While Republicans in DC are creating havoc and letting white supremacist Big Tech billionaires like Elon Musk dismantle the federal government, what are Democrats in Massachusetts doing? Are they taking steps to protect MA from the barrage of cruelty coming from DC? Are they charting a vision for what progressive governance looks like?
No, the first bill passed by the MA House this new session was to kick unhoused families out on the streets.
As explained by the Massachusetts Coalition for the Homeless, for over 40 years, the Emergency Assistance (EA) shelter program has provided shelter and services to eligible Massachusetts children and families experiencing homelessness. This program represents a commitment to protect children and families in the greatest need.
However, for over a year, Governor Healey and the MA Legislature have been chipping away at the right to shelter in our Commonwealth. The shameful restrictions passed yesterday chip away even more by reducing the length of stay even further, excluding many immigrant families, and increasing the administrative burden to gain access to emergency shelter.
The Legislature could have listened to experts and providers about how to meet needs while addressing the growing costs of the shelter system. Instead, they chose to restrict access, a strategy that will displace costs rather than reduce them. Shelter restrictions are both harmful and ineffective. It is also clear that the system has a management problem, and that solving that is the only way to responsibly and humanely control costs. Remember: no one wants to end up in emergency shelter, contrary to what some right-wingers say; you only end up in emergency shelter when you have nowhere else.
The budget supplemental — which contained a $425 million increase in funding to the system combined with cruel restrictions to access — passed 126 to 26, with all but one Democrat voting yes. All of the chamber’s Republicans and Rep. Colleen Garry (D-Dracut), the most conservative Democrat, voted no — in opposition to the added funds (not in opposition to the restrictions). It’s a sad statement on the values of the Massachusetts Democratic Party.
38 amendments were filed. 20 of them were withdrawn without discussion or debate. 9 of the remaining 18 were rejected or laid aside without recorded votes, and another 9 received recorded votes.
The House adopted four amendments:
- A unanimous vote for an amendment to require a competitive bidding process (Amendment #9, 152 to 0)
- A unanimous vote for an amendment to improve data collection (Amendment #15, 152 to 0)
- A unanimous vote to extend hardship waivers to families where a family member has a documented disability (#24, 152 to 0)
- A mostly party-line vote to extend hardship waivers to families with children under age six (#27, 127 to 25, Garry voting with Rs)
The House rejected several Republican amendments to make the bill even more cruel:
- Requiring expensive criminal background checks for any applicant, a way of further taxing the shelter system and demonizing the unhoused (Amendment #6, 26 to 126, Rep. Garry and Rep. Robertson with Rs)
- Reducing the funding to $200 million (Amendment #8, 26 to 126, Rep. Garry and Rep. Robertson with Rs)
- Requiring a 12-month residency requirement (and thereby excluding new arrivals), 26 to 126, Rep. Garry and Rep. Robertson with Rs)
- Limiting shelter access to families who became homeless because of an event in MA (again, excluding new arrivals or even people who have moved around between MA and neighboring states like RI and NH with high degrees of regional integration) (#18, 25 to 127, Rep. Garry with Rs)
The House also laid aside two Republican amendments to require ICE to be allowed in state shelters, a decision that was upheld by a party line vote to sustain the ruling of the chair each time.
