Here’s How MA Can Strengthen Democracy for Our Local Elections

VOTE buttons

Wednesday, June 23, 2021

Chairman Finegold, Chairman Ryan, and Members of the Joint Committee on Election Laws:

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I chair the Issues Committee at Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide grassroots advocacy group committed to fighting for progressive policy here in the Commonwealth. A core part of our platform is an electoral system that expands voting, the electorate, and its trust in candidates and elected officials.

Accordingly, we urge you to give a favorable report to S.485/H.825: An Act providing a local option for ranked choice voting in municipal elections.

When voters get to the ballot box, they can face complicated choices. Our first-past-the-post system forces ordinary voters to weigh whether they can vote for their preferred candidate or whether doing so would lead to a “spoiler effect” that gives a candidate they like less a clearer path to victory. This same dynamic can lead candidates and their supporters to try to force similar candidates out of a race due to a fear of “vote splitting.”

Within the current system, the ultimate winner may command less than a majority support, a contradiction of a basic tenet of democracy and a far too common occurrence in Massachusetts elections. Ranked Choice Voting would eliminate these problems by enabling voters to rank the order of their preferences on the ballot and ensuring that whoever wins does so with majority support.

Although the ballot initiative to implement Ranked Choice Voting for state and county elections did not pass last year, the measure did pass in 78 municipalities in varying parts of the Commonwealth. If such municipalities wish to adopt Ranked Choice Voting for local elections, they should not have to face undue hurdles to doing so.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Chair, Issues Committee

Progressive Massachusetts

Everyone Deserves Dignity at the Workplace

Monday, June 21, 2021

Chairwoman Jehlen, Chairman Cutler, and members of the Joint Labor and Workforce Development Committee: 

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the chair of the Issues Committee of Progressive Massachusetts. Progressive Massachusetts is a statewide grassroots advocacy organization that fights for social and economic justice. 

Good-paying jobs with fair working conditions are a central part of our organization’s shared prosperity agenda. As such, Progressive Massachusetts would like to go on the record in support of S.1185/H.3843 (An Act relative to dignity at work), known as the Dignity At Work Act. 

Everyone deserves a safe and respectful workplace, and that means one that is free of inappropriate and harmful behaviors like bullying. 

Massachusetts labor law currently provides no protections against workplace bullying unless such bullying is targeted at an individual because of their race, sex, or other protected identity. This excludes far too many cases, and even when individuals sue because of identity-based harassment and discrimination, courts can choose to deny them redress out of a disagreement on the motivation for the mistreatment, not the existence of the mistreatment itself. 

Better training and model policies are good so far as they go, and that is not far. Accountability is what will change behavior. The Dignity At Work Act will offer that. 

Countries like Australia, Denmark, Finland, France, the Netherlands, Norway, Serbia, and Sweden–as well as various provinces in Canada–have enacted protections against workplace bullying. It’s time for Massachusetts to join them. 

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Chair, Issues Committee

Progressive Massachusetts

Coalition Testimony on the VOTES Act

Two coalitions of which Progressive Mass is a member submitted testimony for this week’s hearing on the VOTES Act.

Safe Elections Network

Testimony in Support of H.805 & S.459
An Act Fostering Voting Opportunities, Trust, Equity and Security

Joint Committee on Election Laws
May 19, 2021

Dear Chair Ryan, Chair Finegold, Vice Chair Vitolo, Vice Chair Gomez, and members of the Joint Committee on Election Laws,

The more than 100 undersigned organizations write jointly to make sure the committee knows that support for the VOTES Act is deep and broad.
Please accept this letter as testimony in support of H.805 and S.459, An Act Fostering Voting Opportunities, Trust, Equity, and Security, sponsored by Representative Lawn and Senator Creem.

Temporary voter access expansions passed during the COVID-19 pandemic, like mail-in voting and early voting in-person, were not just a win for public health, but for our democracy overall. We saw a significant increase in voter turnout that went beyond just the marquis names on the ballot. With such success in public engagement, it is important to make these reforms permanent. However, we must rise to the times and do even more.


With all eyes on voter suppression bills in other states, now is not the time to sit on the sideline. Massachusetts still has work to do to ensure that every eligible voter has access to a ballot.

