Happy Sunshine Week! ☀️ Let’s Talk about Transparency

Happy Sunshine Week!

Sunshine Week is a nonpartisan collaboration among groups in the journalism, civic, education, government, and private sectors that shines a light on the importance of public records and open government.

Sunshine Week celebrates a radical concept: that you deserve to know what your elected officials are doing.

In other words, what could be a better week to talk about the push for State House Transparency and our Scorecard Website?

Tomorrow, the three state representatives and three state senators who will negotiate a final set of Joint Rules for the legislative session will meet for the first time. There’s a lot at stake (they haven’t come to a deal in several sessions), including whether committee votes and testimony will finally be posted, whether we will see more timely advancement of legislation, and much more. Read on for what you can do to take action.

And *drumroll please* our Scorecard Website is now up to date with full data from last session as well as co-sponsorship data from this session. Want to know if your legislators are co-sponsoring the bills on our Legislative Agenda. We’ve got you covered.

The Fight for State House Transparency Continues

In February, both the House and Senate adopted a series of transparency reforms to make a more open, inclusive, and timely legislative process. They did not go as far as they could have, but the fact that they went as far as they did was only possible because of people like you who emailed, called, and met with your legislators.

But the fight isn’t over yet. The House and Senate have to negotiate the differences between their respective proposals for Joint Rules.

A six-person conference committee was just appointed to oversee these negotiations:

  • Sen. Cindy Creem (D-Newton)
  • Sen. Joan Lovely (D-Salem)
  • Sen. Ryan Fattman (R-Sutton)
  • Rep. Mike Moran (D-Brighton)
  • Rep. Bill Galvin (D-Canton)
  • Rep. David Muradian (R-Grafton)

In recent sessions, these conference committees have stalemated. But this session can and must be different. Legislators have felt the pressure from the public that voters across the commonwealth want to see these changes. Let’s keep up the momentum, get this done, and then get to the important work across so many urgent issues facing the Commonwealth.

We recently sent a letter with Act on Mass and Progressive Democrats of Massachusetts in support of critical transparency reforms. Now it’s your turn:

Email Your State Legislators

Email the Conference Committee

Last Session’s Votes…And This Session’s Co-Sponsorships

Our scorecard website is now up to date with our full data from the 2023-2024 legislative session.

The most striking thing about last session’s recorded votes in the State House? How few of them there were.

Last session saw only 203 votes in the MA House and 252 in the MA Senate, each approximately 50% below average and part of an ongoing decline. That’s bad for accountability. When all of the discussion and debate happens behind closed doors, voters are less aware of where their legislators really stand.

And not each of these recorded votes will be worth scoring: many are low-stakes votes where everyone agrees.

To account for the scarcity of votes last session—especially ones that were beyond unanimous or party-line—we included a few additional data points:

  • Whether your state legislators are visiting prisons and jails to serve as a force for accountability in the conditions there
  • Whether your legislators are holding office hours and town halls to engage constituents
  • Whether your legislators are co-sponsoring the bills that we are tracking on our Scorecard website

For the first two, we did our best to reach out to legislative offices to get information. If we’re missing something, just let us know.

But headed into the new session, our Scorecard website also has other important information: Co-Sponsorship. We’ll be tracking which legislators are co-sponsoring the bills on our Legislative Agenda. That’s a critical tool for you to be able to apply effective pressure — as well as to give credit to the legislators who are fighting the good fight.

Take a look, explore, and take action!

Senate Scorecard Update: The Rest of 2024 in Review

The 193rd session finished as the clock struck midnight and December 31 became January 1st. Rather than merely running out the clock against their usual July 31 legislative deadline, the MA House and Senate nearly went almost all the way up to the end of the year.

Blowing past deadlines is not a new phenomenon in the Massachusetts State House. But what was new this session was the record low number of recorded votes: 203 in the House and 252 in the Senate. By contrast, the average number of recorded votes for all the sessions from 2005 to 2022 (under both Democratic and Republican governors) was 522 in the House and 482 in the Senate; the House, in other words, was well over 50% below average and the Senate getting close. That makes the work of putting together a scorecard—a vital accountability tool—harder. 

A scorecard, as we like to say, should tell a story. As we analyzed recorded votes since our mid-term scorecard update, we focused on votes that advance our Legislative Agenda / Progressive Platform and, importantly, highlight a contrast between legislators. With fewer votes, there are fewer contrasts. 

When putting together a corecard, we shy away from including many unanimous votes: before any unanimous vote, there are often many legislators putting up roadblocks along the way, as well as concessions made to achieve broader support. Moreover, in a case of unanimity, a recorded vote is motivated more by legislators’ desires for a good press release than anything else (if there’s a time to voice vote, it would be then). No scorecard can ever fully capture such behind-the-scenes jockeying, but setting a high bar before including a unanimous vote helps.

We also avoid giving credit where credit has already been given: if we score a bill at one stage of the legislative process, we shy away from scoring its final passage later on to avoid duplication. However, when bills or amendments run counter to progressive values, we may score their multiple appearances. 

