Beacon Hill Roll Call reports local representatives’ and senators’ votes on roll calls from the week of June 29 to July 3.
$63.4 billion state budget (H 5555)
The House, 142-6, and the Senate, 39-1, approved and sent to Gov. Maura Healey a $63.4 billion fiscal year 2027 conference committee version of a state budget for the fiscal year that began July 1, 2026. The House and Senate had approved different versions of the budget and a conference committee hammered out this compromise version. The price tag is 4% higher than last fiscal year’s package.
“As a result of the Trump administration’s sweeping federal funding cuts, reckless trade policies and war with Iran, this budget has come during a period of significant economic uncertainty,” said House Speaker Ron Mariano, D-Quincy. “That’s why I’m incredibly proud of the investments that this budget makes despite those challenges, from funding for free school meals and for the final year of the Student Opportunity Act, to robust support for the MBTA, to nearly $10 billion for cities and towns across the commonwealth — all without raising taxes.”
“Grounded in fiscal responsibility, the fiscal year 2027 budget leads with a steady hand and delivers a spending plan that does not raise any taxes or fees on residents and businesses of the commonwealth, while making major investments in education and local aid, emphasizing our continuing commitment to supporting all 351 cities and towns,” said Sen. Mike Rodrigues, D-Westport, chair of the Senate Committee on Ways and Means.
Not everyone agreed.
“At a time when Massachusetts families and small businesses are pleading for affordability and meaningful tax relief, this budget delivers virtually neither,” said Sen. Ryan Fattman, R-Sutton. “Instead, it continues the commonwealth’s perpetuated pattern of unsustainable spending growth while failing to prioritize the core services that residents rely on every day. Our focus should be on strengthening local communities, supporting municipal services, improving public safety and providing relief to hardworking taxpayers — not funding special interest initiatives such as legal defense funds for individuals who are unlawfully present in our state. Massachusetts can and must do better.”
“Legislative leaders will point to a smaller rate of spending growth as evidence of fiscal restraint, but the underlying budget tells a different story,” said Paul Craney, executive director of the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance. “Rather than confronting structural spending problems, this budget depends on one-time funding sources and accounting shifts while continuing to expand programs that will place increasing pressure on taxpayers in the years ahead. Massachusetts has benefited for years from generous federal funding while failing to improve oversight and accountability. As those federal dollars become less certain, taxpayers could be left paying the price for years of poor fiscal management.”
A “Yes” vote is for the budget.
- Rep. Aaron Saunders — Yes
- Rep. Susannah Whipps — Didn’t Vote
- Sen. Jo Comerford — Yes
- Sen. Paul Mark — Yes
Toxic medical devices (H 5550)
The House, 139-0, approved a bill that would ban the use of DEHP, a toxic chemical that is commonly added to plastic intravenous bags and tubing and linked to breast, liver, lung and testicular cancer. Many IV bags currently contain DEHP, which is added to improve the plastic’s flexibility but can pose serious health dangers to patients. The measure also prevents manufacturers from replacing DEHP with similar ortho-phthalates and encourages the transition to safer alternatives while preserving limited exemptions for specialized blood collection and cell therapy products.
The Senate has approved its own version of the measure, and the House version now goes to the Senate for consideration.
A “Yes” vote is for the bill.
- Rep. Aaron Saunders — Yes
- Rep. Susannah Whipps — Yes
Require more disclosures of fundraising and spending by ballot question groups (H 5549)
The House, 149-0, approved a bill requiring more frequent public reporting of fundraising and spending by groups supporting or opposing ballot questions. Under the bill, ballot question committees would be required to provide monthly reports on their finances. After September of that year, campaigns would have to file biweekly reports until Election Day. The bill would hold ballot question campaigns to the same standard of disclosure already followed by candidates for office. Currently, ballot committees don’t have to report on their finances between Jan. 20 and September.
The bill also establishes a 13-member special legislative commission to conduct a comprehensive review of the initiative petition process and to submit recommendations, including proposed constitutional amendments where appropriate, by Dec. 31, 2027.
The Senate has approved its own version of the measure, and the House version now goes to the Senate for consideration.
“Massachusetts voters deserve to know who is behind the campaigns asking for their vote,” said Rep. Daniel Hunt, D-Boston, House chair of the Committee on Election Laws. “This legislation ensures voters have access to timely, meaningful information before they head to the polls, helping cut through the confusion that can surround statewide ballot question campaigns. By modernizing reporting requirements, increasing transparency, strengthening accountability and making campaign finance information easier to access, we are giving voters the tools they need to make informed decisions and greater confidence in the integrity of our elections.”
