My guide to the November 2024 Massachusetts State Election

My first political post and possibly my last

Summary:

President: you’ve already made up your mind.

All other elected positions: Democrat.

Ballot questions: Yes to auditor (Question 1), no to everything else. For more info on how I got to these positions, read on!

My background

I am a pretty typical nerdy yuppie who lives in Boston and plans to live in the Boston-area (including Cambridge or Somerville) longterm. I believe in capitalism, progress, and a strong safety net. I started a startup myself and try to donate to charity regularly, although I don’t always succeed. 

I think that the government should effectively provide basic services, like education, roads, and law enforcement, occasionally place a heavier thumb on the scales when it comes to other issues, but otherwise generally stay out of everyone’s way. For most social issues, I lean left. For most fiscal issues, I lean right. For most international issues, I lean towards noninterference.

I detest the way that hot-button issues, like trans women in sports or Haitian immigrants in Ohio, tend to hijack the national attention and divert our attention away from what I consider to be much more important national issues. I think the biggest issue in the government today is how ineffective and money-wasting much of it is, and I am a big fan of any politician who would try to combat that. That being said, I’m also a big believer that politicians should be morally upright, and I refuse to vote for any politician that I believe is corrupt.

Locally, I think that Massachusetts and Boston are reasonably well-run but expensive to be in. My biggest issues for both state and local elections are, in order of importance:

1. Increasing the housing supply to decrease rental and housing prices

2. Bettering access to transportation, especially public transportation

3. Making it easier to do business, especially small business like restaurants and startups

4. Improving the efficiency of local government, including limiting overtime and do-nothing jobs

5. Compassionately but effectively dealing with drains on public resources, like the homeless and migrants, without straining the budget or sacrificing resources for the rest of the public (like high quality schools)

Important Deadlines in MA

October 19-November 1: Early Voting

October 26: Voter Registration Deadline

October 29: Vote by Mail Application Deadline

November 5: Election Day

November 8: Last Day for Domestic Mail-In Ballots

November 15: Last Day for Overseas Mail-In Ballots

Offices on the Ballot

1. President and Vice President

Options: NA, you’ve already made up your mind

What you’d want from the winner in order of importance: NA

Weighing the options: NA

Recommendations: NA

2. Senator

Options: Elizabeth Ann Warren, Democratic

John Deaton, Republican

What you’d want from the winner in order of importance:
1. Reliably supports the issues I find important

2. Effective at sponsoring good bills

3. A good influence on the legislature as a whole

4. Honest

Weighing the options:

Elizabeth Warren started off as a wonky Democrat, which is generally what I like. However, she’s been gradually enmeshed in the culture war, and I think has become less effective and a less good influence on the legislature over time. 

John Deaton is a personal injury attorney and former Marine. He generally seems libertarian, but his biggest issues, as far as I can tell from his website, revolve around protecting cryptocurrency. Most of the rest of his platform is actually pretty indistinguishable from a bog-standard moderate Democrat’s.

Recommendations:

Elizabeth Warren. I’m not a huge fan of hers, and I wish there was a better option, but a personal injury attorney whose biggest issue is cryptocurrency is not a better option. 

To be honest, I’m generally against cryptocurrency, as I think it’s caused more harm than benefit through the scams and frauds that have been facilitated through it, so weighing John Deaton as a candidate, he fails on 1 and probably 3. I’m also skeptical of a personal injury attorney to be honest or effective as a Senator, so I’m nixing him on 2 and 4 as well.

3. House Representative

Options: For Cambridge or Boston, the only contested race is the Eighth District. The options are:
1. Stephen F. Lynch, Democratic 

2. Robert G. Burke, Republican

What you’d want from the winner in order of importance:

1. Reliably supports the issues I find important

2. Effective at sponsoring good bills

3. A good influence on the legislature as a whole

4. Honest

Weighing the options: Stephen Lynch has been the representative of Boston in the House of Reps since 2001. I’d say he reliably supports Boston’s interests. He’s a moderate Democrat who’s gradually shifted left over the years, but is still pretty moderate. In his personal life, he’s pretty much the living embodiment of a Boston politician: 4 generations in South Boston, minor tax trouble and a recovering alcoholic, came to power with the support of the unions. There’s really nothing wrong with him, but I wouldn’t say he’s incredible at anything.

