Massachusetts voters were presented with nine ballot questions in the midterm elections on Tuesday, the highest number of questions that have been on a ballot since 1994.
Shelburne resident Lynn Benander, 69, said Franklin County Continuing the Political Revolution (FCCPR), a local grassroots organization committed to progressive causes, released its recommendations on how to vote on the nine ballot questions, which she personally followed to the letter. These recommendations were “yes” on questions 1, 2, 4, 6, 7 and 9, and “no” on 3, 5 and 8.
“They did a lot of great research, they had a lot of great events where people got to weigh the pros and cons of all nine ballot questions,” Benander said of FCCPR. “I’m concerned that ballot questions have turned into a place where people with money can overrule the Legislature, and I don’t like it.”
In Buckland, Lisa Khanna, 70, felt the nine ballot questions inspired conversations and looked to give residents a voice in how the state operates.
“It was interesting that there were so many ballot initiatives, and I felt it really made it participatory democracy to vote on all of those things,” Khanna said. “I was just so happy to see so many issues on the ballot.”
Charlemont resident Molly Cantor, 60, said Question 5, to change the formula used to cap state tax revenue, was one of her motivations for heading to the polls.
A “yes” vote would change how the state calculates its tax-revenue limit under Chapter 62F, with the new limit being based on the previous year’s net state revenue, plus the average growth in Massachusetts wages and salaries over the past three years. It would also count revenue from the state’s surtax on incomes over $1 million toward the cap. A “no” vote, on the other hand, would keep the current formula, which bases the limit on the previous year’s limit, plus the average growth in wages and salaries over the past three years, and excludes the surtax on incomes over $1 million.
“I felt like it was sort of this backdoor attempt to undo our progress with the Fair Share Amendment,” Cantor said on Question 5. “Instead of keeping the Millionaire’s Tax fund separate and delegated for transportation and education, it basically rolled it all together so the state [could] take in less money now.”
A similar sentiment was felt by Shelburne resident Maya Winfrey, 47, who said that keeping the state revenue limit leads to more money for rural schools, which she said the community desperately needs. On the whole, Winfrey said some of the ballot questions were “quite complicated.”
“I don’t want to close off any avenues toward making sure our local schools get proper funding,” Winfrey said on Question 5, adding, “I don’t think our legislators … [are] responding to [the fact that] our schools need more money, and they haven’t gotten it for a long time and they’re getting less and less.”
Jennie Ladew-Duncan of Charlemont, 65, said there weren’t any ballot questions that she felt “particularly passionate about,” and that she always finds ballot questions “a bit tricky.”
“I’m a person that generally votes by the ticket,” Ladew-Duncan said. “I forgot my little piece of paper, so I [was] like, ‘I think this is where I’m going to go with that.'”
David Lewis, who chairs the Greenfield Republican Town Committee, said he voted “no” on Question 9, which aims to maintain a 2024 measure regulating firearms. He said he is not a gun owner but he respects the Second Amendment.
“My ancestors came here in 1634. We fought in the Revolution, we backed the Constitution and I don’t like anybody messing with it,” he said.
Lewis said he voted “no” on Question 8, wanting to keep recreational cannabis legal. He feels Big Pharma would benefit from recriminalizing cannabis as more veterans and other people with chronic pain would consider taking opioids instead.
Orange resident Margaret Lawless also voted “no” on Question 8 because she feels recreational cannabis legalization has done no harm since its approval in 2016.
“I think they should just leave it alone at this point,” she said after leaving the polls at Orange Town Hall.
She said questions 1 and 5 were the most important ballot initiatives to her. The first pertains to expanding the public records law to apply to the Legislature and the Governor’s Office, while Question 5 would change the formula for triggering taxpayer refunds.
“Taxes should come back to people if it’s not used,” Lawless said, regarding her “yes” vote on Question 5.
Ed Berry, who went to the polls in Orange with his wife, Jeanne, said voting “yes” on Question 1 was essentially a no-brainer.
“Public records for every public office should be available,” he said.
Ed, a former Republican, also voted in favor of Question 3, which would eliminate party-specific primaries for state elections. Should the ballot question pass, the state would implement a primary where all candidates are listed on one ballot, and the two candidates with the most votes, regardless of party, would proceed to the general election.
Orange resident Aaron Kendall, who holds a master’s degree in biology, said Question 6 was an important issue for him. The question pertains to creating a “Nature for All Fund,” which would use revenue from an existing sales tax on sporting goods, recreational vehicles and golf courses to support statewide natural resource conservation efforts.
Kendall spoke to the need for more personnel working in conservation.
“I was talking to a DCR official who does conservation work, and she does a lot of the law stuff,” he said. “And she says they literally don’t have ecologists to assess the land they’re acquiring.”
He said adoption would protect drinking water for all living beings, “not just humans.”
