This Bill Can Help Us Wean Our State off Plastics

plastic bag trash

Thursday, June 15, 2023

Chair Rausch, Chair Cahill, and members of the Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources:

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I’m the policy director of Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide, member-based grassroots advocacy organization fighting for a more equitable, just, sustainable, and democratic Commonwealth. 

We urge you to give a favorable report to H.882/S.570: An Act to reduce plastics (The Plastics Reduction Act), filed by Rep. Ted Philips and Sen. Becca Rausch. 

Many of us are familiar with the mantra “reduce, reuse, recycle.” We too often focus on the third command and ignore the first. Indeed, when it comes to plastics, a focus on reduction is vital, not simply because “reduce” should always be the first part of the hierarchy, but because plastics recycling lacks the success of paper (especially cardboard) and metal recycling, where clear markets for repurposing materials exist. Many plastic items put into recycling bins end up in landfills because of such a lack. I personally own a number of shirts that are made from polyester from recycled plastic, but that is a niche market. Melting down and recomposing plastic is expensive, and plastic degrades each time it is used. 

Moreover, as plastic is a petroleum-based product, we need to wean ourselves off it—and do so quickly—if we are to meet climate goals. Fossil fuels need to be left in the ground, not dug up to be turned into products that end up buried under the ground in landfills. 

These bills take a comprehensive approach. They would enact a statewide plastic bag ban: more than two-thirds of our state’s population live in municipalities where such a ban already exists, and we are the only Northeastern state other than New Hampshire not to have passed a statewide law yet.  To ensure that people in environmental justice communities who already bear the burden of pollution do not face undue burden from a new fee on paper bags, the bill would create a fund to cover the costs of reusable bags in such communities. The bill would limit disposable food service packaging (bowls, plates, cuts, cartons, straws, etc.) to biodegradable or compostable products; limit the sale and public purchasing of smaller plastic water bottles; and take other important steps.

When we keep our parks, streets, and rivers clean; reduce the trash that goes into landfills that leak methane and pollute groundwater; and leave fossil fuels in the ground, we all benefit.
 

Sincerely, 

Jonathan Cohn

Policy Director

Progressive Massachusetts 

The Solution to Homelessness Is Homes, Not Criminalization.

Home

Tuesday, June 13, 2023

Chair Kennedy, Chair Livingstone, and Members of the Joint Committee on Children, Families, and Persons with Disabilities:

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I’m the policy director of Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide, member-based grassroots advocacy organization fighting for a more equitable, just, sustainable, and democratic Commonwealth. 

We urge you to give a favorable report to H.211/S.1112: An Act establishing a bill of rights for individuals experiencing homelessness, filed by Representatives Smitty Pignatelli and Frank Moran and Sen. Becca Rausch.

The solution to homelessness is clear: giving people homes. But too often, municipalities see the solution as criminalization and punishment instead, worsening the underlying problems and forcing individuals into vicious cycles of incarceration and housing instability.

As rents and housing prices skyrocket in Massachusetts, an increasing number of families face housing instability, experiencing short-term or long-term homelessness. According to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, 18,471 people in Massachusetts were counted as homeless in January 2019, more than two-thirds of that population consisting of families with children.

We desperately need comprehensive action to address our housing crisis and to secure housing for those currently without it. However, we also need to ensure that misguided and archaic laws do not make it more difficult for individuals to obtain housing.

These bills would rectify this status quo by extending anti-discrimination protections to persons experiencing homelessness, including protections when seeking employment, housing, voter registration, and access to public spaces and places of public accommodation. They would also ensure that individuals experiencing homelessness are not being criminalized for existing in public space, protecting their right to rest, seek shelter from the elements, occupy a legally parked car, pray, eat, and avoid needless harassment in public spaces.

H.211 and S.1112 are essential to ensuring Massachusetts is a state that treats all residents with dignity and respect, and we urge you to give it your support.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Policy Director

Progressive Massachusetts

Everyone Needs ID. Here’s Why, and Here’s What the Legislature Can Do.

