Fuzzy, Xenophobic Math: Mass Fiscal

By Kyle Reilly

The Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, a group that allegedly focuses on “fiscal responsibility” that has had xenophobia at its core from the start, has been targeting legislative supporters of the Safe Communities Act with mailers fear-mongering about undocumented immigrants. On the mailers, they quote a statistic from the ironically named white supremacist group FAIR: “Illegal Immigration costs Massachusetts taxpayers $1.8 Billion Annually.”  As should come as no surprise, there are major problems with both the messenger and the message.  

First, FAIR’s ties to white supremacist ideologies are well-documented. They are not a research center by any definition, and their obvious bias makes any analysis of theirs suspect.

The credibility problem isn’t just about who’s saying it, though. The numbers are also pure nonsense.  

The figure trumpeted by FAIR and Mass Fiscal is based on assumptions and very little empirical data. They don’t consider any of the economic benefits from immigrants whether in or out of status, nor the tremendous cost of removal. FAIR starts by inflating the number of undocumented immigrants by doing things like counting everyone in the US under TPS as undocumented (they are not). All together, this inflates the number by 1.5 million people as compared to the Pew Research Center.  

Over half of the tax burden assigned to education and healthcare are expenses related to the children of undocumented immigrants, approximately three-quarters of whom are native-born citizens of the US (and therefore: not undocumented). (As anyone who was ever a parent—or a child–would know, all children are expensive). FAIR doesn’t count the children born to native-born Americans as a tax burden, because they grow up, join the workforce, and contribute to taxes, off-setting their expense. No such assumptions are made about the children of undocumented immigrants even though they are contributing members of society.  

FAIR’s assumptions lack a data-driven consistency, consistent only in manipulating the assumptions to result in inflated cost conclusions (which is exactly the kind of fakenewsery the right consistently claims of the left). For example: when assessing educational costs, FAIR assumes that ALL children in a family with an undocumented parent live in low-income homes and go to low-income schools, an assumption that on paper increases the alleged costs. And yet, elsewhere, FAIR uses high-income assumptions in other parts of the study: their analysis goes out of the way to minimize their contributions by undocumented members of our economy and maximize their cost.   

There is a wealth of empirical research, on the other hand, that comes to the complete opposite conclusion of groups like Mass Fiscal and FAIR: that immigrants (undocumented or otherwise) and safe community policies both have positive impacts on their communities.  

The Mass Fiscal junk data is designed only to stir up nativist outrage and scare legislators. And Governor Baker and the State House would be wise to listen to facts and reason, not junk data assembled by hate groups with a white supremacist agenda.

Not Having It: Rep. Calter claps back at Mass Fiscal

Mass Fiscal is sending out postcards to voters designed to mislead and provoke a backlash against the Safe Communities Act. We were delighted to receive Rep. Calter’s comprehensive and emailed response to his constituents.

Bravo and thank you Rep. Calter, for being a strong advocate for due process, keeping our communities SAFE, and rejecting xenophobic fear tactics. 

The email is quoted in full below: 

As you may be aware, Mass Fiscal Alliance sent out post cards to residents that misrepresents the substantive elements of House Bill 3269, The Safe Communities Act. Because Mass Fiscal Alliance has a total disregard for truths that do not support its radical political agenda, I now need to set the record straight.

The legislation I co-sponsored does not even address the issue of Sanctuary Cities. It is an act that ensures that our Massachusetts tax dollars are devoted to protecting our communities and not to the enforcement of Federal immigration laws that fall under the sole authority of ICE(Immigration and Customs Enforcement). 

To learn more about what The Safe Communities Act does and does not do, please read below:

On January 23, 2017, the Trump administration introduced an aggressive immigration enforcement agenda that relies on the conscription of state and local law enforcement and facilities to identify and detain immigrants. This agenda is already having far-reaching consequences in our communities, and raises major public safety, public health, economic and civil rights concerns. A federal court has already ruled that such coercion is unconstitutional because-among other things-it violates the 10th amendment prohibition on commandeering state resources for federal purposes. 

It is no coincidence that The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court was the first in the nation to find that state laws don’t allow us to hold a person on an ICE detainer; doing so violates Massachusetts statute.

