Crafting a scorecard depends on recorded votes, and the House has simply not taken very many recorded votes in the 193rd legislative session (2023-2024) to date. 

As of today, the House has only taken 107 recorded votes. By this date in 2022, the House had taken 187 votes, and in 2020, 174. 

Not every vote is worth scoring: we have generally avoided scoring votes that the Legislature must take (veto overrides line item budget vetoes, enactment of state loans, public land transfers), as well as the non-controversial unanimous or near-unanimous votes that occur on budgets and supplemental budgets. 

For the 193rd Session scorecard, visit here.

The Session Starts: Rules

Although the last two sessions had contentious debates on the House rules, 2023 started much quieter on the rules front. However, House Democrats showed again that basic transparency measures supported by the Senate remain anathema in their own chamber. A proposal to require one week notice for legislative hearings (as opposed to the current 72 hours) failed 24 to 129, with Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven (D-Somerville) the only Democrat to vote for it (RC#8). 

Tax Cuts, Tax Cuts, Tax Cuts 

Although the voters passed the Fair Share Amendment in 2022 to raise taxes on the rich so that we can invest more, the House made clear that they plan to give money right back to the rich and large corporations by passing a tax cut package filled with giveaways to the richest residents of the Commonwealth. Only three legislators–Rep. Mike Connolly (D-Cambridge), Rep. Dan Sena (D-Acton), and Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven (D-Somerville)–voted against the bill (RC#16). 

Democrats did, however, vote against Republican proposals to make the bill even worse (RC#14, RC#15). 

During the budget, House Republicans continued that line of attack, but their attempt to divert Fair Share revenue to regressive tax cuts via the “tax cap” law failed on a party line vote (RC#17). 

Although the final tax package was less regressive than what the House passed originally — including some important provisions passed by the Senate to protect Fair Share revenue — it was still skewed too much toward the rich and large corporations and risked harming our ability to invest. It passed near unanimously, with only Rep. Mike Connolly (D-Cambridge) voting no (RC#33). 

Gun Safety Bill 

In October, the House voted 120 to 38 for a comprehensive gun safety bill that strengthened the state’s assault weapons ban, prohibited machine gun conversion devices, cracked down on ghost guns, among other steps. During the debate, Democrats voted down on party line a Republican effort to stall consideration of the bill (RC#59) and on almost party line a Republican effort to expand pretrial detention (RC#61). 

No Cost Calls 

One of the most exciting wins of the session so far was the passage of No Cost Calls, i.e., guaranteeing free access to phone calls to incarcerated individuals and ending the predatory practice of price gouging incarcerated individuals and their loved ones to stay connected.

The House and Senate both originally passed this through their FY 2024 budgets; however, Governor Healey’s desire for technical changes on the implementation date led to the need for a standalone vote in the fall (RC#63). House Republicans tried to deplete the fund for implementation of No Cost Calls during the FY 2025 budget debate, but the effort was soundly defeated (RC#92). 

Pay Equity 

To strengthen the pay equity law passed a few sessions ago, the House passed the Frances Perkins Workplace Equity Act, which would require salary and wage range disclosures and improve statewide data collection (RC#88). 

Shelter Funding 

In light of the rise of migrants and refugees to Massachusetts, the state’s essential right to shelter law has come under attack given the cost of housing new arrivals. Massachusetts should be proud of our right to shelter and of the diversity of our immigrant communities. 

The efforts to restrict the shelter law pose difficulty for a scorecard, since they inspire principled progressive opposition and xenophobic conservative opposition. However, the votes on Republican amendments to restrict new arrivals’ access to emergency shelter are unambiguous. Republicans tried to do this in the supplemental budget in November (RC#65), in a supplemental budget in March (RC#75), and in the FY 2025 budget (RC#99). 

