Beacon Hill Roll Call records local senators’ votes on roll calls from recent February sessions. There were no roll calls in the House or Senate last week.

Allow 30 minutes before considering new items (S 17)

The Senate, 5 to 33, rejected a Senate rules amendment that would require a 30-minute recess before considering new items on the Senate agenda calendar. Current rules require a recess but do not specify the minimum length of the recess

“This amendment would have ensured at least 30 minutes of time for the consideration of new matters pending before the Senate,” said Sen. Becca Rausch, D-Needham, one of only two Democrats to vote for the amendment. “Especially considering the magnitude of some of the legislation that comes to the floor, 30 minutes seemed like a reasonable amount of time to review the content.”

“I respect the intent of the … amendment to ensure sufficient time to contemplate these issues coming before us,” said Sen. Joan Lovely, D-Salem. However, Lovely added that she feels the Senate doesn’t need “a full 30 minutes to do so in every case.”

A “No” vote is against the 30-minute recess.

Sen. Joanne Comerford — No

Sen. Anne Gobi — No

Sen. Paul Mark — No

Eliminate remote voting (S 17)

The Senate, 3 to 35, rejected a Senate rules amendment that would strike the rule that allows a senator to participate remotely, from their home, office or other location. The rule was first instituted during the pandemic.

Amendment supporters said it is time to abolish remote voting and require senators to show up in person for Senate sessions. They argued that the remote voting system was reasonable and useful during the pandemic, but noted that remote voting results in senators not being able to talk to and communicate with each other during the Senate sessions.

Sen. Ryan Fattman, R-Sutton, the sponsor of the amendment, did not respond to repeated requests from Beacon Hill Roll Call asking him why he filed and supported the amendment.

Amendment opponents said that remote voting is a good second option for senators who cannot be in the chamber because of illness, family matters and more. They noted remote voting increases opportunities for senators to vote instead of not being recorded on a roll call because they are not in the chamber.

A “No” vote is against eliminating the rule and therefore in favor of remote voting.

Sen. Joanne Comerford — No

Sen. Anne Gobi — No

Sen. Paul Mark — No

Allow minority reports (S 18)

The Senate, 3 to 36, rejected a joint rules amendment that would allow opponents of a bill to issue a minority report on why they oppose a bill being reported out of a committee. Current rules allow senators to indicate that they oppose the bill but only the senators who support the bill are allowed to submit their reasons for supporting it.

“Those in the minority of a committee decision should be allowed to offer a published record of why they dissented from the majority,” said Sen. Patrick O’Connor, R-Weymouth. “The Supreme Court allows the dissenting justices of a decision to offer a recorded opinion and I believe this avenue has helped shape future public policy for the better.”

“As we know, members are free to cast their votes in favor or in opposition to a chair’s recommendation and such vote is recorded under the … joint rules,” said Sen. Joan Lovely, D-Salem. “The addition of a minority report could actually create some confusion for the public on trying to discern the intentions of the committee. I therefore ask my colleagues to vote ‘no.’”

A “No” vote is against allowing a minority report.

Sen. Joanne Comerford — No

Sen. Anne Gobi — No

Sen. Paul Mark — No

Also up on Beacon Hill

New bills filed for consideration in the 2023-2024 session include:

Gender-neutral bathrooms (SD 316): Would change the state building code to allow gender-neutral bathrooms in new construction and renovations of buildings.

Supporters say that sex-segregated restroom facilities fail to accommodate the needs of every person, posing special difficulty to transgender and gender nonconforming individuals. They note that research shows that nearly two-thirds of transgender students avoid school bathrooms because they feel unsafe or uncomfortable.

“Massachusetts strives to be welcoming to all,” said sponsor Sen. Jo Comerford, D-Northampton. “We were the first state to vote to uphold rights against discrimination for all people. This bill would strengthen those protections in a small but very important way, by reducing daily stress for transgender and gender nonconforming people.”

Warning on mobile phones (SD 2327): Would require all mobile phones sold or leased to disclose, on product packaging, the following notice to consumers: “To assure safety, the federal government requires that cellphones meet radio frequency (RF) exposure guidelines. If you carry or use your phone in a pocket or the phone is otherwise in contact with your body when the phone is on and connected to a wireless network, you may exceed the federal guidelines for exposure to RF radiation. Refer to the instructions in your phone or user manual for information about how to use your phone safely.”

“Information and knowledge are key to consumer safety, especially when it comes to children,” said sponsor Sen. Julian Cyr, D-Truro. “[The bill] would require disclosures on cellphone packaging that inform consumers of the potential risk of radio frequency exposure and advises cellphone users to review instructions to use their phone safely. Health should always be a priority, and as people — especially young people — spend significant time in close proximity to cellphones, this bill seeks to promote awareness around the safe use of cellphones.”

Free diapers (SD 239): Would create a pilot program to provide free diapers to low-income families at food pantries.

“Access to new, clean diapers is necessary to preserve our babies’ health,” said sponsor Sen. Joan Lovely, D-Salem. “No parent should have to resort to reusing soiled diapers due to an inability to pay or have to undergo further economic hardships to acquire diapers. This legislation puts the well-being of our infants and families where it should be: at the forefront.”

Prohibit use of Native American mascots in public schools (SD 857): Would prohibit public schools from using an athletic team name, logo or mascot that names or is associated with Native Americans, or which denigrates any racial, ethnic, gender or religious group.

“Passage of this bill is an obligation of justice, a recognition of the common humanity of all and a repair of historic wrong,” said sponsor Sen. Jo Comerford, D-Northampton. “It also addresses the deep psychological harm caused by perpetuating harmful, racist stereotypes — harm caused to both people who are of Native American heritage and those who are not. This bill says that the time has come to say loud and clear to Native Americans who had been on this land for millennia before the Pilgrims landed a mere 400 years ago: ‘You are people, not mascots.’”

]]>