2025-04-01 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on Election Laws
2025-04-01 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on Election Laws
SEN0 KEENAN0 -0 A0 few people signed up to testify today. When an individual or a panel has concluded their testimony, please remember6 to mute your microphone. In terms of questions from the committee during testimony, members who wish to ask a question should indicate to the chair when the individual's testimony concludes. For members joining us remotely, please use the chat or raise your hand function to indicate that you have a question. When finished, the member who has asked a question should let me know that they have no further questions and then re-mute their microphone. That's what we have for the ground rules. I don't know, Mister Chair, if you have anything else to add. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - No. I'm great.
KEENAN - Awesome. Great. So we are going to move on to 2 folks, and I think together separately if they wish. First would be representative Ida Hoeven and then also Senator Miranda. Welcome. Glad you could join us. How about that applause?
SEN MIRANDA - SB 7 - HB 63 - Haven't done 1 of these in a while. How y'all doing? To my colleagues, to Chairman Keenan and Chairman Hunt, and through you and to all the members here, I appreciate your willingness to have this critical bill included on today's hearing agenda. I want to specifically thank you for making it possible for incarcerated people to participate in democracy and also get to testify today. Ensuring that incarcerated people have access to testify allows our collective work to be more representative of all of our Commonwealth's residents and their lived experiences. I just wanna thank my sister in service here, rep Order Haven, for also putting in that work with us to make this bill happen. For those of you who may not know who I am, I'm Senator Liz Miranda, and I represent the Second Suffolk District in the city of Boston. I come before you today to testify in support of S7, a proposal for legislative amendment to the constitution relative to voting rights, and request that this bill, which would end felony disenfranchisement, be reported favorably out of committee.
There are more than 7,000 mass residents, citizens of the United States, who are disenfranchised and unable to participate in the most fundamental form of our democracy and civic engagement. They are underrepresented in our state's legislature, and our state laws ensure that they have they are unrepresented in the federal government. Black and Latino residents are subject to subject to I can't even talk today. To indefensible overrepresentation among these 7,000 individuals. Black people in Massachusetts are 8 times more likely than white people to lose their right to vote. Additionally, Latino people are 5 times more likely to lose their right to vote. It175 is no coincidence that black residents are disproportionately excluded from this democratic process. These numbers are the result of not just historic183 systems of oppression from slavery to redlining but modern-day practices in which over policing, over-sentencing, and misusing prosecutorial discretion are to blame. The blame for black overrepresentation in prison populations lies with the carceral system from the legislature that makes the law to the police, the prosecutors, and the judges who enforce them.
The result is a dilution of the political voice of an entire community and the relative increased representation of white people in our governments based on a discriminatory justice system and a history of actual oppression. We cannot continue to passively accept the products of such a history, and we have the opportunity to actually create the change we want. Before the year 1924, incarcerated individuals had a right to vote. We are simply asking for a return to that scope of enfranchisement to pre-February levels, a relatively small step on the long road to remediating centuries of racialized harm. Public support on the issue has shifted vastly since February. There is an increased understanding of felony disenfranchisement's role in exacerbating political and racial inequality by removing black voters and other groups who have historically been targets of political exclusion from273 the electorate.
Our government is touted as being of the people, by the people, and for the people. Despite being people, these 7,000 individuals in the commonwealth behind the wall are not legally a part of the people part. Their inability to vote in elections leaves them voiceless in halls of power. I believe that citizens should not go without representation299 in this country or in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. It's not called the privilege to vote. Voting is not a privilege. It is a right. At a time when attacks on our democracy at the federal level leave us feeling powerless, we should do everything in our power to make the right to vote truly universal so that every single person has someone322 representing their will in our government. Thank you to the chairmen and, through you, to the membership for this opportunity to testify today. I ask for your support and favorable report from this committee. Thank you.
REP UYTERHOEVEN - HB 63 - SB 7 - Thank you, Chair Hunt, Chair Keenan, and through you to the members342 of the Election Law Committee. And344 thank you for the opportunities, like taking us out of turn and allowing us to testify.348 And to the chairs, I wanna thank you from the bottom of my heart for ensuring that our incarcerated constituents can355 testify today in this hearing and357 thereby aid us all in living true to359 our values. Thank you. For those who do not know me, my name is rep Erika Uyterhoeven. Today, I join you to testify in support of the367 H 63 and S 7 proposal for legislative amendment to the constitution relative to voting rights. I wanna build upon my colleague Senator Miranda's moving remarks by answering 2 questions. How did we get here, and why now? First, to provide a brief background, as Senator Miranda stated, the Massachusetts constitution is the oldest written and active constitution in the world at over 400 years old, and it served as a model for the US constitution. For almost all of its 400 years of its existence, all citizens had the right to vote, and our incarcerated citizens exercise this right without issue. This was the case and true for most of my lifetime and many of ours. Sadly, this changed in the year when incarcerated citizens lost their right to vote. This change to our constitution followed a decade-long war on drugs and the tough-on-crime policies that preceded it. Beyond losing this fundamental right for thousands of Massachusetts citizens, there were material consequences.
With far less accountability, conditions in prisons got worse, the connection between incarcerated people and their families was restricted, and our stated commitment to prisons and jails as a pathway to rehabilitation, rather than punishment and warehousing of human beings, unfortunately slid backwards. We know440 that since then, my colleague stated, the narratives and views, and values of444 the American public shifted immensely on the issue of restorative justice, accountability, and incarceration. And the Massachusetts legislature has been steadfast in our commitment to our core values. We're committed to our core values. We've repeatedly shown the people of Massachusetts that when you are incarcerated, you do not lose your humanity, you do not lose your government, and most importantly, you do not lose your voice. Restoring the right to vote is about the voice468 of our constituents and470 also our commitment as legislators to representing their voice and serving474 them. We believe that all of our constituents have the right to exercise their voice for their fundamental and universal rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. I'm deeply proud and grateful for the leadership of our legislature and specifically this committee, as well as our partners, the Democracy Behind Bars Coalition, for making immense strides towards restoring the right to vote for many who are incarcerated. Citizens.
With your support and the support of our honorable colleagues, the soonest that this issue would be voted on by the public is 02/1928. Putting aside president Donald Trump's claim and expressed desire to serve a third527 term, there is no doubt that the 2028 election will be an important election year for all Americans and certainly voters in Massachusetts. What better way for us to lead as a537 state than to include this vital question in539 that election? With our federal government, countless democratic institutions torn apart and in peril, and many of our constituents living on the margin forced to live in fear and uncertainty, our constituents are calling on us to do what they've always wanted us to do, but now more than ever, to lead. We all believe in Massachusetts leading the nation. I believe that this issue, along with many, is one of the biggest moral questions of our time. In the face of the horror and damage inflicted by this current federal administration, I believe that now is not only the right time but is a strategic time for us to stand up with moral clarity in support of the right to vote. I will conclude and wanna share with you all that working with our incarcerated and formerly incarcerated brothers and sisters, many who are testifying today, has been 1 of the greatest honors of my life. Through organizing, advocating, and movement building591 behind the wall, the African American Coalition Committee, the Black Latino595 Asian Cultural Coalition, and many more show us all what democracy behind bars looks like and teach us how we can all build a healthy and thriving democracy. The fate of our nation depends on justice. I'm deeply thrilled to610 share with you all on this committee their612 words, wisdom, creativity, genius, and profound resiliency and integrity. Thank you.
KEENAN - Thank you, representative. Thank you, Senator. Are there any questions? Yes, representative. Yeah.
REP FROST - Thank you, and thank you to our legislators who testified on behalf of the bill. Just a quick question in your proposals before us today. How would if this were to go through, does your proposals direct, like, how the voting would take place? In other words, would the incarcerated individuals be registering to vote where they're incarcerated, or would they be voting in the community that they originally came658 from? And the reason I asked660 that is the impact that could have, let's say, on a community that houses a prison or a jail that, you know, how that could impact their local elections and things of that nature, you know, versus if it was more spread out through the commonwealth. And if and if your legislation doesn't touch other, that's fine. But it will
MIRANDA - No. Thank you for that question because that's precisely the point. So 2 years ago, I was able to pass a bill here in the commonwealth called jail-based voting. At the time, we wanted to improve the access to the ballot for folks that were not serving a felony, serving under a felony. In that process, the secretary of state and the department of correction, under the guise of EOPS, work together to increase the ballot access to the ballot, to be able to register to vote and voting at the place where they are incarcerated. Currently, in Massachusetts, if you're incarcerated in a mass DOC facility, you are actually in the census and are attributed to as a resident of the town, not necessarily that you're not coming from Roxbury. You actually get to vote in732 that house of correction as a resident of734 the town.
For example, if you're in Bristol County of the town where the jail is. Right now, it's not stipulated, but I believe that we'll be working on that if the constitutional amendment passes and we pass the legislation to work on making sure access is actually available to the incarcerated people in the jails. In the last couple of years, we've closed a lot of prisons because we have a huge declining population of incarcerated individuals in the Commonwealth. There are less than 6,000 people serving time in our jails, with a large percentage of766 them serving a felony. I don't know if you wanna share anything. But right now, that would have to be worked out. But the secretary of state, through the jail-based voting, actually, thank you committee, worked a lot to778 think about, like, how can we actually improve the access? Many of the DOC facilities are still struggling. The houses of correction began to think that they should have ballot boxes in their facility. Should people be voting, like you're asking, in the town where they're located or in the town that they consider home? Technically, right now, their address is the town that they currently reside in.808 Reached out to us with opinions on both sides.
UYTERHOEVEN - Yeah. I812 can also add to that. And I think that,814 you know, what's before us in terms of the816 constitutional amendment wouldn't include the specificity818 on this, but certainly something as, senator Miranda has worked on in the past by pass through legislation, you know, for whatever that is the will of the legislature. But I did also wanna share there are some, you know, legal proceedings and certain case law behind this. Dane versus Board of Registrar and voters of Concord essentially ruled that voters aren't eligible to vote using their prison or jail unless they've established domicile. And the ways you establish domiciles, whether, you know, how you engage in the community, right, whether you're working there, bank account, paying taxes. Now, of course,851 some of those things may not apply to an incarcerated person, but it left it largely open for us to interpret. So857 that is something that, again, we're hearing from both sides about this issue. I will just speak, and I'm happy to also help provide some more structured or more quantitative analysis or response to this. But what we've heard a lot from incarcerated people behind the walls is that they would prefer to874 vote where they're from because they have that connection to their community. Again, that is something I think is open but outside the scope of this constitutional amendment.
KEENAN - Thank you. Any other questions?
HUNT - Sure. Just to clarify, as far as these 2 proposed constitutional amendments are before us, it is silent to domicile, and that would be handled separately. %. That's right. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you.
SPEAKER7 - Thank you. If I can
SPEAKER8 - clarify that
SPEAKER5 - in a simple
SPEAKER9 - way. But
SPEAKER3 - thank you903 all.
SPEAKER1 - Thank you very much.
SPEAKER4 - Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - Have a great day.
HUNT - I just wanna909 take the opportunity to recognize representative Hamilton, who has joined us.
KEENAN - Next, we will hear from Corey Al. I mean, Patterson. From MCI Norfolk. The next 6 people that we'll hear from are from MCI Norfolk. So bear with us as we work through technology. Great. We can hear you.
COREY PATTERSON - CONCERNED CITIZEN - SB 7 - HB 63 (R )Good afternoon. Good afternoon, everybody. As Chairman Keenan said, my name's Corey. Corey Patterson. A lot of people know me by my Muslim name, AI-Ameen, and my testimony is also in support of S7 and H63. Can y'all hear me? Everybody hear me? Yes.
KEENAN - Yes. We can hear you. Great. Thank you.
PATTERSON - Okay. Alright. Yep. I grew up during the nineties and early 2 thousands in Dorchester and Roxbury. I grew up not feeling included in the local community of politics. Boston is known around the world for its rich political history, its routine displays of democracy and action, and community solidarity. Somehow, this was all invisible to me, a native son. As a child, I often didn't feel safe or protected neither in or outside my house. I knew there were laws, but none of them ever came to my aid whenever I was scared or being armed. This led to me using violence to protect myself.998 And now, after being incarcerated for the past 15 years, it's very clear to me that the laws are largely made to protect not to protect me, to protect, but to protect others from me. It's both sad and ironic that it wasn't until I came to prison that, for the first time, I felt seen and included by lawmakers in society.
I credit this to the African American Coalition Committee here at MCI Norfolk.1029 The AACC taught me civic education and engagement. The AACC,1035 for the first time ever, allowed me to meet with lawmakers from my city all over Massachusetts. I even helped to write a policy that is now law today. Because of the AACC, I feel empowered in a pro-social way to do something about the lack of policy aimed at protecting me and my incarcerated peers who are amongst the state's1059 most marginalized and vulnerable groups. I1063 strongly believe that as lawmakers are truly serious about protecting us in a meaningful way, they must fully include us in a democratic process. This is why for almost a decade now, I've been advocating for the re-enfranchisement of all incarcerated citizens. 1 question I have for this committee is, what does Massachusetts have in common with all the states that went in favor of Donald Trump this past election?
The answer is that the Commonwealth has chosen to restrict democracy by disenfranchising justice-impacted residents. In America, about 4,000,000 citizens are currently excluded from voting due to felony disenfranchisement laws. VP Kamala Harris lost the 2024 election by 2,285,316 votes, significantly less than 4,000,000 in incarcerated and people who are voting people that are felony disenfranchised. So even though Massachusetts, we favored, right, voting in favor of Vice President Harris, we continue to legitimize and support a restrictive democracy to determine the outcome of our elections when we don't have to. Especially knowing that disenfranchisement laws only make incarcerated citizens more vulnerable to unfair practices. It increases recidivism and makes our communities less safe. I wanna thank Chairman Hunt and Chairman Keenan for allowing me to speak here today and to this entire committee. I ask, I urge that you vote this bill out favorably in the same way you voted out favorably last session. Thank you again for allowing me to speak today.
