Take Action: Our State Budget Is Being Finalized Right Now.

In April and May, the MA House and Senate voted on their respective budgets for the next fiscal year. As they reconcile the differences in a Conference Committee, it’s vital that chambers put aside the inter-chamber jockeying and procrastination that so often characterizes these negotiations and instead commit to embracing the best of both budget proposals.

What would that mean? It would mean doing things like the following:

  • Early Education and Child Care: Advancing the Common Start vision of a more robust early education and child care infrastructure with greater stability for providers, better pay for educators, and more affordability for families, as reflected by various parts of both the House and Senate budget
  • Universal School Meals: Fully funding universal school meals by dedicating $190 million to School Meals For All (Line Item 1596-2422)
  • Access to Counsel: Providing $2.5 million for implementation of a statewide Access to Counsel pilot program to increase access to legal representation for low-income tenants and low-income owner occupants in eviction proceedings (item 0321-1800 in the House FY 2025 budget proposal)
  • No Cost Calls Funding: Dedicating $35M in the Communications Access Trust Fund for no–cost calls in prisons and jails (item 1595-6153 in the House FY 2025 budget proposal)
  • No Cost Calls Reporting: Making technical fixes to the No Cost Calls reporting requirements, so that policymakers have the information they need to effectively monitor free communication (Section 29 A&B of the Senate FY 2025 budget proposal)
  • Voting Access: Eliminating barriers to voting access by ending MA’s outlier status as the only state where if a voter doesn’t return the annual municipal census, they’re placed on the Inactive Voter list (an amendment included in the Senate budget that also earned the support of a majority of representatives)

Can you write to your legislators to urge them to express their support for these provisions to the budget negotiators?

Tomorrow is an important deadline at the State House

Tomorrow is an important deadline at the State House: Joint Rule 10 Day.

According to this State House rule, every joint committee (i.e., committee of both the House and Senate) must take action on the bills before them by the first Wednesday in February.

That action can be to give the bill a favorable report (It advances!), to give the bill an adverse report (It’s done for the session), to send the bill to study (It’s effectively done for the session), or to give the bill an extension (It has more time).

The State House relies on deadlines to spur action, so expect to see a flurry of action on bills later this week.

That also means it’s a great time to contact the committees in support of critical bills.

Can you commit to sending at least one email by tomorrow? See below for some action tools.


 
Keep Up the Momentum for Criminal Justice Reform

If we want to continue to move past the failed model of mass incarceration – a model that costs outrageous sums, breaks apart communities, and does not increase public safety – then we need more policy action this year.

Urge the Judiciary Committee to advance key bills before a critical February 7 deadline.

  • Raise the Age (H.1710 and S.942: An Act to promote public safety and better outcomes for young adults): When young adults (18, 19, 20) are kept in the juvenile system, they are able to have better access to school and rehabilitative programming.
  • Prison Moratorium (H.1795: An Act establishing a jail and prison construction moratorium): Massachusetts does not need to build new prisons and jails. We need to be investing in programming, re-entry services, and community supports.
  • Clean Slate Bills (H.1598/S.979: An Act providing easier and greater access to sealing & H.1493/S.998: An Act to remove collateral consequences and protect the presumption of innocence): Too many people are trapped in poverty and deprived of jobs, housing and other chances for success because of their criminal and juvenile records. We need to allow for automatic record sealing in certain cases, rather than relying only on burdensome case-by-case petitions.

Can you write to the Judiciary Committee today in support of these key bills?

Let’s Set up all Students and Families for Success

Every student deserves the support and resources to thrive. That’s why we’ve been such strong supporters of the Common Start bills and the Thrive Act.

Common Start (H.489 and S.301): While Massachusetts is a nationwide leader on early education and child care and we’ve made important progress in recent years, the current system remains broken and access to quality early education and care remains out of reach for too many families. The Common Start framework would provide the specific structure that is needed to deliver affordable care options for families; significantly better pay and benefits for early educators; a new, stable source of funding for providers; high-quality programs and services for children; and substantial relief for businesses and our economy.

