FY 2026 Budget Testimony: Protect Our Essential Services & Invest in Our Future

April 8, 2025 

Chair Michlewitz, Chair Rodrigues, and Members of the Joint Committee on Ways & Means: 

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the Policy Director at Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide grassroots advocacy group fighting for a more equitable, just, sustainable, and democratic commonwealth.

As we contemplate the daunting, anxiety-inducing, catastrophic possibility of steep cuts to the federal budget as Republicans in DC attempt to take an axe to health care, education, infrastructure, and so much more, we need to be prepared in MA to protect our essential services. We need to continue to do what we are doing—and we also need to be doing more. 

To make that possible, I urge you to embrace progressive sources of revenue as well as tap into the rainy day fund as needed. 

First on the rainy day fund. Like many of us, I have had the experience of holding an umbrella while walking in the rain. The rain gets heavier and heavier, but I think, “Oh, it’s not that bad yet” while getting fully soaked. Let’s not be that. When it starts pouring, don’t be afraid to take out an umbrella. 

But beyond that, I want to urge that “the money isn’t there” is a difficult argument to stomach in a state as affluent as Massachusetts. Indeed, our state’s GDP is higher than countries like Sweden or Belgium despite our smaller population. We have great wealth in this state, and that great wealth is why the Fair Share Amendment has been able to deliver so much. 

You have many tools at your disposal to raise necessary funds, such as but not limited to ensuring that billionaire global mega-corporations like Amazon and Apple are paying their fair share and are not able to dodge taxes by offshoring their profits in Bermuda and the Cayman Islands. 

Similarly, as you are going to seek every opportunity to trim our investments, I would urge you to first do the same to the state’s tax corporate tax breaks to evaluate whether or not they deliver upon any goal at all. The sales tax exemption for private jets is but one of many examples. 

It shows a lack of regard for the most vulnerable populations to countenance cuts to mental health case workers and cuts to assistance to needy families, but not countenance cuts to the tax giveaways to large estates and day traders passed two years ago. 

We  know who has the money: the rich and large corporations. What matters is the political will to raise the funds. 

In the FY 2026 budget, we urge you to focus on increasing critical investments that underlie the quality of life in the Commonwealth and make this high quality of life accessible to all: 

  • Delivering on Our Promises to Our K-12 Students: The Student Opportunity Act from 2019 was a major win for students across the Commonwealth. However, the combination of high rates of inflation in FY23 and FY24 and a tight inflation cap under the SOA has led to a $465 million gap in district budgets.  As a result, districts across the state are being forced to cut their budgets, lay off educators and staff, and cancel long-needed investments. We must keep our promises to students.

We further urge you to fix charter school tuition reimbursements so that our public schools are not losing critical funding. Tuition dollars follow students, but if a class size falls from 25 to 23, a school cannot hire 23/25 of a teacher. So many of the costs of education are fixed costs, and siphoning off resources harms the 90% of students who attend local district public schools. 

Our students deserve not only well-funded schools, but also green and healthy schools that focus on the whole student. We urge you to increase funding for capital improvements for school buildings so that students can have the safe and healthy environment conducive to learning, and to provide funding for community schools so that districts can embrace this proven model that empowers students, parents, and educators to collaborate and provide vital wraparound services. 

