Act on Mass’s Requests for Trump’s First 100 Days
With Donald Trump's recent reelection, local action to protect progressive values and the safety of our communities is more important than ever. Without a competent or representative federal government that operates in ways that actually benefit the average American rather than members of the elite, vulnerable and marginalized groups will increasingly face the brunt of the effects of harmful legislation and suffer from the lack of proactive, protective legislation.
The uncertain and terrifying times that we are quickly heading into are only exacerbated by the current state of the House and Senate at the Federal Government. The national government now has the ability to pass legislation that has the potential to affect all Americans negatively and the conservative majority in the Supreme Court means that even laws that seem to cover basic rights are at stake of being torn down. Without a democratic caucus large enough to stop MAGA republicans, the US Congress is threatening legislation that will stifle the rights and protections that are currently in place for U.S. residents – especially for the country’s most marginalized groups.
With this being said, it is not time for us to shut down and hide as we enter another Trump presidency. Trump now has a better understanding of the federal government and is looking to weaponize it against its own citizens.
It is time for us to stand up and push for Massachusetts to enact protections with more vigor than ever.
Massachusetts’s Responsibility under a Trump Administration
Yes, we’re a blue state, but we’re still leaving so many important and vulnerable people out of the fold.
Massachusetts is notoriously unproductive when it comes to legislating. Many of the bills that we have fought for session after session were brought to the table in response to Trump's last presidency. With another Trump presidency just around the corner, why haven’t we seen any action taken by the legislature to get these bills passed?
Ultimately, the state’s major lack of productivity comes from a lack of transparency within the legislature.
With so much power in the hands of House and Senate leadership, any legislator who acts out of line with their wishes faces the risk of having their own privileges taken away. Whether that be through the allocation of stipends or being barred from ever obtaining a leadership position themselves, rank and file legislators don’t have the freedom to act in ways that aren’t in accordance with the desires of the few who hold the true power in the legislature.
Even when bills are brought to the House or Senate floor for a vote, legislators are expected to vote in accordance with leadership, regardless of any previous indication of support. The “Switch ‘em, Mikey” video shows an example of this reality in action.
The State House only passes a small fraction of the bills that are filed each session, coming in last place in productivity last session. Bills that seem like they should be passed easily and that are cosponsored by large numbers of the House and Senate are “sent to study”, a.k.a. the bills are being killed behind closed doors, without any public access to the vote.
Some bills – like the THRIVE Act (H.495, S.246) – have parts of them enacted through different means, but often see important aspects of the bills left out. In the example of the THRIVE Act, the MCAS is no longer a graduation requirement via Ballot Question #2. The kicker is that this ballot question only deals with the graduation requirement, not the rest of the bill that would have provided funding and opportunities for educators and legislators to work together to find alternative graduation requirements. This important aspect of the bill would have allowed for more students to receive a high school diploma that is meaningful for them and cognisant of their needs and backgrounds.
Other bills have portions of their language added to huge omnibus bills or outside sections of the budget while the rest is left out. These omnibus bills and outside sections, like the ballot question, allow for the legislature to say that they’ve passed a larger number of bills, but they often fail to mention that key pieces of legislation are left out in the written text of a bill.
And the worst part is that the use of the ballot questions and the overuse of omnibus bills all stem from our legislature ’s inefficacy and inability to act as it should as a representation of the people's will which is meant to uphold said will. If we had a more effective legislature, we would not have to resort to the use of ballot questions and the like which are the product of an unproductive state legislature.
Our democratic supermajorities within the state have done little to enact legislation that would uphold many of their promises to their constituents – to preserve their access to effective protections, a good education, healthier ways of living, and more. So many bills that would have taken on Trump’s plans from his last presidency are still dying in the legislature, so if there is a time to push our legislators to do their jobs more effectively and efficiently, that time is now.
Just as Trump and other presidents have laid out their goals for the first 100 days of their administrations, we at Act on Mass have ideas for what legislation and protections we want to see enacted in the first 100 days of his administration so that we can resist the archaic and harmful moves made at the federal level.
There are many areas that Trump has promised to attack in his administration, but some have consistently been in headlines since his first campaign back in 2016 and are particularly pressing in Massachusetts.
To Protect Our Communities
With Governor Healey’s statement on noncompliance with Trump’s planned policies to use state and local law enforcement to deport immigrants by working with ICE, this promise is potentially an empty one.
Since actions — and laws — speak louder than words, we are calling for the passing and signing of the Safe Communities Act within the first 100 days of Trump’s presidency.
