How Our Legislature Should Celebrate National Voter Registration Day

Tomorrow is National Voter Registration Day, the country’s largest single-day voter registration drive.

It also happens to be the date for a State House hearing on various voting rights bills, including Same Day Registration.

Our democracy is strongest when everyone can participate, but MA still puts up unnecessary barriers to participation. Given that the average American moves more than 11 times over the course of their lives, moving near Election Day could lead to disenfranchisement with our ten-day registration cutoff. Likewise, given the stress of school, work, family, and myriad other commitments, many voters may first start to learn about an election after the registration window has passed.

Even worse, if clerical errors exist on the voter rolls, voters can fill out a provisional ballot, but voters leave unsure if their vote will be counted. No one should ever lose basic rights due to clerical errors.

Same Day Registration can fix all of that, and MA should join our neighboring states in passing it.

Can you let your legislators know it’s time to pass Same Day Registration?

2025 Medford Municipal Elections

Medford 2025 Elections

Key Dates: 

Medford Preliminary Election: September 16, 2025

General Election: November 4, 2025 

Medford City Council

Voters can choose up to seven. 

Fourteen will advance to the general election. 

Incumbents running for re-election: Zac Bears, Anna Callahan, Emily Lazzaro, Matt Leming, George Scarpelli, Justin Tseng

New candidates: Miranda Briseño, Page Buldini, Rick Caraviello, Patrick Clerkin, Paul Donato Jr, Nick Giurleo, Milva McDonald, Nate Merritt, Liz Mullane, Trish Schiapelli, Melanie Tringali

Medford School Committee

Voters can choose up to six. 

Incumbents running for re-election: Nicole Branley, Jenny Graham, John Intoppa, Aaron Olapade, Erika Reinfeld, Paul Ruseau

Challengers: Jessica Eisenman Parks, Lisa Kingsley, Michael Mastrobuoni

Read the questionnaires:

Want to see more questionnaires?

What MA Can Do to Protect Our Communities from ICE

ICE officials have announced an increase in activity in Massachusetts, and it has been seen on the ground already. ICE has been kidnapping people off the streets, harassing bystanders, and terrorizing communities–making everyone less safe.  

The LUCE hotline has been doing amazing work to keep people alert and to document what’s happening. Bookmark https://www.lucemass.org/if you haven’t already.

Although we can’t stop everything ICE is doing in Massachusetts, we should not be making their work easier. We need our state legislators to pass legislation to limit the scope of ICE in Massachusetts and to better support our immigrant communities.

That’s why it’s essential for your state legislators to co-sponsor and advocate for critical legislation this session in support of immigrants’ rights:

  • Safe Communities Act (H.2580 / S.1681), which would end the voluntary involvement of our public safety officials in civil immigration matters
  • Dignity Not Deportations Act (H.1588 / S.1122), which would prohibit sheriffs from voluntarily renting beds to ICE and ban agreements to deputize state and local law enforcement to ICE
  • Immigrant Legal Defense Act (H.1954 / S.1127), which would ensure that immigrants navigating our complex immigration courts have legal representation and make permanent a recent budgetary appropriation

EMAIL YOUR LEGISLATORS
In solidarity,
Jonathan Cohn
Policy Director
Progressive Massachusetts


Say Hi at the Mass Dems Convention This Weekend!

If you’ll be in Springfield this Saturday for the Massachusetts Democratic Party Convention, swing by the PM table to say hi! (Don’t see us at first? That’s because we’re all the way in a corner.) We’ll have actions for you to take at the table — and to bring back to your Senate district seating area.

CONVENTION ALERT:In 2017 and 2021, we collaborated with allies like Our Revolution MA to help strengthen the Massachusetts Democratic Party platform. The 2025 platform committee erased the gains from 2017 and 2021 as well as decades-old commitments to policies like single payer health care.

The 2025 platform is a major step back on health care, labor, climate, racial justice, democracy reforms, LGBTQ+ rights, disability rights, immigrants’ rights, and more.

Click here to learn about the effort to fight this rollback.

LEARN MORE


Protect Our Care with Corporate Fair Share Town Halls

It’s time to Protect Our Care with Corporate Fair Share. The Trump administration is taking away healthcare from working families and seniors so they can put more money into the pockets of billionaires and big corporations. Here in Massachusetts, we could lose as much as $3.5 billion in federal aid that pays for health care, education, and food access for hundreds of thousands of people. We simply can’t afford the harm that will cause.

