 |
Post Office Box 1147
▪
Marblehead, Massachusetts 01945
▪ (781) 639-9709
“Every Tax is a Pay Cut ... A Tax Cut is a Pay Raise”
48 years as “The Voice of Massachusetts Taxpayers”
— and
their Institutional Memory — |
|
CLT UPDATE
Friday, November 11, 2022
Election Analysis
— The Final CLT Update
Jump directly
to CLT's Commentary on the News
|
Most Relevant News
Excerpts
(Full news reports follow Commentary)
|
|
With 95
percent of the votes counted, voters, by a narrow 52
percent to 48 percent margin (Yes – 1,229,630 votes.
No - 1,134,238 votes) approved Question 1 - a
proposed constitutional amendment that would allow a
graduated income tax in Massachusetts and impose an
additional 4 percent income tax, in addition to the
current flat 5 percent one, on taxpayers’ earnings
of more than $1 million annually. Language in the
amendment requires that “subject to appropriation”
the revenue will go to fund quality public
education, affordable public colleges and
universities, and for the repair and maintenance of
roads, bridges and public transportation....
“I hope
none of those who voted to end the century-old flat
income tax ever becomes successful enough to regret
their decision." Citizens for Limited Taxation
was founded in 1975 to oppose and defeat the fourth
graduated income tax assault on the 1976 ballot and
subsequently defeated the fifth attempt in 1994.
— Chip Ford,
executive director of Citizens for Limited Taxation.
Beacon
Hill Roll Call
Friday, November 11, 2022
Quotable Quotes
By Bob Katzen
Bay State
voters have approved the millionaires’ tax and kept
a law in place that allows immigrants without status
to get driver’s licenses.
A day
after Tuesday’s election, the Associated Press
called the race for the Question 1 millionaires’ tax
— creating a 4% tax on the portion of a person’s
annual income above $1 million. The Yes side was
leading 51.9% to 48.1% when the AP called the race
at around 1:30 p.m. Wednesday with 95% of the vote
in....
The
Associated Press also called the race for Question 4
about driver’s licenses for immigrants. The Yes side
was leading 53.6% to 46.4% when the AP called the
race at around 12 p.m. Wednesday with more than 90%
of the vote in.
A Yes vote
approves the Work and Family Mobility Act. This law
allows Massachusetts residents who cannot provide
proof of lawful presence to obtain a standard
driver’s license if they meet all the other
qualifications for a standard license, including a
road test and insurance, and provide proof of their
identity, date of birth, and residency.
The
Boston Herald
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
Massachusetts Question 1 millionaires’ tax passes,
immigrants without status will be able to get
driver’s licenses
In some of
the closest statewide races this election season,
the final results for all but one of Massachusetts'
four ballot questions rolled in at a nail-biting
pace the day after Election Day.
Results
that came in Wednesday afternoon showed that
Massachusetts voters supported high-profile
initiatives to levy a surtax on the state's highest
earners and to allow undocumented immigrants to
obtain driver's licenses. And over 70 percent of
voters cast their ballots in favor of dental insurer
restrictions, in a contest that the Associated Press
called Tuesday night....
Question
1, the so-called millionaire's tax, passed by a
close margin to amend the state Constitution for the
first time in 22 years. It adds a 4 percent surtax
on top of the state's 5 percent flat tax for the
portion of annual household income that exceeds $1
million.
The AP
called the race around 1:30 p.m. Wednesday with 52
percent of voters in favor of the initiative and 48
percent against....
Though the
question's passage will change the Constitution,
which hasn't happened in Massachusetts since 2000,
it won't give the Legislature a free pass to impose
income tax rate changes on other levels of income.
The
Constitution's requirement that income tax be levied
at a single rate remains, and Question 1 will just
add the four percent surtax -- and only the four
percent surtax -- as an exception. Any other
exceptions would have to go through the same
multi-year Constitutional amendment process.
"Because
the proposed tax would be written into the
Constitution, it does not give the Legislature the
ability to introduce additional brackets without
going back to the voters at least once more for that
authority," the Massachusetts Tax Foundation's
report on the question in September said.
The
amendment added to the Constitution adds that the $1
million threshold will be adjusted annually for
inflation to "ensure that this additional tax
continues to apply only to the commonwealth's
highest income taxpayers."
The
so-called millionaire's tax was first introduced in
2015, though the Boston Globe reported Wednesday
that the first attempt to undo the state's flat rate
income tax was in 1962. Advocates battled for the 4
percent surtax for three years until it was shot
down by the Supreme Judicial Court in 2018 before it
could make it onto the ballot. The Legislature
passed the Constitutional amendment again in 2019
and 2021 to put the question to voters on
Tuesday....
The
initiative passed comfortably in the metro Boston
area and Pioneer Valley, with liberal strongholds of
Somerville and Northampton coming in at 79 percent
and 82 percent in favor, respectively.
In the
wealthy town of Wellesley, where the median
household income is $213,684, Democratic candidate
for governor Maura Healey led over Republican Geoff
Diehl by a 44 point margin but only 37 percent of
voters favored the surtax.
The
question also did well in Western Massachusetts,
with vote shares as high as 75 percent in favor in
Williamstown and 76 percent in Great Barrington.
Supporters
and opponents of the ballot measure released
statements throughout the day Wednesday. The
Massachusetts High Technology Council, which
invested in the No on 1 campaign and has led
anti-surtax efforts for years, said voters were
"caught in a tax trap and misled into voting for a
permanent new tax." ...
The
American Federation of Teachers of Massachusetts,
however, was enthusiastic about the question's
passage. The Massachusetts Teachers Association
spent more than $10 million to support the
surtax....
Another
high profile measure, Question 4 to repeal a new law
that will allow undocumented immigrants to obtain
licenses, was called around noon on Wednesday.
With 95
percent reporting Wednesday afternoon, 54 percent of
voters were in favor of upholding the law that will
go into effect next July. It allows Massachusetts
residents who cannot provide proof of lawful
presence in the U.S. to obtain a standard driver's
license or learner's permit, if they meet all other
qualifications.
State
House News Service
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
Years in the
Making, Millionaire’s Surtax Passes
Immigrant License Law Survives Repeal Effort
After a
years-long bitter fight over the economic future of
Massachusetts, both sides of the income tax ballot
question finally agreed on one thing: This contest
would be too close to call on Election Night.
Turns out
both sides got it right: The Associated Press didn’t
call the race until early Wednesday afternoon. The
narrow result reflects how the Massachusetts
electorate remains deeply divided on whether to
raise taxes on the wealthy – or perhaps anyone. Five
other attempts to change the state constitution to
allow for a graduated income tax failed
spectacularly.
And who
can forget, Massachusetts is the place that once
famously started a revolution rather than pay more
in taxes.
Polls, as
recently as three weeks ago, had indicated that this
time might be different. Question 1 proposes an
additional four percent tax on annual incomes over
$1 million, with the proceeds to fund education and
transportation. It was expected to win with modest
support tallying in the mid to high 50 percent
range. The result was much closer, with the Yes side
winning with 52 percent of the vote.
In other
words, even in our progressive state, it’s basically
a toss up on whether to tax the rich....
For those
keeping score at home, supporters raised about $28.5
million, largely from teachers unions, while
opponents brought in about $14.7 million from a
handful of flush donors, according to state campaign
filings....
Voters in
Greater Boston’s urban core, where the measure won
by a landslide played a pivotal role. Boston carried
the measure with 107,804 votes, or 65 percent, while
Cambridge delivered 24,241 votes, a whopping 75
percent approval. And in Somerville, 79 percent
approved the surtax, adding another 20,956 votes to
the yes margin.
Roughly
90,000 votes separate the winning side from the
losing.
Question 1
also found support in gateway cities such as
Chelsea, Brockton, Malden, and Worcester, while many
towns in Southeastern and Central Massachusetts
voted against, as did the South Shore and some of
Boston’s wealthier suburbs, including Wellesley and
Weston.
“W towns
were a no, kind of parochially,” observed Scott
Ferson, a Democratic strategist.
Ferson
pointed out that Question 1 passing, even by a slim
margin, would represent a significant victory for
the progressive wing of the state.
“We
haven’t passed a tax increase for so long that the
fact that it looks like it’s going to win is kind of
remarkable,” he said....
A few
blocks away at the Colonnade, the “yes” side filled
a ballroom along with supporters of Question 4, a
measure to keep a law that would allow people
without legal immigration status to obtain a
driver’s license. (That proposal also passed
narrowly.)
It was a
much more raucous atmosphere, filled with teachers,
union supporters and politicians including state
senators Lydia Edwards and Adam Gomez, and
Massachusetts Teachers Association president Max
Page. Salsa dancing, lots of selfies, and even a
cameo from Senator Elizabeth Warren, who was mobbed
like a rock star by dozens of attendees.
“We don’t
know yet for sure how it all comes out,” Warren
said. “A lot of places around this country would
back off from a fight like this. They don’t take on
those who have money, they don’t take on people who
have power already in the system. But not here in
Massachusetts.”
Even here,
though, that fight was a pretty close call.
The
Boston Globe
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
Even in progressive Massachusetts,
it was a toss-up on whether to tax the rich
By Shirley Leung
Massachusetts voters have approved the Fair Share
Amendment, known as the "millionaire’s tax," which
would allow a 4% surtax on annual incomes beyond $1
million. That is on top of the current flat income
tax rate of 5%, Bloomberg writes....
In
California, on the other hand, voters struck down
Proposition 30, which would have imposed a 1.75% tax
on annual incomes beyond $2 million, Bloomberg
writes.
The
measure was projected to bring between $3.5 billion
and $5 billion in annual revenue, according to
California’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s
Office, the news service writes. The tax would have
affected some 35,000 California taxpayers,
proponents said, according to Bloomberg.
The state
said the funds would be slated for adding more
firefighters to combat wildfires as well as to
develop charging stations and other infrastructure
to support electric vehicles, the news service
writes.
Financial
Advisor | Financial Times
Friday, November 10, 2022
Massachusetts Votes to Tax the Rich, Californians
Don’t
Maura
Healey shattered a glass ceiling on Tuesday in a
landslide, becoming the first woman ever elected
governor in Massachusetts. She topped a Democratic
ticket that elected three new women to statewide
office, including the first Black woman to hold a
statewide position, and extend Democratic control to
every single constitutional office.
Healey,
who had a nearly 2-to-1 lead over former Republican
state rep Geoff Diehl as of midnight, is also poised
to become the first openly lesbian governor in the
country, possibly joined by Democrat Tina Kotek, if
she wins her race in Oregon. Salem Mayor Kim
Driscoll will be Healey’s lieutenant governor....
Since
2015, women have held four of the constitutional
offices, but this will be the first time women have
held five of the six top posts, including the
governor’s office.
CommonWealth Magazine
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
Healey elected
first female, gay Massachusetts governor
Democrats take control of all constitutional offices
in historic election
What else
did we learn from Tuesday’s election about the big
winners and losers? ...
Women were
big winners in Massachusetts, as Healey led a
statewide Democratic ticket to victory that will
result in five of the state’s six constitutional
offices being held by women. Joining Healey will be
Lt. Gov. Kim Driscoll, Andrea Campbell, who was
elected attorney general, and Diana DiZoglio, who
won the race for state auditor. State treasurer Deb
Goldberg was reelected to a third term....
Trump
Republicans were big losers in this election.
Republican gubernatorial candidate Geoff Diehl, who
had been a leader in President Donald Trump’s
Massachusetts campaign, lost in a landslide. Vocally
pro-Trump Bristol County Sheriff Tom Hodgson lost
his seat after 25 years. And in nearby New
Hampshire, Trump-backed Senate candidate Don Bolduc
failed to unseat Democratic US Sen. Maggie Hassan,
while former Trump White House aide Karoline Leavitt
lost her race for US House to incumbent Democrat
Chris Pappas. Nationally, results for Trump-backed
candidates were mixed, but far from the “red wave”
some had predicted....
If it was
a bad night in Massachusetts for the Trump brand of
Republican politics, it wasn’t any better for
Charlie Baker’s more moderate version of GOP
politics. The only statewide candidate he endorsed,
Anthony Amore, lost decisively in the race for the
open state auditor’s seat. He barely outpaced
Trump-aligned Diehl, suggesting Baker’s endorsement
– and hundreds of thousands of dollars in spending
on the race from a super PAC linked to the outgoing
governor – did little to move the needle. Baker also
endorsed Republican state Rep. Shawn Dooley, who was
defeated for state Senate by incumbent Democrat
Becca Rausch in the most closely watched legislative
race of the night....
