Every two years, the Massachusetts election ballot contains referendum questions that emerge from the Legislature’s reluctance or refusal to take on politically touchy subjects and the determination of special interest groups — for good or ill — to get their favored issues before the voters.
Five binding questions will greet Berkshire voters in November, one of which will likely draw the most attention, and advertising dollars, of any question since the “right to repair” referendum of 2020, which triggered a record $52 million in spending. The Massachusetts Teachers Association wants to eliminate the MCAS exam as a graduation requirement, and the state’s business community stands in opposition.
Here is a look at the five questions and the early line as to how they will fare with voters.
Question 1: State auditor’s authority to audit Legislature
The Legislature should have granted the auditor this authority ages ago in the name of checks and balances, but imperious Democratic Party leadership prefers to keep its public business as private as possible. Such is the danger of one-party government.
The Democratic hierarchy says the measure will supplant lawmakers’ accountability to voters when it would in fact enhance that accountability by shedding light on lawmakers’ actions. The hierarchy also claims it would violate the constitutional separation of powers, although the auditor has investigated every other branch of state government.
Lawmakers also assert that State Auditor Diana DiZoglio has a “clear prejudice” because she campaigned on a pledge to investigate the Legislature. It seems likely her “clear prejudice” resulted from what she saw during her years as a member of both the Massachusetts House and Senate, where she was a thorn in the side of her party’s leadership.
But while it is hard to like the legislative leadership, most voters like their own senator and representative, and the rank-and-file will be campaigning against Question 1 once we get past Labor Day and the election heats up. There is an inherent prejudice against auditors of any stripe, as there is against the Internal Revenue Service, no matter that they serve taxpayers, which works against DiZoglio and her supporters in the Committee for a Transparent Democracy.
Early line: Question 1 is defeated.
Question 2: Elimination of MCAS as a graduation requirement
The MCAS was originally designed in 2003 to determine which schools needed help from the state based on the scores of students on the standardized tests. The business community wanted the MCAS to be a measurement tool “to assess how our young people are doing,” in the words of Gov. Maura Healey, who supports the MCAS as a graduation requirement. Those are the battle lines.
While the question is backed by the awkwardly named Committee to Eliminate Barriers to Student Success For All, the Massachusetts Teachers Association is carrying the ball. The union asserts that MCAS causes teaching to the test and rewards good test-takers to the detriment of those who are not, primarily students with disabilities or those not fluent in English.
Regrettably, the MTA has engaged in hyperbole and made misleading statements in trying to make its case. It has claimed that as many as 50,000 students have been deprived of a diploma since the inception of MCAS, but based on the 1 percent of students denied a diploma each year the number is roughly one-third of that figure. Students are not labeled underperforming as the union has claimed — schools are. Leadership can rant about the evils of “corporate education reform,” but the concerns of the business community are legitimate.
However, while the MTA hierarchy might be difficult to take, people generally back their children’s teachers. (See lawmaker-voter dynamic in Question 1 above.) Respected local members of the Massachusetts Business Alliance for Education will make the case for keeping MCAS as a graduation requirement, but popular teachers on the educational front lines will be a formidable force.
Early line: Question 2 passes.
Question 3: Unionization for transportation network drivers
If approved, this question would enable ride-share drivers to form unions and collectively bargain with Uber, Lyft and similar businesses. The companies want the drivers to serve as independent contractors.
In June, the companies reached a settlement with the state granting employment benefits and rights for drivers while requiring companies to pay $175 million in back salaries and penalties. The settlement alone makes the case for Question 3 in particular and for unions in general.
Early line: Question 3 passes.
Question 4: Limited legalization and regulation of certain natural psychedelic substances
The question made the ballot largely due to advocates of psilocybin mushrooms, known colloquially as “magic mushrooms,” which are found from the Berkshires to Boston. They want to legally enjoy the mushrooms, which are often brewed in tea, and maintain that they can have larger benefits in helping people across the state suffering from depression or anxiety.
The referendum calls for the creation of a state commission that would license “psychedelic therapy centers,” where trained “facilitators” would assist people through their psychedelic experience, which could include drugs like mescaline derived from naturally occurring substances. Sales would be prohibited but residents could grow, use and share these psychedelics without fear of prosecution.
The success of the legalization of cannabis in the state emboldened advocates. The “reefer madness” predictions of opponents of legalization eight years ago didn’t materialize, and a new industry was created that provides jobs and tax dollars.
Early line: Question 4 passes.
Question 5: Minimum wage for tipped workers
The referendum would gradually increase the minimum wage over five years until it meets the state minimum of $15 an hour. The minimum wage for tipped employees is $6.75 an hour.
The opposing Massachusetts Restaurant Association asserts without offering evidence that tipped workers are “overwhelmingly opposed” to Question 5.
The MRA will flood the media with ads implying if not directly stating that should the question pass meal prices will go up in response. Voters might be jaded by “sky is falling” predictions made every time a minimum wage hike in the state is proposed, but restaurant prices are more tangible to consumers than prices passed along for other products. Money talks, and the MRA will spend more than the state chapter of the One Fair Wage campaign.
Early line: Question 5 is defeated.
