Comments on: In defense of Angelo Scaccia http://www.pioneerinstitute.org/blog/news/in-defense-of-angelo-scaccia Public Policy Research Fri, 09 Jan 2009 13:18:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Liam http://www.pioneerinstitute.org/blog/news/in-defense-of-angelo-scaccia#comment-1232 Liam Wed, 03 Sep 2008 15:03:44 +0000 http://www.pioneerinstitute.org/blog/?p=629#comment-1232 Ed, you raise an interesting point (though I think you are arguing past the Esteemed Gentleman just a little bit - I don't believe he was arguing for the efficacy of letting home rule petitions sail through, simply that they do; in other words, he was saying would, not should, and you were saying should not, not would not). On home rule, though, there is a another side to the coin you flip. Yes, home rule petitions do sometimes affect people who don't live in the particular municipality to which the home rule petition might pertain. Still, imagine the frustration of a town or city manager, council or mayor, who feel they must go hat in hand to the legislature every time they attempt to enact anything. And, looking forward, as more and more municipalities face tighter and tighter budgets, how will they feel as they face problems they have not the power to solve precisely because of home rule? Ed, you raise an interesting point (though I think you are arguing past the Esteemed Gentleman just a little bit - I don’t believe he was arguing for the efficacy of letting home rule petitions sail through, simply that they do; in other words, he was saying would, not should, and you were saying should not, not would not).

On home rule, though, there is a another side to the coin you flip. Yes, home rule petitions do sometimes affect people who don’t live in the particular municipality to which the home rule petition might pertain. Still, imagine the frustration of a town or city manager, council or mayor, who feel they must go hat in hand to the legislature every time they attempt to enact anything. And, looking forward, as more and more municipalities face tighter and tighter budgets, how will they feel as they face problems they have not the power to solve precisely because of home rule?

]]> By: Ed http://www.pioneerinstitute.org/blog/news/in-defense-of-angelo-scaccia#comment-1229 Ed Wed, 03 Sep 2008 11:56:00 +0000 http://www.pioneerinstitute.org/blog/?p=629#comment-1229 Local petitions should NOT sail through with a rubber stamp. The purpose of legislative review is to protect the rights of those who don't live in the municipality. For example, the vast majority of those who work in Boston don't live (hence vote) there. The city that gave rise to the cry "no taxation without representation" thus to tax those without representation, and tried this in the 19th Century. Home rule review thus exists to provide representation to those otherwise denied it. Local petitions should NOT sail through with a rubber stamp. The purpose of legislative review is to protect the rights of those who don’t live in the municipality.

For example, the vast majority of those who work in Boston don’t live (hence vote) there. The city that gave rise to the cry “no taxation without representation” thus to tax those without representation, and tried this in the 19th Century.

Home rule review thus exists to provide representation to those otherwise denied it.

]]> By: Liam http://www.pioneerinstitute.org/blog/news/in-defense-of-angelo-scaccia#comment-1222 Liam Tue, 02 Sep 2008 20:58:20 +0000 http://www.pioneerinstitute.org/blog/?p=629#comment-1222 Esteemed Gentleman: You are absolutely correct. If the House had been in formal session, the petition would have sailed through whether or not Representative Scaccia opposed it. But, though you are also correct that informal sessions usually compose little that is controversial, I do not believe it does so by writ and that the reason all legislation conducted during informal session must pass unanimously is for precisely that reason. Esteemed Gentleman: You are absolutely correct. If the House had been in formal session, the petition would have sailed through whether or not Representative Scaccia opposed it. But, though you are also correct that informal sessions usually compose little that is controversial, I do not believe it does so by writ and that the reason all legislation conducted during informal session must pass unanimously is for precisely that reason.

]]> By: The Esteemed Gentleman http://www.pioneerinstitute.org/blog/news/in-defense-of-angelo-scaccia#comment-1220 The Esteemed Gentleman Tue, 02 Sep 2008 20:02:06 +0000 http://www.pioneerinstitute.org/blog/?p=629#comment-1220 A brief thought: The only reason Scaccia can block this legislation is because the House is only conducting informal sessions, which are usually reserved for noncontroversial bills. Home-rule petitions, such as the one Rep. Scaccia is blocking, usually are not controversial - and it is considered incredibly bad form to block a home-rule petition from a district that you yourself do not represent. In fact, legisltive approval of home rule petitions is usually a "rubber-stamp" action by the Legislature. If Formal Sessions were still being conducted, this bill would have sailed through with or without Scaccia's consent. A brief thought: The only reason Scaccia can block this legislation is because the House is only conducting informal sessions, which are usually reserved for noncontroversial bills. Home-rule petitions, such as the one Rep. Scaccia is blocking, usually are not controversial - and it is considered incredibly bad form to block a home-rule petition from a district that you yourself do not represent. In fact, legisltive approval of home rule petitions is usually a “rubber-stamp” action by the Legislature. If Formal Sessions were still being conducted, this bill would have sailed through with or without Scaccia’s consent.

]]>