  • Building on Recent Child Care & Early Ed Investments: Last session, you made historic investments in early education and child care, moving us closer toward a vision of quality and stability for providers, good pay for educators, and affordability and access for families. We join the Common Start Coalition in calling for continued investments:
    • $200 million to increase access to child care financial assistance (line item 3000-4060 in the FY25 budget): A $100 million increase over FY25 is needed just to maintain existing caseloads, and an additional $100 million would be enough to provide financial assistance vouchers to 6,000 additional children who are currently on the waitlist for CCFA.
    • $45 million to increase operational grants to child care providers to a total of $520 million (line item 3000-1045 in the FY25 budget): An increase in total funding to $520 million is needed to keep up with increased utilization of the C3 program by providers. Increased funding for the C3 program is essential to support the growing number of providers who accept families using child care vouchers.
    • $45 million to raise early education and care financial assistance reimbursement rates (line items 3000-1041 & 3000-1042 in the FY25 budget): This will improve access to child care financial assistance by increasing the number of programs that are willing and able to accept vouchers, allow programs to invest in quality, and raise workforce salaries for subsidized child care providers.
    • $20 million for the Head Start Supplemental Grant (line item 3000-5000 in the FY25 budget): Funding needed to increase salaries in Head Start classrooms and help programs that provide high-quality care to some of the state’s lowest-income, highest-need children, especially in anticipation of potential federal cuts.
  • Investing in the Opportunity Engine of Public Higher Ed: Last year, you made community college free, a transformative step that has benefited many residents already. We need to build on that commitment to opportunity by making our four-year public institutions debt-free for all students as well and ensuring that our colleges and universities have the resources needed to give a high-quality education and experience to every student. 

That means ensuring better pay and benefits for adjunct faculty, who often have to juggle high course loads for low pay. That means ensuring that our public higher education employees are paid at or above the national average, especially given the high cost of living in MA.  And that means ensuring that our public colleges and universities have green and healthy buildings and having the Commonwealth assume the capital debt of public higher education institutions and cover the costs of such upgrades. 

  • Increasing Funding for Access to Counsel: We join fellow organizations in the Right to Counsel Coalition in urging for an increase to the Access to Counsel pilot (Line Item 0321-1800) from $2.5 million to $5 million and making the program permanent. While upwards of 90% of landlords are represented, recent Trial Court data shows that over the past two years only 4% of tenants had legal representation. We can change this, prevent homelessness, and stabilize peoples’ housing by incrementally building a strong statewide Access to Counsel program.
  • Protecting Our Right to Shelter by Investing in Emergency Assistance: We believe in listening to the experts connected to communities on the ground about how best to solve the problems facing the Commonwealth. The Massachusetts Coalition for the Homeless are the experts on how to best manage the emergency shelter system in Massachusetts and assume that all families have access to safe housing. We urge you to support their requests, which include:
    • Undoing harmful restrictions to emergency shelter: Removing the length of stay limits, which force families out of shelter before they can access safe housing; eliminating the “dual track” system, which kicks some families out of rapid track shelters in as little as 30 business days; removing the cap on the number of families in EA shelter, currently set at 5,800 families; restoring presumptive eligibility, which gives families temporary access to shelter while they gather documents to prove ongoing eligibility; and strengthening support for families leaving shelter, including by improving housing search, providing ongoing wraparound support, and increasing HomeBASE rehousing resources
    • Increasing funding for RAFT (Line Item 7004-9316): Increase funding for Rental Assistance for Families in Transition RAFT) to $300 million, up from the current FY25 funding level of $204.7 million ($197.4 million in General Appropriations Act funding and $7.3 million in supplemental funding)
    • Increasing HomeBASE (Line Item 7004-1008) Increasing the maximum benefit levels to $50,000 over the first 24 months of the program and up to $25,000 in subsequent years for families needing additional time

Moreover, we urge you to reject harmful proposed cuts in Governor Healey’s budget. 

  • Please reject Governor Healey’s proposed elimination of the 10% increase to cash assistance grants that recently took effect. This assistance is for our families with highest need, and it is unconscionable to think that that is where we would be making cuts in the budget. 
  • Please reject Governor Healey’s proposed cuts to mental health care and the corresponding layoffs of Department of Mental Health case workers. This is critical care, and it is about people’s lives. 

Thank you for your work on the budget and on this marathon of a hearing. 

Sincerely, 

Jonathan Cohn 

Policy Director 

Progressive Massachusetts 

Extremist Republicans in Congress Just Voted to Cut Health Care to Fund Tax Cuts for the Rich. Here’s How to Push Back in MA.

Last night, Republicans in the US House voted to advance a budget outline that entails steep cuts to Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and other essential programs in order to fund tax cuts for billionaires and large corporations.

Their priorities are clear. And so should ours in Massachusetts.