The VOTES Act seeks to make the COVID-19 expansions permanent and strengthen our election infrastructure with key provisions like a back-end Automatic Voter Registration system, enrolling in ERIC, and enhancing our post-election audits.


Perhaps most important, it seeks to remove barriers to eligible voters by establishing Same-Day Registration and codifying jail-based voting practices for incarcerated eligible voters. Without these reforms, Massachusetts cannot say that we have done all that is necessary to ensure that every eligible voter can actually exercise the right to vote.


We must take a comprehensive and systemic approach to improve elections in Massachusetts and the VOTES Act does just that. This bill is not a laundry list of ideal policies, but a delicately woven tapestry of best-practices that will help Massachusetts move towards a more inclusive, welcoming Commonwealth.

We respectfully urge you to report H.805 & S.459 favorably out of committee in its entirety as quickly as
possible.


Sincerely,


ACLU MA
Action for Equity
ADL New England
American Federation of Teachers Massachusetts
American Promise
Amplify Latinx
Arise for Social Justice

Black Boston COVID19 Coalition
Black Economic Justice Institute
Black Ministerial Alliance of Greater Boston, Inc.
Boston Ten Point Coalition
Boston Ujima Project
Cambodian Mutual Assistance Association
College Bound Dorchester

Common Cause MA
City Life / Vida Urbana
City Mission, Inc.
Coalition for a Better Acre
Coalition for Social Justice
Codman Square NDC
College Bound Dorchester
Community Action Works Campaigns
Conservation Law Foundation
Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative
Edgartown Democratic Town Committee
Environmental League of Massachusetts
Equal Citizens
ForwardMA
Franklin County Continuing the Political Revolution
Freedom House
Garrison Trotter Neighborhood Association
Generation Citizen
Greater Boston Nazarene Compassionate Center Inc.
Greater Boston Section-National Council of Negro Women
GSM Labor Council
Immigrants’ Assistance Center, Inc. (IAC)
Indivisible Martha’s Vineyard
Indivisible Massachusetts Coalition
Indivisible Outer Cape
iVOTE
JCRC
Jetpac Resource Center
Jewish Alliance for Law and Social Action
La Colaborativa
La Comunidad, Inc.
Lawrence Partnership
Lawyers for Civil Rights
Lift Every Vote
League of Women Voters MA
Lowell Votes
Madison Park Development Corporation
MAPS-Massachusetts Alliance of Portuguese Speakers
Mass Alliance of HUD Tenants
Mass Equality
Mass NOW
Mass. Assoc. of Community Development Corporations
Massachusetts AFL-CIO
Massachusetts Against Solitary Confinement
Massachusetts Communities Action Network
Massachusetts Law Reform Institute

Massachusetts Peace Action
Massachusetts Women of Color Coalition
MASSCreative
MASSPIRG
MASSPIRG Students
MassVOTE
Massachusetts Voter Table
MITvote
More Than Words
NAACP-Boston Branch
Neighbor to Neighbor Massachusetts
Next Leadership Development Corporation
Nonprofit Vote
Planned Parenthood MA
Pleasant Hill Baptist Church
Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Massachusetts
Progressive Democrats of Massachusetts
Progressive Massachusetts
Progressives for Democracy in America
Project R.I.G.H.T.
Providers’ Council- CareVote
Public Higher Education Network of Massachusetts
Quincy Geneva New Vision CDC
Racial Justice Rising
Reclaim Our Democracy
Roca Inc.
Rosie’s Place
1199 SEIU
Shana Bryant Consulting Services
Small Planet Institute
Sunrise Boston
The Good Governance Project – BC Law
The Greater Boston Interfaith Organization
The Real Cost of Prisons Project
The Women’s Pipeline for Change
Transformative Culture Project
Union of Minority Neighborhoods
Unitarian Universalist Mass Action
UTEC Inc.
VOTE New Bedford
Voter Choice Massachusetts
Worcester Interfaith
Yes – Massachusetts Affordable Housing Alliance
Young Demcorats of Massachusetts
YWCA Malden

Democracy Behind Bars Coalition

Testimony on H.805 and S. 459

An Act Fostering Voting Opportunities, Trust, Equity, and Security (The VOTES Act)

