Voting Rights Advocates Applaud Emergency Election Legislation; Call for Additional Actions

VOTE

Common Cause Massachusetts, MassVOTE, the ACLU of Massachusetts, the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts, Progressive Massachusetts, and the Massachusetts Voter Table today praised emergency legislation allowing municipalities to delay their spring elections until June, and expanding absentee and early voting by mail, among other reforms.

The bill, S. 2608, was passed yesterday and is expected to be signed by Governor Charles Baker imminently.

“Yesterday’s bill is a strong first step. However, there is no guarantee that the coronavirus crisis will have receded by September 1, when Massachusetts state primaries are scheduled, or even for the November elections,” the groups said. “The Election Modernization Coalition urges the Legislature to recognize that this crisis is of indeterminate length, and that we must also act quickly to ensure that the fall’s elections take place as scheduled, maximize participation, and maintain public health. To that end, the Legislature must protect the ability of all eligible voters to cast ballots from home in all elections, and ensure that in-person voting is as safe and participatory as possible.”

The full statement is below.

Voting Rights Advocates Applaud Emergency Election Legislation

The unprecedented outbreak of coronavirus has required Massachusetts officials to respond to many urgent issues surrounding public health, the economy, and more. Yesterday, the Legislature stepped up to the plate to address one of these core issues: protecting the integrity of Massachusetts’ spring elections in this time of a global pandemic.

On Monday, the Legislature passed and today Governor Baker is expected to sign into law an emergency bill that will allow more voters to participate in our elections from the safety of their own home by expanding absentee and early voting by mail in the Commonwealth. The bill also allows cities and towns to postpone spring elections, some of which would have begun next week, until June. Related legislation postpones four state legislative special elections until May and June.

This delay is critical to enable all eligible voters to participate in our democratic process.  It will allow election officials to prepare for a surge in mail ballots.

We also applaud the legislature’s reduction of the voter registration black-out window. Massachusetts law currently requires voters to register or update their registration 20 days in advance of an election, after which eligible voters are unable to register or adjust their registration. The bill cuts that deadline down to 10 days for elections this spring.

Yesterday’s bill is a strong first step. However, there is no guarantee that the coronavirus crisis will have ended by September 1, when Massachusetts state primaries are scheduled, or even by the November elections. The Election Modernization Coalition urges the Legislature to recognize that this crisis is of indeterminate length, and make preparations for the fall elections well in advance. In order to ensure that the fall elections take place as scheduled while maintaining public health and public participation, the legislature should act to expand absentee balloting rules to allow all eligible voters to cast ballots from home, and ensure that in-person voting is as safe and participatory as possible. Expanded absentee voting should include sending ballots to all voters, re-paid postage for responses, and counting ballots postmarked on Election Day. Necessary in-person voting reforms include expanding in-person early voting windows and implementing procedures that create social distancing such as drive-in voting.

The Legislature should also build on the precedent that was set by yesterday’s legislation and  reduce the voter registration cutoff for all elections, not just for this spring’s. Election Day voter registration, already law and working well in 21 states, is the gold-standard reform and should be adopted here in Massachusetts.

Pam Wilmot, Common Cause Massachusetts
Rahsaan Hall, ACLU of Massachusetts
Janet Domenitz, MASSPIRG,
Cheryl Clyburn Crawford, MassVOTE
Beth Huang, Massachusetts Voter Table
Jonathan Cohn, Progressive Massachusetts
Patricia Comfort, League of Women Voters of Massachusetts

We Cannot Achieve Shared Prosperity Under Water

Climate underwater

The following testimony was submitted to the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities, and Energy on Tuesday, January 14, 2020.

Chairman Barrett, Chairman Golden, and Members of the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities, and Energy:

 I, Jonathan Cohn, Co-Chair of the Issues Committee of Progressive Massachusetts, am pleased to offer this testimony on behalf of Progressive Massachusetts. Progressive Massachusetts is a multi-issue, grassroots, member-based advocacy organization committed to an agenda of shared prosperity, racial and social justice, good governance and strong democracy, and sustainable infrastructure and environmental protection.

Progressive Massachusetts would like to go on the record IN SUPPORT of bills H.2810.

As a coastal state, Massachusetts is especially vulnerable to climate change. To put it bluntly, we cannot achieve shared prosperity under water.