The federal budget fight isn’t over. Every Democrat present voted NO yesterday (that includes MA’s 9-member delegation), and there is still time to block harmful cuts. But MA needs to ensure that, regardless of what Congressional Republicans do and regardless of Elon Musk’s illegal federal funding freezes, we are not cutting essential services. We need to do more to meet the needs of all, not less.

Unfortunately, Governor Healey’s proposed budget would halve the number of mental health case workers, limiting access to essential care. Thankfully, she put a pause on her plans to close two of the state’s mental health hospitals, but more funding will be needed.

And we know how to raise such funds. It’s not by giving tax cuts to rich people and large corporations as our Legislature did two years ago. It’s by ensuring that large corporations are paying their fair share.

That’s why we’re supporting Raise Up Mass’s Corporate Fair Share campaign to ensure that billionaire global corporations like Apple, Google, and Walmart pay their fair share and can’t get away with tax-dodging antics.

Can you email your legislator in support of this important legislation?

Email Your State Legislators

Did you know that Massachusetts taxes a smaller share of offshored corporate income than New Hampshire? An Act Combating Offshore Tax Avoidance (HD.3390/SD.1684) would fix that, bringing us in line with the federal government and other states and raising hundreds of millions of dollars in new annual revenues.

MA needs to combat offshore tax dodging and make the world’s most profitable mega-corporations pay their fair share in state taxes, instead of cutting public services like healthcare and education that we all rely upon.

MA Senate Finishes Up Its Budget Debate. Let’s Talk about the Recorded Votes.

Yesterday, late at night, the MA Senate passed its FY 2025 budget. I’ll defer discussion on the specific funding levels to another time and instead highlight some policy victories in the amendment process and the recorded votes.

On the first hand, two amendments that Progressive Mass had advocated for passed, in modified form:

  • Sen. Cindy Creem’s Amendment #100: Improving Voting Access, which would decouple the municipal census and voter registration status. Currently, cities and towns are required to mark registered voters as “inactive” if they don’t fill out the annual municipal census, a document many easily forget to fill out. When voters are inactive, they have to go through extra hoops at their polling location to vote.
  • Sen. Cindy Creem’s Amendment #938: No Cost Calls Reporting Requirements, which would strengthen the oversight and data collection for No Cost Calls (i.e., the recently passed law that guarantees free access to phone calls and other communication to incarcerated individuals)

But now to the recorded votes. The Senate took recorded votes on 41 amendments, 37 of which were unanimous votes.

At Progressive Mass, we love recorded votes: they are a vital tool for accountability and transparency. But when it comes to unanimous votes like these, their main purpose is for senators to be able to publicly take credit for the addition of a specific program or funding increase rather than highlighting meaningful contrasts between legislators.

So what were those 4 non-unanimous votes?

Senator Bruce Tarr’s Amendment (#118) to prevent the diversion of a fraction of excess capital gains tax revenue to the general budget instead of the rainy day fund failed 4 to 35 on a party line vote.

Senator Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester)’s amendment (#810) to create a two-week sales tax holiday failed 5 to 34. Sales tax holidays drain vital revenue and don’t actually achieve goals of tax progressivity or economic stimulus. The 5 YES votes were the chamber’s 4 Republicans plus Walter Timilty (D-Milton).

Senator Bruce Tarr’s amendment to undermine the Fair Share Amendment by allowing high-income couples to evade the surtax failed 10 to 29. The Senate voted to close this loophole last year in order to prevent couples from being “married in DC, but single in Massachusetts” (i.e., filing their taxes together in DC but separately in MA to avoid the surtax on income over $1 million). The 10 YES votes consisted of the chamber’s four Republicans and six Democrats: Nick Collins (D-South Boston), Barry Finegold (D-Andover), Joan Lovely (D-Salem), Michael Moore (D-Auburn), Walter Timilty (D-Milton), and John Velis (D-Westfield).

Senator Jason Lewis’s amendment (#125) to create a new advisory commission to determine a new seal and motto of the commonwealth (in case you’ve forgotten, our state seal is very racist), as recommended by the last commission, passed 30 to 9. Voting NO were 6 Democrats and 3 Republicans (Bruce Tarr bucked his fellow Republicans by voting YES). The 6 Democrats were Mike Brady (D-Brockton), Nick Collins (D-South Boston), John Cronin (D-Fitchburg), Ed Kennedy (D-Lowell), Michael Moore (D-Auburn), and John Velis (D-Westfield).

