Tomorrow is an important deadline at the State House: Joint Rule 10 Day.
According to this State House rule, every joint committee (i.e., committee of both the House and Senate) must take action on the bills before them by the first Wednesday in February.
That action can be to give the bill a favorable report (It advances!), to give the bill an adverse report (It’s done for the session), to send the bill to study (It’s effectively done for the session), or to give the bill an extension (It has more time).
The State House relies on deadlines to spur action, so expect to see a flurry of action on bills later this week.
That also means it’s a great time to contact the committees in support of critical bills.
Can you commit to sending at least one email by tomorrow? See below for some action tools.
Keep Up the Momentum for Criminal Justice Reform
If we want to continue to move past the failed model of mass incarceration – a model that costs outrageous sums, breaks apart communities, and does not increase public safety – then we need more policy action this year.
Urge the Judiciary Committee to advance key bills before a critical February 7 deadline.
Raise the Age (H.1710 and S.942: An Act to promote public safety and better outcomes for young adults): When young adults (18, 19, 20) are kept in the juvenile system, they are able to have better access to school and rehabilitative programming.
Prison Moratorium (H.1795: An Act establishing a jail and prison construction moratorium): Massachusetts does not need to build new prisons and jails. We need to be investing in programming, re-entry services, and community supports.
Clean Slate Bills (H.1598/S.979: An Act providing easier and greater access to sealing & H.1493/S.998: An Act to remove collateral consequences and protect the presumption of innocence): Too many people are trapped in poverty and deprived of jobs, housing and other chances for success because of their criminal and juvenile records. We need to allow for automatic record sealing in certain cases, rather than relying only on burdensome case-by-case petitions.
Let’s Set up all Students and Families for Success
Every student deserves the support and resources to thrive. That’s why we’ve been such strong supporters of the Common Start bills and the Thrive Act.
Common Start (H.489 and S.301): While Massachusetts is a nationwide leader on early education and child care and we’ve made important progress in recent years, the current system remains broken and access to quality early education and care remains out of reach for too many families. The Common Start framework would provide the specific structure that is needed to deliver affordable care options for families; significantly better pay and benefits for early educators; a new, stable source of funding for providers; high-quality programs and services for children; and substantial relief for businesses and our economy.
Thrive Act (H.495 / S.246): Massachusetts’ state takeover law and the state’s misuse of the MCAS as a graduation requirement are failing our students and disrupting their education. The Thrive Act would end the failed system of state takeovers of school districts, and replace it with a comprehensive support and improvement system that focuses on giving students and educators the tools and resources they need to succeed. The legislation would also support students by establishing a modified high school graduation requirement in which coursework would replace the MCAS test as the basis for showing student mastery of state standards. And, the legislation would create a commission to give our communities a voice in building a better assessment and accountability system.
Massachusetts communities are already experiencing the devastating and costly effects of climate change even without considering the HUGE cost of building the climate resilient infrastructure recommended by Climate Chief Hoffer in her 2023 report.
Unless action is taken, our communities will continue to bear the financial and emotional costs of climate change while the fossil fuel companies responsible for climate-related damages make record profits. These companies must bear the cost.
The Make Polluters Pay Bill (S.481/H.872) is a pathway to making that happen.
It would require top polluters to contribute to a superfund used to pay for climate-related damages in Massachusetts. It would create the Climate Change Adaptation Cost Recovery Program, generating $75 billion over the next 25 years for climate adaptation and resilience projects. These funds will then be dispensed through the Climate Change Adaptation Fund, with at least 40% of the funds going to projects directly benefiting environmental justice communities.
In the late 1990s, after incarcerated individuals in MCI-Norfolk started political organizing, Republican Governor Paul Cellucci and the Massachusetts Legislature responded with retaliation and a multi-step process of disenfranchisement. Our commonwealth did something rare in recent history: it took away the right to vote from a category of people who were formerly enfranchised.
According to a new fact sheet from The Sentencing Project, over 7,700 otherwise eligible citizens in Massachusetts are disenfranchised due to a felony conviction. The report further underscores the racial disparities in the Massachusetts criminal legal system that leads to Black and Latinx residents being disproportionately denied their right to vote.
On April 26, 2023, the Joint Committee on Election Laws gave a favorable report to S.8/H.26, constitutional amendments filed by Sen. Liz Miranda and Adam Gomez and Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven that would ensure that incarceration never leads to a loss of voting rights.
Now, the Election Laws Committee must advance S.428/H.724 before the Feb. 7 deadline. This legislation would make relevant changes in state law, and is needed to accompany the constitutional amendments. Passing the constitutional amendments this year would be historic — we need to make sure these bills that change the law for local elections are moving at the same pace.
Chair Keenan, Chair Ryan, and Members of the Joint Committee on Election Laws:
My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the Policy Director at Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide grassroots advocacy group fighting for a more equitable, just, sustainable, and democratic commonwealth.