See our full scorecard here or on https://scorecard.progressivemass.com.

In the session since our last scorecard, the Senate was more willing to pass standalone bills than the House (even if their standalone bills often combined multiple smaller bills too). That included a bill to ban third-party electric suppliers from enrolling new individual residential customers, protecting residents from unfair and deceptive practices that have led to higher energy bills for low-income families (25s, party-line), and a comprehensive bill to reduce plastic waste (30s). Although the Plastics Reduction Act garnered the support of two Republicans (Bruce Tarr of Gloucester and Patrick O’Connor of Weymouth) along with the full Democratic caucus, some efforts to weaken the bill were bipartisan. An amendment to make a proposed ten-cent fee for recycled paper carryout bags optional for retailers failed clearly 8 to 30, but with four Democrats joining Republicans: Barry Finegold (D-Andover), Mark Montigny (D-New Bedford), Michael Moore (D-Auburn), and John Velis (D-Westfield). The House refused to take up either bill, with some controversy around the former.

The Senate’s Affordable Homes Act (i.e., housing bond bill) debate had even fewer recorded votes than the House’s. Despite being in session from 10 am to midnight to work through the bill (with frequent recesses therein), there were almost no recorded votes, and there was little debate.

In the age of the MBTA Communities Act, the new law requiring communities with MBTA service to establish a zoning district where multifamily housing can be built as of right, the Republican Party has become a NIMBY bastion, a bit of irony given that Charlie Baker was the law’s biggest champion. Accordingly, Senate Republicans made an—unsuccessful—effort to create an appeals process to allow communities to evade the law (31s). Two Democrats—Edward Kennedy of Lowell and Walter Timilty of Milton—joined Republicans to vote for it. Although the Senate’s bill included a number of important provisions, we decided not to score it due to the Senate’s exclusion of the real estate transfer fee local option, which Governor Healey had supported: the unanimous final vote on the housing bond bill hides more about the process than it reveals. 

The budget, as “must-pass” legislation, produced a comparatively large share of total recorded votes given the number of amendments filed: the Senate took 44 recorded votes during its budget debate. Most were, of course, unanimous. However, a few were not. The Senate voted 34 to 5 against a Republican amendment to extend the statutory two-day sales tax holiday (a costly gimmick that accomplishes nothing) to two weeks, with Walter Timilty (D-Milton) joining the 4 Republicans (26s). The Senate voted 29 to 10 against a Republican amendment  to undermine the Fair Share Amendment by allowing high-income couples to evade the surtax by filing separate tax returns if they have filed a joint federal tax return (27s). Six Democrats joined the four Republicans: 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). Shockingly, Collins, Lovely, Timilty, and Velis voted the exact opposite way the year prior (3s). 

The Senate also voted 30 to 9 to create a new advisory commission to determine a new seal and motto of the commonwealth (to replace the current very racist flag and seal), as recommended by the last commission (29s). Six Democrats joined 3 out of the 4 Republicans in voting against it: 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). Republican Bruce Tarr of Gloucester joined Democrats in voting yes. 

The Senate’s economic development bill in July became another source of non-unanimous votes despite the unanimity behind the final bill. Two votes were party line: one to strengthen our public health infrastructure by re-passing a bill that the Legislature had passed last session but too late to override Governor Baker’s veto and one to defeat a Republican amendment to reduce the tax rate for short-term capital gains, an attempted giveaway to the top 1 percent (33s; 34s). 

The Senate also used the economic development bill as a vehicle to increase the age of juvenile jurisdiction to include 18-year-olds—keeping high school seniors out of the adult prison system, something they also voted for back in 2017 (32s). Voting against the measure were the chamber’s four Republicans as well as Democrats Nick Collins (D-South Boston), John Cronin (D-Fitchburg), Michael Moore (D-Auburn), Walter Timilty (D-Milton), and John Velis (D-Westfield). 

Several Democrats who opposed such a measure in 2017 have since come around: Mike Brady (D-Brockton), Mark Montigny (D-New Bedford), Michael Rodrigues (D-Westport), and Mike Rush (D-Westport). Rodrigues and Rush have both voted better than their ideology on certain legislation given their need to vote in line with the Senate President as part of the Leadership team. 

Despite our reservations around unanimous votes, we did include two of them because if we encourage legislators to vote for a bill, we believe that we should include that bill in our scorecard. On that front, both chambers voted to update Massachusetts’s forty-year-old parentage statutes to be inclusive of LGBTQ+ families and families formed through assisted reproduction (36s) and pass comprehensive maternal health legislation that would expand equitable access to midwifery care, allow more birth centers to open, offer paid pregnancy loss leave, and more (37s).