Republicans secured recorded votes on several other xenophobic messaging amendments during budget season: 

• A xenophobic amendment to the supplemental budget that falsely implied that job training programs for new arrivals are taking resources away from working-class people when the state already has many existing programs to help (RC#17)
• A xenophobic amendment to prioritize individuals who have lived in Massachusetts for at least a year in the emergency shelter waitlist (RC#100)
• A xenophobic amendment to prioritize honorably discharged unhoused veterans in the emergency shelter waitlist—an attempt to falsely imply that new arrivals are taking housing away from veterans (RC#101) 

Prison & Jail Accountability

Massachusetts state legislators have the authority to visit prisons and jails unannounced and without the need for any special permission. Few visit unannounced, but the number of legislators who visit prisons and jails in scheduled visits is also quite low. The State Legislature votes for the funding for prisons and jails each year, and legislators should be overseeing how that money is being spent, overseeing to what extent laws are being (or are not being) followed. And that requires showing up. So, we decided to add an extra item to this session’s scorecard: whether or not legislators have actually visited at least one of MA’s prisons and jails this session to do such oversight. We reached out to every legislator, and we plan to continually update the data as legislators respond or visit.

For the 193rd Session scorecard, visit this page.

Starting the Session: Rules 

Whereas the House has been the home of contentious rules debates in recent sessions, the Senate began with more of a rules fight than the House, as Senate Leadership put forth an amendment to eliminate term limits for the Senate President (what had been a welcome check on the centralization of power, in contrast to the House). The repeal passed 32 to 6 (RC#7), with three Democrats—John Keenan (D-Quincy), Becca Rausch (D-Needham), and Walter Timilty (D-Milton)—joining Republicans. 

Tax Policy 

After last 2022’s victory for the Fair Share Amendment (i.e., the 4% surtax on income over $1 million, creating dedicated funding for public education and transportation), the business community and conservatives (of both parties) have been organizing to cut taxes. 

During the FY 2024 budget debate, the Senate defeated Republican amendments to reduce the amount of designated funds raised by the Fair Share Amendment: 

• An attempt to enable wealthy individuals to reduce their taxable income subject to the Fair Share surtax, which failed 5 to 34 with Democrats Barry Finegold (D-Andover) and Walter Timilty (D-Milton) joining Republicans (RC#38) 
• An attempt to eliminate language to prevent Fair Share revenue from being redirected to the rainy day fund rather than being used for constitutionally protected purposes, which failed 5 to 34 with Democrats Barry Finegold (D-Andover) and Walter Timilty (D-Milton) joining Republicans (RC#45) 

During the Senate debate on its tax package, Senate Democrats took another stand to protect Fair Share revenue by voting to ensure that couples who file jointly on their federal taxes do so in Massachusetts as well (RC#51), but with Barry Finegold (D-Andover) and Michael Moore (D-Auburn) joining Republicans. 

Democrats also defeated several Republican efforts to make the tax package more regressive 

• Reducing the tax rate for short-term capital gains, a tax cut that goes disproportionately to the top 1% (e.g., day traders, speculators), which failed 5 to 34 (again, Finegold and Timilty) (RC#52) 
• Raising the estate tax threshold to $5 million (which would have given hundreds of thousands of dollars to such multi-million-dollar estates), which failed 5 to 34, with Nick Collins (D-South Boston) joining Timilty and Republicans (RC#53) 
• Applying cost of living increases to the estate tax threshold of $2 million (something the Legislature has always avoided doing for wage increases), which failed 6 to 33, with Collins, Timilty, and John Velis (D-Westfield) joining Republicans (RC#54) 

However, senators also voted down a progressive amendment from Sen. Jamie Eldridge (D-Marlborough) to ensure that Housing Development Incentive Program funds support much needed mixed-income housing by requiring developments funded under the program to have at least 20% permanently affordable housing. Only 9 senators voted in support of it (RC#50): Sal DiDomenico (D-Everett), Lydia Edwards (D-East Boston), Jamie Eldridge (D-Marlborough), Adam Gomez (D-Springfield), Pat Jehlen (D-Somerville), Robyn Kennedy (D-Worcester), Liz Miranda (D-Roxbury), Mark Montigny (D-New Bedford), and Becca Rausch (D-Needham). 

The Senate tax bill passed unanimously, and although opposed to the focus on tax cuts, we chose not to score it was better than the House’s package in ways that would be important for House-Senate negotiations: 

• The Senate bill rejected the proposed $117 million tax cut for day traders and speculators proposed by Gov. Healey and passed by the MA House in April. Notably, both chambers rejected this idea last year when Governor Baker proposed it.
• The Senate bill rejected a $79 million corporate tax giveaway that the House back in April with no public debate.
• The Senate bill offered a less expensive and less regressive cut to the estate tax.

The bill was also significantly less costly than the House’s bill, and it included the important loophole-closing mentioned earlier. 

