he looked forward to working with the speaker to restore funding to programs.
Kulik, D-Worthington, said Thursday that his committee is looking into the details of Baker’s list of so-called 9-C budget cuts, but added, “To go after food assistance, homelessness and teen pregnancy prevention seems unnecessary at this time. I think the comment by the speaker, and the suspicion of many of my colleagues, that these are more philosophically or politically motivated by the governor, that maybe he just doesn’t agree with spending in the budget for some of these programs, I think, has some truth to it.”
Kulik said he’d received 20 emails from constituents about teenage pregnancy program cuts, and that he was concerned about cuts in the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program and a homelessness prevention program.
Some of the agencies hit by the budget ax provide funding to fight opioid addiction, lawmakers told The Associated Press.
“The governor’s been very outspoken about having to address this crisis,” said Kulik, referring to Bureau of Substance Abuse cuts, adding that he wasn’t sure at this point whether the Franklin County opioid task force was slated for a cut. “I don’t understand why he would reduce the level of funding to meet what is really an immediate public health and safety need. …. The governor did not need to make these reductions now.”
Even if the Legislature votes for a supplementary budget in January to restore some of the funding that’s been cut and that’s vetoed by Baker, Kulik said, “at least we’d be in formal session and have an opportunity to override some of these vetoes.”
In announcing plans Tuesday to unilaterally reduce executive branch spending by $98 million, Baker cited a shortfall in the state’s nearly $40 billion budget that was caused by lower-than-expected revenues and unforeseen spending obligations.
Baker also faulted the Legislature for overriding $231 million he vetoed from the budget after it was sent to his desk by lawmakers in July. The governor said making the cuts was difficult, but that he was acting now to trim spending to avoid more serious fiscal problems or the need for tax increases down the road.
State officials reported that November revenues missed benchmarks by more than $150 million, though $51 million in tax collections that would have been recorded last month were bumped into December because of a change in the state’s tax processing system.
George Bachrach, president of the Environmental League of Massachusetts, said Wednesday the governor’s spending reductions would “disproportionately devastate agencies protecting our environment and public health.”
The organization singled out cuts that it said amounted to 7 percent of the operating budget for the state agency that oversees state parks and forests, which has already seen its funding reduced by about 25 percent in recent years.
A nearly $1 million reduction in state funding for programs that combat HIV and AIDS would hurt efforts to educate the public about a promising new HIV prevention tool, said Carl Sciortino, executive director of the AIDS Action Committee.
You can reach Richie Davis at
rdavis@recorder.com
or 413-772-0261, ext. 269