Robert Burke’s website proudly shows him shouting at traffic with a sign that says “Close Our Borders”, and has almost zero information about his stances on anything else. I think that pretty much speaks for itself.

Recommendations: Stephen Lynch.

4. Councillor

Options: NA for Boston and Cambridge. It’s uncontested, so it looks like your councillor will be Christopher Ianella.

What you’d want from the winner in order of importance: I did not know what a councillor was before researching this, so I had to look it up. Apparently, in Massachusetts, they provide advice to the governor, including on judicial appointments. So I guess you want someone who would provide good advice.

Weighing the options: Christopher Ianella is a personal injury attorney. He’s been on the governor’s council for 31 years, and apparently his two main accomplishments, according to him, are “the appointments of the first woman and first African American chief justices to serve on the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court: Margaret H. Marshall, appointed in 1999, and Roderick L. Ireland, appointed to the court in 1997 and appointed chief justice in 2010”. This seems unimpressive for a 31 year term.

Recommendations: Man, I feel pretty weird about a practicing personal injury attorney advising which judges should be appointed. I wish I had paid attention to the Democratic primary for this position, which occurred on September 3. Well, too late now.

5. Senator in General Court (state senator)

Options: For Boston and Cambridge, the only contested position is Third Suffolk District. Your options are:

1. Lydia Marie Edwards, Democratic

2. Jeanna Marie A. Tamas, Republican

What you’d want from the winner in order of importance: 

1. Reliably supports the issues I find important

2. Effective at sponsoring good bills

3. A good influence on the legislature as a whole

4. Honest

Weighing the options: Lydia Edwards is, as Boston politicians go, pretty left. As former Boston city councilwoman, she sponsored legislation against chain stores, for real estate transfer taxes, and for greater local participation in city budgets. Boston’s biggest problems are, in my estimation, lack of housing and worsening public transportation (although that’s recently been turned around). She didn’t really address any of those issues.

Since becoming state senator, she’s continued focusing on left issues. Even when she does focus on housing and transportation, she mostly focuses on bills that subsidize demand, which ignores the supply-side problems (i.e. lack of good housing supply and good public transportation supply). I’m not a fan.

Unfortunately, her Republican opponent is even worse. The only issues her opponent cares about are:
1. Not building houses in Winthrop, MA

2. Not allowing trans women in sports

3. Not providing shelter to migrants

I’m actually somewhat on board with the third option, as providing unlimited shelter to anyone that comes to MA without a place to stay has been a ridiculously expensive boondoggle, but my feeling is that the migrant shelter issue is getting slowly resolved. Even if it’s not, I don’t think a blanket ban on providing shelter to migrants is a particularly smart or effective way to solve the issue.

Recommendations: Lydia Edwards for being the least bad option. But man, I wish there was someone better.

6. Representative in General Court (state representative)

Options: For Boston/Cambridge, your options are for the Ninth Suffolk District.

1. John Francis Moran, Democrat

2. Roy A. Owens, Sr., Boston, Republican

What you’d want from the winner in order of importance:

1. Reliably supports the issues I find important

2. Effective at sponsoring good bills

3. A good influence on the legislature as a whole

4. Honest

Weighing the options: John Francis Moran has been state rep for a while. He’s generally an establishment Democrat, focused on housing, homelessness, and gay rights. Looking through his voting record, he seems like he’s been pretty busy, reasonably effective, and focused on the right things.

Roy Owens seems kind of nuts, from his website, which is also really hard to find (warning: autoplays Gospel music). He’s a black Christian from Roxbury, and mostly focuses on being anti-abortion, anti-alcohol, anti-drugs, and anti-mortgage payments. Also, I think he’s anti-WiFi, as far as I can tell.

Recommendations: John Francis Moran.