Joint Committee on Election Laws

May 19, 2020

Dear Chairman Finegold, Chairman Ryan, and members of the Election Laws Committee, 

We, the Democracy Behind Bars Coalition, are writing in support of H. 805 and S. 459, known as the VOTES Act. Over the past year, we have witnessed rampant, renewed attempts to silence the voices of  Black voters and voters of color, attacks on the capitol to overturn the 2020 election results, and we have been reminded again and again of the impunity with which police are able to take Black lives. The need to build a democracy that is more racially equitable and truly accountable to all of our communities could not be more clear. The provisions of the VOTES Act — universal mail-in voting, same day registration, and the first steps towards building election infrastructure to serve eligible incarcerated citizens — are critical to that end and, especially in 2021, absolutely necessary. 

It is also long past time that Massachusetts end the de-facto disenfranchisement of eligible incarcerated voters. Although individuals serving misdemeanor convictions or incarcerated pre-trial (nearly half of incarcerated people in the Commonwealth) maintain the right to vote, virtually none of these eligible voters cast a counted ballot. This is because the realities of incarceration make casting a ballot difficult or impossible, and Massachusetts has yet to create an elections infrastructure that allows these eligible voters to overcome the myriad barriers they face. This is not only a fundamental democracy issue, but it’s a racial justice issue as hyper-policing and incarceration of Black and POC communities means that Black voters and POC voters are disproportionately those who lose their political voice to incarceration.

As a coalition that is working specifically to end the disenfranchisement of eligible incarcerated people and lift up the political voices of hyper-policed and over-incarcerated communities, we understand today’s hearing to be monumental: for the first time in Massachusetts history, the issue of jail-based disenfranchisement and the particular needs of incarcerated voters are being considered by this body as part of a larger conversation about the project of protecting democracy for all Massachusetts voters. That is a clear step forward. 

We appreciate that this hearing begins to consider the question of how to ensure that all eligible incarcerated voters are able to actually cast their ballots in practice. Though we know it will be the subject of a future hearing, we also want to draw your attention to H.836 and S.474, “An Act to protect the voting rights of eligible incarcerated people,” which was informed, drafted, and supported by our coalition with the leadership of directly-impacted people. As our testimony will make clear, ending jail-based disenfranchisement requires system-wide reform. We urge you to consider H. 836 and S. 474 for that reason, and also out of concern that there may be only one bite at the apple for election reform this session, so we cannot miss the opportunity to promote the more comprehensive provisions in that legislation. We hope the committee will advance a voting rights bill that addresses the needs of people behind bars in the most robust way

H. 836 and S. 474 provide comprehensive solutions that will expand Massachusetts’ election infrastructure to meet the specific needs of eligible incarcerated voters. These bills were informed by experience, designed by directly impacted people, organizers, and local election officials to address real barriers they have encountered with common-sense solutions. 

In asking this Committee to not only support the VOTES Act but also support H. 835, we are urging it to recognize that the de-facto disenfranchisement of those 7-9,000 eligible voters in Massachusetts jails — voters who are disproportionately Black and POC — is a profound and too-often overlooked democractic failure that needs to be addressed now. For many, the fact that thousands of eligible incarcerated voters are unable to participate comes as a revelation. A budding, broader awareness of jail-based disenfranchisement is the direct result of organizing and advocacy by directly impacted people  who have been disenfranchised and seen the disenfranchising effects of mass incarceration. 

Jail-based disenfranchisement is a system-wide problem that requires a system-wide solution:

