Top 10 Excuses You’ll Hear for Why Your Legislator Voted Against Transparency

No Excuses

Last week, the Massachusetts House voted down three common sense transparency amendments to its rules package.

These amendments were simple good government proposals, requiring that…

  • Representatives be given a reasonable amount of time to read the final language of any bill they’re voting on
  • Representatives be given a reasonable amount of time to read any amendment submitted on the floor that they’ll be voting on
  • Hearing testimony (for/against) a bill and all votes taken in committee to be publicly available.

Yet they all failed, as most rank-and-file Democrats voted with House Leadership against them.

If you’ve reached out to your representatives since, they’ve probably given you a number of excuses. Spoiler: They’re not very good ones.

NO Excuses

(1)  “Requiring more time for Legislators to read bills would just create unnecessary delays. my constituents routinely tell me that we need to be doing more.”

The slow pace of legislative progress in the House is a confounding and deliberate choice–of legislators’ (and especially House Leadership’s) own making. Leadership sets the agenda and the pace: Hearings that take months to be scheduled, repeatedly missed deadlines for reporting bills out of committee, and a final month of a 2-year session packed with a flurry of  major bills. This is all by choice, and not out of necessity (recall the lightning speed with which the legislature drafted, debated, passed the “Upskirting” bill). There is no reason they can’t start the real work three days earlier. Better yet, they could start a year and a half earlier and not find themselves in such a time crunch at the end.

(2)  “By a time a bill comes to the floor, there has been a tremendous amount of public input already. So giving more time for experts, advocates, and the public to read it is just superfluous!”  

This is a loose interpretation of the word “public.” The drafting of a bill happens behind closed doors, which only high-ranking legislators and well-financed lobbyists can get behind. Even rank and file legislators do not have access to this process, and there is no record of whose input is actually being incorporated. It is important for experts, advocates, and constituents to be able to offer input as well.

(3)  “This would create an opportunity for obstruction. A Republican state rep like Jim Lyons could file amendment after amendment, clogging up the process and taking days of our time.”

First of all, Jim Lyons was defeated last November. That point aside, the uninformed chaos of floor amendments could be avoided if amendments were filed well in advance of debate and voting. Moreover, if a legislator were seeking to be obstructive, there is already a backstop: the House routinely suspends its own rules anyway, and it would just need an (easily attainable) 2/3 majority to do so. Amendment #2 would have required that this suspension be done by a roll call vote, providing a public record of who judged the amendments to be gratuitous and unworthy of a serious reading, but it would still be perfectly possible.

(4)  “This is a solution in search of a problem. We already have enough time to read what we’re voting on.”

Last year, the House voted to authorize the creation of community benefit districts the very same day the bill was reported out of House Ways & Means Committee. The bill would have let wealthy property owners in residential and commercial areas impose taxes on their neighbors and privatize public spaces. Many members had no idea what they were voting on, having been given favorable talking points but few details. Only after the House passed the bill were organizations like the ACLU, Common Cause, the NAACP, and the Mass Law Reform Institute able to rally the public to action.

The “Grand Bargain” deal passed by the Legislature last summer (in order to avoid a $15 minimum wage, paid family and medical leave, and a sales tax reduction being on the November ballot ) was voted on the very same day it was reported out of the House Ways & Means Committee – indeed, just one hour after activists from the Raise Up Massachusetts coalition, which was behind the $15 minimum wage and paid leave ballot questions, were given the language and well before the 100+ group coalition had finished reading and debating it.

In both cases, the rule granting representatives 24 hours to read a bill was suspended, and this was not because legislators had all finished reading. Indeed, even by extending the window to 72 hours, the House could still suspend the requirement; however, Amendment #1 would again require them to do so by roll call, meaning representatives would have to justify to their constituents why they felt such a suspension was appropriate.

(5)  “Committees should be able to set their own rules, and wouldn’t these rules cause an undue burden for already overworked and underpaid staff?”

The House Rules *already* set standards by which committees must operate. Requiring two additional steps of transparency – the publication of testimony and the publication of committee votes – is fully in line with that. Establishing basic parameters for a committee is not undue interference with its operation.

Moreover, in January 2017, the Massachusetts Legislature voted for a pay hike that increased the pay, stipends, and office expense budgets of committee chairmen. It is fully within their ability to increase the pay of their staff; indeed, they should.

(6)  “All hearing testimony is already public.”

Sure. But very difficult to participate in and to access.

Yes, anyone who is able to come to downtown Boston to attend a hearing in the middle of the workday is able to listen to the testimony. That is no substitute for publishing submitted testimony online, like Alaska, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Ohio, Oregon, and Wisconsin do.

Furthermore, a great deal of testimony is submitted in writing – in fact, the committees encourage it. Even representatives who are not members of the committee have been denied access to this testimony by some committees. If even rank and file legislators can’t get it, experts, advocates, and the public certainly can’t.

(7)  “All of my votes are already public.”

Ha! First of all, publicly recorded floor votes are VERY, VERY DIFFICULT TO FIND especially on the House side. (For more on this issue, check out our Scorecard website FAQs).

But we’re not talking about floor votes; we’re talking about committee votes. And those are not actually available online.  

(8)  “I’m new here, and who am I to say how the chamber should operate? Isn’t that presumptuous?”

So House Leadership has convinced you of their power and the absence of yours. Interesting, don’t you think?

The Legislature does not belong to the Speaker, the Majority Leader, or any other member of House Leadership. It belongs to the people. It is only to their constituents that legislators are accountable because their constituents are the ones who elected – and will decide whether to re-elect – them.  

(9)  “I’m playing a long game. If I vote for this, then I’ll end up on the Speaker’s bad side, and I won’t be able to push any of the priorities that we both care about.”

Many representatives have been saying this for years. But given how important bills keep hitting the same roadblocks session after session, the strategy of going along to get along is certainly not a proven winner. The only reason the Speaker has that kind of control in the first place is the lack of transparency and accountability inherent in the House’s standard practices. The only way to fix structural problems is with changes in structure, and your constituents will certainly have your back.

