Beacon Hill Rollcall

If you have any questions about this week's report, e-mail us at bob@beaconhillrollcall.com or call us at (617) 720-1562.

Beacon Hill Roll Call

Volume 50 -Report No. 18

April 28-May 2, 2025

Copyright © 2025 Beacon Hill Roll Call. All Rights Reserved.

By Bob Katzen

GET A FREE SUBSCRIPTION TO MASSTERLIST – Join more than 30,000 people, from movers and shakers to political junkies and interested citizens, who start their weekday morning with MASSterList—the popular newsletter that chronicles news and informed analysis about what’s going on up on Beacon Hill, in Massachusetts politics, policy, media and influence. The stories are drawn from major news organizations as well as specialized publications.

MASSterList will be e-mailed to you FREE every Monday through Saturday morning and will give you a leg up on what’s happening in the blood sport of Bay State politics. For more information and to get your free subscription, go to: www.massterlist.com

THE HOUSE AND SENATE: Beacon Hill Roll Call records local representatives' votes on roll calls from the week of April 28-May 2. There were no roll calls in the Senate last week.

All roll calls in the House were on matters relating to House passage of a $61.47 billion fiscal 2026 state budget.

A LOOK BEHIND THE SCENES OF THE "MAKING OF THE BUDGET"

Most of the decisions on which representatives' amendments are included or not included in the budget are made behind closed doors. Of the more than 1,650 budget amendments proposed last week, most of them were bundled into consolidated “mega” amendments. This year there were seven mega amendments and all were easily approved on roll call votes.

The system works as follows: Individual representatives file amendments on various topics. All members then pitch their amendments to Democratic leaders who draft consolidated amendments that include some of the individual representatives’ amendments while excluding others.

The categories of consolidated amendments include many subjects including programs relating to public safety, judiciary, energy, environmental affairs, housing, labor and economic development.

Supporters of the system say that any representative who sponsored an excluded amendment can bring it to the floor and ask for an up or down vote on the amendment itself. They say this system has worked well for many years.

Opponents say that most members do not bring their amendment to the floor for an up-or-down vote because that is not the way the game is played. It is an “expected tradition” that you accept the fate of your amendment as determined by Democratic leaders.

HOUSE APPROVES $61.47 BILLION FISCAL 2026 STATE BUDGET (H 4000)

House 151-6, approved and sent to the Senate a $61.47 billion fiscal 2026 state budget after three days of debate. The House version now goes to the Senate which will approve its own version. A House-Senate conference committee will eventually craft a compromise plan that will be presented to the House and Senate for consideration and then sent to Gov. Maura Healey.

“The House’s fiscal year 2026 budget makes key investments that better support Massachusetts students and families, that increase access to affordable health care and that provide for a safer and more reliable public transportation system – all without raising taxes,” said House Speaker Ron Mariano (D-Quincy). “In a moment of incredible uncertainty at the federal level, our budget is proof that government can be both fiscally responsible and an agent of good, the kind of government that our residents deserve.”

“This budget builds off the successes of the last few years by prioritizing our residents,” said Rep. Aaron Michlewitz (D-Boston), chair of the House Committee on Ways and Means. “Whether it is greater investments into programs like housing stability, public transportation or early education, these initiatives are a reflection of our shared values. By reinvesting in the people of the commonwealth, we will continue to make our economy more competitive and equitable for years to come.”

“The fiscal year 2026 budget is a bloated budget that is not attached to the reality of our fiscal situation, and there is a multitude of reasons I could not support it,” said Rep. Ken Sweezey (R-Hanson). “Although there are many good aspects relating to municipal funding that I was happy to see included, it does not go far enough in that realm and continues to poorly prioritize funds. With the fiscal uncertainty relative to the federal government, it is reckless to pretend that this budget should be business as usual and support a budget increase of 7 percent year-over-year and nearly 50 percent in just six years.”

"Beacon Hill has once again shown its commitment to secrecy over sound fiscal policy,” said Paul Craney, executive director of the Mass Fiscal Alliance. “The House tacked on $81 million in new spending over their original proposal. The last three days showed the House has no fiscal restraint. This was negotiated behind closed doors and rammed through massive, opaque consolidated amendments … At a time when the state is facing declining tax revenues, increased outmigration and deep structural budget challenges, lawmakers should be tightening the belt, not throwing more money into a budget crafted in the shadows.”

