The Lowell Sun | Peter Lucas | May 19, 2015

How many Massachusetts politicians do you know who have a law named after them?

Not many, I am sure.

But one who does is state Sen. Marc Pacheco, author and champion of the “Pacheco Law,” which, from time to time, Republicans and conservatives love to beat up on.

One of those times is now, as Republican Gov. Charlie Baker is attempting to persuade a Democratic Legislature to amend the Pacheco Law, which, some say, hampers the state’s ability to contract private companies for services.

Pacheco, a veteran lawmaker from Taunton, is not one of them.

“The Taxpayer Protection Act,” Pacheco said, using the official name of the law, “has been a success. It has saved taxpayers millions of dollars. It is called the Taxpayer Protection Act because that is what it does. It protects the Massachusetts taxpayer.”

The Pacheco Law, in a nutshell, requires state agencies, like the MBTA, that are seeking to outsource contracts for services to the private sector, to prove that the contracted services are less than in-house costs, and are of at least equal quality. The law also requires bidders to maintain comparable labor standards, which means paying union wages. All such contracts must be approved by the state auditor.

Critics argue that the law only increases costs to the taxpayers.

State Auditor Suzanne Bump, a Democrat, told a legislative committee the Pacheco Law is working just fine.

“When an agency demonstrates that a private company can perform a government function at a lower cost without compromising quality, safety or effectiveness, that privatization plan is approved,” she said.

Baker, who is seeking to reform the MBTA, wants to create a five-member finance control board, an idea that has run into trouble in the Democrat-controlled Legislature.

He also wants to exempt the transit agency from certain aspects of the Pacheco Law in order to facilitate the outsourcing of MBTA contracts, like providing late-night bus service, or hiring outside agents to collect fares. This has run into even bigger trouble.

Both proposed changes are being taken up by the Senate this week as part of deliberations on the Senate’s version of the state’s $38 billion budget for the upcoming fiscal year.

While everyone on Beacon Hill understands the need to make changes in the performance of the MBTA in the wake of its disastrous performance this past winter, the issue is proving to be a huge challenge for Baker. He and his small band of Republicans in the Senate, for instance, have the awkward task of attempting to water down the Pacheco Law while Pacheco is sitting among them.

They have to do it while being outnumbered in the 40-member Senate by 34 Democrats to only six Republicans. And one of those fellow Democrats is Sen. Thomas McGee of Lynn, who is not only chairman of the Senate Committee on Transportation, but is also chairman of the Democratic State Committee. As a staunch Democrat and strong supporter of organized labor, McGee is just as supportive of the Pacheco Law as is Pacheco.

Another strong supporter is Democrat Senate President Stan Rosenberg of Amherst, who is presiding over his first budget as the leader of the Senate. He said in an interview that he does not see any chance of the Pacheco Law being changed. Pacheco is part of Rosenberg’s leadership team.

So good luck with that.

Baker is no stranger to the fight over the Pacheco Law. An interesting aside to all of this is the fact that Baker was a member of the Republican Gov. Bill Weld/Paul Cellucci Cabinet when the Pacheco Law was approved in 1993 over a gubernatorial veto.

Now, 22 years later, the fight over Pacheco is on again.

How does Pacheco now feel about Pacheco?

“The law works,” he said. “There was a lot of wheeling and dealing with the privatization of state property and state contracts back then. The governor’s office was like a revolving door, with a lot of insiders doing well for themselves. We brought in transparency. We made sure that when the state puts assets in the hands of a private entity, we get what we pay for.”

But isn’t it a bit strange debating a law that is named after you? Not at all, Pacheco said about Pacheco.

“It was not even called the Pacheco Law back then,” Pacheco said. “I filed the bill as the Taxpayer Protection Act. The Republicans back then called it the Pacheco Law thinking they could kill it, stigmatize me and use it to defeat me. It didn’t work.”

Looks like it won’t work again.

Peter Lucas’ political column appears Tuesday and Friday. Email him at luke1825@aol.com.