Happy August,
As a former student, I know all too well that nothing motivates work like an upcoming deadline. This week and last, as the legislature prepared to take their typical August break from formal sessions, this principle was alive and well. More than your average number of votes being taken, compromises reached, and hearings held before everyone will bus off to the Cape until September.
As much as I love my job, I, too, would love to take a whole month off from my formal duties. And– not to brag– I’ve almost had a busier year than the Massachusetts General Court! Act on Mass has been hard at work since January: pushing for Joint Rules changes, cranking out Saturday Scoops, hosting workshops, and tabling in 17 Senate districts– with 23 to go.
Meanwhile, the Legislature took 6 months to formalize their rules for operating and, despite the Trump administration breathing down the necks of their constituents, has just managed to finalize their first piece of “response” legislation intended to better protect us– the Shield Law, which was sent to the governor this week. If the governor signs it, they will break for September with only 9 new laws on the books for the last 7 months of full-time lawmaking– a record low.
Not waiting until September: Act on Mass' State House 101 workshops! We're hosting another one next week, Thursday August 14th, to cover the basics of what goes on on Beacon Hill and why our movement for transparency and accountability is so important. Join us for a refresh or an introduction!
---
State House Scoop
Legislature’s surprise move on bar advocate pay underwhelming– and anti-labor
This week, Beacon Hill leaders took an unexpected stab at resolving a mounting crisis: the work stoppage of bar advocates, who are demanding increased pay for their work on behalf of indigent defendants.
Constitutional rights require that defendants be appointed legal representation if they cannot afford it themselves. As one MA bar advocate puts it: "The state certainly prosecutes enough people… They can't just pay for the prosecution side of it and then underfund the defense side." According to the Boston Globe, Massachusetts relies more on private lawyers to provide these legal services than any other state; about 80% of such cases in MA are taken by bar advocates, rather than public defenders.
Although they maintain private practices, bar advocates are regulated by the state and agree to take public work at a very low rate compared to private work. That low pay is exacerbated in Massachusetts, where bar advocates are paid half as much for the same work as in some other New England states. This compensation must cover staff and business expenses as well as the lawyers' pay. Massachusetts’ low pay has left bar advocates overworked and underpaid as they stretch to cover the gaps made by the state underfunding public defenders.
These bar advocates initiated a work stoppage in May, asking the legislature for a $35/hour increase. This would still leave Massachusetts with the lowest compensation for bar advocates in New England, but would provide substantial relief. Though a pay raise was included in the Senate’s FY 2026 budget proposal, released in May, this provision was cut in negotiations– and legislative leaders were pretty snarky about it. Since then, the crisis has continued to mount, as constitutional law has required the release of defendants who cannot be provided a lawyer.
Another thing we noticed: without citing any sources, legislative leaders quietly upped their estimation of how much this requested pay raise would cost the state from an initial $60 million to $100 million, to pair with arguments about fiscal responsibility. When you’re the only state in the entire country (!!) without an independent bureau to do research and fiscal analysis on bills, you can twist the numbers all you want!
As recently as Monday this week, the legislature offered no indication of a timeline for resolution. Then, suddenly, it was announced Wednesday that a pay raise for bar advocates would be included in a previously unrelated supplemental budget. Instead of the immediate $35/hr raise that bar advocates asked for, they announced a $10/hr raise this year, upped to $20/hr next year. One bar advocate likened this surprise announcement to “a slap in the face.”
The good: this funding is paired with an additional $40 million injection for CPCS, the state’s public counsel agency, to allow them to hire 320 more public defenders. Legislative leaders framed this as a way to counter the state’s over-reliance on “private lawyers.”
The bad: Not mentioned, of course, is the fact that legislative leaders had no problem relying on those “private lawyers” until they decided to organize for better working conditions. Pretty ironic, unfortunately, that the only thing that pushed legislative leaders to provide more funding for public defenders was the need for scabs…
The ugly: Indeed, the pay boost also comes with a major anti-labor caveat– a requirement for bar advocates to sign a new biannual contract that would prevent them from initiating a work stoppage again. This forces bar advocates who take the deal and start resuming cases again to hand away a significant negotiating tool– and is an obvious retaliation for their organizing. Many have said that they will not start resuming cases, so the crisis may not indeed be resolved.
More public funding for public defense is a good move. However, legislative leaders seem to have let resentment at bar advocates’ labor tactics dictate their timeline and response to a crisis where defendants' constitutional rights are on the line. They also played fast and loose with numbers and legislative procedure along the way. Unfortunately, it’s just another day on Beacon Hill.