Massachusetts has often led the nation in advancing due process and civil rights. Any attempt to take away those rights and revert to a system that supports politically-motivated anti-immigrant policies would be a huge step in the wrong direction. The values that make our Commonwealth a great and welcoming place to live point us toward progress, not retreat.  

In response to President Trump’s unfunded executive orders on immigration, I was pleased to co-sponsor H3269, THE SAFE COMMUNITIES ACT. This legislation if enacted, would ensure that Massachusetts tax dollars are devoted to protecting our communities, not enforcing federal immigration laws, which are the responsibility of Immigration and Customs enforcement (ICE). Over 400 localities, including California, Connecticut, Illinois and Rhode Island, and eight MA cities have similar policies. 

Recently, Mass Fiscal Alliance sent out post cards targeting co-sponsors of The Safe Communities Act. Those post cards are now showing up in mailboxes across the State.

You may remember MassFiscal Alliance as the Boston-based, dark money SuperPAC that sent numerous attack mailers in the last election cycles. This group targets Democrats around the state and has made distorted claims against many officials (for example, concocting a story in 2014 that legislators had voted to prioritize services for illegal immigrants over veterans [Ed. Note: such a vote is #FakeNews]) .  

The citizens of the 12th Plymouth district have always been more interested in facts, as opposed to politically motivated rhetoric. You will hear from Mass Fiscal Alliance often in the upcoming election cycle.

I ask only that you understand their political motives and research their claims.

Please compare the claims made in their recent mailings to the substantive elements of the Safe Communities Act, to which I am a co-sponsor. 

The Safe Communities Act : What it DOES & Does Not Do 

  1. It DOES prohibit the use of state databases or records for enforcement of any federal registry program based on religion or other protected characteristics. 
  2. It DOES limit state and local agencies’ involvement with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) by barring them from arresting or detaining a person solely for federal immigration enforcement purposes, or participating in inquiries, investigations or raids based solely on immigration status. When police become ICE agents, immigrant victims and witnesses of crime are afraid to call police, which makes us all less safe.
  3. It DOES prohibit collaboration agreements between the U.S. Department of Homeland Security(DHS) and Massachusetts law enforcement agencies that deputize state and local officers as immigration agents and co-opt state and local resources for federal purposes, but without any reimbursement of costs.
  4. It DOES ensure basic due process rights for immigrants detained in state and local and state correctional facilities, such as to be informed, in a language they understand, that they have a right to have their lawyer present for any interview by ICE agents. 

What The Safe Communities Act DOES NOT Do:

  1. It DOES NOT stop police from investigating crimes or prosecuting anyone who commits a crime. On the contrary, it encourages immigrant witnesses and victims of crime to cooperate with police investigations, and ensures that police resources are not diverted from fighting crime.
  2. It DOES NOT stop police from collaborating with federal agencies, including ICE, as part of criminal investigations, such as joint operations to stop gangs or drug traffickers. 
  3. It DOES NOT keep ICE from getting information about people who are arrested-by default, all booking information is shared with numerous federal authorities, including the FBI and ICE, as required by federal law. 
  4. It DOES NOT keep ICE from conducting investigations, raids or arrests in Massachusetts communities, or interfere with those activities. 
  5. It DOES NOT jeopardize any community’s federal funding, because the bill is carefully tailored to comply with all relevant federal laws. Indeed, although the bill was drafted well before U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions defined what constitutes a “sanctuary” jurisdiction, the provisions of the bill fall squarely outside that definition.
  6. It DOES NOT declare Massachusetts as a “Sanctuary State”.

While I am always willing to debate issues of public policy, we should not have to debate facts.

Mass Fiscal Alliance has no regard for the truth and is only interested in supporting its own idealogical agenda. That is the case with the mailing regarding The Safe Communities Act.

Because Massachusetts and local governments cannot afford another unfunded federal mandate, hundreds of organizations have endorsed The Safe Communities Act, including the League of Women Voters and several labor unions.  

Thank you to those who have called seeking clarification and to those who have taken the time to read this piece.If you wish to discuss this on any other policy matter, I invite you to visit my district office or call me. 

Endorsing Orgs: Plug in to Make a Difference

Salem YES on 1

Dear Safe Communities Act Endorsing Organizations,

As we articulated last month, the Safe Communities Coalition has concluded that a positive, Yes on 1 outcome in Salem is critically important. A reversal of Salem’s “welcoming” policy would reverberate across the state, critically harming our efforts to pass the Safe Communities Act, as well as undermine support for trust/welcoming/sanctuary policies in other Commonwealth municipalities.