(10) “But this will mean I’ll just get more calls from constituents.”

Yes, that is called democracy.

If You Want a Different Outcome, You Need to Change the Rules of the Game

The Massachusetts General Court is the second oldest deliberative body of the world. It’s time for it to start living up to such a stature.

Opaque processes and procedures are the standard operating procedure in the Legislature, leaving the public—and even many legislators—in the dark while monied interests exert sway behind closed doors. And an over-centralization of power encourages a culture of quiescence and retaliation, discouraging open debate on major issues—a problem especially acute in the Massachusetts House of Representatives.

But it doesn’t have to be this way.

Real reform will be impossible without changes to both rules and norms.

And with the MA House set to vote on its rules for the 191st legislative session tomorrow, we have a few good ideas about measures the House could adopt.

(1) Read What You’re Voting On

PROBLEM: When legislators don’t have the time to do their due diligence, bad legislation can easily slip through. Take, for example, the House’s vote last year on a bill authorizing what’s called “community benefit districts.” That bill would have enabled wealthy property owners to essentially “own” public spaces and impose fees on other property owners in the district with or without their approval, all with zero safeguards for civil liberties and equal access. Representatives only learned that a vote was going to take place on the bill the day of the vote itself, providing no time for legislators to read the fine print or consult with experts. The result? It sailed through almost unanimously, with representatives only realizing what they actually voted on afterwards.

SOLUTION: Bills should be made available to House members and the public, in the form in which they were most recently reported from committee, at least 72 hours (three days) before being considered on the floor. Legislators, experts, advocates, and engaged community members then have the opportunity to more thoroughly evaluate a bill, and legislators will better understand what they are actually voting on.

The same standard – read what you’re voting on – should also apply to amendments. When a bill is being considered, representatives should get at least 30 minutes to review the text of any new amendment before having to vote on it.

(2) Know What You’re Voting On – and Who’s Behind the Bill

PROBLEM: Legislators don’t have the staff (or time) to attend every single hearing on every single bill, and can thus be left with only a cursory understanding of what a bill does and who the main forces behind it are.

Hearings, at least, are public, unlike much of the legislative process. When negotiations happen behind closed doors, other legislators and the public are left in the dark about how a bill is changed and who is lobbying for those changes. Take, for example, the case in 2017 when the House Ways & Means Committee watered down a bill to protect pregnant women in the workplace – with no legislator or lobby group taking ownership of the change.

SOLUTION: Committee staff are already doing a lot of work compiling information on a bill, so that information should be made available to all legislators and the public. As is the norm in a number of other state legislatures, bills reported out of an “issue area” committee should be accompanied by substantive reports with a) a summary of the arguments advanced pro/con at the bill hearing and in written testimony submitted; b) a list of organizations and individuals that testified pro/con on the bill; c) a list of organizations and individuals that met or otherwise communicated with the Committee Leadership. And when a bill gets reported out of a committee like Ways & Means or Third Reading, those reports should also include an explanation of any changes made to the bill.

(3) Show Your Vote

PROBLEM: Of the thousands of bills that get filed at the start of a session, comparatively few get passed in either chamber, let alone being signed into law. Most bills end up dying in the committee stage – whether voted down, sent to further study (i.e., indefinitely tabled – the study never happens), or discharged to another committee (where they then flounder). When a bill dies in committee, all legislators are left with clean hands, since no recorded vote is made available for the decision. Indeed, the House evades its own stated rules around making these recorded votes available by polling votes electronically instead of in person. This leaves legislators outside of the committee—and the public—in the dark about what is happening on important pieces of legislation.

SOLUTION: The state legislatures in a majority of US states publish roll call votes from committees online, and so should ours. A recorded vote should be taken (and published) whenever a committee makes a decision, whether to give a bill a favorable/negative report, “send it to further study,” or discharge it.

CommonWealth: A resolution for Legislature: Finish last year’s work

“A resolution for Legislature: Finish last year’s work” — Jonathan Cohn, CommonWealth 

DATE: 12/29/2018 

IN A FEW short days, the next legislative session in the Massachusetts State House will begin. New legislators will be sworn in. The governor will give his State of the State address. The mad dash to file bills and secure co-sponsorships will start—and end—in the blink of an eye.

But we’re not there yet. Now is the time for reflections on the past and aspirations for the new. And in that spirit, I’d like to propose a New Year’s resolution for the Massachusetts Legislature: finish last year’s business.

The Legislature will have a lot on its table soon, and indeed, new issues arise all the time. But if they want to avoid the chaotic spectacle that the final days of a legislative session too often are, then it’s good to start early.

Read the rest here.

Taking Stock of the 190th Legislative Session

In January of 2017, Progressive Massachusetts unveiled our legislative agenda for the 190th legislative session — 17 items for 2017 (and 2018). As we near the end of the year — and the start of the next legislative session, it’s the perfect time to take stock of how the various bills fared.

Clear Victories

Reproductive Rights

The ACCESS bill, which updates MA’s contraceptive coverage equity law to require insurance carriers to provide all contraceptive methods without a copay, passed overwhelmingly in the Legislature and was signed by the Governor.

Democracy

Massachusetts became the 13th state to adopt Automatic Voter Registration. In this reform pioneered by Oregon in 2015, eligible voters who interface with select government agencies (here, the RMV or MassHealth) are automatically registered to vote unless they decline. With more than 700,000 eligible citizens in MA unregistered, AVR will increase the accuracy, security, and comprehensiveness of voter rolls.

The bill also enrolls Massachusetts in Electronic Registration Information Center, a coalition of states founded by the Pew Research Center that enable states to synchronize their voter rolls. ERIC has increased the comprehensiveness and accuracy of the voter rolls in participating states.

[Note: The original bill included smaller social services government agencies as well. The final bill allows for their later inclusion but focuses on the two largest sources of possible new registrants.]

