Here’s How MA Can Strengthen Democracy for Our Local Elections

VOTE buttons

Wednesday, June 23, 2021

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

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I chair the Issues Committee at Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide grassroots advocacy group committed to fighting for progressive policy here in the Commonwealth. A core part of our platform is an electoral system that expands voting, the electorate, and its trust in candidates and elected officials.

Accordingly, we urge you to give a favorable report to S.485/H.825: An Act providing a local option for ranked choice voting in municipal elections.

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 last year, 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.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Chair, Issues Committee

Progressive Massachusetts

Everyone Deserves Dignity at the Workplace

Monday, June 21, 2021

Chairwoman Jehlen, Chairman Cutler, and members of the Joint Labor and Workforce Development Committee: 

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the chair of the Issues Committee of Progressive Massachusetts. Progressive Massachusetts is a statewide grassroots advocacy organization that fights for social and economic justice. 

Good-paying jobs with fair working conditions are a central part of our organization’s shared prosperity agenda. As such, Progressive Massachusetts would like to go on the record in support of S.1185/H.3843 (An Act relative to dignity at work), known as the Dignity At Work Act. 

Everyone deserves a safe and respectful workplace, and that means one that is free of inappropriate and harmful behaviors like bullying. 

Massachusetts labor law currently provides no protections against workplace bullying unless such bullying is targeted at an individual because of their race, sex, or other protected identity. This excludes far too many cases, and even when individuals sue because of identity-based harassment and discrimination, courts can choose to deny them redress out of a disagreement on the motivation for the mistreatment, not the existence of the mistreatment itself. 

Better training and model policies are good so far as they go, and that is not far. Accountability is what will change behavior. The Dignity At Work Act will offer that. 

Countries like Australia, Denmark, Finland, France, the Netherlands, Norway, Serbia, and Sweden–as well as various provinces in Canada–have enacted protections against workplace bullying. It’s time for Massachusetts to join them. 

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Chair, Issues Committee

Progressive Massachusetts

The Legislature Just Voted 159 to 41 to Advance the Fair Share Amendment. Here’s What’s Next.

Earlier today, the MA Legislature voted 159 to 41 to advance the Fair Share Amendment to the November 2022 ballot. 

The vote was 121 to 39 in the House and 38 to 2 in the Senate (the 2: Ryan Fattman and Bruce Tarr). 

2021 FSA Vote House

The Fair Share Amendment would amend the Massachusetts Constitution, creating an additional tax of 4 percentage points on the portion of a person’s annual income above $1 million. This new revenue would be invested into funding our public schools and colleges as well as the repair and maintenance of our roads, bridges, and public transportation infrastructure.

Although today’s vote was exciting, the work isn’t over yet. It’s just beginning. 

In the coming months, we’ll keep you posted about ways to help ensure a victory for Fair Share in November of 2022. But here’s what you do now. 

(1) Make a pledge to vote for Fair Share next year! 

Do you support the Fair Share Amendment? Do you plan to vote YES in favor of passing it on the ballot in 2022? Then become an official “Fair Share Amendment Voter” by filling out the pledge at https://raiseupma.us/pm

And then after you sign, share it with five friends!

(2) Sign up for a Fair Share event! 

You can find launch events around the state here. 

Dignity Should Not Be a District-by-District Decision (Redux)

Not Your Mascot

The following testimony was submitted to the Joint Committee on Education on May 20, 2021, adapted from earlier testimony submitted the prior session on June 25, 2019.

Chairman Lewis, Chairwoman Peisch, and members of the Joint Education Committee: 

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the chair of the Issues Committee of Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide grassroots advocacy organization fighting for progressive policy. 

One of the planks in our organization’s platform is an “All means all” agenda of racial and social justice. That means ensuring that underrepresented communities are treated with dignity and respect. 

The reduction of Native American identity to “mascot” status is the opposite of that. We would like to go on record in support of Bill S.294/H.581 (An Act Prohibiting the Use of Native American Mascots by Public Schools in the Commonwealth). 

Such mascots have serious social and emotional consequences for Native American youth, including lower self-esteem and more hostile school climates. For non-Native people, they promote a false understanding of Native Americans and culturally insensitive behaviors and stereotypes. 

Whether or not someone’s dignity and rights are respected should not be a factor of which school they attend or in which city or town they live. This is a state matter. 

The National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) has been fighting to eliminate Native American mascots since the 1960s. Here in Massachusetts, the Chappaquiddick Tribe of the Wampanoag Nation, Herring Pond Wampanoag Tribe, Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe, and Nipmuc Nation have all called for the elimination of such mascots, and they are joined nationally by such organizations as the National Education Association, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, the American Psychological Association, the American Anthropological Association, and the National Collegiate Athletic Association.

It’s time we listen. 

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Chair, Issues Committee

Progressive Massachusetts

We Need to Strengthen Democracy Here at Home in MA.

VOTE buttons

The following testimony was submitted to the Joint Committee of Election Laws in support of the VOTES Act.