KEENAN - Thank you. Are there any questions? Thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER11 - Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - Next is Maurice Skillman.
MAURICE SKILLMAN - CONCERNED CITIZEN - SB 7 - HB 63 - Thank you. Thank you for having me. Good afternoon. Members of the committee on election laws. My name is Maurice Skillman. I am currently incarcerated at MCI Norfolk. I have been incarcerated for 13 years. I've earned a bachelor's degree from Emerson Prison. I'm an advocate with the African American Coalition Committee and the Asian Pacific Islander Cultural Alliance. In 2023, I began working and collaborating with democracy behind bars to ensure that democracy does not stop in prisons and jails in Massachusetts. I am testifying today in support of S7 and H 63 voter restorations filed by Senator Liz Miranda and Representative Erica Idaho. I support these bills for the following reasons. The ability to vote in both state and federal elections is needed by incarcerated1254 individuals because they are legislators on all levels who file and enact legislation that impacts me during and after my incarceration. This can have a profile impact on my ability to seek housing, employment and to rebuild ties with my community. Being able to vote can also be meaningful and have a positive influence when incarcerated individuals.
If I can vote while incarcerated, I would feel like I belong to my community. Having a say and stake in the well-being of the community, I believe, is the art of democracy. Our state secretary, William Galvin, said, democracy depends on us, the people. Stand up and speak out. And I think that's what we're doing here1303 today with these testimonies. Being disenfranchised has stripped away my ability to vote,1309 stripped away dehumanizing. I believe it is time to end incarcerated-based marginalization and bring Massachusetts in line with Maine, Vermont, Puerto Rico, and Washington, DC. I wish to sincerely thank the committee1326 chairs, Senator John Keane and Representative Daniel Hunt, as well as the entire joint committee on election laws, for giving me the opportunity to share my testimony. And please advance legislative amendment relative to voting rights. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you. Any questions?
SPEAKER13 - No.
SPEAKER1 - Seeing none, thank you very much.
SPEAKER14 - Hello, everyone.
SPEAKER1 - Good afternoon.
SPEAKER14 - Good afternoon. You guys tell me when I can start it, please?1363
SPEAKER1 - Go ahead.
YISABEL LARA - CONCERNED CITIZEN - SB 7 - HB 63 - (R)- Alright. Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Yisabel Lara. I am a member of the African American Coalition Committee at MCI State Prison. I am 43 years old, and I'm an innocent person. Roughly incarcerated for almost 20 years for a crime that I did1379 not commit. Today, my testimony is in1382 support of Senate Bill 7 and House Bill 63, the voting restoration bill filed by respectable Senator Liz Miranda and Representative Erika Uyterhoeven. The right to vote is the very heart of democracy. The Voting Rights Act was enacted with the intent of banishing racial discrimination in voting. Currently, the majority Massachusetts state prison population are people of color serving time and preparing society for their crimes. It is time for deep reflection, rehabilitation, and to recognize the impact of harm inflicted upon the victims and survivors in our community.
Most of the prisoners will eventually be released, but long before, many of us will recognize the value of living a pro-social life and being role models for our families and friends. The right to vote is essential in this respect. Being granted the right to vote will encourage positive participation with our communities and prevent and prevent and prevent recidivism. This allows us to become civically involved and for some of us to experience for the first time how we feel to collectively participate in a crucial community event and to know that our opinions and important issues matter. The right to vote allows us to raise our voices, be part of conversations with elected officials, and simply support our families to take positive systemic change in our community. As a person of color and an illegal, my voice will never be heard, similar to those 7,000 incarcerated individuals in Massachusetts who are currently denied the right to vote and are simply the best since the convictions.
My voice can only be heard through activism and returning the right to vote to those incarcerated individuals who are in a similar circumstance, who would like to affect change by voting. The Massachusetts is one of the top state leading the nation in enacting law guaranteeing fairness, sorry, fairness, compassion, and humanity in a wide variety of issues. It is now time for our elected officials to take seriously this fundamental right at stake here and the civic responsibility to return the right to vote to those who have been felony disenfranchised, a still citizen of the United States. I wish to thank the committee chair, Senator John Keenan, and representatives Daniel Holmes, Liz Miranda, and Erika Uyterhoeven, as well as the entire joint committee on election law for giving me the opportunity to share this testimony. Thank you very much, everyone, and God bless you all. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you. Any questions? Thank you very
SPEAKER14 - much. Alright. Have a good day, everyone.
SPEAKER1 - Thanks. You too. Next is Alexander Gallot.
Good afternoon.
ALEXANDER GALLIP -CONCERNED CITIZEN - SB 7 - HB 63- Hello, everyone. So, my name is Alexander Gallip. I'm part of the Asian Pacific Honor Cultural Alliance Committee (APICA. I'm part of the AACC African American Coalition Committee, and I'm here today to support the S 7 and H 63 building restoration bill by Miss Liz Miranda and her representative. As you heard in my opening, I'm a first-generation immigrant. My mom came here from Canada. My dad came here from Haiti slash the Dominican Republic. Growing up, as early as 2 years old, I was already sent to different parts of the world. So, I've been to Canada, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, France, and Australia. I've been to 6 continents besides Antarctica. But it wasn't really America that my dad highlighted as being the land of opportunity. But I didn't understand that then. Looking back now, thinking about how my parents highlighted knowing all my cultures, but keeping that in mind as I'm learning and trying to navigate this system was something that I wish I would have taken advantage of then.
But when I got sentenced and my dad said, Don't let the sentence define or determine my actions, and that's when I met who I call my mentor, Alonine Patterson. He really encouraged me, and I started working with the Democracy Behind Bars Coalition. And restoring our voting rights was 1 of the main things that I wanted to be a part of because it finally gives me the opportunity to show my dad that1645 I now see the importance of our rights, and I wanna exercise those rights.1649 And like Miss Erica said, it's not a privilege; it's a right. Things that I was alluded to as a young man,1655 but these days going forward, these are things I'm trying to really help learn and help change the culture of incarcerated people. And I would like to thank you, Senator John Keenan, Senator Daniel Hunt, and the whole joint committee for really including us to have our voices heard today. My dad was able to be here today. I'll finally tell him that our narratives and our voices are finally being heard. I appreciate you all. Thank you.
KEENAN - Thank you. Any questions? And thank you very much. Have a good day. Next is Justin Rodriguez.
JUSTIN RODRIGUEZ - CONCERNED CITIZEN - Good evening, everybody. First and foremost, I would like to thank everybody today. I speak impassioned to speak truth to power today because my expression comes from a position of disenfranchisement and civil death. Disenfranchisement, to me, is a tear in the social fabric of our democracy in our states in our nation. It makes for a long time, it made me question whether or not democracy was real and who it was real for. I believe everything the way that it is right now has happened from a fractured democratic state. And what's going on right now to me isn't good. But the thing is that we can't even join that fight. And that bothers me because for a long time, I didn't feel like I was a part of democracy. I didn't feel like I was a part of the community. But since I've come to organizational efforts with brothers, like, who have spoken before me, I am a member of the African American Coalition Committee, civic engagement department, also empowering descendants to unlock democracy project as well.
And to me, they taught me what civic duty and responsibility was when I never had a sense before coming to prison. So it encourages me now since I've been educated by the people around me and the people that also believed in me from the outside that this matters and that this is important for me to be able to exercise democratic practice and be a part of my people, and to encourage my people to get involved in what impacts our lives. To me, that's been vital. It's been very important, and it's helped me care a lot more than I used to. And, again, I would like to I would like to thank the committee for allowing my voice to be heard today. It was said that voting isn't a privilege but it's a right. And I've looked at it like democracy isn't a face, democracy isn't a race, and democracy isn't a case by case. But democracy, from what I've learned about it, should be wholesome and should be true. And I believe there being only 4 territories, 3 states that allow this, it wouldn't be so different for Massachusetts to also appreciate and support a wholesome democracy. Again, I thank the committee. I appreciate Y'all for letting me speak today, and I support and would like to support S 7 and H 63. Thank you.
KEENAN - Thank you. Any questions? Seeing none. Thank you very much. Next is Rafael Martinez.
RAFAEL MARTINEZ - CONCERNED CITIZEN - SB 7 - HB 63 - Good day. Can everybody hear me?
KEENAN - Yes.
MARTINEZ - Thank you, sir. My name is Rafael Martinez. I am the chairman of the old men's committee. I am currently incarcerated at MCI Norfolk, and I'm here to support the S7 and house number 63 voting restoration bill filed by Senator Liz Miranda and Representative Erica Eidelman. But I also wanna thank all you all for the joint committee of election law practically hearing us out here at inside Norfolk and all across the state. What I wanna what I want to address here to this committee is that we're just having a serious problem with our youth and what's going on with this incarceration and how voting is so integral in that process to deny a lot of these young men and women that right for democracy and to be able to take part of this process is like that I'm trying to deny a cancer patient, the remedy, and the solution to that ailment. A lot of these young men and women that are incarcerated today didn't can we today didn't can all grow up in a harsh environment and circumstances where their ignorance was was basically parts of their environment.
And for me, as a young man going through this whole process of growing up in prison, coming in at the age of 19 and having to grow up and be a man. To see these young men and women go through1983 that same process is heartening. It hurts me because, at the end of the day, I was there.1989 I've been where they're at. And I know that if I1993 had known what democracy meant and how it is the solution, I would have never been even nowhere near the place that I was at. Because at the end of the day, for me, the state of2008 Massachusetts is supposed to be 1 of the most uplifting and liberal states there is. It's easier to say that2014 we're liberal, but it's a lot harder to actually be about action and actually take that first step and show the world that the state of Massachusetts is more than that. We are the pillar of democracy for the United States. For me, the young men's committee has strived to always bring awareness, bring education to quell idleness.
Because at the end of the day, voting rights the rest of this voting rights restoration bill is to prove to everyone that our voice matters, that we are not your super predator. We are not there to harm you. We are not there to be a plague among our own communities. We are the solution. Our voice matters because we are striving to be better. But how can we do that if our voice is never is never gonna have sense, never gonna have no potency because at the end of the day, nobody's willing to come down off their mouth and stop debating and arguing with us and have to start having a conversation. Let's treat each other on equal grounds with 1 another. I'm not just speaking about those who are in favor of this bill. I'm speaking about those who are against it because, at the end of the day, I want to have a concert. I want to know each 1 of you committee members. I want to know each legislator in that statehouse. On a personal level, because at the end of the day, I am 1 day will hopefully be able to go we need to be back to society as a better man and a person who wants to be back and be a solution to everything that's going on with today's world.
Our democracy is in crisis because we have individuals who are just one-sided and do not want to actually see the overall render view. And for me, as a chairman and a representative of those men from the 18 to 35 demographic, I must voice those concerns because, at the end of the day, I know these young men. If they had the opportunity of knowledge and education that they do now, they would have never been in this situation, and they would be fighting and speaking to this day. So I've asked them as a lot of those men's voice. I'm speaking and echoing what their concerns is to allow us to vote and allow us to voice that for all our communities all across the state of Massachusetts, not just Boston, not just Worcester, not just Pitch Field, not just Lowell, not just Springfield, not just a bigger demographic, but the smaller towns because there's men from all across this this state who are here who are just asking to let us have a chance and opportunity to make a change. Let us have a seat at that table because, at the end of the day, we are here to be treated on equal grounds. And for that, I'm asking for this bill to be passed because, at the end of the day, we are all equal under this one constitution. And that's why I'm asking for this vote to be checked and this bill to be passed because I definitely want to see you all one day out there to be better. And we can all strive to progress the state of Massachusetts and into a better and more liberal progressive democracy. Thank you.
KEENAN - Thank you. Any questions? No questions? Thank you very much. Thank you all. We appreciate it. We're gonna now move on to folks who are incarcerated at MCI Shirley. The first person to speak was Derek Washington.
DEREK WASHINGTON - CONCERNED CITIZEN - It's a pleasure afternoon. Can you hear me?
KEENAN - Yes. Welcome.
WASHINGTON - Yeah. First, I just wanna say it's a pleasure, Miss Sandra. My name is Derek Washington. I currently facilitate the Black Latino Asian Cultural Coalition group, and in this group, we have a lot of real conversations. We're able to hear folks out. We're able to flesh out some of the inequities about incarceration. People fifth place. Recently, there was a visiting practice was implemented. And in that practice, it had discouraged our loved ones from being able to come visit us. And that's a touchy place in prison because our first state of representation is our families. So when we're unable to see our families, individuals look for families in other places, whether it be a gang culture, whether it be a drug culture, whether it be whatever can help an individual get through the day-to-day health of incarceration. Voting is important because a lot of people disconnect or become desensitized to what voting is when they think of voting. They think in terms of Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. They don't think about Erica Odehoven. They don't think about Senator Miranda.
They don't think about Jamie Eldridge looking at the conditions of confinement of what else a lot of individuals in here. I say their names because they are a representation in place of the people who don't come in here, like our families and loved ones who can give us hugs. So in this space, our black, Latino, Asian, cultural, listen, we have a family within that, and we try to work through some of the tumult that keeps the individual not wanting to use drugs or what they call k 2 in here or join the gang. If the individual in the gang is the only person showing you love by giving you commissary food and speaking up for you and doing the thing that you don't have available to you, that's what you're gonna gravitate towards. But we encourage people not to do that, and that's why we are arguing for incarcerated suffrage.