New reporting highlights Black and Latino legislative caucus– a good sign for intra-chamber organizing
This week, a story in new local news outlet Flipside News caught our eye: “Black and Latino Caucus is back in action under new leadership." The article covers new changes in the legislature’s Black and Latino caucus, a 52-year-old caucus that convenes legislators of color to push for issues impacting Black and Latino residents. It currently numbers 26 members and represents communities across the state, “as far flung as Barnstable, Berkshire County, Wrentham and Haverhill.”
The caucus saw a period of inactivity following internal conflicts in 2021, leaving the organization without an executive director and without a clear policy agenda in the last few years. However, it is reportedly “back in action” since the election of Rep. Anthony Vargas as chair in January. Members have hired a new executive director, finalized a policy agenda addressing a number of pressing issues, and already met with leadership to promote them.
Here’s why that’s good news for our mission for a transparent, accountable, and effective legislature: active organizing among rank-and-file members disrupts the top-down hierarchies that reinforce leadership’s power in the Massachusetts General Court.
In state legislatures and in the U.S. Congress, ideological or identity-based organizing in caucuses by members can serve to rally members behind particular policy goals and provide room for policy alternatives. In a state like Massachusetts, where 83% of the House and 87% of the Senate are Democrats, you might expect caucuses to play an outsized role in driving political debate.
Well… in a state like Massachusetts, you also might expect political debate– and end up empty-handed. And indeed, the Black and Latino caucus is not the only one that has taken a back seat in recent years.
The House Progressive Caucus has traditionally served as a hub for members on the left-er wing, but has been essentially MIA in recent years. Many of its members have been lured by lucrative committee assignments to march right in line with leadership; the caucuses’ long-time chairwoman, Representative Tricia Farley-Bouvier is now a Joint Committee Chair, netting a cool $22,430.96 extra annually thanks to leadership’s goodwill. The progressive caucus does not maintain a website, has not updated their one social media account since September, and does not publish their membership– how’s that for transparency?
So, yes, in a chamber where 85% of Democrats voted with the Speaker on every single vote and outgoing lawmakers lament the lack of internal debate, steps to strengthen and revive one of its historic caucuses is an exciting development. I wish them good luck!
Do you know what caucuses your representative and senator take part in? Since that information might not be publicly available (looking at you, progressive caucus 👀), take the time today to send your representative an email asking them which caucuses they are on and what work those caucuses are doing to get legislation passed.
SUPPORT LEGISLATIVE STAFFERS>>
Worth reading: more stories from this week
Some other important stories from Beacon Hill this week:
- Our friends in the movement for fair and affordable housing in Massachusetts hosted a huge rally at the state house this week in favor of ending the ban on rent control
- Our allies at Mass Budget have released their final, comprehensive analysis of the Fiscal Year 2026 budget
- Another reason Beacon Hill had to break last week: they'll be busy this week hosting legislators from around the country for the National Conference of State Legislatures Legislative Summit. Fundraising for this event saw our legislators chasing 6-figure donations from businesses currently seeking legislation– Boston Globe has the story (paywall)
Transparency on Tour: Progress Report
Let's keep building our movement! Upcoming dates:
- Fall River Farmers & Artisan Fair, August 3rd - 10 am - 2 pm in Fall River
- Central Square Farmers Market, August 11th - 12 pm - 6 pm Central Square, Cambridge
If one of these are in your district or a district you want to visit, join us to table!
HELP US HIT 40 DISTRICTS THIS SUMMER>>
Bilingual? Act on Mass seeks translating help
Another way to help us out with our Transparency on Tour initiative: translating some of our literature into common second languages! We are particularly looking for Spanish and Portuguese speakers. If you might be able to help us translate a flyer or two, please reach out to Scotia at scotia@actonmass.org.
---
Missed a Scoop or two? You can find a full archive of all past Saturday Scoops on our blog.
---
Syd's Sprinkles: Will another “no-brainer” bill stall out in the Legislature?
Did you know that over 150,000 people living in Massachusetts are facing period poverty?
Period poverty, or the “lack of access to safe and hygienic menstrual products during monthly periods and inaccessibility to basic sanitation services or facilities as well as menstrual hygiene education,” is currently an issue that affects 1 in 9 women and girls in Massachusetts, but it does not have to be.
