NEWS & MEDIALatest updates from Act on Mass and the fight for transparency in the State House

Act on Mass said publishing how committee members vote on bills is “standard practice in a majority of other states as well as in the Massachusetts State Senate.” The group said an “opaque committee process” in the House, which controls joint committees by virtue of having more reps on those panels than senators, is “key to the concentration of power on Beacon Hill.” The group further claims that the current setup enables House Democrats to “kill progressive legislation with little explanation as to why.”

“As a good governance watchdog, our goal at Act on Mass is to shine a light on the canyon between what voters want and believe and what their state house is doing. The legislature’s refusal to publish committee votes is a perfect example of this disconnect that is, frankly, anti-democratic.”

Erin Leahy, executive director of the group Act on Mass., said it is “disappointing” to see the state Legislature taking fewer votes on the record. “When the Legislature conducts the public’s business behind closed doors, our democracy suffers,” she said. “How are everyday people supposed to engage with the lawmaking process when so few votes are recorded for them to see? How can constituents hold their elected officials accountable when they can’t see how they’re voting on issues that affect their lives?”

Executive Director of Act on Mass, Erin Leahy, told 22News, “Having committee votes be public, not only is that a great way to just hold our Reps accountable for representing the views of their constituents, it’s also a great way to make sure that they’re actually going through the steps of our democratic process as they should be.”

“Session after session, the Massachusetts State House writes their own rulebook to exclude their constituents from monitoring and participating in the legislative process,” Brenna Ransden, organizing director of Act on Mass, said. “This overwhelming victory for Question 6 is an unmistakable mandate for Beacon Hill to finally, after all these years, open itself up to the public.”

“Right now we see committees being used as a rubber stamp for leadership’s agenda–not as real, deliberative bodies. When legislators get to vote in secret, they are incentivized to vote with leadership while avoiding the scrutiny of their constituents” said Ransden. “How are we supposed to hold our elected officials accountable to our beliefs and values if we can’t see how they’re voting?”

"It’s hard to believe that Massachusetts, which prides itself on its place in American history as one of the leading colonies in the fight for independence and democracy, would have such a poor record when it comes to transparency in government. The public’s right to know something as basic as how a state representative votes in one of the 30 committees in the House shouldn’t even be in question. Fortunately, the nonprofit organization Act on Mass — a coalition of progressive groups and unions — is working to pry open the secretive Statehouse, including not just legislators, the governor and the courts, but also law enforcement agencies."

“We really tried to target leadership districts this time around, because we know they hold disproportionate power over the rest of the state Legislature,” said Erin Leahy, Act on Mass’ executive director. “We don’t think that’s right, which is why we’re trying to change that system.” Leahy said advocates also targeted open House races to help win support for open meetings and legislative reforms among freshman lawmakers and their new constituencies. “We know there’s a lot of pressure from inside the building, once you get brought into that culture, to go along with leadership,” she said. “We want to set the tone before people even get into that office.”

“Right now we see the committee process being used as a rubber stamp for leadership’s agenda–not as a real, democratic body. When legislators get to vote in secret, they are incentivised to vote with leadership while avoiding the scrutiny of their constituents” said Ransden. “When voters head to the ballot box and decide to reelect their incumbent, they’re doing so only knowing a fraction of their actual voting record. How are we supposed to hold our elected officials accountable to our beliefs and values if we can’t see how they’re voting?”