Salem is putting our values to a vote, and if we can’t show that there is strong public support for these policies, we will face an even greater challenge in the State House.

So many of the endorsing organizations have stepped up and contributed volunteer time and effort on canvasses and phone banks already. It has been a beautiful example of what we can do when organizations come together in coalition to work on a larger goal.

In the last weeks before the Nov. 7 election, we’re asking you once again to appeal to your members and networks.

TAKE ACTION THIS WEEKEND:

Join the Salem 10/29 Statewide Virtual Phonebank — all you need is a phone, laptop and internet connection. Sign up at the link!

Call to Endorsing Orgs: Focus Salem

Dear Safe Communities Act Endorsing Organizations,

In all the news on a national and state level concerning immigration, the Safe Communities Act Action Committee wants to bring to your attention a local fight for immigrant rights with major implication: the Salem is for Everyone campaign.

Salem is in a heated fight to protect their Sanctuary for Peace Ordinance which was passed in March 2017 and codifies existing Salem City and Police Department policies that protect the rights of all Salem residents, regardless of immigration status.

Anti-immigrant forces want to repeal, and have successfully put the Ordinance on the November 7th ballot and are marshalling their forces to convince voters to repeal it.

The Safe Communities Act Action Committee believes that a positive, Yes on 1 outcome in support of the Ordinance is critically important not just for Salem, but for the passage of the Safe Communities Act, as well as trust/welcoming/sanctuary policies across the state. If we can’t show that there is strong public support for these policies, we will face an even greater challenge in the State House.

Please alert your networks and invite your members to join our coalition effort in Salem!

Safe Communities Coalition Canvassing for Salem

As a coalition, we are organizing 2 canvassing days with Yes on 1 Salem: Saturday, October 7, and Saturday, October 21 from 1pm-5pm.

October 7 Safe Communities Canvass for Salem

1pm-5pm

First Church, 316 Essex St. in Salem

We will be joining Yes on 1 to canvass North Salem on this date. Join forces with Salem locals to knock on doors! All routes will be walkable or you will be paired with someone with a car.

Parking: Leave extra time. Parking is challenging in Salem in October. You can try for street parking on parking is available a few blocks away at the MBTA garage. Taking the Train: First Church is just a few blocks away from the MBTA station.

The Campaign has invited all volunteers to meet at Mercy Tavern, 148 Derby St. for drinks/bites to eat after and enjoy October in Salem!

RSVP to the Action Committee for September 7th.

October 21 Safe Communities Canvass for Salem

1pm-5pm

First Church, 316 Essex St. in Salem

We will be joining Yes on 1 to canvass South Salem on this date. Join forces with Salem locals to knock on doors! All routes will be walkable or you will be paired with someone with a car.

Parking: Leave extra time. Parking is challenging in Salem in October. You can try for street parking on parking is available a few blocks away at the MBTA garage. Taking the Train: First Church is just a few blocks away from the MBTA station.

The Campaign has invited all volunteers to meet at Mercy Tavern, 148 Derby St. for drinks/bites to eat after and enjoy October in Salem!

RSVP to the Action Committee for September 21.

Carpooling: Sign up to request a ride or to offer rides for both dates!

Can’t make these dates? Sign up for canvassing on other days here.

Follow Yes on 1! Salem is for Everyone to stay up to date on their entire campaign and ways that you can support their work.

Other action opportunities from Yes on 1:

Spanish Day of Action:

October 14 10:00 am and 1:00 pm – North Shore CDC, 96 Lafayette St. (upstairs) Salem

Yes on 1 will be canvassing The Point neighborhood (Salem’s primarily Latino neighborhood) in two shifts, 10:00 am and 1:00 pm. Opponents went into this neighborhood to get residents to sign their referendum petition, misleading people that it was “for Sanctuary.” We need to combat that. If you speak Spanish, that is great! Feel free to come even if you don’t.

Parking: Street parking should be available in the surrounding blocks. The routes will be walkable.

Phone Banking: If you are looking for remote support, the Yes on 1 Salem campaign is working to set up remote phone banking! Contact salemsanctuarynow@gmail.com to work out how you can set up a phone bank for your group.