A Yes” vote is for the bill.
- Rep. Aaron Saunders — Yes
- Rep. Susannah Whipps — Yes
Illuminating public spaces (S 3145)
The Senate, 39-0, approved and sent to the House a bill that supporters say would improve how public spaces are illuminated and would help protect public health and safety; reduce energy consumption; safeguard wildlife and ecosystems; and lower long-term costs for municipalities.
Provisions include requiring all new and replacement publicly funded outdoor lighting fixtures to meet industry standards and best practices for reducing light pollution and minimizing glare; directing the Department of Energy Resources to establish regulations governing the brightness, shielding and design of public outdoor lighting; establishing a cheaper electric rate for low-wattage street lamps that would help municipalities trim their electric costs if they use the low-wattage lights; cutting down on extra light poles to ensure the number of streetlamps along a roadway matches the level needed for traffic and pedestrian safety; and exempting light fixtures related to safety or security needs, including lights related to aviation and nautical safety, and temporary emergency, repair and construction lighting.
“This legislation strikes a vital balance of reducing unnecessary light pollution, conserving energy, and protecting both wildlife and the night sky,” said Senate President Karen Spilka, D-Ashland. “By introducing a lower electric rate for streetlights, mandating fully shielded fixtures and setting a warmer color temperature, we’re helping cities and towns cut costs while improving public safety and environmental health. It’s a cost-effective, science-based step to ensure future lighting installations respect our dark skies — and to ensure future generations are able to experience the natural wonder of gazing up at our starry skies.”
A “Yes” vote is for the bill.
- Sen. Jo Comerford — Yes
- Sen. Paul Mark — Yes
Energy costs (S 3143)
The Senate, 32-8, approved legislation that supporters said would save people money; repair the climate; grow the economy; tackle rising energy costs head-on by cutting unnecessary fees; even out price spikes that hit households during high-demand months; crack down on predatory sales practices by energy suppliers; and steer the state away from expensive infrastructure projects that don’t deliver value for ratepayers.
“Baystaters want to power their lives without polluting our air and water, harming our health, changing our climate or emptying our wallet,” said MASSPIRG’s Legislative Director Deirdre Cummings. “This bill will help them do that. By removing costly and cumbersome red tape, this bill makes it easier and quicker for residents to go solar. Alongside new municipal solar options, this means more people will be able to tap the abundant, clean energy of the sun’s golden rays. The bill also prioritizes energy efficiency and adopts common sense consumer protections.”
“The systems run by the gas and electric companies are sprawling and complicated,” said Sen. Mike Barrett, D-Lexington, Senate chair of the Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy. “The Senate sees no greedy masterminds behind the scenes, but we do identify pockets of overspending and overcharging that have accumulated over the years. My colleagues and I want to go after the excesses and save people some serious money.”
Not everyone was on board with the bill.
“This Massachusetts Senate bill asks families and businesses to pay more money for a less reliable electric grid,” said Sen. Ryan Fattman, R-Sutton. “It would dramatically expand offshore wind mandates while shifting the financial risk from developers to ratepayers. The proposal could cost an estimated $20 billion, leading to even higher electric bills at a time when Massachusetts is already one of the most expensive states in the country in which to live and do business. Energy affordability and reliability must be the objective — not increasing costs for hardworking families.”
“Tonight’s vote is a profound disappointment for the hundreds of thousands of Massachusetts consumers who exercise their right to choose who supplies their electricity,” said Chris Ercoli, president of the Retail Energy Advancement League. “Rather than standing with their constituents, members of the Senate voted today to cede control of the Legislature to local government over a decision that belongs to consumers.”
A “Yes” vote is for the bill.
- Sen. Jo Comerford — Yes
- Sen. Paul Mark — Yes
Biomass (S 3143)
The Senate, 35-4, approved an amendment that would remove woody biomass as an eligible fuel under the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standard for Massachusetts municipal light plants. Supporters explained that while biomass was removed from the state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard in 2022 because it is not considered clean energy, it remained eligible under a separate section of state law governing municipal light plants. They said the amendment would close that inconsistency by ensuring public clean energy standards are aligned with current science and Massachusetts climate policy, preventing municipal light plants from counting electricity generated by burning woody biomass toward their greenhouse gas reduction requirements.
“For too long, Massachusetts law treated a polluting energy source as if it were clean,” said amendment sponsor Sen. Adam Gomez, D-Springfield. “This amendment closes that loophole, aligns our statutes with science, and ensures our clean energy policies reflect our climate commitments and environmental justice values.”