(A “Yes” vote is for the budget. A “No” vote is against it.)

Rep. Jeffrey Roy Yes

MUNICIPAL TAX AMNESTY (H 4000)

House 25-132, rejected an amendment that would authorize cities and towns to conduct a municipal tax amnesty program over a two-month period, as determined by the local legislative body, any time prior to June 30, 2027. It specifically authorizes communities to waive any or all penalties, fees, charges and accrued interest if the original overdue tax assessment is paid in full.

“This proposal would clear the way for the first municipal tax amnesty since 2003,” said amendment sponsor Rep. Brad Jones (R-North Reading). “I filed this as a flexible local option for cities and towns to generate additional revenues by giving residents an incentive to pay their overdue property and excise taxes. This amnesty program would not only help communities but also would benefit individuals who have outstanding tax liabilities so they can wipe the slate clean by settling their original debt.”

Rep. Adrian Madaro (D-East Boston) opposed the amendment and said there is uncertainty in the budget writing process that we're dealing with given the recent events in Washington, D.C. He said that the House drafted a budget taking into account current municipal collections in order to develop local aid and apportionments. He noted that adopting this measure right now may undermine those efforts and require the House to reassess how much local aid will be needed to ensure cities and towns have the resources they need again, at a time when we don't know what holes will need to be plugged at the federal level.

(A “Yes” vote is for the amendment. A “No” vote is against it.)

Rep. Jeffrey Roy No

ALLOW DETAINMENT BY IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT (H 4000)

House 25-131, rejected an amendment that would provide a mechanism for law enforcement and the courts to detain individuals for United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) if the person poses a direct threat to public safety. It would specifically allow for the detainment of individuals for possible immigration violations for up to 12 hours upon receipt of a written request and warrant from ICE.

“This amendment is an attempt to respond to the 2017 Commonwealth v. Lunn decision, in which the Supreme Judicial Court determined the authority to honor ICE detainer requests is not expressly permitted under current statutes,” said amendment sponsor Rep. Brad Jones (R-North Reading). “The amendment is a relatively modest proposal because the authorization is limited to ICE detainer requests for individuals who pose a serious threat to public safety for engaging in, or being suspected of engaging in, specific crimes such as terrorism or espionage, criminal street gang activity, sexual abuse or exploitation, human trafficking, unlawful firearm possession and drug distribution or trafficking.”

Rep. Daniel Cahill (D-Lynn) opposed the amendment and said there are criminal detainers issued by ICE and there are civil detainers. He noted that as a former prosecutor, he understands that when there's a criminal warrant for an ICE detainer from a defendant and they are in the custody of Massachusetts, there is a cooperation with ICE to ensure that upon release of that defendant, or sometimes while a case is pending, ICE is notified and they're allowed to come pick up that defendant. What we're talking about here would be for Massachusetts to cooperate with the federal government in civil detainers. The law says here in Massachusetts, we are not to detain someone a moment -- not 12 hours, not 12 seconds. When your case is concluded, you leave. What the federal government wants us to do is expend resources to hold people beyond that time. That's a constitutional problem.

(A “Yes” vote is for the amendment. A “No” vote is against it.)

Rep. Jeffrey Roy No

RIGHT TO SHELTER (H 4000)

House 27-129, rejected an amendment that would place further restrictions on the state’s right to shelter law by limiting participation in the commonwealth’s emergency housing assistance program to U.S. citizens who have resided in Massachusetts for at least six months.

“Over the last two years, the state’s emergency shelter system has been plagued by cost overruns, fueled by the migrant crisis, which has led to waiting lists for services,” said Rep. Brad Jones (R-North Reading). “This amendment would help restore the original intent of the right to shelter law by ensuring that Massachusetts residents in need have access to emergency shelter.”

Rep. Alice Peisch (D-Wellesley) opposed the amendment and said it would unfairly restrict eligibility for the emergency shelter program to citizens of the United States and make legal residents ineligible. She argued that it also raises constitutional questions around defined length of residency. She said that the state has put in a number of controls on this program and the number of people using it and seeking to use the program, is now down to 4,804 families.