2368 In2368 my process of growth and development, I was reading about our history, and they were talking about the2374 founding of this country. When Patrick Henry had a vote, he said his life was so dead, a piece so sweet to be purchased at the price of change in slavery. He said, I forbid it. Almighty God, I know not what course others may take, but for me, give me liberty and death. Prisons are dignity-deprived environments where there is no liberty in here. We lead with the Thirteenth Amendment, which states to abolish slavery and involuntary service to accept forced labor as punishment for a crime in a sense that with property in it, give us dignity. Give us a voice. Humanize our circumstances. Don't let individuals return from incarceration to their community without being able to flip parts participate in a political process. Because when you are able to do so, you value your community. You value the people you're returning to. I can get long-winded, but I appreciate you all giving us this platform. At the black Latino Asian Cultural Coalition, we're having these conversations. Liz Miranda is a is scheduled to come next week. So that's our representation till we could get our full representation. So I encourage you all to allow incarcerated suffrage and continue in these processes to have our voices heard. It's a pleasure, and thank you all.
KEENAN - Thank you. Any questions? Thank you very much for your testimony. Next is Gabriel Espada.
GABRIEL ESPADA - CONCERNED CITIZEN - Hello and good afternoon.
KEENAN - Good afternoon.
ESPADA - It's no secret that in history, our government laws were were created to diminish the voting of our marginalized communities. Denying prisoners the right to vote has a disproportionate impact, not only on prisoners in general but those same marginalized communities we come from. This form of penalization towards incarcerated citizens strips us of constitutional interest. It is a disenfranchisement that constitutes civil death, which undermines rehabilitation and causes social exclusion. Social exclusion is a key cause of reoffending. It also further promotes the Us versus them mentality, which is so prevalent within the cultures we come from, where we think the government is against us. Prisons are supposed to prisons are supposed to be approximated to as closely to our community as possible. Allowing prison prisoners to vote solidifies the value of a democratic society.
The restoration of this right will create links with society, furthering the process of normalization for our incarcerated population. For without this right, our minority communities' voting strength is diminished by the law. Most of our incarcerated come from poverty and less fortunate environments with families lack political awareness and involvement. We, as incarcerated2594 individuals, will open the door to this awareness amongst these communities. This is what we've been doing here at Black. Actually, Shirley, MCI Shirley to create and encourage this this commitment for ourselves and a civil society. Therefore, a sense of responsibility by social inclusion. We must assure incarcerated citizens that they also are stakeholders in how this government is formed. I close with this. To continue to deprive prisoners of their right to vote is regressive. Are we not a progressive state that leads the nation? If so, then who can provide the effective solutions to the problems of crime than those who have experienced the cause of it within the system? Let the voiceless have a voice. Let our incarceration, incarcerated population exercise a right to vote. I thank you, chairman, for this opportunity.
KEENAN - Thank you. Are there any questions? And thank you for your testimony. Next is Anthony Garvin. Good afternoon.
ANTHONY GARVIN - CONCERNED CITIZEN - Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, committee. In my search for some history on this matter to determine where we go wrong, I found out that in 1974, prisoners were first given their right to vote. At that time, the statistics for racial breakdown were unknown. In 1979, 66 percent of the prison population was Caucasian, and the rest was non white. Governor Cellucci filed the constitutional amendment in 1997. At that time, 52% of the population in prison was non white. That that passed in 02/2001. At that time, 93% of the prison population was non white. So when we talk about disenfranchisement, we understand that it actually means to deprive somebody of a right.
It reminds me of Eugenics in the early 19 hundreds, which was designed to deprive people who are marginalized of the right to build children if 3 generations were in state institutions. That became unconstitutional as a crime. But all the way up to 02/2008, sisters in California were being given hysterectomies under the guise of other procedures. So So when we look at these rights that we're being deprived of, they're really aimed at non white individuals. So being a felon makes me a clap ass of people. Those were felonies. Are we not citizens of Massachusetts for those who will return to your communities, or will they be pushed into the underworld and told that what they think doesn't matter? How they feel doesn't matter why they're incarcerated. This can do something to the psyche of an individual who already doesn't feel like the political process is for them or that what they have to say doesn't matter. Those who sit in front of us and make the decisions on what laws will be passed, our lives are in your hands.
All we ask is that we'd be2855 able to sit down and tell you what we believe we need while we are doing the things that we are doing that are wrong and what we need to get the help that we need. But we also believe that we are in a dire state right now with the2870 way the federal government is being run, and the ability to participate in the political process would only lend a hand. So I ask you to seriously consider reinstating the right to vote in Massachusetts for those who are incarcerated. Because, believe me, when I deal with individuals at the black program, at the Hispanic Heritage2899 Group. We are only seeking to better our lives2903 so that we don't have to come back to prison. I've been down 22 years, and a lot of the brothers you heard speak have been down for a long time as well, if not longer than that. We don't wanna come back to prison, but we do wanna become productive members of society. So, why not start now? SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you.
GARVIN - The type of idea am I done?
KEENAN - You, go ahead. If you wanna finish up, sure.
GARVIN- Yeah. The type of idea that we shouldn't participate in this process is detrimental to the mental health of individuals as well, and we'll be returning to your community. So take that into mind, please. Thank you.
KEENAN - Thank you very much. Any questions?
HUNT - I would just make sure that we have your written testimony because I'd also like to do2955 a deeper dive into those numbers.
GARVIN - I will be writing my testimony out and sending it2961 in soon. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - Thank you.
SPEAKER12 - Thank you.
KEENAN - No other questions? Next is Anthony Moore. Good afternoon.
ANTHONY MOORE - CONCERNED CITIZEN ( R ) - Good afternoon. I've been thinking over this for a long time in my head to think about exactly what kind of clear data we have to support2988 voting in prison. And there's nothing directly linked to voting in prison in terms of support. But I will say this: we do have substantial surrounding data to support voting in prison. 7 years ago, this governmental body passed the criminal reform3012 bill. And in that bill, you did it with the intention for communities to be better. 3 weeks ago, we watched the national treasure, Mayor Wu, testify in front of the nation and talk about how the numbers are down and crime is down.
So, I wanna speak about a full circle moment. How this is a full circle moment. 8 years ago, you guys passed the criminal reform bill, and what happened after that? What happened after that is that brothers and sisters incarcerated have bettered themselves while incarcerated. They have turned prisons into colleges. They have left prison and established programs that help individuals come home. They have worked independently with our legislative, executive, and judicial branches so that our communities are better. The 1 data point that Mayor Wu consistently drove home is that crime is down. Crime is down. Now, this is the full circle moment. The full circle moment is this. 7 years ago, you guys made a decision to pass this bill. Now the onus is back on you guys. We need the vote. Now it's time for phase 2. Now it's time to double down on the bet of the people because the people have spoken, and the people have had enough. The people who have done 10, 20, 30 years in prison, we are grabbing all of these younger individuals, and we are trying to encourage them to say forget this crime.
We are finding different ways to be active members of our community. But we cannot be completely active members of our community until the vote is reestablished to us. So all I ask and I humbly request of this governmental body to please rein to please reinstate the vote and double down on your back from 7 years ago. I really do appreciate all of you.
KEENAN - Thank you. Any questions? Who's on the phone? None? Thank you very much for your testimony. Thank you to all your folks at MCI Shirley. We appreciate it. We're gonna move on to 2 people who are at MCI Framingham. The first is Melissa Cordle.
MELISSA CORDLE - CONCERNED CITIZEN - ( R ) Hi. Good afternoon.
CORDLE - Good afternoon.
CORDLE - My name is Melissa Cordle. I'm 75 years old and have been serving a natural life sentence for the past 40 years. I am a human being. When I was first incarcerated, we were able to vote, but it was taken away from us. I would like the right and freedom to do to the United States to express what happens in this country, my country. Most people who are incarcerated will leave and can register to vote. There is a large population here that can't. We watch the media, the TV, read newspapers, and even in prison. What happens on the outside renders us helpless to the issues outside. It is also a burden for families of the incarcerated that the economy and families with the incarcerated as the economy the turmoil and state and country are entered in as it is.
We don't want to be exiled by the government, army and live for our country. We don't want anyone outside to think that we don't know or understand what's happening. Most of us here have strong feelings and stress with our families about the economy because we rely on our families and the support while incarcerated. The prison population isn't as small as 1 thinks, and we would like the opportunity to participate in these troubling times. Even though some of us may have may have made mistakes in the past, that doesn't mean we don't have a strong moral compass. I have a big heart and perspective to share.3270 Some who haven't been in the through the criminal system wouldn't understand. I knew nothing really until the system entered it. Most of the law has been cited individuals are educated. We understand what's going on. We discuss, complain, don't agree, or agree with present situations. All this affects us in many other different ways. I3298 wanna thank you for allowing me3300 the opportunity to express our concerns. We have lost a lot, but we still should be able to express feelings3306 and incite our country. Thank you.
KEENAN - Thank you, Melissa. Any questions? Sheena, thank you for your testimony. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER20 - Thank you.
SPEAKER5 - Have a
SPEAKER1 - good day. Next is Patricia Olsen. Hi Patricia.
PATRICIA OLSEN - CONCERNED CITIZEN ( R )- Hi. Good afternoon. My name is Patricia Olsen, and I'm currently incarcerated at NCI Framingham. First of all, I'd like to thank the committee for allowing us to do these groundbreaking testimonies. This is the third time that I've been privileged and honored to do this, and I thank you very much. You guys have no idea how much this means to us. Today, I'm asking that our right to vote while incarcerated be reinstated by passing this bill. I was a registered voter prior to coming to prison.
For the last 20 years, I have been unable to vote. No matter what my conviction, no matter where I lay my head at night, I am still a US citizen, and I should have the right to vote since I am affected by many of the people who are elected into office. We the incarcerated are mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, and have elderly parents out there. The loss not only affects the people on the inside, but it affects our loved ones on the outside. We, the incarcerated, witness issues that many are not aware of. If given a voice and the right to vote, we can help elect officials who can address things like recidivism and the reduction of prison populations.
We need to address topics like the opioid crisis, addictions that people are going through, the aging population, the people who are incarcerated who have mental health issues, and whether or not to build a prison. These are all topics that really need to be addressed. I've had the privilege of meeting numerous amounts of state reps and senators. I met Attorney General Campbell and Governor Healy himself. They all listened. They gave me a voice, and I wish I had the right to vote for them because they cared enough to come to prison and hear about the good and the bad. God willing, I will leave here. And when I do, I will get my right to vote back. Having this time out doesn't make sense. I'm still a US citizen, in here or out there. We lose a lot of rights when we go to prison. Voting should not be won. People who hold powerful positions should be elected by every citizen, especially by those whose lives depend on who wins and what laws they pass. That's all I have to say, but thank you very much for listening to me.
KEENAN - Thank you, Patricia. Any questions? Seeing none. Thank you for your testimony. I wanna take a moment to thank the Department of Corrections for coordinating this. We know it was a bit of work. We wanna thank them. We wanna thank all those who provided their testimony remotely from our correctional institutions. Thank you, Paul. We're gonna now move on. The next speaker, Joshua Berrios. Is Joshua here? Good afternoon. We can be the panel. I'm sorry? That's fine. Yeah. That's fine. If you just wanna give us your name in case you're on the list separately. Andrea Jefferson. Andrea Jefferson. Christina. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER22 - It's on the back side. Cassius.
SPEAKER1 - Cassius. Gotcha. This 1? Okay. Thank you.
SPEAKER2 - Welcome. So, oh, do I could go. Alright.
SPEAKER23 - So yeah. So sorry about that.
SPEAKER1 - Alright.
JOSHUA BARRIOS - CONCERNED CITIZEN - So yeah. My name is Joshua Barrios, also known as Hamza. I, too, served over a little over 15 years, and I know a lot of those men that just spoke here and testified here today. Actually, it gives me great pleasure to hear them speak today. Me, I personally wanna support this bill, and I encourage the election laws committee to do so. For myself, I was disenfranchised for over 15 years. In fact, the first time I ever voted was this last election that we had with Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. And for me, my personal experience with that, I felt really empowered. I felt like my voice was heard. I felt connected to my community. I felt more engaged. And for the longest time, while I was incarcerated, I never felt like that. Right? Never felt politically engaged, politically motivated until this election.
So I would say, honestly, 1 of the most important things that I wanna say, and not to double down on anything that was already previously said, but I feel the points behind this bill in allowing people incarcerated to vote is significantly important, not only to people here and, people inside having the ability to vote, but also the significance on the fact that it's, like, if we're encouraging people to, be responsible, be accountable, this is a form of accountability. This is a form of responsibility. When we're saying people that are inside to be responsible and accountable, asking the ballot, being able to have the right to vote is that. Right? It is saying we are being responsible right now. We are taking the initiative. We are being responsible to our communities, our state, and our country by having the access to vote, and we're being accountable to these things. Right? And then once people are inside, specifically from my own experience, if I had that, I'll feel more connected to my community. I have more of a say and more of an obligation to3624 do better for my community because of the fact that I've been previously advocating and voicing my opinion3630 on the matter. So this is really important, and I think it's3634 really important not only for people inside but also the significance of rehabilitation as well.
And then the last thing I would just, like, like just to end with is the fact that this is I would say that Massachusetts is a progressive liberal state that we are trying to do things. And I think 1 of the things that we have to do is get rid of the remnants of the institution of slavery, and filling disenfranchisement is a remnant of the institution of slavery. From the embossment of the Thirteenth Amendment, like Derrick Washington has cited, all the way from Jim Crow into the point of where we have mass incarceration. So, by implementing felony disenfranchisement, again, this is just a badge of the institution of slavery. So I think we should be here making history and kinda leading the country in that, and I'll end with that. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER17 - Thank you.