Steps Forward

Criminal Justice Reform

The comprehensive criminal justice reform bill passed by the Legislature in April incorporated some elements from our priority bills (Read our write-up here):

  • Eliminating most mandatory minimums for retail drug selling and drug paraphernalia and limiting mandatory minimums in school zones to cases involving guns or minors. [Note: PM and advocates had sought the elimination of all mandatory minimums. The bill, however, left in place mandatory minimums for Class A drugs (like heroin), expanded this definition to include opioids like fentanyl and carfentanil, and created a new mandatory minimum for assaulting a police officer, an overused charge wielded as a threat against protesters.]
  • Raising the felony-larceny threshold from $250 to $1,200 [Note: PM and other advocates had sought $1,500.]
  • Reducing fines and fees [Note: PM and other advocates wanted probation and parole fees fully eliminated.]
  • Establishing a process for expunging records, especially for juveniles convicted of minor offenses

There is still work to be done–from raising the age of criminal majority to severely curtailing (or outright abolishing) solitary confinement. That said, the bill, despite its shortcomings, was a step in the right direction.

Fight for $15

At the start of the session, we supported legislation to raise the minimum wage from $11 to to $15 by 2021, raise the tipped minimum wage from $3.75 to $15.75 by 2025, and require the minimum wage to increase with inflation starting in 2022.

The Raise Up Massachusetts coalition’s ballot initiative was slightly more modest in its ambition, extending the full phase-in date one year (due to a later start) and raising the minimum wage for tipped employees to only $9 (60% of the minimum wage) by 2022.

What passed in the ultimate “Grand Bargain,” an effort of the Legislature and the Governor to avoid three ballot initiatives ($15 minimum wage, paid family and medical leave, sales tax reduction) was more modest still. It raised the minimum wage to $15 by 2023, raised the tipped minimum wage to only $6.75, and dropped indexing. Unfortunately, the Legislature included a further concession to the business lobby, agreeing to phase-out time-and-a-half on Sundays and holidays. Although the bill is a net win for workers in Massachusetts, it’s possible that, due to the phase-out of time-and-a-half, some workers will be left worse off.

Fight for 15 Original Bill vs Ballot Initiative vs Final Grand Bargain Text

Paid Family and Medical Leave

The version of paid family and medical leave passed in the aforementioned “Grand Bargain” was less robust than the original legislation and the ballot initiative text, but still more robust than the programs that exist in other states.

PFML Senate Bill vs Ballot Initiative vs Final Grand Bargain Text

Senate Victory, House Opposition

Several of our priority bills succeeded, or made partial progress, in the Senate, only to flounder in the House amidst fierce opposition from the conservative House leadership.

Fully Funding Our Schools

Massachusetts’s 25-year-old education funding formula is short-changing our schools $1-2 billion per year due to outdated assumptions about the costs of health care, special education, ELL (English Language Learners) education, and closing racial and economic achievement gaps.

The 2015 Foundation Budget Review Commission recommended a path forward for fixing it. The Senate unanimously adopted a bill to implement them. The House, however, insisted on leaving English Language Learners, Black and Brown students, and poor students (not mutually exclusive categories) behind.

Protecting Our Immigrant Friends and Neighbors

Despite Massachusetts’s liberal reputation, our Legislature has been historically hostile to strengthening protections for our immigrant community.

The Senate included four provisions from the Safe Communities Act, a bill that our members fought strongly for, in its FY 2019 budget: (1) a prohibition on police inquiries about immigration status, a prohibition on certain collaboration agreements between local law enforcement and ICE, (3) a guarantee of basic due process protections, and (4) a prohibition on participation in a Muslim registry. The amendment was a win-win for both rights and safety, but House Leadership opposed its inclusion in the final budget.

Bold Action on Climate Change

Many elements from our priority environmental legislation were incorporated in the Senate’s impressive omnibus bill:

  • Building on the Global Warming Solutions Act by setting intermediate emissions targets for 2030 and 2040
  • Establishing a 3% annual increase in the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) to accelerate our commitment to renewable energy
  • Prohibiting a “pipeline tax” on energy consumers
  • Instructing the governor’s office to develop carbon pricing for the transportation sector by the end of 2020, for commercial buildings and industrial processes by 2021, and for residential buildings by the end of 2022 (not as strong as a revenue-positive carbon pricing scheme, but still in the right direction)

However, the House proved a roadblock yet again. The ultimate compromise energy legislation included only a 2% increase from 2020 to 2030, after which it would fall back to the current 1%. This would take us to only 56% renewable energy by 2050 instead of 100%.

Loss…But a Battle Not Over

Revenue & Reinvestment

Progressive Mass members played a major role in the signature collection for the Fair Share amendment (or “millionaires tax”), which would have created a 4% surtax on income above $1 million (inflation-adjusted) to fund education and transportation investment.

As a citizen-originated ballot initiative for a constitutional amendment, the Fair Share amendment had to receive the support of at least 25% of the Legislature in two constitutional conventions. It secured well more than double this amount, but the Supreme Judicial Court struck it from the ballot this June.

Inaction

Medicare for All

Although the Senate took modest steps in the direction of single payer, passing legislation to create a public option (a MassHealth buy-in) and require a study of whether a single payer system would save money relative to the current system, the House took no such action.

Housing Production

Although the Senate passed a comprehensive zoning reform bill to increase housing production in the suburbs last session, no such action was taken in either house this session.

Debt/tuition-free Higher Education

The cost of higher education has grown a lot in Massachusetts, and the Legislature continues to punt.

In Conclusion: We won some, we lost some, and we’ll keep on fighting.

Four Weeks Until Election Day

Election Day is just four weeks away. That’s right: 28 days.

Ballot Question Endorsements: YES-YES-YES

Massachusetts voters will see three questions on the ballot when they go to vote in four weeks. Progressive Massachusetts is recommending that you vote YES-YES-YES.

Progressive Massachusetts has been a part of the Freedom for All Massachusetts coalition since the legislative push the session before last, but before taking a position on Questions 1 and 2, we polled our members–the ultimate decision-makers in our organization. Our members overwhelmingly voted to say Yes  on 1 and Yes on 2 as well.

