A deeper look at ballot Question 2
Roll Call breaks down ranked choice voting option
There were no roll calls in the House or Senate last week.
This week, Beacon Hill Roll Call looks at Question 2, one of the two questions on the ballot that will be decided directly by the voters in November. Secretary of State Bill Galvin has mailed the “Information for Voters on the 2020 Ballot Questions,” nicknamed the “Red Book,” to voters across the state. If you didn’t receive a copy, you can see one online at https:// www.sec.state.ma.us/ele/elepdf/ IFV_2020.pdf or call the secretary’s office at 1-800-462-VOTE to have one mailed to you.
Question 2 asks voters if they approve of a proposed law that would implement a voting system known as “ranked-choice voting” (RCV) in which voters rank one or more candidates in order of preference. If one candidate receives more than 50% of the first-place votes, that candidate would be declared the winner and no other rounds would be necessary. If no candidate receives a majority of first-place votes, the candidate who received the least number of firstchoice votes is eliminated. The second choice of the voters who supported the eliminated candidate then becomes their first choice and that vote is added to the totals of the remaining candidates. The same process is repeated, if necessary, until a candidate is the first choice of a majority of voters.
Under current law, cities and towns can adopt RCV for local elections for offices including city councils and town select boards by charter commission or by home rule petition. Cambridge is currently the only city or town that uses RCV for its city elections. Both Amhrest and Easthampton recently approved RCV and will implement it for their local elections beginning in 2021. According to Question 2’s sponsors, there are local efforts to approve RCV being pursued in Arlington, Brookline and Northampton.
The system, if approved in November, would be used statewide beginning in 2022 in primary and general elections for all Massachusetts statewide offices, seats in the Massachusetts State Senate and House, U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representatives and most county offices except county commissioner. The system would also not be used in any U.S. presidential race.
The initial vote count to see if any candidate reaches 50% on the first round would be conducted by individual cities and towns. Any contest that goes to a second round or beyond will be calculated at a central tabulation facility where voters’ rankings would be entered into a computer, which would then calculate the results of each round of the counting process.
The measure would give candidates at least three days to request a recount and require the secretary of state to conduct a voter education campaign about the ranked-choice voting process.
Gov. Charlie Baker’s Office of Administration and Finance is required by law to analyze the fiscal consequences if the proposed law is approved.
“This measure will likely require implementation costs for state and municipal elections officials, but because the proposed law would only apply to elections and primaries that are held on or after January 1, 2022, the fiscal consequences of this proposed measure for state and municipal government finances are otherwise unknown,” said the analysis.
“Voters are tired of feeling like they have to hold their noses and vote for the lesser of two evils,” Evan Falchuk, Board Chair of Yes on 2, told Beacon Hill Roll Call. “We should have more than two choices when it comes to elections. We should be able to vote for who we truly like, instead of
worrying that the candidate we like might be a ‘spoiler.’ The people we elect should have to build consensus — not division — in order to win. And they must be accountable to the broadest spectrum of voters, not just their ‘ base.’ ”
“At a time when anxiety of the integrity of our election system is at an all-time high, let’s not add complicated layers of bureaucracy that increases opportunities for corruption and let’s not discourage voter participation with confusing ballots and layers of complication,” Paul Craney, executive director of the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, told Beacon Hill Roll Call. “Ranked choice voting does have some limited advantages but overall, the disadvantages far outweigh the advantages and we should not mess with our current system at this time.”
“Voting Yes on 2 is about building a stronger democracy that puts power in the hands of the people,” said Rep. Andy Vargas (D-Haverhill). “This question can be boiled down to a very simple principle — that candidates that win elections should win with more than 50% of voters supporting them. In the absence of RCV, we sideline majority rule and enable minority and special interest rule. A simple change to the way we vote can bring so many benefits to Massachusetts voters. RCV would increase diversity in government, decrease polarization in campaigns and help restore faith in our democracy in a time when we need it most.”
“In 2019, RCV was voted down in the city of Lowell,” said Kamara Kay, chairman of the Lowell Republican City Committee. “The RCV option is for the winner to become a loser and a loser to become the winner.”
“I cannot understate the value that ranked choice voting would bestow upon voters,” said Michael Porter, director of Harvard’s Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness. “We are so fortunate to have the chance in Massachusetts to be among the pioneers in adopting a simple, and straightforward way to make sure our elected leaders have the support of the broadest majority when they take office and begin to govern. Our current system does not elect leaders that fully reflect the will of the voting public, and too often it shuts out outside candidates from the process, assigning them the role of spoiler instead of contender. We can do so much better by voting yes on 2.”
“RCV is on the ballot this year because the effort is being funded by out-of-state billionaires and their special interests,” Craney said. “Some of the biggest funders include a former executive from the Enron Corporation, family members of Rupert Murdoch of Fox News, and the family members of the George Soros family. The irony should not be lost, that they want to influence our state’s democratic process that has worked for centuries.”
Here are the official arguments, gathered by the secretary
of state, by each side of the question. A maximum of 150 words is allowed.
In favor of Question #2: Written by Shauna Hamilton, Voter Choice for Massachusetts.
“A yes vote adopts ranked choice voting, a common-sense reform that puts more power in the hands of voters. Ranked choice voting addresses three problems: 1. Big money and corrupt special interests have too much control over our democracy 2. Politicians can win with less than a majority, and independents are shut out. 3. Politics are tearing us apart, preventing solutions to major challenges. It works by giving voters the option to rank candidates in order of preference. You can vote for just one candidate like you always have, or you can rank your first, second and third choice. If your favorite candidate doesn’t win, your vote is instantly counted for your second choice so candidates must compete for every vote. Ranked choice voting ensures the winner has majority support and reflects the true will of the people. A ‘yes’ vote gives voters more voice and will help make our democracy stronger.”
