News Covers PM’s Call for Openness about OpenAI Contract

MASSterList (February 21, 2026)

There’s mounting pressure from the left on Healey’s decision last week to launch an executive branch artificial intelligence tool powered by industry behemoth OpenAI.

Progressive Mass took issue with OpenAI’s collaboration with federal immigration enforcement authorities and the way Healey locked the state into a contract with the company without first bargaining with state workers. The group is urging supporters to contact the governor’s office to demand more information.

In a Substack post, Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven echoed the group’s complaints that the Healey administration has declined to release the state’s contract with OpenAI and taking issue with the procurement process.

Massachusetts Playbook (February 20, 2026)

AI-N’T IT — Gov. Maura Healey’s announcement last week about a new partner with OpenAI that will provide ChatGPT-powered artificial intelligence assistants to roughly 40,000 executive-branch employees drew some early criticism from local unions. It’s also seeing some backlash from the left.

Progressive Mass is urging Bay Staters to reach out to the governor’s office to request “the release of the full procurement documents and the data processing agreement and ask why workers, consumer advocates and civil rights advocates were excluded from this decision.” Somerville state Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven is also taking up the cause on Beacon Hill, as she wrote in a Substack post this week.

MA Senate Passes Strong Data Privacy Protections

Earlier today, the MA Senate voted 40 to 0 to pass the Massachusetts Data Privacy Act, which would — among other steps — ban the sale of sensitive data (including location data) and impose meaningful data minimization on companies harvesting our personal information. You can read the MA Senate’s fact sheet here.

During debate, the Senate passed two amendments that we, along with groups in the Location Shield Act, had advocated for:

  • Amendment 4, which extends the ban on sales of geolocation data to cover anyone who visits Massachusetts for any reason, including travel to the state to pursue personal health care.
  • Amendment 52, which ensures that businesses cannot sell sensitive data, regardless of whether they are otherwise exempt under the act.

The bill now moves to the House. 99 state representatives have co-sponsored the bill, but pressure will be needed to get past the Legislature’s characteristic inertia.

“The purchase and sale of cell phone location data empowers bad actors.”

Wednesday, April 8, 2025 

Chair Moore, Chair Farley-Bouvier, and Members of the Joint Committee on Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity:

My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the Policy Director at Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide grassroots advocacy group fighting for a more equitable, just, sustainable, and democratic commonwealth.

We urge you to give a favorable report to S.197: An Act to protect safety and privacy by stopping the sale of location data and H.86: An Act to protect location privacy, known collectively as the Location Shield Act. 

This Saturday, tens of thousands of Massachusetts residents rallied to protest the chaos, cruelty, and corruption of the Trump administration. 

If you attended a rally, you know when you arrived and when you left, and where you went next. Your friends and family might know that too, at least part. 

But do you know who doesn’t need to know that? Bad actors like Elon Musk. 

Right now, there is no law that prevents anyone with a credit card from purchasing cell phone location data. 

The purchase and sale of cell phone location data empowers bad actors: right-wing extremists seeking to target individuals seeking abortion care or gender-affirming care, domestic abusers seeking to track their victims, predatory bosses seeking to spy on their employees, the list goes on. And by attacking privacy rights, it also weakens the basic rights of free expression and dissent in a democracy. 

We have already seen the Trump administration detain and threaten to deport students merely for the act of attending protests, and they are not subtle about their desire to ramp up targeting and to target citizens as well. We should not be giving them any more tools to do so. 

As your chamber deliberates on our Commonwealth’s response to the disasters in DC, we urge you to make this bill a part of it. 250 years ago this month, Massachusetts was the site of taking a stand against the abuses of civil liberties by a monarchical government, and that is a legacy that we should continue. 

Sincerely, 

Jonathan Cohn

Policy Director

Progressive Massachusetts