7. Register of Deeds

Options: For Boston/Camberville, the only election you might be able to vote in is Middlesex Southern District (Somerville), and your options are 

1. Maria C. Curtatone, Democratic

2. William "Billy" Tauro, Independent

What you’d want from the winner in order of importance: I had to look this up, but it’s just the bureaucrat who keeps track of deeds, which are just land records. Again, paper-pusher, so I assume you just want someone who’s good at pushing paper.

Weighing the options: The Somerville/Medford news weekly, which is a website I literally just found, claims Maria Curtatone is bad at her job and a bad boss. She’s the sister of the former mayor, Joe Curtatone, and there was a stabbing at her house party 6 years ago, which seems bad. Apparently their brother is also a bad guy.

But, r/Somerville claims Billy Tauro is terrible. According to them, he’s a slumlord with a criminal history. He might also be behind the Somerville/Medford news weekly. 

I’m not sure I like any of these people.

Recommendations: Maria Curtatone, I guess? The options seem to be “person with close family connection to felons and also the former mayor’s sister” or “literal felon”. Does the register of deeds in Somerville have to be terrible?

8. Clerk of Courts

Options: NA for Boston/Cambridge residents. You’re stuck with Michael A. Sullivan, Cambridge, Democratic; Maura Hennigan, Boston, Democratic, for Criminal Business; John E. Powers, III, Boston, Democratic, for Civil Business; and Allison S. Cartwright, Boston, Democratic, for Supreme Judicial.

What you’d want from the winner in order of importance: Apparently, they can either just be paper-pushers of the court, or judges for unimportant civil cases, in which case they are clerk-magistrates. I think Michael Sullivan and John Powers are Clerk Magistrates, and Maura Hennigan and Allison Cartwright are just normal clerks.

I think you just need them to be reliable employees and maybe show good enough judgment that you’re fine with them being the judge of unimportant cases.

Weighing the options: NA

Recommendations: Eh. I don’t really get why this is an elected position.  

8. Register of Probate (Hampshire and Suffolk Counties)

Options: For Boston/Cambridge, your options are 

1. Stephanie L. Everett, Democratic

2. Mohamed Bah, Independent

What you’d want from the winner in order of importance: Probate court is for estates. The Register of Probate is the bureaucrat who helps keep it functioning (not the judge). So, this person should probably be a good paper-pusher.

Weighing the options: Maura Healey, MA governor, endorsed Stephanie Everett. I think Maura Healey has done an ok job, so I guess I’ll accept her endorsement.

I literally can’t find any info about Mohamed Bah, and there are multiple people with that name in Boston.

Recommendations: Stephanie Everett by default.

Ballot Questions

1. State Auditor’s Authority to Audit the Legislature

What the bill is supposed to do: the bill is supposed to make the State Auditor, who is an elected officer in Massachusetts, empowered to audit the legislature. Currently, the legislature audits itself, making it unique among states.

This is problematic because the MA state legislature doesn’t do much. Out of 10,500 bills that were filed in 2023, apparently only 21 were passed. It is unclear where our tax dollars are going or what these guys are getting paid for. 

The bill is supposed to create someone who digs through the legislature’s books and records and figures out what exactly they’re spending their time on. Right now, the audits only cover expenditures, but nothing else.

If it will accomplish said goal: For obvious reasons, the legislature says no. They say their audits are enough. They also say that this would be against the constitution of MA, as the auditor is part of the Executive Branch, which shouldn’t have authority over the legislative branch.

My answer is yes. The legislature’s audits don’t explain what they spend their time on. Also, I think empowering an elected official to figure out how the legislature is spending their time is fine. I’m not convinced by this whole separation of powers thing.

Recommendation: Yes, although it might turn into a court case. We’ll see.

2. Elimination of MCAS as High School Graduation Requirement

What the bill is supposed to do: Make sure teachers don’t have to “teach to a test” and instead “focus on the most important skills and knowledge to help students succeed in life”.