In a major
victory for liberal-minded voters, Democratic
Attleboro mayor and former state representative Paul
Heroux unseated Republican Bristol County Sheriff
Tom Hodgson, who has held the office since May 1997.
Hodgson has long been criticized for his harsh
treatment of inmates, and he has also been a
staunchly pro-Trump politician, even expressing
willingness to send inmates to help build a border
wall with Mexico....
It was a
good – and probably bad – night for the state’s
all-Democratic House delegation in Washington. All
eight representatives cruised to reelection
victories, but if forecasts hold up and Republicans
retake the House – even if by a much narrower margin
than many had predicted – they will all be stripped
of the power they held in the Democratic-run
chamber.
CommonWealth Magazine
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
Election winners and
losers
No
Republican has held the offices of attorney general,
auditor, secretary of state or treasurer in
Massachusetts this century, and the GOP's drought
will continue for at least another four years as
Democrats swept the Massachusetts Constitutional
offices in Tuesday's elections.
Voters
granted new four-year terms, beginning in January,
to incumbents Secretary of State William Galvin and
Treasurer Deborah Goldberg. They also elected Andrea
Campbell to succeed Gov.-elect Maura Healey as
attorney general and Diana DiZoglio to succeed
Suzanne Bump as auditor.
The most
recent Republican to hold one of the four statewide
Constitutional offices outside the governor's suite
was Joe Malone, who ran the state Treasury until
early 1999. And with Healey and Kim Driscoll's
election as governor and lieutenant governor,
Republicans will be shut out of statewide offices in
Massachusetts after holding the corner office for
the last eight years.
State
House News Service
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
Campbell,
DiZoglio Cap Off Statewide Sweep for Dems
Five of Six Constitutional Officers Will Be Women In
2023
The
already-massive supermajority Democrats wield in the
Massachusetts Legislature is guaranteed to get
larger next session.
With one
race still too close to call Wednesday afternoon,
Democrats had already claimed victory or been
declared winners in 132 of 160 House districts.
That's three more seats than they secured last
cycle, and with the Senate maintaining its existing
37-3 breakdown, Democrats are assured of a net
legislative pickup of at least three and perhaps
four seats as they head toward trifecta control on
Beacon Hill....
Republicans so far won 26 seats in the House, four
fewer than they held at the start of the 2021-2022
term, and Rep. Susannah Whipps of Athol secured
reelection to keep one district independent.
By
Wednesday afternoon, 39 of the 40 Senate races had
been called by the Associated Press, and Democrat
Rep. Jake Oliveira of Ludlow claimed victory in the
only other one. Democrats cruised to victory in all
five open Senate races, with Oliveira, fellow Reps.
Liz Miranda of Boston and Paul Mark of Becket, and
newcomers Robyn Kennedy of Worcester and Pavel
Payano of Lawrence set to join the chamber in
January.
All three
Senate Republicans -- Minority Leader Bruce Tarr of
Gloucester, Patrick O'Connor of Weymouth and Ryan
Fattman of Sutton -- secured reelection Tuesday,
when every single incumbent in either chamber who
sought another term emerged victorious.
The final
unresolved House race could break in either
direction as the final votes get tallied.
State
House News Service
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
House to Have More
Democrats Than Any Session Since 2009
GOP Poised to Lose Three or Four Legislative Seats
Democrats
on Tuesday flipped at least two state House
districts last held by Republicans, an early sign of
downballot success on a night when the party powered
to victory in statewide races but results were slow
to trickle in elsewhere....
Several
other races remained undecided Tuesday night,
leaving it unclear whether Shand and Flanagan's win
would propel Democrats to expand their already
enormous supermajority on Beacon Hill or
counterbalance Republican pickups elsewhere.
In what
one Democrat insider called "probably the most
competitive race statewide," incumbent Sen. Becca
Rausch of Needham said she fended off a challenge
from Republican Rep. Shawn Dooley in a district that
has historically bounced back and forth between the
two parties....
At least
21 winners of House races and five winners of Senate
races in Tuesday's general elections will be
newcomers to the Legislature, most of whom emerged
victorious in contests for open seats with no
incumbent on the ballot.
Through
the first few hours of vote-counting, Democrats
declared victory or drew congratulations for their
wins in at least six of those 26 open districts.
State
House News Service
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
Rausch
Outlasts Dooley, GOP Loses North Shore & Cape House
Seats
Democrat Supermajority Grows in Early Counting
For
decades it has served as a winning argument for
electing Republican governors in deep-blue
Massachusetts: A Republican in the corner office is
a sensible check on the impulses of the
Democratic-dominated Legislature.
In
January, however, that equation will be scrambled
for only the second time in 32 years, with
Democratic attorney general Maura Healey poised to
take the reins as governor alongside a Legislature
where Democrats wield power with overwhelming
supermajorities.
On paper,
that should make for harmony-filled days on Beacon
Hill. But it hasn’t always worked that way, as
one-party rule can also bring new challenges and
potential for internecine conflict.
Deval
Patrick’s two terms as governor, from 2007 to 2014,
mark the only time Democrats have controlled both
branches of government since Michael Dukakis left
office more than three decades ago, at the start of
1991.
CommonWealth Magazine
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
One-party rule
returns to Beacon Hill
The split
personality of the Republican Party in Massachusetts
didn’t fare well in this year’s election, losing a
handful of additional offices and continuing its
slide to near-total irrelevance.
Republicans lost two seats they previously held in
the House, held on to their seats in the Senate, and
watched as the district attorney’s office for the
Cape and Islands and the sheriff jobs in Barnstable
and Bristol counties shifted to Democratic control.
Gov.
Charlie Baker, who represents the moderate wing of
the Republican Party, decided not to run for a third
term, which opened the door for Maura Healey and Kim
Driscoll to move in to the corner office.
More
importantly, however, Baker’s absence from the
ballot created an identity crisis for state
Republicans, whose state party apparatus steered
hard to the right as its moderate leader prepared to
exit the political stage.
CommonWealth Magazine
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
Split-personality state
GOP didn’t fare well
Party finds two wings are not better than one |
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary |
|
This ongoing Covid-warped
election month, early, extended, and mail-in voting have not
only raised doubts about election integrity among many but
have stalled results unconscionably only adding to the
suspicions, as we're seeing in states across the nation, and
even in Massachusetts if to a lesser degree. For over two
hundred years voting in states across the nation was
performed in-person with paper ballots on Election Day
and we had the results within hours of the polls closing — until the
Wuhan Chinese Virus was unleashed. "Never let a good
crisis go to waste" Democrats exclaimed and here we are,
days and weeks later votes still being counted, voters
wondering just what is going on, who's winning today, who'll
be ahead tomorrow, and when will the winners finally be
announced so that partisan law suits can be launched.
The State House News Service reported on Wednesday
afternoon ("Years in
the Making, Millionaire’s Surtax Passes Immigrant License
Law Survives Repeal Effort"):
In some of the closest
statewide races this election season, the final
results for all but one of Massachusetts' four
ballot questions rolled in at a nail-biting pace
the day after Election Day.
Results that came in
Wednesday afternoon showed that Massachusetts
voters supported high-profile initiatives to
levy a surtax on the state's highest earners and
to allow undocumented immigrants to obtain
driver's licenses. And over 70 percent of voters
cast their ballots in favor of dental insurer
restrictions, in a contest that the Associated
Press called Tuesday night.
The Boston Herald reported on Wednesday afternoon ("Massachusetts
Question 1 millionaires’ tax passes, immigrants without
status will be able to get driver’s licenses"):
Bay State voters have approved the
millionaires’ tax and kept a law in place that allows
immigrants without status to get driver’s licenses.
A day after Tuesday’s election, the
Associated Press called the race for the Question 1
millionaires’ tax — creating a 4% tax on the portion of
a person’s annual income above $1 million. The Yes side
was leading 51.9% to 48.1% when the AP called the race
at around 1:30 p.m. Wednesday with 95% of the vote
in....
The Associated Press also called
the race for Question 4 about driver’s licenses for
immigrants. The Yes side was leading 53.6% to 46.4% when
the AP called the race at around 12 p.m. Wednesday with
more than 90% of the vote in.
A Yes vote approves the Work and
Family Mobility Act. This law allows Massachusetts
residents who cannot provide proof of lawful presence to
obtain a standard driver’s license if they meet all the
other qualifications for a standard license, including a
road test and insurance, and provide proof of their
identity, date of birth, and residency.
What do we need elections for anyway if the
Associated Press persistently gets to "call" the outcomes
before all the votes are counted days if not weeks later?
Boston Globe business reporter
Shirley Leung reported on Wednesday ("Even
in progressive Massachusetts, it was a toss-up on whether to
tax the rich"):
. . . In other words, even
in our progressive state, it’s basically a toss
up on whether to tax the rich....
For those keeping score at
home, supporters raised about $28.5 million,
largely from teachers unions, while opponents
brought in about $14.7 million from a handful of
flush donors, according to state campaign
filings....
Voters in Greater Boston’s
urban core, where the measure won by a landslide
played a pivotal role. Boston carried the
measure with 107,804 votes, or 65 percent, while
Cambridge delivered 24,241 votes, a whopping 75
percent approval. And in Somerville, 79 percent
approved the surtax, adding another 20,956 votes
to the yes margin.
Roughly 90,000 votes
separate the winning side from the losing.
Question 1 also found
support in gateway cities such as Chelsea,
Brockton, Malden, and Worcester, while many
towns in Southeastern and Central Massachusetts
voted against, as did the South Shore and some
of Boston’s wealthier suburbs, including
Wellesley and Weston.
“W towns were a no, kind of
parochially,” observed Scott Ferson, a
Democratic strategist.
Ferson pointed out that
Question 1 passing, even by a slim margin, would
represent a significant victory for the
progressive wing of the state.
When asked last night by
Beacon
Hill Roll Call for a comment on the results
of Question 1,
I replied ("Quotable Quotes"):
With 95
percent of the votes counted, voters, by a narrow 52
percent to 48 percent margin (Yes – 1,229,630 votes.
No - 1,134,238 votes) approved Question 1 - a
proposed constitutional amendment that would allow a
graduated income tax in Massachusetts and impose an
additional 4 percent income tax, in addition to the
current flat 5 percent one, on taxpayers’ earnings
of more than $1 million annually. Language in the
amendment requires that “subject to appropriation”
the revenue will go to fund quality public
education, affordable public colleges and
universities, and for the repair and maintenance of
roads, bridges and public transportation....
“I hope
none of those who voted to end the century-old flat
income tax ever becomes successful enough to regret
their decision." Citizens for Limited Taxation
was founded in 1975 to oppose and defeat the fourth
graduated income tax assault on the 1976 ballot and
subsequently defeated the fifth attempt in 1994.
—
Chip Ford,
executive director of Citizens for Limited Taxation.
I expect that's the final quote from me that
you'll ever see.
How bad has the insatiable greed of
Massachusetts Takers become?
The Financial
Advisor | Financial Times reported on Thursday ("Massachusetts Votes to Tax the Rich, Californians
Don’t"):
Massachusetts voters have approved the Fair Share
Amendment, known as the "millionaire’s tax," which
would allow a 4% surtax on annual incomes beyond $1
million. That is on top of the current flat income
tax rate of 5%, Bloomberg writes....
In
California, on the other hand, voters struck down
Proposition 30, which would have imposed a 1.75% tax
on annual incomes beyond $2 million, Bloomberg
writes.
The
measure was projected to bring between $3.5 billion
and $5 billion in annual revenue, according to
California’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s
Office, the news service writes. The tax would have
affected some 35,000 California taxpayers,
proponents said, according to Bloomberg.
The state
said the funds would be slated for adding more
firefighters to combat wildfires as well as to
develop charging stations and other infrastructure
to support electric vehicles, the news service
writes.
For the first time
in history California lost a U.S. House of Representatives
seat last year after the 2020 census. For the first
time in its history out-migration has far exceeded
in-migration (even including the waves of illegal aliens),
almost if not entirely due to its taxation and regulatory
policies making the state's cost of doing business and its
cost-of-living prohibitive. How far behind can
Massachusetts be? (It can't come soon enough for
Red-State America!)
