Beacon Hill Roll Call records the votes of local senators and representatives from the week of Nov. 18 to Nov. 22.
House, 156 to 0, Senate, 39 to 0, approved and sent to Gov. Charlie Baker the Student Opportunity Act that invests $1.5 billion, mostly in the form of Chapter 70 aid for local school districts, in the state’s public kindergarten through 12th grade education system over the next seven years. The measure implements the recommendations of the Foundation Budget Review Commission, which found the state was underfunding schools by more than $1 billion annually.
“Access to a high-quality public education is a fundamental right for every child, and that’s why the Student Opportunity Act will make an unprecedented $1.5 billion investment in our public schools, ensuring that school districts across the commonwealth have adequate and equitable resources to provide all students — especially those facing adversity — with a high-quality public education,” said Sen. Jason Lewis, D-Winchester, the Senate chair of the Education Committee. “I am confident that the Student Opportunity Act will effectively address achievement and opportunity gaps and make a meaningful difference to generations of Massachusetts students.”
“Today’s enactment of the Student Opportunity Act will lead to greater resources for public school students across the commonwealth,” said House Education Committee Chair Rep. Alice Peisch, D-Wellesley. “The House vote is a clear indication of our commitment to ensuring that all students, and especially low-income students and English learners, have full access to the high-quality education that Massachusetts provides its children.”
“This historic bill represents a milestone for our students, for our communities and for racial and economic justice,” said Massachusetts Teacher Association President Merrie Najimy. “It will have a dramatic impact on the education of more than 900,000 students, especially benefiting low-income students and students of color who have been left behind by the state’s outdated school funding formula.”
A “Yes” vote is for the bill.
Rep. Natalie Blais — Yes
Rep. Paul Mark — Yes
Rep. Susannah Whipps — Yes
Sen. Joanne Comerford — Yes
Sen. Adam Hinds — Yes
House, 154 to 1, Senate, 38 to 1, approved and sent to Gov. Baker a bill that would prohibit drivers, except on-duty public safety personnel, from using a hand-held cellphone or other electronic device to make a call or access social media. The measure allows drivers to use only a hands-free phone but allows him or her to perform a single tap or swipe to activate or deactivate the hands-free mode feature. Public safety personnel are exempt from the ban.
Use of a hand-held phone would be permitted in emergencies including if the vehicle is disabled; a disabled vehicle or an accident are present on a roadway; medical attention is required; police, firefighter or other emergency services are necessary for the personal safety of the operator or a passenger; or to otherwise ensure the safety of the public.
Violators would be fined $100 for a first offense, $250 for a second offense, and $500 for a third and subsequent offense. A third offense would count as a surchargeable offense that could lead to higher insurance rates for the violator.
The measure basically keeps the current mandate that police departments document the driver’s race only when they issue a ticket, write a warning, or make an arrest after a traffic stop. Some say that will not gather enough data and that the only way to do so is to get the information on all cars that are stopped regardless of whether they are arrested or received a ticket or a warning.
Supporters said that the bill would save lives and prevent accidents. They noted that the measure does not ban cellphone use but simply requires the use of hands-free ones. They pointed to accidents, deaths and injuries involving handheld cellphones.
Some opponents say the restriction is another example of government intrusion into people’s cars and lives. Others note that there are already laws on the books prohibiting driving while distracted and that the bill is a bonanza for insurance companies, which will collect millions of dollars in surcharges.
“Today marks a significant milestone in increasing safety on our roadways,” said Sen. Mark Montigny, D-New Bedford, longtime sponsor of hands-free legislation. “While this should have happened years ago, I am thankful that we have delivered a strong bill to the governor. For far too long, distracted driving has claimed the lives of innocent people and wreaked havoc upon families, forever robbed of planning graduations, weddings and holidays. Amazingly, many of these families have channeled their pain into making our roadways safer, and it has been a privilege to have worked closely with them over the past 15 years to ensure a strong law. I hope this measure provides some solace, as it is their tenacious advocacy in memory of their loved ones that has finally achieved these new life-saving protections.”
“I wholeheartedly support the provisions of the compromise bill that outlaws distracted driving, and I so much wanted to vote yes to enact this legislation,” said Sen. Becca Rausch, D-Needham. “But I could not get to a ‘yes’ vote because the data provisions do not mandate data collection on all traffic stops or define ‘racial or gender profiling.’ The bill also creates concerning precedent about access to public records, such as the data actually collected, even though all of the data contemplated by the bill must be de-identified. Further, I have serious concerns about the path the data will take to its final analysis.”