However, the final tax bill included those two regressive tax cuts and a more regressive estate tax cut than the Senate proposed, even though it did include the loophole-closing. Senator Jamie Eldridge (D-Marlborough) was the lone no vote (RC#62). 

Gun Safety 

In February, the Senate passed its gun safety package, which would crack down on ghost guns, codify the state’s assault weapons ban, ban machine gun conversion devices, and other steps  on a party line vote of 37 to 3 (RC#114). 

In the lead-up to doing so, Senate Democrats voted down a Republican effort to send the bill back to committee 31 to 9 (RC#109), with Mike Brady(D-Brockton), Paul Mark (D-Peru), Mark Montigny (D-New Bedford), Marc Pacheco (D-Taunton), and Walter Timilty (D-MIlton) joining Republicans. They also voted down a proposal to replace the bill with a narrower, Republican-drafted bill 33 to 6 (RC#111), with Pacheco and Timilty joining Republicans.  

Supporting Our Immigrant Neighbors 

Senate Democrats defeated several xenophobic amendments from Republicans throughout the session: 

• Eliminating the language in the FY 2024 budget to extend in-state tuition to all Massachusetts high school graduates, regardless of immigration status (RC#6, party line) 
• Excluding arriving families from access to emergency housing assistance funding (RC#92, party line) 
• Barring resettlement agencies from doing their work if the emergency shelter could be at capacity at an undefined future point — solving a problem via exclusion that can be solved via funding (RC#119), with Nick Collins (D-South Boston), Michael Moore (D-Auburn), Marc Pacheco (D-Taunton), and Walter Timilty (D-Milton) joining Republicans 
• Determining  eligibility for emergency shelter according to the duration of residence in the commonwealth (RC#120), with Nick Collins (D-South Boston), John Cronin (D-Fitchburg), Barry Finegold (D-Andover), Mark Montigny (D-New Bedford), Michael Moore (D-Auburn), Marc Pacheco (D-Taunton), Walter Timilty (D-Milton), and John Velis (D-Westfield) joining Republicans 

Pay Equity 

To strengthen the pay equity law passed a few sessions ago, the Senate voted 38 to 1 to pass the Frances Perkins Workplace Equity Act, which would require salary and wage range disclosures and improve statewide data collection (RC#88). The sole NO came from Ryan Fattman (R-Sutton). 

Unanimity: It Can Be Good 

The Senate also passed several noteworthy bills unanimously, all of which it passed last session only to see the House take no action: 

• Allowing for a non-binary option on birth certificates and driver’s licenses in the state (RC#57) 
• Making it easier for unhoused individuals to obtain a state-issued ID (#58) 
• Making disposable menstrual products such as sanitary napkins, tampons, and underwear liners available for free in public schools, homeless shelters, and prisons in Massachusetts. (RC#89) 
• Expanding access to HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) by allowing pharmacists to provide a 60-day supply for those facing barriers to care. (RC#90) 

We often shy away from scoring unanimous votes, but the Senate’s persistence amidst House intransigence is worth rewarding.

The Senate unanimously passed legislation based on the Common Start bill: the EARLY ED Act, which would make the state’s Commonwealth Cares for Children (C3) operational grant program permanent, expanding eligibility for the state’s subsidy program, and boosting compensation for educators by creating a career ladder and providing scholarships and loan forgiveness (RC#116). During the debate, the Senate also voted down a Republican amendment to require a Legislative commission in the bill to study the development of a tax credit for employer-supported early education and care, a policy that has proven ineffective and underutilized in other states that have adopted it. It failed 7 to 32, garnering the support of Mike Barrett (D-Lexington), Nick Collins, and Marc Pacheco (D-Taunton) along with the chamber’s now-four Republicans (RC#115). 

Prison and Jail Accountability

Massachusetts state legislators have the authority to visit prisons and jails unannounced and without the need for any special permission. Few visit unannounced, but the number of legislators who visit prisons and jails in scheduled visits is also quite low. The State Legislature votes for the funding for prisons and jails each year, and legislators should be overseeing how that money is being spent, overseeing to what extent laws are being (or are not being) followed. And that requires showing up. So, we decided to add an extra item to this session’s scorecard: whether or not legislators have actually visited at least one of MA’s prisons and jails this session to do such oversight. We reached out to every legislator, and we plan to continually update the data as legislators respond or visit.