In the Press: MA Senate’s “Response 2025” Doesn’t Meet the Moment

Kelly Garrity, “A Call and a Delayed Response,” Politico, April 2, 2025.

“The big announcement fell flat among progressives, who have been urging the Legislature to quickly pass a joint rules package and turn their attention toward the deluge of actions out of D.C. In a letter sent last week, more than a dozen activist groups urged lawmakers quickly “respond to the extraordinary moment we are facing.”

“Why is it only now that Senate Democrats feel the need to announce that they are thinking about how to respond to the disasters in Washington?,” said Jonathan Cohn, policy director of Progressive Massachusetts. “Somehow, the Senate’s announced response is more comical and more underwhelming than creating a new committee. They held a press conference to let the public know that an existing committee is going to do the work that it should have already been doing.”

The anticlimactic reveal shined a spotlight on the Legislature’s typically sluggish start to the session. Lawmakers did approve changes to the state’s emergency shelter system earlier this year and recently passed a bill extending a pandemic-era remote meeting provision. But little major legislation has made it across the finish line.

“Until a few days ago, when the Legislature temporarily extended hybrid meeting access for public meetings again, the only bill that the Legislature had passed this session was to kick unhoused families out of shelter,” Cohn said.”

Chris Lisinski, Ella Adams, and Eric Convey, “Frustrated at incremental movement, progressives want leaders to legislate action against Trump policies,” MASSter List, April 2, 2025.

“The lack of concrete details prompted Jonathan Cohn, policy director of the Progressive Massachusetts group that signed onto last week’s letter, to ask: what took so long?

“We are now at the start of the fourth month of the year and are 10 weeks into Trump’s second administration. Why is it only now that Senate Democrats feel the need to announce that they are thinking about how to respond to the disasters in Washington?” Cohn said. “Somehow, the Senate’s announced response is more comical and more underwhelming than creating a new committee: they held a press conference to let the public know that an existing committee is going to do the work that it should have already been doing.””

Chris Lisinski, “Progressives in Massachusetts demand legislative response to Trump,” State House News Service, April 1, 2025.

“Signatories on the letter include progressive watchdog Act on Mass, Homes for All Massachusetts, the Massachusetts Sierra Club, the Mass. Campaign for Single Payer Health Care, and Progressive Massachusetts.”

Anjali Hunynh, “‘We can’t sit idly by’: Mass. Senate tasks committee with deciding how to respond to Trump 2.0,” Boston Globe, April 1, 2025.

“Some advocates, however, remained unsatisfied by the Senate’s new approach. Jonathan Cohn, policy director of left-leaning advocacy group Progressive Massachusetts, criticized lawmakers for how long it took to coordinate any response to Trump.

“Somehow, the Senate’s announced response is more comical and more underwhelming than creating a new committee: they held a press conference to let the public know that an existing committee is going to do the work that it should have already been doing,” Cohn said in a statement.

“Let’s just hope that their announced intention to take threats seriously is not another April fool’s joke,” he added.”

Chris Van Buskirk, “Trump cuts $106M in COVID-era grant funding for Massachusetts as Senate taps pol to lead Democratic response,” Boston Herald, April 1, 2025.

“Progressive advocates in Massachusetts have been hounding legislators to do something about the Trump administration’s decisions to slash federal funding for a variety of sectors in the state.

Progressive Massachusetts Policy Director Jonathan Cohn said Massachusetts voters have for months wanted to see their elected officials “be bolder and more proactive in protecting” the state against Trump’s “chaos, cruelty, and corruption.”

Cohn said voters want to hear “real answers from Beacon Hill: how we will protect our essential services amidst looming budget cuts, how we will protect marginalized communities, how we will protect civil liberties and our democracy, how we will show a real governing alternative.”

“Somehow, the Senate’s announced response is more comical and more underwhelming than creating a new committee: they held a press conference to let the public know that an existing committee is going to do the work that it should have already been doing,” Cohn said in a statement.”

Sam Drysdale, “Mass. senators begin fashioning response to Trump, face complaints of slow start,” State House News Service, April 2, 2025.

Jonathan Cohn, policy director of Progressive Massachusetts, questioned the point of the press conference.

“We are now at the start of the fourth month of the year and are 10 weeks into Trump’s second administration,” Cohn said. “Why is it only now that Senate Democrats feel the need to announce that they are thinking about how to respond to the disasters in Washington? Somehow, the Senate’s announced response is more comical and more underwhelming than creating a new committee: they held a press conference to let the public know that an existing committee is going to do the work that it should have already been doing.”