The
State
House News Service reported on Wednesday ("House to Have More
Democrats Than Any Session Since 2009
—
GOP Poised to Lose Three or Four Legislative Seats"):
The
already-massive supermajority Democrats wield in the
Massachusetts Legislature is guaranteed to get
larger next session.
With one
race still too close to call Wednesday afternoon,
Democrats had already claimed victory or been
declared winners in 132 of 160 House districts.
That's three more seats than they secured last
cycle, and with the Senate maintaining its existing
37-3 breakdown, Democrats are assured of a net
legislative pickup of at least three and perhaps
four seats as they head toward trifecta control on
Beacon Hill....
Republicans so far won 26 seats in the House, four
fewer than they held at the start of the 2021-2022
term, and Rep. Susannah Whipps of Athol secured
reelection to keep one district independent.
By
Wednesday afternoon, 39 of the 40 Senate races had
been called by the Associated Press, and Democrat
Rep. Jake Oliveira of Ludlow claimed victory in the
only other one. Democrats cruised to victory in all
five open Senate races, with Oliveira, fellow Reps.
Liz Miranda of Boston and Paul Mark of Becket, and
newcomers Robyn Kennedy of Worcester and Pavel
Payano of Lawrence set to join the chamber in
January.
All three
Senate Republicans -- Minority Leader Bruce Tarr of
Gloucester, Patrick O'Connor of Weymouth and Ryan
Fattman of Sutton -- secured reelection Tuesday,
when every single incumbent in either chamber who
sought another term emerged victorious.
The final
unresolved House race could break in either
direction as the final votes get tallied.
The already
insignificant ranks of Massachusetts Republican
office-holders have been even further culled.
Democrats swept all constitutional offices from Governor
down and captured even more seats in the Legislature.
At this rate it won't be long before there is not even
token opposition to a complete Democrat junta, not that
it much matters at this point.
For the last time
I will again remind you:
It Doesn't Need
To Be
THE MASSACHUSETTS WAY
The Louisville Courier Journal reported
on Wednesday ("How the Kentucky GOP
expanded its supermajorities in the state legislature"):
Republicans in
Frankfort have wielded a dominant supermajority in both
chambers of the Kentucky General Assembly over the past
two years — which will now grow even stronger after
flipping more Democratic seats in Tuesday's election.
Currently holding a
75 to 25 seat supermajority in the House, Republicans
knocked off five Democratic incumbents in the general
election this week, giving them 80 of the 100 seats when
they return for the 2023 regular session in January.
In the Senate,
Republicans flipped one seat held by a retiring
Democratic incumbent, with the party not fielding a
candidate in the race. Currently holding 30 of the 38
seats in the Senate, the GOP supermajority in the
chamber will grow to 31 in January.
Sometimes
discretion is the better part of valor. At some point
the time might well arrive to minimize your losses, reduce the
frustrations and pain, to cut and run. I'm a
problem-solver: "Better to light a candle than curse the
darkness." That point arrived for me four years ago
and I've celebrated my decision every single day since.
Breaking the inertia wasn't easy and the act of physically moving was
difficult, but it's behind me now that I'm settled in and
I'm very much satisfied. Though the thought of initiating
such an undertaking was
intimidating, overwhelming in fact — it
could be and was accomplished and now I often wonder
why I didn't do it sooner. It's doesn't need to be
The Massachusetts Way. Available options
for such greater happiness, less cost, and far less
government abuse are almost limitless. Just how much
satisfaction can be attained can't be conceived until it's actually experienced
as a new way of life.
CLT and its
supporting members and activists have fought the good fight
at great expense and sacrifice to benefit all the
state's taxpayers for over 48 years, winning numerous
battles, losing a few along the way. We have saved
all Massachusetts taxpayers tens of billions of their
dollars, are leaving them in a far better place than had CLT
never existed — whether they recognize and
appreciate it or not and most don't.
Thank you citizens of
Massachusetts who've supported Citizens for Limited Taxation over all
those many decades, and especially to those who helped
keep it breathing on life-support through the
final weeks and days until its demise. I'd hoped CLT could survive
until the election and it did if barely.
I wish you the best of luck and success ahead.
Loretta Hayden,
former CLT office manager
(until she had to be laid off years ago when the funds
ran low)
designed and sent
this to me last night as a surprise
No, they are not for
sale!
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
Beacon Hill Roll
Call
Friday, November 11, 2022
Quotable Quotes
By Bob Katzen
With 95 percent of the votes counted, voters, by a
narrow 52 percent to 48 percent margin (Yes – 1,229,630
votes. No - 1,134,238 votes) approved Question 1 - a
proposed constitutional amendment that would allow a
graduated income tax in Massachusetts and impose an
additional 4 percent income tax, in addition to the current
flat 5 percent one, on taxpayers’ earnings of more than $1
million annually. Language in the amendment requires that
“subject to appropriation” the revenue will go to fund
quality public education, affordable public colleges and
universities, and for the repair and maintenance of roads,
bridges and public transportation.
Supporters say the tax hike will affect only 18,000
extremely wealthy individuals and will generate up to $2
billion annually in additional tax revenue. They argue that
using the funds for education and for the repair and
maintenance of roads, bridges and public transportation will
benefit millions of Bay State taxpayers.
Opponents of the measure say the hike is a “bait and switch”
scenario in which $1.9 billion in new revenue from the 4
percent tax is dedicated to transportation and education but
then the Legislature takes money out of the money currently
spent in those areas and spends it elsewhere. They argue net
result would be that the $1.9 billion would be essentially
spent in other areas rather than the two promised ones.
“On Tuesday, Massachusetts voters seized a
once-in-a-generation opportunity that was years in the
making. “We’ve done what some thought was impossible: passed
the Fair Share Amendment to create a permanently fairer tax
system and deliver billions of dollars in new revenue for
our public schools, colleges, roads, bridges and transit
systems.”
— Fair Share for Massachusetts
Campaign Manager Jeron Mariani.
“The commonwealth has voiced its approval for tax justice
and it couldn’t have come a moment too soon. The historic
passage of Question 1, also known as the Fair Share
Amendment, will unlock billions of new dollars each year for
schools and transportation across the state.
— Marie-Frances Rivera,
MassBudget President.
“I hope none of those who voted to end the century-old
flat income tax ever becomes successful enough to regret
their decision." Citizens for Limited Taxation was
founded in 1975 to oppose and defeat the fourth graduated
income tax assault on the 1976 ballot and subsequently
defeated the fifth attempt in 1994.
— Chip Ford,
executive director of Citizens for Limited Taxation.
“Gov.-Elect Maura Healey made several promises to cut taxes,
and we will hold her to her word. Question 1, which raises
taxes 80 percent on the top earners, passed narrowly with
her express support. Over the next four years, we look
forward to supporting her measures to counteract the
negative consequences this will have on the commonwealth,
including the plummeting of Massachusetts’ ranking by the
nonpartisan Tax Foundation to 4th worst business climate in
the country and a return to our former reputation as ’Taxachusetts.’”
— Paul Craney,
spokesperson for the Mass Fiscal Alliance.
The Boston
Herald
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
Massachusetts Question 1 millionaires’ tax passes,
immigrants without status will be able to get driver’s
licenses
By Rick Sobey
Bay State voters have approved the millionaires’ tax and
kept a law in place that allows immigrants without status to
get driver’s licenses.
A day after Tuesday’s election, the Associated Press called
the race for the Question 1 millionaires’ tax — creating a
4% tax on the portion of a person’s annual income above $1
million. The Yes side was leading 51.9% to 48.1% when the AP
called the race at around 1:30 p.m. Wednesday with 95% of
the vote in.
Revenues from this tax will be used for public education,
public colleges and universities; and for the repair and
maintenance of roads, bridges and public transportation —
subject to appropriation by the state Legislature. This
change may increase annual state revenues by $1.2 billion in
the near term.
“On Tuesday, Massachusetts voters seized a
once-in-a-generation opportunity that was years in the
making,” Fair Share for Massachusetts Campaign Manager Jeron
Mariani said in a statement. “We’ve done what some thought
was impossible: passed the Fair Share Amendment to create a
permanently fairer tax system and deliver billions of
dollars in new revenue for our public schools, colleges,
roads, bridges, and transit systems.”
But millionaires’ tax opponents have argued that the law
will spark wealthy taxpayers to move or businesses to
relocate to another state. Detractors have also said there’s
no guarantee that revenue from the tax would actually
increase spending on education and transportation.
The Coalition to Stop the Tax Hike Amendment called the
passage of Question 1 “a setback for the Massachusetts
economy, a setback for small business owners, a setback for
retirees, and a setback for homeowners who will be captured
by this amendment.”
“There is no guarantee that this ill-conceived amendment
will increase spending for either education nor
transportation,” Coalition to Stop the Tax Hike Amendment
spokesperson Dan Cence said in a statement. “It will,
however, severely impact retirees, homeowners, and
hardworking residents across the state. This amendment will
hurt small businesses as they struggle with inflation,
supply chain issues, and work to rebuild from the negative
impacts of the pandemic.”
The Associated Press also called the race for Question 4
about driver’s licenses for immigrants. The Yes side was
leading 53.6% to 46.4% when the AP called the race at around
12 p.m. Wednesday with more than 90% of the vote in.
A Yes vote approves the Work and Family Mobility Act. This
law allows Massachusetts residents who cannot provide proof
of lawful presence to obtain a standard driver’s license if
they meet all the other qualifications for a standard
license, including a road test and insurance, and provide
proof of their identity, date of birth, and residency.
“The passage of this law made history, and voters in
Massachusetts have just made it again,” 32BJ SEIU Executive
Vice President Roxana Rivera and Brazilian Worker Center
Executive Director Lenita Reason, co-chairs of the Yes On 4
for Safer Roads campaign, said in a statement. “Our
Commonwealth will now have safer roads, and our immigrant
families will safely be able to drive to work, drop their
kids off at school, and go to medical appointments.”
Question 4 was triggered by a referendum petition for a
ballot question, as opponents of the law tried to repeal the
Work and Family Mobility Act.
Supporters of the law have argued that it will lead to safer
roads and better tools for law enforcement to do their jobs.
In 17 states with similar laws, passage led to declines in
uninsured drivers and hit-and-run crashes.
“We are incredibly glad to see that the policy we have long
supported — which will ensure that all drivers, regardless
of immigration status, take the same road test, meet the
same identification requirements, and follow the same rules
of the road — will remain law,” Elizabeth Sweet, executive
director of the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy
Coalition, said in a statement.
Gov. Charlie Baker had vetoed the law, saying the Registry
of Motor Vehicles does not have the capability or expertise
necessary to verify documents from other countries. He also
noted that Massachusetts drivers’ licenses will no longer
confirm that a person is who they say they are.
Opponents have also argued that the law would significantly
diminish the public safety of all residents in the state.
Voters passed Question 2, as the AP called the race Tuesday
night with the Yes side holding an overwhelming lead. The
ballot question approval regulates dental insurance rates,
including by requiring companies to spend at least 83% of
premiums on member dental expenses and quality improvements
instead of administrative expenses.
“This is a landmark victory for Massachusetts dental
patients, who will get more value from what they are already
paying for dental care and be protected from large increases
in premiums thanks to the passage of Question 2,” said
Andrew Tonelli, committee spokesperson and co-chair of the
Massachusetts Dental Society’s Government Affairs Committee.
Question 3 was rejected by voters, as the No side had 55% of
the vote. If approved, the ballot question would have
increased the number of licenses a retailer can have for the
sale of alcoholic beverages to be consumed off premises,
limited the number of “all-alcoholic beverages” licenses
that a retailer can acquire, restricted use of
self-checkout, and required retailers to accept customers’
out-of-state identification.
State House News
Service
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
Years in the Making, Millionaire’s Surtax Passes
Immigrant License Law Survives Repeal Effort
By Sam Drysdale
In some of the closest statewide races this election season,
the final results for all but one of Massachusetts' four
ballot questions rolled in at a nail-biting pace the day
after Election Day.
Results that came in Wednesday afternoon showed that
Massachusetts voters supported high-profile initiatives to
levy a surtax on the state's highest earners and to allow
undocumented immigrants to obtain driver's licenses. And
over 70 percent of voters cast their ballots in favor of
dental insurer restrictions, in a contest that the
Associated Press called Tuesday night.