We urge you to give a favorable report to the following bills:
H.724/S.428: An Act relative to voting rights restoration
S.410: An Act making voting administrative changes to create equitable systemic solutions (Voting ACCESS bill)
H.688: An Act establishing same day registration of voters
H.707: An Act decoupling the municipal census from voter registration
H.724/S.428: Voting Rights Restoration
Felony disenfranchisement in Massachusetts is a recent phenomenon. Indeed, although we often think of the history of voting rights in the US as one of ever-forward motion, Massachusetts stands as an outlier. In the late 1990s, after incarcerated individuals in MCI-Norfolk started organizing for better conditions, Republican Governor Bill Cellucci and the MA Legislature responded with retaliation: a multi-step process of disenfranchisement. In 2000, Massachusetts voters approved a constitutional amendment to prohibit people incarcerated for felonies in state prison from voting in state elections; the subsequent year, Cellucci signed a law to extend this prohibition to federal and municipal elections. Our commonwealth did something rare in recent history: it took away the right to vote from a category of people who were formerly enfranchised.
In 2022, the Massachusetts Legislature took an important step forward when passing the VOTES Act by including language creating protections for jail-based voting for those who still maintain the right to vote, but we must build on that momentum by ending remaining disenfranchisement, as these bills would.
Felony disenfranchisement compounds the systemic racism of the criminal legal system. Approximately 8,000 residents of the Commonwealth are disenfranchised due to a felony conviction, more than 50% of them are Black or Latinx.
Felony disenfranchisement laws disenfranchise more voters than those directly affected. Whenever someone loses the right to vote even temporarily, they are likely to mistakenly think that they have lost it permanently. We must eliminate archaic laws that create voter suppression and voter confusion.
Felony disenfranchisement exacerbates the humanitarian crisis in our prisons and jails. Even Trump’s DOJ pointed out that Massachusetts correctional facilities are engaging in torture, and a lack of political voice puts individuals at risk for abuse.
Moreover, studies have often shown that fostering ties to the outside world is central to reducing recidivism. Civic engagement provides just that, and we should welcome it.
S.410, H.688, and H.707: Strengthening Voting Access
With regard to the comprehensive Voting ACCESS bill (S.410), we would like to underscore the importance of Election Day Registration. In Massachusetts elections, an unnecessary and arbitrary 20-day registration cutoff disenfranchises more than 100,000 voters from participating in our elections. Given that the average American moves more than 11 times over the course of their lives, moving near Election Day could lead to disenfranchisement under the current system. Likewise, given the stress of work, family, and myriad other commitments, many voters may first start to learn about an election after the registration window has already passed. Indeed, this is the period when media coverage of elections—and thus voter information—is the strongest. But when voters seek to update their registration or register anew, they are shut out of the process.
When there are errors in voters’ registration, they are typically asked to fill out a provisional ballot. Provisional ballots are cumbersome for election workers and leave voters feeling as though their votes didn’t count. And our first experiences at the polls–indeed, all of our experiences at the polls–have an impact on our voting habits throughout our lives.
Our neighboring states of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Connecticut have already realized the problems with such a cutoff and adopted Election Day Registration (EDR). Maine has had EDR since the 1970s, and New Hampshire since the 1990s. EDR creates more positive experiences at the polls and, indeed, higher turnout, with studies showing an increase in turnout of approximately 5 percent.
Moreover, if we want to create positive experiences at the polls, we should also delink the municipal census from the inactive voter list. Removing voters from the active voter list for failing to fill out a form is unnecessarily punitive, and it creates unnecessary work for both voters and poll workers.
We have appreciated the recent steps forward in democracy passed in recent sessions, such as automatic voter registration, vote-by-mail, and expanded early voting, and we hope that you will continue this forward motion.
Chairman Keenan, Chairman Ryan, and Members of the Joint Committee on Election Laws:
My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the Policy Director of Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide grassroots advocacy group committed to fighting for an equitable, just, democratic, and sustainable Commonwealth.
At a time when democracy is under attack in many states, municipalities across Massachusetts are instead seeking to strengthen democracy by expanding both who can participate in our elections and how reflective of the electorate the outcomes are. We ask you to allow them to take the lead by giving a favorable report to several enabling bills:
H.725: An Act ensuring municipal power over whether elections are reformed
S.438: An Act ensuring municipal participation of the widest eligible range
H.706/S.415: An Act extending voting rights in municipal elections to noncitizen voters of the Commonwealth
H.711/S.433: An Act providing a local option for ranked choice voting in municipal elections
Enabling Municipalities to Expand the Local Electorate: S.438, H.706, S.415
Cities and towns across the Commonwealth have also sought to expand representation in local elections, by extending the franchise to 16- and 17-year-olds or legal non-citizens. The case for both is clear.
With the voting age at 18, many experience their first time voting when they are away at college, often voting by absentee back home if at all. 16 and 17-year-olds, by contrast, know their local polling locations well: they are the elementary schools, the middle schools, the high schools, the town halls, the libraries. They feel the impact of a school committee election directly. And they can get a powerful experience of democracy in action, which is the best civic education.
Similarly, voting and civic engagement are ways of integrating new community members and strengthening the whole community. Non-citizen parent involvement in school affairs (through school committee elections) can increase students’ academic performance, and democracy works best when all communities are reflected in governance.
Moreover, both teen voting and all-resident voting embody the basic principle of no taxation with representation.