This is an opportunity we cannot pass on. Thank you for your continuing support for the Safe Communities Act.

SCA Action Committee:

Progressive MA

Indivisible

JALSA

MIRA

ACLU

32BJ

Salem: For Want of a Nail

THE best hopes of pushing back against the Trump agenda is to pass solid, good policy at the State Level. 

On the Administration’s xenophobic anti-immigration policies, our hopes are in the courts — where we are winning– and in the states, with good ‘Safe’ and ‘Trust’ communities legislation as has been so recently passed by Illinois (!!) and California. 

Massachusetts, Illinois is surpassing us in #Resisting autocracy and state oppression.

Our State Legislature must take up the mantel of justice and adopt an urgency that is so far shockingly absent.* 

To catch up with Illinois, Massachusetts must pass the Safe Communities Act, which is, dumbfoundingly, languishing in committee and without enough champions among our Legislators. With your grassroots outreach and our Safe Communities Coalition’s advocacy inside the building, we are making progress — but time is running out... 

…And we are looking at a loose horseshoe nail in Salem.

The Safe Communities Coalition has concluded that losing the Salem welcoming city ordinance would send already nervous legislators running away from the goals of justice for all. All Beacon Hill eyes are watching Salem. A no vote there, on a municipal initiative, could close down the SCA for at least next two years. We must do everything to make sure SCA passes NOW. 

A driving philosophy at Progressive Mass is that taking action, organizing, in our communities is the sine qua non of progress and justice.

So simple, so powerful: Act Locally. 

Gather up your neighbors and friends, and join us to knock on doors and get on phones to help Salem voters make a vote for justice, with a YES ON 1 vote. Schedule a phone bank in your community and invite your friends. Your work will go farther than any other activity this season.**

Right now, we focus on securing a horseshoe nail. 

Teen Workers Need the Full Minimum Wage

By Margaret Heitz, Progressive Lexington

I grabbed a great seat for Tuesday’s State House hearing on the minimum wage. I wanted a seat with a good view of the folks testifying. Rachael Collins and her colleagues from the Restaurant Opportunities Center United slid into seats next to me. By noon, Gardner Auditorium was filled to capacity . 

The SEIU 1199 organizer sitting to my left shared good information with me. His personal story itself was a testimony to the value of a strong bedrock minimum wage. His parents were teens when he was born, which judging by his salt and pepper hair might have been in the late seventies. In his childhood, they supported themselves through minimum wage work.

He also told me about a conversation he had with a hardware store owner. The owner said that at a $15/hr minimum wage, he would hire only adults, no teens. Presumably, in his view, teens are not mature enough take the responsibility of work. If that’s the sentiment of most employers, it could be bad news for teens. On the other hand, employers should take to heart their responsibility to hold a teen employee accountable as they would an older one.

I remember a good friend telling me that her teenage son, who wouldn’t pick up a wet towel in the bathroom let alone keep his room neat or remember to take out the trash, was a completely different person at his job at a CVS store. He was consistently on time and on task at the store. She gave the store manager and the paycheck credit for the new man she saw in her son.

Teens, especially in lower income levels, have financial obligations to themselves and their families that they might not have had years ago. They need and deserve the full minimum wage to start off their work career.

Regrettably, I had to leave the hearing early. The panels of speakers in support of the badly needed wage increase were extraordinary. It’s clear to me and to just about all the people in the auditorium that the time to raise the wage to $15/hr for workers has come—regardless of their age.

The More Things Change, The More They Stay the Same….Unless

Taking Beacon Hill by surprise, House Ways and Means Chairman Brian Dempsey (D-Haverhill) announced his resignation from the House of Representatives last Wednesday, to take a position at the corporate lobbying firm ML Strategies in September.

Dempsey, a conservative Democrat who has overseen the drafting of several austerity budgets, was widely viewed as next in line for Speaker of the House. He also played a leading role last session in weakening the solar incentive bill and the omnibus energy bill, and sided with the big business group AIM on the Equal Pay bill, Noncompetes, and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.

One of ML Strategies’ clients is Wynn Casinos–perhaps a reason for a last minute addition to the FY18 budget allowing casinos to serve drinks until 4 a.m. Needless to say, Progressives in Massachusetts will not be missing him.

A New Way on Ways & Means?

