A scorecard tells a story. So what story does our 2018 scorecard of the Senate tell? : A guide to the 2018 Scorecard (View Spreadsheet here, website here) -- All numbers refer to the spreadsheet.

The #MeToo movement underscored the myriad ways that power imbalances and a toxic culture increase the likelihood of sexual harassment and assault, across industries and across states. According to the 2010 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey data for Massachusetts, nearly 1 in 2 women and 1 in 4 men in Massachusetts have ever experienced sexual violence victimization other than rape. Nearly 1 in 3 women and 1 in 5 men in MA have experienced rape, and more than 1 in 7 women have experienced rape.

The Massachusetts Legislature has the opportunity to take action this session by promoting healthy relationships and protecting the rights of those who seek to speak out. But time is short.

A guide to the Mid-session Scorecard (View Spreadsheet here, website here) -- All numbers refer to the spreadsheet.

The 190th legislative did not have a very auspicious start. Both House and Senate fast-tracked a bill to give pay increases to the Senate President, Speaker of the House, judges, the governor, and other constitutional officers; raise stipends to appointed committee chairs and select other legislative leaders; and increase the number of legislators eligible for stipends (1s). Here at Progressive Mass, we understand that it is important that elected officials be paid well for the work that they do (especially so that they don’t seek more lucrative work that leads to a host of conflicts of interest), but the bill reflected the endemic problems of Beacon Hill. It lacked any semblance of deliberative, democratic process, and its ultimate effect was to centralize power further in Leadership, creating a more hierarchical and less democratic Legislature. It also left out woefully underpaid staffers from the pay increase---and the countless workers across the Commonwealth facing stagnant and sub-livable wages. In short, we deserve better from our Legislature.

IT'S BEEN A YEAR, this 2017. And as a community, we have risen to its challenges. But, it's not enough to fight back: we must lead a progressive path forward. While we fight, we must also create and nurture the infrastructure to be stronger the next round (there will always be a next round).

Progressive Mass started as a group of organizers--old hands and many, many newbies--who saw how much valuable time and energy was wasted rediscovering wheels and reduplicating work, over and over. Our conclusion: progressives lacked an infrastructure to support grassroots organizing and activism--and an umbrella organization to produce and share resources, research, plans, infrastructures, coordination, tools. It's not flashy, but it's important. 

And so, 

• If you believe that local neighborhood teams, regular people, are driving big changes, and that this power, when coordinated and focused, is stronger together...

• If you've found valuable any of these--the scorecards, the drill-down analyses (eg, this), the legislation tracking, the calls to action at critical junctures, the endorsements and candidate questions, the tweets, the information, the resources, the convenings and conference calls, the connecting and the camaraderie...

• If you're tired of Top Down political parties that barely fuss around the edges and think we need a people-powered revolution in politics....

If a platform is adopted and no legislators are there to enact, it, did it make a sound?

Yesterday, the Massachusetts Democratic Party adopted a new platform. Back in March and April, Progressive Mass worked with Our Revolution Massachusetts and the Progressive Democrats of America - MA on a list of recommendations to make the platform more progressive.

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

| top |

Slim Pickings...

Scoring the House can be a tricky endeavor given paucity of votes compared to the Senate. Amendments or bills that might split the Democratic caucus are less likely to get a hearing, let alone a recorded vote. This was especially the case in the second half of the 189th session.

Because of this reluctance, the House had fewer accomplishments than the Senate.

It did not, like the Senate, advance legislation to combat wage theft, guarantee paid family and medical leave, protect families from abusive debt collectors, divert youth with low-level offenses from going deeper into the criminal justice system, or set 2030 and 2040 climate benchmarks--to name a few.

| top |

...Limited Gains

However, the session was not without accomplishments

The Fair Share amendment, or “millionaire’s tax,” passed its first constitutional convention.

Massachusetts played catch-up to other states by modernizing our public records laws, and furthered good government principles by improving campaign finance laws.

The House also showed how we can continue to be a beacon to other states by passing legislation protecting the rights of trans individuals (and beating back amendments to weaken it).

| top |

Speaker Says

The scores of the Democratic caucus ranged widely, from 30% (Colleen Garry) to 100% (Jonathan Hecht).

Unlike in the Senate, where no Republican scored above any Democrat, Republicans James Kelcourse and David Vieira scored above Garry, with 35%.