Here’s why:

Why Yes on 1: In Massachusetts, there is no law and no limit governing the number of patients that can be assigned to a nurse at one time (aside from the Intensive Care Unit). Overworked nurses and understaffed hospitals lead to more complications, readmissions, and errors. Nurses aren’t able to thrive at their work, and patients aren’t able to get the care they deserve. Everyone deserves high-quality working conditions, and everyone deserves the best health care our state can offer.

Why Yes on 2: On the local, state, and federal level, we see time and time again how the outsize role of money in politics distorts democracy. A Yes on Question 2 would send a powerful statement to elected officials and to other states that Massachusetts voters want to see real action on campaign finance reform.

Why Yes on 3: Because everyone deserves to be treated with dignity and respect. Because every young person deserves a chance to succeed in school and prepare for their future — including young people who are transgender. Because we are better than fear, bigotry, and transphobia. To name a few.

Some More Endorsements: Senator Elizabeth Warren & AG Maura Healey

Our members overwhelmingly voted to endorse Elizabeth Warren and Maura Healey for re-election.

Why Elizabeth Warren? Let’s turn it over to our members?

“Elizabeth Warren has been a champion in Washington for all in a very dark and scary time in U.S politics. Her voice, her actions and her persistence are needed now more than ever.”

“MA voters should know that Senator Warren has our back.”

“Senator Warren is a leader for government of the people, by the people and for the people. She stands up to wealthy corporations (who are not people) and the oligarchs who are continuing to strangle democracy in the United States.”

And why Maura Healey?

“Absolutely the people’s attorney… She is a great watchdog for the people and a great bull dog against President Trump and his policies.”

“Maura Healey has been in the forefront of the resistance to the Trump administrating since the first day.”

“Among the leaders in holding pharmaceutical manufacturers accountable for the opioid crisis.”

We agree!

One more DA Endorsement: John Bradley, Plymouth County

As countless stories from right here in Massachusetts and around the country have shown, a District Attorney has a lot of power. Too often, DAs have used that power in favor of mass incarceration and the attendant racial and economic disparities. From overcharging to lobbying against criminal justice reform, DAs have proven themselves to be an obstacle.

We’ve been working with the Justice for Massachusetts coalition to elect progressive DAs–and then hold them accountable. JFM endorsed John Bradley for Plymouth County DA, and our members voted to do so as well.

John is committed to:

  • Abolishing cash bail
  • Taking illegally possessed firearms off the streets
  • Shifting strategy for dealing with drug addiction to medical-based solutions rather than criminalization
  • Meeting regularly with community leaders and instituting accountability checks
  • Increasing data transparency from the DA’s office to the community

John’s experience as a career prosecutor for over 30 years in Plymouth and Worcester Counties, as well as in the U.S. Attorney’s Office, equips him to implement progressive change to restore ethics, compassion, and common sense to the important public safety work of the DA’s Office.

2018 Ballot Questions: Why We’re a YES – YES – YES

Ballot Questions

On November 6, Massachusetts voters will see three questions on their ballot. Progressive Massachusetts recommends YES-YES-YES.

Question 1: Nurse-Patient Assignment Limits Initiative

Recommendation: Vote YES.

Yes on 1 2018

What a Yes Would Do: Question 1 would limit the number of patients that can be assigned to each registered nurse in Massachusetts hospitals and certain other health care facilities. The maximum number of patients would vary by type of unit and level of care (see the breakdown here). The enforcement of the measure would be suspended during a public health emergency as declared by the state or nationally.

Have Other States Done This?: California is currently the only state to have implemented fixed nurse-to-patient ratios. Doomsday scenarios have not come to pass, job satisfaction among nurses has gone up, and readmissions have gone down. You can read more here:

Why You Should Vote Yes: In Massachusetts, there is no law and no limit governing the number of patients that can be assigned to a nurse at one time (aside from the Intensive Care Unit). Overworked nurses and understaffed hospitals lead to more complications, readmissions, and errors. Nurses aren’t able to thrive at their work, and patients aren’t able to get the care they deserve. More time with your nurse means better care for you.

Who is Supporting Q1: A wide coalition of labor groups, community groups, and progressive elected officials — See the full list here. The No on Question 1 campaign is being funded by mega-rich hospital executives (read more here). Which side are you on?

Question 2: Advisory Commission for Amendments to the U.S. Constitution Regarding Corporate Personhood and Political Spending Initiative

Recommendation: Vote YES.

Yes on 2 2018

What a Yes Would Do: Question 2 would create a 15-member citizens commission tasked with proposing amendments to the US Constitution, specifically regarding overturning Citizens United and defining inalienable constitutional rights as belonging to individual living human beings, not artificial entities or collections of human beings. The commission would create reports onpolitical and election spending in Massachusetts; the legal ability of the state government to regulate corporations; and proposals for federal constitutional amendments and actions recommended for advancing the proposed amendments. Read the full text here.

Who Would Sit on the Commission?: Any citizen residing in Massachusetts would be eligible to serve, and the commissioners would be unpaid. The commissioners would be appointed by the Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, Speaker of the House, and Senate President (each of whom would appoint 3 members).

When Would It Take Effect?: The measure would take effect on January 1, 2019, and the commission’s first report would be due on December 31, 2019.

Why You Should Vote Yes: On the local, state, and federal level, we see time and time again how the outsize role of money in politics distorts democracy. A Yes on Question 2 would send a powerful statement to elected officials and to other states that Massachusetts voters want to see real action on campaign finance reform.

Who is Suporting Q2: See a list of endorsing individuals and organizations here.

Question 3: Gender Identity Anti-Discrimination Veto Referendum

Recommendation: Yes

Yes on 3 2018

What a Yes Would Do: A “yes” vote on Question 3 supports upholding the landmark 2016 bill that that prohibits discrimination based on gender identity in public places. The law requires access to areas segregated based on gender—such as bathrooms and locker rooms—to be allowed according to an individual’s self-identified gender identity. In short, the law is about the right of trans people to exist in public space.