Thrive Act (H.495 / S.246): Massachusetts’ state takeover law and the state’s misuse of the MCAS as a graduation requirement are failing our students and disrupting their education. The Thrive Act would end the failed system of state takeovers of school districts, and replace it with a comprehensive support and improvement system that focuses on giving students and educators the tools and resources they need to succeed. The legislation would also support students by establishing a modified high school graduation requirement in which coursework would replace the MCAS test as the basis for showing student mastery of state standards. And, the legislation would create a commission to give our communities a voice in building a better assessment and accountability system.

Can you email the Joint Committee on Education in support of these bills?


It’s Time to Make Polluters Pay

Massachusetts communities are already experiencing the devastating and costly effects of climate change even without considering the HUGE cost of building the climate resilient infrastructure recommended by Climate Chief Hoffer in her 2023 report.

Unless action is taken, our communities will continue to bear the financial and emotional costs of climate change while the fossil fuel companies responsible for climate-related damages make record profits. These companies must bear the cost.

The Make Polluters Pay Bill (S.481/H.872) is a pathway to making that happen.

It would require top polluters to contribute to a superfund used to pay for climate-related damages in Massachusetts. It would create the Climate Change Adaptation Cost Recovery Program, generating $75 billion over the next 25 years for climate adaptation and resilience projects. These funds will then be dispensed through the Climate Change Adaptation Fund, with at least 40% of the funds going to projects directly benefiting environmental justice communities.

Can you write to the Joint Environment and Natural Resources Committee in support of these bills?

MA Needs to Lead on Democracy

In the late 1990s, after incarcerated individuals in MCI-Norfolk started political organizing, Republican Governor Paul Cellucci and the Massachusetts Legislature responded with retaliation and a multi-step process of disenfranchisement. Our commonwealth did something rare in recent history: it took away the right to vote from a category of people who were formerly enfranchised.

According to a new fact sheet from The Sentencing Project, over 7,700 otherwise eligible citizens in Massachusetts are disenfranchised due to a felony conviction. The report further underscores the racial disparities in the Massachusetts criminal legal system that leads to Black and Latinx residents being disproportionately denied their right to vote.

On April 26, 2023, the Joint Committee on Election Laws gave a favorable report to S.8/H.26, constitutional amendments filed by Sen. Liz Miranda and Adam Gomez and Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven that would ensure that incarceration never leads to a loss of voting rights.

Now, the Election Laws Committee must advance S.428/H.724 before the Feb. 7 deadline. This legislation would make relevant changes in state law, and is needed to accompany the constitutional amendments. Passing the constitutional amendments this year would be historic — we need to make sure these bills that change the law for local elections are moving at the same pace.

Can you write to the Joint Election Laws Committee in support of these bills?

Let’s Continue Expanding Voting Access

I voted stickers

Wednesday, September 13, 2023

Chair Keenan, Chair Ryan, and Members of the Joint Committee on Election Laws:

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. 

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

  • H.724/S.428: An Act relative to voting rights restoration
  • S.410: An Act making voting administrative changes to create equitable systemic solutions (Voting ACCESS bill)
  • H.688: An Act establishing same day registration of voters
  • H.707: An Act decoupling the municipal census from voter registration

H.724/S.428: Voting Rights Restoration

Felony disenfranchisement in Massachusetts is a recent phenomenon. Indeed, although we often think of the history of voting rights in the US as one of ever-forward motion, Massachusetts stands as an outlier. In the late 1990s, after incarcerated individuals in MCI-Norfolk started organizing for better conditions, Republican Governor Bill Cellucci and the MA Legislature responded with retaliation: a multi-step process of disenfranchisement. In 2000, Massachusetts voters approved a constitutional amendment to prohibit people incarcerated for felonies in state prison from voting in state elections; the subsequent year, Cellucci signed a law to extend this prohibition to federal and municipal elections. Our commonwealth did something rare in recent history: it took away the right to vote from a category of people who were formerly enfranchised. 

In 2022, the Massachusetts Legislature took an important step forward when passing the VOTES Act by including language creating protections for jail-based voting for those who still maintain the right to vote, but we must build on that momentum by ending remaining disenfranchisement, as these bills would. 