Wednesday, May 19, 2021

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

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the chair of the Issues Committee of Progressive Massachusetts. Progressive Massachusetts is a statewide grassroots advocacy organization that fights for shared prosperity, racial and social justice, good government and strong democracy, and sustainable infrastructure and environmental protection.

Last year, the Legislature provided voters with greater options for how to cast their ballot. We had more days available to vote early and an expanded possibility to vote by mail. It worked, it was popular, and it shouldn’t become a one-off due to COVID-19. 

We need to make the electoral reforms from last year permanent as well as to build on them in order to make Massachusetts a leader in voting rights. I urge you to give a favorable report to the VOTES Act (S.459 / H.805), filed by Sen. Cindy Creem and Rep. John Lawn, which would make that happen. 

The VOTES Act is a critical and comprehensive package of election reforms that will make our democracy more equitable, accessible, and secure. It includes the popular and successful reforms from last year, such as expanded early voting and vote-by-mail, as well as time-tested reforms like Same Day Registration, which would allow citizens to update their registration or register anew when they go to vote—something 20 states already allow. The VOTES Act, importantly, has reforms geared towards equity, like those aimed at ensuring eligible incarcerated citizens can actually vote, as well as election security, such as risk-limiting audits.

We would like to underscore the importance of Same Day Registration as a part of this package. 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. That is what a strong democracy looks like.

We would also urge the Legislature to go beyond the provisions in the VOTES Act to fully guarantee the right to vote for eligible incarcerated voters. Individuals serving misdemeanor convictions or incarcerated pre-trial maintain the right to vote but suffer from de facto disenfranchisement due to the myriad barriers they face in exercising that right. Although the Jail-Based Voting Bill (S.474 / H. 836) is not on the agenda for today’s hearing, its comprehensive measures to address this issue are essential and should be included in an omnibus voting reform package.

Over the past few months, we have seen a growing number of states unfortunately take unfounded steps to restrict voter access. In a time when democracy is increasingly under threat, we need to show our commitment to a robust democracy—and positive voting experience for all—here in Massachusetts. 

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Chair, Issues Committee

Progressive Massachusetts

“It is far past time for us to stop shortchanging our students.” (Redux)

Graduation cap on a stack of books

The following testimony was originally submitted to the Joint Committee on Higher Education on April 30, 2019. Since neither bill passed the Legislature in the 2019-2020 session, the testimony was updated for new bill numbers and resubmitted on May 18, 2021.

Tuesday, May 18, 2021

Chairwoman Gobi, Chairman Rogers, and Members of the Joint Committee on Higher Education,

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the chair of the Issues Committee of Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide multi-issue grassroots organization committed to fighting for social justice and progressive policy. Since our founding, treating education as a public good and funding it as such has been central to our mission.

As such, we strongly support S.829 / H.1339, An Act to guarantee debt-free public higher education, and S.824 / H.1325, An Act committing to higher education the resources to Insure a strong and healthy public higher education system (or CHERISH), and urge you to report them out favorably.

Since 2001, Massachusetts has cut funding for public higher education by 14 percent. However, at the same time that our state was retrenching from investing in our future, enrollment was going up. As a result, per student funding has fallen by 32 percent, almost a third.

When the state pulls back, the cost burden falls onto students. Massachusetts saw some of the highest tuition and fee increases in the country from 2001 to 2016, particularly during the recession. The share of costs borne by students and their families doubled, putting a degree out of reach for more and more students, especially those of disadvantaged backgrounds.

Today, the average graduate from our state universities and the UMass system leaves with over $30,000 in student debt—the tenth highest in the country. The average debt for graduates of public, four-year postsecondary schools grew faster in Massachusetts than in all but one other state from 2004 to 2016.

A postsecondary degree provides a proven premium in lifetime wages for graduates and countless other opportunities. Cost should not be a barrier. By preventing young people from living independently, buying a home, or pursuing their career of choice, college debt is a drag on our economy. Even when students drop out due to cost, they can be saddled with debt for years after.

It is far past time for us to stop shortchanging our students. Investing more in public higher education, as the CHERISH Act would require, and making public higher education debt-free would benefit not only students. When financial concerns are no longer a hindrance for people seeking to realize their full potential, we all benefit.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Cohn

Chair, Issues Committee

Progressive Massachusetts

Strengthening Democracy at Home

Each day, we seem to be hearing about new brazen efforts from reactionary state governments across the US to restrict the right to vote.

Strengthening our democracy requires federal action to protect voting rights, but it also requires action here at home. Indeed, while Massachusetts often leads other states across policy areas, we’ve been a laggard on voting rights.

The VOTES Act would change that The bill would make the reforms that worked for voters last fall permanent, like mail-in voting and expanded early voting. And it will do more to ensure administrative barriers to not bar Bay Staters from making their voice heard, with Same Day Registration, reforms to help eligible incarcerated people vote, and more.