When the Senate belatedly took up a bill to address the Steward crisis, the amendment votes often reflected lobbying coming from the Senate Leadership and the Mass Nurses Association in opposite directions, leading to strange bedfellows. An example in point: the Senate voted 25 to 14 against an amendment creating a moratorium on any hospital, provider, or provider organization entering into any financial agreement with a private equity firm, real estate investment trust, or management services organization until 180 days after the bill’s regulations go into effect (35s). Voting yes were two reliable progressives: Jamie Eldridge (D-Marlborough) and Adam Gomez (D-Springfield), the chamber’s four Republicans, and then eight mostly more moderate-to-conservative Democrats (Michael Brady of Brockton, Nick Collins of South Boston, John Keenan of Quincy, Edward Kennedy of Lowell, Mark Montigny of New Bedford, Michael Moore of Auburn, Marc Pacheco of Taunton, and Walter Timilty of Milton). 

The Senate passed their chamber’s siting reform and clean energy climate package in June. The final bill passed in November had stronger language around environmental justice but narrower language around a transition away from gas. The two votes were the same: 38 to 2, with Republicans Peter Durant of Spencer and Ryan Fattman of Sutton voting no. Since the roll calls were identical, we chose to score the latter (38s). 

With the dearth of recorded votes this session, we have sought other opportunities to show contrast between legislators. Starting in our mid-session scorecard, we tracked whether legislators used their oversight powers over prisons and jails (they can enter any DOC facility unannounced, but we did not restrict this data point to unannounced visits). For the final session scorecard, we added data points around co-sponsorship (39s, 40s) because if we ask legislators to do something, we should give credit if they do it, as well as accessibility (41s), measured via whether they hold office hours, town halls, or other events in district to actually hear from their constituents.

House Scorecard Update: The Rest of 2024 in Review

The 193rd session finished as the clock struck midnight and December 31 became January 1st. Rather than merely running out the clock against their usual July 31 legislative deadline, the MA House and Senate nearly went almost all the way up to the end of the year.

Blowing past deadlines is not a new phenomenon in the Massachusetts State House. But what was new this session was the record low number of recorded votes: 203 in the House and 252 in the Senate. By contrast, the average number of recorded votes for all the sessions from 2005 to 2022 (under both Democratic and Republican governors) was 522 in the House and 482 in the Senate; the House, in other words, was well over 50% below average and the Senate getting close. That makes the work of putting together a scorecard—a vital accountability tool—harder. 

A scorecard, as we like to say, should tell a story. As we analyzed recorded votes since our mid-term scorecard update, we focused on votes that advance our Legislative Agenda / Progressive Platform and, importantly, highlight a contrast between legislators. With fewer votes, there are fewer contrasts. 

When putting together a corecard, we shy away from including many unanimous votes: before any unanimous vote, there are often many legislators putting up roadblocks along the way, as well as concessions made to achieve broader support. Moreover, in a case of unanimity, a recorded vote is motivated more by legislators’ desires for a good press release than anything else (if there’s a time to voice vote, it would be then). No scorecard can ever fully capture such behind-the-scenes jockeying, but setting a high bar before including a unanimous vote helps. 

We also avoid giving credit where credit has already been given: if we score a bill at one stage of the legislative process, we shy away from scoring its final passage later on to avoid duplication. However, when bills or amendments run counter to progressive values, we may score their multiple appearances. 

See our full scorecard here or on https://scorecard.progressivemass.com.

Since our mid-session scorecard, the biggest source of votes was the Affordable Homes Act, also known as the housing bond bill. The House did not take any recorded votes on individual progressive Democratic amendments to improve the bill, preferring to voice vote most of them down if they were not yet withdrawn. 

In the age of the MBTA Communities Act, the new law requiring communities with MBTA service to establish a zoning district where multifamily housing can be built as of right), the Republican Party has become a NIMBY bastion, a bit of irony given that Charlie Baker was the law’s biggest champion. House Republicans tried and rightly failed in their attempts to weaken the enforcement of the MBTA Communities Act, such as waiving compliance if a town meets the 40B threshold (i.e., at least 10 percent of housing units are low- or moderate-income) and creating an appeals process to allow communities to evade the law with spurious arguments (20h, 21h). House Republicans also tried to get mobile homes automatically counted toward a 40B threshold as a way of denying the need to actually build more affordable housing (22h). 

But the debate was not just about blocking bad amendments to the bill. The House did improve their base bill during the floor debate, such as by adopting a Tenant Opportunity to Purchase local option, which would enable cities and towns to choose to pass ordinances giving tenants the right of first refusal to buy their building if it goes up for sale (23h). However, the welcome embrace of a TOPA local option did not suffice for their refusal to include a real estate transfer fee local option; with such a critical piece of the Healey’s own proposed bill missing, we did not see fit to score the final bill itself. Those who voted against the bill (two Democrats—Rep. Bill Driscoll of Milton and Rep. Dave Robertson of Tewksbury—and eleven Republicans) should be criticized for their NIMBYism, but the yes votes hide more than they reveal given the jockeying around what should be in the final bill. 

