Roll Call

The Senate Just Voted 40 to 0 for Its Housing Bill. What’s In It — And What’s Not?

Last night, the MA Senate voted unanimously (40 to 0) for its redraft of the Affordable Homes Act.

The Senate’s bill contains a $5.4 billion bond authorization, which — as it is important to acknowledge — is more than the $2 billion that the Governor actually plans to spend over the next five years. Not all of the spending authorized will materialize: the authorizations create potential, not hard reality.

But the policy components of bond bills are different: they are laws like any other laws. Their impact is not just potential, but reality.

Like Healey’s original version of the bill, the Senate bill would establish an Office of Fair Housing and legalize accessory dwelling units in single-family zoning districts without undue restrictions.

The Senate’s bill, like Healey’s, allows cities and towns to pass inclusionary zoning ordinances (i.e., requirements that a certain percentage of new construction be affordable units) by simple majority, but only allows it for requirements up to 13 percent.

The Senate’s bill, like Healey’s, creates a process for the sealing of eviction records and, importantly, allows this for cases that are dismissed or where tenants win (omissions in Healey’s original language), although the Senate did not streamline the process to make some of the sealing automatic to remove administrative burdens on tenants.

In a further win for tenants, the Senate bill bans brokers’ fees, requiring that real estate brokers’ fees be paid solely by the party that contracted with them and not born by renters for whom such fees can come as a costly and prohibitive surprise.

That all being said, the Senate’s exclusion of a local option real estate transfer fee was shameful and indefensible, a cowardly capitulation to the real estate industry, condescending a dismissal of cities and towns that want to take action, and sign that they simply do not take the housing crisis seriously. We can’t take tools off the table.

Recorded Votes from the Senate Session

Despite being in session from 10 am to midnight to work through the bill (with frequent recesses therein), there were almost no recorded votes, and there was little debate. Indeed, the third item that the Senate did was bundle 64 amendments — 1/5 of the total filed — and reject them en bloc on a voice vote (“All those in favor say aye, all those opposed say nay, the nays have it, and the amendments are rejected.” It lasts as long as it took you to read that.) The amendment to restore the local option transfer fee was among them.

They then adopted 71 amendments en bloc via voice vote. Later in the day, they rejected a bundle of 14 amendments and adopted a bundle of 30.

In other words, a total of 78 amendments were rejected via a bundled voice vote, and 101 were adopted via a bundled voice vote. Our deliberative body in action.

The remaining amendments did not get meaningful back-and-forth debate and deliberation either. Only three received recorded votes, and two of those were unanimous: the creation of a Crumbling Concrete Assistance Fund and the creation of First Time Home Buyers Savings Accounts. That those two received recorded votes is just a sign that their lead sponsors wanted to issue a press release or otherwise get public credit: the votes offer nothing in the way of transparency or accountability.

The only non-unanimous vote was on an amendment from Minority Leader Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester) to enable cities and towns to evade compliance with MBTA Communities Act zoning requirements. It failed 6 to 34, with two Democrats — Edward Kennedy of Lowell and Walter Timilty of Milton — joining Republicans.

Status of Amendments We Supported

#119, Air Quality for Homes: Withdrawn
#141, HOMES Judiciary Committee Bill: Adopted
#150, Establishing local-option rent stabilization: Withdrawn
#214, Foreclosure Prevention Program: Adopted but redrafted
#235, Encouraging homeownership: Withdrawn
#242, Local Option Transfer Fee: Rejected en bloc via voice vote

Status of Amendments We Supported

The House and Senate now have until July 31 to conference their two bills and vote upon consensus language.

housing

MA Senate Passes Climate Omnibus Bill 38 to 2. Here’s What’s in It.

On Tuesday, the MA Senate voted 38 to 2 to pass its climate omnibus bill (An Act upgrading the grid and protecting ratepayers). The 2 NO votes coming from Republicans Peter Durant of Spencer and Ryan Fattman of Sutton.

Here are some of the key parts of it.