In fact, there have been plenty of proposed solutions to this global issue, such as eliminating luxury sales taxes on period supplies. While this would not do much here in Massachusetts, given that period supplies are not taxed as luxuries in this state, there are other ways that menstrual equity activists have campaigned for better access to menstrual products
“An Act to Increase Access to Disposable Menstrual Products” (S.1549, H.2483), also referred to as the “I AM” bill, has been introduced in the Massachusetts Statehouse four times before and has stalled out in the Legislature – you guessed it – every time. More specifically, the bill has faced roadblocks in the House of Representatives, never making its way out of the House Committee on Ways and Means even after being passed by the Senate.
Now, having been filed in yet another legislative session, advocates and supporters of the bill are emphasizing that while there are initiatives sponsored by donations to non-profits, there is a need for legislative action to fully address such a pervasive yet easily solvable issue.
With cuts to grant-funded programs for menstrual equity run by Mass NOW – the state’s chapter of the non-profit National Organization for Women – advocates will only have access to half of the funding that they have received in previous years going into 2026.
So what are our legislators doing to help promote menstrual equity in Massachusetts?
Right now, they have argued that they are focusing on pressing issues that are at the top of people’s minds and are working to assess the need for this legislation with its stakeholders.
While you can read more of the reasons as to why this issue has yet to be addressed in CommonWealth Beacon’s coverage, I figured I should cite at least one of the reasons for the stall-out of menstrual equity in the State House over multiple sessions here in the Sprinkles.
Senator Pat Jehlen of Somerville was quoted by CommonWealth Beacon, stating that “If a bill doesn’t have an enormous lobbying push behind it, it can get lost because there are 6,000 bills and it just takes work and sometimes it takes persistence.”
Unfortunately, Senator Jehlen is somewhat understating the inner workings of the State House. In fact, she is only beginning to highlight a major transparency issue within the State House.
Oftentimes, legislation that gets passed by the Legislature may not have much public support, partially due to lobbyists who are able to interact with our legislators behind closed doors and beyond the scope of the public. When this is compounded with other issues like a lack of sufficient notice or time to attend hearings where public testimony is able to be heard, the disconnect between legislators and the constituents that they serve is only reinforced.
And you don’t just have to take my word for it.
Brown University conducted a study on the lack of climate legislation being passed in the Massachusetts State House despite widespread public support.
In this study, it was found that while “Public testimony reflects widespread public support for climate action in Massachusetts shown in polls,” professional lobbyists that can be hired by large interests groups like the fossil fuel companies that oppose climate legislation give said companies “immediate access to the top decision-makers in Massachusetts.”
In other words, “Bills supported by utilities had a significantly higher chance of progressing through the legislature and ultimately passing both chambers.”
Luckily, according to this session’s new Joint Rules, hearings for bills in this session must be scheduled with a minimum of 10 days notice.
While lobbyists still hold disproportionate influence over the actions taken by our legislators, and 10 days often is not enough time for residents of Massachusetts to change their schedules to voice their opinions of pieces of legislation that affect them, these Joint Rules are a crucial step in promoting transparency in the State House and seeing issues like menstrual equity addressed by both the House and Senate.
Now… let’s return to the original question at hand: Will another “no-brainer” bill stall out in the Legislature?
Unfortunately, to that question I have no answer. But, if you would like to see the state support menstrual equity you can learn more about the I AM bill on the Massachusetts Menstrual Equity (MME) Coalition’s website and use the MME Coalition’s action toolkit to contact your legislators about the issue.
---
Take Action
Help us support a documentary about Beacon Hill dysfunction
Shadows on the Hill is a documentary about the real reason popular bills don’t pass: leadership decides which ones live, which ones die, and who gets punished for speaking out. The film is fundraising now to finish production.** Watch the trailer (featuring a familiar face!) and help amplify the campaign.**
Take action against polluting utilities! - August 7th, 5:15 pm
As extreme heat stalks communities across the Bay State, utility giant Eversource is holding a "Listening Session" this Thursday related to their plans to expand their massive gas pipeline. You can bet our friends in the climate movement are showing out! Join the Springfield Climate Justice Coalition to take action against Eversource this Thursday.
JOIN IN PERSON IN SPRINGFIELD>>
Tell Gov. Healey and your reps: no to $360 million in new prison spending!
Our allies at Free Her MA have put together an action kit: use it today to take a stand against new prison spending!
"NO" TO $360 MILLION FOR WOMENS PRISON>>
---
That's a wrap! Enjoy your weekend– we'll be back next week.
In solidarity,
Scotia
Scotia Hille (she/her)
Executive Director, Act on Mass