Why Is This Even on the Ballot?: Reactionaries in this state collected enough signatures to do so because they want to take our state backwards. This is the first time in decades that Massachusetts has had a citizens veto referendum on the ballot. What that means is that when you enter the ballot box, you–the voter–should act as though you are the governor being presented with this bill. A yes is a vote to sign it. A no is a vote to veto it.

Why You Should Vote Yes: Because everyone deserves to be treated with dignity and respect. Because every young person deserves a chance to succeed in school and prepare for their future — including young people who are transgender. Because we are better than fear, bigotry, and transphobia. To name a few.

Who is Supporting Q3: Check out the coalition partners here.

How You Can Help: Find volunteer opportunities on the Freedom for All Massachusetts website here.

About Our Process

Progressive Massachusetts has been a part of the Freedom for All Massachusetts coalition since the legislative push the session before last, but before taking a position on Questions 1 and 2, we polled our members–the ultimate decision-makers in our organization. Our members overwhelmingly voted to say Yes  on 1 and Yes on 2 as well.

Announcing Our Latest Round of Endorsements….

Election Day — Tuesday, November 6th — is less than seven weeks away. We had some great wins on primary night two weeks ago, but the work continues.

Over the past couple of months, we’ve been inviting candidates to fill out our comprehensive policy questionnaire — a vital tool for informing voters and for holding politicians accountable. Our Election and Endorsement Committee reviews them and then chooses whether to make a recommendation to our members, the ultimate deciders. We set a high bar for endorsements; candidates must earn at least 60% of our members’ votes.

Congrats to our latest round of endorsees!

State Senate

Cape & Islands: Julian Cyr

Julian Cyr serves in the Massachusetts Senate representing Cape Cod, Martha’s Vineyard, and Nantucket. Born and raised in Truro, Julian got his start in with a career in public policy, health advocacy, organizing, and social justice. Julian was elected to the State Senate in 2016 as the youngest senator in the 40-member body. As State Senator, Julian is dedicated to identifying solutions for the opioid epidemic, public education, and protecting the Cape’s vulnerable environment. As a proudly gay legislator, Julian has advocated on behalf of the Commonwealth’s LGBTQ residents as State Senator and as former chair of the Massachusetts Commission on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and Questioning (LGBTQ) Youth.

Middlesex & Worcester: Jamie Eldridge

Jamie Eldridge has served as State Senator for the Middlesex and Worcester district since January 2009. Senator Eldridge serves as the Senate Chair of the Joint Committee on Financial Services, and is known for his leadership on progressive issues. Previously, Senator Eldridge served as State Representative for the 37th Middlesex district, after being elected the only Clean Elections candidate to public office in Massachusetts history in November 2002. For the 2017-18 session, Senator Eldridge, filed bills aimed at reducing the wealth gap, making health care a right, protecting the environment, combating climate change, increasing education funding, reforming the criminal justice system, and safeguarding the civil rights of immigrants and Muslims in Massachusetts.

Plymouth & Norfolk: Katie McBrine

Dr. Katie McBrine is a lifelong Democrat, a pediatrician and a mom, not the classic politician. She decided to run for office because she is disappointed by our state’s failure to make progress toward the goals in our party platform. As a doctor, she is witnessing firsthand the attacks on health care. She cannot sit by any longer while people suffer because our legislators do not know enough about how our health care system works to propose effective solutions. Dr. McBrine has long been active in the community as a health and science educator. She is a progressive who sees many issues through the lens of impact on public health. She wants to see our state lead the nation in affordable health care, in environmental protection, in civil rights, in education, in public transportation, and in gun safety. She will take her experience, her concerns, and her values to Beacon Hill and knowledgeably advocate for change.

State House

5th Barnstable: Jack Stanton

Jack Stanton is a lifelong Sandwich resident with deep ties to his community. He is a product of the public schools, graduating as president of his high school class in 2010 and receiving his BA from the George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs in 2014. Since then Jack has been working primarily in the development sector with experience at the World Bank, and at Forcier Consulting in Mozambique. Deeply troubled by the political climate, concerned about the numerous challenges affecting Cape Cod, and seeing a need for more activist leadership at the state level, Jack decided to move home and run for office in his hometown. Since returning, Jack has been working as an offshore lobsterman while campaigning to bring attention to the many issues affecting Cape Cod – a region wrongly perceived as a wealthy enclave. Jack is running to challenge this notion and better serve his neighbors.

2nd Essex: Christina Eckert

Christina Eckert has been advocating for the children of Essex County for 11 years.  After serving as President of Boxford PTO, she then co-founded Masconomet Education Foundation, raising nearly half a million dollars for two STEM labs and other educational initiatives. She is Development Director for grassroots children’s charity Community Giving Tree, helping the organization grow from serving hundreds of children per year, to helping 10,000 annually. She also serves on Boxford’s Recreation Committee, overseeing the summer Park Program since 2008. Christina sees her run for State Rep in the 2nd Essex District as a way to have a larger impact on the greater community. She wants to prioritize public schools and their safety; move toward a clean energy future; and make health care truly universal and comprehensive.

18th Essex: Tram Nguyen

Tram Nguyen is running for state representative to be a tireless advocate for the 18th Essex District. As a legal aid attorney, Tram has represented workers, domestic violence survivors, seniors, children, and veterans in the courtroom and has worked on legislation that improves the quality of life for ALL people in the Commonwealth. As state representative, Tram will advocate for the people of this district on issues like reproductive rights, common sense gun reforms and the opioid epidemic.  Tram’s family immigrated to America as political refugees when she was 5 years old —not knowing a word of English. Tram is proud of the public education system that allowed her to be the first in her family to attend college. She graduated from Tufts University and later went on to earn her juris doctor from the Northeastern University School of Law. Tram looks forward to bringing her passion, dedication, and determination to Beacon Hill.