That’s why the Raise Up Mass coalition is holding a series of regional Protect Our Care Town Halls across the state to tell our legislators: it’s time to make big corporations pay their fair share in taxes—and stop the cuts. Chances are we’re holding one near you! Can you join us?

Find a Town hall near you

Here’s what’s at stake. Up to 350,000 people in MA could lose their health care and/or food assistance because of cuts to Medicaid and SNAP. More than one million students could be hurt by cuts to PreK-12, colleges, and child care. The money from these cuts to state funding is flowing directly to big corporations and billionaires, while our communities are stuck with the cost of hospital closures, hungry students, and long ER lines.


Help Get Rent Control on the Ballot

Homes for All Massachusetts is launching the process to place rent control on the ballot in 2026 with a kickoff event this Saturday, September 13, at 11 am in Town Field (1565 Dorchester Ave) in Dorchester–the first of many events.

Want to volunteer for the campaign? Sign up here.

Real Estate Transfer Fees Are a Critical Tool for Addressing Our Housing Crisis

Tuesday, September 9, 2025

Chair Eldridge, Chair Madaro, and Members of the Joint Committee on Revenue:

I am writing on behalf of Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide, member-based grassroots advocacy organization fighting for a more equitable, just, sustainable, and democratic Commonwealth.

We urge you to give a favorable report to S.1937/H.3056: An Act granting a local option for a real estate transfer fee to fund affordable housing, filed by Sen. Jo Comerford and Reps. Mike Connolly and Carmine Gentile.

Massachusetts has a housing crisis. We see it in every survey of top issues among residents. We see it in the rising home prices and the number of communities where the median home sale has passed $1 million. We see it in the way that growth in rents has outpaced growth in wages. And we see it in the number of young families or long-term residents who decide to move out of state because they simply can’t afford the high cost of housing in Massachusetts.

Our cities and towns need every tool in the toolbox to address our state’s housing crisis, and a real estate transfer fee 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 get in the way.

Thank you for your work on the hearing, and again we urge a favorable report on S.1937 and H.3056.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Policy Director

Progressive Massachusetts

When Big Corporations Pay Their Fair Share, We All Win

The Trump administration and Republicans in Congress have been rolling back critical funding for climate initiatives at the state and local level. But the fact that they deny the realities of climate change to appease their billionaire backers doesn’t make the climate crisis any less severe.

With such federal retrenchment and sabotage, we need states to step up. Here’s one way: make sure the major polluters who caused the climate crisis start paying up to fund the solutions.

The very companies who lied to the public for decades about climate change are benefiting while all of us, especially the most vulnerable, bear the cost.

The Make Polluters Pay bill (H.1014 / S.588), which just had a hearing on Tuesday, would require these major polluters to pay a one-time fee based on their historic emissions to fund climate-resilient infrastructure upgrades.  

That means more money for restoring coastal wetlands; upgrading roads, bridges, subways, and transit systems; preparing for extreme weather; energy efficiency upgrades and retrofits; supporting the creation of self-sufficient clean energy microgrids; and addressing urban heat island effects through green spaces and urban forestry.

New York and Vermont have already passed such a bill. Let’s make MA next.

Can you write to your state representative and state senator in support of the Make Polluters Pay bill?

Email Your Legislators


Protect Our Care with Corporate Fair Share Town Halls

It’s time to Protect Our Care with Corporate Fair Share. The Trump administration is taking away healthcare from working families and seniors so they can put more money into the pockets of billionaires and big corporations. Here in Massachusetts, we could lose as much as $3.5 billion in federal aid that pays for health care, education, and food access for hundreds of thousands of people. We simply can’t afford the harm that will cause.

That’s why the Raise Up Mass coalition is holding a series of regional Protect Our Care Town Halls across the state to tell our legislators: it’s time to make big corporations pay their fair share in taxes—and stop the cuts. Chances are we’re holding one near you! Can you join us?

Find a Town hall near you

Here’s what’s at stake. Up to 350,000 people in MA could lose their health care and/or food assistance because of cuts to Medicaid and SNAP. More than one million students could be hurt by cuts to PreK-12, colleges, and child care. The money from these cuts to state funding is flowing directly to big corporations and billionaires, while our communities are stuck with the cost of hospital closures, hungry students, and long ER lines.