The only ballot question voters rejected this year would
have changed the state's liquor license laws. It sought to
increase the number of alcohol licenses a single company
could hold, allowing more stores to sell beer and wine,
while gradually reducing the number of licenses specifically
allowing the sale of all alcoholic beverages including
liquor.
Committees for and against the four questions spent a total
of more than $63.6 million this election cycle plus another
$2.1 million from Total Wine & More, which did not go
through a campaign committee in opposition to the alcohol
licensing question. Of the total expenditures by all
committees this cycle, about 65 percent was spent by the Yes
on 1 and No on 1 campaigns.
Question 1, the so-called millionaire's tax, passed by a
close margin to amend the state Constitution for the first
time in 22 years. It adds a 4 percent surtax on top of the
state's 5 percent flat tax for the portion of annual
household income that exceeds $1 million.
The AP called the race around 1:30 p.m. Wednesday with 52
percent of voters in favor of the initiative and 48 percent
against.
The surtax will raise an estimated $1.3 billion a year
intended for transportation and public education.
"On Tuesday, Massachusetts voters seized a
once-in-a-generation opportunity that was years in the
making," Jeron Mariani, campaign manager for the "yes" camp
Fair Share for Massachusetts, said. "We've done what some
thought was impossible: passed the Fair Share Amendment to
create a permanently fairer tax system and deliver billions
of dollars in new revenue for our public schools, colleges,
roads, bridges, and transit systems."
The Coalition to Stop the Tax Hike Amendment spokesperson
Dan Cence said the opposition campaign was "disappointed" by
the initiative's passage, calling it a "setback for the
Massachusetts economy."
"There is no guarantee that this ill-conceived amendment
will increase spending for either education nor
transportation," he said. "It will, however, severely impact
retirees, homeowners, and hardworking residents across the
state. This amendment will hurt small businesses as they
struggle with inflation, supply chain issues, and work to
rebuild from the negative impacts of the pandemic."
Opponents to the ballot question have argued throughout this
election cycle that the additional state tax revenue is not
certain to actually be spent on education and transportation
since it is subject to legislative appropriation.
Though the question's passage will change the Constitution,
which hasn't happened in Massachusetts since 2000, it won't
give the Legislature a free pass to impose income tax rate
changes on other levels of income.
The Constitution's requirement that income tax be levied at
a single rate remains, and Question 1 will just add the four
percent surtax -- and only the four percent surtax -- as an
exception. Any other exceptions would have to go through the
same multi-year Constitutional amendment process.
"Because the proposed tax would be written into the
Constitution, it does not give the Legislature the ability
to introduce additional brackets without going back to the
voters at least once more for that authority," the
Massachusetts Tax Foundation's report on the question in
September said.
The amendment added to the Constitution adds that the $1
million threshold will be adjusted annually for inflation to
"ensure that this additional tax continues to apply only to
the commonwealth's highest income taxpayers."
The so-called millionaire's tax was first introduced in
2015, though the Boston Globe reported Wednesday that the
first attempt to undo the state's flat rate income tax was
in 1962. Advocates battled for the 4 percent surtax for
three years until it was shot down by the Supreme Judicial
Court in 2018 before it could make it onto the ballot. The
Legislature passed the Constitutional amendment again in
2019 and 2021 to put the question to voters on Tuesday.
The initiative passed comfortably in the metro Boston area
and Pioneer Valley, with liberal strongholds of Somerville
and Northampton coming in at 79 percent and 82 percent in
favor, respectively.
In the wealthy town of Wellesley, where the median household
income is $213,684, Democratic candidate for governor Maura
Healey led over Republican Geoff Diehl by a 44 point margin
but only 37 percent of voters favored the surtax.
The question also did well in Western Massachusetts, with
vote shares as high as 75 percent in favor in Williamstown
and 76 percent in Great Barrington.
Supporters and opponents of the ballot measure released
statements throughout the day Wednesday. The Massachusetts
High Technology Council, which invested in the No on 1
campaign and has led anti-surtax efforts for years, said
voters were "caught in a tax trap and misled into voting for
a permanent new tax."
"As Massachusetts residents and businesses prepare for a
likely global recession in 2023, our economic prospects will
be handicapped by the fallout of a Constitutional Amendment
that is detrimental to our business climate and harmful to
the state's already fragile post-COVID competitive
position," President Christopher Anderson said.
Associated Industries of Massachusetts also released a
statement that Question 1 would have a "negative impact" on
"small businesses and the economy as a whole."
"The proposal will have an immediate effect on businesses
organized as pass-through entities," AIM said. "These
companies -- many of them small, family businesses that
invest profits back into their businesses to grow and expand
-- will be punished for their success with higher taxes.
This will prevent businesses from being able to buy
machinery and equipment and provide competitive pay
increases for employees at a time of heightened economic
uncertainty."
The American Federation of Teachers of Massachusetts,
however, was enthusiastic about the question's passage. The
Massachusetts Teachers Association spent more than $10
million to support the surtax.
"Starting next year, Massachusetts will have a fairer tax
system and substantial new revenue to invest in our public
schools, colleges, and transportation systems," AFT
Massachusetts President Beth Kontos said. "Years from now,
our communities will continue to see the benefits of better
schools, safer roads, and a tax system that asks those at
the very top to do their part.
Another high profile measure, Question 4 to repeal a new law
that will allow undocumented immigrants to obtain licenses,
was called around noon on Wednesday.
With 95 percent reporting Wednesday afternoon, 54 percent of
voters were in favor of upholding the law that will go into
effect next July. It allows Massachusetts residents who
cannot provide proof of lawful presence in the U.S. to
obtain a standard driver's license or learner's permit, if
they meet all other qualifications.
"The passage of this law made history, and voters in
Massachusetts have just made it again," said 32BJ SEIU
Executive Vice-President Roxana Rivera and Brazilian Worker
Center Executive Director Lenita Reason, co-chairs of the
Yes On 4 for Safer Roads campaign. "Our Commonwealth will
now have safer roads, and our immigrant families will safely
be able to drive to work, drop their kids off at school, and
go to medical appointments. We built a strong and diverse
coalition that fought back against division and drove
Massachusetts forward."
Question 4 came about as a grassroots effort of those
opposed to the law to repeal it via this fall's ballot after
the law was passed over a gubernatorial veto. The "yes" vote
now allows the law to proceed to full implementation
starting on July 1 next year.
"Massachusetts voters have reaffirmed our Commonwealth as a
welcoming place that defends dignity and equity for all by
voting Yes on 4," said Carol Rose, executive director of the
ACLU of Massachusetts. "Tonight, we sent a message to the
entire country: At a time when fundamental freedoms are
being threatened nationally, we absolutely must preserve the
protections we have secured at the state level."
Though voters did not have to wait until Wednesday to hear
the results of Question 2, which will add new regulations on
dental insurer spending, supporter Joseph Casale still
reported being "ecstatic" on Wednesday afternoon.
The Yes on 2 campaign released a press release around 11
p.m. Tuesday claiming a "decisive, landmark victory" for the
initiative, which requires companies to spend at least 83
percent of premiums on member dental expenses and quality
improvements, instead of administrative expenses. Supporters
said throughout the campaign that it would implement a
medical loss ratio system similar to the one currently in
place for medical insurers.
"Together, we put patients first over profits," Meredith
Bailey, president of the Massachusetts Dental Society, said
in a statement Tuesday night. "Dental patients deserve the
same consumer protections as medical patients, and we are
hopeful that the better dental benefits that the people of
Massachusetts will soon experience will spread to patients
across the country."
The question's passage makes Massachusetts the first state
in the country to impose a minimum spending requirement on
dental insurance companies, said Dr. Mouhab Rizkallah,
author of Question 2 speaking on behalf of the "yes"
campaign, Wednesday.
"By adopting Question 2, Massachusetts voters have started a
national revolution dubbed 'The Boston Teeth Party,'"
Rizkallah said. "The Question 2 victory will now ricochet to
every state in the country, and hundreds of millions of
patients will have Massachusetts voters to thank for their
improved oral health."
The campaign against the initiative, the Committee to
Protect Access to Quality Dental Care, said they were
disappointed.
"While we are disappointed with the outcome of the election,
we are committed to working with regulators, lawmakers and
other stakeholders to protect families and businesses from
the potential consequences of this ballot question that
could lead to higher costs and less access to dental care,"
the committee released in a statement.
The AP called Question 3 relating to liquor licenses
Wednesday morning around 9:45 a.m. with 55 percent of voters
seeking to keep the law as is, the only ballot question that
didn't pass this year.
The question would have doubled the combined number of
licenses supermarkets and convenience stores could hold,
gradually raising the license threshold from nine to 12
licenses in 2023, to 15 in 2027 and eventually to 18 by
2031.
It also could have required retailers to accept customers'
out-of-state identification to purchase alcohol and
prevented its sale at self-checkout stations.
The coalition in support of the ballot question released a
statement Tuesday night that said Question 3 was an attempt
at a compromise between "well financed corporate chains" and
locally owned package stores, markets and convenience
stores.
"Question 3 was a grassroots effort led by locally owned
stores across the state," said Rob Mellion, executive
director of the Massachusetts Package Stores Association.
"Now all efforts by MassPack and locally owned stores must
again be directed to defense against unrepentant corporate
interests and their surrogate trade associations as a flood
of deregulatory legislation can be anticipated in the
2023-2024 legislative session."
Mellion added that the group of locally owned stores would
"prevail and regroup."
The Boston
Globe
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
Even in progressive Massachusetts, it was a toss-up on
whether to tax the rich
The tight margin on Question 1 reflects Massachusetts’
long-held reluctance to hike taxes, despite its progressive
reputation.
By Shirley Leung
After a years-long bitter fight over the economic future of
Massachusetts, both sides of the income tax ballot question
finally agreed on one thing: This contest would be too close
to call on Election Night.
Turns out both sides got it right: The Associated Press
didn’t call the race until early Wednesday afternoon. The
narrow result reflects how the Massachusetts electorate
remains deeply divided on whether to raise taxes on the
wealthy – or perhaps anyone. Five other attempts to change
the state constitution to allow for a graduated income tax
failed spectacularly.
And who can forget, Massachusetts is the place that once
famously started a revolution rather than pay more in taxes.
Polls, as recently as three weeks ago, had indicated that
this time might be different. Question 1 proposes an
additional four percent tax on annual incomes over $1
million, with the proceeds to fund education and
transportation. It was expected to win with modest support
tallying in the mid to high 50 percent range. The result was
much closer, with the Yes side winning with 52 percent of
the vote.
In other words, even in our progressive state, it’s
basically a toss up on whether to tax the rich.
That’s no surprise to Jen Benson, president of the Alliance
for Business Leadership, the only business group to support
Question 1. Previously, Benson served as a state
representative and was among those lawmakers who voted to
put the measure on the ballot. She said this one confounded
voters.
“Both campaigns have worked really hard at putting out
information, or misinformation depending on your point of
view,” she said. “A lot of people didn’t understand or still
had questions when they went to the polls. It’s a good
example of why it’s so difficult for complicated policy to
be decided at the polls.”
I can attest to that based on the flood of e-mails from
readers each time I wrote about the so-called millionaires
tax. Both campaigns blitzed voters with slick TV ads in what
turned out to be the most expensive state-wide race this
season. For those keeping score at home, supporters raised
about $28.5 million, largely from teachers unions, while
opponents brought in about $14.7 million from a handful of
flush donors, according to state campaign filings.
The “yes” side assured people only the rich would pay more,
while the “no” side warned that homeowners and small
business owners would get hit when they sell their homes and
businesses. Opponents also fed into the public’s mistrust of
the Legislature and whether the money would be spent
appropriately.
In the final days of the campaigns, both sides predicted the
vote would be tighter than what public polling had revealed.
Consider this: Who wants to admit they are against taxing
millionaires even it means more funding for schools and
fixing the MBTA?
“Sometimes they’re embarrassed,” said Benson. “On a question
like this, where it’s about your own personal finances
versus the greater good, people might feel like it’s hard to
admit how they’re going to vote in a poll.”
Voters in Greater Boston’s urban core, where the measure won
by a landslide played a pivotal role. Boston carried the
measure with 107,804 votes, or 65 percent, while Cambridge
delivered 24,241 votes, a whopping 75 percent approval. And
in Somerville, 79 percent approved the surtax, adding
another 20,956 votes to the yes margin.