Mike Deehan, “Mass. Democrats’ Tea Party moment that wasn’t,” Axios Boston, April 2, 2025.

What they’re saying: “Somehow, the Senate’s announced response is more comical and more underwhelming than creating a new committee: they held a press conference to let the public know that an existing committee is going to do the work that it should have already been doing,” Progressive Massachusetts policy director Jonathan Cohn said after Spilka’s announcement.

Chris Lisinski, “Beacon Hill still figuring out how to fight back while bracing for the worst,” MASSter List, April 5, 2025.

Jonathan Cohn, policy director of Progressive Massachusetts, questioned why it took Senate Democrats until 10 weeks into Trump’s term to announce they would consider unspecified action at an unspecified later date.

“Somehow, the Senate’s announced response is more comical and more underwhelming than creating a new committee: they held a press conference to let the public know that an existing committee is going to do the work that it should have already been doing,” he said.

John Micek, “In Mass., nationwide, the meter is running for the resistance. What’s next?,” MassLive, April 4, 2025.

The Senate’s “announced response is more comical and more underwhelming than creating a new committee: they held a press conference to let the public know that an existing committee is going to do the work that it should have already been doing,” Jonathan Cohn, of Progressive Massachusetts, said in a statement to MASSterList.

“We are now at the start of the fourth month of the year and are 10 weeks into Trump’s second administration. Why is it only now that Senate Democrats feel the need to announce that they are thinking about how to respond to the disasters in Washington?” Cohn said.

“Our commonwealth did something rare in recent history: it took away the right to vote from a category of people who were formerly enfranchised. “

April 1, 2025

Chair Keenan, Chair Hunt, 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 H.63 and S.7: Proposal for a legislative amendment to the Constitution relative to voting rights.

I would like to begin with a bit of history. 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. The Department of Justice, even under Trump’s first administration, 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. 

If Massachusetts were to pass these amendments, we would be in good company. Maine, Vermont, Puerto Rico, and DC already ensure that all citizens of voting age are able to participate in elections, regardless of incarceration status. That is also true of a number of European countries, such as Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland. Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and Ukraine.

At a time when democracy is under attack, let’s take this opportunity to strengthen and expand it.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Policy Director

Progressive Massachusetts

Our Response to “Response 2025”

Our statement on the MA State Senate’s “Response 2025”:

For months, Massachusetts voters have wanted to see our elected officials to be bolder and more proactive in protecting our Commonwealth from the chaos, cruelty, and corruption of the Trump administration. Back in December, we joined dozens of organizations in calling on the Legislature to start this work early. We are now at the start of the fourth month of the year and are 10 weeks into Trump’s second administration. Why is it only now that Senate Democrats feel the need to announce that they are thinking about how to respond to the disasters in Washington?

Somehow, the Senate’s announced response is more comical and more underwhelming than creating a new committee: they held a press conference to let the public know that an existing committee is going to do the work that it should have already been doing.

Until a few days ago, when the Legislature temporarily extended hybrid meeting access for public meetings again, the only bill that the Legislature had passed this session was to kick unhoused families out of shelter. Let’s just hope that their announced intention to take threats seriously is not another April fool’s joke.

Massachusetts voters want to hear real answers from Beacon Hill: how we will protect our essential services amidst looming budget cuts, how we will protect marginalized communities, how we will protect civil liberties and our democracy, how we will show a real governing alternative.”

Letter to Senate and House Leadership, Rules Conference Committtee

The Honorable Karen Spilka

The Honorable Ron Mariano

The Honorable Michael Moran 

The Honorable Cynthia Stone Creem 

The Honorable William Galvin 

The Honorable Joan Lovely 

The Honorable David Muradian 

The Honorable Ryan Fattman 

Monday March 25th, 2025

Dear President Spilka, Speaker Mariano, Majority Leader Moran, Majority Leader Creem, and Members of the Conference Committee, 

We write to you at a time of great uncertainty for citizens of the Commonwealth. Residents are reeling from an onslaught of current and anticipated cuts to federal funding, which target key programs and sectors that shape the daily lives of many in our state. Others fear for their livelihoods in the face of indiscriminate federal immigration raids. 

We are following up on the letter written by some of us Saturday March 8th, on the subject of the Joint Rules negotiations, to stress the utmost urgency of the task before you. The public has clearly spoken about a need for legislative reform to improve transparency and accountability. We were pleased that Rules proposals from both chambers take significant steps in that direction. It is imperative that you reach an agreement on Joint Rules to deliver on these promises. 