Help Get Rent Control on the Ballot

The Homes for All Mass coalition is spearheading an effort to get rent control on the 2026 ballot. Want to help collect signatures? Attend an upcoming signature collection training.


It’s Time to Make Polluters Pay

Tuesday, September 2, 2025

Chair Rausch, Chair Barber, and Members of the Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources:

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I’m the policy director of Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide, member-based grassroots advocacy organization fighting for a more equitable, just, sustainable, and democratic Commonwealth.

We urge you to give a favorable report to H.1014 / S.588: An Act establishing a climate change superfund (“Make Polluters Pay”), filed by Sen. Jamie Eldridge and Reps. Steve Owens and Jack Lewis.

Massachusetts is already facing the impacts of climate change, and it will only get worse. The increased incidence of storms will damage coastlines and increase inland flooding: the state has projected that inland property damage due to climate change will increase by almost 50% by mid-century, with a disproportionate impact on low-income communities. Additional rail repair costs from extreme temperatures could reach $6 million per year by 2050 and a striking $35 million by the end of the century, and repair costs for electric transmission and utility distribution infrastructure alone are projected to increase by almost $100 million by 2050, with power outages disproportionately impacting low-income communities again. Not to mention the impact on human health and lives.  [1]

Meanwhile, major fossil fuel companies are seeing record profits. The very companies who lied to the public for decades about climate change are benefiting while all of us, especially the most vulnerable, bear the cost.

We already have a successful model for addressing these situations of public damages, private profits: the “polluter pays” principle. This principle is employed in all of the major US pollution control laws: Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (solid waste and hazardous waste management), and Superfund (cleanup of abandoned waste sites).

This bill would extend that proven principle to the climate crisis by establishing a climate change adaptation cost recovery program. It would require companies that have contributed significantly to the buildup of climate-warming greenhouse gases in the atmosphere to bear a share of the costs of needed infrastructure investment, based on their historic emissions.

This bill would raise significant revenue from the 20 largest polluting companies to provide funding for climate resiliency efforts such as restoring coastal wetlands; upgrading roads, bridges, subways, and transit systems; preparing for and recovering from hurricanes and other extreme weather events; installing energy efficient cooling systems; upgrading the electrical grid; and expanding green spaces and urban forestry. This revenue is especially critical as we see the federal government pull back from any action on climate change and indeed try to sabotage the action that is happening.

This year has been chaotic for our commonwealth and for our municipalities. Federal grants for climate action and environmental justice are being cut unilaterally by the Trump administration, with the Republicans in Congress serving backup where needed. We have a lot of work to do, and that work outstrips existing resource. Many cities and towns want to advance bold action but are constrained by limitations on raising revenue.

Your constituents want to see what MA is going to do to respond to this chaos and regression from the Trump administration. This bill is one such example of what we can do.

This bill doesn’t just raise needed revenue. It also understands that our sustainability transition must be a just one, with key provisions to ensure that sufficient funds go to environmental justice populations and that the funding goes to the creation of good-paying jobs.

Massachusetts has taken important steps toward climate mitigation in recent sessions and we must continue to do so to meet our state’s climate goals, but we also need to address the climate crisis that is already hitting communities. This bill shows a way forward.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Policy Director

Progressive Massachusetts

[1]  Gloninger, Chris and Asher Klein. “When a Major Hurricane Hits New England, the Costs Will Be Huge.” NBC News. July 25, 2019. https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/catastrophic-hurricane-new-england-modeling/92234/; Zhao, Bo. The Effects of Weather on Massachusetts Municipal Expenditures: Implications of Climate Change for Local Governments in New England. Boston: Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, 2023; 2022 Massachusetts Climate Change Assessment. Boston: Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 2022. https://www.mass.gov/doc/2022-massachusetts-climate-change-assessment-december-2022-volume-i-executive-summary/download.