Ways & Means is by far the most powerful committee. Any legislation that involves public money must go through both the W&M in both the House and Senate. In that space, W&M can—and sometimes does—change legislation, with zero transparency or democracy. Any policies that require funding can be rendered ineffective by W&M’s level of funding for it, too.

These Ways and Means Committees are not required under the Legislature’s rules to report out any bill that is referred there. Therefore the Committees are frequently graveyards.

And, yeah, Ways and Means Committees write the budget. As they say, whoever holds the purse strings holds the power.

Over the weekend, Rep. Jeffrey Sanchez (D-Mission Hill) was named the next chair of the committee. Sanchez represents one of the most progressive districts in the state. What does this mean for the committee? 

In our scorecards for the last two legislative sessions (188th, 189th), Sanchez fared modestly better than Dempsey and Speaker DeLeo. Each case, the difference was a result of Sanchez standing up for the rights of undocumented residents. And unlike Dempsey, Sanchez is a co-sponsor of the Safe Communities Act.

However, beyond those votes, Sanchez has a history of voting in lockstep with the Speaker, right or wrong. And his name is missing on the list of co-sponsors of key bills this session–from the $15 minimum wage to paid family and medical leave to single payer health care to ending mandatory minimum sentences. And under his chairmanship of the Health Care Financing Committee, the House has not taken the necessary steps to improve the quality and reduce the cost of care. Last session, Sanchez as the House chair sent single-payer legislation to study.

How will Sanchez be as the new chairman of this most powerful committee? Will there be a new spirit of transparency, collaboration in this new tenure? We’ll find out.

With his ascension to this powerful position, the role of progressive organizers within his district–like the great activists at JP Progressives–becomes even more important to the state as a whole.

Stepping Stones and Musical Chairs

As noted above, the Ways & Means Chairmanship is often seen as a stepping stone to the Speaker’s office. Although the House has abolished term limits for the Speaker, DeLeo may ultimately choose to retire. And it’s important to make sure that the next Speaker has a progressive vision for the state.

A strong coalition can be built, as noted by Rep. Russell Holmes (D-Mattapan):

Now is the time for the Massachusetts Black and Latino Legislative Caucus, the Progressive Caucus, the Women’s Caucus to be strong and united in our selection of the next speaker of the House. We should not do this individually; we should do this together so our voices are heard.

We couldn’t agree more. If the Progressive Caucus is to exist in more than name, then it should take on a more assertive role in shaping the direction of the State House.

Apparently, Speaker DeLeo doesn’t agree. In the committee shakeup that followed Sanchez’s promotion, DeLeo stripped Holmes of his vice chairmanship of the Joint Committee of Housing. Two years ago, DeLeo stripped Rep. Jonathan Hecht (D-Watertown) of a vice chairmanship after Hecht spoke out against abolishing term limits.

The centralization of power in the Speaker’s office has been a hurdle to the progressive legislation that would make Massachusetts live up to its liberal reputation.

If DeLeo stays at the helm for another four to five years, progressive legislators need a plan to push the Speaker for a bolder legislative agenda to invest in our schools and infrastructure, reduce inequality, reform our broken criminal justice system, model a transition to clean energy, protect and expand the rights of marginalized populations, and on and on. And if they don’t have a plan, then activists need to make them.

Four to five years is a long time. For persons suffering under injustice and insecurity, two is a long time, too.

But progressives, both inside and outside the State House, need to think long-term as well. The caucuses described by Rep. Holmes could place their support for the Next Speaker behind one person, and dramatically alter the future of progressive legislation. While the very rapid ascension of Sanchez to W/M chair puts him on an important stepping stone towards speakership, it is not by any means a fait accompli, and certainly the rank and file have the option of exercising their power for larger progressive goals.

This would take discipline, focus, and an ability to put the Common Good ahead of individual legislators’ narrow self interests—which too often are reduced to fears of conservatives’ wrath, and almost never liberals’ disappointments. It would be a glorious thing to see; there are moments of stepping up and changing the narrative—this is one of those for House Progressives (and every caucus whose aims have been stepped over for austerity budgets and corporate comforts).

At the very least, or, less inspiringly, come up with a key set of issue priorities, expectations, and rules reforms that the leading contenders for the next Speaker of the House would commit to.

Given that the House has already sought to water down or stop even very modest progressive policies in recent years, the stakes could not be higher.