1st Hampden: Tanya Neslusan

As the daughter, sister and wife of veterans, Tanya Neslusan believes strongly in the concept of service to country and community. She is an activist who currently serves as the President of the Sturbridge Regional Huddle, Secretary of the Sturbridge Democratic Town Committee, and a member of the Planning Committee for the Worcester Chapter of Showing Up for Racial Justice. Giving back to her community has always been important to her, whether she was coaching youth soccer or participating in Habitat for Humanity. Running for office is just another extension of that commitment which will enable her to help others on a larger scale. She currently resides in Sturbridge with her wife, Rebecca, her teenage son, Nick.

14th Middlesex: Tami Gouveia

Tami Gouveia is a strategic thinker and collaborator with a strong passion for social and environmental justice. For over 15 years, she has worked as a leader in public health and social work, serving as Director of Programs for the Greater Lawrence Health Center, Founder and Chair of the Lowell Roundtable on Substance Abuse Prevention, and Executive Director of Tobacco Free Mass. In 2016, Tami founded and co-organized the MA Chapter of the Women’s March, an experience that ultimately precipitated her run for office. On Beacon Hill, Tami hopes to continue the work she’s achieved in enhancing community health, addressing the roots causes of addiction, advocating for justice, and holding corporations accountable. A native Lowellian, Tami now lives in Acton with her two sons.

2nd Plymouth: Sarah Hewins

Sarah Hewins is in her fourth term as Carver Selectman, was elected twice for 10 years to the Planning Board, and served as the town’s Conservation Agent for 15 years. Thirty years ago, Sarah formed a coalition to preserve hundreds of acres of wetlands in the Mississippi delta. Over the past 20 years in southeastern Massachusetts, she has preserved 600 acres of land, established inclusive zoning for affordable housing, was a leader in getting a new elementary school, spearheaded passing the Community Preservation Act, was a co-founder and volunteer Executive Director of a non-profit to help at-risk youth, and attempted to unionize town hall management employees. She has served on many town and regional committees and boards and has run the toddler story hour at the library for 22 years. She earned a PhD in Sociology of Community from Princeton University.

17th Worcester: David LeBoeuf

David LeBoeuf is a lifelong Worcester resident and proud graduate of the Worcester Public Schools. David began his career as an interim staff assistant in the Worcester City Manager’s Office. In 2011, he was appointed as the Director of the Initiative for Engaged Citizenship (IEC), a coalition of community-based organizations focused on increasing civic participation in local elections and advocating for election modernization. Since 2015, he has been an Urban Business Initiatives Associate at the Initiative for a Competitive Inner City, focused on increasing opportunities for small businesses in underserved communities. He currently serves on the boards of the African Community Education program (ACE), the Latin American Health Alliance of Central MA (Hector Reyes House), and the NeighborWorks HomeOwnership Center of Central MA/Oak Hill Community Development Corporation, where he is board president.





2018 Primary Elections: Whew!

Primary Night 2018 was a big night for Progressive Massachusetts and our endorsed candidates.

Boston City Councilor Ayanna Pressley defeated incumbent Congressman Mike Capuano by 17%, becoming the first woman of color to represent Massachusetts in Washington.

Rachael Rollins won by 16% and will become the first woman of color to be the District Attorney of Suffolk County. She ran on a strong progressive platform of implementing the recently passed criminal justice reform bill and taking bold steps beyond it to curb mass incarceration and make sure we aren’t criminalizing poverty, illness, and addiction.

And in a strong message to House Leadership, challengers Jon Santiago and Nika Elugardo defeated Assistant Majority Leader Byron Rushing and Ways & Means Chair Jeff Sanchez, respectively.

They will be joined in the House by other Progressive Mass endorsees Lindsay Sabadosa (Northampton), Maria Robinson (Framingham), and Tommy Vitolo (Brookline), all of whom had big wins last night and face no challenge in the general election. Additionally, Berkshire County will now have a progressive reformer District Attorney in Andrea Harrington.

Becca Rausch won big and will go on to face incumbent Senator Richard Ross this November, and Steve Leibowitz will go on to face incumbent Representative Tim Whelan. Christina Minicucci will face a Republican challenger this fall as well. They will all need your help.

As do our endorsees Jay Gonzalez and Quentin Palfrey, who are fighting to bring progressive policy back to the Corner Office.

Not all of our endorsed candidates won, but we admire the hard work they put in and commitment to moving Massachusetts in a more progressive direction.

Running for office isn’t easy, especially if you are challenging an incumbent. But primaries are essential in a single-party Legislature that too often quells any actual debate.

Reflecting on her victory, Nika Elugardo said, “We need a new kind of politician. And some of those are already in the State House and waiting for their own personal transformation and they will come to be that type of politician. And some are going to have to be replaced because that’s not what they want or are capable of.”

That has been our mission since Progressive Mass started. We hold elected officials accountable, combining issue advocacy and electoral organizing, in a uniquely powerful combination. And our ability to succeed at that work depends on supporters like you.

And the Winners Are….: Announcing Our Final Round of Our Primary Endorsements

Elections matter. Our ability to make progressive change in Massachusetts depends on having progressive champions in office — every office.

In particular, primaries matter, especially in an often single-party state like Massachusetts. Primaries are the time that we can debate concrete policies and large-scale visions.

Massachusetts’s state primary is Tuesday, September 4th.

Over the past couple of months, we’ve been inviting candidates to fill out our comprehensive policy questionnaires — a vital tool for informing voters and for holding politicians accountable. Our Election and Endorsement Committee reviews them and then chooses whether to make a recommendation to our members, the ultimate deciders.

We’re proud to endorse the following candidates, each of whom won an overwhelming majority of the vote among our membership, for our final round of primary endorsements.