“Today’s final bill is a major public safety improvement for the residents of Massachusetts,” said Rep. Bill Straus, D-Mattapoisett, House chair of the Committee on Transportation. “Distracted driving has caused too many unnecessary tragedies and I am pleased that our state will now join the ranks of other states who have adopted a ban on holding a phone while driving.”
“For decades, the ACLU has advocated to make roads and highways safer by collecting race data for all motor vehicle stops and ensuring equity in traffic enforcement,” said Rahsaan Hall, racial justice program director at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Massachusetts. “Without data on all stops, police departments cannot have a complete picture of their practices, and where reforms may be necessary. This version of the bill continues to require data collection only for the subset of traffic stops that result in a warning or citation, as required under current law.
A “Yes” vote is for the bill.
Rep. Natalie Blais — Yes
Rep. Paul Mark — Yes
Rep. Susannah Whipps — Yes
Sen. Joanne Comerford — Yes
Sen. Adam Hinds — Yes
House, 155 to 0, Senate, 40 to 0, approved and sent to Gov. Baker legislation designed to make it easier for children and their families to navigate the state’s complicated and often difficult to understand health care system. A key provision requires health insurance companies to perform monthly updates of their provider databases that tell patients which doctors and other medical resources are available to them. Patients complain that many physicians are listed as local and taking new patients despite having retired, moved or stopped accepting new patients.
The measure also allows foster children to remain covered by MassHealth until they turn 26, the same option that children covered by their parents’ private insurance currently have; examines the barriers to mental and behavioral health supports for children; establishes a commission to study mandated reporting laws; and provides for increased education around child sex abuse and exploitation.
“I am proud of the efforts of the Legislature this week to expand access to behavioral health services for children in Massachusetts,” said Rep. Jennifer Benson, D-Lunenburg, the House chair of the Committee on Health Care Financing. “This bill bridges the gap between our children and the services available to them, and gives parents the information they need to make informed health care decisions.”
“There are several barriers to access for children in the commonwealth who are in need of behavioral health services, and this legislation takes several steps to address them,” said Sen. Cindy Friedman, D-Arlington, Senate chair of the Committee on Health Care Financing. “I’m especially proud that this comprehensive bill requires provider network directories to be more transparent and include accurate, up-to-date information to help connect children with the mental health providers that they need.”
A “Yes” vote is for the bill.
Rep. Natalie Blais — Yes
Rep. Paul Mark — Yes
Rep. Susannah Whipps — Yes
Sen. Joanne Comerford — Yes
Sen. Adam Hinds — Yes
House, 155 to 0, Senate, 39 to 0, approved and sent to the governor a bill making changes in the state’s campaign finance laws. Current law exempts legislative candidates and some candidates for mayor from the requirement that they use a depository reporting system that currently must be followed by statewide, county and many other municipal candidates. The bill requires legislative candidates and some candidates for mayor to adhere to the same strict requirements.
The depository reporting system requires candidates to file a monthly report that discloses all campaign finance activity. Legislative reports are under the current non-depository system and are filed only two or three times a year.
Another provision directs the Office of Campaign and Political Finance to write regulations regarding the appropriate use of websites and social media for campaign purposes. The measure also creates a special legislative commission to examine the feasibility of allowing candidates for state, county or municipal elected office to use campaign funds to pay for family care and child care services for the candidate.
“I’m proud of the Senate for passing this updated campaign finance reform legislation,” said Elections Committee Senate Chair Sen. Barry Finegold, D-Andover. “The depository system will lead to increased transparency and uniformity, while minimizing the accidental errors in reporting that often plague campaigns. Voters deserve to know how we get our money as candidates and how we spend it, and the move to the depository system will make all of that data more readily available.”
A “Yes” vote is for the bill.
Rep. Natalie Blais — Yes
Rep. Paul Mark — Yes
Rep. Susannah Whipps — Yes
Sen. Joanne Comerford — Yes
Sen. Adam Hinds — Yes
House, 119 to 33, Senate, 32 to 6, approved and sent to Gov. Baker a bill that would ban the sale of flavored vaping and tobacco products — including mint and menthol cigarettes — and impose a 75 percent excise tax on e-cigarettes. Businesses that don’t comply with the bill’s provisions could have their Lottery licenses temporarily suspended.