Siting Reform

Establishes a fund to support individuals, local governments, and community organizations seeking to intervene in the siting regulatory process (formally known as “intervenors”), a Division of Public Participation within the Department of Public Utilities, and an Office of Environmental Justice and Equity
Creates a consolidated permitting process under the Energy Facilities Siting Board (as opposed to a series of permits across local, regional, and state levels) for various clean energy projects and limits the review process to one year for smaller projects and 15 months for larger projects
Requires any electric company, distribution company, generation company, transmission company or natural gas pipeline company to petition the Energy Facilities Siting Board when it seeks to take land via eminent domain
Requires the facility siting division within the Department of Public Utilities to maintain a clean energy infrastructure dashboard

Moving Beyond Gas

Allows gas companies to provide networked geothermal energy
Requires the Department of Utilities to consider the public interest (such as achieving greenhouse gas reduction goals) and the availability of non-gas alternatives when evaluating proposals from gas companies to expand territory and petitions from individuals for gas service.
Requires gas companies to file plans with the Department of Public Utilities on decommissioning gas infrastructure and remedying leak-prone infrastructure
Repeals the gas system expansion mandate at the DPU (i.e., the requirement that gas companies design programs “which increase the availability, affordability and feasibility of natural gas service for new customers”

Electrification of Transportation

Makes it easier for cities and towns to procure electric school buses and EV charging equipment for their municipalities
Authorizes $27M from the RGGI Auction Trust Fund to be made available for the Electric Vehicle Adoption Incentive Trust Fund for the next three fiscal years
Prohibits a historic district commission, board of a neighborhood conservation district, or condo association from prohibiting or unreasonably restricting an individual unit owner from installing electric vehicle supply equipment.
Requires the MBTA to develop short-term, medium-term, and long-term plans to electrify the commuter rail (Amendment #31)

Building Decarbonization

Directs the Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance to evaluate the potential of increasing energy efficiency and reducing greenhouse gas emissions in all buildings owned or leased by the Commonwealth
Expands the mission of the Board of Building Regulations to include energy efficiency, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and reductions in embodied carbon

Consumer Protection

Prohibits competitive electric suppliers, which frequently engage in predatory business practices, from signing up new residential customers,
Requires the Department of Public Utilities to establish discounted rates for moderate-income consumers with distribution companies

Defining Clean Energy

Positive: Removes the designation of biomass as clean energy for Municipal Light Plant clean energy standards (Amendment #34)
Negative: Expands the definition of “clean energy” to include nuclear, carbon dioxide removal, hydrogen, renewable natural gas and includes carbon capture & sequestration in clean energy research

Just Transition

Creates a commission to examine ways to increase access to employment, training, and workforce opportunities in clean energy industries and related fields for gas workers (Amendment #120)

Other Measures

Updates the state’s bottle bill to expand the types of beverage containers that have a deposit, to cover water bottles, iced teas, fruit juices, and more (Amendment #67)

Unfortunately, several of the amendments we supported to strengthen the bill were withdrawn:

#14 Protecting the Commonwealth from Gas Expansion (Gomez), which would halt large gas infrastructure expansion projects from being approved by the Energy Facilities Siting Board (EFSB).
#15 Halting the Expansion of Large Gas Pipes (Gomez), which would stop the Department of Public Utilities (DPU) from approving gas companies to expand into new towns & cities not already served by gas.
#16 Protecting the Climate and Ratepayers from Gas Expansion (Gomez), which would halt both large gas infrastructure expansions approvals by the EFSB (Amendment 14) and gas territory expansions by the DPU (Amendment 15).
#100 Improving Outdoor Air Quality (Jehlen), which would create a technical advisory committee for air quality, direct the DEP to identify at least 8 pollution hot spots, install air monitors, and reduce the air pollution by 50% by 2030.
#106 Stemming the Expansion of RNG and Hydrogen (Eldridge), which would stop RNG and Hydrogen as being defined as clean energy.
#119 Prevailing Wage (Feeney), which would bring natural gas, electrical, and renewable energy utility workers under the Commonwealth’s prevailing wage statute to make it harder for work to be outsourced to low-road employers.

And several were voted down in quick, perfunctory voice votes with no accountability:

#28 Zero Carbon Renovation Fund (Gomez), which would provide funding for the decarbonization measures we need across sectors to meet Massachusetts’ ambitious climate goals.
#35 Limiting Biomass (Gomez), which would remove subsidies for burning biomass.
#57 Clean Energy Siting and Permitting, Local Option Amendment (Mark), which would make the consolidated permit a local option (like stretch code).
#116 Accurately Assessing Community Impacts (DiDomenico), which would strike a clause from the definition of cumulative impact analyses that would limit the analysis to only assessing the risks and exposures attributable to the proposed new pollution source
#119 Prevailing Wage (Feeney), which would bring natural gas, electrical, and renewable energy utility workers under the Commonwealth’s prevailing wage statute to make it harder for work to be outsourced to low-road employers.

climate

MA Senate Votes 38 to 2 to Reduce Plastic Waste

Yesterday, the MA Senate passed the Plastics Reduction Act, a comprehensive bill to reduce plastic waste, by a wide margin of 38 to 2. The only NO votes were from Republican Senators Peter Durant (R-Spencer) and Ryan Fattman (R-Sutton).