A “Yes” vote is for the amendment removing woody biomass as an eligible fuel.
- Sen. Jo Comerford — Yes
- Sen. Paul Mark — Yes
Gas line extensions (S 3143)
The Senate, 19-20, narrowly rejected an amendment that supporters said would end ratepayer-backed subsidies for new gas line extension allowances. They noted that the current system allows utilities to distort the market and undermine competition by charging ratepayers for costly new gas connection infrastructure, which ratepayers pay for decades in their utility bills. They argued that ending these subsidies will help reduce costs for ratepayers while allowing lower-cost clean energy alternatives to compete on a level playing field, including electrifying the grid in new neighborhoods, and the use of heat pumps and solar panels in homes.
“I voted for this amendment because if Massachusetts is really serious about meeting its carbon emissions reductions goals, while also delivering long-term energy savings to residents, we need more tools in the toolbox to end the continued expansion of costly gas infrastructure, which we all pay for decades,” said Sen. Jamie Eldridge, D-Marlborough. “I do not support subsidizing utility companies to maintain the status quo, while climate change continues to bring weather extremes, infrastructure damage and ever-rising electric bills to Massachusetts residents.”
“I voted against the amendment to ensure that the commonwealth will build all new types of housing, including affordable housing, as part of an overall approach that balances mitigating the effects of climate change on the one hand and incentivizing needed residential development on the other,” said Sen. John Keenan, D-Quincy.
A “Yes” vote is for the amendment. A “No” vote is against it.
- Sen. Jo Comerford — Yes
- Sen. Paul Mark — No
Also up on Beacon Hill
Change ‘hearing impaired’ to ‘deaf or hard of hearing’ (S 3142)
The House gave initial approval to a measure, already approved by the Senate on June 23, that would strike outdated language from state laws that refer to people who are deaf or hard of hearing as being “hearing impaired.” The legislation replaces the term “hearing impaired” with the phrase “deaf or hard of hearing.”
Ban medical debt from being reported to consumer credit agencies
A proposed regulation filed by Gov. Maura Healey and the Department of Public Health would prohibit licensed health care providers and debt collectors working on their behalf from reporting medical debt to credit bureaus. Supporters said this would help protect patients from long-term financial harm after an unexpected illness or medical emergency.
“Today’s action by the governor is a much-needed first step in preventing disastrous debt spirals,” said Health and Human Services Secretary Kiame Mahaniah. “Families in Massachusetts should be able to access the health care they need free from the worry that their credit could be ruined — potentially impacting their housing and other finances.”
The Department of Public Health is accepting written public comments on the proposed regulations, and will hold public hearings on July 27 and July 28 before finalizing the rules. For more information or to sign up to testify remotely and/or with written testimony, go to mass.gov/info-details/medical-debt-reporting-requirements-for-health-care-facilities-and-providers-licensed-by-the-department-of-public-health.
Make it easier to cancel subscriptions
A proposed law that would require companies to make it easier to cancel subscriptions was included in Gov. Maura Healey’s version and the Senate’s version of the fiscal year 2027 state budget, but the House did not include it in their version. The conference committee that hammered out a compromise version of the budget chose not to include the requirement in its version, which was approved by the House and Senate and sent to the governor. The proposed law would have required that methods of canceling a subscription are as simple as the methods of signing up for that one.
House Ways and Means Committee Chair Aaron Michlewitz, D-Boston, who led budget talks on the part of the House, said the proposal still needs some work, but added that he’s sure the issue will resurface, possibly very soon.
“From the House side, I don’t think it’s that we were averse to the discussions,” he said. “I think it was just more about the mechanics, how to make it actually be meaningful and work, and I don’t think, from our end, we were there yet.”
Attorney general wins settlement against food companies
Attorney General Andrea Campbell announced a settlement agreement with two food provision companies for violating Massachusetts’ Animal Cruelty Prevention Law. The agreement resolves allegations that the companies misled Massachusetts consumers and unfairly competed in the marketplace by selling products derived from farm animals confined in a cruel and unlawful manner.
The companies, Connecticut-based City Line Distributors LLC and New Hampshire-based Poultry Products Company of New England LLC, each operating in Massachusetts as Prime Source Foods, will pay $495,000 in penalties to the state and must refrain from selling noncompliant meat and eggs to Massachusetts consumers. The settlement also requires Prime Source Foods to implement resource planning systems to prevent future noncompliance.