The bill also requires commercial health insurers and MassHealth to cover the costs of smoking cessation programs and nicotine replacement therapy. Another provision raises the penalties on retailers for illegal tobacco sales.
“For far too long, Big Tobacco has targeted our kids with flavored products,” said Sen. John Keenan, D–Quincy, the lead sponsor of the legislation. “By banning the sale of the flavored products that attract young people, implementing a 75 percent excise tax on e-cigarettes and expanding coverage of cessation treatment, we are telling Big Tobacco their days of hooking kids in Massachusetts are over. Hopefully, this effort will serve as a roadmap for the rest of the country. I am proud to stand with my colleagues in the Massachusetts Legislature in passing this landmark legislation.”
“We are disappointed the Legislature supports bills that disproportionately impact communities of color and have disastrous implications for public health, public safety, state tax revenue and jobs in the commonwealth,” said Jon Shaer, executive director of the New England Convenience Store and Energy Marketer Association. “The House and Senate bills claim to address youth vaping, but by including menthol and mint tobacco they target adults and, in particular, minority adults and their communities. Action to positively impact youth vaping is achievable without banning menthol and mint tobacco — legal, adult products that aren’t associated with youth overuse and have no reason to be included in this legislation.”
“This legislation is a critical step to help end the worsening youth e-cigarette epidemic and stop tobacco companies from using appealing flavors to lure kids into a lifetime of addiction,” said Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. “It would make Massachusetts the first state in the nation to prohibit the sale of all flavored tobacco products.”
“While I wholeheartedly supported the ban on flavored tobacco and vaping products, I thought the ban on menthol cigarettes was an overreach,” said Rep. Chris Hendricks, D-New Bedford. “Menthol cigarettes have been around for 100 years and I find the claim that menthols have led to a rise in smoking among adolescents to be unpersuasive. I do acknowledge that minority communities have been unfairly targeted with menthol advertising by the tobacco industry for decades. However, a proper remedy to that behavior should not be a ban on menthol cigarettes.”
“The … vote to support removing all flavors from tobacco products is essential for reducing their appeal to youth,” said Allyson Perron Drag, the government relations director for the American Heart Association in Massachusetts. “The evidence is clear that flavors have played a key role in increasing their appeal among our children. Today’s vote is a crucial step in protecting future generations from a lifetime of addiction to deadly tobacco products.”
“These products are already outlawed for children,” said Rep. Shaunna O’Connell, R-Taunton. “I trust that adults can make intelligent decisions on these products.”
“Representing border communities, this bill will just send even more business over the border and some of that business will be young adults,” said Rep. Colleen Garry, D-Dracut. “I don’t think it will stop people from smoking. It will just have them buying cigarettes and other things in New Hampshire.”
A “Yes” vote is for the bill. A “No” vote is against it.
Rep. Natalie Blais — Yes
Rep. Paul Mark — Yes
Rep. Susannah Whipps — No
Sen. Joanne Comerford — Yes
Sen. Adam Hinds — Yes
Senate, 11 to 27, rejected an amendment that would exempt menthol cigarettes from the ban and allow them to be sold.
Amendment supporters said the ban on menthol cigarettes goes too far. They noted adults are old enough to have freedom of choice and decide whether they want to smoke menthol cigarettes.
Amendment opponents said menthol has the ability to make the intake of chemicals and nicotine smoother — allowing smokers to take nicotine in more frequently, which results in a quicker and stronger addiction. They noted that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration banned all flavored cigarettes except menthol in 2009. They argued it is time to include menthol in the ban.
A “No” vote is against allowing the sale of menthol cigarettes.
Sen. Joanne Comerford — No
Sen. Adam Hinds — No
Senate, 7 to 32, rejected an amendment providing up to a $500 tax credit for smokers who purchase smoking cessation products or get counseling to stop smoking.
Amendment supporters said this modest tax credit will be an additional incentive to try to stop smoking and will actually save some people from smoking-related illnesses or death.
Amendment opponents said the bill already requires private and state workers’ health insurance plans to cover cessation products and counseling, and exempts products available only by prescription from the sales tax. They noted that there has been no estimate of how much the tax credit will cost the state in lost revenue.