2025 MetroWest Municipal Elections

MetroWest 2025 Elections

General Election: November 4, 2025 

Framingham Mayor

Incumbent: Charlie Sisitsky 

Challenger: Geoff Epstein

Read the questionnaires:

Framingham District 2 Councilor

Incumbent: Brandon Ward 

Challenger: Carol Spack

Read the questionnaires:

Framingham District 2 School Committee Member

Incumbent: David Gordon 

Challenger: Lorena Tovar

Read the questionnaires:

Framingham District 3 Councilor (OPEN)

Outgoing Incumbent: Adam Steiner 

Candidates: Mary Kate Feeney, Ken Weiss

Read the questionnaires:

Framingham District 8 Councilor

Incumbent: Leslie White Harvey 

Challenger: John Stefanini

Read the questionnaires:

Marlborough Councilor At-Large

Incumbents: Sean Navin, Mark Oram, Michael Ossing, Kathleen Robey 

Challengers: Richard Aldrich, Taryn Kennedy-Janet Wilkins

Read the questionnaires:

Marlborough Ward 1 Councilor

Incumbent: Mark Vital

Read the questionnaires:

Want to see more questionnaires?

Editorial: How Mass. Must Respond To Trump’s Big Ugly Bill

Jonathan Cohn, “How Mass. Must Respond To Trump’s Big Ugly Bill,” Fenway News, September 2025.

In time for July 4, Trump and Congressional Republicans celebrated the passage of their policy wish list, a massive tax cut for the rich and large corporations combined with the biggest rollback of healthcare access in U.S. history, cuts to food assistance and public education, and escalated funding for ICE that puts it on par with the size of other countries’ militaries. It was the most regressive bill passed by Congress in decades.

This all raises the question: how is Massachusetts going to do to respond?

Here are some critical first steps.

First, Massachusetts needs to better protect our essential services from federal cuts. The extreme cuts to health care access, food assistance, education, and other vital programs will hit the state budget hard.

Massachusetts is an affluent state, with a GDP per capita in the top five of states and a total GDP on par with Sweden’s (if only we had their welfare state…). Rather than making cuts that will fall on the backs of the most vulnerable, we should make  sure that the most profitable corporations in our commonwealth are paying their fair share. That’s why we need to pass the Corporate Fair Share bill (H.3110 / S.2033), which would ensure that large multinational corporations like Amazon and Walmart pay more in taxes on the profits they hide in offshore tax havens in places like Bermuda and the Cayman Islands. This bill would make a simple change to the tax code that would put us in line with the federal government and the state of New Hampshire (yes, New Hampshire) and bring in significant new revenue.

Second, Massachusetts needs to better protect our immigrant communities, and that means not being complicit with Trump’s mass deportation agenda. Trump’s $45 billion infusion into ICE means that the administration will be looking for more people to work as immigration agents. Scaling up means that they will want states to offer existing personnel to do their dirty work. We must be clear that we won’t. The Safe Communities Act (H.2580 / S.1681) would ensure that our state and local law enforcement are not being deputized as ICE agents and shore up other vital protections.

Where is Fenway’s delegation on these priorities? Good question. Sen. Liz Miranda, who has a sliver of Fenway along with adjacent neighborhoods of Roxbury and Mission Hill, is the co-filer of both the Corporate Fair Share and the Safe Communities Act, and Sen. Lydia Edwards, who represents Back Bay and East Fenway, is a co-sponsor of both. Rep. Chynah Tyler, who has the Longwood Medical Area as well Roxbury and Mission Hill, joins them on the Corporate Fair Share bill. But Sen. Will Brownsberger, Rep. Jay Livingstone, and Rep. Dan Ryan have yet to do so.

Massachusetts prides itself for its role in our country’s democracy and as a beacon to other states. At this moment, we should do that by making clear that we don’t leave people behind when under attack by a hostile administration.

Jonathan Cohn, Policy Director, Progressive Mass; Secretary, Boston Ward 4 Democratic Committee

Top 12 Excuses You’ll Hear When Lobbying Your Legislators

Your state legislators may be good at many things, but being creative in the excuses that they give you is not one of them. When you lobby your legislators on key issues, you’ll likely hear the same set of excuses. We highlight what the most common ones are — and why they don’t hold up — below.

(1) Lack of Knowledge

What They Say: “I’m not familiar with the issue.”

Why It Doesn’t Hold Up: If a bill is new, they might actually not be that familiar (even though it is their job). But if they keep asking you for more and more answers, or keep saying they aren’t familiar even after you’ve spoken with them, they’re not being honest with you. This is an easy excuse to neutralize.