Felony disenfranchisement compounds the systemic racism of the criminal legal system. Approximately 8,000 residents of the Commonwealth are disenfranchised due to a felony conviction, more than 50% of them are Black or Latinx. 

Felony disenfranchisement laws disenfranchise more voters than those directly affected. Whenever someone loses the right to vote even temporarily, they are likely to mistakenly think that they have lost it permanently. We must eliminate archaic laws that create voter suppression and voter confusion. 

Felony disenfranchisement exacerbates the humanitarian crisis in our prisons and jails. Even Trump’s DOJ pointed out that Massachusetts correctional facilities are engaging in torture, and a lack of political voice puts individuals at risk for abuse. 

Moreover, studies have often shown that fostering ties to the outside world is central to reducing recidivism. Civic engagement provides just that, and we should welcome it. 

S.410, H.688, and H.707: Strengthening Voting Access 

With regard to the comprehensive Voting ACCESS bill (S.410), we would like to underscore the importance of Election Day Registration. In Massachusetts elections, an unnecessary and arbitrary 20-day registration cutoff disenfranchises more than 100,000 voters from participating in our elections. Given that the average American moves more than 11 times over the course of their lives, moving near Election Day could lead to disenfranchisement under the current system. Likewise, given the stress of work, family, and myriad other commitments, many voters may first start to learn about an election after the registration window has already passed. Indeed, this is the period when media coverage of elections—and thus voter information—is the strongest. But when voters seek to update their registration or register anew, they are shut out of the process.

When there are errors in voters’ registration, they are typically asked to fill out a provisional ballot. Provisional ballots are cumbersome for election workers and leave voters feeling as though their votes didn’t count. And our first experiences at the polls–indeed, all of our experiences at the polls–have an impact on our voting habits throughout our lives.

Our neighboring states of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Connecticut have already realized the problems with such a cutoff and adopted Election Day Registration (EDR). Maine has had EDR since the 1970s, and New Hampshire since the 1990s. EDR creates more positive experiences at the polls and, indeed, higher turnout, with studies showing an increase in turnout of approximately 5 percent.

Moreover, if we want to create positive experiences at the polls, we should also delink the municipal census from the inactive voter list. Removing voters from the active voter list for failing to fill out a form is unnecessarily punitive, and it creates unnecessary work for both voters and poll workers.

We have appreciated the recent steps forward in democracy passed in recent sessions, such as automatic voter registration, vote-by-mail, and expanded early voting, and we hope that you will continue this forward motion.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Policy Director

Progressive Massachusetts

If Cities and Towns Want to Deepen Democracy, We Should Let Them.

I voted stickers

Wednesday, June 21, 2023

Chairman Keenan, Chairman Ryan, and Members of the Joint Committee on Election Laws:

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the Policy Director of Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide grassroots advocacy group committed to fighting for an equitable, just, democratic, and sustainable Commonwealth.

At a time when democracy is under attack in many states, municipalities across Massachusetts are instead seeking to strengthen democracy by expanding both who can participate in our elections and how reflective of the electorate the outcomes are. We ask you to allow them to take the lead by giving a favorable report to several enabling bills:

  • H.725: An Act ensuring municipal power over whether elections are reformed
  • S.438: An Act ensuring municipal participation of the widest eligible range
  • H.706/S.415: An Act extending voting rights in municipal elections to noncitizen voters of the Commonwealth
  • H.711/S.433: An Act providing a local option for ranked choice voting in municipal elections

Enabling Municipalities to Expand the Local Electorate: S.438, H.706, S.415

Cities and towns across the Commonwealth have also sought to expand representation in local elections, by extending the franchise to 16- and 17-year-olds or legal non-citizens. The case for both is clear.

With the voting age at 18, many experience their first time voting when they are away at college, often voting by absentee back home if at all. 16 and 17-year-olds, by contrast, know their local polling locations well: they are the elementary schools, the middle schools, the high schools, the town halls, the libraries. They feel the impact of a school committee election directly. And they can get a powerful experience of democracy in action, which is the best civic education.