CHRISSY CASA - CONCERNED CITIZEN - My name is Chrissy Casa, and I'm here as the legislative organizer with Democracy Behind Bars and Coalition, which is under the EDC, where I serve as the outside liaison to incarcerated coalition members. And I have to say it's been3705 an honor to work with my teammates at Norfolk, and I was excited you got to hear from them all. I just wanted to point out to make sure that Anthony, Justin, and Rafael spoke about how3723 much they are educating themselves and each other behind the wall. They educate themselves and each other behind the wall so that when they are finally out in society, the role models that they're being inside the wall carries through to when they're back in society. Personally, I was shocked to learn that, in February, the constitutional right to vote3747 was stripped away from incarcerated people.
Felony disenfranchisement laws go back to the end of the civil war, the same time that legislators were passing black codes to prevent black Americans from accessing the ballot, which is why it's so hard to believe that a quarter of a century later, Massachusetts has a voting ban that acutely affects the civil rights of people of color. Restricting voting from people with a felony conviction undermines Massachusetts's leadership in civil rights and extends racial injustice embedded in the criminal legal system to its electoral system. Allowing incarcerated people to vote prepares them for a more successful reentry and gives them a sense of belonging to their community. In fact, research suggests that voting while incarcerated reduces recidivism and can help increase a sense of self-worth and ties to one's community. Having a say in the well-being of your life in the community is at the heart of our democracy. To exclude incarcerated men and women from our democracy, to quiet their voice and not let them vote on matters that impact their lives, their families, or their communities, to me, is a crime. That is why I believe it is time we amended and acknowledged that revoking the right to vote 25 years ago was a bad decision. Thank you.
ANGELIA JEFFERSON - CONCERNED CITIZEN - SB 7 - HB 63 - Good afternoon. My name is Angelia Jefferson, and I am in support of the bill S 7 H 63. I am formally incarcerated. Seeing my 2 sisters testify just brought so much joy to my heart. Thank you for allowing them to testify, and my brothers also. But mainly my sisters because I spent3864 the majority of my life with those 2 women that just testified. When I was in Framingham, I was unable to vote due to my incarceration. The fact that I am a citizen of the United States, I feel I should have been able to vote because my voice does matter. Oh, excuse me. I'm so fucking I know. Incarceration should not have taken away should not take away anybody's humanity, excuse me, or or the ability to affect change in our community. Our community needs to hear the voices of the incarcerated people. Just because we3910 and I still say I. I still3912 say we because I still feel like I'm incarcerated in a lot of ways. But it shouldn't take away our humanity or our voices. We should have a right to vote. We should have a right to have our voices heard, not just through this but throughout the world. We matter. We're human. We're not animals. We are human, we matter, and our voices matter. Thank you.
HUNT - I just wanna just check and say thank you for your testimony, but also, excited to see you as the appointee to, by you you just appointed by Andrew Campbell for the Criminal Justice Commission. Yes. I did. So I'm sharing that with Senator Brownsburg. So looking forward to working with you, and we'll be hearing from you.
JEFFERSON - Alright. Thank you.
AUSTIN FRIZZELL - CONCERNED CITIZEN - Thank you, committee members. I just wanna say I greatly appreciate the amazing turnout today from the committee. I really appreciate3966 the ongoing commitment you all have shown to this issue. My name3970 is Austin Frizzell. I've worked on this issue since 2019 when I3974 helped co-direct the outside efforts for the mass power campaign, which was a citizen-initiated voting rights amendment attempt that happened that year. I think a predominant lesson I've learned from speaking to thousands of voters is that 1 thing they always ask me is when do we take the, when do places like Vermont and Maine give voting rights back to people? And I say they never did take the right away. And I think that it's important for us to remember that this was a regressive choice when we made it in the year February. But we do have an opportunity to lead the nation in reversing that. I really appreciate this committee having led the effort to include incarcerated folks in testimony, which happened in the equivalent hearing last session. I also really appreciate the committee for showing great attention to detail with this. I think the votes act amendments that strengthen jail-based voting are directly responsible for the work in this committee.
So I appreciate Chair Keenan, former Chair Ryan, and other folks who worked on that effort. I also appreciate the questions from representative Frost. I do think it is important to consider implementation. I would just like to emphasize, in addition to what the senator representative said, that there's actually more precedent for voting in prison than there isn't many ways. This was happening for the decades prior to the ban. And also, we have secretary Galvin working hard with the sheriffs and along with the attorney general Campbell to really see how we issue these questions. So I think there is quite a different defensive precedent we can draw from people that are voting in jail now who never lost the right to vote. And I think that is just important enough for us to remember and communicate to the rest of the legislature that there's a strong foundation that this committee has helped establish that I think would be a strong pathway for us to move through some of those concerns. Especially because people do wanna vote overwhelmingly where their family still is and where they will be returning to. And I would also just point to what Secretary Galvin has put out. It would be most people would be voting, and most people are voting where they were formally living prior to incarceration. There's a lot of good advice from that office. So thank you all for your continued commitment to accountability to incarcerated people, and I hope you advance both amendments. Thank you so much.
KEENAN - Thank you. Any questions? Yes, representative.
FROST - Thank you, mister chairman, and thank you to the panel for your testimony today. So back in 1997 through February, the much of the debate and discussion would be centered around this question, but I'm gonna ask you and feel free to respond, is, you know, why should someone who murdered another individual, who took their rights away, have that right while they're incarcerated, to have the right to vote. When they, again, took somebody else's life away or a rapist who took someone else's, you know, dignity away, if you will, and harm them, why, while they're incarcerated, you know, should they still be able to to vote? And I think that's the big question you're gonna run into if we do debate this in a constitutional convention, and it would be the biggest debate because all as you all know, we just don't get to decide this as a committee. We don't get to decide even as a legislature. Eventually, it has to go to the voters to ultimately decide if it were to be changed. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER2 - Thank you, guys.
BARRIOS - Yeah. I think that's a fair question. Essentially, what comes to my mind, honestly, is, like, harm doesn't negate another harm. And, also, I think, again, what I speak to is, like, when we talk about responsibility4212 and accountability, this is4214 another form of we being responsible and accountable. So by just stripping someone's right4220 to vote is you're depriving that person of the ability to be responsible and accountable, whether it's a right to vote or not exercising that right. Also, I would like to say that people incarcerated, when they go to the Canteen, they're paying taxes. So you don't strip in that, right? So, if they're paying taxes, why are we not being allowed to vote as well? So
FRIZZELL - Yes. Thank you for the question. I've definitely engaged a number of voters on this concern as well, and I think people do recognize that we wanna create a society in which there is accountability, and I believe deeply in repair. I think, when we focus on a punishment approach, which I believe this is part of, that it doesn't give us much opportunity for repair as well. I also think that the harm that comes is very important to address. I don't think it is addressed by removing democratic rights. So I think that is just my concern, as there isn't really a similar relationship between what the punishment is and what the potential for repair is. I think those are independent questions, and we should really be focused on bringing people back into the community, and I think this is a very limiting way of understanding what our community is. The other thing I would just say is that we know that, like, I apologize. I'm going on a different train of thought. But yeah, that would be my primary consideration for this matter.
And I do think people, once they're able to have that conversation, once we bring it to light and bring it to a constitutional convention or to the voters. People are really willing to engage with this topic in a way I think isn't true. And I also just wanna emphasize that that was a question, that time frame, but also what I understand was responding to at the time was political organizing by folks inside. And it was actually while it was framed as a consideration like you are now, and I don't think that's a bad question to consider. I also believe that the focus was on punishment, that political organizing for folks creating a pack while inside. And I do think that trying to put up barriers is actually a very dangerous precedent for us to do in that manner, and it could lead to further stripping of rights. So those are my considerations for that, among others. Any other responses? Go ahead.
HUNT - Sure. So conversely, as a constitutional amendment, is it your understanding that 6 6 years from now, the legislation that's proposed would not preclude a future legislature having subsets of the representatives, question, limit amount of time served or half time served or certain, you know, criminal activities could be included or excluded from any future legislation if this constitutional amendment were to pass.
FRIZZELL- Speaking on behalf of myself, I would support no such limitations. I would have no support softball. And I know. And I have an easy answer personally for that from my political standpoint. I would not want to see any carve-outs. I have a strong commitment to not segmenting our populations like that, and I think it's a limited understanding of where harm comes from if we are to do that.
HUNT - To the question that would not preclude a future legislature and say
FRIZZELL - They could do that, but I would not support it. So I appreciate that. I appreciate it, but I have to stick true to what I believe in. If other folks have any responses.
HUNT - That's fine. Thanks.
KEENAN - Any questions? Great. Thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER7 - Thank you.
KEENAN - I appreciate it. Next is Michael Beowice. Did I get that right? SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER14 - He's going to be
SPEAKER1 - testifying remotely. Michael Beowice, are you with us?
We don't see you online, so we will come back. Next is Andrea James.
SPEAKER29 - Good morning. Good morning.
SPEAKER1 - Good morning. How are you?
SPEAKER29 - I'm well. Thank you. How are you?
SPEAKER1 - I've been doing well. Thanks.
SPEAKER29 - Good job, Ange.
SPEAKER1 - Receiving an interesting testimony, so we thank everybody.
ANDREA JAMES - NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR INCARCERATED AND FORMERLY INCARCERATED WOMEN AND GIRLS - SB 7 - HB 63 - Yeah. Thank you so much to the committee. Thank you to the co-chairs. Wonderful to be here today. I'm here in support of Senate 7 and House 63. My name is Andrea James, and I'm the founder of Families for Justice is Healing and founder and current executive director of the National Council for Incarcerated and Formerly Incarcerated Women and Girls. I'm a widow. I'm a mother, a grandmother, a former member of the Massachusetts bar, and I am a formerly incarcerated woman. When the Massachusetts constitution was amended 25 years ago to strip incarcerated people of their right to vote, a group of prisoner activists filed a lawsuit in federal court as we have spoken about today, claiming the action violated the Federal Voting Rights Act because it had a disparate impact on the political power of minority voters across Massachusetts, and that it exerted a disproportionately adverse effect on the voting rights of African Americans and Hispanic Americans compared to its effect on the voting rights of other citizens because these groups were and still overrepresented in Massachusetts prisons due to considerable racial and ethnic bias, both direct and subtle, in the Massachusetts courts.
Today, African Americans are still significantly overrepresented in the Massachusetts prison system. Black people make up approximately 28% of the incarcerated population here in the Commonwealth while4581 only representing approximately 8% of the state's total population. And still, while the overall incarceration rate in Massachusetts has declined, the racial disparities have widened as the incarceration rate for white residents fell by 40% compared to a 21% decrease for black residents. Black people are more than 7 to 8 times more likely than whites to be incarcerated here in the Commonwealth. Also, 25 years ago, in defense of amending the Massachusetts constitution to strip incarcerated people from the right to vote, the Massachusetts attorney general's office argued that there was no claim that Massachusetts had any history of using laws, rules, practices, tests, or devices to restrict, impede, or4638 discourage voting by racial minorities.
4642 The4642 late esteemed professor of history in African American studies, Manning Marable, stated that law enforcement and policing policies that target urban communities and residents contribute to racial disparity that has a direct impact on the process of black voting. He referred to the consequences of such widespread disenfranchisement as civil death, a term we have heard several times already this morning this4672 afternoon. To continue to uphold the argument put forth by the mass then Massachusetts attorney general that there is no4680 claim that the state has any history of using laws, rules, practices, tests, or devices to restrict, impede, or discourage voting by racial minorities is to pretend that Massachusetts state police, police departments across the Commonwealth, like Boston, the gang unit, cities like Worcester, cities like New Bedford, have not struggled with a history of race based and other practices covenants such as covenants such as the discriminatory housing policies practiced for years by the Boston Housing Authority that denied public housing in certain neighborhoods to black families.
The aggressive saturation of law enforcement targeted residents of Boston's communities of color, and the repeated violations of the constitutional protection against unreasonable search and seizure and the countless studies evidencing the harsher treatment and longer sentences given to black defendants in the Commonwealth. Stripping the voting rights of incarcerated people continues to impact seriously the very communities where a healthy electorate is most needed to affect the change we need and to do it at a more appropriate and meaningful pace. I will wrap here by just saying that at a time when voting rights are under attack and intentionally targeting the black vote, the poor, the marginalized, the incarcerated, the formerly incarcerated. Let Massachusetts live up to its name as a commonwealth. Let's not continue to uphold a practice that blatantly serves the purpose of discriminatory voter disenfranchisement. When people are incarcerated, they still count. They count, and they deserve the right to vote in the Commonwealth, particularly due to the insidious and continued practice of racial discrimination throughout the criminal law system in Massachusetts. It's time for the adoption of this act relative to the voting rights restoration, and I ask you to vote S 7 and H 63 out favorably. I thank you, and I appreciate the opportunity to extend my time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you.
SPEAKER29 - Thank you so very much.
SPEAKER1 - Any questions? Thank you very much. Next is Jonathan Cohen.
SPEAKER5 - Okay.