The bill would prohibit carry-out plastic bags at retail stores statewide and require stores to charge 10 cents for recycled paper bags, five cents of which will be allocated to environmental protection measures (including making reusable bags widely available in low- and moderate-income communities). As of last year, more than 160 cities and towns, constituting nearly 70 per cent of the state’s population, already regulated single-use plastic bags.

The bill also takes additional steps, such as the following:

Preventing plastic utensils and straws from automatically being given to consumers
Prohibiting single-use plastic bottle purchases by state agencies
Creating a statewide program for recycling large plastic objects such as car seats
Requiring the Department of Environmental Protection to submit a report on how to expand access to composting
Establishing a commission on extended producer responsibility

During the floor debate, conservatives of both parties, led by Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester), sought to make the plastic bag fee optional for retailers. That amendment failed 8 to 30, with Barry Finegold (D-Andover), Mark Montigny (D-New Bedford), Michael Moore (D-Auburn), and John Velis (D-Westfield) joining the chamber’s four Republicans.

environment

The House Passed Its Version of the Affordable Homes Act. Here Are the Votes.

On Wednesday, the House voted 145 to 13 to pass its redraft of Governor Healey’s Affordable Homes Act. The bill contains many important provisions, such as authorizing increased investment in housing (including rehabilitating public housing stock and decarbonizing our housing stock), allowing Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) by right, making it easier to convert unused commercial space into housing, creating an Office of Fair Housing, and creating a Tenant Opportunity to Purchase (TOPA) local option. Unfortunately, the bill left out important parts of the Governor’s bill as well, such as a local option real estate transfer fee, eviction sealing protections, and reducing the threshold for passing inclusionary zoning ordinances. It now goes on to the Senate.

The 13 NO votes came from two Democrats — Rep. Bill Driscoll (D-Milton) and Rep. Dave Robertson (D-Tewksbury) — and 11 Republicans — Rep. F. Jay Barrows (Mansfield), Rep. Nicholas Boldyga (R-Southwick), Rep. Angelo D’Emilia (R-Bridgewater), Rep. David DeCoste (R-Norwell), Rep. Paul Frost (R-Auburn), Rep. Steve Howitt (R-Seekonk), Rep. Susan Gifford (R-Wareham), Rep. Marc Lombardo (R-Billerica), Rep. Norman Orrall (R-Lakeville), Rep. David Soter (R-Bellingham), and Rep. Alyson Sullivan-Almeida (R-Whitman).

The House voted 131 to 27 against an amendment from Rep. Marc Lombardo (R-Billerica) to exempt communities from MBTA Communities Act requirements if at least 10 percent of the housing units in the city or town are low or moderate-income (the “40B” threshold).

Two Democrats — Colleen Garry (D-Dracut) and Dave Robertson (D-Tewksbury) — joined Republicans in supporting the amendment.

The House voted 126 to 32 against an amendment from Minority Leader Brad Jones (R-North Reading) to make it easier for communities opposed to building more housing to evade compliance with the MBTA Communities Act.

Rep. Bill Driscoll (D-Milton), Rep. Dylan Fernandes (D-Falmouth), Rep. Colleen Garry (D-Dracut), Rep. Pat Kearney (D-Scituate), Rep. Kathy LaNatra (D-Kingston), and Rep. Dave Robertson (D-Tewksbury) joined Republicans in voting for it.

The House voted 130 to 28 in favor of an amendment to preserve language allowing for the construction of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) by right without any of the unnecessary obstacles and poison pills conservative representatives tried to add to the language. The amendment made one modification that was acceptable to advocates: requiring a special permit process for building more than 1 ADU on a property.

Rep. Bill Driscoll (D-Milton), Rep. Colleen Garry (D-Dracut), Rep. Dave Robertson (D-Tewksbury), and Rep. Jeff Turco (D-Winthrop) voted against it with Republicans, and Rep. Donnie Berthiaume (R-Spencer) joined Democrats in support.

The House voted 127 to 30 against an amendment from Rep. Paul Frost (R-Auburn) to automatically count all mobile homes toward a community’s 40B threshold (i.e., that 10% of all housing units need to be for low or moderate incomes). The amendment was driven by NIMBY opposition to building affordable housing and would make it harder to achieve affordability goals.

Rep. Dylan Fernandes (D-Falmouth), Rep. Colleen Garry (D-Dracut), Rep. Sally Kerans (D-Danvers), Rep. Dave Robertson (D-Tewksbury), and Rep. Thomas Walsh (D-Peabody) joined Republicans in voting for it.

The House voted 133 to 25 for a consolidated amendment that, among other positive measures, added a Tenant Opportunity to Purchase (TOPA) local option to the bill. Under this, cities and towns could choose to pass ordinances giving tenants the right of first refusal to buy their building if it goes up for sale.

The House unanimously passed an amendment to add a veterans preference for housing and 153 to 5 to add a series of earmarks.

housing

MA Senate Finishes Up Its Budget Debate. Let’s Talk about the Recorded Votes.

Yesterday, late at night, the MA Senate passed its FY 2025 budget. I’ll defer discussion on the specific funding levels to another time and instead highlight some policy victories in the amendment process and the recorded votes.

On the first hand, two amendments that Progressive Mass had advocated for passed, in modified form:

Sen. Cindy Creem’s Amendment #100: Improving Voting Access, which would decouple the municipal census and voter registration status. Currently, cities and towns are required to mark registered voters as “inactive” if they don’t fill out the annual municipal census, a document many easily forget to fill out. When voters are inactive, they have to go through extra hoops at their polling location to vote.
Sen. Cindy Creem’s Amendment #938: No Cost Calls Reporting Requirements, which would strengthen the oversight and data collection for No Cost Calls (i.e., the recently passed law that guarantees free access to phone calls and other communication to incarcerated individuals)

But now to the recorded votes. The Senate took recorded votes on 41 amendments, 37 of which were unanimous votes.

At Progressive Mass, we love recorded votes: they are a vital tool for accountability and transparency. But when it comes to unanimous votes like these, their main purpose is for senators to be able to publicly take credit for the addition of a specific program or funding increase rather than highlighting meaningful contrasts between legislators.

So what were those 4 non-unanimous votes?

Senator Bruce Tarr’s Amendment (#118) to prevent the diversion of a fraction of excess capital gains tax revenue to the general budget instead of the rainy day fund failed 4 to 35 on a party line vote.

Senator Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester)’s amendment (#810) to create a two-week sales tax holiday failed 5 to 34. Sales tax holidays drain vital revenue and don’t actually goals of tax progressivity or economic stimulus. The 5 YES votes were the chamber’s 4 Republicans plus Walter Timilty (D-Milton).

Senator Bruce Tarr’s amendment to undermine the Fair Share Amendment by allowing high-income couples to evade the surtax failed 10 to 29. The Senate voted to close this loophole last year in order to prevent couples from being “married in DC, but single in Massachusetts” (i.e., filing their taxes together in DC but separately in MA to avoid the surtax on income over $1 million). The 10 YES votes consisted of the chamber’s four Republicans and six Democrats: Nick Collins (D-South Boston), Barry Finegold (D-Andover), Joan Lovely (D-Salem), Michael Moore (D-Auburn), Walter Timilty (D-Milton), and John Velis (D-Westfield).

Senator Jason Lewis’s amendment (#125) to create a new advisory commission to determine a new seal and motto of the commonwealth (in case you’ve forgotten, our state seal is very racist), as recommended by the last commission, passed 30 to 9. Voting NO were 6 Democrats and 3 Republicans (Bruce Tarr bucked his fellow Republicans by voting YES). The 6 Democrats were Mike Brady (D-Brockton), Nick Collins (D-South Boston), John Cronin (D-Fitchburg), Ed Kennedy (D-Lowell), Michael Moore (D-Auburn), and John Velis (D-Westfield).

budget Indigenous Agenda revenue

10 Weeks Left in the Legislative Session. How Has Your Legislator Been Voting?

Did you know that there are only 10 weeks left in the formal legislative session? That’s right: all the major decisions being made and votes being cast on Beacon Hill will be happening in the next 70 days.

But that’s all still to come. Let’s take a moment to talk about the session so far with our Legislator Scorecard.

Our 2023-2024 Scorecard

Fewer Recorded Votes: 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. The same problem exists in the Senate, where there have only been 148 recorded votes so far as opposed to 166 by this point in 2022 (and 14 of those 148 have happened just this week with unanimous votes on budget amendments).

Follow the Leader: We have been talking for years about the culture in the Legislature in which legislators defer to the will of the respective chamber’s Leadership, and that shows up even more starkly this year. Fewer votes that are not just party line are making it to the floor. Votes that show clear divides in the Democratic caucus are rare in the Senate and even rarer in the House. Whey such votes do happen, they are typically on roll call votes requested by Republicans which show which handful of Democrats are the most conservative in the caucus but little beyond that.

New Additions to the Scorecard: 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 (also important) 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 and 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. Feel free to reach out to your own legislator as well.