Similarly, voting and civic engagement are ways of integrating new community members and strengthening the whole community. Non-citizen parent involvement in school affairs (through school committee elections) can increase students’ academic performance, and democracy works best when all communities are reflected in governance.

Moreover, both teen voting and all-resident voting embody the basic principle of no taxation with representation.

Ranked Choice Voting Local Option: H.711/S.433

When voters get to the ballot box, they can face complicated choices. Our first-past-the-post system forces ordinary voters to weigh whether they can vote for their preferred candidate or whether doing so would lead to a “spoiler effect” that gives a candidate they like less a clearer path to victory. This same dynamic can lead candidates and their supporters to try to force similar candidates out of a race due to a fear of “vote splitting.”

Within the current system, the ultimate winner may command less than a majority support, a contradiction of a basic tenet of democracy and a far too common occurrence in Massachusetts elections. Ranked Choice Voting would eliminate these problems by enabling voters to rank the order of their preferences on the ballot and ensuring that whoever wins does so with majority support.

Although the ballot initiative to implement Ranked Choice Voting for state and county elections did not pass, the measure did pass in 78 municipalities in varying parts of the Commonwealth. If such municipalities wish to adopt Ranked Choice Voting for local elections, they should not have to face undue hurdles to doing so.

The number of cities and towns passing home rule petitions on these three issues grows every year, and yet such petitions continue to die in the Legislature. We urge you to stop being a roadblock to democracy and pass these enabling bills.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Policy Director

Progressive Massachusetts

A #FlashbackFriday about Disenfranchisement in MA and What You Can Do Today

Although we often think of the history of voting rights in the US as one of ever-forward motion, Massachusetts stands as an outlier. In the late 1990s, after incarcerated individuals in MCI-Norfolk started organizing for better conditions, Republican Governor Bill Cellucci and the MA Legislature responded with retaliation: a multi-step process of disenfranchisement. In 2000, Massachusetts voters approved a constitutional amendment to prohibit people incarcerated for felonies in state prison from voting in state elections; the subsequent year, Cellucci signed a law to extend this prohibition to federal and municipal elections. Our commonwealth did something rare in recent history: it took away the right to vote from a category of people who were formerly enfranchised.

But the tide is turning. On Wednesday, the Joint Committee on Election Laws took the significant step of giving a favorable report to S.8/H.26, constitutional amendments filed by Sen. Liz Miranda and Adam Gomez and Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven that would ensure that incarceration never leads to a loss of voting rights.

Urge your legislators to support the bill and advocate for its advancement in an upcoming constitutional convention.

And in upcoming events….

Wednesday, May 3: Higher Ed for All Speakout

Celebrate graduates and ensure that debt-free public higher ed is an option for future generations!

The Massachusetts State House will soon be considering the Cherish Act (S.816 / H.1260) and Debt-Free Bill (S.823 / H.1265). Collectively, these bills call for debt-free public higher education, increased student supports, better wages and working conditions, and green/healthy buildings.

Join the Higher Ed for All coalition on the State House steps and share your testimony alongside graduates, students, faculty, librarians, staff, and community from across the commonwealth!

  • 12:00-12:55 PM: Speak Out
  • 12:55 PM: Group Photo
Higher Ed for All

Thursday, May 4: Medicare for All Lobby Day

The Medicare for All Lobby Day will take place on Thursday, May 4, from 10AM to 3PM at the State House. RSVP here to let Mass-Care know you can join!

PM in the News: “Proposed amendment to state constitution could give prisoners back their right to vote”

Ivy Scott, “Proposed amendment to state constitution could give prisoners back their right to vote,” Boston Globe, April 6, 2023.

Jonathan Cohn, policy director of the grassroots political group Progressive Mass, cited multiple studies that indicate a significant percentage of incarcerated people leave prison believing their right to vote is gone forever. Eleven states prevent formerly incarcerated people from voting, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Preventing prisoners from voting “disenfranchises more than just those directly affected,” Cohn said.

The House and Senate Agree to a Final Version of the VOTES Act. Here’s What’s In, and What’s Out.

I voted stickers

On Wednesday, exactly five months before the November 8 general election, the House and Senate released their final agreement on language for the VOTES Act. Yesterday, the Senate voted 37 to 3 in support of the final version of the bill, and the House is expected to vote soon.