  • Sheriffs are not required to maintain data that would allow us to know the true numbers of impacted people, or even allow volunteers to reach voters incarcerated on misdemeanors (several sheriffs told our coalition that beyond posting know-your-rights signs, no proactive measure could be taken to ensure that eligible voters serving misdemeanors could cast a counted ballot). 
  • There is no legal burden on sheriffs to do anything to provide eligible voters access to the ballot, short of providing eligible voters who request a ballot application with one — and we have no way of ensuring accountability even then.
  • Sheriffs statewide have no consistent processes and procedures for ensuring eligible incarcerated people can vote — in some counties, sheriffs told us that eligible voters could receive an absentee ballot application if they “write” to the sheriff requesting one, in counties with ‘active’ jail-based voting programs, a jail librarian kept absentee ballot applications and relied on outside volunteers to mail completed applications, and in the majority of counties, sheriffs do not respond to our inquiries and eligible voters simply have no recourse to vote.
  • Those few eligible voters who do access ballot applications overwhelmingly have those ballot applications rejected — in many cases, ballot applications are held for up to 3 weeks and rejected only days before Election Day, making it impossible for eligible incarcerated voters to resolve issues with their applications.
  • Until 2020, we do not know of the Secretary of Commonwealth issuing regulations to elections officials on procedures for processing absentee ballot applications — as a result, elections officials including town clerks with jails in their town thought that the law of who was eligible/not eligible had changed. In short, elections officials, office-holders, and others who are responsible for ensuring full participation do not know that there are eligible voters incarcerated, and as a result we have failed to implement systems to ensure incarcerated people can cast counted ballots.
  • Jail-Based Disenfranchisement extends far beyond jail walls — eligible voters who have returned to community often do not participate because they believe they lost the right to vote permanently while incarcerated. That is why provisions of H. 836 and S. 474 that make jails and houses of corrections automatic voter registration agencies, and that require returning citizens be notified of their voting rights, are so critical. But as we know, voting is a habit: the best way to ensure eligible voters participate when they return to community is to ensure they participate while incarcerated in the first place.

The list of problems that encompass jail-based disenfranchisement goes on. It is a systemic issue that requires a systemic solution, and one that is best understood by those who have been disenfranchised, including members of the Democracy Behind Bars Coalition who drafted and support the Jail-Based Voting Bill. We respectfully urge the Joint Committee on Election Laws to thoughtfully review the provisions of the Jail-Based Voting Bill (H. 836 and S. 474) in addition to those strong steps forward in the VOTES Act. 

We fully support the provisions of the VOTES Act, especially those like same day registration that research shows both bolsters participation and helps reduce political inequality. We note, however, that those critical provisions of the VOTES Act which were in place as temporary measures for the 2020 elections did not help incarcerated voters who were de-facto disenfranchised from exercising their voting rights. Now is a moment to not only make permanent those reforms that helped voters on the outside participate safely, but to identify and dismantle those barriers that keep disproportionately Black and POC incarcerated voters from participating at all. We support the jail-based voting provisions that are included in the VOTES Act, and we urge the committee to consider these provisions not in isolation, but along with legislation crafted and supported by directly-impacted communities in Massachusetts like S. 474 and H. 836.

Last, as this committee considers critical issues of democracy, voter access, and racial equity in our voting systems, we also urge you to think about the impact that our current system of felony disenfranchisement has on our democratic system. Although people who are incarcerated on misdemeanors, those who are civilly committed, and those who are awaiting trial retain their voting rights, thousands of people who are serving state prison sentences, also disproportionately Black people and people of color, do not have access to the ballot. They were stripped of their voting rights in 2001. Through felony disenfranchisement, combined with targeted policing and criminalization, we perpetuate racial inequity and our continued failure to reinstate voting rights for incarcerated people reinscribes these inequities each legislative session.The right to vote is fundamental and the Commonwealth must return to universal enfranchisement.

We hope the committee sends strong ballot-access language out of committee.

Signed,

The African American Coalition Committee (AACC)

The Democracy Behind Bars Coalition, including: 

Criminal Justice Police Coalition (CJPC)

Decarcerate Western Massachusetts

Families for Justice as Healing

Kathleen Talbot, Holyoke Organizer for Neighbor to Neighbor 

Emancipation Initiative

The F8 Foundation

The Massachusetts Voter Table

Massachusetts Prisoners and Organizers Working for Enfranchisement and Restoration (Mass POWER)

MOCHA Springfield (Men of Color Health Awareness)

The National Council for Incarcerated & Formerly Incarcerated Women & Girls

Prisoners’ Legal Services of Massachusetts

Progressive Massachusetts

The Sentencing Project

Dignity Should Not Be a District-by-District Decision (Redux)

Not Your Mascot

The following testimony was submitted to the Joint Committee on Education on May 20, 2021, adapted from earlier testimony submitted the prior session on June 25, 2019.