Congress

MA-01: Tahirah Amatul-Wadud

Tahirah.jpg

Tahirah Amatul-Wadud runs a successful law practice in Western Massachusetts with a focus in domestic relations and civil rights law. She is a graduate of Elms College in Chicopee and Western New England University School of Law in Springfield. Tahirah was named a 2016 Top Woman of Law by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly. As a commissioner for the Massachusetts Commission on the Status of Women, Tahirah has advocated before the state legislature to enact laws responsive to the needs of women. She is a member of the Family Advisory Council of Boston Children’s Hospital. Tahirah understands the need to prioritize healthcare for every person and is thus an avid supporter of Medicare for All. She also supports universal public education from pre-K through college and affordable high-speed Internet access for every resident to improve the economic prosperity of the district.

MA-07: Ayanna Pressley

Ayanna_Pressley.jpg

Ayanna Pressley is an advocate, a policy-maker, an activist, and survivor. Her election to the Boston City Council in 2009 marked the first time a woman of color was elected to the Council in its 100-year history. This laid the foundation for Ayanna’s groundbreaking work, with which she has consistently strived to improve the lives of people that have too often been left behind and to reduce inequality in all forms. Raised in Chicago as the only child of an activist mother who instilled in her the value of civic participation, Ayanna understands the role that government should play in helping to lift up communities that are in need of the most help. After her election to the Council in 2009, she successfully pursued the establishment of the Committee on Healthy Women, Families, and Communities. The Committee addresses causes that Ayanna has always been most devoted to: stabilizing families and communities, reducing and preventing violence and trauma, combating poverty, and addressing issues that disproportionately impact women and girls. Ayanna lives in the Ashmont/Adams neighborhood of Dorchester with her husband Conan Harris, nine-year-old stepdaughter Cora, and cat Sojourner Truth.

District Attorney

Berkshire County: Andrea Harrington

Andrea_Harrington.jpg

Andrea Harrington comes from a working class family in Berkshire County and was among the first generation in her family to attend college and then law school. Her criminal law professor’s scholarship focused on the role of prosecutorial discretion in mass incarceration and the particularly devastating effect of bias in the criminal justice system on communities of color. This inspired her work representing convicted death row inmates in their post-conviction appeals in Florida. When Andrea returned home to Massachusetts, her work representing indigent criminal defendants in appellate and trial matters made the urgent need for statewide criminal justice reform very apparent. Over the past fifteen years of legal practice, she has seen the struggles of working families in Berkshire County through her work in family court and in representing employees in discrimination claims. Andrea also serves on the Richmond School Committee and is a co-founder of the Massachusetts Women’s Political Caucus- Berkshire Committee.

Middlesex County: Donna Patalano

Donna_Patalano.jpg

Donna Patalano is a nationally recognized leader in legal ethics who has worked as both a prosecutor and a defense attorney. As Chief of Professional Integrity & Ethics in the Suffolk DA’s Office, Donna created the state’s first Conviction Integrity Program. From her time as a prosecutor reviewing cases to be sure that justice had been done, to her work as a defense attorney protecting the rights of people who couldn’t afford an attorney, Donna has developed a unique perspective. As District Attorney, Donna will bring transformative, transparent change to our justice system. She will implement evidence-based reforms that improve safety while restoring integrity and accountability to our courts. She will work to end mass incarceration and eliminate the racial disparities entrenched in our system. And, she will collect and release data to make sure that the programs we invest in are working.

State Senate

Hampden: Amaad Rivera

Amaad_Rivera.jpg

Amaad Rivera is a former Policy Advisor to Senator Ed Markey, a role through which he brought the voices and values of Western MA to bear on issues like health care, climate change, and proper funding for important regional transportation projects. When he served as a Springfield City Councilor, he stopped unfair foreclosures and creeping blight that was affecting our community, by leading the effort that gave the city the tools to stand up to greedy lenders. As a person raised by a single mother, he knows firsthand  how community support and government investments can change people’s lives and is running to help make that difference for people across the district and combat the growing wealth and income inequality of the region.

Fifth Middlesex: Sam Hammar

Sam_Hammar.jpg

Sam Hammar is an experienced public servant, activist, and family woman, whose passion and life experiences have covered the gamut–from teaching and tech to advocating for women and families. Born in New England and raised along the East Coast, Sam has watched her single mom juggle three jobs to provide for her family and her dad struggle as a business owner while managing a chronic illness. Sam spent most of her career in public service—whether in the Boston Public Schools, Boston City Hall, or state government. She recently served on the Women’s Commission, where she fought for affordable and accessible childcare. She also served as the Chair of the Melrose Democratic City Committee. She and her husband have twin daughters who attend kindergarten in public school. Sam believes we need new voices on Beacon Hill to get us the progress we deserve.

State House of Representatives

6th Middlesex: Maria Robinson

Maria_Robinson.jpg

Maria Robinson is running for State Representative in the 6th Middlesex District of Massachusetts. A former Town Meeting member, Maria is a clean energy policy expert and advocate, who has spent the last decade helping state policymakers and public officials throughout the country to address climate change through renewable energy and energy efficiency policies. Maria is an MIT graduate and the child of public servants and union members, who taught her the value of hard work and giving back to her community. Maria serves on the board of the Framingham Public Library Foundation, the Friends of the Framingham Library, and is a member of the Framingham Democratic Committee. Maria lives in Framingham with her husband, their two foster (soon-to-be-adopted!) children ages 10 and 12, her parents, and their lively dog Guinness. 

23rd Middlesex: Sean Garballey

Sean_Garballey.jpg

Sean Garballey is the representative of the 23rd Middlesex District, which includes parts of Arlington and Medford. He has served in the House since 2008, when he was one of the youngest to ever be elected to the body. Prior to his election, he served on the Arlington School Committee (2005 to 2008) and in the Arlington Town Meeting (2003-2008). At the State House, he has been a strong advocate for a single payer health care system, transitioning Massachusetts to 100% renewable energy, and increasing our investments in public transportation and public education.

