Jay Kaufman was elected to the Massachusetts House of Representatives in 1994 and represented the 15th Middlesex district for 24 years. He is on the steering committee of the bipartisan Coalition to Reform Our Legislature, and publishes on his “Uncertain Times” Substack site – jayrkaufman.substack.com

The Nov. 3 Massachusetts ballot includes nine statewide questions, tying the record for the most that voters have had to consider. I’ve been asked for my guidance, so here are my thoughts on the matters before us.

Question 1: Expanding the Public Records Law — This proposed law would eliminate the exemption from the state’s public records law that the Legislature and the governor’s office now enjoy. Massachusetts is one of only two states that exempt legislators and the governor from the public records law and, sadly, has a reputation as one of the least transparent and accountable of the 50 state governments. On its face, Question 1 is a good-government proposal. There are legitimate concerns that, because of the way it is drafted, privacy rights may be violated and the healthy give-and-take of lawmakers’ conversations may be constrained. These potential — and fixable — problems notwithstanding, I will be voting YES on 1, confident that the Legislature will be forced to address what the petition’s drafters got wrong. More critically, a “no” vote endorses the unacceptable status quo.

Question 2: Collective Bargaining for CPCS Employees — This initiative would allow employees of the Massachusetts Committee for Public Counsel Services to form a union. CPCS lawyers represent defendants who cannot afford to pay a lawyer, and they are notoriously overworked and underpaid. YES on 2 is a no-brainer.

Question 3: State Primary Elections — This controversial proposal would eliminate party primaries and put all candidates on one ballot regardless of party affiliation. The two candidates receiving the most votes would advance to the general election. At first, I was drawn to this as a way to disrupt the flailing two-party system. But because this top-two system is likely to favor the candidates who spend the most money, it would make the already obscene influence of money in politics (especially “dark” and “big” money) even worse. The people sponsoring this initiative originally backed ranked-choice voting (RCV), which I think is a great idea. They backed into “top two” when their polling showed RCV couldn’t win. I’d have been with them on RCV, but I will vote NO on 3.

Question 4: Election Day Registration — This proposed change in our laws would allow same-day voter registration with proof of residency. Twenty-one states currently allow it, and bills to bring Massachusetts in line have been filed every year for decades, only to die from legislative inaction. It’s time for us voters to do the job. YES on 4.

Question 5: State Revenue Limit and Rebate — This proposal comes to us from the anti-tax forces of the state’s big business organizations. It would erode our ability to fund essential public services. I don’t think it even serves the long-term interests of the groups advocating for it, since it would reduce funding for the schools, transit services, and training programs that make for a favorable business environment. This is an easy one for me. NO on 5.

Question 6: Natural Resource Conservation Fund — This proposal would establish a “Nature for All Fund,” diverting some sales tax revenue to open space conservation. While I agree with its purpose, my decade as Revenue Committee chair taught me to be wary of laws, even well-intentioned ones, that limit the Legislature’s responsibility to exercise judgment about budget priorities. On that basis, I’ll vote NO on 6.

Question 7: Single-Family Homes — Like the nature fund proposal, this initiative to encourage more starter homes is good in theory but flawed in practice. It proposes a one-size-fits-all zoning solution that fails to account for the huge differences among communities across the state: large and small, urban, suburban, and rural. We need more housing, but this is not the way to get it. NO on 7.

Question 8: Prohibit Retail Sale of Adult Recreational Use Marijuana — A decade ago, voters approved an initiative to legalize, regulate, and tax marijuana sales in Massachusetts. This proposal would roll back that vote and prohibit those sales. I’ll vote NO on 8 to leave our existing marijuana laws unchanged.

Question 9: Firearms Regulation — This is a referendum on the state’s existing laws on guns, ghost guns, machine guns, and assault weapons. Massachusetts has some of the strongest gun safety laws, and one of the best gun safety records, in the nation. A “yes” vote would keep the laws in place. A “no” vote would repeal them. This is easy: YES on 9.

Those of us in some districts have two more questions to consider. To make matters more confusing, they may appear as Question 10, 11, or 12, depending on where you live and how many other questions are on your ballot.

Health Care Reform — “Shall the Representative from this District be instructed to vote for legislation to create a single-payer system of universal health care that would provide all Massachusetts residents with comprehensive health care coverage including the freedom to choose doctors and other health care professionals, facilities, and services, and that would eliminate the role of insurance companies in health care by creating a publicly administered insurance trust fund?”

Stipend Reform — “Shall the Representative from this District be instructed to vote in favor of legislation or rules to reduce the House Speaker’s and Senate President’s control over state legislators’ stipends (extra pay) and to provide stipends only to legislators who do significant extra work that is transparent and accountable to the public?”

These last two aren’t binding, but they tell our elected officials what we think about these subjects. I live in the 15th Middlesex House district, where they will appear as Questions 10 and 11. I support both health care and stipend reform and have worked for them, so I will be voting YES on both.

So: Yes-Yes-No-Yes-No-No-No-No-Yes-Yes-Yes.

Jay Kaufman was elected to the Massachusetts House of Representatives in 1994 and represented the 15th Middlesex district for 24 years. He is on the steering committee of the bipartisan Coalition to Reform Our Legislature, and publishes on his “Uncertain Times” Substack site – jayrkaufman.substack.com

Leave a comment

Commenters must be registered and logged in with a verified email address and REAL FIRST AND LAST NAME. To register for an account visit the registration page for our site. If you already have an account, you can login here or by clicking "My Account" on the upper right hand corner of any page on the site, right above the search icon.

Commenters must use their real first and last name and a real email address.
We do not allow profanity, racism, or misinformation.
We expect civility and good-faith engagement.

We cannot always fact check every comment, verify every name, or debate the finer points of what constitutes civility. We reserve the right to remove any comment we deem inappropriate, and we ask for your patience and understanding if something slips through that may violate our terms.

We are open to a wide range of opinions and perspectives. Criticism and debate are fundamental to community – but so is respect and honesty. Thank you.