Ranked Choice Voting Local Option: H.711/S.433
When voters get to the ballot box, they can face complicated choices. Our first-past-the-post system forces ordinary voters to weigh whether they can vote for their preferred candidate or whether doing so would lead to a “spoiler effect” that gives a candidate they like less a clearer path to victory. This same dynamic can lead candidates and their supporters to try to force similar candidates out of a race due to a fear of “vote splitting.”
Within the current system, the ultimate winner may command less than a majority support, a contradiction of a basic tenet of democracy and a far too common occurrence in Massachusetts elections. Ranked Choice Voting would eliminate these problems by enabling voters to rank the order of their preferences on the ballot and ensuring that whoever wins does so with majority support.
Although the ballot initiative to implement Ranked Choice Voting for state and county elections did not pass, the measure did pass in 78 municipalities in varying parts of the Commonwealth. If such municipalities wish to adopt Ranked Choice Voting for local elections, they should not have to face undue hurdles to doing so.
The number of cities and towns passing home rule petitions on these three issues grows every year, and yet such petitions continue to die in the Legislature. We urge you to stop being a roadblock to democracy and pass these enabling bills.
Although we often think of the history of voting rights in the US as one of ever-forward motion, Massachusetts stands as an outlier. In the late 1990s, after incarcerated individuals in MCI-Norfolk started organizing for better conditions, Republican Governor Bill Cellucci and the MA Legislature responded with retaliation: a multi-step process of disenfranchisement. In 2000, Massachusetts voters approved a constitutional amendment to prohibit people incarcerated for felonies in state prison from voting in state elections; the subsequent year, Cellucci signed a law to extend this prohibition to federal and municipal elections. Our commonwealth did something rare in recent history: it took away the right to vote from a category of people who were formerly enfranchised.
But the tide is turning. On Wednesday, the Joint Committee on Election Laws took the significant step of giving a favorable report to S.8/H.26, constitutional amendments filed by Sen. Liz Miranda and Adam Gomez and Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven that would ensure that incarceration never leads to a loss of voting rights.
Celebrate graduates and ensure that debt-free public higher ed is an option for future generations!
The Massachusetts State House will soon be considering the Cherish Act (S.816 / H.1260) and Debt-Free Bill (S.823 / H.1265). Collectively, these bills call for debt-free public higher education, increased student supports, better wages and working conditions, and green/healthy buildings.
Jonathan Cohn, policy director of the grassroots political group Progressive Mass, cited multiple studies that indicate a significant percentage of incarcerated people leave prison believing their right to vote is gone forever. Eleven states prevent formerly incarcerated people from voting, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Preventing prisoners from voting “disenfranchises more than just those directly affected,” Cohn said.
On Wednesday, exactly five months before the November 8 general election, the House and Senate released their final agreement on language for the VOTES Act. Yesterday, the Senate voted 37 to 3 in support of the final version of the bill, and the House is expected to vote soon.
The negotiations around the VOTES Act have been going on for months. The Senate passed a bill back in October, and then the House passed one back in January. There has always been strong support from both chambers this session for making the widely popular vote-by-mail and expanded early voting reforms from 2020 permanent, but House leaders have remained fiercely opposed to Same Day Registration or even a narrower Election Day Registration despite ongoing Senate support. Rep. Mike Moran (D-Brighton), one of the most vociferous opponents of Same Day Registration in the House debate, was one of the House appointees to the Conference Committee negotiating the bill.
The opposition to Same Day Registration / Election Day Registration is revealing. Reforms like vote-by-mail and expanded early voting can give incumbents a clearer picture of who is voting and who has already voted. SDR/EDR means that new people with whom they may not have spoken could show up at the polls. That uncertainty terrifies many representatives, and rather than stepping up their work at engaging all residents of their districts, they would rather shut such prospective voters out of the process entirely.
The final version of the VOTES Act, to be clear, contains a number of wins, some big and some modest. Special credit to the Democracy Behind Bars coalition for elevating the issue of jail-based voting during the debate and the negotiations around the bill.
Here are the key provisions of the Conference bill:
Voter Registration
Reducing the voter registration deadline from 20 days before the election to 10 days. Unfortunately, the Conference bill left out Same Day Registration or Election Day Registration, which, as noted, had been a major point of contention in negotiations. The Senate has now voted to pass Same Day Registration three times, only to see it fail each time due to House intransigence. Same Day Registration is one of the simplest and most effective ways to increase turnout, and it is especially important for working-class voters, BIPOC voters, young voters, and renters, and it continues to be appalling that our Democratic supermajority in the House is too afraid of new people participating in the democratic process to embrace this reform.
Requiring the Secretary of State to make the online registration portal accessible in English, Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese, and other languages deemed necessary or required by law
Reasserting that the Automatic Voter Registration law passed in 2018 is a back-end rather than front-end opt-out system. Secretary Bill Galvin has been refusing to implement the bill as passed, creating instead what is called a “front-end opt-out system” in which eligible registrants are given the opportunity to opt out during the initial transaction as opposed to afterwards. For more on this issue, read this.
Requiring the Secretary Galvin to enroll Massachusetts in theElectronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), which helps states keep more accurate voting rolls, no later than July 1, 2022. This too was required in the 2018 AVR bill, and Galvin has refused to adhere to the law.