Chairman Lewis, Chairwoman Peisch, and members of the Joint Education Committee: 

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the chair of the Issues Committee of Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide grassroots advocacy organization fighting for progressive policy. 

One of the planks in our organization’s platform is an “All means all” agenda of racial and social justice. That means ensuring that underrepresented communities are treated with dignity and respect. 

The reduction of Native American identity to “mascot” status is the opposite of that. We would like to go on record in support of Bill S.294/H.581 (An Act Prohibiting the Use of Native American Mascots by Public Schools in the Commonwealth). 

Such mascots have serious social and emotional consequences for Native American youth, including lower self-esteem and more hostile school climates. For non-Native people, they promote a false understanding of Native Americans and culturally insensitive behaviors and stereotypes. 

Whether or not someone’s dignity and rights are respected should not be a factor of which school they attend or in which city or town they live. This is a state matter. 

The National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) has been fighting to eliminate Native American mascots since the 1960s. Here in Massachusetts, the Chappaquiddick Tribe of the Wampanoag Nation, Herring Pond Wampanoag Tribe, Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe, and Nipmuc Nation have all called for the elimination of such mascots, and they are joined nationally by such organizations as the National Education Association, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, the American Psychological Association, the American Anthropological Association, and the National Collegiate Athletic Association.

It’s time we listen. 

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Chair, Issues Committee

Progressive Massachusetts

We Need to Strengthen Democracy Here at Home in MA.

VOTE buttons

The following testimony was submitted to the Joint Committee of Election Laws in support of the VOTES Act.

Wednesday, May 19, 2021

Chairman Finegold, Chairman Ryan, and Members of the Joint Committee on Election Laws:

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the chair of the Issues Committee of Progressive Massachusetts. Progressive Massachusetts is a statewide grassroots advocacy organization that fights for shared prosperity, racial and social justice, good government and strong democracy, and sustainable infrastructure and environmental protection.

Last year, the Legislature provided voters with greater options for how to cast their ballot. We had more days available to vote early and an expanded possibility to vote by mail. It worked, it was popular, and it shouldn’t become a one-off due to COVID-19. 

We need to make the electoral reforms from last year permanent as well as to build on them in order to make Massachusetts a leader in voting rights. I urge you to give a favorable report to the VOTES Act (S.459 / H.805), filed by Sen. Cindy Creem and Rep. John Lawn, which would make that happen. 

The VOTES Act is a critical and comprehensive package of election reforms that will make our democracy more equitable, accessible, and secure. It includes the popular and successful reforms from last year, such as expanded early voting and vote-by-mail, as well as time-tested reforms like Same Day Registration, which would allow citizens to update their registration or register anew when they go to vote—something 20 states already allow. The VOTES Act, importantly, has reforms geared towards equity, like those aimed at ensuring eligible incarcerated citizens can actually vote, as well as election security, such as risk-limiting audits.

We would like to underscore the importance of Same Day Registration as a part of this package. In Massachusetts elections, an unnecessary and arbitrary 20-day registration cutoff disenfranchises more than 100,000 voters from participating in our elections. Given that the average American moves more than 11 times over the course of their lives, moving near Election Day could lead to disenfranchisement under the current system. Likewise, given the stress of work, family, and myriad other commitments, many voters may first start to learn about an election after the registration window has already passed. Indeed, this is the period when media coverage of elections—and thus voter information—is the strongest. But when voters seek to update their registration or register anew, they are shut out of the process.

When there are errors in voters’ registration, they are typically asked to fill out a provisional ballot. Provisional ballots are cumbersome for election workers and leave voters feeling as though their votes didn’t count. And our first experiences at the polls–indeed, all of our experiences at the polls–have an impact on our voting habits throughout our lives.

Our neighboring states of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Connecticut have already realized the problems with such a cutoff and adopted Election Day Registration (EDR). Maine has had EDR since the 1970s, and New Hampshire since the 1990s. EDR creates more positive experiences at the polls and, indeed, higher turnout, with studies showing an increase in turnout of approximately 5 percent. That is what a strong democracy looks like.