The negotiations around the VOTES Act have been going on for months. The Senate passed a bill back in October, and then the House passed one back in January. There has always been strong support from both chambers this session for making the widely popular vote-by-mail and expanded early voting reforms from 2020 permanent, but House leaders have remained fiercely opposed to Same Day Registration or even a narrower Election Day Registration despite ongoing Senate support. Rep. Mike Moran (D-Brighton), one of the most vociferous opponents of Same Day Registration in the House debate, was one of the House appointees to the Conference Committee negotiating the bill.

The opposition to Same Day Registration / Election Day Registration is revealing. Reforms like vote-by-mail and expanded early voting can give incumbents a clearer picture of who is voting and who has already voted. SDR/EDR means that new people with whom they may not have spoken could show up at the polls. That uncertainty terrifies many representatives, and rather than stepping up their work at engaging all residents of their districts, they would rather shut such prospective voters out of the process entirely.

The final version of the VOTES Act, to be clear, contains a number of wins, some big and some modest. Special credit to the Democracy Behind Bars coalition for elevating the issue of jail-based voting during the debate and the negotiations around the bill.

Here are the key provisions of the Conference bill:

Voter Registration 

  • Reducing the voter registration deadline from 20 days before the election to 10 days. Unfortunately, the Conference bill left out Same Day Registration or Election Day Registration, which, as noted, had been a major point of contention in negotiations. The Senate has now voted to pass Same Day Registration three times, only to see it fail each time due to House intransigence. Same Day Registration is one of the simplest and most effective ways to increase turnout, and it is especially important for working-class voters, BIPOC voters, young voters, and renters, and it continues to be appalling that our Democratic supermajority in the House is too afraid of new people participating in the democratic process to embrace this reform. 
  • Requiring the Secretary of State to make the online registration portal accessible in English, Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese, and other languages deemed necessary or required by law 
  • Reasserting that the Automatic Voter Registration law passed in 2018 is a back-end rather than front-end opt-out system. Secretary Bill Galvin has been refusing to implement the bill as passed, creating instead what is called a “front-end opt-out system” in which eligible registrants are given the opportunity to opt out during the initial transaction as opposed to afterwards. For more on this issue, read this. 
  • Requiring the Secretary Galvin to enroll Massachusetts in the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), which helps states keep more accurate voting rolls, no later than July 1, 2022. This too was required in the 2018 AVR bill, and Galvin has refused to adhere to the law.

Vote By Mail 

  • Permanent early voting by mail for all elections (unless municipalities vote to opt out in a public vote of the local legislative body for local elections)
    • Application deadline of the fifth business day before the election (the Tuesday before the election for all regularly scheduled Tuesday elections, and the Monday before the election when the primary falls on the week of Labor Day)
    • Special accommodations for those with disabilities seeking to vote by mail.
    • Creation of an online portal for VBM requests, as well as publication of the application on the Secretary website and the websites of each city and town 
    • Mailing of VBM applications no later than 45 days before the election to all voters registered no later than 60 days before the election 
    • VBM applications and ballots postage-paid, pre-addressed, and available in all languages as required by law. 
    • Mailing of applications with the voter registration acknowledgement letters sent out after registering to vote or updating registration 
    • Deadline of 5 pm on the third day after the election for receipt of VBM ballots mailed on or before Election Day  

Unfortunately, there are no requirements around the number or accessibility of drop boxes for cities and towns to make available for return of VBM ballots. 