JONATHAN COHEN - CONCERNED CITIZEN - SB 7 - HB 63 - Thank you. Thank you, Chair Keenan, Chair Hunt, and all the members of the committee who are here today. My name is Jonathan Cohen. I'm the policy director at Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide grassroots advocacy group fighting for a more equitable, just, sustainable, and democratic commonwealth. We're here in support of a favorable report to H 63 and S 7, which you've heard from many others so far this afternoon, the proposal for a legislative amendment to the constitution relative to voting rights. As folks have already noted, felony disenfranchisement in Massachusetts is a recent phenomenon in our state's history. And then, as people noted, I'm kind of even even more recent than folks kind of often think. And would just like to take a moment to recognize how rare it is that we took the right to vote away from a group of people who are formerly enfranchised. We like to view the history of voting rights in this country as 1 of eliminating the different sources of disenfranchisement and a perpetual process of moving ever forward. And it's a blight on the history of the Commonwealth's wealth in the country as a whole that Massachusetts makes a marker in the opposite direction of that.
However, let's say, from the Massachusetts perspective, the legislature has been taking far taking steps forward in recent years. We recommend the work that the legislature did a few years ago in the votes act, which included language around jail-based voting. So around those who still maintain the right to vote, who are incarcerated, and moving toward full, kind of, reenfranchisement as a step forward, building on the progress there. Since, folks that we know, we know how to ensure that people can vote when they're eligible. As others have already noted, felony disenfranchisement compounds the systemic racism of our criminal legal system. I don't need to repeat statistics that others have already published. And I would also underscore that it enfranchises more voters than those directly impacted. Many of you may have experienced this. I know I, as somebody who canvases met canvases quite a bit, have is that people, even though Massachusetts does not disenfranchise people, after they have already left incarceration, I have encountered on so many times people who think that they lost the right to vote permanently because they didn't have it when they were incarcerated.
And as whenever somebody loses the right to vote at any point in time, a lot of them will think that they have lost it permanently because they're like, no. There's not necessarily the civic infrastructure to make sure that every single person knows otherwise as well as the values that were sent to them. We're kind of put kind of sent to them from that, disenfranchisement. And so, like, it's again, it speaks to more than just the directly impacted. Felony disenfranchisement exacerbates the humanitarian crisis in our prisons and jails as people lose the ability to have a direct impact on the conditions in which they live. And I will also highlight that in addition to, as folks noted before, Vermont and Maine in the US have already done this as Puerto Rico and DC have. But many other countries do, particularly in Europe, like the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Montenegro, Serbia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and Ukraine. Hopefully, I should you know, just in time, all already have full enfranchisement so people know don't never lose the right to vote because of incarceration there, and we should join them. So thank you again.
KEENAN - Great. Thank you. Any questions?
HUNT - Where is, sorry. Go ahead.
REP MENDES - Yeah. What you said that when people think that they lose their rights permanently is so right because as I'm door knocking in Brockton, I met an individual and then, you know, you're trying to get your votes. And then his answer to me was, like, oh, I can't vote. I'm a felon. And I was just caught by surprise. I didn't have an answer because you expect people just to say I don't vote or I'm not a citizen. Like, other reasons, but that just really completely just I just didn't know how to respond, and I was I felt awkward at that moment. But that's obviously wrong. But in his mind, because, obviously, he was incarcerated, I don't know. I didn't go into details. I just ended there because I, at that moment, did not know. I wasn't ready for that answer, and I didn't know how to proceed. So that is so, correct. Thank you for bringing that up. I just it happens.
COHEN - Yeah. No. I've counted, like, especially when canvassing, like, obviously, from Boston, canvassing in Roxbury. I've heard that so many times, and people think that they don't they they don't have the right to vote anymore. And I have to kind of explain to them, and sometimes they don't even believe me when I'm trying to explain to them that they do have that right. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER5 - Yeah. Thank
SPEAKER31 - you. Thank you, mister chair.
SPEAKER1 - Any questions? Thank you.
SPEAKER30 - Thanks so much.
SPEAKER1 - Next is Lily Allen.
SPEAKER2 - Should be remote.
SPEAKER1 - Should be participating remotely.
SPEAKER9 - Yes. Hello. Can you hear me?
SPEAKER1 - Yes.
LILI ALLEN - CONCERNED CITIZEN - SB 7 - HB 63 -( R ) Wonderful. Thank you so much. My name is Lili Allen, and I'm a resident of Watertown. I am testifying today in support of S 7, H 63, a legislative amendment to the constitution relative to voting rights. I need to start by saying how moved I was by the testimony today from the women and men who are incarcerated. Their testimony was more powerful than anything I could say. As 1 of them said, democracy is the answer. Let us have a seat at that table. I believe that. I am testifying today as a member of building up people, not prisons, led by Families for Justice as Healing. I have a strong commitment to ensuring that all people in the Commonwealth are treated with dignity and have the best chance possible of attaining self-sufficiency and a family-sustaining wage. It seems obvious to me that giving the right to vote has no drawbacks. Anyone who votes has a stake in their community and their state. This seems especially important for people who are incarcerated.
The act of voting can make them feel they belong. It can strengthen their connections to the Commonwealth and help facilitate reentry. In addition, it is a racial equity issue. Less than 7% of the state's population is black, but it accounts for 31% of people in prison. Latinx individuals make up 13% of Massachusetts' population but 29% of the prison population. Given the history of disenfranchisement of people of color in this country and as others here have stressed at a time when voting rights are under attack, Massachusetts can and should step up and restore this recently stripped right to people who are incarcerated. I would5261 like to speak to the question about why someone who has caused harm should be able to vote. I do not see how denying the right to vote helps victims of harm. I don't see how it helps our democracy. And, of course, I don't see how it helps the person who caused harm take accountability for their actions and repair the harm that they have done. I urge you to advance the legislative amendment relative to voting rights. Thank you for your time.
HUNT - Thanks so much. Any questions from the committee? Hearing none. I appreciate it. Next up is Emma Chinman. And then just wanna as of now, Nicole Porter, you're up next, remote.
EMMA CHINMAN - CONCERNED CITIZEN - SB 7 - HB 63 - Hello. Good afternoon. Thank you to Chair Keenan, Chair Hun, and the rest of the committee. My name is Emma Chinman, and I serve as the policy and strategy manager at Partners in Democracy. I'm here today to speak in strong support of S 7 and H 63, the constitutional amendment that would restore voting rights to all incarcerated people in Massachusetts. At Partners in Democracy, we believe that a healthy democracy rests on 3 rights: The right to vote, the right to run for office, and the right to see and shape your community. This constitutional amendment boldly affirms 1 of these core rights, the right to vote. It also reflects our broader belief that all people, regardless of incarceration status, govern their lives. Stripping incarcerated people of the right to vote serves no restorative or rehabilitative function.
It does not prevent crime or promote safety, but restoring voting rights can foster a sense of dignity, belonging, and responsibility. It's a way to affirm that everybody has a stake in our shared future and the right to help shape it. We know that this is also a racial justice issue. Black and Latinx residents are vastly overrepresented in our prison system, the result of longstanding systemic inequalities in policing, sentencing, and access to opportunity. In Massachusetts, black residents make up less than 7% of the population but over 30% of the prison population. Latinx residents are 13% of the state's population, yet nearly 30% of them are incarcerated. When we deny the right to vote to people who are incarcerated, we are disproportionately discommunities of color and further entrenching the political marginalization they already face.
Reenfranchisement is not just a policy fix, it is an important and powerful corrective to centuries of exclusion and suppression. It is a step forward, towards a more equitable and representative democracy where every voice truly counts. By reporting s 7 and h 63 favorably out of committee, you are helping Massachusetts to lead with integrity, rejecting exclusion, and embracing a democracy that truly includes everyone. On behalf of embracing a democracy that truly includes everyone. On behalf of Partners in democracy, I5465 urge you to support this legislation. Thank you.
HUNT - No questions, Katie. Thanks for your testimony. We'll just remind you and all, you know, you gave us a lot of statistics there, many of which are googled, but, would appreciate, any verbal testimony to be also submitted. Thank you. And next online again is Nicole
NICOLE PORTER - CONCERNED CITIZEN - SB 7 - HB 63 - ( R) Porter. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair Keenan, Chair Hunt, and members of the Election Laws Committee. I am Nicole Porter, senior director of advocacy with the Sentencing Project, and I am requesting your strong support for H 63 and S7. The Sentencing Project is a national organization that stands with the incarcerated men and women who testified earlier today, as well as the Massachusetts residents who are supporting these measures. We thank you for your careful consideration of these important bills and for amending the state constitution to restore voting rights to persons completing their sentences inside of prison. Oh, can you hear me?
HUNT - Yes. Sorry.
PORTER- I will submit written testimony that but I wanna focus my comments this afternoon on the community safety benefits associated with these proposed constitutional amendments. There is indeed a community safety benefit to guaranteeing the vote to persons with past incarceration experience and who are currently incarcerated. Voting is among several pro-social behaviors for justice-impacted persons, like getting a college education that is associated with reducing future contact with the criminal legal system. Having the right to vote or voting is related to reduced recidivism for persons with a criminal legal history. These constitutional amendments would continue to center Massachusetts leadership in guaranteed voting rights for certain marginalized communities and building off of measures passed in recent years. S 7 and H 63 bring mass would bring Massachusetts in line with 26 states and Washington DC that5589 have expanded voting rights to citizens with felony convictions since the late 19 nineties. These reforms have contributed to over 2,000,000 people getting their voting rights back nationally. Part of the steps to guarantee those rights is to ensure access to voter registration and ballot access in Massachusetts through H63 and S 7 would allow that. So the sentencing project urges you to vote yes on these measures, and thanks to the committee for this consideration. Again, I will follow up with written testimony. Thank you. Thank you.
HUNT - Any questions from, committee? Hearing none, thank you for your testimony. Next on the list is Vincent Dixon. Yeah. Is there another sheet or just one? We wanna get 2 Great. If you could just speak into the microphone for those participating remotely. And again, as you go, I'll introduce you.
VINCENT DIXON - CONCERNED CITIZEN - SB 521- Thank you.5669 Thank you, senators, representatives, and staff. My name is Vincent5675 Lawrence Dixon, 60 Lake Street, unit n, Winchester, Mass 0 1890. I am a historian, but I have also been an activist in many other areas. I appear today in order to support S 521, the idea of a child labor constitutional amendment to the United States constitution, asking ratification of a pending US constitutional amendment. My testimony on this issue may seem to be an issue that is possibly obscure and, in some sense, an overlooked issue. However, we live in an odd time where old or even older issues seem to be appearing or reappearing, and child labor is an important problem that has been resurfacing even here in Massachusetts, even here in local Massachusetts businesses.
I am well aware that in the setting, we want to be careful regarding the mention of particular names and circumstances. So, in doing so, I will provide a reference sheet and additional written comments. Child labor has been a haunting threat to the lives of children, families, and societies throughout much of history and, sadly, has never really gone away. The particular proposed amendment to the United States Constitution that I appear to support has been pending since 1924, has no time limit on ratification, and has had more recent activity in its support. Oddly, Massachusetts placed this proposed amendment on the Massachusetts ballot in 1924 in the nature of advisory question 7, and it was voted down. I think that since the amendment is still alive and social progress understanding may have reached the prescient provisions of this proposed amendment, it is now before us as an opportunity to correct injustice and to be forward-thinking in our legal policies.
In fact, many reformers here in Massachusetts, following the lead of many in England, helped to create the important concept of adolescence, which has strengthened our educational ladder and reduced harm to the lives of many young people. Part of the concept was about limiting abuse, long adult hours for young students so they could learn and explore, not just burn out. State law has operated appropriately in terms of issues here, but, in fact, franchisees of a major chain have been identified as violators of Massachusetts child labor5812 laws and have been fined by the Massachusetts attorney general in recent years.
Not minor violations, but major and varied. Specific violations covered at least 2 different franchise group operators covering a total of at least 27 different locations. My colleagues on this panel have separately and distinctly filed H 3845, referred to the Joint Committee on Veterans and Federal Affairs, h 18, 1986, which has been referred to the Joint Committee on the judiciary. And looking at these related bills, all 3 of our bills provide basic language for ratification and notification of passage of the federal child aligned amendment. My bill S 521 provides additional, I think, useful language that provides reasonably concise and relevant reasoning for the passage of the child labor amendment. I'd be willing to help staff and others on this, and I turn this over to my colleagues.
HUNT - Thank you, and I just wanted you to know that I've had a conversation with representative Day regarding this issue.
DIXON - Representative Day is my representative and, you know, a very knowledgeable fellow.
ALEXANDER GIBBON - CONCERNED CITIZEN - Awesome. Thank you. I'll give you extra time. Thank you. Appreciate that. Co-chairman, vice chairs, well, ranking member not here anymore, and distinguished members of the committee, thank you for allowing us the opportunity to testify5896 today. My name is Alexander Gibbon. I'm from Newton, Massachusetts, and I'm here to, you know, with my colleagues here who I'm actually meeting in person for the first time today. We all separately filed our bills and find ourselves here as a coalition. We are urging Massachusetts to adopt 1 of the 3 resolutions or resolves to ratify the child labor amendment, a mere century after Congress first sent it to the states, but better late than never. Right? You might be wondering, though, why now? Isn't child labor a thing of the past? Unfortunately, recent legislative actions suggest otherwise.
In Florida, we have seen just this week a senate bill, I believe 918, that proposes allowing 16 and 17-year-olds to work unlimited hours without mandated breaks during the school year and permits 14 and 15-year-olds who are homeschooled or have graduated to work similar hours. And why are they doing it? Well, because of all the deportations and threat of deportations from the federal administration has left them with a foreseeable labor shortage. But how about you know that could just be hypothetical? That's just a bill. Or, there's actually recent legislation that was passed in Iowa that allows children, you know, that are 14 and 15 to work up to 6 hours on a school day, extending their hours late into the night, and allow for dangerous industries like meat packing. That is not something that I think our children should be exposed to. These aren't just policy shifts. They represent a broader regression that endangers our youth, compromising their education, well-being, and future prospects.