9th Suffolk: Jon Santiago

JonSantiago.jpg

Jon Santiago has spent his life in service to others. After college, Jon joined the Peace Corps, organizing sugarcane workers and immigrants in the Dominican Republic. A graduate of Yale School of Medicine, Jon now works and cares for underserved communities as an emergency medicine doctor at Boston Medical Center, the city’s safety net hospital. He is an active participant in neighborhood meetings, has knocked on thousands of doors for progressive causes, and sits on the boards of the South End Community Health Center, Friends of the South End Library, and the Puerto Rican Veterans Park. He is running for state representative to fight for a community where people can afford to live at any stage of their lives, where kids can go to quality schools and play outside on safe streets, where people can rely on efficient public transportation, and where bold action can be taken to address challenges from the opioid crisis to climate change.

15th Suffolk: Nika Elugardo

Nika_Elugardo.jpg

Nika Elugardo has over 20 years of experience in community and economic development with public, private, and nonprofit leaders in communities of color, including serving as Jamaica Plain Liaison and Senior Policy Advisor to Massachusetts Senator Sonia Chang-Díaz. Nika’s professional career helping nonprofit and business leaders work together to break injustice and open doors to opportunity began at the National Consumer Law Center in Boston. She later became founding Director of MassSaves, an economic justice collaborative jointly sponsored by community organizations and financial institutions. Nika earned her B.S. from MIT in Urban Planning, an MPP from Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government with concentrations in political advocacy, leadership, and peace and security, and a J.D. from Boston University Law School with externships in tax law, human rights, and corporate social responsibility. Nika’s work experience, training as a lawyer and policy leader, progressive values, and passion for our District position her to be a bold, effective leader on Beacon Hill.

And the Winners Are….: Announcing Round Two of Our Legislative Primary Endorsements

Elections matter. Our ability to make progressive change in Massachusetts depends on having progressive champions in office — every office.

In particular, primaries matter. Whether you’re ousting a conservative or passive incumbent (of either party) or electing a real champion in an open seat (replacing a retiring one or getting a real progressive upgrade), primaries can send a powerful message.

Massachusetts’s state primary is Tuesday, September 4th.

Over the past couple of months, we’ve been inviting candidates to fill out our comprehensive policy questionnaire — a vital tool for informing voters and for holding politicians accountable. Our Election and Endorsement Committee reviews them and then chooses whether to make a recommendation to our members, the ultimate deciders.

We’re proud to endorse the following candidates, each of whom won an overwhelming majority of the vote among our membership, for our second round of primary endorsements.

State Senate

2nd Essex & Middlesex: Mike Armano

Mike Armano is a proud member of the Lawrence Firefighters Local 146. Mike is a fourth-generation civil servant, with experience working with some of our most vulnerable populations as a coach, counselor, and substitute teacher. After attending Mass School of Law and starting his own law practice, he followed in his father’s footsteps eight years later and was hired as a firefighter. He graduated from the Mass Fire Academy while earning his EMT license and pursuing his master’s degree in Public Administration. Today, Mike supports legislative initiatives as a delegate to the Professional Firefighters of Massachusetts, and works with city officials and community leaders as the Lieutenant of Fire Prevention in Lawrence, Massachusetts. As a state senator, he will fight the expansion of charter schools and is committed to fully funding public education in Massachusetts.

State House of Representatives

1st Barnstable: Steve Leibowitz

Steve Leibowitz has been active in his community since being elected a town meeting member in Amherst as a Freshman to his work the past 23 years on Cape Cod. He’s served on the Brewster School Committee, Brewster Affordable Housing Partnership, and the board of Protect Our Cape Cod Aquifer. Steve chaired the Brewster Democratic Town Committee for 6 years, was elected twice to the Democratic National Convention as an Obama and Sanders delegate and currently is a member of the Democratic State Committee. He’s running to replace Republican Tim Whelan and would be a strong voice for economic fairness and open, engaged government.

14th Essex: Christina Minicucci

Christina Minicucci is a community activist in North Andover who understands that democracy is not a spectator sport. She currently serves as Vice-Chair of the North Andover School Building Committee, member of the Master Plan Advisory Committee, and the Expo Coordinator for the Feaster Five Road Race. Christina is also an active member of the North Andover Parent Advisory Council (NAPAC), her local Boy Scout Troop, and the Merrimack Valley Striders running club, as well as a former member of the YWCA Board of Directors and a sexual assault hotline advocate. She looks forward to being a strong advocate for investing in our public schools, addressing the affordable housing crisis, and promoting equitable economic development for the region.

2nd Hampshire: Marie McCourt

Marie McCourt is a dedicated community activist in Granby. Having grown up in a struggling family, she has made a point in her career to create opportunities for others. She currently works as an assistant program director for a grant-funded afterschool program, and it is through this work that she got involved in politics. She currently serves on the executive board and works as a volunteer for Neighbors Helping Neighbors, Inc., a client-choice pantry that serves South Hadley and Granby residents dealing with food insecurity. She will be an enthusiastic champion of increasing our investment in public education, increasing access to medical care, and improving our elder and disability services so that everyone can thrive.  

28th Middlesex: Gerly Adrien

Gerly Adrien ran for State Representative for the 28th Middlesex District as a first-time candidate in 2016 with no name recognition and fell just 600 votes short of winning. She is running again to continue the fight to improve education, economic development, and quality of life for the people of Everett. The oldest child of parents born in Haiti, Gerly moved to Everett in 1993 when she was 4 years old. Her parents instilled in her and her two brothers the importance of serving others, and she has carried that value with her wherever she has gone in life, whether working to advance teen empowerment, affordable housing, arts education, and public health.

15th Norfolk: Tommy Vitolo

Tommy Vitolo is an environmental professional and a long-time progressive leader in his local legislature, the Brookline Town Meeting. A PhD engineer, Tommy works as an expert witness on behalf of government agencies and environmental organizations. He has served on a dozen town boards and committees, and is an elected member of the Brookline Democratic Town Committee and an elected Brookline Constable. He’s authored and shepherded to passage progressive local legislation related to public schools, public health, diversity and inclusion, the environment, and public art in Brookline and looks forward to being a champion of these and other issues at the State House.