Despite such a wide range, 40 Democrats, almost one-third of the caucus, had the same score (78%) as Speaker DeLeo, with 31 of them matching him vote-for-vote. This number would have been higher if not for occasional absences.

Two votes this session highlighted significant contrasts within the Democratic caucus.

1. 31 Democrats voted for an amendment to the trans equality bill that sought to sow confusion about the bill and promote damaging stereotypes by redundantly criminalizing acts of trespassing.
2. And 34 Democrats rightly voted against an amendment by Governor Baker to the bill updating Massachusetts’s IDs to be compliant with the federal REAL ID law. In its attempt to prohibit undocumented immigrants from obtaining state-issued IDs, the amendment created additional hurdles for documented immigrants to do so.

| top |

Looking Ahead: Politics of a Supermajority and a GOP Governor

Massachusetts can boast the third largest Democratic legislative supermajorities in the country (after Hawaii and Rhode Island). However, a supermajority is only valuable insofar as it is put to use.

In Washington, the conservative agenda of slashing taxes, safety nets, public interest regulations, and civil rights is about to be unleashed. Given the sharp regress to come, it is time for Massachusetts legislators to step up their game.

With veto-proof majorities in both Houses, Massachusetts Democrats cannot point to Governor Baker for excuses about their failure to pass the bold legislation we need to make our Commonwealth work for all of its residents (and for future generations).

|  top |

Who's Being Served?

A major obstacle going into 2017 will continue to be the centralization of power into the Speaker’s office--a problem exacerbated in 2015 when House Democrats voted to abolish term limits for Speaker Robert DeLeo (see our scorecard vote #189.2h). The Speaker tightly controls the agenda; under current norms of leadership, the body of work of the MA House will only be as progressive as the Speakers wants it to be. Under Speaker DeLeo, most truly progressive legislative priorities do not even get out of committee, let alone come to a vote -- let alone a roll called (recorded) vote.

An important question progressives should consider is, who does their legislator see as his or her most important constituency -- voters or the Speaker? One of the aims of the scorecard is to help provide data for assessment and conversation.

| top |

Notes on Process

Methodology & Action: Absences are scored as votes against the progressive position: our elected officials are paid to represent us, and that demands showing up to vote. (There can, of course, be extenuating circumstances, which we can point out when brought to our attention). Present votes are scored the same way. We encourage every constituent with questions about absences -- or indeed, any vote -- to contact their legislators and directly inquire about their records. Scorecards, as we have articulated elsewhere, are imperfect instruments, but legislators’ votes (or non-presence for votes) are the best material available from which to assess an elected’s record. A call and conversation can be very illuminating about the priorities and decision-making of your representative.

Vote Selection: Although the public records reform bill that was passed marks an improvement on the status quo, it was watered down enough to achieve unanimity, leaving much work still to do. Scoring the vote would be of little utility to holding legislators accountable---for that, we need to continue to be vigilant and to push for bolder and better reforms.

The 189th Final Progressive Mass Scorecard is here--with a new interface! scorecard.progressivemass.com

Please cite with attribution: Progressive Massachusetts Scorecard, 189th House, “Notes and Observations,” http://progressivemass.com/scorecard

1 | Snapshot of the House of Representatives

2 | Composition of the House: Dem Supermajority

3 | Follow the Leadership

4 | Who's Voting How?

5 | Progressive Legislation Being Put Off

| top |

Snapshot of the House of Representatives

Halfway through the 2015-2016 session, and before a series of important budget votes, we’re sharing our ongoing scorecard.

There are a few interesting things to note, particularly in the House of Representatives. (Our analysis on the Senate appears here).

 | top |

Partisan Composition of the House: Dem Supermajority

The House has 125 Democrats and 35 Republicans. There are 46 members in the Progressive Caucus; they are all Democrats.

• Democrats are 78% majority of the House
• Republicans are 22% of House membership
• The Progressive Caucus members (as reported at the beginning of 189th session) represent

• 29% of the entire membership

• 37% of all the Democrats

 | top |

Follow the Leadership

Massachusetts legislative districts have great diversity, politically. But, every session, the vast majority of legislators have a voting record that is virtually (and sometimes, absolutely) identical to Speaker DeLeo’s.

Many reading this will already know that the Speaker’s position is quite powerful. But when legislators coming from districts as diverse as Amherst (very liberal) and Hingham (more conservative), and yet still have the exact same voting record -- are the voters’ interests being best served?

| top |

Who’s Voting How?