.

(A “Yes” vote is for the amendment. A “No” vote is against it.)

Rep. Jeffrey Roy No

PUBLIC SAFETY GRANT FUNDING (H 4000)

House 28-128, rejected an amendment that would prohibit any city or town’s eligibility for public safety related grant funding from being contingent upon that municipality’s compliance with the MBTA Communities Act.

The MBTA Communities Act, according to the state’s website, requires that an MBTA community “must have at least one zoning district of reasonable size in which multi-family housing is permitted as of right and meets other criteria” including minimum gross density of 15 units per acre; and a location not more than 1/2 mile from a commuter rail station, subway station, ferry terminal or bus station. No age restrictions can be applied and the district must be suitable for families with children.

“Earlier this year, the Healey Administration changed the rules for the Firefighter Safety Equipment Grant program by denying grants to communities that are not in compliance with the MBTA Communities zoning law,” said amendment sponsor Rep. Brad Jones (R-North Reading). “Although the huge public outcry that followed led the governor to reverse course and restore this grant funding, it is important that we add language to the zoning law to ensure that this does not happen again. Tying public safety grant funding to compliance with the MBTA Communities Act is simply unacceptable, as it not only jeopardizes the public, but also the police, firefighters and other first responders who work to keep our communities safe.”

Rep. Richard Haggerty (D-Woburn) opposed the amendment and said it is not needed because the Healey Administration showed its flexibility and announced that these grants are no longer at risk for noncompliant communities.

(A “Yes” vote is for the amendment. A “No” vote is against it.)

Rep. Jeffrey Roy No

REQUIRE ID TO VOTE (H 4000)

House 25-131, rejected an amendment that would require voters to present a valid form of identification, such as a driver’s license or passport, when voting. It also directs the Secretary of State’s office to develop a program to make a Massachusetts photo identification card available free of charge for voting purposes.

“Establishing a voter ID requirement would help poll workers verify that an individual is properly registered to vote in Massachusetts,” said Rep. Brad Jones (R-North Reading). “This amendment would also allow individuals who do not have an ID to secure one free of charge through a new program that would be run through the Secretary of State’s office, which oversees elections.”

Rep. Daniel Hunt (D-Dorchester) opposed the amendment and said that in states that already require this, it's often used as a tool, not a rule, and it's used to disenfranchise voters. He noted that the Elections Law Committee has not yet held hearings on several bills that are being considered relative to voter ID and urged members not to rush this amendment through the House but rather wait until the committee holds a public hearing on the bills.

(A “Yes” vote is for the amendment. A “No” vote is against it.)

Rep. Jeffrey Roy No

ALSO UP ON BEACON HILL

WHEELCHAIR REPAIRS (H 1278) – The Financial Services Committee held a hearing on a bill that would mandate a ten-business day deadline for the completion of motorized wheelchair repairs, with a couple of exceptions.

"The bill … models a law recently passed in Connecticut,” said sponsor Rep. Jim O’Day (D-West Boylston). “This proposal requires the repair of a motorized wheelchair to be completed within ten days, differing from a bill filed in the Senate that aims to extend warranty provisions. While I believe the House bill is easier to understand for both consumers and providers, both approaches seek to target the same issue – a consolidated market for repairs that leaves persons with disabilities and wheelchair users stranded and without options. At the end of the day, the goal is to expand consumer protection and dramatically improve life for Massachusetts residents who use wheelchairs."

HEALTH INSURANCE PLAN TRANSPARENCY (S 685) – Another measure heard by the Financial Services Committee would require health insurance plans that are regulated by the state to include the following statement on plan members’ identification cards: “This health plan is fully-insured, subject to all Massachusetts insurance laws.”

Supporters said that this simple requirement would make it much easier for patients to understand what rights they have and what treatments are covered under their health plans. They noted that roughly half of Massachusetts residents with employer-based health insurance are in “fully-insured” plans regulated under Massachusetts law, while the other half are in “self-funded” plans that are federally regulated. They noted that the distinction is important, because fully insured plans are subject to state mandates guaranteeing access to treatment for more than a dozen medical conditions and for mental health conditions generally; and self-funded plans are not subject to these mandates.

.

