Earlier today, the MA Senate joined the House in passing the Work & Family Mobility Act, which would allow any qualified driver—regardless of immigration status—to obtain a driver’s license, by an overwhelming, veto-proof margin of 32 to 8. Five Democrats—Nick Collins (D-South Boston), Anne Gobi (D-Spencer), Marc Pacheco (D-Taunton), Walter Timilty (D-Milton), and John Velis (D-Westfield) joined the three Republicans—Ryan Fattman (R-Sutton), Patrick O’Connor (R-Weymouth), and Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester) in opposing it.
The success of the bill was the testament to the hard work of the Driving Families Forward coalition, led by SEIU 32BJ and the Brazilian Workers Center, and the sponsors Brendan Crighton (D-Lynn) and Adam Gomez (D-Springfield).
Sixteen states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico already allow residents the right to apply for driver’s licenses regardless of immigration status, including our neighbors New York, Vermont, and Connecticut. And Massachusetts is poised to be next.
The bill is a win-win all around. It recognizes the essential contributions of our immigrant brothers and sisters, who often depend on a car to get to work, to school, to the hospital, etc. Immigration status shouldn’t be a barrier to getting a license. The bill would help make the roads safer for all, lower insurance rates, bring in more revenue for the state (through license fees), and strengthen our economy.
Before voting on passage, the Senate rejected five right-wing amendments.
The Senate voted 31-8 against an amendment from Bruce Tarr that would have required the RMV to issue licenses of a different color to immigrants without status, a move that would open the door to discrimination police entanglement with immigration enforcement. If you are driving and a police officer asks to see your license, there is no reason why that police officer needs to know whether or not you are a citizen; there is simply no bearing.
This vote was similar to the final vote on the bill, but with Michael Moore (D-Auburn) and Nick Collins (D-South Boston) flipping and Senate President Karen Spilka (D-Ashland) not casting a vote (which she only does on votes she deems especially important).
The Senate voted 32 to 7 against another amendment from Tarr requiring licenses to be marked “Not valid for identification” with bold text, again opening the door to stigma, discrimination, and entanglement with federal immigration enforcement. The only difference from the final vote was Nick Collins joining Democrats.
The Senate voted 29 to 10 against an amendment from Ryan Fattman requiring the RMV to pass on information on license-holders to city and town clerks, a pointless and costly exercise that is rooted merely in Republican myths around voter fraud. We already have non-citizen drivers (e.g., green card recipients) who have obtained a license but are not eligible to vote: earning a license has nothing to do with your ability to vote. Moreover, there is already a system in place at the RMV, MassHealth, and the Health Connector to account for this in the AVR system. Mark Montigny (D-New Bedford) and Michael Moore (D-Auburn) joined the bill’s opponents in voting for it.
The Senate voted 30 to 9 against another amendment from Tarr to require the RMV to provide information on the holder of a license in response to any request from any commonwealth agency pursuant to any criminal or civil investigation. Unnecessary information sharing would have a chilling impact and reduce the number of applicants, who would be afraid that their information could be passed on to ICE. John Keenan (D-Quincy) and Michael Moore (D-Auburn) joined the bill’s opponents, but Nick Collins voted with fellow Democrats.
The Senate finally voted 31 to 7 against another disingenuous amendment from Tarr to require that applicants attest that they will not use the license for identification or to register to vote, an amendment that serves no real purpose in a state where you don’t need an ID to vote other than to fear-monger about non-existent voter fraud. Collins joined fellow Democrats in voting against the amendment.