PM in the News: “Healey’s No New Taxes Talk”

Gintautas Dumcius and Bruce Mohl, “Political Notebook: Healey’s no-new-taxes talk | Rollins pay adjustment | Who is Jeanne Louise?,” CommonWealth Beacon, May 3, 2024.

Jonathan Cohn, policy director for Progressive Massachusetts, said Healey’s “clichéd ‘no new taxes’ line is out of step with her own promises and the needs” of the state. He pointed to high child care costs, health insurance premiums, and traffic as forms of taxation that hit working and middle-class residents.

PM in the News: On Healey’s Hiring Freeze

Colin A. Young, Michael P. Norton, and Chris Lisinski. “Healey Plans To Reduce Gov’t Hiring, Critics Say It’s Coming Too Late.” State House News Service. April 3, 2024.

Blowback came from the left, too. Progressive Massachusetts Policy Director Jonathan Cohn castigated Healey and the Legislature for having approved a series of targeted tax cuts last year after voters in 2022 “made clear that they support higher taxes on the rich and greater investment in our commonwealth.” He said the governor’s January budget cuts and her hiring restrictions “are the result of such decisions.”

“The Legislature should not operate from a standpoint of scarcity. Whether that means putting a pause on the regressive tax cuts from last year’s bill or finding new ways to raise money (e.g., by closing corporate loopholes or ending misguided corporate tax incentives), the Governor and Legislature can’t pretend there isn’t money available,” Cohn said. “Even more, the rainy day fund remains flush, and adding more money to it each year is not a badge of honor if it can never be used.”

He added, “When voters gave Massachusetts a Democratic trifecta, it was not out of a desire for tax cuts for the rich and hiring freezes; it was to make the Commonwealth better for all.”

Lisa Kashinsky, Kelly Garrity, and Mia McCarthy. “The fallout from Healey’s ‘hiring controls’.” Politico. April 4, 2024.

“If the governor believes that the commonwealth is facing an economic downturn that would necessitate such a freeze, she should communicate to the public what she believes is the cause of the revenue shortfall and outline how the commonwealth will protect critical investments,” Progressive Massachusetts’ Jonathan Cohn told Playbook.

PM in the News: “Midyear budget shortfall raises questions about Healey’s tax cuts”

Midyear budget shortfall raises questions about Healey’s tax cuts,” WGBH, January 12, 2024.

Have Gov. Maura Healey’s tax cuts backfired?

That’s the argument coming from some on the left as Healey makes hundreds of millions of dollars in midyear budget cuts, just a few months after she signed off on the state’s first big tax-break package in two decades. But not everyone thinks the state’s current fiscal duress means the cuts were a bad idea.

Adam Reilly is joined by Mass. Taxpayers Foundation president Doug Howgate and Progressive Mass policy director Jonathan Cohn, who discuss the impact of the cuts and what they might portend for the future of budget-making in the state.

PM in the News: Governor Healey defends “absolutely essential” tax cuts (But Are They?)

Chris Lisinksi, “Governor Healey defends ‘absolutely essential’ tax cuts,” State House News Service, January 9, 2024.

Progressive Massachusetts, which describes itself as a grassroots organization with local chapters, called itself “disappointed and disturbed” by the budget cuts, contending they will “disproportionately harm the most disadvantaged members of the Commonwealth.”

“Last year, advocates repeatedly stressed that now was not the time for permanent tax cuts, as signs of lower revenue collection were already coming. The Legislature refused to listen and instead passed a tax cut package that included regressive tax cuts almost equivalent in size to these draconian cuts,” the group said in an unsigned statement. “It should not be lost on us that we never see emergency pauses of regressive tax giveaways; the solution is always one that falls on the backs of the poorest.”

Chris Van Buskirk, “Gov. Maura Healey defends tax cuts as Massachusetts faces $1 billion revenue slowdown,” Boston Herald, January 9, 2024.