Despite our reservations around unanimous votes, we did include two of them because if we encourage legislators to vote for a bill, we believe that we should include that bill in our scorecard. On that front, both chambers voted to update Massachusetts’s forty-year-old parentage statutes to be inclusive of LGBTQ+ families and families formed through assisted reproduction (24h) and pass comprehensive maternal health legislation that would expand equitable access to midwifery care, allow more birth centers to open, offer paid pregnancy loss leave, and more (25h). 

Because the House’s own climate bill, passed in July, excluded any provisions around transitioning the state away from gas, we did not believe it to be worth scoring. As with the Affordable Homes Act, the NO votes (i.e., the Republican caucus) deserve criticism, but the YES votes hide more than they reveal. That said, the final climate bill passed in November was a solidly comprehensive bill with important language around environmental justice and the gas transition; Democrats were unanimously in support, and Republicans were split nearly down the middle (27h). 

In Massachusetts, we are aghast when Republican legislatures in other states try to block their liberal capital cities from passing their own laws. But that’s common practice here already given our restrictive home rule system. Fortunately, the House voted to approve (26h) a home rule petition from Boston Mayor Michelle Wu to soften a looming residential property tax increase (with Proposition 2 ½, which has wreaked havoc on municipal finances for decades, residential and commercial real estate taxes are linked, and given a set of formulas, commercial real estate taxes are dropping while residential ones rising). If only the Senate would have obliged. 

With the dearth of recorded votes this session, we have sought other opportunities to show contrast between legislators. Starting in our mid-session scorecard, we tracked whether legislators used their oversight powers over prisons and jails (they can enter any DOC facility unannounced, but we did not restrict this data point to unannounced visits). For the final session scorecard, we added data points around co-sponsorship (28h, 29h) because if we ask legislators to do something, we should give credit if they do it, as well as accessibility (30h), measured via whether they hold office hours, town halls, or other events in district to actually hear from their constituents. 

10 Weeks Left in the Legislative Session. How Has Your Legislator Been Voting?

Did you know that there are only 10 weeks left in the formal legislative session? That’s right: all the major decisions being made and votes being cast on Beacon Hill will be happening in the next 70 days.

But that’s all still to come. Let’s take a moment to talk about the session so far with our Legislator Scorecard.

Our 2023-2024 Scorecard

Fewer Recorded Votes: As of today, the House has only taken 107 recorded votes. By this date in 2022, the House had taken 187 votes, and in 2020, 174. The same problem exists in the Senate, where there have only been 148 recorded votes so far as opposed to 166 by this point in 2022 (and 14 of those 148 have happened just this week with unanimous votes on budget amendments).

Follow the Leader: We have been talking for years about the culture in the Legislature in which legislators defer to the will of the respective chamber’s Leadership, and that shows up even more starkly this year. Fewer votes that are not just party line are making it to the floor. Votes that show clear divides in the Democratic caucus are rare in the Senate and even rarer in the House. Whey such votes do happen, they are typically on roll call votes requested by Republicans which show which handful of Democrats are the most conservative in the caucus but little beyond that.

New Additions to the Scorecard: Massachusetts state legislators have the authority to visit prisons and jails unannounced and without the need for any special permission. Few visit unannounced, but the number of legislators who visit prisons and jails in (also important) scheduled visits is also quite low. The State Legislature votes for the funding for prisons and jails each year, and legislators should be overseeing how that money is being spent and overseeing to what extent laws are being (or are not being) followed. And that requires showing up. So, we decided to add an extra item to this session’s scorecard: whether or not legislators have actually visited at least one of MA’s prisons and jails this session to do such oversight. We reached out to every legislator, and we plan to continually update the data as legislators respond or visit. Feel free to reach out to your own legislator as well.

Missed Votes: It’s the job of a legislator to show up, so our Scorecard has always counted missed votes against legislators. However, if a percentage of missed votes gets too high, a legislator’s score becomes more a story about attendance than about votes. That’s why you’ll see a number of legislators with no score at all: they missed too many of the scored votes. However, every legislator has the ability to submit on record to the House or Senate clerk how they would have voted had they been present, and we will count those.

What’s Coming:

Our scorecard won’t be finalized until the end of the legislative session, and so there might be many more votes to come — and many opportunities for your legislators to show that they stand for the progressive values you care about.

The 2021-2022 Legislative Session is Now Over. Here’s Our Scorecard.

Last Tuesday marked the end of the 192nd Legislative Session (2021-2022) in Massachusetts. New and returning legislators were sworn in, and soon, bills will be filed, committees assigned, etc., etc.

But before diving into the new session, let’s take a look back at the one that just passed with our Final 192nd Session Legislator Scorecard.

How did your legislators do? Find out by visiting our scorecard website here, or looking at the charts on our website (here & here).

Our Honor Roll

Six returning legislators — 3 state senators and 3 state reps — had As on our scorecard for the past session.

The 3 senators were Sen. Jamie Eldridge (D-Acton), Sen. Pat Jehlen (D-Somerville), and Sen. Becca Rausch (D-Needham).

192nd Session Senate Honor Roll

The 3 representatives were Rep. Mike Connolly (D-Cambridge), Rep. Dan Sena (D-Acton), and Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven (D-Somerville).