• In 2015, 74 Democrats (60% of all Democrats in the House) received the same score on our scorecard as Speaker DeLeo’s 67% (click here to review [PDF] those legislators).
• Of the Progressive Caucus (click here to review [PDF] the Progressive Caucus scores), 24 members (52% of the Caucus) matched Speaker DeLeo’s 67%
• All 45 Republican members scored lower than the Speaker’s 67% on our scorecard (click here to review [PDF] the Republicans’ scores)
• [Updated to add: For your reference, here’s a PDF snapshot of the scorecard and all members, as of 2/9/2016. For all of these, please distribute/cite with attribution: Feb. 2016, ProgressiveMass.com/Scorecard]

 | top |

Progressive Legislation Being Put Off

With so many issues of critical importance in the Commonwealth, it is truly disappointing how little effort had been made to bring certain important legislative items to a vote in 2015. The biggest, most important -- or contentious -- issues are still pending as of writing.

Consider the Progressive Massachusetts legislative agenda, or the issues we hear about in every day in the news. On these important and sometimes controversial matters, the legislature has done very little so far. Bringing to the floor critical progressive policy can give strong Progressives the opportunity to distinguish themselves from their colleagues as progressive leaders. As more issues get a debate on the floor, and contentious issues such as charter schools, Paid Family Medical Leave and the Fair Share amendment are debated, along with their accompanying amendments, we hope that the the hard work of Progressive legislators will become more apparent.

| top |

Scorecards from 189th Legislative Session, House and Senate are finalized. Compare legislators’ last session records with your values and the district’s. See where there’s room for improvement or need for a thank you! 

Engaged democracy doesn’t end at the doorknock!

To win on our big issues--such as single-payer health care, a living wage, a stable climate, a robust public infrastructure, a healthy democracy, among many others--we know we must elect politicians who align with our values.

To get progressive champions elected, we’ve learned the mechanics of grassroots campaigning -- to knock on doors, host house parties, make phone calls, enter data from sign in sheets, cut lists, recruit volunteers, GOTV.

It feels like victory when our progressive candidates win -- but our work must not end there.

We also have to hold them accountable to the principles and goals we share.

And if they aren’t fighting for our progressive goals, we need to organize and mobilize again. As presidents like FDR and Obama have said, we need to make our elected officials do the things that are difficult.

Words and Actions

Legislators’ votes are an obvious means to assess how hard they are working for our big, urgent long-term goals. But “How did my State Legislator vote on these issues I care about?” is, in Massachusetts, not easy to find out. If we don’t know, how can we hold them accountable?

The new Trump administration is rolling back progressive achievements and pushing a reactionary, racist agenda at a breakneck pace. The moral urgency of our goals has never been more acute.

Progressive Massachusetts proudly announces our 2017-2018 Legislative Agenda for the 190th session of the Mass General Court.

The Moral Urgency of Now: Massachusetts Must Lead.

We are watching the federal government under President Donald Trump, with little braking from the Republican Congress, move us rapidly in a fascist direction that deeply contradicts Massachusetts values and liberties. Resistance is imperative.

What are the ways we can resist? Where can we effect the most dramatic changes, shape a progressive alternative and protect the most people vulnerable under this regime?

Our efforts on the national scene are important--but our impact, as liberals served by Democrats in a majority Republican Congress, is unfortunately, realistically, quite limited.

But, we can make Massachusetts a blue, progressive fortress against Trumpism. There is no excuse for not passing a vigorous progressive agenda in one of the bluest states in the country.

This past weekend gave a pretty clear visual of how much power we have when we organize together. And we all know that showing up to march was merely the first step of many.

The next is engaging with the political process -- via electoral, issue and legislative work -- as well as the work of community organizing-- building communities of trust, making outreach and strengthening our progressive infrastructure. We're committed to both. 

This week, we are releasing our 2017-18 Legislative Agenda, and we will be asking progressives to make some noise about how Massachusetts should become a leader again in bold progressive policy. 

The Opposite of Trump

We all want to DO something to stop the coming wave of Trump's -- and the traditional conservatives' -- cruel and incoherent policies on immigration, health care, women's bodies, education, and their accelerating privatization and corporate kleptocracy. 

While many emerging activist networks are urging outreach to Congress, we'd like to propose that, in Massachusetts, we'll get a lot more mileage fighting Trump -- and making real change, helping real people who are vulnerable -- BY focusing on Massachusetts: