Skip to content
MA election laws committee endorses voting for those in jail
BOSTON — A push is underway on Beacon Hill to expand voting rights in the Commonwealth, but not all efforts are receiving similar traction.
A package of proposed constitutional amendments came before the Legislature’s Joint Committee on Election Laws earlier this spring, including those that would:
- restore the right to vote for incarcerated people;
- create an independent redistricting commission in an effort to combat gerrymandering;
- change the classification of companies and corporations to address campaign finance issues.
The only measure to receive a positive report from the committee, moving it forward in the process to become an official constitutional amendment, was the proposal to restore voting rights to incarcerated individuals.
Why officials want to reverse the voting ban on incarcerated individuals
“The Massachusetts Constitution is one of the world’s oldest functioning written constitutions,” said bill co-sponsor state Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven, D-Somerville, during the committee’s hearing in April. “And as recently as the year 2000, for the entirety of (time) that Constitution existed, we have enabled people the right to vote who are serving time in our state prisons and jails. In 2000, that was when that right was revoked.”
Uyterhoeven spoke to the political context surrounding the 2000 decision to revoke voting rights from those serving time for felony convictions, attributing the change to the “tough on crime” era of the 1990s.
“Public support on the issue has shifted vastly in the time since, and we have come to understand felony disenfranchisement’s role in exacerbating political and racial inequality by removing Black voters and groups who have historically been the targets of political exclusion from the electorate,” said another sponsor, state Sen. Liz Miranda, D-Boston, during the same hearing.
‘Death by another name’:Mass. legislator opposes sentences of life without parole
Passing this amendment would redress the Commonwealth’s disenfranchising decision, she said, and prepare those incarcerated to assume the responsibility of any Massachusetts resident.
“The Commonwealth is disenfranchising currently 4,982 people who had the right to vote until we took it away from them two decades ago,” said Miranda. “People of color only make up 18% of the population in Massachusetts but we represent 58% of our carceral system.”
Derek Washington, who is 18 years into serving a life sentence, testified before the committee.
“The fact of the matter is, I’ve never had a chance to participate in the political process in my 18 years (as an incarcerated individual), which means the society I live in isn’t the reflection of my imagination or the individuals who came through the same school-to-prison pipeline I came through,” Washington said.
He spoke to the “squalor conditions” that prisoners live in and attributed their inability to vote as a contributing factor.
“All of the shootings that are happening on the outside, all of the inequities that are happening in prison, that’s all related, that’s all connected,” Washington said. “The fact that we can’t vote is why things are so ugly in here and things are so ugly out there.”
Independent redistricting commission denied
Unlike Miranda and Uyterhoeven’s proposal, a measure to create an independent commission for redistricting purposes was rejected by the committee.
Rather than state lawmakers drawing new district maps each decade after the census — which has historically led to gerrymandering throughouts the country — the bill called for a commission of independent parties to be convened in an attempt to combat any improprieties.
Nominees from the governor, attorney general, secretary of the commonwealth, House speaker, Senate president and the House and Senate minority leaders would make up the commission, and their hearings and decision making would be open to the public.
Eldridge opinion:Let’s complete our moral commitment to our brave Afghan refugees
For proposal sponsor state Sen. Jamie Eldridge, D-Marlborough, the point of creating of an independent commission in Massachusetts is less to combat gerrymandering within the state, and more so to create a positive model for other states to follow.
“If we want to get rid of that kind of gerrymandering in other states, then one way to increase the chances of that is to show that this is a bipartisan issue, and therefore Massachusetts being a Democratic state, should take leadership to create greater independence in redistricting,” he said.
If Massachusetts does not act on the issue, Eldridge said, “why would a Republican legislature take action when there are gross problems in certain states?”
Gerrymandering in Massachusetts
However, Massachusetts has had its own history with gerrymandering — the mechanism is named for former Massachusetts Gov. Elbridge Gerry, who signed a bill that redistricted the state Senate for benefit of his party in 1812.
In 2005, former Massachusetts House Speaker Thomas Finneran, D-Boston, was indicted on federal charges related to gerrymandering and redistricting. He was found guilty of lying about his involvement in redrawing districts in a way that would benefit him and other incumbents while harming blocs of minority voters.
While the state hasn’t faced issues with its redistricting since then, Ruth Greenwood, director of Harvard Law School’s Election Law Clinic, said it was unsurprising that the Legislature has consistently decided not to move forward with an independent commission.
“Because power is at play and people are very hungry for power in politics, without transparency, it is so easy for the system to end up being gamed and (for) people to lose,” she said.
In states like California and Arizona that have adopted a version of an independent redistricting commission, those measures were not passed through the state legislatures.
‘Millionaires tax:Mass. educators say colleges are top priority for new tax funds
“Everywhere else to get an independent commission, it has to be a valid proposition that people put together by gathering signatures and putting it on the ballot. Arizona, California, Michigan, that’s how it happens,” Greenwood said.
Despite Eldridge filing similar proposals for an independent commission every legislative session, Greenwood said a ballot initiative like the one for the millionaires tax that became law in 2022 would likely be the only way to make this measure a reality.
“I’ve never seen a legislature voluntarily give up their power,” she said. “There are no incentives for currently elected leaders to give up their own power.”
‘Corporations are not people’ measure denied
The Election Laws Committee also shot down a proposal to change the classification of companies and corporations in order to better regulate their contributions to political campaigns.
The proposed amendment stated that “corporations are not people and may be regulated,” and would give the Legislature the ability to set limits on all political contributions and expenditure.
This change would be in an effort to “ensure that all individuals, regardless of their economic status, have access to the political process and that no individual gains more access or ability to influence in any way, the election of any candidate for public office, or any ballot measure,” according to the proposal.
The potential change would rebut former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney’s take from the presidential campaign trail in 2011.
“Corporations are people, my friend… Everything corporations earn ultimately go to people,” he said at an event in Iowa.
The proposal to restore voting rights to incarcerated individuals will now be up for vote by the full Legislature at a Constitutional Convention later this year.
To become an amendment though, the measure will need to be passed twice, once this session and once in the next two-year session before it can be added to the commonwealth’s Constitution.
The rejected measures would need to be proposed again through the legislative process or be taken on as ballot initiatives by citizens in order to eventually make their way to being certified constitutional amendments.
/cloudfront-ap-southeast-2.images.arcpublishing.com/nzme/WUFYAADKHFA4ZNU7MLMEGPPMK4.jpg "Napier Boys’ v Hastings Boys’: Annual twin-cities schools 1st XV match goes down to the wire")