We would also urge the Legislature to go beyond the provisions in the VOTES Act to fully guarantee the right to vote for eligible incarcerated voters. Individuals serving misdemeanor convictions or incarcerated pre-trial maintain the right to vote but suffer from de facto disenfranchisement due to the myriad barriers they face in exercising that right. Although the Jail-Based Voting Bill (S.474 / H. 836) is not on the agenda for today’s hearing, its comprehensive measures to address this issue are essential and should be included in an omnibus voting reform package.

Over the past few months, we have seen a growing number of states unfortunately take unfounded steps to restrict voter access. In a time when democracy is increasingly under threat, we need to show our commitment to a robust democracy—and positive voting experience for all—here in Massachusetts. 

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Chair, Issues Committee

Progressive Massachusetts

“It is far past time for us to stop shortchanging our students.” (Redux)

Graduation cap on a stack of books

The following testimony was originally submitted to the Joint Committee on Higher Education on April 30, 2019. Since neither bill passed the Legislature in the 2019-2020 session, the testimony was updated for new bill numbers and resubmitted on May 18, 2021.

Tuesday, May 18, 2021

Chairwoman Gobi, Chairman Rogers, and Members of the Joint Committee on Higher Education,

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the chair of the Issues Committee of Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide multi-issue grassroots organization committed to fighting for social justice and progressive policy. Since our founding, treating education as a public good and funding it as such has been central to our mission.

As such, we strongly support S.829 / H.1339, An Act to guarantee debt-free public higher education, and S.824 / H.1325, An Act committing to higher education the resources to Insure a strong and healthy public higher education system (or CHERISH), and urge you to report them out favorably.

Since 2001, Massachusetts has cut funding for public higher education by 14 percent. However, at the same time that our state was retrenching from investing in our future, enrollment was going up. As a result, per student funding has fallen by 32 percent, almost a third.

When the state pulls back, the cost burden falls onto students. Massachusetts saw some of the highest tuition and fee increases in the country from 2001 to 2016, particularly during the recession. The share of costs borne by students and their families doubled, putting a degree out of reach for more and more students, especially those of disadvantaged backgrounds.

Today, the average graduate from our state universities and the UMass system leaves with over $30,000 in student debt—the tenth highest in the country. The average debt for graduates of public, four-year postsecondary schools grew faster in Massachusetts than in all but one other state from 2004 to 2016.

A postsecondary degree provides a proven premium in lifetime wages for graduates and countless other opportunities. Cost should not be a barrier. By preventing young people from living independently, buying a home, or pursuing their career of choice, college debt is a drag on our economy. Even when students drop out due to cost, they can be saddled with debt for years after.

It is far past time for us to stop shortchanging our students. Investing more in public higher education, as the CHERISH Act would require, and making public higher education debt-free would benefit not only students. When financial concerns are no longer a hindrance for people seeking to realize their full potential, we all benefit.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Chair, Issues Committee

Progressive Massachusetts

“The time is right for Massachusetts to end felony disenfranchisement.”

Prison

Testimony in Support of S.18 and H.74

Legislative Amendment to the Constitution Relative to Voting Rights

Joint Committee on Election Laws

April 26, 2020

Dear Chairman Finegold, Chairman Ryan, and members of the Election Laws Committee, 

We, the Democracy Behind Bars Coalition, are writing in support of S. 18 sponsored by Senator Adam Hinds and H. 74 sponsored by Representative Mindy Domb. We believe it is time to take the first step to restore voting rights to people incarcerated for felony convictions. Therefore we urge you to send S. 18 and H. 74 out of committee with a favorable review to create a path for voting rights to be restored through legislative amendment or ballot initiative.

In Massachusetts, we strip incarcerated citizens of the ability to exercise their political voice even though they are our most governed population. This happens through de jure disenfranchisement for those serving felony convictions, and de facto disenfranchisement for those held pre-trial or on misdemeanor convictions, as even eligible voters behind bars have virtually no access to a ballot. These systems systematically revoke political power from hyper-policed Black communities and communities of color. We, the Democracy Behind Bars Coalition, are working to end both de facto and de jure disenfranchisement, but we write today specifically in support of S. 18 and H. 74 to end the de jure disenfranchisement of those serving felony convictions. 