Against Question #2: Written by Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance.
“Two Democratic governors rejected ranked choice voting because it was confusing and denied voters informed choice. Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown witnessed a mayoral election in Oakland where the winner won with voters’ seventh and eighth place rankings. Gov. Brown said, ‘Ranked-choice voting is overly complicated and confusing. I believe it deprives voters of genuinely informed choice.’ Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom said Ranked Choice Voting ‘ has often led to voter confusion and the promise that ranked choice voting leads to greater democracy is not necessarily fulfilled.’ Ranked Choice Voting ballots force voters to guess the candidates who will remain standing in multiple voting rounds and cast their votes in the dark. If they guess wrong and vote for eliminated candidates, their ballots are not counted in the final vote. Winners win a false ‘majority’ of remaining ballots, not a true majority of all the voters voting in the election.”
Also up on Beacon Hill
Moratorium on evictions and foreclosures expires — A law that placed a moratorium on most residential, commercial and nonprofit evictions and foreclosures until Oct. 17 has expired. The expired law allowed for emergency for-cause evictions that involve allegations of criminal activity or lease violations that are “detrimental to the health or safety of other residents, health care workers, emergency personnel or the general public.” Another provision prohibited landlords from charging late fees or sending reports to credit rating agencies as long as a tenant provided notice
within 30 days of a late payment that their failure to pay was tied to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Baker has the power to postpone the expiration in increments of up to 90 days. The governor did not extend the moratorium and instead proposed a new $171 million piece of legislation he calls the Eviction Diversion Initiative, designed to keep tenants safely in their homes and to support the ongoing expenses of landlords. Housing advocates said the bill does not go far enough and instead support a bill that extends the moratorium for one year after the state of emergency ends, freezes rents during that span and creates a fund to help financially distressed small landlords.
Provisions of the governor’s plan, according to the administration, include $100 million to expand the capacity of the Residential Assistance for Families in Transition (RAFT) program to provide relief to renters and landlords impacted by COVID19; $48.7 million to HomeBASE and other rapid rehousing programs for when tenants are evicted and are at risk of homelessness; $12.3 million to provide tenants and landlords with access to legal representation and related services prior to and during the eviction process, as well as community mediation to help tenants and landlords resolve cases outside of court; $6.5 million for Housing Consumer Education Center, the “front door” for those facing a housing emergency; and $3.8 million for the Tenancy Preservation Program to provide case management support and to act as a neutral party to help tenants and landlords come to agreement.
“The pandemic has created financial challenges for many individuals and families who are struggling with rent payments, and today we are pleased to announce a $171 million initiative to promote household stability, and provide more support for tenants and small landlords,” Baker said. “This strategy has been designed to be user friendly and easily accessible for tenants and landlords in need, and is comprised of new or expanded programs to help people stay in their homes … I am grateful to the court system and all stakeholders for their partnership in this effort in keeping all families and households stable throughout this pandemic.”
“Housing is a human right and, in the middle of this pandemic due to COVID-19, it is both a concern for public health and economic stability. We applaud the Baker administration’s commitment to launching this important initiative,” said Annette Duke, Senior Housing Attorney, Massachusetts Law Reform Institute. “A broad coalition has come together to support access to legal assistance in eviction actions in Massachusetts because such access will avert unnecessary evictions, displacement and homelessness — and will prevent human and economic devastation. This ini
tiative creates a path to housing stability that will strengthen all our communities.”
But not everyone is on board. Rep. Mike Connolly (D- Cambridge) supports the legislation to extend the moratorium. He called Baker’s plan “the barest layer of protection,” that won’t even come close to protecting the hundreds of thousands of renters at risk of being evicted due to financial setbacks resulting from COVID-19. “Just yesterday, the chief justice of the Trial Court said there could be up to 200,000 evictions pending, which is … just unfathomable,” Connolly said. “At this stage it has come down to: Do legislative leaders want to play an active role in crafting housing policy or not? And in this situation, it appears that the Legislature has really ceded its policymaking role to the governor.”
Connolly said that his gravest concern is that the state’s most vulnerable residents won’t know how to navigate the complicated legal system and will instead choose to leave their homes, thinking that to be their only option.
“The first and foremost message to get out there is, a notice to quit is not an eviction,” Connolly continued. “Getting a summons to appear for a trial date, that’s not an eviction. Being behind on your rent is not an eviction. So if you are struggling, reach out to government agencies, reach out to your local officials, reach out to community groups like City Life / Vida Urbana that organize and help connect local tenants to resources. And know that you’re entitled to a legal process — and that’s the hope.”
Lawyers for Civil Rights, the Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts, Rosie’s Place, Centro Presente, the Chelsea Collaborative, the Brazilian Worker Center, Family Nurturing Center, the Northeastern Community Business Clinic and the Massachusetts Black Lawyers Association joined forces urging the governor and Legislature to do more. They urge the administration to take immediate action to guarantee emergency housing stability during the COVID-19 pandemic.
“We are grateful for the recent infusion of $171 million dedicated to keep Massachusetts renters in their homes,” said a letter signed by all the groups. “We applaud this investment in tenants and landlords. However, in light of the scale and scope of the housing crisis, this is not enough. The coexistence of housing instability during a public health crisis places Massachusetts tenants in a dangerous position — particularly low-income families and tenants of color. We urge the commonwealth to enact the COVID-19 Housing Stability Act and extend the eviction moratorium, paired with additional rental assistance resources to provide direct support to tenants and landlords.”