Early Voting 

  • Two weeks for biennial state elections (Saturday two weeks before GOTV Saturday through the Friday before the election) 
  • One week for primary elections (Saturday before GOTV Saturday through the Friday before the election) 
  • Posting of early voting sites at least two weeks prior 
  • Local option for early voting in municipal elections (Majority of registrars must request, and then local legislative body must approve. The early voting period must exist within 17 days before the election and 2 business days prior. For Tuesday elections, this would mean between the Saturday two weeks before GOTV Saturday and the Friday before the election.) 
  • See below for early voting requirements by city/town population
Early voting by municipality's population

Staffing the Polls 

  • Enabling cities and towns to appoint poll workers from outside the city/town if there is insufficient staffing 
  • Granting the power to determine the staffing of police officers of the polls to the local legislative bodies, rather than the police departments

Jail-Based Voting Reforms

  • Ensures that individuals who are incarcerated who are currently eligible to vote are provided with voting information and materials to exercise their right to vote
  • Requires correctional facilities to display and distribute information about voting rights and procedures, as prepared by the Secretary of the Commonwealth
  • Requires facilities to assist individuals who are incarcerated in registering, applying for, and returning mail ballots
  • Ensures that individuals who are incarcerated are properly notified of their right to vote upon release and given the opportunity to fill out a voter registration form
  • Creates systems for data collection on jail-based voting, as well as the ability of incarcerated individuals to submit complaints

Unfortunately, the JBV language only applies to state/federal elections (and does not include municipal elections), but it is still a big win. 

What’s in the MA House Budget….And What Could Be.

First of all, happy Earth Day! This Earth Day, I’m thinking about how the investments from the Fair Share Amendment will help us improve our public transit systems, a vital part of our response to climate change (as well as reducing air pollution and expanding economic opportunity). The Fair Share campaign recently launched new social media accounts, so if you haven’t followed them yet, make sure to do so on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.

A Budget Is a Moral Document

Last week, the MA House Ways & Means Committee released its budget for the next fiscal year.

The Good: The budget avoids the regressive tax cuts for the rich proposed by Republican Governor Charlie Baker, includes the new investments in public schools required by the Student Opportunity Act, and ends the exploitative practice of charging incarcerated individuals for phone calls to loved ones.

The Bad: At the same time, the budget continues our chronic underfunding of public transit and fails to deliver on the investments in child care necessary for true affordability and accessibility.

How the Budget Could Be Better: The House will be considering various amendments next week to improve the budget and better deliver on the promise of shared prosperity and justice for all.

Can you contact your state rep in support of these amendments?

Voting Access for All

Amendment #47 (New American Voters Fund), filed by Reps. Ultrino & Donato: Would allocate $4 million to municipalities and community organizations to hire bilingual election workers, pay for professional translators and interpreters, and train elections departments.

Justice for All

Amendment #902 (ACES), filed by Rep. Sabadosa: Would ensure that every call to 911 gets the best response by providing funding to communities that want to develop alternatives to police response for calls better handled by mental and community health providers, like social workers and peer specialists.

Amendment #936 (Community Empowerment and Reinvestment Grant), filed by Rep. Mary Keefe: Would provide $15 Million for the Community Empowerment Reinvestment Grant Program, which funds reentry and intervention programs.

Amendment #1346 (Youth Bail Fees), filed by Rep. Fluker Oakley: Would (1) eliminate the statutorily-required $40 administrative bail fees charged to juveniles when they are arrested overnight and (2) shift the decision to release a child to their parent or to impose cash bail decisions from the police officer on call to the Bail Magistrate, a neutral 3rd party.

The House budget remains poised to earmark millions of dollars for the incarceration of men civilly committed for treatment of substance use disorder under the statute known as “Section 35” (M.G.L. c.123 s.35).

  • Amendment #332 (Section 35), filed by Rep. Balser: Would eliminate the Governor’s proposed funding for correctional section 35 facilities.  
  • Amendment #333 (Access to Addiction Services), filed by Rep. Balser: Would ensure sufficient bed space in DPH or DMH facilities for men committed under section 35.

Economic Security for All

Amendment #181 (Lift Kids Out of Deep Poverty FY23), filed by Rep. Decker: Would raise cash assistance grants for very low-income families with children, elders, and persons with disabilities by 20% for FY 23.

Amendment #640 (Excluding Temporary COVID Relief Income from FY23 Means Testing), filed by Rep. Elugardo: Would ensure that economic assistance from the CARES Act does not count against anyone’s eligibility for means-tested public assistance programs.

Amendment #802 (Including underemployed and unstably housed youth in “at-risk”), filed by Rep. Elugardo: Would add a focus of creating economic opportunity for youth experiencing homelessness to the YouthWorks Youth Jobs program.