Do MA Dems Stand for Women’s Rights in the Workplace Or Not?

The 190th legislative session has been off to a slow start on Beacon Hill. Beyond the pay raise, and the budget process, the Legislature has not been doing much in the way of, well, legislating.

One small bit of progress was the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which passed the House unanimously last month. The bill requires employers to provide “reasonable accommodation” for pregnant women and nursing mothers (such as more frequent breaks, less strenuous duties, and the ability to sit down on the job) provided that they don’t cause “significant difficulty or expense.”This new bill is not as strong as the one introduced last session—which Speaker DeLeo and others in the Democratic leadership, doing the bidding of powerful business interests, blocked. Like much progressive legislation, the bill died in committee. The 2017 bill resulted from negotiations between women’s advocacy group MotherWoman and the Associated Industries of Massachusetts (AIM). And although it was watered down to get AIM on board, the bill was nonetheless a positive development for women across the Commonwealth.

But because of the House’s standard lack of transparency, it was almost watered down even further.

As the Globe reported on Thursday, the powerful Ways & Means Committee quietly changed one word in the bill in committee before it went to a vote:

But it emerged from the House Committee on Ways and Means for a full vote on the floor with the word “knowingly” added at the beginning of that sentence. The language passed in the House without anyone noticing the change, and now the bill awaits a vote in the Senate.

It’s an addition that advocates for these pregnant worker protections say creates a serious new layer of what a worker would have to prove if she felt there was discrimination in her denial of a job. To prove an employer acted “knowingly” requires direct evidence that the employer knew the applicant was pregnant and denied them a job because of it — a much higher standard of proof.

Neither sponsors of the bill nor key advocates, who helped negotiate the legislation, were notified. AIM claimed to have not been behind the change–though it was clearly done in their interest.

Mass Dems Platform Gets Bolder – Can We Turn it into Policy?

If a platform is adopted and no legislators are there to enact, it, did it make a sound? Yesterday, the Massachusetts Democratic Party adopted a new platform. Back in March and April, Progressive Mass worked with Our Revolution Massachusetts and the Progressive Democrats of America – MA on a list of recommendations to make the platform more progressive.

The good news is that a number of them got in.

Here’s a run-down of new platform additions that were called for in the joint document:

Education

  • Free education is a human right, and therefore public education from high-quality universal preschool and full-day kindergarten through higher education and vocational training should be free to all residents
  • Fixing the public education funding formula to fully fund high-quality public education for all students
  • Ending the state’s punitive use of high-stakes testing

Immigration

  • Becoming a sanctuary state, where all immigrants and refugees feel welcome and safe in all communities of the Commonwealth
  • Eliminating policies that make local and state officials responsible for the enforcement of national immigration laws

Labor and Workforce

  • A decent living wage for all workers and a $15 minimum wage that is increased and indexed to inflation
  • Strong laws to combat wage theft and misclassification of workers
  • Paid family and medical leave insurance that allows all employees to take job-protected paid leave to recover from a serious illness or injury, to care for a seriously ill or injured family member, or to care for a new child, and prohibits employer retaliation against workers who take time off under these conditions
  • Fighting for anti-discrimination laws to make sure that employers don’t take advantage of workers, employees receive fair compensation for their hard work, corporations obey the law, and employees are able to be their most productive in a safe work environment free from harassment.

Public Safety and Crime Prevention

  • Comprehensive criminal justice reform that includes the removal of mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent crimes, giving the judge discretion with the sentencing in these cases
  • Ending the militarization of police

Voting and Democracy

  • Offering automatic voter registration
  • Ensuring early voting in all elections

And yesterday, two additional recommend planks got in as part of one of ORMA’s floor amendments: mandatory de-escalation training for police an end to for-profit prisons.

It’s a testament to the hard work and commitment of activists who showed up at platform hearings, submitted testimony online, and went to the convention that these got in. Give yourself a pat on the back!

But the important part comes next: holding elected officials accountable to the stated ideals of the party.

Democrats hold ~80% of the seats in both houses. However, as I wrote recently for CommonWealth, this hasn’t always translated into progressive policymaking.

To my opening question, the answer depends on the activists (ALL OF US), who need to make sure that Beacon Hill hears loud and clear that the time is now (indeed, yesterday) to put such professed values and ideals into concrete policy.