192nd Session Senate Honor Roll

Some Quick Stats

  • We scored 31 votes in the House and 38 in the Senate, as well as scoring
    public support for the Massachusetts State House Employee Union.
  • In the Massachusetts House of Representatives, there is a strong dynamic of legislators voting lockstep with the speaker. We can see that in this session, as 45 other Democrats (more than one-third of the caucus) have the exact same score as Speaker Ron Mariano (D-Quincy).
  • Three Democrats in the House had Fs on our scorecard: Rep. Colleen Garry (D-Dracut), Rep. Dave Robertson (D-Tewksbury), and Rep. Jeff Turco (D-Winthrop).
  • Although Rep. Garry was the lowest-scoring Democrat at 38%, she was still higher than the highest-scoring House Republicans, who all had only 28%.
  • Five Democrats in the Senate had Fs on our scorecard: Sen. Michael Moore (D-Auburn), Sen. John Velis (D-Westfield), Sen. Anne Gobi (D-Spencer), Sen. Walter Timilty (D-Milton), and Sen. Marc Pacheco (D-Taunton).
  • Although Pacheco was the lowest-scoring Democrat at 44%, he was still higher than the highest-scoring Republican, Sen. Patrick O’Connor (R-Weymouth) at 33%

We are looking forward to the new legislative session. At the end of the day, legislators decide what votes we can score by what recorded votes they request and what bills they advance. May the new session be one filled with progressive legislative action.

2022 MA House Scorecard: The Rest of the Session in Review

PM Scorecard graphic

A scorecard, as we like to say, should tell a story. And telling that story requires careful attention. 

As we analyzed recorded votes since our mid-term scorecard update, we focused on votes that advance our Legislative Agenda / Progressive Platform and, importantly, highlight a contrast between legislators. 

Because of that, we shy away from including many unanimous votes: before any unanimous vote, there are often many legislators putting up roadblocks along the way, as well as concessions made to achieve broader support. Moreover, in a case of unanimity, a recorded vote is motivated more by legislators’ desires for a good press release than anything else (if there’s a time to voice vote, it would be then). No scorecard can ever fully capture such behind-the-scenes jockeying, but setting a high bar before including a unanimous vote helps. 

See our full scorecard here or on https://scorecard.progressivemass.com.

False Solutions for Rising Inflation  

In the wake of rising inflation, conservatives in the state and nationally started pushing for suspending or even eliminating the gas tax. Such a move does not get at the root of the commodity speculation pushing the price increase and drains revenue that could be used to address the true cost drivers. More forward-thinking policymakers embraced free public transit as a way to address rising costs (see, for example, Connecticut). Republicans roll-called an amendment to suspend the gas tax during the budget debate in April, and fortunately, it failed 32 to 124 (26h). Only Colleen Garry (D-Dracut), Dave Roberson (D-Tewksbury), Alan Silvia (D-Fall River), and Jeff Turco (D-Winthrop) joined Republicans in voting for it. 

Reproductive Justice 

Although the Legislature often claims that it cannot act quickly, at times it can, and the Legislature responded quickly to the Dobbs ruling by passing a follow-up bill to last session’s ROE Act. The new bill established critical protections for Bay Staters who provide or help someone access reproductive health care and gender-affirming care, requiring insurance to cover abortion and abortion-related care, and other important measures supporting reproductive justice and bodily autonomy. It passed overwhelmingly 136 to 17, with only 6 Democrats and 11 Republicans voting against it (27h). Notably, this was a much larger margin than the ROE Act last session, which just cleared the two-thirds threshold for an override of Governor Baker’s veto. The Democrats who opposed the bill were Colleen Garry (D-Dracut), Russell Holmes (D-Mattapan), John Rogers (D-Norwood), Alan Silvia (D-Fall River), Jeff Turco (D-Winthrop), and Bud Williams (D-Springfield).

Tackling the Climate Crisis 

Back in March, the House passed a bill to accelerate the development of the offshore wind industry. The bill contained many important provisions, but was narrow in scope given the scale of the climate crisis. We chose to score the final conferenced climate bill that the House and Senate passed in July. Entitled An Act driving clean energy and offshore wind, that bill took steps to accelerate the transition to renewable energy, modernize the grid, make green jobs accessible to the communities most in need, require large buildings to report energy usage, improve electric car infrastructure and affordability, and require electrification of public fleets. It passed 143 to 9, with opposition coming from Democrat Colleen Garry (D-Dracut) and 8 Republicans (28h). 

Public Safety Done Right 

Just as the Legislature acted quickly to respond to the Supreme Court’s ruling on abortion rights, the Legislature also acted quicky to respond to the Supreme Court’s assault on gun violence prevention by passing a bill to harmonize MA’s gun safety laws with the ruling as well as requiring law enforcement officials to conduct personal interviews with anyone seeking to apply for a firearm license and banning anyone facing a restraining order from getting a license. It passed on a largely party line vote of 120 to 33 (29h). Colleen Garry (D-Dracut), Rady Mom (D-Lowell), Dave Robertson (D-Tewksbury), Paul Schmid (D-Westport), and Jeff Turco (D-Winthrop) joined Republicans in opposition. 