Roughly 90,000 votes separate the winning side from the
losing.
Question 1 also found support in gateway cities such as
Chelsea, Brockton, Malden, and Worcester, while many towns
in Southeastern and Central Massachusetts voted against, as
did the South Shore and some of Boston’s wealthier suburbs,
including Wellesley and Weston.
“W towns were a no, kind of parochially,” observed Scott
Ferson, a Democratic strategist.
Ferson pointed out that Question 1 passing, even by a slim
margin, would represent a significant victory for the
progressive wing of the state.
“We haven’t passed a tax increase for so long that the fact
that it looks like it’s going to win is kind of remarkable,”
he said.
On Tuesday night both sides settled in for what was expected
to be a long evening, though by midnight they began packing
it in, largely because the hotels were about to kick them
out of their rented ballrooms.
The “no” coalition had gathered at the Westin Copley with a
few dozen small business owners, donors, and campaign
staffers cycling in and out of a staid affair with an open
bar and carving station. I was hoping to run into some of
the bigwig supporters who ponied up at least $1 million, but
no such luck hobnobbing with Patriots owner Bob Kraft, New
Balance chairman Jim Davis, or Suffolk Construction boss
John Fish.
No cranberry farmer either, but I didn’t expect Leo Cakounes,
the star of the opposition’s TV ads, to ever talk to the
media again after my colleague Yvonne Abraham finished with
him.
A few blocks away at the Colonnade, the “yes” side filled a
ballroom along with supporters of Question 4, a measure to
keep a law that would allow people without legal immigration
status to obtain a driver’s license. (That proposal also
passed narrowly.)
It was a much more raucous atmosphere, filled with teachers,
union supporters and politicians including state senators
Lydia Edwards and Adam Gomez, and Massachusetts Teachers
Association president Max Page. Salsa dancing, lots of
selfies, and even a cameo from Senator Elizabeth Warren, who
was mobbed like a rock star by dozens of attendees.
“We don’t know yet for sure how it all comes out,” Warren
said. “A lot of places around this country would back off
from a fight like this. They don’t take on those who have
money, they don’t take on people who have power already in
the system. But not here in Massachusetts.”
Even here, though, that fight was a pretty close call.
— Shirley Leung is a
Business columnist.
CommonWealth
Magazine
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
Healey elected first female, gay Massachusetts governor
Democrats take control of all constitutional offices in
historic election
By Shira Schoenberg
Maura Healey shattered a glass ceiling on Tuesday in a
landslide, becoming the first woman ever elected governor in
Massachusetts. She topped a Democratic ticket that elected
three new women to statewide office, including the first
Black woman to hold a statewide position, and extend
Democratic control to every single constitutional office.
Healey, who had a nearly 2-to-1 lead over former Republican
state rep Geoff Diehl as of midnight, is also poised to
become the first openly lesbian governor in the country,
possibly joined by Democrat Tina Kotek, if she wins her race
in Oregon. Salem Mayor Kim Driscoll will be Healey’s
lieutenant governor. “Tonight I want to say something to
every little girl and every young LGBTQ person out there,”
Healey said, speaking at a Massachusetts Democratic Party
victory event at the Fairmont Copley Plaza Hotel in Boston.
“I hope tonight shows you that you can be whatever, whoever
you want to be.” Healey, wearing a white pantsuit, an outfit
that has come to symbolize women’s rights, got a sustained
ovation from the packed crowd upon declaring that she will
be the first woman and first gay person ever elected
Massachusetts governor.
Driscoll opened her remarks by exclaiming that Massachusetts
made “her-story.” “This evening is 242 years in the making,”
Driscoll said, referring to the year Massachusetts adopted
its state constitution. “Today Massachusetts voters stood
proud and spoke with one powerful clear voice and said it’s
her time.”
Healey had positioned herself during the campaign as someone
willing to work across party lines, similar to outgoing
Republican Gov. Charlie Baker. In her victory speech, Healey
again pledged bipartisanship.
“To those who voted for me and to those who didn’t, I want
you to know I’ll be a governor for everyone. And I’ll work
with anyone who’s up for making a difference in this state,”
Healey said. Healey said she and Driscoll will meet
Wednesday with Baker and Lt. Gov. Karyn Polito to begin
discussing the transition. “Tomorrow we will model the kind
of leadership and collaboration and, yes, the respect we
want to see elsewhere,” Healey said.
Healey’s centrist message in the race, during which she
often gave credit to the Baker administration for its
handling of state government, contrasted sharply with the
campaign run by Diehl, a supporter of former president
Donald Trump, who ran hard to the right and never made a
serious play for the huge swath of Massachusetts voters who
fall in the political middle. In the end, the race was
something of a layup for former Harvard basketball point
guard, who also coasted to the Democratic nomination after
all her rivals dropped out.
Former Boston city councilor Andrea Campbell defeated
Republican Jay McMahon in her quest to replace Healey as
attorney general, becoming the first Black woman to win
statewide office in Massachusetts. Having Campbell, a Black
woman, in the state’s top legal position is likely to carry
significant resonance at a time when racial disparities in
policing and the criminal justice system are getting
increasing attention.
State Sen. Diana DiZoglio, a Democrat from Methuen, defeated
Republican Anthony Amore in the race for auditor. Amore was
the only Republican statewide candidate endorsed by Baker,
but he was running only slightly ahead of Diehl.
Incumbent Secretary of the Commonwealth Bill Galvin defeated
Republican challenger Rayla Campbell to win a historic
eighth term in office, making him the longest-tenured
secretary in Massachusetts.
Incumbent state treasurer Deborah Goldberg, a Democrat,
easily defeated libertarian challenger Cristina Crawford to
retain her position.
Since 2015, women have held four of the constitutional
offices, but this will be the first time women have held
five of the six top posts, including the governor’s office.
All of the women elected have worked their way up in
politics over the years, serving in municipal, legislative,
or state offices.
“It may seem like this is a sudden wave of women leaders,
this unprecedented number of incredibly powerful women
leaders,” said Boston Mayor Michelle Wu at the Democrats’
election night celebration. “But those who we’re celebrating
tonight have been at this for a very long time.”
Healey ran for office for the first time in 2014, when she
was elected attorney general. Before that, she worked as
head of the attorney general’s civil rights division, as a
private practice attorney, a Middlesex County prosecutor –
and was a professional basketball player in Europe.
During her campaign, Healey rarely played up the historic
nature of her candidacy, focusing instead primarily on
policy issues, like climate change, housing, abortion
rights, education, and others. But asked last Thursday about
the possibility of becoming the first female governor,
Healey said she thinks it is significant and “long overdue.”
“I’m proud of the entire ticket and what it represents
because at the end of the day we’re going to have better
laws and policies when those in office, just like those in
boardrooms, reflect the diversity of the populations that
they serve or work on behalf of,” Healey said.
Healey said it is also important because of the model it
sets for the next generation. “With the opportunity to elect
women, it will also mean something for a lot of little girls
out there who can see themselves maybe someday as governor
or secretary of state or attorney general, and that’s
important because you don’t want anyone to be limited by
their race or their ethnicity or their gender, for example,
when it comes to things like getting elected,” Healey said.
Galvin, who defeated a Republican woman, said Monday that he
thinks people are aware of the significance of electing
women to office, but it is positive that it was not seen as
a bigger deal during the race. “It’s less about that, it’s
more about policy,” Galvin said.
One reason electing female leaders is significant, experts
say, is because it will erode stereotypes and encourage the
next generation of women to run.
“Voters have entrenched stereotypes of what a governor looks
like,” said Amanda Hunter, executive director of the Barbara
Lee Family Foundation, a nonpartisan organization that
researches women in politics. “Having women elected at the
highest levels in Massachusetts will break down stereotypes
and hopefully erode the ‘imagination barrier’ for good.”
Hunter said that is particularly significant in a state like
Massachusetts that has existed for hundreds of years with
leadership positions dominated by men. Organization founder
Barbara Lee often refers to Massachusetts as the “original
old boys club.”
Erin O’Brien, an associate professor of political science at
the University of Massachusetts Boston who has written about
women in Massachusetts politics, said women also legislate
differently. While both women and men are focused on
reelection and constituent services, women often ask
different questions and prioritize different policy issues,
she said. For example, O’Brien recalled Wu posting on
Twitter when an MBTA station was not accessible to
strollers. “We might expect [Healey] to prioritize women’s
interests in ways that previous governors probably would
have voted similar to her, but she’ll make sure legislation
gets to the top of her desk,” O’Brien said.
CommonWealth
Magazine
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
Election winners and losers
By Michael Jonas | CommonWealth executive editor
What else did we learn from Tuesday’s election about the big
winners and losers?
SMASHING THE CEILING
Women were big winners in Massachusetts, as Healey led a
statewide Democratic ticket to victory that will result in
five of the state’s six constitutional offices being held by
women. Joining Healey will be Lt. Gov. Kim Driscoll, Andrea
Campbell, who was elected attorney general, and Diana
DiZoglio, who won the race for state auditor. State
treasurer Deb Goldberg was reelected to a third term.
MAGA LOSS
Trump Republicans were big losers in this election.
Republican gubernatorial candidate Geoff Diehl, who had been
a leader in President Donald Trump’s Massachusetts campaign,
lost in a landslide. Vocally pro-Trump Bristol County
Sheriff Tom Hodgson lost his seat after 25 years. And in
nearby New Hampshire, Trump-backed Senate candidate Don
Bolduc failed to unseat Democratic US Sen. Maggie Hassan,
while former Trump White House aide Karoline Leavitt lost
her race for US House to incumbent Democrat Chris Pappas.
Nationally, results for Trump-backed candidates were mixed,
but far from the “red wave” some had predicted. J.D. Vance
won the Ohio Senate seat and Herschel Walker appeared poised
to force a runoff for US Senate in Georgia, but Republican
Mehmet Oz lost in the hotly contested Pennsylvania US Senate
race to John Fetterman.
If it was a bad night in Massachusetts for the Trump brand
of Republican politics, it wasn’t any better for Charlie
Baker’s more moderate version of GOP politics. The only
statewide candidate he endorsed, Anthony Amore, lost
decisively in the race for the open state auditor’s seat. He
barely outpaced Trump-aligned Diehl, suggesting Baker’s
endorsement – and hundreds of thousands of dollars in
spending on the race from a super PAC linked to the outgoing
governor – did little to move the needle. Baker also
endorsed Republican state Rep. Shawn Dooley, who was
defeated for state Senate by incumbent Democrat Becca Rausch
in the most closely watched legislative race of the night.
SPLIT VERDICT ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM
It was a mixed night for criminal justice reformers in
Massachusetts.
In a major victory for liberal-minded voters, Democratic
Attleboro mayor and former state representative Paul Heroux
unseated Republican Bristol County Sheriff Tom Hodgson, who
has held the office since May 1997. Hodgson has long been
criticized for his harsh treatment of inmates, and he has
also been a staunchly pro-Trump politician, even expressing
willingness to send inmates to help build a border wall with
Mexico.
Heroux pledged to create a modern, professional jail system
with focus on rehabilitation and programming for inmates,
and on preparing people to successfully return to the
community. With 79 percent of precincts reporting Wednesday
morning, Heroux led by just one percentage point, but
Hodgson conceded defeat.
Democrats also succeeded in flipping control of the Cape and
Islands District Attorney’s office after longtime Republican
DA Michael Keefe declined to run for reelection. Democrat
Robert Galibois, who stuck to a more moderate message than
liberal reform candidates for DA in Massachusetts and
nationally, beat Republican Dan Higgins.
Yet in Plymouth County, Democratic reformer Rahsaan Hall, a
former civil rights lawyer focused on racial justice issues
who worked for the American Civil Liberties Union and
Lawyers for Civil Rights, fell far short in his bid to
unseat Republican District Attorney Timothy Cruz. Cruz has
been DA since 2001. With 80 percent of precincts reporting
Wednesday morning, Cruz had 65 percent of the vote.