A “No” vote is against the tax credit.
Sen. Joanne Comerford — No
Sen. Adam Hinds — No
Senate, 36 to 4, approved and sent to the House a bill that would prohibit stores from providing customers with a single-use carryout bag — defined as “made of plastic, paper or other material that is provided by a store to a customer at the point of sale and that is not a recycled paper bag or a reusable grocery bag.” Stores would have the option to make recycled paper bags available for a charge of at least 10 cents. The measure exempts companies that have fewer than three stores, less than 4,000 square feet of retail space per store and not more than 15 employees.
The bill would preempt existing plastic bag bans already implemented in cities and towns to provide consistency for stores across the state. The ban would continue to allow for plastic bags for specific products where plastic serves an enhanced purpose, such as for produce, poultry or other food items to keep them fresh, or for frozen items or items prone to leak.
“As the lead Senate sponsor of the plastic bag ban since I first arrived in the Senate in 2009, I am proud to join my senator colleagues in passing one of the strongest plastic bag bans in the country,” said Sen. Jamie Eldridge, D-Acton. “I’m extremely pleased that the Senate has passed legislation that will address the negative impacts of single-use plastic bags on our environment.”
“We should find ways to recycle single-use plastic bags properly,” said Sen. Dean Tran, R-Fitchburg. “Banning them is not the right approach to addressing the recycling issue. This will not help the environment, but rather creates a hardship on our low-income and senior citizen population.”
“We are grateful that the Senate took action last night on an important environmental issue reducing plastic waste,” said MASSPIRG Executive Director Janet Domenitz. “Plastic bags start out as fossil fuels and end up as pollution in landfills and incinerators; or as litter in our parks, neighborhoods and oceans.”
“Unfortunately, the Senate’s plastic bag ban will increase operating costs for Main Street businesses and raise prices for shoppers trying to balance household budgets,” said Christopher Carlozzi, the Massachusetts state director of the National Federation of Independent Business. “Most consumers already re-use shopping bags to line garbage cans, pack their lunches or dispose of animal waste. Instead of a ban, the Senate should have focused their efforts on promoting and educating the public on plastic bag recycling programs.”
A “Yes” vote is for the bill.
Sen. Joanne Comerford — Yes
Sen. Adam Hinds — Yes
A bill before the Judiciary Committee would make it a crime punishable by up to five years in prison to intentionally coerce or encourage someone who they know has a propensity for suicide into committing or attempting to commit suicide. The law is named after Conrad Roy, the teenager who died by suicide when his girlfriend, Michelle Carter, encouraged his death. Carter was convicted of involuntary manslaughter.
“It will send a clear message that this behavior is not only unacceptable, but criminal in Massachusetts,” said bill sponsor Sen. Barry Finegold, D-Andover.
Rep. Natalie Higgins, D-Leominster, who has filed the same bill in the House said that Massachusetts is one of only eight states that doesn’t have this type of coerced suicide law.
The Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy Committee is considering legislation that would prohibit “spoofing,” a practice used by telemarketing companies to have a phony telephone number show up on a consumer’s caller ID, with the intent to deceive, defraud, harass, cause harm or wrongfully obtain anything of value, including financial resources or personal identifying information. Current law only prohibits the telemarketers from blocking their phone number from appearing on caller ID.
Companies that violate this prohibition would be fined between $5,000 and $10,000 for each deceptive call involving a consumer age 65 or older, and up to a $10,000 fine for calls to others.
The Judiciary Committee is considering several bills that would exempt certain people from jury duty. The exempt include a person who is a college student or the primary provider of health care services to another person who relies on said services, and the performance of juror service would cause a risk of injury to the health of the recipient of said services (H 1468); legally blind (H 3438); and the sole owner of a business if his or her juror service would require said person to close the business (H 1461).
Another measure before the committee would reimburse a juror for any fares paid to the MBTA to travel back and forth from the trial (S 965).
The Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight’s hearing last week included a measure that would declare every Feb. 4 as Rosa Parks Day in Massachusetts. In 1955 in Montgomery, Ala., Parks refused to move to the back of the bus and give up her seat to a white passenger. Her refusal led to the Montgomery Bus Boycott, the integration of public transportation in Montgomery and the modern civil rights movement. She was jailed for refusing to give up her seat and lost her job for participating in the boycott.