If it will accomplish said goal: Yeah, I think this is a bad idea. The MCAS maybe isn’t perfect, but it’s a basic measure of whether you can read, write, and do math. If you can’t pass it, you shouldn’t graduate high school. If your teacher can’t teach you to pass it, they are probably a bad teacher (or stuck in a bad system, or you’re a bad student, etc.).

Recommendation: No. 

3. Unionization for Transportation Network Drivers

What the bill is supposed to do: Let Uber and Lyft drivers unionize. This would only apply to active drivers (i.e. people who drive more than the median number of rides) and only to companies that transport people.

The goal of unionization is then to let these drivers negotiate with Uber and Lyft over pay and benefits. This would result in drivers being paid more and being happier. Maybe it would also result in consumers being happier, although I doubt anyone cares about that.

If it will accomplish said goal: Eh…I think it would definitely result in drivers being paid more. But I’m wary of letting drivers unionize. Right now, there’s a pretty free market for drivers. They can drive for Uber, Lyft, Doordash, or the taxi companies. If they are getting underpaid by one, they can switch to the other. Similarly, companies can feel free to recruit the better drivers from the other organizations and fire the worse ones. Competition is good for everyone.

If they unionize, especially if they all have one union, that’s going to just create a single source of drivers. Competition will be eliminated, which will be bad for the consumer and possibly bad for drivers who’d want to switch. I’m especially worried that bad drivers will be impossible to fire. As anyone who lives in Boston can say, bad Uber/Lyft drivers can be really bad, and letting transportation companies kick drivers off their network is important.

Recommendation: No.

4. Psychedelic Legalization

What the bill is supposed to do: Allow people to grow, possess, and use psilocybin (magic mushrooms), dimethyltryptamine (DMT), mescaline, and ibogaine. It would also allow licensed distributors to sell it. There would still be laws around using it, though.

Ultimately, this would put these psychedelics on the same level as weed now.

If it will accomplish said goal: Directly, yes, it would put psychedelics on the same level as weed.

The more important question is whether this is a good thing. I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, I think psychedelics can be helpful for lots of people. They’ve been helpful for me. 

On the other hand, I do think psychedelics can be really bad for people who are prone to psychosis. I have heard multiple times of people with years-long psychosis from bad trips. That is a risk that does not really exist with alcohol and very rarely exists with weed.

As such, although I’m pro psychedelics for medical use and for safe personal use, I don’t like the idea of licensed facilities selling them to anyone who walks in. Set and setting are very important, and I don’t like the idea of people casually doing mescaline before going out to party.

Basically, I wish they hadn’t put in the licensed facility bit here. I think it’s bad enough that I’m going to vote against this, with the idea that anyone who wants psychedelics bad enough now can obtain them without too much fuss.

Recommendation: No, regretfully. 

5. Minimum Wage for Tipped Workers

What the bill is supposed to do: Make sure employers pay tipped workers 100% of the state minimum wage by January 1, 2029. The state minimum wage is currently $15.

It also lets employers pool tips and distribute them to everyone, not just waiters. Overall, this is supposed to increase everyone in the restaurant industry’s wages.

If it will accomplish said goal: It is really difficult for me to predict what the effect of this will be. I can see a few possible scenarios:

1. Waiters get paid more but still demand the same tips. Restaurant prices rise and restaurant costs rise, hurting the restaurant industry and consumers. Waiters and back of staff might benefit, but they get fewer customers.

2. Waiters get paid more and ask for less tips. Restaurant prices stay the same, restaurant costs rise, but consumers go out to restaurants more because they’re cheaper. No effect on restaurant industry or consumers.

3. Waiters get paid more and tipping goes out of fashion completely. Restaurant prices go down, restaurant costs rise, and consumers go to restaurants way more. Restaurant industry and consumers benefit, waiters and back of staff benefit.

I wish I had way more information. My gut is no, because I think this will probably be bad for everyone, consumers and restaurants alike, as costs go up. Also, I don’t know who this is for, given that apparently 90% of waiters earn at least $20/hr anyway. Can’t we run a small pilot program in a single town and see what happens before we make a statewide law?

Recommendation: No.