"I filed [the bill] to make it easier for patients, providers and advocates to understand what rights and coverage apply to a given health insurance plan,” said sponsor Sen. Cindy Creem (D-Newton). “Right now, it’s often unclear whether a plan is subject to Massachusetts law - which can mean the difference between getting essential health services covered or not. This bill would add a simple line to insurance cards to clarify that distinction, following the lead of at least a dozen other states, including Connecticut and New York."

CONSUMER PROTECTION AND PROFESSIONAL LICENSURE COMMITTEE HEARING – The Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure held a hearing on several pieces of legislation including:

AUTOMATIC RENEWAL OF PROFESIONAL LICENSES (S 275) - Would automatically renew professional licensures as opposed to requiring the license holder to submit an online application or wait on a renewal to be approved by a licensure board.

Supporters said that this would be beneficial in more prompt renewal times for licenses, creating a more streamlined process that takes the burden off those who issue licenses and those who hold them.

“I believe that this system of automatic renewal for those who must hold a professional licensure in Massachusetts will create an easier process for all involved in this system,” said sponsor Sen. Patrick O’Connor (R-Weymouth). “Automatic renewal would save the time and effort on the end of those who need their license renewed promptly and it may have not been a top priority among a demanding work schedule. Automated systems would keep errors at a minimum while ensuring renewal information is complete and consistent.”

WAIVE SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER REQUIREMENT (H 451) - Would standardize what forms of identification can be used by applicants when applying for occupational licenses from the Division of Occupational Licensure and the Department of Public Health. The measure would allow individuals to submit a Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) or another form of verified identification in place of a social security number.

“Currently, there is no uniform policy across state licensing boards,” said sponsor Rep. Francisco Paulino (D-Methuen). “Some, like the Board of Registration in Nursing, already allow applicants to use a TIN. This means a qualified applicant can become a Registered Nurse but may be barred from becoming a Certified Nurse Assistant because the Certified Nurse Assistant Board does not accept a TIN. The inconsistency creates unnecessary barriers, particularly for tax-paying immigrants and others who are legally authorized to work or who are otherwise contributing members of our workforce.”

“This reform is especially urgent in industries facing significant labor shortages, including healthcare, construction and other trades,” continued Paulino. “Allowing more qualified individuals to obtain licensure helps meet workforce demands and strengthens the state’s economy. By passing [the bill], Massachusetts would promote fairness, workforce inclusion and consistency, ensuring that professional opportunity is determined by skill and qualification—not paperwork inconsistencies between different state boards.”

GAS STOVE WARNING (H464) - Would prohibit anyone from selling a gas stove that is produced or manufactured after January 1, 2026, without a warning label affixed to the stove. The warning label would read as follows:

“Warning: Gas stoves can release nitrogen dioxide and carbon monoxide inside homes at levels exceeding the Environmental Protection Agency’s standards for outdoor air quality. The presence of these pollutants may exacerbate pre-existing respiratory illnesses or lead to the development of asthma, especially in children. Gas stoves may also release other pollutants, including benzene and formaldehyde.”

“Gas stoves emit pollutants that can harm health -- irritating airways, and cause or exacerbate respiratory problems,” said sponsor Rep. Amy Sangiolo (D-Newton). “They burn natural gas which generates nitrogen dioxide which is known to have harmful health effects – irritating lungs and exacerbating or even causing respiratory conditions including asthma. Unburned natural gas contains benzene – a known carcinogen. Requiring warning labels is an efficient and effective way to ensure that consumers have the information they need to make an informed decision on their purchases.”

TOXIC CHEMICALS IN CHILDREN’S PRODUCTS (H 384) – Would ban toxic chemicals, known as PFAs, in children's products. The bill would require the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to establish a list of known toxic chemicals and require manufacturers and distributors to pay fees and submit biannual reports disclosing if these chemicals are in products they make or distribute for children under 12. After three years, the measure would ban the use of these chemicals in products for children three and under, children's personal care products and anything designed to be put in a child's mouth, such as a pacifier. The bill also allows DEP to restrict toxic chemicals from products for children 4-12 if scientific research shows a possible exposure risk. Safer alternatives must replace all toxic chemicals.