Vote By Mail
Permanent early voting by mail for all elections (unless municipalities vote to opt out in a public vote of the local legislative body for local elections)
Application deadline of the fifth business day before the election (the Tuesday before the election for all regularly scheduled Tuesday elections, and the Monday before the election when the primary falls on the week of Labor Day)
Special accommodations for those with disabilities seeking to vote by mail.
Creation of an online portal for VBM requests, as well as publication of the application on the Secretary website and the websites of each city and town
Mailing of VBM applications no later than 45 days before the election to all voters registered no later than 60 days before the election
VBM applications and ballots postage-paid, pre-addressed, and available in all languages as required by law.
Mailing of applications with the voter registration acknowledgement letters sent out after registering to vote or updating registration
Deadline of 5 pm on the third day after the election for receipt of VBM ballots mailed on or before Election Day
Unfortunately, there are no requirements around the number or accessibility of drop boxes for cities and towns to make available for return of VBM ballots.
Early Voting
Two weeks for biennial state elections (Saturday two weeks before GOTV Saturday through the Friday before the election)
One week for primary elections (Saturday before GOTV Saturday through the Friday before the election)
Posting of early voting sites at least two weeks prior
Local option for early voting in municipal elections (Majority of registrars must request, and then local legislative body must approve. The early voting period must exist within 17 days before the election and 2 business days prior. For Tuesday elections, this would mean between the Saturday two weeks before GOTV Saturday and the Friday before the election.)
See below for early voting requirements by city/town population
Staffing the Polls
Enabling cities and towns to appoint poll workers from outside the city/town if there is insufficient staffing
Granting the power to determine the staffing of police officers of the polls to the local legislative bodies, rather than the police departments
Jail-Based Voting Reforms
Ensures that individuals who are incarcerated who are currently eligible to vote are provided with voting information and materials to exercise their right to vote
Requires correctional facilities to display and distribute information about voting rights and procedures, as prepared by the Secretary of the Commonwealth
Requires facilities to assist individuals who are incarcerated in registering, applying for, and returning mail ballots
Ensures that individuals who are incarcerated are properly notified of their right to vote upon release and given the opportunity to fill out a voter registration form
Creates systems for data collection on jail-based voting, as well as the ability of incarcerated individuals to submit complaints
Unfortunately, the JBV language only applies to state/federal elections (and does not include municipal elections), but it is still a big win.
First of all, happy Earth Day! This Earth Day, I’m thinking about how the investments from the Fair Share Amendment will help us improve our public transit systems, a vital part of our response to climate change (as well as reducing air pollution and expanding economic opportunity). The Fair Share campaign recently launched new social media accounts, so if you haven’t followed them yet, make sure to do so on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
A Budget Is a Moral Document
Last week, the MA House Ways & Means Committee released its budget for the next fiscal year.
The Good: The budget avoids the regressive tax cuts for the rich proposed by Republican Governor Charlie Baker, includes the new investments in public schools required by the Student Opportunity Act, and ends the exploitative practice of charging incarcerated individuals for phone calls to loved ones.
The Bad: At the same time, the budget continues our chronic underfunding of public transit and fails to deliver on the investments in child care necessary for true affordability and accessibility.
How the Budget Could Be Better: The House will be considering various amendments next week to improve the budget and better deliver on the promise of shared prosperity and justice for all.
Amendment #47 (New American Voters Fund), filed by Reps. Ultrino & Donato: Would allocate $4 million to municipalities and community organizations to hire bilingual election workers, pay for professional translators and interpreters, and train elections departments.
Justice for All
Amendment #902 (ACES), filed by Rep. Sabadosa: Would ensure that every call to 911 gets the best response by providing funding to communities that want to develop alternatives to police response for calls better handled by mental and community health providers, like social workers and peer specialists.
Amendment #936 (Community Empowerment and Reinvestment Grant), filed by Rep. Mary Keefe: Would provide $15 Million for the Community Empowerment Reinvestment Grant Program, which funds reentry and intervention programs.
Amendment #1346 (Youth Bail Fees), filed by Rep. Fluker Oakley: Would (1) eliminate the statutorily-required $40 administrative bail fees charged to juveniles when they are arrested overnight and (2) shift the decision to release a child to their parent or to impose cash bail decisions from the police officer on call to the Bail Magistrate, a neutral 3rd party.
The House budget remains poised to earmark millions of dollars for the incarceration of men civilly committed for treatment of substance use disorder under the statute known as “Section 35” (M.G.L. c.123 s.35).
Amendment #332 (Section 35), filed by Rep. Balser: Would eliminate the Governor’s proposed funding for correctional section 35 facilities.
Amendment #333 (Access to Addiction Services), filed by Rep. Balser: Would ensure sufficient bed space in DPH or DMH facilities for men committed under section 35.
Economic Security for All
Amendment #181 (Lift Kids Out of Deep Poverty FY23), filed by Rep. Decker: Would raise cash assistance grants for very low-income families with children, elders, and persons with disabilities by 20% for FY 23.
Amendment #640 (Excluding Temporary COVID Relief Income from FY23 Means Testing), filed by Rep. Elugardo: Would ensure that economic assistance from the CARES Act does not count against anyone’s eligibility for means-tested public assistance programs.
Amendment #802 (Including underemployed and unstably housed youth in “at-risk”), filed by Rep. Elugardo: Would add a focus of creating economic opportunity for youth experiencing homelessness to the YouthWorks Youth Jobs program.
