Today’s focus on how Internet gambling, or I-gaming, became District law highlights a reform DCFPI and others have been strongly advocating for over the years: That there should be a mandatory 48-hour examination or “waiting period” between the time DC Council members receive final budget documents and when they cast votes on this important legislation.
Putting a legally-binding examination period in place allows Council members and staff’as well as the public’time to read and digest budget documents. It gives members as well as the public a chance to weigh in on changes made to the budget between the time the Council has finished its round of public hearings and the vote on the budget.
Over the years, there have been several examples of a major public policy matter that made its way into the budget with little public notice. In the last few budget cycles, major policy changes in human services, economic development and transportation were placed into the budget at the last minute without public hearing or discussion.
In fact, only a few weeks ago, when the Council was considering the second vote on the Budget Support Act ‘ legislation that includes all the legalese to enact the budget and requires two votes ‘ a provision impacting parents who receive Temporary Assistance for Needy Families was inserted into the bill. The provision, which would have tied assistance to mandatory attendance of parent-teacher school conferences, made its way into the legislation without any hearing, testimony or public input. Luckily, it was pulled at the last minute.
It’s true: Budget documents aren’t exactly as scintillating a read as a John Grisham novel. Yet the budget is a statement of our public policy priorities, and legislators and the public should be given the chance to examine and understand and changes made to it before it is voted upon.
The Council and Mayor should work together to make the 48-hour examination period a standard part of the budget process.