Photo ID card

Tuesday, June 13, 2023

Chair Crighton, Chair Straus, and Members of the Joint Committee on Transportation:

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I’m the policy director of Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide, member-based grassroots advocacy organization fighting for a more equitable, just, sustainable, and democratic Commonwealth. 

We urge you to give a favorable report to H.3388, H.3360, and S.2251: An Act to provide identification to youth and adults experiencing homelessness (the Everyone Needs ID bill), filed respectively by Rep. Jim O’Day, Rep. Kay Khan, and Sen. Robyn Kennedy.

Individuals experiencing homelessness face significant obstacles to obtaining an ID, but IDs can often be essential to securing employment and even accomplishing everyday life tasks. Without an ID, it can be difficult, if not outright impossible, to apply for jobs, enroll in education programs, get a library card, pick up a package from the post office, receive a prescription from a pharmacy, and more. So many of us take such tasks for granted, but for individuals experiencing homelessness, they become complicated endeavors and roadblocks on the path toward stability.

The aforementioned bills offer a solution by requiring the Registry of Motor Vehicles to waive the $25 fee for an ID for people experiencing homelessness and by allowing applicants to support alternative documentation to prove Massachusetts residency, such as allowing individuals to provide evidence of receiving services from a state agency under the Executive Office of Health and Human Services.

Massachusetts must take comprehensive addition to ensure housing for all; however, in the interim, we must ensure that our policies are not exacerbating the obstacles faced by individuals experiencing homelessness. We urge you to make a difference this session by advancing these bills.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Policy Director

Progressive Massachusetts

MA Doesn’t Need New Tax Giveaways for the Rich

Tuesday, June 6, 2023

Chair Moran, Chair Cusack, and Members of the Joint Committee on Revenue:

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I’m the policy director of Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide, member-based grassroots advocacy organization fighting for a more equitable, just, sustainable, and democratic Commonwealth.

We urge you to give a favorable report to H.2964/S.1801: An Act to reform the charitable deduction, filed by Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven and Sen. Jamie Eldridge.

Legislative leaders have been talking about the importance of “progressive” tax reform. If we want to build on steps toward a more progressive tax code, such as last year’s passage of the Fair Share Amendment, one place worth attention is the charitable deduction, which recently took effect.

The charitable deduction will reduce state revenue by approximately $300 million annually, with disproportionate benefits to the richest residents of the Commonwealth. According to a 2020 analysis from the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center, tax filers with more than $1 million in income would receive a benefit of almost $10,000 on average (amounting to more than half of the total benefits from the deduction). Those with income under $50,000 would receive just $7 on average (amounting to just 4% of the total benefits from the deduction).

This bill would address such disparities by limiting the charitable deduction to individuals who don’t also get such a deduction on their federal taxes: in other words, it would limit the deduction to low- and middle-income residents.

Voters were clear last year that they want to see a more progressive tax code and greater investments in our Commonwealth. Especially with the possibility of a recession in the near term, as well as a federal retrenchment from key social programs, now is not the time to be protecting tax cuts to the richest residents of the Commonwealth and eliminate a new “double dip” deduction.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Policy Director

Progressive Massachusetts

Ensuring Birthing Justice in the Commonwealth

Tuesday, June 6, 2023

Chair Cyr, Chair Decker, and members of the Joint Committee on Public Health:

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I’m the policy director of Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide, member-based grassroots advocacy organization fighting for a more equitable, just, sustainable, and democratic Commonwealth. 

We urge you to give a favorable report to S.1415, An Act relative to birthing justice in the Commonwealth, and H.2209/S.1457, An Act promoting access to midwifery care and out-of-hospital birth options.

Since the Dobbs decision last year, nearly 20 states have moved to ban or severely restrict access to abortion, with wide-reaching negative impacts on access to reproductive health care, especially for marginalized communities. Although Massachusetts has taken important strides in recent years to strengthen access to reproductive health care, which we greatly appreciate, our Commonwealth still sees severe inequalities in access to care. Indeed, Black women are twice as likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than white women. We have more work to do to break down barriers to the full spectrum of reproductive health care that still exist for Black, Indigenous, and other people of color.