Amendment #881 (Massachusetts Rental Voucher Program), filed by Rep. Madaro: Would cap tenant rent share to 30% income instead of 40% and expand mobile vouchers to cover tenant-paid utilities, among other measures.
Amendments #1068 (RTA Funding) & #1070 (RTA Funding Distribution), filed by Representative Sarah Peake: Would make $101 million in base funding available to the RTAs (an increase from $94 million).
Amendment #1268 (Housing Protections), filed by Rep. Moran: Would extend Chapter 257 eviction protections to cases where landlords seek to recover arrears for non-payment of rent – effectively closing the non-payment loophole – and require landlords to participate in the rental assistance process in good faith before being permitted to file an eviction case in court.
Amendment #1371 (Rental Assistance for Families in Transition), filed by Rep. Decker: Would expand eligibility for RAFT to households with incomes from 50% of the area median income (AMI) up to 60% AMI.
Safe & Welcoming Schools for All
Amendment #1133 (Targeted Intervention to Enhance the Learning of Students in Early Grades), filed by Rep. Uyterhoeven: Would provide funding for student specific supports and interventions that enhance learning during preschool through the third grade and that support the elimination of disciplinary sanctions for this population of students
Amendment #1138 (Student Wellness School Support), filed by Rep. Uyterhoeven: Would provide funding to reduce school exclusion for students in prekindergarten through the third grade by utilizing best practices, increased parent engagement and community-based services to support teachers and school staff to employ alternatives to suspensions and expulsions to address student misbehavior in the early grades
Amendment #1321 (Holistic School Health and Safety Practices Grant Program), filed by Rep. Khan: Would create a grant program, administered by the state’s Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, to support public schools and school districts in transitioning to safety models that do not rely on stationing police in schools.
Election Day is exactly 8 months away: November 8, 2022.
In Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut, and Vermont, prospective voters will be able to register or update their registration at the polls. But in Massachusetts, they won’t be able to because of our arbitrary, exclusionary, and outdated voter registration cutoff.
Late last month, the Massachusetts House of Representatives voted in favor of the VOTES Act, pledging their support for making permanent critical electoral reforms like mail-in and early in-person voting. However, the House chose to leave out the heart of the VOTES Act: Election Day Registration (EDR). Now, because the House and Senate versions of the VOTES Act differ, a small group of legislators are finalizing the bill in conference committee.
EDR has been proven to make elections more equitable and efficient in 20 states. By reducing voter registration barriers, EDR boosts voter turnout for all, especially BIPOC, low-income, immigrant, and young voters. It also decreases administrative burdens of running elections by allowing election workers to update registration information on the spot.
Before November will be the primaries on September 6 to determine who advances. And before that will be the party conventions in June that determine who even makes the ballot in the first place.
Over the past month, Democratic ward and town committees have been holding caucuses to elect delegates to the state party convention. If you want to take part, check out the caucus calendar here to see if your caucus has happened yet or is still to come.
And if you didn’t get elected or can’t make your caucus, you might still be able to become a delegate. You can find additional opportunities here.
Know What’s on the Ballot
Do you know what an Attorney General, an Auditor, or a Secretary of the Commonwealth does?
Do you want to know?
And do you want to find out more about what the candidates vying for these important statewide positions plan to do with these offices?
Jonathan Cohn and Kristina Mensik in CommonWealth:
“House leadership and members must vote to include same-day registration and strong jail-based voting reforms in the VOTES Act so that we can guarantee that no eligible voter who wants to participate in our democratic process gets turned away. Then, it’s time for all of us to roll up our sleeves and work on the harder, and year-round, task of increasing the number of people who want to participate in the first place.”
President Biden, Senator Warren, Senator Markey, all 9 of our US Representatives, and all 37 Democratic members of the MA Senate support allowing eligible voters to register or update their registration at the polls, and yet the MA House remains undemocratically opposed.
During that floor debate, several House Democrats—Assistant Majority Leader Mike Moran (D-Brighton), Rep. Danielle Gregoire (D-Marlborough), Rep. Mike Day (D-Stoneham), Rep. Tackey Chan (D-Quincy), Rep. Kip Diggs (D-Barnstable), Rep. Joan Meschino (D-Hull), Rep. Dan Hunt (D-Dorchester), and Rep. Kathy LaNatra (D-Kingston)—spoke against implementing Same Day Registration or Election Day Registration (terms often used interchangeably, but in the context different as to whether or not the early voting period would be included for at-the-polls registration), delivering remarks filled with specious arguments and factual inaccuracies. Their colleagues have given similarly specious defenses of the vote to constituents afterwards. Let’s go through them.
Bad Argument #1: We are already a leader on voting rights.