The Safe Communities Act – which died this session once again after having been filed every session since 2013 – would have:
- prevented local and state law enforcement from working with ICE through contracts at the expense of taxpayers
- prohibited state and local involvement in immigration enforcement
- protected people of color from racial profiling by law enforcement
Donald Trump’s threats to deploy the military and other law enforcement agencies outside of ICE in an effort to deport immigrants within the United States should not be taken lightly. While his plans have been vague aside from him simply saying that he will deport undocumented immigrants, he and his advisors have gone on record stating that entire families will be deported, including children who are U.S. citizens but have immigrant parents.
Over 4 million families – citizen and non-citizen – are at risk of being separated by Trump and his administration.
Massachusetts is a state that already has 8 sanctuary cities – Somerville, Newton, Northampton, Amherst, Boston, Concord, and Cambridge – but more needs to be done at the state level to protect immigrants, especially since it is the cities and not the state that is not complying with federal law. Even within this group of cities, the definition and practice of being a sanctuary city varies tremendously.
For example, the Boston Trust Act affirms that local police officers and law personnel “shall not detain a person solely on the basis of a civil immigration detainer request issued by a federal immigration officer, or an administrative warrant issued by a federal immigration officer,” meaning that they are unable to work as immigration officers. This is a key aspect of the Safe Communities Act, but not all of Massachusetts currently has this protection as part of their local laws.
While this is a city ordinance in Boston, this is not law for other places in Massachusetts. The levels at which cities comply with federal law enforcement agencies vary as well, meaning that the protections for immigrants vary even within the sanctuary cities based on what their city’s local government has proven to be a protection under the state Constitution. The current method of protecting immigrants within the sanctuary cities and Massachusetts at large is hindered by its non-uniformity.
By failing to pass the Safe Communities act, the state government is allowing for the federal patchwork of varying protections for immigrants to reflect in the varying protections across Massachusetts itself.
Enacting protections at the state level is vital to protect communities in Massachusetts, especially given how many sanctuary cities we already have that are in need of more consistent laws.
To Protect Our Education System
With a second Trump presidency, public education is at stake, and as a leading state in education we need to do everything we can to protect students and their right to learn information from various perspectives.
There are three ways that we can achieve this goal: the THRIVE Act, the CARE Act, and the Cherish Act.
Each bill addresses different problems within our state’s public education system, and would ensure that when states are given authority over their curriculum and funding, Massachusetts will be able to support its schools.
The THRIVE Act would have placed a moratorium on the MCAS graduation requirement for high schoolers and established grants to fund efforts to find alternative exit exams, projects, etc. so that all students are able to receive an education that focuses on their immediate needs and the development of life skills. While over half of Massachusetts voters voted “Yes” on the MCAS ballot question, eliminating the graduation requirement, the funding for schools to research and provide alternatives to the exam along with experts and legislators still has not been addressed.
Even though the use of ballot questions can force action on important and oft-neglected legislation, it is not a sufficient alternative to address and combat many of the state’s issues in a holistic way. Therefore, the legislature should be doing more to pass important legislation that will benefit the state in a way that protects us against Trump and his administration.
The CARE Act is another piece of legislation that was not passed this session and it would have:
- Established a commission to develop anti-racist and social-justice focused curriculum, as well as advise Department of Elementary and Secondary Education on how to increase the presence of and support educators and counselors of color
With Trump’s threats to defund education systems in states that teach their curriculum in ways that address the atrocities committed against BIPOC throughout its history and its ongoing struggles with racism, now is the time to establish and entrench provisions like the CARE Act’s into the education system to attempt to get ahead of his policies. Simply failing to address our collective history in forms that address as many perspectives and realities as possible will not get rid of them, as Donald Trump may believe.
Without well-rounded approaches to educating younger generations, the United States continues to repeat mistakes of the past and is quickly losing its prestige in the world of education. This is especially threatening given that educators and counselors are unable to work effectively with their own students.
The Cherish Act would have ensured that public higher education in the state would receive sufficient funding by:
- Allocating $600M in new funding for Massachusetts’ public higher education system
- Establishing a fair minimum funding level per student to ensure funding keeps pace with enrollments
- Freezing tuition and fees for five years to ensure higher ed is in reach of all students who want to attend
In a similar vein to the CARE Act, the Cherish Act would have allowed more perspectives to become part of important conversations within the state’s education system. With the current state of our higher education system,
The state legislature needs to be held accountable and motivated to enact protections like the ones to protect students, educators, immigrants, and all residents of Massachusetts as we enter unprecedented times. The threat of Trump’s administration is not one that should be taken lightly, and while the federal government may not reflect the needs and values of the people it claims to represent, our state government can if necessary actions are taken by passing protections in favor of the people, rather than of corporations and the rich.
Act on Mass is calling for the passing and signing of the THRIVE Act, the CARE Act, and the Cherish Act within the first 100 days of Trump’s presidency, so that our state’s schools are protected from the legislation that Trump has threatened to impose to harm education systems.
Blog post by Sydney Mascoll, Act on Mass Policy Fellow Fall 2024