An Act relative to birthing justice in the Commonwealth introduces a critical framework to improve maternal health outcomes and ensure people have the support, education, and access to resources to be empowered throughout their pregnancies. An Act promoting access to midwifery care and out-of-hospital birth options, standalone legislation which is also a core provision of the birthing justice bill, creates a pathway to licensure for Certified Professional Midwives, the key midwifery workforce trained in out-of-hospital births.

These bills advance key recommendations from the Special Commission on Racial Inequities in Maternal Health. When the Legislature creates commissions to investigate policy areas, it is incumbent upon the Legislature to listen to the recommendations. Commissions take time and work from countless legislators, administrators, staff, and outside experts, and the recommendations are the result of such underappreciated work.

By embracing those recommendations, Massachusetts can ensure all pregnant people—regardless of race—have the autonomy, support, and adequate birth options to feel empowered throughout their pregnancies.

Sincerely, 

Jonathan Cohn

Policy Director

Progressive Massachusetts 

The Major Polluters Who Caused the Climate Crisis Should Pay for the Cleanup

Flooding

Wednesday, May 17, 2023

Chair Rausch, Chair Cahill, and Members of the Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources, 

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I’m the policy director of Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide, member-based grassroots advocacy organization fighting for a more equitable, just, sustainable, and democratic Commonwealth. 

We urge you to give a favorable report to H.872/S.481: An Act establishing a climate change superfund and promoting polluter responsibility (“Polluters Pay”), filed by Sen. Jamie Eldridge and Rep. Steve Owens.

Massachusetts is already facing the impacts of climate change, and it will only get worse. The increased incidence of storms will damage coastlines and increase inland flooding: the state has projected that inland property damage due to climate change will increase by almost 50% by mid-century, with a disproportionate impact on low-income communities. Additional rail repair costs from extreme temperatures could reach $6 million per year by 2050 and a striking $35 million by the end of the century, and repair costs for electric transmission and utility distribution infrastructure alone are projected to increase by almost $100 million by 2050, with power outages disproportionately impacting low-income communities again. Not to mention the impact on human health and lives.1 

Meanwhile, major fossil fuel companies are seeing record profits. The very companies who lied to the public for decades about climate change are benefiting while all of us, especially the most vulnerable, bear the cost. 

We already have a successful model for addressing these situations of public damages, private profits: the “polluter pays” principle. This principle is employed in all of the major US pollution control laws: Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (solid waste and hazardous waste management), and Superfund (cleanup of abandoned waste sites). 

This bill would extend that proven principle to the climate crisis by establishing a climate change adaptation cost recovery program. It would require companies that have contributed significantly to the buildup of climate-warming greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere to bear a share of the costs of needed infrastructure investment, based on their historic emissions. 

This bill would raise an estimated $75 billion over 25 years from the 20 largest polluting companies to provide funding for climate resiliency efforts such as restoring coastal wetlands; upgrading roads, bridges, subways, and transit systems; preparing for and recovering from hurricanes and other extreme weather events; installing energy efficient cooling systems; upgrading the electrical grid; and expanding green spaces and urban forestry.

Moreover, the bill understands that our sustainability transition must be a just one, with key provisions to ensure that sufficient funds go to environmental justice populations and that the funding goes to the creation of good-paying jobs. 

Massachusetts has taken important steps toward climate mitigation in recent sessions and we must continue to do so to meet our state’s climate goals, but we also need to address the climate crisis that is already hitting communities. This bill shows a way forward. 

Sincerely, 

Jonathan Cohn

Policy Director

Progressive Massachusetts 

Endnotes


[]1 Gloninger, Chris and Asher Klein. “When a Major Hurricane Hits New England, the Costs Will Be Huge.” NBC News. July 25, 2019. https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/catastrophic-hurricane-new-england-modeling/92234/; Zhao, Bo. The Effects of Weather on Massachusetts Municipal Expenditures: Implications of Climate Change for Local Governments in New England. Boston: Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, 2023; 2022 Massachusetts Climate Change Assessment. Boston: Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 2022. https://www.mass.gov/doc/2022-massachusetts-climate-change-assessment-december-2022-volume-i-executive-summary/download.