The Election Modernization Coalition will be hosting a virtual lobby lunch on the VOTES Act tomorrow — Tuesday, May 11, from noon to 1:30 pm.

You can RSVP for tomorrow’s VOTES Act lobby lunch here.


Also Wanted: Democracy in the MA State House

Back in February, the MA House and MA Senate both passed sets of Joint Rules to govern how the Legislature operates.

But due to opposition to basic transparency measures from the MA House, the Conference Committee negotiating a final set of rules (behind closed doors) has yet to come to an agreement.

The transparency measures passed by the Senate are both essential and non-controversial:

  • Publishing full committee roll call votes online
  • Making testimony accessible to the public with appropriate redactions (as with any other public record)
  • Extending the notice period for hearings to one week

All of these steps will help legislators do their own jobs better and strengthen the participatory nature of our democracy.

There’s so much work to do this session, and the House needs to stop delaying the passage of Joint Rules.

Can you email your state legislators in support of transparency in the Joint Rules?

Sunlight on Beacon Hill

Representation Matters! Redistricting Training for Trainers

Training Dates: Thursday, May 13, 1 pm to 3 pm & Wednesday, May 19, 6 pm to 8 pm

Join the Drawing Democracy Coalition to learn about the impact of redistricting on your community and how you can help ensure that your community has the power to elect representatives of choice for the next decade.

These workshops will prepare community groups and leaders to engage their members in the redistricting process. Topics covered will include:

  • How to communicate the importance and process of redrawing district lines with your community
  • Defining and mapping your community of interest
  • How to support the Drawing Democracy Coalition’s goal to create a state-wide unity map that empowers immigrants, people of color, and low-income voters.

Beacon Hill Voted to Uphold Disenfranchisement — Behind Closed Doors

In only two states — Vermont and Maine — individuals with felony convictions never lose their right to vote.

Massachusetts used to be another, until that right was taken away twenty years ago by both state legislators and the public in a racist backlash to political organizing by incarcerated individuals.

Full enfranchisement provides individuals with a link to the outside community that facilitates the goals of rehabilitation and reentry and recognizes that the right to vote is sacred and should not be taken away when the flaws and biases of our criminal legal system are so clear.

Over the past few years, activists have been pushing for Massachusetts to restore voting rights, but the Legislature, given an opportunity to do so last week, instead voted down a proposal — and did so in secret.

S18

Because the House and Senate have yet to agree on a set of Joint Rules (including how and whether to post committee votes), no vote was posted.

By hiding how they voted, the MA legislature continues endorsing and affirming our racist history of disenfranchisement without accountability to the public – a dual loss for democracy. 

So what’s next?

Although the Legislature gave an adverse report to the full goal of voting rights restoration, there is still important work to be done to ensure that those who do still have the right to vote are able to exercise that right.

Citizens who are incarcerated on non-felony convictions or held on pre-trial convictions retain their right to vote. But without a system in place to provide these citizens with access to ballot applications, voting materials, and deadlines, that right is rendered meaningless.

This leads to a de facto disenfranchisement of as many as 10,000 incarcerated citizens.

Sen. Adam Hinds and Reps. Liz Miranda and Chynah Tyler have a bill this session — the Jail-Based Voting Act — to create a long overdue system to provide citizens behind the wall with meaningful access to the ballot.

The bill would require sheriffs to provide all eligible voters ballot applications, voting materials, and a private place to vote; improve registration of returning citizens; create a robust data reporting system for such work; and more.

Can you email your state legislators in support of the Jail-Based Voting Act?

2020 Special Elections

2020 Special Elections

Plymouth & Barnstable (3/3, 5/19)

Consisting of the towns of Kingston, Pembroke and Plymouth in the county of Plymouth; and the towns of Bourne, Falmouth and Sandwich in the county of Barnstable

Prior seatholder: Vinny DeMacedo (R)

2012: Obama 50.3% – Romney 49.5%

2012: Warren 42.8% – Brown 57.2%

2016: Clinton 49.8% – Trump 44.3%

37th Middlesex (3/3, 6/2)

Consisting of Precincts 3, 4 and 5, of Acton, precinct 2 of Ayer, Boxborough and Shirley, all in Middlesex County; Harvard, and precincts A, C, and D, of Lunenburg, Worcester County

Prior seatholder: Jen Benson (D)

2016 election: Clinton 62% – Trump 31%

2012 election: Obama 57% – Romney 41%

2012 election: Warren 49.7% – Brown 50.3%

Read the questionnaires:

3rd Bristol (3/3, 6/2)

Consisting of Precinct 6 of Easton, and precinct A of ward 3, and all precincts in wards 1, 2, 5, 7 and 8, of Taunton, Bristol County

Prior seatholder: Shauna O’Connell (R)

2016 election: Clinton 52% – Trump 42%

2012 election: Obama 58% – Romney 40%

2012 election: Warren 50.4% – Brown 49.6%

 

Read the questionnaires:

Want to see more questionnaires?