Amendment #881 (Massachusetts Rental Voucher Program), filed by Rep. Madaro: Would cap tenant rent share to 30% income instead of 40% and expand mobile vouchers to cover tenant-paid utilities, among other measures.

Amendments #1068 (RTA Funding) & #1070 (RTA Funding Distribution), filed by Representative Sarah Peake: Would make $101 million in base funding available to the RTAs (an increase from $94 million).

Amendment #1268 (Housing Protections), filed by Rep. Moran: Would extend Chapter 257 eviction protections to cases where landlords seek to recover arrears for non-payment of rent – effectively closing the non-payment loophole – and require landlords to participate in the rental assistance process in good faith before being permitted to file an eviction case in court.

Amendment #1371 (Rental Assistance for Families in Transition), filed by Rep. Decker: Would expand eligibility for RAFT to households with incomes from 50% of the area median income (AMI) up to 60% AMI.

Safe & Welcoming Schools for All

Amendment #1133 (Targeted Intervention to Enhance the Learning of Students in Early Grades), filed by Rep. Uyterhoeven: Would provide funding for student specific supports and interventions that enhance learning during preschool through the third grade and that support the elimination of disciplinary sanctions for this population of students

Amendment #1138 (Student Wellness School Support), filed by Rep. Uyterhoeven: Would provide funding to reduce school exclusion for students in prekindergarten through the third grade by utilizing best practices, increased parent engagement and community-based services to support teachers and school staff to employ alternatives to suspensions and expulsions to address student misbehavior in the early grades

Amendment #1321 (Holistic School Health and Safety Practices Grant Program), filed by Rep. Khan: Would create a grant program, administered by the state’s Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, to support public schools and school districts in transitioning to safety models that do not rely on stationing police in schools.

Can you contact your state rep in support of these amendments?

MA Voters Deserve Election Day Registration for This Year’s Elections

Election Day is exactly 8 months away: November 8, 2022.

In Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut, and Vermont, prospective voters will be able to register or update their registration at the polls. But in Massachusetts, they won’t be able to because of our arbitrary, exclusionary, and outdated voter registration cutoff.

Late last month, the Massachusetts House of Representatives voted in favor of the VOTES Act, pledging their support for making permanent critical electoral reforms like mail-in and early in-person voting. However, the House chose to leave out the heart of the VOTES Act: Election Day Registration (EDR). Now, because the House and Senate versions of the VOTES Act differ, a small group of legislators are finalizing the bill in conference committee.

EDR has been proven to make elections more equitable and efficient in 20 states. By reducing voter registration barriers, EDR boosts voter turnout for all, especially BIPOC, low-income, immigrant, and young voters. It also decreases administrative burdens of running elections by allowing election workers to update registration information on the spot.

Contact your state representative NOW and urge them to include EDR in the final version of the VOTES Act.

But Before November….

Before November will be the primaries on September 6 to determine who advances. And before that will be the party conventions in June that determine who even makes the ballot in the first place.

Over the past month, Democratic ward and town committees have been holding caucuses to elect delegates to the state party convention. If you want to take part, check out the caucus calendar here to see if your caucus has happened yet or is still to come.

And if you didn’t get elected or can’t make your caucus, you might still be able to become a delegate. You can find additional opportunities here.

Know What’s on the Ballot

Do you know what an Attorney General, an Auditor, or a Secretary of the Commonwealth does?

Do you want to know?

And do you want to find out more about what the candidates vying for these important statewide positions plan to do with these offices?

Then join us on Saturday, March 26, at 1 pm for our Spring Candidate Interviews.

All are welcome! Just RSVP here.

In solidarity,
Jonathan Cohn

“House should pass same-day voter registration,” CommonWealth (Op-Ed)

Jonathan Cohn and Kristina Mensik in CommonWealth:

“House leadership and members must vote to include same-day registration and strong jail-based voting reforms in the VOTES Act so that we can guarantee that no eligible voter who wants to participate in our democratic process gets turned away. Then, it’s time for all of us to roll up our sleeves and work on the harder, and year-round, task of increasing the number of people who want to participate in the first place.”