I took my first job as a caddy at Braeburn Country Club when I was in seventh grade. It's a weekend and summer job. I loved it very much, but school always came first. These bills and laws were not to enhance opportunities for caddies, ice cream scoopers, and summer camp counselors, but it is to allow for the exploitation of a vulnerable group for profit. When states begin to roll back child labor protections, it signals a disturbing trend. Ratifying this amendment will send a powerful and clear message. Massachusetts unequivocally stands for protecting children and the right to education, safety, and a future unburdened by exploitative labor. We will say loud and clear that exploitation is not an economic strategy and that6042 children are not commodities. History reminds us that we often take for granted, our rights if we become complacent. We've seen that with, you know, with Dobbs and Massachusetts stepped up, in order to protect, women's health care, in the in the wake of that. Massachusetts, by ratifying this, would then be able to solidify those rights for all. In closing, I say let's not wait another hundred years. Our children or our conscience deserve better. It's time to take a stand to lead and finally ratify the child labor amendment, which is pending before us, and make the biggest investment we can in the future of the Commonwealth.
SAMUEL FIELDMAN - CONCERNED CITIZEN - Thank you, chairs, members of6094 the committee. My name is Samuel Fieldman, and I work as a consultant on issues of amending the constitution, though I'm here just as a volunteer. I began that work in 2010 after the Citizens United decision, with my kids on the way. They were born in 2011. My kids today are6114 taking a test on the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments. And I realized that they're very lucky right now. Because I am unlike them, many other kids don't have the luxury of going to school. And we're looking at a situation where that could get potentially significantly worse. This amendment was first proposed during what's called the Lochner era of the Supreme Court, a time when they were throwing out many efforts to perform the government. And, it was left behind when the Lochner era ended, and a new Supreme Court case said that, in fact, Congress did have the power to address this issue and to fight back against child labor. We are now facing what many are calling a second Lochner era. A time when many of our precedents that we thought were safe, that we thought were long standing, and and, are now being overturned.
That's the reason why this amendment was6171 first proposed, and that's the reason why it should now be6173 ratified today. And the reason why many of your6175 colleagues in other states, there's only6177 10 states left that need to ratify it, are now looking at doing exactly that. The precedent on this issue is very clear. There was the case of it not was gonna be the other 1. Dylan v. Gloss. No. Hawk v Smith. Sorry. The case of Hawk- sorry about that. The case of Hawk v Smith made it clear that the vote that happened in 1924 on this issue has absolutely no bearing on this case. The constitution gives you, the state legislature, the right to ratify this amendment. And, given that it's been well over, it's been a hundred and 1 years since that time. I think the opinions of the people from that time don't really have much bearing; we've seen and made tremendous progress since then. Further, the case of Coleman made it crystal clear, specifically dealing with this very amendment, that there is no time limit on this amendment, that it can be ratified even many years later.
And we've seen that happen as well with the 20 seventh Amendment, ratified for 200 years before it was finally ratified. It was originally6250 proposed as part of the Bill of Rights, and it is now part of the constitution after 1 person, who wrote a college essay decided, that he got a bad grade on, decided to take it up, and basically to get revenge on that bad grade, went around the country, trying to get people to ratify that amendment. And we saw state legislators respond. There were many more ratifications that were needed for that 1. We only need 10 to get this into the constitution at Massachusetts is 1 of the ones we need. This seems like a very easy thing for the state to do that can have a potentially enormous impact. On the procedure, I just urge you to keep in mind there are 3 resolutions that all do the same thing. Procedurally, we think that the strongest one is H 3845. In terms of the language, we urge you to amend this and work with representative Gentile to amend that once they all match, and we're happy to work with this committee and other committees to make sure that they all match. This one is a resolution rather than a joint a senate resolution rather than a joint senate resolution. So procedurally, it might not be the best vehicle. But regardless, as long as any of them gets passed by both houses of the legislature, that's valid to ratify the constitutional amendment. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you. Any questions? See none.
SPEAKER5 - Thank you
SPEAKER1 - very much.
SPEAKER16 - Appreciate your testimony.
FIELDMAN - Can I also just voice my support separately for all of the other remaining bills before the committee, including the 1 that referred so much testimony on voting rights for Prisoners? SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER34 - Great. Thank you. I would second that, as well.
SPEAKER1 - Okay. Thanks.
SPEAKER34 - Thank you, guys.
KEENAN- Next is Mac Hudson. I noticed you there. Kinda twitch in a testifier.
MATT HUDSON - CONCERNED CITIZEN - SB 7 - HB 63 Well, I thank you for hearing me and taking me out of turn as I'm I really must go. My name is Matt Hudson. First, thank you, chairs Keenan and Hunt, and to the members. I'm in support of passing the restoration of the vote, S 7 and House, 63. And I wanted to get up here to kinda give you some context in regards to some interesting questions that I heard from the body itself. Mister Frost had, had raised a question, an interesting question, and that was, well, what do we say counter to someone who has taken a life? And just to give you some context, I spent 33 years incarcerated, mostly for a crime that I did not commit, and finally was paroled September 22. I've been out working for prison legal service as a community liaison slash paralegal for the Racial Equity and Correction Initiative. So when I speak from this, I speak from a historical I am someone who was present when the vote was taken.
We did have the right to vote at 1 point, and how that vote actually worked is that we voted from our community. That's so our vote was counted from where the communities and where we came from. And I hope that gives you some context as you move along and consider that. The second thing is that in order for you to really get to the core of that question, you have to understand that Massachusetts has already decidedly decided what prisons are supposed to be doing to Massachusetts in Massachusetts. In the passage of the 1972 Omnis Bill Correctional Reform Act right, Massachusetts has said it wants our institutions to be institutions of rehabilitation.
It changed its name from the Department of Bureau of Prisons to Department of Corrections. Right? It changed the name prisons to facilities. They also did not want the name prisoner or what have you to be associated or convicts to be associated, so they adopted the term inmate. When you look up the term inmate, inmate is a resident of treatment. Right? So they wanted those who were housed there to be treated in those facilities in which6529 they would become returning back to society as as civilians, as citizens. Part of that, and it's enacted in 01/24, general law6539 124, section 1.
Part of the commissioner's duty is to get those who are incarcerated ready for civilian ship. It's in the mandate that the legislative body has given to the commissioner. Right? So if you go back and actually look at that, you will see that the right to vote actually lines up with that civility and advocacy aspect. So this is the reason why we have grievances. This is the reason why we have the privilege to write our legislators and what have you and to communicate because we're learning how to engage like every other citizen. And that is what the facility is supposed to do and as well as treat those other humanistic, errors that prog those programs and social programs that exist behind the wall is supposed to do.
So if we're now gonna say that these institutions and this has been a political atmosphere of back and forth because depending on who's the governor, really dictates what, what the question on whether or not what prisons are designed or meant to be. What we've seen from former governor Weld and on is that there has been this change of idea that prison should not be made for rehabilitation, but instead, it should be used to be warehousing those who are incarcerated and punished. And we have seen the result of that as a result. Right? So neither the governor nor no.. 1 has the authority to undermine the actual law that was in place the entire time. It's still applicable.
It's still on the books. Right? So the only way as Massachusetts in this body could do anything to change that would have to you would have to go back and say, well, we no longer want our prisons to be institutions of rehabilitation. We want them to be institutions of punishment. If we are saying today that they are institutions of rehabilitation, then that is the answer to why someone is deserving of the vote because there's an obligation for us to prepare this individual who may or may not, but may come out in society. And if they do, then they have to be equipped and prepared to be able to advocate and to exercise the laws in which this body is given. Thank you.
KEENAN - Any questions? No question. Good afternoon. Afternoon. I'll just tell you that up next after Deb is Nick Bocron. Just so great. Thank you.
DEV CHATTERJEE - CONCERNED CITIZEN - SB 7 - HB 63 - Thank you, Chair Hunt, Chair Keenan, and honorable members of the Joint Committee on Election Laws. My name is Dev Chatterjee, and I am proud to be representing Common Cause Massachusetts. I'm here to speak in favor of S 7 and H 63, a proposal for a legislative amendment to the constitution relative to voting rights sponsored by Senator Liz Miranda and rep Erica Eiderhoven, which would restore voting rights to people incarcerated for felony convictions. For well over a hundred years, Massachusetts joined along with our neighbors in Maine and Vermont in ensuring that even being incarcerated wouldn't prevent you from casting your ballot. Regrettably, in February, a constitutional amendment was passed, which took this essential right away from citizens who became incarcerated on a felony conviction. Studies show that felony disenfranchisement disproportionately impacts low-income communities and communities of color, but research also indicates that an increase in civic engagement opportunities, including voting, reduces the likelihood of recidivism.
The facts are clear. Felony disenfranchisement is bad for individuals, bad for communities, and bad for democracy overall. Now is the time to address this urgent issue. This legislature has made tremendous progress over the last 6 years with the 2018 criminal justice reform bill, the police reform bill, the votes act, and various policy and budget investments in racial justice and democracy. This very committee has also led in recent years to allow for the remote participation of incarcerated folks to give testimony relative to legislation, knowing that their voices and experience add tremendous value to your consideration of policy matters. Surely, this benefit would also be achieved by restoring their full franchise. Simply put, we are not the same commonwealth as we were in the late nineties when the constitutional amendment to revoke voting rights was passed.
Thanks to the criminal justice reform debate, we know that a focus on recidivism reduction leads to better public safety outcomes, which includes civic engagement programs behind the walls of our jails and prisons. Thanks to the votes act, we know that this legislature cares deeply about removing long-standing barriers to voting access. Last session, we were thrilled that this very committee voted for the first time to advance these bills favorably out of the committee. Now, we are at the intersection of justice and6871 democracy. We respectfully ask that you give S 7 and H 63 a favorable report so we can continue to have the next important conversation with you and your colleagues about strengthening democracy in Massachusetts. Thank you.
KEENAN - Thank you. Any questions? None. Thank you for your testimony. Next is Nick Bocron. Hopefully, I pronounced that correctly. Then after Mister Bocron will be Leah Ramachandran. Did I get that close? I don't know. Thank you. Welcome.
NICK BOCRON - CONCERNED CITIZEN - Hi, all. Chairs, members of the committee, staff, and aides that put the together, thank you. Folks that have shown up to advocate for their issues and have the opportunity to do it online are appreciated. My name is Nick Bocron. I'm with the past mass amendment. Also, a local 7 iron worker retired during COVID-19. I moved to Vermont, Northern Vermont. I was born and raised in, Linsalem area, the last 30 years in the heart before retiring. Been working on this past mass amendment. Actually, before I say that, let me say this to all. Whatever your main issue is, whether it's the environment, wars, health care, or payment of taxes, it will not be addressed to your satisfaction until you end the corrupting influence of money in politics I6959 mean, the corporations and big money in the political process.
It's just not happening, and people are getting frustrated about it. And I can go back to even, in '98, the Clean Elections Law, ballot initiative passed by 66 percent. It got a voice vote, and it got a hard time. I mean, it's this has been going on for a while. My frustration actually probably started, I came back home for the big day. At that time, there was an election going on. Las Perot. NAFTA was a big issue, but I didn't like it at all. But we were guaranteed it wouldn't be a problem. The factories would go over the border, and then we would no longer have an immigration problem solved, except for the corporations made a quick stop there, found cheaper labor over in Asia, and then they were getting tax breaks for moving their the machinery out of the country. And then we end up with an immigration problem. Got the clean elections law. We can go to GW getting elected in the what called a shit show by the Supreme Court. He left us with a tanking economy and never-ending wars. Obama comes in. Nobody went to jail. All the people the banks got bailed out, and the people got sold out. The only people that went to person who went to jail at that point was Bernie Madoff. He had the audacity to rip off the rich people.
So the frustration's been growing. It's a Citizens United decision. The Republicans were ready. Red map. They had it ready. They're gonna start working the legislatures and take over the redistricting and all that. The first thing that happened after that election was that Governor Scott Walker, Madison was calling, so7066 they went after the unions. They wanna take7068 away the collective bargaining rights. This started 1 of the huge protests. I was7074 actually there on the day of the biggest protest in the state since the Vietnam War. It was a great day seeing the people get out there advocating. Fantastic. I came back home, and it's like, okay. What's next? Occupy happened about 6 months later. And people had lost everything, and we're out of occupy. The Citizens United working group, we were part of that. We came out of that and tried to do something. So gotta do something with Citizens United. It's a federal amendment. What do you do? In Massachusetts, what would what can we do? We can lead the way and say, hey.
This is how you do it. We're gonna amend our constitution to say that we don't like what's going on. And we can do that in a way where it doesn't harm anybody and it cannot be challenged. Look at article 59, I believe. The legislature has the ability to enforce mandatory voting. Unconstitutional to me, but it's in our constitution. We need you folks. The people need you folks. They want their voices back. They want money out of politics so the representatives will actually speak to them and listen to them. I'm sorry. My time's up. 1 thing I'd like to do, a song. I actually heard it on the way down here. It's got great lyrics by The Call. The walls came down. Zemont in the yank Zemont in the Russians. There ain't no Yanks. Just corporate criminals playing with banks. I'd like to thank you all. Please give us. I don't understand how this can't get out of the committee. It's easy. Nobody's gonna get hurt by it.
KEENAN - Well, thank you. Appreciate your testimony. Thanks. And if
BOCRON- I could answer any questions
KEENAN - Does anybody have any questions? Nothing. Nope. All set. Thank you very much. Peter, how do you say your last name? SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER7 - Rameshondran.
SPEAKER1 - Lita Ramachandran. Thank you. Next will be Tracy Griffin.