More than a decade ago, the Global Warming Solutions Act was signed into law, committing the state to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 25% below the 1990 baseline in 2020 and by at least 80% in 2050. However, as advocates have often pointed out, and the Supreme Judicial Court ruled recently, Massachusetts is not on track to meet its own goals.

After President Trump moved to pull the United States out of the Paris Agreement, elected officials from both parties in Massachusetts condemned this misguided move and said that Massachusetts would continue to push forward with climate mitigation. But we need more than just rhetoric. We need concrete policies that enable us to realize and build upon our current commitments.

H.2810 is such a policy. A 2014 study prepared for the Department of Natural Resources found putting a price on carbon in a scheme akin to that of this bill “would reduce state GHG emissions to a larger degree than most other Massachusetts programs that currently operate for this purpose.”[1] Indeed, it could reduce economy-wide emissions by 5-10%, with much of this reduction coming from the transportation sector.

The environmental benefits of such a pricing scheme are not limited to climate mitigation. The reduction in air pollution resulting from the price incentive could save over 300 lives over the next twenty years.[2]

We are pleased that H.2810 takes important steps to counteract any potential regressive economic effects of a carbon pricing scheme, making sure that low-income residents are not bearing the burden of climate mitigation. We also underscore the importance of the bill’s allocation of 20% of collected funds for a new Green Infrastructure Fund that would facilitate the decarbonization of the transportation sector and increase investments in renewable energy, energy efficiency, and climate resilience. Getting the price right is just the first step in the critical task of mitigating climate change.

The situation at the federal level for climate policy ambitious enough to meet the challenges before us is grim. It has thus become increasingly important for states like Massachusetts to redouble their commitments. We must do so to avoid regression, and we must do so to provide models for national policies as our state so often has.

Please Give a Favorable Report to H.2810.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Chair, Issues Committee

Progressive Massachusetts

[1] www.mass.gov/eea/docs/doer/fuels/mass-carbon-tax-study.pdf

[2] https://climate-xchange.org/public-health-study/

We Need to Use Every Tool in the Toolbox

The following testimony was submitted to the Joint Committee on Housing on Tuesday, January 14, 2020.

Chairman Crighton, Chairman Honan, and Members of the Joint Committee on Housing:

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the chair of the Issues Committee of Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide grassroots advocacy group committed to fighting for an equitable, just, democratic, and sustainable Commonwealth.

It is because of those values that we write today in support of H.3924 (An Act enabling local options for tenant protections) and S.773 (An Act supporting affordable housing with a local option for a fee to be applied to certain real estate transactions).

Massachusetts has a lot to offer, but that does little if people can’t afford to live here. The US News & World Report’s annual state rankings put Massachusetts at #41 in housing affordability (and #43 in cost of living).[1] A worker earning minimum wage in Massachusetts would have to work 91 hours a week to afford a modest one-bedroom rental home at market rate (and 113 hours for a modest two-bedroom).[2] Monthly median rents have gone up by more than one-third since 2010, outpacing income growth.[3]

Clearly, Massachusetts has an affordable housing crisis. This is unsustainable. It has led to expanding economic inequality, increased homelessness, and damage to our economy, as talented workers often leave the state for less expensive regions.

Solving this affordable housing crisis will require us to use every tool in the toolbox.

That requires zoning reform that encourages the creation of walkable, sustainable, and inclusive communities.

But it also requires public investment. Over the last ten years, the need for affordable housing has increased, while funds for affordable housing have decreased at both federal and state levels.

And it requires strengthening tenant protections that ensure that communities can remain affordable, inclusive, and stable.

However, municipalities across Massachusetts are blocked from taking the necessary steps to address the housing crisis. The misguided statewide ban on rent stabilization policies and a stringent home rule system that prevents municipalities from passing their own laws to govern the basic aspects of civil affairs hamstring municipalities.

H.3924 provides the appropriate redress. It repeals the outdated and misguided statewide ban on rent stabilization policies and enables cities and towns to pass policies aimed to regulate rents, limit condo conversions, prevent landlords from evicting tenants without just cause (e.g., failure to pay rent, illegal activity), require landlords to inform tenants of their rights, and take other steps to protect tenants and ensure long-term affordability.

S.773 also removes barriers that cities and towns face in addressing the housing crisis. It would enable cities and towns to raise additional revenue for affordable housing by levying a small fee on real estate transactions (with the ability to establish exemptions as appropriate in each municipality).