DC DELEGATION WINS – BUT COULD FACE BIG LOSS
It was a good – and probably bad – night for the state’s
all-Democratic House delegation in Washington. All eight
representatives cruised to reelection victories, but if
forecasts hold up and Republicans retake the House – even if
by a much narrower margin than many had predicted – they
will all be stripped of the power they held in the
Democratic-run chamber. The higher they ranked, the harder
the fall, which means Katherine Clark could lose her status
as assistant speaker, the fourth highest-ranking post in the
House. A Republican takeover would also mean Richard Neal
loses his chairmanship of the powerful Ways and Means
Committee and Jim McGovern gets bounced from his post
chairing the Rules Committee.
BALLOTING BALLAST
Despite nationwide concerns over election fraud, especially
by Republican followers of former President Trump, the
election in Massachusetts seemed to go relatively smoothly.
Unlike during September’s primary, there were no reports of
ballots locked in an unopenable safe. As of mid-day, Lawyers
for Civil Rights reported a few minor issues coming through
its election hotline - broken voting machines in Boston and
New Bedford, reports of officials asking for identification
in New Braintree and Boston, election protection volunteers
being asked to leave polling sites, and some confusion about
whether people who requested but did not return mail-in
ballots could vote in person.
State House News
Service
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
Campbell, DiZoglio Cap Off Statewide Sweep for Dems
Five of Six Constitutional Officers Will Be Women In 2023
By Colin A. Young
No Republican has held the offices of attorney general,
auditor, secretary of state or treasurer in Massachusetts
this century, and the GOP's drought will continue for at
least another four years as Democrats swept the
Massachusetts Constitutional offices in Tuesday's elections.
Voters granted new four-year terms, beginning in January, to
incumbents Secretary of State William Galvin and Treasurer
Deborah Goldberg. They also elected Andrea Campbell to
succeed Gov.-elect Maura Healey as attorney general and
Diana DiZoglio to succeed Suzanne Bump as auditor.
The most recent Republican to hold one of the four statewide
Constitutional offices outside the governor's suite was Joe
Malone, who ran the state Treasury until early 1999. And
with Healey and Kim Driscoll's election as governor and
lieutenant governor, Republicans will be shut out of
statewide offices in Massachusetts after holding the corner
office for the last eight years.
Attorney General
Former Boston City Council president Andrea Campbell won the
contest to take over for Governor-elect Maura Healey in the
attorney general's office and will be the first Black woman
attorney general in state history. Her victory makes her the
first Black woman has been elected statewide in
Massachusetts.
The Boston Democrat defeated second-time Republican nominee
Jay McMahon, a Bourne attorney who has a background in law
enforcement and pledged to end the "wokeness" of the
attorney general's office. With 40 percent of ballots
counted around 11:30 p.m., Campbell had 63 percent of the
vote to McMahon's 37 percent. Driscoll declared victory for
Campbell around 9:30 p.m. Tuesday night, and Campbell took
the stage to celebrate her win about an hour later.
Elliot Richardson was the last Republican attorney general
in Massachusetts, serving until 1969.
Campbell, a former deputy legal counsel under Gov. Deval
Patrick, ran for mayor of Boston in 2021 and turned her
sights to the attorney general's office hoping to make the
position what she called "an advocate for fundamental change
and progress." Her family's story -- her mother's death in a
car crash, her father and brother cycling in and out of the
prison system, and her twin brother's death 10 years ago in
Department of Correction custody -- featured prominently in
her campaign.
"I jumped into the race recognizing that families all across
Massachusetts are struggling and they're worried about
whether or not they're going to thrive and prosper coming
out of COVID," Campbell said Tuesday. "At the same time, I
recognize that families are frustrated with government and
don't necessarily see government as a solution to their
daily struggles. But what I know to be true is that we live
in the best state in the nation and I know it because I've
lived it."
While Campbell won Tuesday, she probably will not directly
succeed Maura Healey as the state's top law enforcement
official.
Instead, Campbell is likely to assume the reins of the
attorney general's office from Kate Cook, the first
assistant attorney general expected to run the office on an
interim basis between the time when Healey resigns to become
governor and when the other new Constitutional officers are
sworn in later in January.
Secretary of State
Democrat William Galvin easily won his eighth, and
potentially final, four-year term as the secretary of state,
setting him up to surpass former Secretary Frederic Cook's
record 28-year tenure in the secretary's office. Cook held
that office during the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s, and was the
last Republican secretary of state in Massachusetts.
Galvin told the Boston Globe in August that a victory
Tuesday would mean "quite likely, I will not run again."
En route to another four-year term, the Brighton Democrat
defeated Rayla Campbell, a Whitman Republican whose campaign
largely revolved around government mandates and the
sexualization of children. Galvin pitched himself to voters
as a reliable and effective elections administrator who now
holds a senior position among elections officials
nationally. Driscoll also declared victory for Galvin just
after 9:30 p.m. Tuesday and he had 68 percent of the counted
votes as of 11:30 p.m.
Campbell joins Anthony Amore, David D'Arcangelo, William
Campbell, Jack E. Robinson III, Dale Jenkins Jr. and Arthur
Chase as Republicans who came up short against Galvin.
A statewide post, the secretary of state's office oversees a
broad suite of functions, ranging from elections and voting
to corporations and securities, public records, lobbyists,
the decennial census, and historical commission and state
archives.
Auditor
The race for state auditor was the closest contest on the
statewide ballot Tuesday and was the only one in which other
Democrats did not declare victory at their party bash in
Boston. Instead, Driscoll said that DiZoglio would
"hopefully" be the state's next auditor.
But around 11:15 p.m., Republican Anthony Amore said he had
conceded to DiZoglio and "wished her nothing but the best in
her new role." With 39 percent of votes counted at about
11:30 p.m., the Democrat DiZoglio was leading Amore 55.5
percent to 37.3 percent.
DiZoglio, a second-term senator from Methuen who served
three terms in the House before winning election to the
Senate in 2018, was the only sitting legislator to win their
statewide primary race this election cycle. She has long
been a vocal advocate for restricting the use of
non-disclosure agreements on Beacon Hill and has clashed
with Democratic leadership about how much time lawmakers
receive to review legislation.
Amore is the head of security at the Isabella Stewart
Gardner Museum in Boston and was the party's 2018 nominee
for secretary of state. The Winchester Republican is a rare
candidate to have the official endorsement of outgoing Gov.
Charlie Baker and he pitched himself as a Republican check
on the Democratic Party's supermajorities in both branches
of the Legislature and among Constitutional offices.
The last Republican auditor was Russell Wood, who served one
term in the office from 1939 until 1941. Democrat Suzanne
Bump, who did not seek reelection this year, has held the
office since 2011.
Treasurer
Treasurer Deborah Goldberg, a Brookline Democrat, sailed to
a third term in office on Tuesday without any serious
challenge in the Democratic primary or general election. The
only other candidate who appeared on the ballot was Sherborn
Libertarian Cristina Crawford.
In her new term, Goldberg will become the longest-serving
state treasurer since Robert Crane, who served more than a
quarter-century in the post from the mid-1960s to the early
1990s.
Goldberg passed up a race for an open Congressional seat in
2020 because she said there was more that she wanted to
accomplish as treasurer. Her reelection announcement cited
the work her office has done to help families create college
savings accounts for new children and to pressure
corporations as an investor through the state pension fund
to become cleaner energy consumers.
State House News
Service
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
House to Have More Democrats Than Any Session Since 2009
GOP Poised to Lose Three or Four Legislative Seats
By Chris Lisinski
The already-massive supermajority Democrats wield in the
Massachusetts Legislature is guaranteed to get larger next
session.
With one race still too close to call Wednesday afternoon,
Democrats had already claimed victory or been declared
winners in 132 of 160 House districts. That's three more
seats than they secured last cycle, and with the Senate
maintaining its existing 37-3 breakdown, Democrats are
assured of a net legislative pickup of at least three and
perhaps four seats as they head toward trifecta control on
Beacon Hill.
Republicans so far won 26 seats in the House, four fewer
than they held at the start of the 2021-2022 term, and Rep.
Susannah Whipps of Athol secured reelection to keep one
district independent.
By Wednesday afternoon, 39 of the 40 Senate races had been
called by the Associated Press, and Democrat Rep. Jake
Oliveira of Ludlow claimed victory in the only other one.
Democrats cruised to victory in all five open Senate races,
with Oliveira, fellow Reps. Liz Miranda of Boston and Paul
Mark of Becket, and newcomers Robyn Kennedy of Worcester and
Pavel Payano of Lawrence set to join the chamber in January.
All three Senate Republicans -- Minority Leader Bruce Tarr
of Gloucester, Patrick O'Connor of Weymouth and Ryan Fattman
of Sutton -- secured reelection Tuesday, when every single
incumbent in either chamber who sought another term emerged
victorious.
The final unresolved House race could break in either
direction as the final votes get tallied.
In the First Middlesex District, which Republican Rep.
Sheila Harrington of Groton held until she resigned to join
the judiciary, Townsend Republican Andrew Shepherd led
Pepperell Democrat Margaret Scarsdale by only a few dozen
votes with an undetermined amount of mail-in ballots yet to
be counted, according to a source.
If Shepherd closes out a victory, it would leave the final
balance at a three-seat loss for Republicans compared to the
start of the last term; a Scarscale comeback would push the
shift to four seats.
The outcome is on track to surpass what top Massachusetts
Democrats forecast in the days leading up to Tuesday's
election, and it reflects another string of losses for
Republicans who will not only see their minority ranks in
the House shrink but will also hand the corner office to
Democrat Gov.-elect Maura Healey after eight years under
Republican Gov. Charlie Baker.
Baker, who opted against seeking a third term and has
repeatedly clashed with MassGOP leadership who are seeking
to pull the party further to the right in an embrace of
former President Donald Trump, did not say much Wednesday
when asked to reflect on the significance of Republican
losses.
"The voters spoke, it's what elections are for," Baker said
after meeting with Healey to discuss the gubernatorial
transition.
Pressed on what the outcomes up and down the ballot mean for
the MassGOP and his future connections to the state party,
he replied, "She's still the attorney general, I'm still the
governor. I've got a job I got to do for the next 58 days or
so, and then we can talk about that stuff."
"Elections are about the people on the tickets. And as I
said in my remarks, I think the governor-elect and the
lieutenant governor-elect both ran a very strong campaign
and the voters have spoken," Baker added about Healey and
her Democrat running mate, Lt. Gov.-elect Kim Driscoll.
With Tuesday's wins, Democrats have now expanded their House
supermajority in each of the past three elections. And
regardless of the outcome in the lone unresolved district,
the incoming class will reflect the most House Democrats at
the start of a two-year term since the 2009-2010 session,
when they outnumbered Republicans 144 to 16.
To cross into guaranteed-pickup territory, Democrats rode
widespread success in open seats, including at least two
flips of districts last held by Republicans. Newburyport
business research publisher Dawne Shand won in a North Shore
district vacated when Republican Rep. Jim Kelcourse resigned
to join the Parole Board, and Dennis Select Board member
Chris Flanagan topped the race for the seat Republican Rep.
Tim Whelan gave up to launch an unsuccessful bid for
Barnstable County sheriff.
Wrentham Republican Marcus Vaughn squeaked out a narrow win
in the Ninth Norfolk District, keeping GOP control of the
seat Rep. Shawn Dooley gave up to challenge for the Senate.
The AP tally listed Vaughn leading 51 percent to 49 percent
with more than 95 percent of the vote counted, and Democrat
Kevin Kalkut conceded the race late Wednesday morning. While
he claimed victory, Vaughn praised Kalkut for "extraordinary
tenacity and conviction throughout this process."
"Though we have differing opinions on policy issues, I
recognize in him the kinship of activism. Kevin holds strong
convictions and is willing to fight for them, to put his
name on the ballot and work to earn votes. That is not easy,
and it takes a special person to commit to the task in the
way he did," Vaughn said in a statement. "As we embarked on
this journey nine months ago, [my wife] Kaitlin and I knew
that this was going to be an extremely tough race and feat.
I am completely honored and humbled by this experience and
very much look forward to following through on my commitment
to you, the people of 9th Norfolk by focusing on your
wallet, your family and your future."
Republican Rep. Leonard Mirra of Georgetown also won
narrowly, fending off a challenge from Hamilton Democrat
Kristin Kassner. Mirra said in an Election Night tweet that
preliminary results listed him up by 83 votes with all
precincts reporting.
"It's been an honor to represent you & your families, and
I'm excited to get back to work," he wrote.
Also on track to earn reelection by tight margins were
Republican Rep. David DeCoste of Norwell and Democrat Rep.