LEELA RAMACHANDRAN - CONCERNED CITIZEN - HB 63 - SB 7 - Good afternoon, folks. Thank you for taking up these critical issues. By way of introduction, my name is Leela Ramachandran. I am speaking on behalf of myself. I'm an elected school committee member in Senator Eldridge's district, and my professional work has focused on public health and policy. As a locally elected official, I vote on a budget of over a hundred million. I drafted an approved policy, and I spent a fair amount of time trying to share out the work that we do in soliciting feedback and ideas. I expect that I will be held accountable to the people whose families are affected by the votes that I take. I want to be accountable to every constituent, and that includes incarcerated members of our communities. Local decisions also affect transportation, housing, proximity to health care, all relevant factors in reentry.
A felony conviction does not make an individual any less deserving of voting rights, and it doesn't make their families any less affected by the decisions that we make at the local level. Congresswoman Ayanna Presley said the people closest to the pain should be closest to the power, driving and informing the policy making. Many of our incarcerated community members have seen and experienced the acute pain of multi-system failure in the commonwealth. Who better to be participating in our democratic process? Folks in my life who've served time have been some of the most politically savvy and well-read people that I know. We should want incarcerated people invested in the schools and the communities that they belong to.
And we know that community connection is integral to well-being and reentry. If we want this, we must change structures to facilitate this. And you all have a precious opportunity right now. In a moment when the federal government is threatening all that we want this country to be, we have an opportunity to undo a Massachusetts constitutional amendment that actually took rights away. Because of this, I'm urging you all to support H 63 S 7. This is the time to restore basic voting rights to all citizens. And I'd also like you to support ratifying the child labor constitutional amendment. It feels incredible that this remains an issue that we're discussing. But I assume that you all understand why protecting against child labor exploitation is important. So thank you for your time this afternoon. Thank you.
KEENAN - Any questions? Thank you very much for your testimony. Next is Tracy Griffin, followed by Sonia Nadeem. Good afternoon.
TRACY GRIFFITH - CONCERNED CITIZEN - Good afternoon. Chair Keenan, Chair Hunt, and members of the Election Laws Committee, my name is Tracy Griffith. I offer my testimony as the racial justice program director for the ACLU of Massachusetts. We express our strong support for the restoration of voting rights to incarcerated individuals who are completing their sentences in Massachusetts prisons and jails. This issue is not only a matter of equity and justice but also a fundamental aspect of our democratic principles. The right to vote is a cornerstone of our democracy, a democracy that was birthed here in our commonwealth. Denying incarcerated individuals this right undermines the very essence of our democratic system. Every citizen, regardless of their circumstances, should have a voice in the governance of our society.
Additionally, the disenfranchisement of incarcerated individuals disproportionately affects marginalized communities, particularly people of color. Nationwide, 1 in 13 black adults cannot vote due to a felony conviction, a rate more than 4 times that of non black adults. Voter exclusion is particularly acute for black and Latino residents of Massachusetts due to their disproportionate incarceration. Despite being less than 7% of the state's population, 30% of the prison population in Massachusetts is black. Similarly, less than 13% of the state's population is Latino, but Latinos make up 29% of the prison population. Disenfranchisement7412 and overrepresentation in the criminal system is a double whammy7416 to black and brown citizens.
The impact of this exclusion and over-incarceration extends beyond individuals, affecting families and communities by reducing political representation and weakening the collective voice of marginalized groups. Massachusetts has a complex history of racial inequality and disenfranchisement. In February, Massachusetts became the 40 eighth state to disenfranchise persons completing their felony sentences inside prisons and jails. In 2023, the legislature took action to end disenfranchisement for misdemeanor offenses. Restoring voting rights for those incarcerated for felonies is the next step toward addressing these historical injustices and ensuring that all voices are heard.
Voting is a powerful tool for safe engagement. By allowing incarcerated individuals to vote, we empower them to participate in the democratic process, advocate for policies that affect their lives, and contribute to the betterment of society. This engagement fosters a sense of responsibility and connection to the community, which is essential for successful reintegration. In conclusion, restoring voting rights to incarcerated individuals in Massachusetts is a vital step towards a more inclusive and just society. It upholds our democratic values while addressing systemic inequalities. We hope that you will support this important initiative and ensure that every citizen has the opportunity to participate in our democracy. We urge the committee to report on H 63 and S 7 and vote this out of committee favorably. Thank you very much.
KEENAN - Thank you for your testimony. Any questions? Yes. Yes.
REP SOUSA - Thank you so much. Appreciate the testimony. Is there any data that you can find? You mentioned the importance of participation7529 and reintegration. Is there any data between that and recidivism with civic participation that you can see from other places around the country?
GRIFFITH - Yes. So, we recognize I can't give you the specific numbers at the moment, but we do recognize that there has been a link between recidivism and reintroduction into society and access to the vote. Some of7554 this comes out from the Sentencing Project. They have a report on that. There are also statistics that come out of the Open Society Foundation. So, yes, the statistics are there.
SOUSA - Thank you so much. I didn't mean to put you on the spot for numbers.
KEENAN - Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions? Thanks for your testimony. Next is Sonia Nadeem, and Sonia Nadeem will be followed by Kate Ueda. I'm afraid I didn't mess that up too badly. Good afternoon. Welcome.
SONIA NADEEM - CONCERNED CITIZEN- Good afternoon. member of the committee on election laws. My name is Sonia. I'm 16. I'm a high school student from Walpole. So, even though I'm not old enough to vote yet, I've spent the last few years fighting to increase the big participation at the local, state, and national levels because I believe that our democracy only works when everyone has a voice. That belief is at the heart of why I urge you to support S 7 and H 63 to restore voting rights to incarcerated people in Massachusetts. Our country was founded on the principle that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. Those words are written in the Declaration of Independence.
The entire premise of American democracy is that everyone deserves a say in the decisions that shape their lives. But how can we claim to uphold that principle when over 7,000 citizens in Massachusetts are stripped of the right to vote while in prison? Reading the book The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander helped me understand how mass incarceration has become a system of racialized voter suppression. But it was Just Mercy by Bryan Stevenson that truly broke me. 1 line that stuck with me was when Stevenson wrote, Each of us is more than the worst thing we've ever done. In the book, he tells a story of Joe Sullivan, convicted at 13, sentenced to life without parole. His humanity was stripped from him, not just by prison walls but by a system that refused to recognize his voice. That story helped me realize voting isn't just a right, it's a form of dignity. And that pain doesn't stop when the sentence ends.
I read about people like Larry Joe Newby, a grandfather in Alabama who raised his 2 grandsons, worked 17 years for Madison County, and still couldn't vote in his local election because his past conviction was labeled7688 a crime of moral turpitude. Pamela King, who served her time, paid her taxes, and still7694 faces permanent disenfranchisement. Timothy Lanier, who started a business and a nonprofit after 18 years in prison, said, I walked out of 1 cell and into another. I still feel shackled. But when people do get the right to vote restored, something shifts. A study from the University of Minnesota and NYU found that formerly incarcerated Minnesotans who voted7717 were significantly less likely to be rearrested.
Another study showed that people released in states with automatic voting rights restoration were about 10 percent less likely to recidivate than those in permanent disenfranchisement states. That's because voting builds a sense of belonging. It gives people a reason to care about their communities again. So, even though I'm too young to cast a ballot, I know how much it means to have a voice. And I know that we cannot keep silencing the very people most impacted by the policies we vote on. Please advance this amendment. Let Massachusetts be a leader in building a democracy that's not for some but for all of us. Thank you to the members of the committee on the election law, Senator Kean, rep Hunt for allowing me the opportunity to speak and give a testimony today. Thank you.
KEENAN - What year are you in high school?
NADEEM - I'm a high school junior, so eleventh grade. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER21 - Alright. Yeah.
SPEAKER5 - Thank you.
KEENAN- Thank you. Great job. Any questions? You make us all feel better about tomorrow. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Next is Kate Ueda. She will be joining us remotely.
KATE UYEDA - CONCERNED CITIZEN - SB 7 - HB 63 - Yes. Thank you. I'm not quite sure how to follow that excellent testimony, but I will try. Well, dear Chair Keenan, Chair Hunt, and members of the joint election committee on election laws, thank you for your time today and for providing the opportunity to share this testimony. I'm here today to urge you to support S 7 and H 63. I've also submitted written testimony. My name is Kate Uyeda. I am an attorney at Campaign Legal Center, in their voting rights program. Campaign Legal Center, or CLC, is a national nonpartisan organization, and we work to protect and strengthen American democracy at7829 all levels. I7831 specifically work on our Restore Your Vote program, which assists formally and currently incarcerated people to restore their voting rights and7839 ask to ballot. It. Recently, CLC worked with the city of Washington, DC, on implementing its own re-enfranchisement of people serving time as well. It's also been a tremendous honor to work closely with the African American Coalition Committee at MCI Norfolk and the Democracy Behind Bars Coalition, which y'all have heard from today,7859 on efforts to ensure people impacted by the criminal system have an7863 equal opportunity to have a voice and a7865 vote. I just want to underscore how special it is that they were able to speak on their own behalf today.
It's a rare opportunity to hear directly from those who are most impacted by felony disenfranchisement and 1 that's too often denied. CLC strongly supports eliminating felony disenfranchisement. S 7 and7885 H 63 are not just about whether incarcerated individuals should be allowed7889 to vote but whether there is any legitimate reason why an American citizen should be stripped of that right to vote in the first place. We simply don't think that there is. Put simply, as you've heard today, felony disenfranchisement laws are a racist stain on our democracy. In many states, these laws were enacted after the Civil War and proliferated during the Jim Crow era with the explicit and open purpose of disenfranchising black voters and undermining the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments. As you've heard today, unfortunately, Massachusetts' disenfranchisement scheme still serves that purpose, disenfranchising black and Latino citizens at a higher rate than the general population.
As you know, incarcerated people could vote in Massachusetts until February, and 25 years have passed since that large step backward. But there's now an opportunity to move the commonwealth forward as a national leader in voting rights access for incarcerated individuals. Denying the right to vote does not serve any legitimate purpose. It does not deter crime. It hinders rehabilitation from reentry. Studies and testimony today show that restoring the right to vote improves individuals' connection and engagement with their communities while incarcerated and improves their transition back to society. And we know that enfranchising incarcerated individuals is important for democratic accountability because, again, as you've heard today, few people understand our criminal legal system7978 like those who have been approved. So, S 7 and H 63 are Massachusetts's opportunity to become a national leader on this issue. These bills would eliminate the outdated, discriminatory, anti democratic practice of felonies and franchisement and would affirm the state's commitment to the principle that democracy works best when all eligible voters can participate. So we at CLC Campaign Legal Center urge you to take this important step. Thank you.
KEENAN - Thank you. Any questions? Tina, thank you for your testimony. Next is Mallory Hanaura, followed by Richard Johnson. Good afternoon.
MALLORY HONORA - CONCERNED CITIZEN - Good afternoon. Welcome. My name is Mallory Honora, and I'm the co-director of Families for Justice as Healing. Thank you for the opportunity. We are a statewide organization headquartered in Roxbury. Our mission is to end the incarceration of women and girls. We are founded by incarcerated women, and we continue to be led by incarcerated and formerly incarcerated women and women with incarcerated loved ones. Our work is supported by hundreds of volunteers from every demographic across the state. Our organization fully supports restoring the right to vote for incarcerated people. Being denied the right to vote is dehumanizing. This country is home to centuries of an ongoing struggle to achieve and protect full enfranchisement and equity.
For people to have the right to vote, then have it ripped away in the month of February is a lasting shame and scourge on Massachusetts. It was wrong and regressive at the time, at the turn of the millennium, and now, 25 years later, it's worse. Now, in this legislative session, this political moment, we are called to account for the Commonwealth's decision to deny incarcerated people the right to vote in the context of a Trump regime using the full force of the executive to suppress voting rights and crush democratic participation. Why revisit the constitutional amendment right now? The logic of the republic evolves. Voters are fallible. We ask the joint committee on voting laws.
Do we want to expand freedom, dignity, and democracy for people in the Commonwealth, or do we want to shrink, cower, and concede to racism, repression, and rising fascism? This is the central and pressing question we must revisit. The committee can give the people of Massachusetts a reason to feel hope and courage in the face of a federal regime hell bent on destroying democracy. We applaud this committee for making history by allowing incarcerated people to testify virtually for the first time last session and for maintaining this new higher standard of inclusion and civic engagement this session. Thank you.
We urge you to transcend the fear mongering, both federally and locally, about what happens when we let people speak up for themselves. We ask you to strengthen our shared principles of democracy, dignity, and equity by advancing the proposal for a constitutional amendment to restore voting rights as you did last session. As you've heard over and over again, incarcerated people are parents and grandparents who have a stake in their children's education and their grandchildren's recreation. Incarcerated people are workers who have a stake in labor issues. Incarcerated people are friends and loved ones who have a stake in policies affecting their neighborhoods and communities.
Incarcerated people are predominantly Black and Brown and have a stake in racial justice, civil rights, and equity. Incarcerated people certainly have a stake in healthcare policy, and any health conditions or disabilities they may have are exacerbated by8204 their incarceration and the abject care available to them in jail and prison. Incarcerated people are survivors of domestic and sexual violence. Incarcerated people have experienced homelessness, have struggled with addiction, and have unmet mental health needs. Perhaps more than any other group of people, they have borne the brunt of some of the state and country's worst policy failures and, therefore, must have a stake in advancing the solutions that will lead to healing and interrupting cycles of harm, trauma, and poverty.