(2) Lack of Expertise / Focus

What They Say: “My expertise is [ISSUE], and I only focus on that.” / “There are more than 6,000 bills. I can’t read all or co-sponsor all of them!” 

Why It Doesn’t Hold Up: Your legislators aren’t just elected to work on one narrow issue. They should care about a broad set of issues, and co-sponsorship is the lowest-hanging fruit when it comes to ways to show support.

(3) Lack of Pressure

What They Say: “My constituents aren’t calling me about this.” / “My constituents don’t care about this.” 

Why It Doesn’t Hold Up: Make sure that they are actually hearing from constituents. If they still claim this after public displays of support for legislation, then they are just making excuses for their own lack of support for it.

(4) Lack of Popular Support

What They Say: “My district is very conservative.” 

Why It Doesn’t Hold Up: Studies have shown that both Democrats and Republicans believe that their districts are more socially and economically conservative than they really are. This is true in MA where Biden beat Trump in more districts than Democrats hold in either chamber. But beyond that, it’s the job of legislators to lead.

(5) Lack of Will

What They Say: “I don’t sign on to things.” /  “If I take a public position, it harms my ability to negotiate.” / “I’m in Leadership, so I don’t co-sponsor.” 

Why It Doesn’t Hold Up: As noted earlier, co-sponsorship is the most basic of asks. Moreover, strong starting asks actually increase negotiating power if you want a strong outcome. But if your legislator won’t co-sponsor bills at all, still urge them to support a bill and ask what they will do to build support for it. 

(6) Lack of Leadership

What They Say: “You don’t need to bother me. Spend your time on other legislators.”

Why It Doesn’t Hold Up: Even the best legislators need reinforcement–it helps them make a better case to Leadership about why they need to vote on X, Y, or Z. Moreover, passive supporters of legislation can be made into active supporters: true champions who lobby colleagues and Leadership. 

(7) Lack of Independence

What They Say: “What does Leadership think about it?” 

Why It Doesn’t Hold Up: Legislators serve at the will of their constituents, not the Leadership of the chamber. You — not the Speaker or Senate President — are their boss. Accordingly, if Leadership isn’t on board with a bill yet, it’s their job to change that reality, not resign themselves to it.

(8) Lack of Time

What They Say: ““We have a lot of competing priorities.” / “I’m busy with the budget!”

Why It Doesn’t Hold Up: Here in Massachusetts, we have a full-time legislature. The legislative session goes from January in the odd-numbered year to July in the subsequent even-numbered year—more than a year and a half. If they run out of time, it’s because of their procrastination — and they should start legislating earlier, rather than waiting until the end of the session.

(9) Lack of Money

What They Say: “We don’t have the money.” 

Why It Doesn’t Hold Up: We are one of the richest states in the country. “Not enough money” is never an acceptable excuse for not ensuring a high quality of life for all.

(10) Lack of Initiative 

What They Say: “We don’t have consensus on this.”

Why It Doesn’t Hold Up: Legislators should be proactive, not seek to make policy based on the lowest common denominator. If other legislators are not on board yet, your legislator should try to be a partner in bringing them on board, and not deflect for them.  

(11) Lack of Ability to Maneuver

What They Say: “I don’t co-sponsor bills that pass through the committee I chair / serve on in order to give every bill a fair hearing and preserve my leverage in the redrafting process.” 

Why It Doesn’t Hold Up: A legislative committee is not a court of law where impartiality is critical. Legislators, chairs included, enter every committee hearing with opinions on the bills before them, and indeed, they can file bills that appear before the committees that they chair and/or serve on. This is a common excuse, although it is not a good one. However, if a legislator won’t co-sponsor, follow up by asking them, “What will you do instead to show your support?” If they want you to believe that they are an ally behind the scenes, demand that they show you how.

(12) Lack of Independence

What They Say: “I don’t co-sponsor bills because I’m in Leadership.”

Why It Doesn’t Hold Up: We need our leaders tolead. The idea that those in a room making a decision can’t be public about their support is a self-imposed constraint, not something baked into any rule. Similar to #11, if a legislator won’t co-sponsor, follow up by asking them, “What will you do instead to show your support?” If they want you to believe that they are an ally behind the scenes, demand that they show you how.