After the House and Senate passed a measure to end the predatory practice of charging incarcerated individuals exorbitant costs to connect with their loved ones (No Cost Calls), Governor Baker threatened to veto it unless the Legislature also passed his “dangerousness bill,” an expansion of pre-trial detention (i.e., when individuals are incarcerated without yet being convicted of a crime) with few if any safeguards. Despite being touted as a victims’ rights bill, the proposal was opposed by Jane Doe, Inc., who argued that the bill would be harmful for the survivors they serve. Thankfully, the House rejected Baker’s measure, voting it down 31 to 122 (31h). If only the Senate had as well (but that’s another story). Four Democrats joined Republicans in siding with Baker: Colleen Garry (D-Dracut), Dave Robertson (D-Tewksbury), Paul Tucker (D-Salem), and Jeff Turco (D-Winthrop). 

Labor Solidarity 

In April, members of the MA State Senate staff announced that after years of staff organizing, they achieved the number of authorization cards necessary to form a MA Senate staff union. On Thursday, March 31, representatives of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 2222 (IBEW) notified Senate President Karen Spilka of the successful majority and requested voluntary recognition of the Massachusetts State House Employee Union, which would become the second state legislative staff union in United States history. To show solidarity with the union organizers, we chose to score any statements made by legislators in support of the Staff Union (32h). 

2022 MA Senate Scorecard: The Rest of the Session in Review

PM Scorecard graphic

A scorecard, as we like to say, should tell a story. And telling that story requires careful attention. 

As we analyzed recorded votes since our mid-term scorecard update, we focused on votes that advance our Legislative Agenda / Progressive Platform and, importantly, highlight a contrast between legislators. 

Because of that, we shy away from including many unanimous votes: before any unanimous vote, there are often many legislators putting up roadblocks along the way, as well as concessions made to achieve broader support. Moreover, in a case of unanimity, a recorded vote is motivated more by legislators’ desires for a good press release than anything else (if there’s a time to voice vote, it would be then). No scorecard can ever fully capture such behind-the-scenes jockeying, but setting a high bar before including a unanimous vote helps. 

False Solutions for Rising Inflation  

In the wake of rising inflation, conservatives in the state and nationally started pushing for suspending or even eliminating the gas tax. Such a move does not get at the root of the commodity speculation pushing the price increase and drains revenue that could be used to address the true cost drivers. More forward-thinking policymakers embraced free public transit as a way to address rising costs (see, for example, Connecticut). Votes to suspend the gas tax came up during a supplemental budget in March and in the regular budget in May; we scored the former, which failed 11-29 (21s). Paul Feeney (D-Foxborough), Barry Finegold (D-Andover), Anne Gobi (D-Spencer), Mark Montigny (D-New Bedford), Michael Moore (D-Auburn), Marc Pacheco (D-Taunton), Walter Timilty (D-Milton), and John Velis (D-Westfield joined Republicans in the gimmick. 

Tackling the Climate Crisis 

In April, the Senate took up a multi-issue climate bill to accelerate the clean energy transition, with a particular focus on electrification of transportation and also, to a lesser extent, on building emissions. You can read our full write-up here. It was a strong bill and passed on party lines, i.e., 37 to 3 (23s). There were several worthwhile amendments that passed with recorded votes, but we chose not to score the unanimous votes to allow local pension funds to divest from fossil fuels and require MassDOT to assist Regional Transit Authorities in transitioning to the use of electric buses (If there was unanimous support, it could have just been in the base bill that came to the floor or received a voice vote to move along the process faster). However, Senator Pacheco’s amendment based on his Building Justice with Jobs bill received a more contentious vote (22s). The amendment requested $1 billion from federal Covid-19 recovery funds be transferred to the Clean Energy Investment Fund for at least 1 million home retrofits, prioritizing people living in Environmental Justice (EJ) communities. The amendment was a key priority for the Mass Renews Alliance, MA Power Forward, 350 Mass, and the Mass Sierra Club, but it failed 11 to 28, with a coalition of yes votes from both some of the most progressive and the most conservative senators. 

Sports Betting

Despite the many far more important issues the Legislature could have devoted time to addressing this session, the Legislature was consumed a fair amount by the question of legalizing sports betting. We have been on the record opposing the expansion of casinos given the public health impacts of gambling and the predatory business practices at its core; however, we did not engage in this fight. That said, Sen. Sonia Chang-Díaz (D-Jamaica Plain) roll-called an amendment to the Senate’s sports betting bill to build an evaluation of sports betting license-seekers’ Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) commitments and past record into the licensing process. If the industry is to exist, it should not reinforce the inequities of the economy at large. Unfortunately, Senate Leadership opposed the amendment, and it failed 14 to 26 (24s) — a nonetheless remarkably close vote by our Legislature’s standards. 