“Those solutions share one thing in common: they all require money.”

Money

Tuesday, May 16, 2023 

Chair Moran, Chair Cusack, and Members of the Joint Committee on Revenue:

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the policy director at Progressive Massachusetts. We are a statewide, multi-issue, grassroots membership organization focused on fighting for policy that would make our Commonwealth more equitable, just, sustainable, and democratic. 

This year so far, the Legislature’s discussion about “tax reform” has centered on how to roll back taxes. The framing of “tax relief” has unfortunately warped discussion of the major issues facing our Commonwealth. “Tax relief” implies that taxes are a burden harming our Commonwealth rather than our collective investments in our collective well-being. And the framing of “tax relief” displaces discussion from the real burdens faced by residents of the Commonwealth: the high cost of housing, the high cost of health care, the high cost of child care, the high cost of higher education, long hours in traffic, a malfunctioning transit system—the list goes on. 

Addressing those true burdens that Commonwealth residents face requires many disparate policy solutions, but they share one thing in common: they all require money. If we want to ensure that our students get the best education possible from pre-K to postsecondary, that everyone has the best health care possible, that everyone has a safe roof over their head, that everyone can get to where they need to go efficiently, cleanly, and safely, that everyone has clean air to breathe, then we need to raise the revenue to do it. Our new Governor has outlined proposals to move us closer to such goals, but they will exist only on paper if not backed by funding. 

As such, we urge you to broaden the discussion of “tax reform” to think about how the Commonwealth can make a more progressive tax code that enables us to do right by all our residents. 

Please give a favorable report to the following bills: 

  • H.2708/S.1925: An Act to close corporate tax loopholes and create progressive revenue (Barber & Uyterhoeven / Rausch)   
  • H.2743 / S.1835: An Act establishing a tiered corporate minimum tax (Connolly / Gomez)    
  • H.2967 / S.1858: An Act establishing a tax on excessive executive compensation (Uyterhoeven / Lewis)  
  • H.2856 / S.1788: An Act relative to restoring corporate tax rates (Keefe / DiDomenico)
  • H.2725/S.1875: An Act requiring public disclosures by publicly-traded corporate taxpayers (Capano / Miranda)

To provide a quick note on each of these bills: 

  • H.2708 and S.1925 would increase the share of GILTI income (“Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income,” or offshored income made in Massachusetts) that the state taxes from 5% to 50%. This could raise up to $450 million in additional revenue each year and would bring us in line with Maine, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island. 
  • The corporate minimum tax—namely, the tax that corporations pay if they are able to wipe away all tax obligations through accounting tricks—is $456 and hasn’t budged since 1989 (the year after I was born, I might add). H.2743 and S.1835 would create a tiered structure for this minimum tax so that large corporations are paying their fair share. 
  • By imposing additional taxes on corporations with excessive imbalances in how much they pay their C-suite executives versus their median employees, H.2967 / S.1858 would both raise revenue and reduce the Commonwealth’s sky-high income inequality. 
  • A decade ago, Massachusetts lowered the tax rate on corporate profits from 9.5% to 8.0%. H.2856 and S.1788 would reverse that change to, again, make sure corporations are paying their fair share. According to MassBudget, each 1 percentage point increase in the rate could generate between $200 -$300 million in additional annual tax revenue. 
  • Large corporations pay teams of lawyers to help them avoid paying taxes. We know that this problem exists, but without disclosure, we cannot understand the totality of the problem and best calibrate our response. The disclosure requirements required in H.2725/S.1875 would help us do that. 

Our Commonwealth has the resources to ensure the best for all our residents, but we need to commit to realizing such a vision through our policy.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Policy Director

Progressive Massachusetts

“Transparency is essential to closing persistent gender and racial pay inequities.”

Wage Equity Now

Tuesday, May 9, 2023

Chair Jehlen, Chair Cutler, and Members of the Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development:

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the policy director at Progressive Massachusetts. We are a statewide, multi-issue, grassroots membership organization focused on fighting for policy that would make our Commonwealth more equitable, just, sustainable, and democratic.