“When I think about what we have done — pre-registration, where we allow our young kids ages 16 and 17 to pre-register so they automatically are registered — you can go online right now. We require the secretary of state to have an online portal where you can register to vote online. It takes approximately 12 to 15 minutes to register to vote online on your phone. If you’re moving and you need to change your address or change your voter registration address, you can do it online. You can follow your ballot online, much like FedEx lets you track your package. We’ve also done election day audits and early voting by mail. All of these are part of the package we should be very proud to talk about in this Legislature. The very last thing we did, automatic voter registration, might be one of the most impactful pieces of legislation we’ve done relative to voters.” (MORAN)
“We have enacted the most sweeping voter protection laws in the nation. No one is more frustrated about what is going on in this country and the attacks on voting.” (GREGOIRE)
“Based on some of the debate some might conclude we’re sitting in the Georgia State House. We seem to be losing sight of the gains we are making. Our constituents expect us to determine what’s best for here, not other states. Here in Massachusetts, we lead the country in making the franchise available and accessible to all eligible voters. No other state offers pre-registration, mail-in voting, outdoor ballot boxes, automatic and online registration and online updating.” (DAY)
“The gentleman from Stoneham was saying some say this is voter suppression. I say give me a break. Massachusetts has been a leader. I think our work today proves that.” (HUNT)
Massachusetts Democrats often like to describe our state as a leader in small “d” democracy, but it’s a claim in desperate need of a reality check. Massachusetts only began allowing early voting, pre-registration, and online registration after the election reform package in 2014 (we were a late adopter). Massachusetts was not the first state to adopt Automatic Voter Registration; we were the 14th. Our 20-day voter registration cutoff puts us to the right of most states. Eight states mail every eligible voter a ballot, going even further than the mail-in voting reforms discussed in Massachusetts (which, to be clear, have lapsed and which did not exist before 2020).
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, Vermont, and Washington have Same Day Registration, Automatic Voter Registration, online registration, and all-mail elections (with the equivalent of in-person early voting with the drop-off centers). DC, Illinois, Maryland, and Michigan have Same Day Registration, Automatic Voter Registration, online registration, in-person early voting, and no-excuse absentee voting. So our current laws, or even the bill passed by the House, do not make us a leader.
But what if we were? What if our election laws were the best in the country? Simply “being better than other states” is not a sufficient benchmark; the question is always whether we are doing all that we can. And we’re not.
Bad Argument #2: It is a solution in search of a problem.
“The very last thing we did, automatic voter registration, might be one of the most impactful pieces of legislation we’ve done relative to voters. We have an opt out system, so when you engage with the Registry of Motor Vehicles or other agencies, you have to tell them you don’t want to be registered. I can tell you when we passed that vote, I won’t divulge names, one of the advocacy groups said to me, “You’re making it very, very challenging for us to make the case for same day voter registration.” I agreed with her then, but I think we have something to do in that direction, and that is what this further amendment is about.” (MORAN)
“I rise in support of the further amendment for several reasons, not the least of which is that the underlying proposals are solutions looking for problems. We do not have a voter registration problem, we have a perception problem here. This past November, in the election, that was historic, only 28.9 percent of registered voters cast a ballot. In the last municipal election before COVID in Marlborough, the turnout was 25 percent… However, enacting solutions to non-existent problems does nothing to change the national discourse. It creates issues and opens us to unprecedented criticism.” (GREGOIRE)
People move, and that includes moving close to Election Day. Especially when our state primary is so close to a major move-in day in Boston (i.e., September 1). The act of moving close to Election Day, or even being evicted close to Election Day, can lead to disenfranchisement if people are far away from their old polling location, and that is an injustice.
Moreover, these arguments are ignorant of the many stresses that working-class people face: planning more than 20 days (or even 10 days) in advance can be difficult for those balancing family commitments and multiple jobs with erratic work schedules, not to mention an array of bills and other responsibilities. Missing deadlines is common (the legislature does it all the time), and managing a deadline that far in advance can be difficult for those with ADHD (one Election Day is easier to get a handle of than the many steps that need to be juggled prior). None of that should make someone less worthy of participation.
Imagine as well how likely of a scenario it could be that someone thought they had registered but, indeed, hadn’t (they already get to fill out a provisional ballot, so why not let them register? ) Or imagine if someone’s pre-marriage or pre-divorce name, or deadname, were the one on the rolls, differing from what they use now and what their ID shows. Or, since poll workers are human, imagine if there was a clerical error in the books. Why should none of this be able to be fixed?
Automatic Voter Registration is great, but it will never capture everyone, both for the reasons stated above and for the fact that not everyone would be interfacing with a designated agency (not everyone has a license!).
That legislators would not see a need for Election Day Registration shows that they are not talking with their constituents with the greatest need. And that’s a problem.
Bad Argument #3: It doesn’t even lead to any demonstrable increases in turnout.
“To the contrary of the lady before me, I found the National Conference of State Legislatures, research from them has concluded that there is no demonstrable increase in voter participation in states that have same day or election day registration.” (GREGOIRE)
From the very website referenced: “There is strong evidence that same-day and Election Day registration increases voter turnout, but the extent of the impact is difficult to conclude. Immediately following the implementation of SDR, states usually see a boost in voter numbers. SDR states also tend to outperform other states in terms of turnout percentages. Many states that have implemented SDR have historically produced higher voter numbers, making changes hard to gauge. Multiple studies place the effect between an increase of 3% to 7%, with an average of a 5% increase.”
Bad Argument #4: We haven’t done the research, and we don’t know the cost and the impact. We need to study this.
