Massachusetts Voters Face Nine Complex Ballot Measures
A record number of proposals on tax, housing, and election rules will define the Tuesday vote, even as few state office races are competitive.
By Adam Richardson ·
Massachusetts has long featured low-competition races for state offices, but Tuesday’s ballot shifts focus to policy through a record-tying set of nine ballot questions. These measures cover a wide range of issues, including tax policy, gun control, and the legal status of recreational cannabis.
The state has not previously offered voters such a long slate of proposals. The dense wording of these questions requires careful review, a task that some residents compare to a final exam. While Democratic candidates hold strong leads in races for governor and attorney general, the outcomes of the nine ballot measures remain uncertain.
The surge in ballot questions reflects a direct approach to lawmaking in a state dominated by one party. Proponents argue that the legislative process is too slow and often ignores popular issues. Danielle Allen, a Harvard democracy expert and former gubernatorial candidate, said these questions allow voters to bypass a system that is not listening. Allen is leading the effort on Question 3, which would end party primaries and place all candidates on a single ballot.
This year’s slate nearly doubled the number of proposals seen in 2024, when voters faced five questions. In most election years, Massachusetts offers only three or four statewide proposals. Alan Saunders, an 80-year-old Democrat from Hardwick, noted that these measures give people a choice on specific issues like marijuana and gun laws.
Several measures address issues the state Legislature has not resolved. Question 4 would allow voter registration on Election Day, a popular idea that has faced resistance in the House. Another proposal would permit single-family homes on smaller lots without special local approval, aiming to address the housing crisis. Question 2 would allow employees of the state public defenders agency to unionize, a push that has continued for over a decade.
Polling data shows mixed support for the election overhaul in Question 3. A recent Suffolk University and Boston Globe poll found that 47 percent of likely voters support ending party primaries, while 41 percent oppose the change. Opponents, including major political parties, argue the system could reduce the influence of third-party candidates and increase the role of money in politics.
Critics of the legislative process point to the lack of competitive races as evidence of voter frustration. Jonathan Hecht, a former Democratic state representative, said the Legislature is unresponsive and unrepresentative. Only 57 of the 200 legislative seats up for election are contested. Steve Koczela, president of the MassINC Polling Group, noted that it has been more than a decade since the state held a competitive statewide November election.
The process of getting these questions on the ballot was costly and difficult. Proponents had to collect roughly 75,000 signatures last fall and an additional 12,000 this year. Signature gathering can cost campaigns more than $1 million. Campaign finance records show that groups supporting and opposing these measures have raised approximately $25 million this year, with significant contributions from out-of-state sources.
Legislative leaders have expressed concern about the influence of special interests in ballot question campaigns. House Speaker Ronald Mariano described the proponents as special interest groups and overly ambitious politicians. Some lawmakers worry that the process oversimplifies complex issues. State Representative Alice Peisch noted that complicated questions can be reduced to simple sound bites, which may then be mistaken for established facts.
Voters will also decide on measures that could change how state agencies operate and how taxes are administered. Question 1 would subject the Legislature and the governor’s office to public records laws. Question 5 would likely result in more automatic tax refunds during years with high revenue. Lawmakers have introduced bills that could limit the impact of some of these measures, but they have not yet reached agreement on the final language.
Source: The Boston Globe