Natalie Higgins of Leominster, though neither race had been
formally called as of Wednesday afternoon.
Democrats secured a clean sweep of all five incumbent-free
House districts newly drawn in the latest round of
redistricting, which will send Rita Mendes of Brockton,
Judith Garcia of Chelsea, Estela Reyes of Lawrence, Kate
Donaghue of Westborough and Priscila Sousa of Framingham to
Beacon Hill. (Of that group, only Donaghue and Garcia had
opponents in Tuesday's election.)
Insiders had a close eye on the race for a redrawn Senate
district stretching from Needham down to the Rhode Island
border. Democrat Sen. Becca Rausch turned heads when she
toppled sitting Republican Sen. Richard Ross in 2018, and
she faced a tough challenge this year from Dooley, who had
Baker's backing.
The final margin turned out to be not all that close. With
more than 95 percent of votes counted, the AP tally reported
that Rausch secured 55 percent to Dooley's 45 percent to
notch a comfortable win.
"We talked to thousands of voters in each and every town
about the issues that matter most -- abortion access and
reproductive equity, the economy, health care, education,
and climate action. We engaged hundreds of new volunteers --
especially young people -- throughout this district and
beyond who got involved because they believe in fighting for
the future of our Commonwealth," Rausch said in her victory
speech. "Most importantly, we ran a campaign that was rooted
in shared values and focused on making our communities
stronger and people's lives better, fairer, more equitable,
and hopefully less expensive. We ran a race that centered
integrity, decency, and truth."
U.S. Sen. Ed Markey on Tuesday praised a quintet of Democrat
newcomers who won elections to state legislative seats. He
touted Representative-elect Shirley Arriaga as the first
woman and first Latina to represent the Eighth Hampden
District, Payano as the first Dominican-American in the
state Senate, Mendes and Sousa as the Legislature's first
Brazilian-American women, and Garcia as the Legislature's
first Honduran-American.
"Meeting them, I was inspired. They are optimistic about
what they can accomplish, about the opportunities they plan
to create for their new constituents," Markey said,
according to a transcript of his remarks provided by his
office. "These are not the leaders of tomorrow, they are the
leaders of today."
The Massachusetts Caucus of Women Legislators said Wednesday
it expects to welcome "several new members" and see its
ranks swell to "upwards of 60 members" in January,
reflecting about 30 percent of the Legislature.
State House News
Service
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
Rausch Outlasts Dooley, GOP Loses North Shore & Cape House
Seats
Democrat Supermajority Grows in Early Counting
By Chris Lisinski
Democrats on Tuesday flipped at least two state House
districts last held by Republicans, an early sign of
downballot success on a night when the party powered to
victory in statewide races but results were slow to trickle
in elsewhere.
Newburyport business research publisher Dawne Shand claimed
victory over the Republican candidate, Northeast Auto
Auction general manager C.J. Fitzwater, in the race for the
First Essex House District.
"I am so humbled to be your next State Representative and I
am ready to get to work to deliver on the issues that matter
most," Shand tweeted shortly after 9 p.m. Tuesday night.
Former Republican Rep. Jim Kelcourse of Amesbury held the
seat for four terms before he resigned in June to become a
member of the state Parole Board.
Down on the Cape, Republican candidate Tracy Post of
Yarmouth conceded to Dennis Democrat Chris Flanagan in the
race for the open First Barnstable district, according to
WCAI.
That district is today held by Republican Rep. Tim Whelan,
who was locked in a close race for Barnstable County sheriff
as Tuesday night wore on.
Several other races remained undecided Tuesday night,
leaving it unclear whether Shand and Flanagan's win would
propel Democrats to expand their already enormous
supermajority on Beacon Hill or counterbalance Republican
pickups elsewhere.
In what one Democrat insider called "probably the most
competitive race statewide," incumbent Sen. Becca Rausch of
Needham said she fended off a challenge from Republican Rep.
Shawn Dooley in a district that has historically bounced
back and forth between the two parties.
Rausch, who flipped the district in 2018 by ousting veteran
Republican Sen. Richard Ross, told the News Service she was
victorious. The district was reshaped by last year's
redistricting exercise.
Only about 40 percent of the vote had been reported by 11:40
p.m., but Rausch told the News Service that she claimed
victory.
"This campaign was hard-fought," Rausch told supporters
Tuesday, according to a copy of her remarks she provided.
"We were up against opponents who did not believe in truth
or decency. Opponents who used every dirty tactic in the
book against us."
"As I reflect on the remarkable benchmarks we hit during
this campaign, I can't help but think back to 2018 and the
people who said that we were never going to win this seat.
Even some of our endorsers were not sure we could do it,"
Rausch later added. "This year, again, people doubted us,
and once again, we proved them wrong. Once again, we proved
the power of grassroots grit and determination, grounded in
shared core beliefs of justice, fairness, and equity."
At least 21 winners of House races and five winners of
Senate races in Tuesday's general elections will be
newcomers to the Legislature, most of whom emerged
victorious in contests for open seats with no incumbent on
the ballot.
Through the first few hours of vote-counting, Democrats
declared victory or drew congratulations for their wins in
at least six of those 26 open districts.
U.S. Air Force veteran and Chicopee High School teacher
Shirley Arriaga kept an open western Massachusetts district
part of the Democratic caucus, topping independent candidate
Sean Goonan in a race to succeed 16-term Rep. Joseph Wagner.
Arriaga thanked her supporters on Twitter, writing "We have
won and we're onto the State House in Boston!!"
Other Democrat winners for open seats include Chelsea City
Councilor Judith Garcia, who topped Chelsea Republican Todd
Taylor. Garcia said she will be the "first woman or Latina
in this position, and the first Central American elected to
the MA Legislature."
"I have spent the last 7 years fighting for Chelsea on the
City Council, and I am more than ready to advocate for
Chelsea and Everett on Beacon Hill," she wrote in a
statement. "Thank you for trusting me with that
responsibility. I won't let you down."
Robyn Kennedy, a Worcester Democrat and longtime Beacon Hill
aide, also said she won her race for a Senate seat to
succeed Sen. Harriette Chandler.
Two of the victors in open seats are not exactly first-time
state lawmakers: Rep. Paul Mark of Becket won the state's
westernmost Senate seat, and Rep. Jake Oliveira of Ludlow
won a Senate seat slightly further toward the east.
Among successful Republicans on Tuesday was Rep. Marc
Lombardo, who marked victory to secure a seventh term with
perhaps the most colorful celebration of the night. Lombardo
tweeted a photo of himself, sprawled comfortably on a couch
against a bright-red wall answering an old-fashioned rotary
phone and wearing a T-shirt bearing the message "Just a kid
from Billerica."
"#Billerica, we got the call," he wrote. "Big victory for
Team Lombardo. Thank you!"
Tuesday's election will restore both chambers of the
Legislature to full strength.
Seven different House districts sit vacant after
representatives resigned partway through their two-year
terms to take new jobs, leaving more than 300,000
Massachusetts residents -- more than the population of
Worcester, the state's second-largest city -- without any
political representation in that chamber.
House legislative leaders decided not to call special
elections to fill those seats, citing the complexity of
hosting contests for the existing district lines just a few
months before voters would head to the polls in the first
cycle featuring newly redrawn districts.
The Senate is also down one member after Pittsfield Sen.
Adam Hinds, who opted for an unsuccessful lieutenant
governor bid instead of seeking another term, resigned in
September to take over as leader of the Edward M. Kennedy
Institute for the U.S. Senate.
CommonWealth
Magazine
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
One-party rule returns to Beacon Hill
Will the Democratic ‘trifecta’ bring harmony or infighting?
By Michael Jonas | Executive Editor
For decades it has served as a winning argument for electing
Republican governors in deep-blue Massachusetts: A
Republican in the corner office is a sensible check on the
impulses of the Democratic-dominated Legislature.
In January, however, that equation will be scrambled for
only the second time in 32 years, with Democratic attorney
general Maura Healey poised to take the reins as governor
alongside a Legislature where Democrats wield power with
overwhelming supermajorities.
On paper, that should make for harmony-filled days on Beacon
Hill. But it hasn’t always worked that way, as one-party
rule can also bring new challenges and potential for
internecine conflict.
Deval Patrick’s two terms as governor, from 2007 to 2014,
mark the only time Democrats have controlled both branches
of government since Michael Dukakis left office more than
three decades ago, at the start of 1991.
“Generally, when you have the same party in power in the
executive and legislative branch, there certainly is broader
philosophical cohesion, but from our experience, each branch
takes its role seriously and is proprietary about that,”
said Tim Murray, who served as lieutenant governor under
Patrick, a Beacon Hill outsider who had his share of
conflicts with lawmakers.
While there may be greater philosophical cohesion when the
governor and legislative majority come from the same party,
it can make it harder to establish who takes the lead in
putting forward legislative priorities. That has led to no
small amount of Beacon Hill chatter over the years of mostly
divided government that Democratic leaders of the House and
Senate actually like that arrangement.
“The conventional wisdom for decades has been that
Democratic legislators have better relations with Republican
governors, because politically they’re in charge in a way
that isn’t true when a Democratic governor is in office and
in charge,” said Jim Aloisi, a longtime player in Democratic
politics who served as transportation secretary under
Patrick.
Lou DiNatale, a veteran Democratic strategist and pollster,
said a Democratic governor may have an expectation that
Democratic legislative leaders will take cues from them.
Under a Republican governor, DiNatale said, “If I‘m Speaker
or Senate president, he’s got to negotiate with me every
goddamn day. If it’s a Democratic governor, they come to me
with something I have to do every day. The governor gets to
tell me I need to whip the Democrats into line and pass
these three important things that I know are going to cause
me problems in my caucus.”
One-party rule combined with lopsided margins in the
Legislature can also cause more tension within the House and
Senate because legislation proposed or supported by the
governor doesn’t need a veto-proof supermajority, setting
the stage for potential division among Democrats in each
chamber.
Senate President Karen Spilka said Democrats don’t always
see eye to eye on every issue, but she dismissed the idea
that Democratic lawmakers work better with Republican
governors. “I am excited to see a Democrat back in charge of
the governor’s office in Massachusetts,” Spilka said. “I’ve
known and worked with the governor-elect for a long time. We
are aligned with each other on a lot of our values. I know
from past experience that Maura Healey is a good partner in
communicating and getting things done.”
Good relationships and collaboration, say Beacon Hill
veterans, are often more important than agreement on every
policy detail.
It’s a lesson Dukakis says he learned the hard way. The only
person to ever serve three four-year terms as governor in
Massachusetts, Dukakis said in his first term he was a much
better talker than listener when it came to dealing with the
Democratic-led Legislature.
“I kind of woke up to that fact after getting my head handed
to me,” he said of the crushing Democratic primary defeat he
suffered in 1978 when seeking reelection after his first
term in office.
Dukakis came back to win the governor’s office four years
later and was then easily reelected to a third term. In
those two later terms, he said, “every time we came up with
a new policy, we created working groups,” which included
lawmakers, to flesh out the ideas. “I became a better
consensus builder,” he said, “and we managed to get a hell
of a lot done.”
“My hope is that Maura and company will do a good job of
building relationships with the Legislature and getting
things done,” Dukakis said of Healey.
Although she won office as attorney general eight years ago
against the insiders’ favored candidate, Healey is now “a
known commodity” with established relationships on Beacon
Hill, said Aloisi, which he said bodes well for her tenure.
The mindset of many lawmakers, he said, is “you have to
quote-unquote ‘pay your dues.’ That’s a short way of saying,
are you one of us?”
Patrick, a former Justice Department official in Washington
who had never run for office before, was very definitely not
one of them when he arrived on Beacon Hill after winning the
governor’s office in 2006 as a crusading, progressive
outsider.
He bumped heads with then-Senate President Robert Travaglini
a month before even taking office. In December of 2006,
Travaglini told a meeting of a business group that he had
criticized Patrick in a private conversation they had for
vowing to cut hundreds of millions of dollars in waste from
state government, something Travaglini felt was an insult to
the Legislature. He said Patrick backed away from the idea
in their conversation.
Travaglini, the Globe reported, told the business group he
told Patrick they would get along well if the new governor
collaborated with the Senate. “If not,” Travaglini said,
according to one attendee who spoke with the paper, “I have
senators across the state who share my vision and my
approach, and if forced to choose, I’m comfortable with whom
they’ll choose.”