As you will read in testimony submitted today by currently and formerly incarcerated leaders of our coalition, maintaining the right to vote is critical to protect the dignity, wellbeing, and fundamental humanity of incarcerated people. Stripping people serving felony convictions of their right to vote serves no restorative or rehabilitative function, and it has no deterrent effect on crime. It distorts democratic outcomes and maintains mass incarceration. Felony disenfranchisement and jail-based disenfranchisement are certainly not the only culprits – redressing these issues alone will not solve mass incarceration or political inequality – but they are direct holdovers from slavery, Jim Crow, and voter suppression practices that target Black voters and voters of color, skew representation and public policy outcomes, and have no place in a racially equitable democracy. 

The time is right for Massachusetts to end felony disenfranchisement. 

In Massachusetts, individuals serving sentences on felony convictions lost the right to vote twenty years ago as a result of a ballot initiative and constitutional amendment put forth by the acting Governor Cellucci. It was a punitive measure in response to civic engagement initiatives by incarcerated individuals in the Norfolk Prison. This is a dark stain on Massachusetts’ history that took place at a moment when some states were beginning to move in the opposite direction and liberalize voting rights for the formerly incarcerated and ‘tough on crime’ was beginning to pivot to ‘smart on crime.’ 

Twenty years later, it is time to restore the right to vote to all incarcerated Bay Staters. Especially in a moment when voting rights and democracy itself are under attack, it is critical that we in Massachusetts actively and unapologetically work to protect our democracy – especially the political voice of our Black communities and communities of color who have systematically been the target of hyper-policing, mass incarceration, voter suppression attempts, and gerrymandering. 

As a coalition advocating to end the disenfranchisement of eligible incarcerated voters (those serving misdemeanors and imprisoned pre-trial) and to bolster the political power of returning citizens, we know all too well that felony disenfranchisement has effects that extend far beyond whether those serving felony convictions can vote. Eligible voters behind the wall and returned citizens in community frequently do not vote specifically because of confusion about the extent and duration of disenfranchisement within the criminal legal system. 

Now is the time to end the disenfranchisement of those behind the wall in Massachusetts. We must undo the punitive and harmful measure passed 20 years ago, and rejoin Vermont, Maine, and Washington DC in recognizing that the right to vote should never be taken away. 

We would like to thank Senator Adam Hinds and Representative Mindy Domb for their leadership on this critical legislation. 

Thank you for your consideration, and we hope to continue working with you to protect access to the ballot for all people in the Commonwealth. 

The Democracy Behind Bars Coalition, which includes:

The African American Coalition Committee (AACC)

The ACLU of Massachusetts

Common Cause Massachusetts

Decarcerate Western Massachusetts

Emancipation Initiative

Families for Justice as Healing

Healing Our Land, Inc. 

The National Council for Incarcerated & Formerly Incarcerated Women & Girls

The Massachusetts Voter Table

MassPOWER
Mass Political Cooperative

MOCHA

Progressive Massachusetts

Prisoners Legal Services

Will Any True Reform Have Taken Place?

Dear Conference Committee Members,


I am writing today as the chair of the Issues Committee and Secretary of the Board of Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide grassroots progressive advocacy

We urge you to the inclusion of the following provisions in a final bill, We would specifically note that without strengthening the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act and limiting qualified immunity, most other reforms in the bill will fail to deliver on their promise. If our legal system continues to allow police officers to violate the basic constitutional rights of Massachusetts residents, especially those who are Black or Brown, with impunity, then little if any “reform” will have taken place.

From the SENATE Bill:

(1) Section 10, which enables victims of police abuse to seek redress in the courts

(2) Sections 34-40, which require transparency and public decision-making about local police acquisition of military equipment such as tanks, grenade launchers, and armored vehicles

(3) Section 37, which establishes a Justice Workforce Reinvestment Fund

(4) Section 49, which prohibits schools from transmitting to law enforcement personal information about students or their family members

(5) Section 50, which permits school superintendents to determine whether or not police should be assigned to local schools.

(6) Section 52, which bans racial and other profiling, requires data collection for all stops, frisks, and searches with, analysis, reporting, and accountability if the data demonstrates profiling

(7) Sections 59-61, which clarify that individuals petitioning for expungement may do so for more than one record and creates a limited, rather than indefinite, lookback period for expungement eligibility.