Work & Family Mobility Act 

Although we are often more critical of the House than of the Senate, the Senate were the laggards on the Work & Family Mobility Act, which the House passed in February but the Senate did not take up until May (intentionally after the filing deadline for candidates…). The bill, 

for which immigrants’ rights advocates had been fighting for decades, would remove immigration status as a barrier to obtaining a driver’s license so that all drivers on the road are tested and so that immigrants without status are able to drive safely to work, to school, to the hospital, etc. It passed 32 to 8 (30s), with only 5 Democrats joining the 3 Republicans in opposition. Republicans tried several times to weaken the bill, with amendments to create a second-class status for such new license-holders, increase entanglement with ICE, or foster voter fraud conspiracies. They all failed, obtaining between 4 and 7 Democratic votes depending on amendment (25s – 29s). 

Nick Collins (D-South Boston), Anne Gobi (D-Spencer), Marc Pacheco (D-Taunton), Walter Timilty (D-Milton), and John Velis (D-Westfield) were the only Democrats to oppose it. John Keenan (D-Quincy), Mark Montigny (D-New Bedford), and Michael Moore (D-Auburn) were the only senators to vote for the bill but support at least one effort to weaken it.

Criminal Legal Reform 

In late June, the Senate took up two bills to make the criminal justice system slightly more “just.” The first bill was to reform the civil asset forfeiture system, raising the legal bar that law enforcement must meet to seize and keep people’s money and property in suspected drug crimes. MA currently allows DAs the lowest legal burden of proof to keep property that’s seized, even when charges are never filed, and is the only state to do so. The Senate passed it 31 to 9, with 6 Democrats joining Republicans in opposition (32s). A Republican amendment to weaken the bill failed 10 to 29 (33s).

Mike Brady (D-Brockton), Nick Collins (D-South Boston), Barry Finegold (D-Andover), Marc Pacheco (D-Taunton), Walter Timilty (D-Milton), and John Velis (D-Westfield) were the only Democrats to oppose it. Anne Gobi (D-Spencer) and Michael Moore (D-Auburn) voted for the effort to weaken the bill but ultimately supported it. Nick Collins (D-South Boston) opposed the effort to weaken the bill, but then also voted against the bill itself. 

The second was to increase opportunities for judicial diversion for youth, thereby ensuring opportunities for rehabilitation and curbing the school-to-prison pipeline. It passed 32 to 8, with 5 Democrats joining Republicans in opposition (36s). The Senate also defeated three Republican efforts to weaken the bill, with amendments receiving between 3 and 9 Democratic supporters (33s – 35s). 

Nick Collins (D-South Boston), Barry Finegold (D-Andover), Anne Gobi (D-Spencer), Marc Pacheco (D-Taunton), and John Velis (D-Westfield) were the only Democrats to oppose it.Paul Feeney (D-Foxborough), Mark Montigny (D-New Bedford), Michael Moore (D-Auburn), and Walter Timilty (D-Milton) all supported at least one of the conservative amendments but still voted for the bill itself. 

In a sad final note for the session, however, the Senate embraced a harmful proposal from Governor Baker to reinforce the carceral framework. After the House and Senate passed a measure to end the predatory practice of charging incarcerated individuals exorbitant costs to connect with their loved ones (No Cost Calls), Governor Baker threatened to veto it unless the Legislature also passed his “dangerousness bill,” an expansion of pre-trial detention (i.e., when individuals are incarcerated without yet being convicted of a crime) with few if any safeguards. Despite being touted as a victims’ rights bill, the proposal was opposed by Jane Doe, Inc., who argued that the bill would be harmful for the survivors they serve. 

Nonetheless, in the final hours of the session, the Senate chose to pass a narrowed but still harmful version of Baker’s proposal, thereby closing off a path forward for the No Cost Calls bill and pandering to the worst of “tough on crime” mentality. The amendment passed, shamefully, 30 to 8 (38s). The eight rightful dissenters were Mike Barrett (D-Lexington), Sonia Chang-Díaz (D-Jamaica Plain), Jo Comerford (D-Northampton), Cindy Creem (D-Newton), Jamie Eldridge (D-Acton), Adam Hinds (D-Pittsfield), Pat Jehlen (D-Somerville), and Jason Lewis (D-Winchester).

Reproductive Justice 

Although the Legislature often claims that it cannot quickly, at times, it can, and the Legislature responded quickly to the Dobbs ruling by passing a follow-up bill to last session’s ROE Act. The new bill established critical protections for Bay Staters who provide or help someone access reproductive health care and gender-affirming care, requiring insurance to cover abortion and abortion-related care, and other important measures supporting reproductive justice and bodily autonomy. It passed overwhelmingly 39 to 1, with only Republican Ryan Fattman (R-Sutton) opposing it (37s). 

