In the Press: MA Senate’s “Response 2025” Doesn’t Meet the Moment

Kelly Garrity, “A Call and a Delayed Response,” Politico, April 2, 2025.

“The big announcement fell flat among progressives, who have been urging the Legislature to quickly pass a joint rules package and turn their attention toward the deluge of actions out of D.C. In a letter sent last week, more than a dozen activist groups urged lawmakers quickly “respond to the extraordinary moment we are facing.”

“Why is it only now that Senate Democrats feel the need to announce that they are thinking about how to respond to the disasters in Washington?,” said Jonathan Cohn, policy director of Progressive Massachusetts. “Somehow, the Senate’s announced response is more comical and more underwhelming than creating a new committee. They held a press conference to let the public know that an existing committee is going to do the work that it should have already been doing.”

The anticlimactic reveal shined a spotlight on the Legislature’s typically sluggish start to the session. Lawmakers did approve changes to the state’s emergency shelter system earlier this year and recently passed a bill extending a pandemic-era remote meeting provision. But little major legislation has made it across the finish line.

“Until a few days ago, when the Legislature temporarily extended hybrid meeting access for public meetings again, the only bill that the Legislature had passed this session was to kick unhoused families out of shelter,” Cohn said.”

Chris Lisinski, Ella Adams, and Eric Convey, “Frustrated at incremental movement, progressives want leaders to legislate action against Trump policies,” MASSter List, April 2, 2025.

“The lack of concrete details prompted Jonathan Cohn, policy director of the Progressive Massachusetts group that signed onto last week’s letter, to ask: what took so long?

“We are now at the start of the fourth month of the year and are 10 weeks into Trump’s second administration. Why is it only now that Senate Democrats feel the need to announce that they are thinking about how to respond to the disasters in Washington?” Cohn said. “Somehow, the Senate’s announced response is more comical and more underwhelming than creating a new committee: they held a press conference to let the public know that an existing committee is going to do the work that it should have already been doing.””

Chris Lisinski, “Progressives in Massachusetts demand legislative response to Trump,” State House News Service, April 1, 2025.

“Signatories on the letter include progressive watchdog Act on Mass, Homes for All Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Sierra Club, the Mass. Campaign for Single Payer Health Care, and Progressive Massachusetts.”

Anjali Hunynh, “‘We can’t sit idly by’: Mass. Senate tasks committee with deciding how to respond to Trump 2.0,” Boston Globe, April 1, 2025.

“Some advocates, however, remained unsatisfied by the Senate’s new approach. Jonathan Cohn, policy director of left-leaning advocacy group Progressive Massachusetts, criticized lawmakers for how long it took to coordinate any response to Trump.

“Somehow, the Senate’s announced response is more comical and more underwhelming than creating a new committee: they held a press conference to let the public know that an existing committee is going to do the work that it should have already been doing,” Cohn said in a statement.

“Let’s just hope that their announced intention to take threats seriously is not another April fool’s joke,” he added.”

Chris Van Buskirk, “Trump cuts $106M in COVID-era grant funding for Massachusetts as Senate taps pol to lead Democratic response,” Boston Herald, April 1, 2025.

“Progressive advocates in Massachusetts have been hounding legislators to do something about the Trump administration’s decisions to slash federal funding for a variety of sectors in the state.

Progressive Massachusetts Policy Director Jonathan Cohn said Massachusetts voters have for months wanted to see their elected officials “be bolder and more proactive in protecting” the state against Trump’s “chaos, cruelty, and corruption.”

Cohn said voters want to hear “real answers from Beacon Hill: how we will protect our essential services amidst looming budget cuts, how we will protect marginalized communities, how we will protect civil liberties and our democracy, how we will show a real governing alternative.”

“Somehow, the Senate’s announced response is more comical and more underwhelming than creating a new committee: they held a press conference to let the public know that an existing committee is going to do the work that it should have already been doing,” Cohn said in a statement.”

Sam Drysdale, “Mass. senators begin fashioning response to Trump, face complaints of slow start,” State House News Service, April 2, 2025.

Jonathan Cohn, policy director of Progressive Massachusetts, questioned the point of the press conference.

“We are now at the start of the fourth month of the year and are 10 weeks into Trump’s second administration,” Cohn said. “Why is it only now that Senate Democrats feel the need to announce that they are thinking about how to respond to the disasters in Washington? Somehow, the Senate’s announced response is more comical and more underwhelming than creating a new committee: they held a press conference to let the public know that an existing committee is going to do the work that it should have already been doing.”