Nevertheless, we are now nearly three months into the legislative session, and committees await clear instructions on Rules changes before taking up the work of lawmaking. Contingency plans must be made and debated publicly for the state’s 2026 budget, which anticipates $16 billion in federal funds that may not materialize. Bills have been filed that, if passed, could immediately provide better protections for immigrant families, incarcerated individuals, and other vulnerable groups that have been targeted by the Trump administration. 

We address you also as progressives, committed to providing a meaningful alternative to conservative governance by attacks on social services and vulnerable populations. A major takeaway from last year’s election is that elected officials are seen by many as distant and unresponsive to the needs of working-class voters. Constituents are looking for leadership in light of a perceived unwillingness among elected officials to fight the billionaire takeover of the federal government or to take concrete action to defend social policies. With this in mind, further delays to begin the lawmaking process in Massachusetts are unwise. 

Massachusetts has an opportunity to serve as a beacon of stability and hope at a time of great chaos and fear for the nation and for the Commonwealth’s own residents. However, this bold vision cannot materialize until we get to work. 

We urge you to move swiftly to pass a robust Joint Rules package, including transparency reforms, and immediately take up and pass legislation to respond to the extraordinary moment we are facing. 

Sincerely, 

Act on Mass

Boston Catholic Climate Movement

Climate Action Now Western Mass

Community Action Agency of Somerville (CAAS) 

Food & Water Watch 

Homes for All Massachusetts

Lexington Climate Action Network  

Massachusetts Sierra Club 

Mass-Care: the Massachusetts Campaign for Single Payer Health Care

Our Revolution Massachusetts 

Pipe Line Awareness Network for the Northeast

Progressive Democrats of Massachusetts 

Progressive Massachusetts 

Springfield No One Leaves

Unitarian Universalist Mass Action 

Live Every Week Like Sunshine Week: Transparency Campaign Update & Action Hour

Sunshine Week—the week-long celebration of open government — may have been last week, but we know that it’s important to live every week like Sunshine Week.

Join us TOMORROW at 6 pm for an update on the push for a more transparent, responsive, and timely Legislature.

In February, both the House and Senate adopted a series of transparency reforms to make a more open, inclusive, and timely legislative process. These reforms were 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.

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 get to the important work across so many urgent issues facing the Commonwealth.

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!

The Trump-Musk Administration Is Pulling Climate Funding. MA Should Make Polluters Pay.

The Donald Trump – Elon Musk administration has been unconstitutionally withdrawing funding for climate initiatives at the state and local level, and Republicans in Congress want to cut such funding in the budget. While the fight to block these cuts proceeds, here’s something that MA can do now: 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) 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?

The Make Polluters Pay campaign is going to have a campaign launch this Sunday. Join 350 Mass, Mass Youth Climate Coalition, and Mass Power Forward along with lead sponsors Senator Jamie Eldridge, Representative Steve Owens, and Representative Jack Lewis to kickoff the 2025-2026 Make Polluters Pay Campaign! RSVP here.

Letter to the Conference Committee on Rules Reform

The Honorable Michael Moran 

The Honorable Cynthia Stone Creem 

The Honorable William Galvin 

The Honorable Joan Lovely 

The Honorable David Muradian 

The Honorable Ryan Fattman 

Saturday, March 8, 2025 

Dear Majority Leader Moran, Majority Leader Creem, and Members of the Conference Committee: 

We are pleased that both chambers have taken up reforms to the legislative process to promote greater transparency, accountability, and timeliness. As we said in our January 22 letter, “The citizens of Massachusetts have made it clear: we expect our legislature to be transparent, democratic, and accountable to its constituents.” 

As you negotiate differences to determine a final set of Joint Rules to govern the 194th session of the General Court, we urge you to consistently side with the reforms that maximize the ability of rank-and-file legislators and the public to participate fully in the process. 

Hearing Notice (Joint Rule 1D)

We urge you to adopt the language from the Senate, which would increase the notice for hearings from 72 hours to 5 days. This makes it more possible for members of the committee and members of the public to make space in their schedule to participate and to make whatever arrangements they need to in order to make that possible. 

Making Testimony Public (Joint Rule 1D)

We were pleased to see both chambers recognize the public interest in making the testimony submitted to committees accessible. We urge adoption of Senate language specifying that such testimony will be made “available on the general court website,” as opposed to simply “publicly available.” This guarantees the broadest accessibility and reflects best the underlying intent we hope both chambers share. 

Committee Votes (Joint Rule 1D) 

We were similarly pleased that both chambers recognize that Massachusetts should join the majority of state legislatures in publishing committee votes. We urge adoption of Senate language specifying that the rule applies to “study orders” as well as votes on pieces of legislation themselves and language clarifying that the results of both “electronic polls” and in-person roll calls are to be made public. 