(8) Language in Section 55 – 2(f) that requires police to plan for de-escalation in advance of protests or gatherings

From the HOUSE bill:

(1) Section 2, which clarifies that law enforcement misconduct records are public records

(2) Section 25, which restricts government use of facial surveillance

(3) Section 78, which establishes reasonable safeguards around the use of no-knock warrants

(4) The definition of “choke hold” in Section 29

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Chair, Issues Committee

Secretary, Board

Progressive Massachusetts

Housing Stability Is an Essential Part of the Cure for COVID

The following testimony was submitted to the Joint Committee on Housing.

Thank you chairs and members of the committee for reading our testimony.

As municipal leaders scramble desperately to find solutions to the onslaught of evictions they know are headed their way, the people must turn to the state legislature to quell the oncoming tsunami of homelessness that will destroy families and traumatize children if the state legislature does not act.

We urge you to pass S2831/H.4878 in order to end the threat of evictions posed by the sudden end of the current eviction moratorium in October. If families are required to pay back rent for almost half a year, there is no way those living paycheck to paycheck will be able to stay in their homes. If we don’t provide a solution to this problem, we will have a catastrophe unlike any we have confronted before, as families are turned out of their homes en masse.

Please vote yes to allow a year long moratorium on evictions to give families the time they need to get back on their feet and forgive them their back rent since living paycheck to paycheck will not allow them the ability to accumulate the savings they will need to pay their back rent. There is no perfect solution to the housing emergency that confronts us, but this bill is the best solution to a difficult problem. It ensures housing stability for renters while also providing funds for smaller landlords who are also victims of the pandemic economy.

If you pass this into law, it would say a lot about who we are as a state and as human beings. Please show the compassion and responsibility to our citizens that we want to see in other states. You have an opportunity to show leadership to the entire country. Please pass S2831/H.4878.

Thank you,

Caroline Bays

Board President, Progressive Massachusetts

No Worker Should Have to Choose Between Their Job and Their Health

Wednesday, May 26, 2020

Chairwoman Jehlen, Chairman Hay, and Members of the Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development: 

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the chair of the Issues Committee of Progressive Massachusetts. Our organization and our 16 chapters around the state advocate for shared prosperity, racial and social justice, robust democracy, and environmental sustainability. 

We are writing today to urge you to give a favorable report to SD.2918/HD.5039: An Act relative to emergency paid sick time

Our top priority over the past two months has been to ensure that the Commonwealth’s response to COVID-19 is equitable and leaves no one behind. A guiding principle of an equitable response is that no worker should be forced to choose between their health and their livelihood. 

There are clear income and class divides in who has access to robust benefits at work and who has the ability to work from home. Healthcare and long-term care workers, janitorial workers, food service workers, child care workers, and many gig workers do not have the luxury to work from home as many in the finance, tech, and media sectors (among other industries) do. And they are also the essential workers that have kept society running over the past few months and have always done so. By having to show up in work in person, they have had to put themselves at risk, or face the risk of greater economic insecurity — an untenable dilemma. 

As our state embarks on a premature, phased-in “reopening,” it is important that we have in place the health and safety measures to prevent a second surge. That requires filling the gaps in paid sick leave legislation so that no worker who is sick (or has a sick loved one) feels compelled to go into work in order to make ends meet. 

Massachusetts’s landmark 2014 earned sick time law does not provide enough hours to meet the scale of the crisis, and the federal Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) has big coverage gaps that leave millions of front-line workers without paid sick time.

Emergency paid sick time legislation would provide ten additional work-days (80 hours) of job-protected paid sick time for immediate use during the COVID-19 outbreak for all workers not covered by recently passed federal legislation. It would be available, with no waiting period, for a worker to care for themselves or a family member, domestic partner, or household member if they or said love one is diagnosed with COVID-19, experiencing COVID-19 symptoms and awaiting a diagnosis, quarantined or self-quarantined, or reasonably believes their health is at risk.

This crisis has shown clearly that the health of each one of us is connected (the mantra of public health professionals for decades). And to have a sound public health response, we need people to stay home if they are sick — and to be able to afford to do so. 

Sincerely, 

Jonathan Cohn

Chair, Issues Committee

Progressive Massachusetts