Murray, Patrick’s lieutenant governor, said the uneasy
encounter was “like a hazing,” to show the incoming
administration “how this thing works.”
Patrick notched more than a few accomplishments together
with the Legislature, including a $1 billion life sciences
initiative, major transportation restructuring, and several
big energy and environmental measures. But he never seemed
to find his groove in cultivating relationships, in many
ways the lifeblood of Beacon Hill. That boiled over when
Patrick introduced a sweeping tax package in his 2013 State
of the Commonwealth speech without giving legislative
leaders any heads-up on the proposal, a slight that helped
doom the plan. Lawmakers slashed back the package by more
than two-thirds.
Sometimes, however, conflict emerges over straightforward
differences on issues, despite the shared party affiliation.
“The Democratic Party does not suffer from groupthink,
whatever else you think of it,” said Jesse Mermell, who
served as Patrick’s communications director in his second
term.
When the administration proposed a transportation package at
one point that included a 19-cent increase in the gas tax,
the cold shoulder from lawmakers was not a consequence of
being kept out of the loop as the plan was developed. “We
kept them pretty well briefed,” said Aloisi. “They just
didn’t like it.”
John McDonough, who served in the House during the end of
the Dukakis reign and the first years of Republican Bill
Weld’s administration, said the unique challenges that come
from one-party rule are real, but so are the opportunities
it creates. “In terms of the actual policymaking, I think on
the big things there’ll be more consistency than not, and
the differences will be less consequential,” said McDonough,
now a professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public
Health. “But disagreements and conflict are the nature of
the work.”
Mariano, who was an early supporter of Healey, endorsing her
in March, two months after she announced her candidacy, said
he’s eager to collaborate with the new governor. “I was
proud to support governor-elect Healey’s historic campaign,
as I know she is committed to building a better
Massachusetts for everyone,” the Speaker said in a
statement. “I look forward to working with the
Healey-Driscoll administration on addressing the most
pressing issues facing the Commonwealth.”
Though Healey and legislative leaders have said they want to
take up tax relief in the new session that begins in
January, exactly where else their agendas will align or part
is unclear. Healey, who faced no opposition in the
Democratic primary and little competition in the general
election, largely steered clear of specifics in the
campaign.
“The question always becomes, what’s the governor’s agenda?”
said DiNatale. “What are you going to do, what are you going
to ask the Legislature to pass? This is when the rubber
meets the road.”
Those questions, said McDonough, remain unanswered. “The
campaign, in terms of discussion of issues, has been a
complete nothing-burger,” he said. “There’s just nothing to
chew on.”
“In a few months, I’ll be able to give you a better answer,”
she said. “But I’m excited about the energy that I believe
Maura and Kim bring to the jobs for the Commonwealth, and
the ability we’ve had to work together in the past.”
CommonWealth
Magazine
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
Split-personality state GOP didn’t fare well
Party finds two wings are not better than one
By Bruce Mohl
The split personality of the Republican Party in
Massachusetts didn’t fare well in this year’s election,
losing a handful of additional offices and continuing its
slide to near-total irrelevance.
Republicans lost two seats they previously held in the
House, held on to their seats in the Senate, and watched as
the district attorney’s office for the Cape and Islands and
the sheriff jobs in Barnstable and Bristol counties shifted
to Democratic control.
Gov. Charlie Baker, who represents the moderate wing of the
Republican Party, decided not to run for a third term, which
opened the door for Maura Healey and Kim Driscoll to move in
to the corner office.
More importantly, however, Baker’s absence from the ballot
created an identity crisis for state Republicans, whose
state party apparatus steered hard to the right as its
moderate leader prepared to exit the political stage.
Jim Lyons, the chair of the Massachusetts Republican Party,
believed that conservatives needed to stand by their
principles no matter what it cost them at the polls. He
learned the hard way on Tuesday that Massachusetts voters
were not going where his Trump-loving Republican Party was
going.
“Thank you to our candidates, our campaign volunteers, our
donors, and our staff,” he said in a tweet. “We fought
together for Life, Liberty, and the American Dream. We gave
it our all, but Massachusetts voters sadly decided to go in
a different direction.”
Baker tried to turn back the tide, both personally through
scattered endorsements and also through his fundraising for
the Massachusetts Majority super PAC, which tends to support
centrist Democrats and Republicans. But his efforts had
mixed success.
The Massachusetts Majority super PAC spent nearly $1.7
million in the runup to the general election on behalf of 38
candidates – 30 Republicans, six Democrats, one Independent,
and one Unenrolled. Twenty-four of the candidates, including
all six Democrats, won their races and 13 of the candidates
lost. One race was too close to call.
The super PAC supported many of the Republican incumbents in
the Legislature who were facing challenges, and most of them
managed to hang on to their jobs.
A handful of Republicans running for open seats appeared to
eke out narrow victories. Republican Andrew Shepherd of
Lunenberg was leading Democrat Margaret Scarsdale of
Pepperell by 34 votes in the race for a House seat
previously held by a Republican. Republican Marcus Vaughn of
Wrentham edged out Democrat Kevin Kalkut of Norfolk by 428
votes. And incumbent Republican Rep. Leonard Mirra of
Georgetown edged out Democrat Kristen Kassner of Hamilton by
84 votes, while Republican Rep. David DeCoste of Norwell
scored a narrow victory over Democrat Emmanuel Dockter of
Hanover.
The bulk of the super PAC’s money went to support Republican
candidates in a handful of high-profile races – Anthony
Amore running against Sen. Diana DiZoglio for state auditor;
Bristol County Sheriff Thomas Hodgson, facing a challenge
from Attleboro Mayor Paul Heroux; and three Senate
candidates – Rep. Shawn Dooley of Wrentham, William Johnson
of Granby, and Edward Dombroski Jr.of Wakefield – running
against incumbents or battling for an open seat.
All of those candidates lost, even though the super PAC
money helped make the races competitive financially.
The problem, at least in some instances, was former
president Donald Trump, who is not regarded favorably by
most Massachusetts voters. Dooley and Amore tried to align
themselves with Baker’s moderate style of politics, but they
had difficulty explaining away their past support for Trump.
One of the losing candidates, Hodgson, never backed away
from Trump.
Gus Bickford, the chair of the Massachusetts Democratic
Party, said he was puzzled by the Baker-affiliated super
PAC’s support for Hodgson, which he said created confusion
among voters who are fans of Baker. Speaking as if he was
addressing Baker directly, Bickford said: “He’s not your
brand. He stands for everything you’re against.”
Baker didn’t want to talk about the future of the state
Republican Party on Wednesday. At a press conference with
Healey and Driscoll to discuss the transition, Baker said he
would put off any discussion of the party until after his
term ends in January. But he did suggest money and support
can only do so much for candidates.
“Elections are about the people on the ticket,” he said.
“The voters have spoken.”
The Louisville (KY) Courier
Journal
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
How the Kentucky GOP expanded its supermajorities in the
state legislature
By Joe Sonka
Republicans in Frankfort have wielded a dominant
supermajority in both chambers of the Kentucky General
Assembly over the past two years — which will now grow even
stronger after flipping more Democratic seats in Tuesday's
election.
Currently holding a 75 to 25 seat supermajority in the
House, Republicans knocked off five Democratic incumbents in
the general election this week, giving them 80 of the 100
seats when they return for the 2023 regular session in
January.
In the Senate, Republicans flipped one seat held by a
retiring Democratic incumbent, with the party not fielding a
candidate in the race. Currently holding 30 of the 38 seats
in the Senate, the GOP supermajority in the chamber will
grow to 31 in January.
Democrats did have some success in races across the state,
including the defeat of two GOP-backed constitutional
amendments, while Republican-supported candidates in two
Kentucky Supreme Court races and the Franklin Circuit Court
race were also defeated.
However, Republican dominance in the legislature will only
grow over the next two years. The party has a supermajority
that could easily dispel any vetoes from Democratic Gov.
Andy Beshear with a majority vote override — as well as
ignore the governor's policy wish list.
Democrats will now have no representatives or senators from
Kentucky's Central time zone, along with just two members
from rural Kentucky and three from outside of Jefferson and
Fayette counties.
As for their legislative victories Tuesday, Republican Party
of Kentucky spokesman Sean Southard issued a statement
touting their "unprecedented effort this year to put
Democrats on the defense with messages focused on inflation
and crime" — and signaling optimism that they will defeat
Beshear in his reelection bid next year, tying him to
President Joe Biden.
"Kentucky voters overwhelmingly sided with Republicans in
rejecting the Biden agenda," Southard stated. "There is no
difference between a Kentucky Democrat and a Biden Democrat.
We will capitalize upon this momentum in 2023 when we make
Andy Beshear, Biden’s biggest Kentucky cheerleader, a one
term Governor.”
Among the five Democratic House incumbents to lose Tuesday
was Rep. Angie Hatton of Whitesburg, who is the minority
whip for the party in that chamber.
Hatton was defeated by Republican challenger Jacob Justice
in the race for District 94, which was made more difficult
by Republican redistricting by including areas that former
President Donald Trump had won by an overwhelming 62
percentage points in 2020.
Justice won with 57% of the votes, though Democrats were
able to hold onto their last remaining rural seat in
District 95 of Eastern Kentucky, where Rep. Ashley Tackett
Laferty defeated Republican challenger Brandon Spencer by a
60% to 40% margin.
Tackett Laferty's wins comes despite Trump winning the
district by 51 percentage points in 2020, and Spencer's
campaign using the coded anti-Biden slogan "Let's Go
Brandon!"
Democrats also lost their last remaining legislative seat in
the Central time zone, as Rep. Patti Minter, D-Bowling
Green, lost to Republican Kevin Jackson by 9 percentage
points.
In Northern Kentucky, Rep. Buddy Wheatley, D-Covington, lost
a close race to Republican attorney Stephanie Dietz, who won
by less than 300 votes.
The districts of Minter and Wheatley were heavily
redistricted to areas more hospital to Republicans, where
Trump had won by a few points.
Rep. Rachel Roberts, D-Newport, also faced a redistricting
challenge in Northern Kentucky, but won with 56% of the vote
over Republican Jerry Gearding. Unlike the other GOP
challengers who won, Gearding did not receive support from
the Republican Party or Kentuckians for Strong Leadership, a
PAC that spent well more than $500,000 on House races.
GOP challengers also knocked off two Democratic House
incumbents in southwest Louisville districts that have
trended Republican in recent years.
Rep. Charles Miller, an 11-term incumbent in District 28,
was defeated by Republican challenger Jared Bauman, who won
56% of the vote, while Rep. Jeff Donohue, a four-term
incumbent in District 37, lost to Republican Emily Callaway
by a slightly larger margin.
The two Democratic incumbents were greatly outspent in their
races, with the RPK and Republican PAC hitting Miller and
Donohue with ads highlighting increased violent crime rates
in Louisville. Both also faced an uphill climb in new
districts where former Trump won by double digits in 2020.
Republicans also flipped an open seat in Louisville's
District 31 seat, with Republican Susan Tyler Witten
knocking off Democrat Sue Foster by 4 percentage points.
Republicans came an eyelash away from knocking off another
Democratic incumbent in Lexington, as Rep. Cherlynn
Stevenson hung on to defeat Republican challenger Jim
Coleman by just 35 votes in District 88.
Stevenson win came despite her south Lexington district
being dramatically altered by Republicans to include much of
the northern outskirts of Fayette County and part of Scott
County, with Trump winning the area by 5 points in 2020.
Democrat Lamin Swann also flipped a GOP-held open seat in
District 93 of south Fayette County, winning with 54% over
Republican Kyle Whalen.
In a statement from House Democratic leadership — including
Hatton, Rep. Derrick Graham and Rep. Joni Jenkins, who did
not run for reelection — they said their poor results
Tuesday would not stop their caucus "from continuing to
fight for laws and budgets that benefit families, strengthen
public education, improve our collective health and promote
justice and fairness for all."
The Democratic leaders went on to state that the hurdles
their candidates faced on the GOP nationalization of races,
flood of "dark" money ads against them and "gerrymandered"
redistricting was "beyond their control." |
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes
only. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Citizens for Limited Taxation ▪
PO Box 1147 ▪ Marblehead, MA 01945
▪ (781) 639-9709
BACK TO CLT
HOMEPAGE
|