Supporters said the bill intends to reduce or reverse rising rates of noncommunicable illness that a strong body of scientific evidence links to early life exposure to toxic chemicals, including childhood and young adult cancers, neurodevelopmental diseases such as ADHD, autism, behavioral and learning challenges, reproductive disorders and asthma.

"We now know how damaging these forever chemicals are to humans, and especially vulnerable are children who cannot choose for themselves how to avoid unnecessary illnesses,” said sponsor Rep. Jim Hawkins (D-Attleboro). “It is our job and responsibility to protect them from harm and to use alternatives in the products we make and market to families. My office is grateful for the steadfast advocacy of organizations such as Clean Water Action, whose mission is to keep harmful PFAS out of children's products.”

QUOTABLE QUOTES

“Our annual Advocacy Day is an opportunity to highlight the incredible impact assisted living has on the lives of older adults across Massachusetts. By sharing personal stories and advocating for policies like the Frail Elder Waiver expansion, we can ensure that more individuals have access to the care, community and independence that assisted living provides.”

---Mass Assisted Living Association (ALA) CEO Brian Doherty hosting the group’s annual Advocacy Day on Beacon Hill.

.

“For hundreds of years, agricultural fairs have been a way for the public to understand the importance of farming and how a thriving agricultural sector benefits everyone. Long before grocery stores and supermarkets, farmers sold their products directly to consumers.”

---Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources Commissioner Ashley Randle announcing that the Healey Administration awarded over $2 million in grants to support agricultural fairs, farmers markets and programming to strengthen ‘Buy Local’ groups in Massachusetts.

“We are proud to see Massachusetts recognized as the best state for working moms in the country. Our greatest strength is our people. We are home to the best childcare programs and schools, the most innovative businesses and a strong paid family medical leave program. Our administration has made progress to expand the number of childcare seats, increase educator wages and stabilize childcare business.

---Gov. Maura Healey celebrating a recent national ranking of Massachusetts as the best state for working moms, beating out larger states like Florida and California and neighboring states like Connecticut, Rhode Island and New Hampshire.

"It was an honor to be part of today’s Healthy Youth Summit, standing alongside leaders who are committed to building safer, stronger communities. As a kid from Boston, I know firsthand the challenges young people face and how important it is to have people in your corner. Through the work of Boston Athletic Academy and events like this, I’m proud to help create opportunities for kids to build resilience, trust and confidence. Whether it’s on a team, in the classroom, or in life, every young person deserves a support system. I'm honored to represent the Red Sox and be part of the effort to set them up for success.”

--- Manny Delcarmen, former Boston Red Sox player, on the Healey Administration hosting the first-ever Healthy Youth Summit, a one-day conference aimed to equip local high school students with practical tools for healthy relationships with their peers, family members and the broader community.

HOW LONG WAS LAST WEEK’S SESSION?

Beacon Hill Roll Call tracks the length of time that the House and Senate were in session each week. Many legislators say that legislative sessions are only one aspect of the Legislature’s job and that a lot of important work is done outside of the House and Senate chambers. They note that their jobs also involve committee work, research, constituent work and other matters that are important to their districts. Critics say that the Legislature does not meet regularly or long enough to debate and vote in public view on the thousands of pieces of legislation that have been filed. They note that the infrequency and brief length of sessions are misguided and lead to irresponsible late-night sessions and a mad rush to act on dozens of bills in the days immediately preceding the end of an annual session.

During the week of April 28-May 2, the House met for a total of 25 hours and 11 minutes while the Senate met for a total of three hours and 47 minutes.

Mon. April 28 House 11:05 a.m. to 8:22 p.m.

Senate 11:19 a.m. to 1:59 p.m.

Tues. April 29 House 11:01 a.m. to 8:42 p.m.

No Senate session.

Wed. April 30 House 11:01 a.m. to 5:10 p.m.

No Senate session

Thurs. May 1 House 11:00 a.m. to 11:04 a.m.

Senate 11:10 a.m. to 12:17 p.m.

Fri. May 2 No House session

No Senate session

Bob Katzen welcomes feedback at bob@beaconhillrollcall.com

Bob founded Beacon Hill Roll Call in 1975 and was inducted into the New England Newspaper and Press Association (NENPA) Hall of Fame in 2019.