“Now we come to the further amendment. The further amendment would call on the secretary of state to create a report. One of the things that having some institutional knowledge gives you is you have some sense of where this comes and where this is going. For years, it was something we talked about, it was debated in bills, but it wasn’t something that we really took in a serious way and did any real prudent research on.” (MORAN)
“When you’re talking about paying for same-day voter registration or the mechanisms you need to put in place and what that means to 351 cities and towns that range in size from 89, which is Gosnell, to Boston, it means very different things to very different cities and towns. What this report would hopefully do is identify some of those challenges that we would have.” (MORAN)
“I think it’s important to get it right and reject the argument this is suppression. It’s not a study in procedure only. It’s a true study. We have 351 cities and towns because when they were founded, individuals in one town got fed up with government, went to the next plot of land and started over. I think it’s important to spend some time and get down to the facts and get it right. The argument that this is voter suppression is not unlike Mona Lisa Vito. It does not hold water.” (HUNT)
The fact that the House has done no research on this issue, if true, is damning. The Joint Committee on Election Laws held a hearing on the VOTES Act in May of last year. If cost were a genuine concern, the Committee had ample time to investigate that question. Why does it exist if not to perform due diligence on bills?
Moreover, Same Day Registration has been filed each session at least going back to the 2000s, and it was voted on by the MA Senate in 2007 and 2014 (in both cases, the House refused to take it up). Why did the Joint Committee on Election Laws never collect such desired information in the hearings or meetings in the past? The only logical conclusion is that they never wanted to do it, and that they still don’t.
A “study” that has no deadline and no funding is not a study. Sending a bill or amendment to “study” is a common procedural trick in the Legislature to avoid having to formally vote yes or no. It is done all the time. The House routinely uses “further amendments” (which send an amendment to study) to nullify Republican messaging amendments that Democratic members are afraid to vote on. It gives people the ability to deflect from criticism of having opposed the thing itself: they didn’t oppose it; they just asked for a study. It is an insult to everyone’s intelligence.
“I had a chat with the clerk with the city of Marlborough and his assertion was that if we implement same day or election day voting in addition to codifying emergency measures, the additional burden would be a logistical nightmare he was unsure of how it would work.” (GREGOIRE)
“A lot has been said today about clerks. Yes, we do read every single thing you send us. Reading the letters and the communications from the clerk and speaking with the women, the clerks, in my communities, they actually share our commitment to increasing voter access and engaging voters. These women are trained and knowledgeable in every facet of elections, including the parts you don’t see. They are committed to ensuring integrity, making sure it is a smooth easy process. They do a fantastic job. If they are the ones reaching out and asking us to just take a small pause, I think we owe it to them to listen to the people who do this work. I’m asking you to join me in supporting the further amendment.” (MESCHINO)
“In speaking with the clerks in my district, same day registration would be an overwhelming task to add to what is already a daunting process.” (LANATRA)
To the contrary, the Town Clerks’ Association expressed support for Election Day Registration (see their letter here). They disagreed with allowing voters to register at the polls during early voting. We can debate whether or not their opposition has merit (it doesn’t; other states have handled it fine), but the legislators are clearly disingenuous in invoking clerks to cover for themselves.
Bad Argument #6: This would be burdensome for staffing.
“In our caucus earlier, the gentlelady from Gloucester brought up some of the staffing issues and staffing levels that would have to happen in the state to do this. Also brought up was training people to know how to do this correctly. There’s more than 2,000 precincts in Massachusetts and approximately 1,220 polling locations, and there are 391 early voting locations. All of those would need to be looked at to see how they could appropriately carry out the process of same-day voter registration. In many of those locations, they’ve never even considered it.” (MORAN)
“Other issues we need to consider: bilingual residence. How many additional staff do we need across the commonwealth to make sure those people coming in have their voices heard?” (MORAN)
“Those who spend quite a bit of time at polling locations know that there is a challenge regarding staffing election days. The expansion of early voting prompted a lot of questions about staffing. Challenges were met and overcome but it took some time. The same issue applies to linguistic access to polling places, people that you can find on election day to work polls, to talk to people who don’t speak English to help them to vote. I want to have a system where no one is disenfranchised or one that makes people feel small when they have the opportunity to cast a vote.” (CHAN)
If legislators had good faith concerns about staffing, they would have asked for an analysis last year or years prior and made the necessary appropriation. The feigned concern for overworked small towns is undermined by the fact that the House made early voting requirements more burdensome for small municipalities than the Senate did (see the chart below). Having more early voting hours is, obviously, better than having fewer ones, but it demonstrates that staffing is not a genuine concern.
Furthermore, our poll workers, on whom our democracy depends, have to prepare for full turnout every election. We never get close to that unfortunately; turnout more than 50% is often deemed impressive. But what that means is that going into Election Day, we need to assume that everyone who has not yet voted by mail or voted early could show up to vote. The additional voters that EDR could turn out will be small in comparison to that (although meaningful in terms of election results).
Bad Argument #7: We do not have the technology.