We urge the committee to give a favorable report to the following bills: 

H.1849/S.1191: An Act relative to salary range transparency / An Act relative to pay range disclosure

H.1940/S.1181: An Act relative to transparency in the workplace

These bills would build on past progress toward gender and racial equity in Massachusetts workplaces. 

The first set of bills would require employers to disclose salary ranges to employees who ask for them when hiring for positions, and the latter set would require companies and municipalities to submit their federally required EEOC data to the Massachusetts Secretary of State’s office. This information would then be combined with statewide figures to provide aggregate and accurate reports of the wage gaps within various business sectors that can be seen and understood both by workers and employers.

Transparency is essential to closing persistent gender and racial pay inequities. If we can’t identify the existence and extent of disparities within and across industries, it is difficult to make and track progress. We cannot change what we do not measure.

Moreover, studies have repeatedly shown the importance of pay range transparency to enabling prospective employees to better negotiate for fair compensation. 

California, Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland, Nevada, New York, Rhode Island, and Washington have all already passed pay range disclosure laws. For Massachusetts to have a competitive and equitable economy, we should join them.

Sincerely, 

Jonathan Cohn 

Policy Director 

Progressive Massachusetts  

“More and more residents are unable to afford to live in our commonwealth anymore”

Green affordable housing

Tuesday, May 9, 2023 

Chair Eldridge, Chair Day, and Members of the Joint Committee on Housing: 

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the policy director at Progressive Massachusetts. We are a statewide, multi-issue, grassroots membership organization focused on fighting for policy that would make our Commonwealth more equitable, just, sustainable, and democratic. 

We see it all the time in polls, we hear it on the doors, and we see it in the data: Massachusetts has a housing crisis. More and more residents are unable to afford to live in our commonwealth anymore, priced out from one community to another and then out entirely, or face severe housing instability. 

We need a comprehensive approach to the housing crisis, and strong protections for tenants must be a part of it. We urge you to give a favorable report to the following bills: 

S.864/H.1731: An Act promoting access to counsel and housing stability in Massachusetts

S.956/H.1690: An Act promoting housing opportunity and mobility through eviction sealing (HOMES)

Right to Counsel (S.864/H.1731): These bills would provide legal representation for low-income tenants and low-income owner-occupants in eviction proceedings. The eviction moratorium that the Legislature passed earlier in the pandemic was a vital lifeline for so many, but eviction filings have now been climbing past what they were in 2019, pre-pandemic. Tenants enter such eviction proceedings at a major disadvantage: according to FY2022 Trial Court data, while 86% of landlords are represented, only 11.5% of tenants are represented. Tenants facing eviction are disproportionately poor, female, and BIPOC, and evictions can have lasting negative impacts on physical and mental health. Connecticut, Maryland, and Washington have already passed Right to Counsel policies, and Massachusetts should join them. 

HOMES Act (S.956/H.1690): Having an eviction record is creating a devastating barrier for tenants looking for housing. Records are created as soon as a case is filed and are publicly available forever––regardless of the outcome. These records impact people’s ability to obtain housing, credit, and employment, harming many, especially women and people of color. 

Regardless of whether one does anything wrong or is actually evicted, being party to an eviction or housing case is being unfairly held against tenants when they try to rent a new place. Even winning in court hurts tenants. However, there is no current process by which a tenant can seal an eviction record, as there already is in states such as California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, Utah, and Texas. 

Notably, the Legislature already passed language around eviction sealing in early 2021, only for it to fail to become law due to a last-minute veto by former governor Charlie Baker. We urge you not to wait longer before bringing this issue back up, and we urge you to strengthen the language of these bills to allow eviction sealing to be automatic in certain cases, as opposed by merely by petition: the families facing eviction are least likely to be able to navigate a maze of paperwork. 

