Linsky late to EBT reform efforts

If you’ve been watching television news, or reading the newspapers lately, you’ve no doubt seen Rep. David Linsky (D-Natick) telling you how outraged he is at recent developments with the Department of Transitional Assistance.  Here’s a sampling from the Boston Herald

“This audit exposes the gross lack of oversight within DTA. We need to change the culture of waste, fraud and abuse,” said state Rep. David Linsky (D-Natick), chairman of the House Post Audit and Oversight Committee, who is also probing welfare payments made to slain Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his family. “We need to bring the DTA out of the Stone Age and into the computer age.”

Over the past few months, Linksy had multiple chances to put the reforms shown as necessary by the Auditor’s report, but he didn’t vote for them.  

First on February 6, 2013Linsky voted against a Further Amendment by Ryan Fattman (R-Sutton) to give the Inspector General, Auditor, or Attorney General responsibility for fraud investigation in the Department of Transitional Assitance.  This was after a report showed $50M in waste.

Then during the budget debate, Linsky took a series of votes against reform.  

Amendment 385 would have required a photo on EBT cards.  The amendment was killed by sending it to further study.  Linsky voted send the amendment to be studied.

Amendment 848 would have set a cap on the number of exemptions to the welfare work requirement.  The cap would have been 25% of total recipients. Linsky voted against this amendment.

More after the jump

Amendment 753 would have given teeth to the Speaker’s so called EBT reform.  It would replace the word may with shall.  This would ensure that the reforms were adopted by the administration of Deval Patrick.  Linsky, you guessed it, voted no.

Amendment 840 would have required the Department of Transitional Assistance to enforce all fines, and publish once a month all fines, and make public all hearings.  It failed, and David Linsky voted no.

Amendment 871 would have required the Department of Transitional assistance to do more monitoring and review of recipients eligibility.  David Linsky, voted no.

David Linsky, now that their is pressure is talking a good game, he should have been acting when he had the chance, just one short month ago.

About Rob "EaBo Clipper" Eno

  • Linsky’s grandstanding is consistent with his obvious intentions to seek another office.

  • Rep O’Connell made a valiant effort to push for her amendments that would have addressed some of these issues and put the entire caucus in front of this issue.  When her amendments were summarily ruled out of order by the Speaker did Minority Leader Jones raise his voice in protest? NO!  Did Minority Leader Jones do anything to support Rep O’Fonnell’s initiative and foresight in these issues? NO!  Rather he did what he seems to do best, he acquiesced to the wishes of the Speaker.

    Rep O’Connell has shown true leadership and dogged determination on these issues.  She deserves our support (she has mine as I know she has many of the other readers of this blog) and encouragement.  But what she really needs, what all the hard working members of th caucus need, what we need, is a minority leader willing to LEAD and not to follow the Speaker.