We also urge adoption of House language specifying that such votes should be published in a timely manner, i.e., within 48 hours. 

Materials Presented to Committee Members Before Votes (Joint Rule 1D)

The legislative process works best when legislators are fully informed about the matters before them. We urge you to adopt House language stating that committee members will receive “(i) a document clearly marking any changes made by the committee to the underlying matter, and (ii) a document clearly marking any changes to any general or special law proposed by the matter, which shall be made publicly available.” We urge that these be made available to the public as well as legislators before said votes and that committee members be provided due time to review them before voting. 

Reporting Deadlines (Joint Rule 10)

We are pleased to see that both chambers are interested in moving up the deadline for reporting bills out of committee. 


To ensure a thorough and expedient legislative process, we urge adoption of Senate language establishing a new reporting deadline of the first Wednesday in December as well as House language creating a series of rolling deadlines following hearings. 

Disposition of Bills Not Acted Upon (Joint Rule 10)

Under current rules, if a committee makes no report on a bill by a given deadline, the bill is marked as receiving an adverse report. This language, included in the Senate‘s proposal, should stay, instead of the House’s proposal to dispense of such remaining bills with a bulk study order.

Open Conference Committee Meetings (Joint Rule 11) 

We have endorsed making conference committee meetings fully open to the public, and we urge you to adopt Senate language specifying that the first meeting of a conference committee must be an open meeting. 

Time to Read Conference Reports (11B) 

As previously stated, the legislative process works best when legislators are fully informed about the matters before them. We urge you to adopt Senate language ensuring that members have at least one full day to review a conference report before voting on it. 

End of Formal Session (Joint Rule 12A)

Both chambers adopted new language specifying what work can occur after the end of formal session on July 31 of the second year of session. We urge adoption of the House’s more tailored language identifying the specific cases in which votes could occur and how such cases relate to work largely conducted within the formal session. We are concerned by any effort to push significant legislative activity into the fall and winter of the second year of session. 

Again, we are pleased to see attention to issues of transparency, accountability, and efficiency of the legislative process. The changes elaborated above embrace the best of both chambers’ proposals and would help improve public trust and engagement in the legislative process. We hope that this will be a sign of a broader change in the building in the direction of openness, engagement, and responsiveness. 

Sincerely, 

Act on Mass 

Progressive Democrats of Massachusetts 

Progressive Massachusetts

“We are the safest major city in the nation because we are safe for everyone.”

Earlier today, Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, in her opening remarks defending Boston’s Trust Act to the US House Oversight Committee, explained, “We are the safest major city in the nation because we are safe for everyone.”

During the hearing, Mayor Wu and three other mayors had to withstand the racist, intellectually dishonest attacks from House Republicans but made clear that protecting the rights of our immigrant communities makes us safer.

Cities like Boston and countless others across the Commonwealth have passed ordinances to make clear that local law enforcement do not work for ICE and should not do the work of federal immigration enforcement. But we need to enshrine local best practice into state law and strengthen the protections for our immigrant communities against the threats from the Trump administration.

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

  • Safe Communities Act, which would end the voluntary involvement of our public safety officials in civil immigration matters
  • Dignity Not Deportations Act, 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, which would ensure that immigrants navigating our complex immigration courts have legal representation

Can you write to your state representative and state senator in support of these key bills?

Editorial: “Some hopeful signs, but still a long way to go on legislative transparency”

Jonathan Cohn, Peter Enrich, and Scotia Hille, “Some hopeful signs, but still a long way to go on legislative transparency,” CommonWealth Beacon, March 3, 2025.

ALTHOUGH THE DAYS were dark early in January, the legislative session began with some glimmers of sunlight, as both Senate President Karen Spilka and House Speaker Ron Mariano expressed a commitment to legislative process reform, indicating there would be upcoming proposals about how to make the Legislature more transparent and accountable.

We believe that Massachusetts ought to be a leader in just democratic rule and civic action. However, national rankings place us toward the bottom with regard to public ease of access to information, competitive elections, and financial transparency. Indeed, Massachusetts distinguishes itself by being the only state in the entire country in which all three branches of government hold themselves exempt from public records law. This means that for most residents of Massachusetts, our city councils and town meetings are held to a higher standard of transparency and accountability than our state elected officials.

The remarks from legislative leaders were a sign of growing momentum behind the push for more sunlight on Beacon Hill. When legislators last updated the public records law, in 2016, they created a commission to investigate whether the public records law should apply to them. They ended with no agreement, but more and more advocates have begun to understand that a non-transparent, overly top-down legislative process works against our goals.

……