Sincerely, 

Jonathan Cohn 

Policy Director 

Progressive Massachusetts 

“A right to reproductive health care is not a real right unless every individual is able to access that care”

May 2, 2023

Rep. James M. Murphy, Co-Chair Senator Paul Feeney, Co-Chair 

Joint Committee on Financial Services Joint Committee on Financial Services

Massachusetts State House, Room 254 Massachusetts State House, Room 

Boston, MA 02133 Boston, MA 02133

Dear Chairs Murphy, Feeney, and members of the Joint Committee on Financial Services:

We, the undersigned organizations committed to advancing reproductive freedom, equity, and justice in the Commonwealth, write today in support of H.1137 filed by Representatives Sabadosa and Balser and S.646 filed by Senator Friedman. 

Massachusetts law, as currently written, requires insurers to offer coverage for childbirth and treatment of miscarriages, but permits cost sharing. For too many mothers and families navigating high deductible plans and increased out-of-pocket spending, the burden of this cost sharing results in long-term financial struggles.

Under this legislation, all Massachusetts-regulated health insurance plans would be required to cover the full spectrum of pregnancy-related care without any cost-sharing, ensuring that Bay Staters are not saddled with insurmountable debt post-pregnancy and enabling them to have greater control over their lives and financial futures. We are grateful to the Legislature for its bold action to ensure coverage without cost-sharing for all abortion and abortion-related care, a key provision of Chapter 127 of the Acts of 2022. Now, we must go further to break down financial barriers to all pregnancy-related care. 

A right to reproductive health care — including care for all pregnancies, abortion, and miscarriage — is not a real right unless every individual is able to access that care, free from cost barriers. Being a new parent is tough enough. The last thing someone adjusting to life with a newborn needs to worry about is how they’re going to pay for the care they just received. 


According to the Massachusetts Center for Health Information and Analysis’ (CHIA) 2021 Massachusetts Health Insurance Survey, more than 1.7 million people in Massachusetts are on high deductible health plans. That’s 1.7 million people…

  • Who may never be able to get out of debt once they start a family;
  • Who could be forced to meet their deductible twice if the nine months of their pregnancy falls across two insurance plan years;
  • Who may be forced to forgo prenatal or postpartum care because of costs;
  • Who may delay family planning because they are too concerned about making ends meet; or most cruelly,
  • Who would be sent a hefty bill days after suffering the devastating loss of  miscarriage. 

The futures of people seeking pregnancy care should not be dictated by deductibles. 

This is an issue of gender and racial equity. Massachusetts is already combatting an epidemic of racial inequities in maternal health. Black women in our state are twice as likely as white women to die from pregnancy-related complications, and financial barriers to care are compounding these poor health outcomes. Forty percent of mothers have reported delaying prenatal care because they lack the money or insurance to cover the visits. Newborns of mothers who do not receive prenatal care are three times more likely to have a low birth weight and five times more likely to die than children born to mothers who receive prenatal care. We must reimagine our health care system and health care spending to center and support the needs of birthing people, families, and Black and Brown communities by making all pregnancy care more accessible. 

Based on CHIA’s Mandated Benefit Review of this legislation, we can make high-quality pregnancy-related care accessible to all Bay Staters for only an extra $2.09 per month on our monthly health insurance premiums—less than a cup of coffee. We don’t have to imagine a Massachusetts where everyone has access to the pregnancy care they need to safely give birth and raise a family; where fewer of our loved ones die from pregnancy-related care; and where no one has to go into debt to start a family. All we have to do to make this our reality is pay an extra $25 a year on our health insurance premiums.

Every Bay Stater must have access to the full spectrum of pregnancy-related care so we all can decide if, when, and how to have a family or raise children. We can ensure that our friends, families, loved ones, children, and children’s children would be safer, happier, and healthier, because pregnancy-related care would be so much more accessible to them.

Thank you for the opportunity to submit our testimony, and we again urge you to give H.1137 and S.646 a favorable report.

Respectfully,

Rebecca Hart Holder, President, Reproductive Equity Now

Carol Rose, Executive Director, ACLU of Massachusetts

Nate Horwitz-Willis, Executive Director, Planned Parenthood Advocacy Fund of Massachusetts

Luu Ireland, MD, MPH, Chair, Massachusetts Section of the American College of Obstetricians and 

Gynecologists

Jonathan Cohn, Policy Director, Progressive Massachusetts

Jeremy Burton, Chief Executive Officer, Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Boston