“Internet accessibility was brought up by the gentleman from Quincy. There are parts of this commonwealth we have yet to get appropriate access. Are we going to have a closed system, where only clerks are limited to using that system? Or is it going to be held in the cloud? These are lots of challenging things we’ve never really thought about when it comes to same-day voter registration.” (MORAN)
“We do not have a plan before us to equip them with technology and access to the internets [sic] they would need to implement these proposals. We do not have a sense of what it would cost. Our clerks describe a normal election day, charitably, as a nonstop fire drill, sometimes ending days later. Clerks have not been provided with information about these changes. This amendment would do just that. You want same day or election-day voting? Let’s figure it out. That’s what this amendment does. As enshrined in this bill voters may register up to the day before.” (DAY)
Maine has had Election Day Registration since the 1970s, and New Hampshire has since the 1990s. We are no less technologically advanced. It is not a question of technology; it is a question of political will.
Moreover, the small towns in Massachusetts that have bad Internet access (digital inequities are real) are places where voting likely occurs at one location: their city hall—a place that will have decent Internet access. (Additionally, Rep. Day’s comment that “voters may register up to the day before” is factually untrue; the underlying bill only narrows the cutoff period to ten days.)
Bad Argument #8: What if it leads to more people voting in a pandemic?
“What about queuing in line, where there are many people who want to vote but the facility has a queue that can’t build up? What about COVID? What about the next variant? How serious is that going to be? We all took that vote last year. Our clerks and the people that administer our elections are essential workers to us. These are things that we have not really fleshed out or considered when thinking about same-day voter registration.” (MORAN)
First of all, this frames higher turnout as an inherently bad thing, a disappointing thing to hear from an elected.
Second of all, see the comments about staffing earlier.
Third, isn’t the very purpose of mail-in voting and early voting to spread out when voting occurs to avoid lines? This bill is creating less work on the day of by doing so.
Bad Argument #9: People should have to register in advance; it’s a vital step of responsibility and a part of political education.
“It is a privilege and it comes with responsibilities and efforts in registration, in a timely way. We agree that they are benchmarks of our democracy. Forward thinking people of all races walked over the trenches in the South to get here to vote. I am a professional boxer but to have to fight on same day voting is a bit much. I will fight for anyone in the state to vote but I feel that they have to register in time. They have from now until 10 days before our voting day. And then we can give 10 days to mail in or walk in to vote. We have plenty of time to vote and that is the best way to do it.” (Diggs)
“I have a different perspective as a person who in his 20s stood on street corners to register voters. This was some 25 or so years ago today. And in Quincy at the time it was predominantly Chinese and people of color. We had to engage them one on one. I didn’t do this sitting at a fair, it was a direct approach for engagement. Voter education is a large part of voter registration and the need to explain why it is important to register. This is very time consuming. Since my days of registering people in person, new ways have come up. The ability to vote online which at the time websites were not used that much back then, but it is very commonplace now. I never thought that we would have automatic voter registration through the RMV. There are many new ways to cross different barriers. I am concerned about the impact on the underlying amendment because the engagement of registering to vote is a one on one experience. To have the linguistic ability present at the polls to explain to people how to manage a ballot, how to register is important.” (CHAN)
To some extent, the response is the same in #2 about the need that Election Day Registration fills, especially among BIPOC communities, working-class communities, immigrant communities, young people, and renters.
But both of these comments ignore the simple fact that figuring out that an election is happening, finding your polling place, and doing some research on candidates—all things that people who show up at the polls have done—is a demonstration of the very responsibility and political education that they are demanding. To Rep. Chan’s remarks, the work of civic engagement is year-round, and that reality is not an excuse for turning anyone away from the polls.
Bad Argument #10: This would allow voter fraud.
“From my conversation with constituents, there is a sense that same day or election day voting could give a fog of potential nefariousness. I have faith in our clerks and the secretary to have fair elections but I do have concerns over that sentiment, which I believe is false. I’ve heard from constituents who are looking for this underlying amendment and numerous who have great concern.” (HUNT)
It should be beneath any Democrat, and any elected official, to dignify voter fraud myths that have been debunked time and time again and are only ever invoked as a justification for racist and exclusionary policies.
Bad Argument #11: We didn’t have a veto-proof (two-thirds majority) for Election Day Registration, and Baker would have vetoed it.
Several state reps have said this in response to constituents, arguing that they themselves don’t oppose Election Day Registration but that the votes aren’t there in the caucus and they wanted to do something. None of them are willing to name the colleagues that are the roadblocks; they just seek to absolve themselves of all blame.
It is unclear why a study with no funding and no deadline that is never intended to actually happen is the solution to a political question. Given the centralization of power in the House, if the votes are wanted for something, the votes are typically corralled one way or another (when one is in charge, one has many tools at one’s disposal). Framing a fake study as a “consensus, second-best outcome” is an insult to the intelligence of voters, and it also conveniently ignores how many of the people who voted for this study are vehement opponents of Election Day Registration (indeed, almost every Republican voted for it, with the only ones opposing it doing it because they thought even a study was too much).
A Democratic supermajority should not lower its ambitions to cater to a Republican governor, especially now.
Bad Argument #12: If we allowed people to register to vote on Election Day, then people in my district I don’t know—such as college students, recent graduates, renters, working-class people, immigrants, members of BIPOC communities, etc.—might show up to voteand not for me.
No one said this out loud, but it’s the dominant reason why many are opposed. And if they want people not to show up to vote for someone else, they should do the work of engaging with their constituents and welcoming new ones. Indeed, isn’t that what representative democracy is about?