Labor Solidarity 

In April, members of the MA State Senate staff announced that after years of staff organizing, they achieved the number of authorization cards necessary to form a MA Senate staff union. On Thursday, March 31, representatives of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 2222 (IBEW) notified Senate President Karen Spilka of the successful majority and requested voluntary recognition of the Massachusetts State House Employee Union, which would become the second state legislative staff union in United States history. Senate Leadership has remained resolutely opposed to recognizing them, and to show solidarity with the union organizers, we chose to score any statements made by senators in support of the Staff Union (39s).

Happy Sunshine Week! ☀☀ Announcing Our Mid-Session Scorecard

Happy Sunshine Week! ☀☀ Sunshine Week is an initiative from the News Leaders Association to educate the public about the importance of open government and the dangers of excessive and unnecessary secrecy. We know a thing about excessive and unnecessary secrecy in government here in MA.

But one piece of information we do have is recorded votes.

Each session, we create a scorecard based on a subset of key roll call votes related to our progressive platform. Scorecards provide a vital accountability tool, enabling constituents to see what the Legislature is doing, how their legislators are voting, and where there is room for pressure.

Announcing Our Mid-Session 2021-2022 Scorecard

Our 192nd Scorecard through February 2022 is now live on https://scorecard.progressivemass.com/. You can also find it on our website here and here.

How did your legislators do? Click to find out.

Perfect Scores & Other Data Points

Congratulations to the five legislators who had perfect scores!

  • Rep. Mike Connolly (D-Cambridge)
  • Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven (D-Somerville)
  • Sen. Sonia Chang-Díaz (D-Jamaica Plain)
  • Sen. Jamie Eldridge (D-Acton)
  • Sen. Becca Rausch (D-Needham)

Other legislators who scored above 90% include Rep. Tami Gouveia (D-Acton), Rep. Nika Elugardo (D-Jamaica Plain), Rep. Russell Holmes (D-Mattapan), Rep. Dan Sena (D-Acton), Sen. Adam Gomez (D-Springfield), Sen. Adam Hinds (D-Pittsfield), Sen. Pat Jehlen (D-Somerville), and Sen. Ed Kennedy (D-Lowell).

Compared to last session, fewer Democrats received Ds and Fs. Why? Because the Legislature last session took a number of votes on policing reform, which highlighted major ideological splits in the Democratic caucus in both the House and Senate. There are still plenty of important pending bills that might raise similar ideological splits in the current session if the Legislature chooses bold action instead of inertia and avoidance.

That said, Democrats scoring a “D” or below include Rep. Patrick Kearney (D-Scituate), Rep. Christopher Markey (D-Dartmouth), Rep. Angelo Puppolo (D-Springfield), Rep. Jeff Turco (D-Winthrop), Rep. Dave Robertson (D-Tewksbury), Rep. Colleen Garry (D-Dracut), Sen. Marc Pacheco (D-Taunton), and Sen. Walter Timilty (D-Milton).

No Republican in the House scored above 30%; in the Senate, the highest was Sen. Patrick O’Connor (R-Weymouth) at 45%.

Why a Scorecard?

We believe that Democracy functions best when there’s transparency. And, our Massachusetts Legislature functions best when citizens know what votes our elected officials are taking and when we can compare their actions to their rhetoric. But on Beacon Hill, that’s not such a straightforward proposition.

Finding your legislator’s voting record, and understanding it, can be very difficult and time-consuming. With our “progressive scorecards,” finalized at the end of every 2-year legislative session (but with mid-session updates), we aim to make it easier.

What a Score Means…and What It Doesn’t

As they do with letter grades, an A means excellent, a B means good, a C means average, a D means poor, and an F, well, you get the point.

It’s important to understand these scores from two perspectives: (1) how a legislator is doing compared to how we want them to be doing and (2) how a legislator is doing compared to his/her colleagues. A good scorecard is one that tells a story.

That being said, EVERY legislator can be doing better. And part of doing better is providing more recorded votes that truly capture the story of each chamber. We are only scoring the votes that are taken, and there are many bills and amendments that never receive the votes they deserve. A scorecard can’t account for what goes on behind the scenes and how legislators championed or fought bills or amendments before they came to that vote.

But recorded votes matter. They are how legislators provide receipts of their professed principles, and scorecards provide engaged citizens with an understanding of what’s happening at the Legislature—and how they (YOU) can change it.

PM in the News: “Massachusetts Legislature Ranks Most Liberal Nationwide, Conservative Groups Say”

Hannah Green, “Massachusetts Legislature Ranks Most Liberal Nationwide, Conservative Groups Say,” WGBH News, October 28, 2021.

Others say Massachusetts lawmakers aren’t liberal enough. Jonathan Cohn, chair of the issues committee at Progressive Massachusetts, disagreed with the ranking. The Commonwealth has a high number of Democratic legislators, he said, but the legislation they pass isn’t as progressive when compared to states like California or New York. He believes Massachusetts is behind on key progressive legislation, like same-day voter registration and allowing undocumented immigrants to obtain driver’s licenses.

“My initial thought on Massachusetts being ranked as the most liberal in the country is — I wish,” Cohn said.