Progressive Massachusetts, a policy group, said 2023 was “not the time for permanent regressive tax cuts.”

“We remain disappointed that so many legislators chose not to listen,” the group said on social media in response to the financial headwinds.

Daily Collegian: Debating the Effectiveness of New Tax Cuts

Sam Cavalheiro, “Massachusetts passes first tax cuts in almost two decades,” Daily Collegian, October 23, 2023.

Jonathan Cohn, Policy Director at Progressive Massachusetts (a progressive policy advocacy group,) was disappointed at the new tax law as he felt it only focused on  cutting taxes.

Cohn explains that Massachusetts voters, in the most recent election, voted out a Republican governor who was fiscally conservative and passed an increase on taxes on the wealthy, called the Fair Share Amendment.

“Shifting the entire discussion to cutting taxes feels like ‘Wait, what just happened in the last election?’ It’s just not the best use of that in the political moment,” he said.

Cohn argues that the tax cuts do little to make Massachusetts an affordable place, referencing the Child Tax Credit Expansion: “…raising that child tax credit of $440 is ultimately not going far for people given how expensive children are. In Massachusetts, the cost of childcare is over $20,000 a year and saying that their tax credit is [going to] go up from $140 to $440 over a few years, that’s not a significant amount.”

He also argues that the rental deduction will do little to make Massachusetts more affordable: “What the expansion of the rental deduction means maybe $50 more for many renters… and many people see their rent increase each year by more than $50.”

Cohn criticized the short-term capital gains cuts and estate tax cuts, which mostly affect wealthier residents. He questions who the tax cuts are benefiting.

“Is it disproportionately benefiting those who already have high incomes or is it benefiting the people who are really struggling with being able to afford to live in Massachusetts?”

Testimony: Tackling Affordability Requires Investment

Wednesday, October 11, 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. 

We have heard a lot from the Legislature recently about wanting to take action on affordability, as the cost of living in Massachusetts has become increasingly unsustainable for many. However, contrary to recent steps, we cannot tax-cut our way into affordability. We need to invest. And that, of course, requires money.

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

  • S.1771 / H.2747: An Act granting a local option for a real estate transfer fee to fund affordable housing, filed by Sen. Jo Comerford and Rep. Mike Connolly.
  • S.1799 / H.2894: An Act providing for climate change adaptation infrastructure and affordable housing investments in the Commonwealth, filed by Sen. Jamie Eldridge and Rep. Sam Montaño
  • S.1834 / H.2824: An Act to support educational opportunity for all, filed by Sen. Adam Gomez, Rep. Natalie Higgins, and Rep. Christine Barber

Transfer Fee (S.1771/H.2747)

Our cities and towns need every tool in the toolbox to address our state’s housing crisis, and this bill would provide a crucial one. By imposing a small fee on high-end real estate transactions, communities will be able to provide much-needed funding to affordable housing trusts so that we can preserve and expand affordable housing stock. These bills recognize that each community’s housing situation is different and thus enable cities and towns to craft the proposal that best fits their community’s needs.

Cities and towns from across the Commonwealth have already filed home rule petitions to do this. When our cities and towns want to become places where people can afford to live at every stage of life, the State Legislature should support them, not be a roadblock. 

HERO bill (S.1799/H.2894)

This bill offers another tool for responding to our affordable housing crisis and, moreover, recognizes the need for not just affordable housing but green and healthy communities as well.

Initiated by the Housing and Environment Revenue Opportunities (HERO) Coalition, it would raise the deeds excise fee to a value still lower than comparable fees in Connecticut, New Hampshire, New York, and Vermont to raise dedicated revenue for climate resilience and affordable housing.

The estimated $300 million from this bill could go toward steps like creating or preserving additional housing for 18,000 working-class homeowners and renters over 10 years; financing hundreds of millions of dollars in competitive, flexible grants to localities for climate resilience and mitigation; or assisting between 3,500 and 6,500 additional extremely low-income families per year with housing vouchers or project-based rental assistance.

Educational Opportunity for All (S.1834/H.2824)

Massachusetts is lucky to be home to many world-class universities. But these large institutions, despite often operating indistinguishably from for-profit institutions, do not have to pay taxes. Given their large footprint, that is a fiscal drain for many communities across the Commonwealth, especially given the fact that such private universities will only ever educate a small percentage of the Commonwealth’s residents.

The endowment of Harvard University stood at over $50 billion last year; MIT, over $20 billion.

These bills recognize that such affluent institutions have the ability to contribute more. They would put a small excise fee on the part of a university’s endowment over $1 billion to create dedicated revenue for a fund subsidizing the cost of higher education, early education, and child care for lower-income and middle-class residents of the commonwealth.

Governor Healey and House and Senate leaders have all spoken about wanting to take action on the exorbitant cost of child care, early education, and higher education, and this bill offers a sensible and dependable way of raising the funds to do so.

Thank you for all your work on today’s hearing, and again, we urge you to swiftly advance these bills.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Policy Director

Progressive Massachusetts

Here’s What Fair Share Is Delivering in its First Year

Last year, voters like you showed up in November to vote for the Fair Share Amendment because you understood the importance of a fairer tax code and greater investment in public education and transportation. And you didn’t just show up to vote — you canvassed, phone-banked, text-banked, tabled, spoke to neighbors, and much more.

Now that Governor Maura Healey has signed the FY 2024 budget, we can see how much the Fair Share Amendment has delivered in its first year. Let’s take a look.

  • $229 million for public colleges and universities
  • $224 million for K-12 public schools
  • $70.5 million for early education and care
  • $175 million for roads and bridges
  • $95.7 million for regional public transit
  • $205.8 million for the MBTA
✅$229 million for public colleges and universities ✅$224 million for K-12 public schools  ✅ $70.5 million for early education and care ✅$175 million for roads and bridges ✅$95.7 million for regional public transit  ✅$205.8 million for the MBTA

For early education and K-12 public education, that means….

For early education and care, that means $25 million for reducing the early education and care waitlist, $15 million for additional early education and care slots, $25 million for early educator and pay benefits, $5.5 million for expansion of pre-K. For K-12, public schools, that means....$150 million for school building projects and green schools, $69 million for universal school meals, $5 million for early college programs

For public higher education, that means….

For public higher education, that means....      $109 million for financial aid for Massachusetts public colleges and universities     $20 million for the endowment match program     $50 million for maintenance of physical buildings     Free community college for students ages 25+ and nursing students this fall     $50 million for free community college     Building towards free community college for all students in fall 2024

For roads, bridges, and regional transit, that means….

For roads and bridges, that means $100 million for municipal roads and bridges, $50 million for state bridges, and $25 million for federal matching funds. For regional transit, that means $90 million for regional transit agencies(funding fare-free pilot program, expanded service hours, weekend services, and route expansions) and $5.7 million for ferry service.

For the MBTA, that means…

  For the MBTA, that means...      $70 million for station and accessibility improvements     $50 million for MBTA bridges     $30 million for subway track and signal improvements     $20 million for commuter rail infrastructure     $20 million for work and safety improvements     $10.8 million for design of the Red-Blue connector     $5 million to study a low-income MBTA fare program

(See a written version of this information here.)

But Wait…The Fight Continues

The new revenue raised by the Fair Share Amendment could be at risk this fall if the Legislature passes major tax giveaways for the ultra-rich and large corporations.

Massachusetts needs to prioritize spending on what will make our state truly affordable, equitable, and competitive: programs that support working people and ensure a labor force adequate to our economy’s needs. That, in turn, requires that families have affordable housing, childcare, educational opportunities, and reliable transportation to make it possible for them to work, gain skills, and earn a good living.

We need to act NOW to protect the Fair Share Amendment from tax avoidance, and ensure that Massachusetts can invest more in our schools, colleges, roads, bridges, and public transit systems. At the same time, we need to make sure our legislators don’t give away billions of dollars to the ultra-rich.

Can you write to your state legislators to thank them for the budget victories and urge them to protect Fair Share revenue?

Email Your Legislators