Mike Deehan, “Mass. Democrats’ Tea Party moment that wasn’t,” Axios Boston, April 2, 2025.

What they’re saying: “Somehow, the Senate’s announced response is more comical and more underwhelming than creating a new committee: they held a press conference to let the public know that an existing committee is going to do the work that it should have already been doing,” Progressive Massachusetts policy director Jonathan Cohn said after Spilka’s announcement.

“Our commonwealth did something rare in recent history: it took away the right to vote from a category of people who were formerly enfranchised. “

April 1, 2025

Chair Keenan, Chair Hunt, and Members of the Joint Committee on Election Laws: 

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the Policy Director at Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide grassroots advocacy group fighting for a more equitable, just, sustainable, and democratic commonwealth. 

We urge you to give a favorable report to H.63 and S.7: Proposal for a legislative amendment to the Constitution relative to voting rights.

I would like to begin with a bit of history. Felony disenfranchisement in Massachusetts is a recent phenomenon. Indeed, although we often think of the history of voting rights in the US as one of ever-forward motion, Massachusetts stands as an outlier. In the late 1990s, after incarcerated individuals in MCI-Norfolk started organizing for better conditions, Republican Governor Bill Cellucci and the MA Legislature responded with retaliation: a multi-step process of disenfranchisement. In 2000, Massachusetts voters approved a constitutional amendment to prohibit people incarcerated for felonies in state prison from voting in state elections; the subsequent year, Cellucci signed a law to extend this prohibition to federal and municipal elections. Our commonwealth did something rare in recent history: it took away the right to vote from a category of people who were formerly enfranchised. 

In 2022, the Massachusetts Legislature took an important step forward when passing the VOTES Act by including language creating protections for jail-based voting for those who still maintain the right to vote, but we must build on that momentum by ending remaining disenfranchisement, as these bills would. 

Felony disenfranchisement compounds the systemic racism of the criminal legal system. Approximately 8,000 residents of the Commonwealth are disenfranchised due to a felony conviction, more than 50% of them are Black or Latinx. 

Felony disenfranchisement laws disenfranchise more voters than those directly affected. Whenever someone loses the right to vote even temporarily, they are likely to mistakenly think that they have lost it permanently. We must eliminate archaic laws that create voter suppression and voter confusion. 

Felony disenfranchisement exacerbates the humanitarian crisis in our prisons and jails. The Department of Justice, even under Trump’s first administration, pointed out that Massachusetts correctional facilities are engaging in torture, and a lack of political voice puts individuals at risk for abuse. 

Moreover, studies have often shown that fostering ties to the outside world is central to reducing recidivism. Civic engagement provides just that, and we should welcome it. 

If Massachusetts were to pass these amendments, we would be in good company. Maine, Vermont, Puerto Rico, and DC already ensure that all citizens of voting age are able to participate in elections, regardless of incarceration status. That is also true of a number of European countries, such as Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland. Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and Ukraine.

At a time when democracy is under attack, let’s take this opportunity to strengthen and expand it.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Policy Director

Progressive Massachusetts

Our Response to “Response 2025”

Our statement on the MA State Senate’s “Response 2025”:

For months, Massachusetts voters have wanted to see our elected officials to be bolder and more proactive in protecting our Commonwealth from the chaos, cruelty, and corruption of the Trump administration. Back in December, we joined dozens of organizations in calling on the Legislature to start this work early. We are now at the start of the fourth month of the year and are 10 weeks into Trump’s second administration. Why is it only now that Senate Democrats feel the need to announce that they are thinking about how to respond to the disasters in Washington?

Somehow, the Senate’s announced response is more comical and more underwhelming than creating a new committee: they held a press conference to let the public know that an existing committee is going to do the work that it should have already been doing.

Until a few days ago, when the Legislature temporarily extended hybrid meeting access for public meetings again, the only bill that the Legislature had passed this session was to kick unhoused families out of shelter. Let’s just hope that their announced intention to take threats seriously is not another April fool’s joke.

Massachusetts voters want to hear real answers from Beacon Hill: how we will protect our essential services amidst looming budget cuts, how we will protect marginalized communities, how we will protect civil liberties and our democracy, how we will show a real governing alternative.”