There is no silver bullet to solving our affordable housing crisis. But if we are to have a chance at solving it, we must empower municipalities to take action. We thus encourage you to give a favorable report to H.3924 and S.773.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Chair, Issues Committee

Progressive Massachusetts  

[1] https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings/opportunity/affordability

[2] http://nlihc.org/oor/massachusetts

[3] https://www.zillow.com/ma/home-values/

“A security that disenfranchises is no security at all.”

VOTE

Wednesday, October 2, 2019

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

I’m writing on behalf of Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide member-driven advocacy organization committed to advancing progressive policy in our state. Since our founding, good government and strong democracy have been an essential part of our mission.  

As the 2020 election approaches, we need to be thinking about how we can best improve the security of our elections and the participation in our elections. Too often, security and participation are pitted against each other, and a security that disenfranchises is no security at all.  

Post-Election Audits 

Risk-limiting audits are an essential way to confirm the accuracy of elections and boost voter faith in the democratic process. The post-election audits that were created by the 2015 election modernization bill are limited to the presidential general election and rely on a sample of just 3% of total ballots, without confirming whether or not the election result is correct. Risk-limiting audits, by contrast, ensure that the reported winners of elections are the actual winners and can catch problems resulting from foreign interference, technological glitches, or simple human error.

We urge you to give a favorable report to S. 388, H. 687, H. 721, and H. 694. The first three bills would enact risk-limiting post-election audits, the gold standard reform. H. 694 strengthens the current system by applying the current 3% audit to presidential primaries and state general elections. 

Language Access

Language should not be a barrier to participation in our democracy. Accordingly, we also urge a favorable report to H.690 (An Act concerning certain ballots). This bill would require the full translation of all ballots, including transliteration of candidates’ names in languages that do not use the Roman alphabet. This particularly impacts limited English proficient Chinese and Cambodian voters.  

Transliteration affirms the right to a secret ballot, ensuring that all voters are able to mark their ballot for their intended candidates independently. This is a clear win-win for security and participation.  

Early Voting

Early voting, which was authorized by the 2015 election modernization bill, was a success. However, it was limited to state and federal elections. The City of Boston has a home rule petition to expand early voting to city elections, and we urge a favorable report to this petition, H. 3859. Due to work, school, or familial engagements, many people are unable to find the time to go to the polls on Election Day. Expanding early voting ensures that scheduling conflicts are not a barrier to participation and reduces any confusion people might have about which elections offer early voting.  

Our democracy is our most cherished institution, and we need to strengthen it.

Sincerely,

 Jonathan Cohn

Chair, Issues Committee

Driver’s Licenses: An Equity Issue and a Public Safety Issue

Chairman Boncore, Chairman Straus, and members of the Joint Committee on Transportation, my name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am pleased to offer testimony. Progressive Massachusetts would like to go on record in support of S.2061 / H.3012: An Act relative to work and family mobility.

The Work and Family Mobility Act would enable all qualified state residents to apply for a standard Massachusetts driver’s license, regardless of immigration status, to increase road and public safety and allow for greater mobility across our Commonwealth.  

Immigrants are a core part of the fabric of our community, but regressive laws still on the books hinder their ability to fully participate. Notably, our state still prevents undocumented residents from obtaining driver’s licenses, hindering their ability to work and to engage in the community. 

This is bad for our economy and bad for public safety. In 2016, undocumented immigrants contributed $8.8 billion to the Massachusetts economy, and not being able to obtain a driver’s license prevents their full participation in the economy, especially as our underfunded public transit system too often provides irregular hours and insufficient reach.

Moreover, this situation is bad for public safety. All drivers on the road should have the appropriate training that comes with a license: that makes everyone — fellow drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians — safer. 

But a true definition of public safety is much broader. In the first two years of the Trump administration, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests of people with no criminal convictions more than tripled, fueled by a fivefold increase in arrests of immigrants who’ve been charged with an offense but not yet convicted. The most common charges are traffic offenses. Massachusetts can and should reduce our complicity with a federal immigration agenda out of step with our values and priorities as a Commonwealth. 

Other states have realized that changing the law so that immigration status is no longer a barrier to obtaining a license is common-sense policy. Fourteen states have already passed such laws, including our neighbors in New York, Connecticut, and Vermont. It’s past time that we do too. We urge a prompt favorable report for S.2061 / H.3012: An Act relative to work and family mobility.

Sincerely, 

Jonathan Cohn

Chair, Issues Committee

Progressive Massachusetts