Missed Votes: It’s the job of a legislator to show up, so our Scorecard has always counted missed votes against legislators. However, if a percentage of missed votes gets too high, a legislator’s score becomes more a story about attendance than about votes. That’s why you’ll see a number of legislators with no score at all: they missed too many of the scored votes. However, every legislator has the ability to submit on record to the House or Senate clerk how they would have voted had they been present, and we will count those.

What’s Coming:

Our scorecard won’t be finalized until the end of the legislative session, and so there might be many more votes to come — and many opportunities for your legislators to show that they stand for the progressive values you care about.

beacon hill roll call scorecard

193rd Session: House Roll Call Votes in Review

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.

roll call

193rd Session: Senate Roll Call Votes in Review

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

roll call

MA Senate Passes Gun Safety Bill 37 to 3. Here’s What’s in It.

In October, the MA House passed a comprehensive gun bill 120 to 38 (read about it here).

The Senate debated and passed its own gun safety bill, named the SAFER Act, yesterday.

Among the key provisions of the bill were:

Cracking down on ghost guns by bringing MA’s laws in line with national standards of what counts as a firearm, prohibiting the 3D-printing of weapons unless the person owns a license to manufacture firearms, and requiring any kit-assembled guns by a licensed gun owner to be registered

Codifying the state’s assault weapons ban as it is currently being interpreted by the Attorney General, thereby modernizing outdated language referring to the since-expired federal ban
- NOT in the SENATE BILL: expanding the AWB to cover more firearms

Prohibits machine gun conversion devices or devices that increase the rate of fire of firearms

Creates manufacturer accountability by banning the marketing of unlawful firearm sales to minors and allowing industry actors to be held civilly liable if such marketing practices lead to an individual being harmed. [SENATE ONLY]

Ensures that gun dealers are inspected annually and allows the Massachusetts State Police to conduct those inspections if a local licensing agency does not or cannot do so.

Prohibits the carry of firearms in government administrative buildings, with exceptions for law enforcement officers and municipalities that choose to opt out.
- NOT in SENATE Bill: Extension to polling places, educational institutions (including higher education); ban on carry on private property without express permission or signage

Expands the list of individuals eligible to file an extreme risk protection order (ERPO) to include licensed healthcare professionals
- NOT in SENATE bill: Extension to include school administrators and employers
- SENATE ONLY: Ability to file a pre-emptive ERPO, prohibiting someone who does not yet have a license for applying for one for a certain period of time

Protects survivors of harassment by requiring courts to compel the surrender of firearms by individuals who are subject to harassment protection orders who pose an immediate threat.

Ensures that firearm licensing authorities have access to certain information about an applicant’s history of involuntary mental health hospitalizations due to posing a serious harm—with appropriate safeguards to guarantee privacy and due process [SENATE ONLY]

Establishes commissions to study the funding structure for community-based violence prevention services and to study emerging firearm technology

Strengthens data collection on firearms and firearm crimes

The final vote was 37 to 3. The only NO votes were Republicans Peter Durant (R-Spencer), Ryan Fattman (R-Sutton), and Patrick O’Connor (R-Weymouth).

During the debate on the bill, Senator Patrick O’Connor (R-Weymouth) tried to replace the bill with a narrower substitute bill. It received only 6 votes, the 3 NO votes plus Marc Pacheco (D-Taunton), Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester), and Walter Timilty (R-Milton).

gun violence

House, Senate Send No Cost Calls to Governor’s Desk

Right now, families are charged exorbitant fees to maintain vital connections with incarcerated loved ones. The DOC charges 12 cents per minute, and most County Sheriffs charge 14 cents per minute: $2.40 and $2.80 for a 20-minute call, plus fees for putting money on an account. This is a regressive tax on the most marginalized families that also harms public safety by limiting communication and weakening community bonds. Families currently spend more than $14 million per year on service the State could get for around $3 million by negotiating a better contract.

As communities already struggle with the high cost of housing and health care, no one should be forced to choose between basic needs and maintaining contact with loved ones.

The campaign for No Cost Calls, which almost saw victory last session before last-minute legislative shenanigans, had a great week, as both the House and Senate took the final enactment votes needed to send an amended version of No Cost Calls to the Governor’s Desk.

Both the House and Senate had previously passed No Cost Calls language in their budget, but Governor Healey requested a change in the effective date to December 1, which advocates agreed to as long as there was a clear guarantee of no loss in access (i.e., preventing DOC from taking the extended runway as an opportunity to create a lower baseline of access to phone calls).

The House voted 132 to 26 on Wednesday to formally enact the amended language, and the Senate did so by voice vote on Thursday.

You can find the House vote below:

no cost calls