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

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?”

"Advocacy group Act on Mass has led the campaign to include this question on the ballot in certain districts. Massachusetts is largely considered one of the most opaque governments in the country — it's the only state in which the Legislature, courts, and governor's office all claim to be exempt from public records laws. This ballot question is part of the nonprofit's long-term strategy to change that."

"You have the vast majority of legislators knowing for sure that they're going to be reelected," said Erin Leahy, the executive director of Act on Mass, a progressive group that advocates for rules reform in the Legislature. "They're going to sail to reelection without having to even run another campaign, and that brings about a really problematic dynamic where reps and senators aren't really accountable to their constituents. In theory, a healthy, representative democracy means voters have a choice in who represents them."

“There are reps — and our intention is for there to be reps — who want to take these votes in favor of good governance and transparency issues,” Leahy said. “Given a data point that 90 percent of their constituents voted for them to do this, instructed them to do this, that can be a really great excuse for them to do the right thing if they’re up against the speaker or House leadership or their colleagues who don’t want them to vote for this amendment. Having this in their back pocket is kind of a shield, a little bit of a defense mechanism for them to vote the right way on this issue.”