Why should the responsibility for our incarcerated community fall on only a few concerned legislators who choose to visit when nearly all elected officials have these policy8246 matters as part of their platforms? Most8247 legislative8247 offices say their top priority is constituent services. Expect people living inside jails and prisons to cede their personhood. Incarcerated people are constituents with expertise, with brilliance, with opinions, and with needs, especially given the lack of transparency and accountability Correction, which is well known to this body. Our organization receives messages from incarcerated women on a daily basis who desperately need the advocacy of elected officials. An example that stands out from just 2 weeks ago is a trans woman who asked for our help as she was being held for months, months after she was already granted parole without the DOC finding an appropriate placement for her in the community.
With the intervention of a legislator, she was released within days. Speaking of matters of dignity and democracy that require legislative attention, by the way, women incarcerated at MCI Framingham have still been forbidden to have self-led groups like Black at Shirley and AACC at Norfolk. We urge you to embrace this opportunity to support your constituents when they are eligible for parole, when they petition for clemency, and when they prepare to be released back to your districts. It is the pinnacle of hypocrisy for anyone to expect incarcerated people to be rehabilitated despite minimal programming and to engage in pro-social behaviors in an unnatural environment while simultaneously denying people the most basic right to vote and any opportunity for civic engagement. Thank you so much. Yeah. And just to the question earlier as well about what, you know, what do we do as as taking away voting rights as a punishment, some people that have been convicting have caused harm and have never been convicted of anything. Right? Some people are serving their time. Either way, voting is about reshaping the conditions in our communities to prevent future harm. Thank you so much.
KEENAN - Thank you. Any questions? See none. Thank you very much. Next is Richard Johnston, followed by Clarence Williams, who will be joining us remotely. Richard, thank you for your patience in waiting.
RICHARD JOHNSTON - CONCERNED CITIZEN - Hi. Thanks. My name is Richard Johnston. Thank you to Chair Keenan and Chair Hunt, and the committee. A little history. I was first imprisoned in Massachusetts in 1975, and there was a gentleman named Kyle Valleka who was a prisoner at Concord at that time. He ran for the select board in Concord, and the registrar from Concord8408 went into Concord prison to register all the inmates there to vote. And people got really upset about this. It became a national news story. He was running board. And so what happened was they it was the biggest turnout in Concord's history of voters. So, the right of prisoners to vote enriched democracy in this situation, and more people voted because of this. They didn't want this guy to win, and he didn't win because of this. They didn't want this guy to win, and he didn't win. Fast forward to February. The reason the vote was taken away, I was in, in prison at that time too.
I voted throughout that time through absentee ballots because after the Valleka case in Concord, they said that prisoners needed to vote in the community from whence they came. So it was really exciting to, you know, put in for an absentee ballot to get sent. We love getting mail in prison. You know, it's like getting an Amazon package today. You go to your door, and it's there. And so it's very exciting, but it was it made me feel empowered. It really did. It made me feel a part of I remember, you know, being able to vote. And, you know, of course, I'm gonna be interested in prisoners' issues, but I had elderly parents at the time that I was interested in elder issues. I had a son who was in school at the time.
I was interested; it wasn't just that I wanted to vote based on making my life easier as a convict. I was interested in social issues. But anyway, what happened was there was this guy in Norfolk who, he he was a little loud. He got into the press. He was in the lifers group at Norfolk, and that's when all this movement came when people in society didn't realize that prisoners had the right to vote. And that's the reason the vote was taken away in February. It was just a strictly this guy went on TV and said, hey. We're a bunch of prisoners en masse. The prison population had risen greatly because of the nineties; all those laws that came8522 out in the prison population swelled. So, people got upset that prisoners had the right to vote. That was the only reason it was taken away. And now, you know, I wanna reiterate. It made me feel really good. It was probably 1 of the only ways I felt a part of society when I was in the prison system, to be able to vote and have a voice.
And, you know, we have constitutional rights. Rights. There's a constitutional right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. You know, do you wanna take that away? You know, there a constitutional rights that are set up that are for even for prisoners today. And I just wanna remind people that, you know, when you start taking a block of people who are disenfranchised and you say it's easy to take the vote away from them, it's just the next step to go to the next level. Who else are we gonna take the vote away from? So, you know, the opportunity to vote is, to me, in a democracy, it's like that's the name of the game. Right? So, I think it's. I'm in support of this bill, obviously. And, you know, I think it's something that we8582 need to be reminded of that, you know, people that are powerless, taking more power away from them serves no purpose. You know? It serves no purpose whatsoever. So I think this is a great idea. Go with it. Thank you.
KEENAN - Thank you very much. Any questions? Yes. We have a question before is that it?
REP DAVIS - Thank you, sir, chair. I find this fascinating that you were, you know, 25 years ago, you remember voting. In your opinion, how do you think voting would change 25 years if voting rights were restored? To prisons? Yes. So technology. Do you see anything that, you know, 25 years forward that things need to be changed that perhaps you experienced? Any barriers? Or
JOHNSTON - As far as I'm not sure of the question.
DAVIS- Yes. In terms of how to vote.
JOHNSTON - How I voted? Yep. It was really easy. I just wrote to the. I was in Watertown before I was in prison, so I wrote to say I was voting through the Watertown8633 town hall. They would send me an absentee ballot, like, if I8637 was in the service and, you know, it was just they sent me an absentee ballot. Nothing8641 that says that I was a convict voting. It was just that it was an absentee ballot that was sent to me. It was really8646 simple. I filled it out, put it in the mail, and sent it back, and I felt like I was part of the process. And I8652 remember how that went. You know? It was really simple.8654 It was really easy. You would ask about that question earlier. You know? How would it be done? And
DAVIS - And at the time, you felt you had all the information.
JOHNSTON- Done that way was because of Kyle Vallecher in '76. They didn't know how to handle it. Prisoners always had the right to vote. It just never was an issue until he ran for Selectman and said people said, wow. You know? No. No. We can't have you know, if there's a small town in Massachusetts that has 2,000 inmates and only 1,500 citizens, people don't like that. You know? So they said to diverse you know, to, you know, make disperse the vote. They said you had to vote from when where you lived prior to imprisonment. So, they could just8691 do that again. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Right? I mean, okay.
SPEAKER31 - Thank you. You too.
KEENAN - Thank you. Any questions?8695 Thanks for your testimony. Appreciate it. Clarence Williams followed by Ellen Fine, both remote.
CLARENCE WILLIAMS - CONCERNED CITIZEN - ( R ) Good afternoon. My name is Clarence Williams. I'd like to say kudos to this committee just for even taking the time to hear what8714 the citizens read is feel, and think on this issue. I'm here to support S 7 as well as H 63. Once again, my name is Clarence Williams. I spent 20 years incarcerated and in8728 2020 was exonerated. The reason why I support this bill is because I have lived the experience of both sides of this issue. I am also part of the board of the National Prison Debate League, which goes back into prisons. And what we do is we set up debates between those who are formerly incarcerated in colleges. And in 2023, we actually had a debate on this issue. What we found in our research is that due to the fact that it'll be made, Vermont and DC allow their inmates to actually vote. We found that it helped along the way in many different ways.
One of the impacts was education. It kept those who are incarcerated up on current information. It also forced them to research and study different positions. It also helped the criminal justice8789 system by actually cutting recidivism. Florida's parole commission found that individuals who had voting rights restored actually cut recidivism. That's a parole commission.8805 It also encourages community engagement. It forced a lot8813 of us to actually reach back to the community and want to better our community by taking certain stands. It also allowed us to invest in family members who were actually still in the community. So me being a8828 father of 2, I had 2 children who were actually in the Boston Public School system8833 and actually had no right to their future, even though I wanted the8836 best future for them. Civil engagement. As you can see, I noticed a few guys, such as Mac Hudson, who asked me to. I noticed a few guys, such as Mac Hudson, who actually brought members of our representatives into the prison system.
So now we were able to engage and actually be a part of the community and raise some of our risk. Excuse me. You may hear some people in the background. I also work as an outreach specialist for a community peer recovery center. Once again, it cuts recidivism. By allowing us to feel that we are part of the community, we will now invest in the community. I've witnessed this firsthand. Going back to the question of if someone committed a rape or murder, it's simple. Our criminal system isn't a tool for revenge. A lot of times, we believe it's a tool for revenge, not a tool to correct or help someone regain a possible trauma8911 response in which they did something that may be horrible.8915 But also within that, we're still part of the census as well as if we owed any taxes, they would be. If we had child support payments, we would still have to pay those. So, we are actually still citizens even though we are removed from the overall society. Prison, at best, is a microcosm of overall society. Technically, we reflect what our society puts upon us. By allowing those8951 who are incarcerated to8953 feel like part of the community, they will actually become part of the community. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you.
SPEAKER2 - Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
KEENAN - Testimony. Any questions? Thank you very much. We8966 appreciate it. Next is Ellen Fine. She's gonna be remote.
ELLEN FINE - CONCERNED CITIZEN - (R ) Yes. Good afternoon, everyone. And thank you. Can you hear me?
KEENAN - Yes. Thank you.
FINE - Thank you to the chairs for allowing me to testify on s 8 and 9. And I just wanna say a big thank you to all the formerly and currently incarcerated people and advocates. They all have restored my sense of democracy today, and I really, really appreciate that.8999 Speaking of democracy, SAIG and the whole movement to pass9007 amendments concerning the Citizens United ruling in 02/2010 are so integral to our democracy. Because while everybody has the right to vote, and now we're restoring rights to people who were formerly in, who are incarcerated, hopefully, what's underlying that is a big system of money.
It's a big system of money that skews elections, that says that a corporation, basically a person, and has the same rights as me, same rights as the people who are in prison right now, the same rights as everybody in9041 this room, including people in this room, including people in this committee. And I just don't believe, and I think many of us don't believe, that this is9050 so. A corporation is not a person. It's not a human being who has the capacity to breathe, feel, and have skin, and all the other things that make us human, like a heart. My life has been drastically impacted by some of the hidden money and some of the somewhat overt money in politics. I have been poisoned by pesticides approximately 36 times, lawn care pesticides in the states of New Hampshire and Massachusetts. How is this possible, you ask? From lawn care chemicals.
Once you get sick, you get sick and sicker and sicker. Things that have happened like chemically induced pneumonia, inability to see, destruction of my reproductive system, destruction of my urinary tract system, my musculature, and so many other things. Once you get infected, it's easier to get affected. Am I the only person in Massachusetts or this country who this is happening to or this country? Heck no. It happens to about 75000 to 100000 people a year, several million people worldwide, and billions of pounds of pesticides. That is an example of just 1 system, oil and gas being of just 1 system, oil and gas being another, farmers being another, the prison industrial complex being yet another, where there is so much dark money. That if we break this kind of amendment9136 into the light and make Massachusetts 1 of those first states to pass it, what will happen is that we will restore our democracy to the kinds of levels that it used to be.
And this is not talking about the regular campaign contributions. I worked for the governor of New York back in the years when we meticulously had to report everything. This is not about those 550 and $25 contributions. This is about large amounts of dark money that are influencing policy in Washington and have somewhat led us to where we are today on the brink of fascism and holding on to democracy with our hands and our knuckles and every bit of force. So please pass this amendment and please let Massachusetts once again be a leader, a revolutionary leader, just 2 or 3 weeks before it's the anniversary of the 200 fiftieth at Concord and Lexington. Thank you very much. If there are any questions, I would like to answer.
KEENAN - Thank you very much. Any questions? Neil, thank you for your testimony. We've now come to the end of our register to testify. Is there anyone else present in person online that we should testify that has been recognized? If so, we're just gonna ask that you briefly give your name and any organization and then a testimony for about9219 a minute. Is there anybody here who wishes to testify? I'm sorry? Okay. Great. Yes. I don't see anybody else here or online wishing to testify. Just, oh, yes. If you could come up to the microphone, briefly give your name, what bill you're testifying on, and then very brief testimony. This is for folks who haven't registered, but we're here. We appreciate it. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Oh, you did?
PAUL VAN BERGER - CONCERNED CITIZEN - My name is Paul Dan Brogan. I registered online. Okay. Chairman Keenan, Chair Hunt, and members of the committee, I appreciate the chance to testify on behalf of H 63 and S 7. I'm supporting those bills. I'm a member of the community. I live in Somerville, and I'm active in the Boston and Massachusetts communities. I wanna echo many other people who have said that these bills support us as human beings. As human beings, we should have the right to vote. We should not be defined by our worst actions as someone else. I believe she was a student who quoted Bryan Stevenson, and I wanna support that statement. I wanna draw your9323 attention to the preamble of the United States Constitution, which says We the people. It does not exclude people who are convicted of felonies or are in prison. I also wanna, echo the people who said that racial disparities are at the heart of this issue.
I wanna hearken back to the reverend Martin Luther King. He did not die 50 years ago for this dream that this current situation represents. And I want to agree with representative Uber Oderhoven, who said that, and others, who said that the loss of the vote for people convicted of9384 felonies who are incarcerated in February was part of the war on drugs, part of mass incarceration. That was a racially motivated war, and this is our chance to turn that around. And I wanna echo what my colleague Hamza said, that this exclusion of people who are convicted of felonies, who are incarcerated, is a continuation of the institution of slavery. And I also wanna support what Mack Hudson said, that this state purports to have a policy that prisons are a place for rehabilitation and healing and not punishment. Because punishment does not improve public safety. Healing does. Disenfranchisement is part of the punishment model. It's isolating and abandoning people. We should be widening the circle of compassion, not diminishing it. Thank you. Thank you.
KEENAN - Thank you. Appreciate it. I think that ends those who have signed up to testify or anybody else wishing to testify. Just a couple of reminders that there will be a copy of this. The live stream version of this will be copied and then available on the website in a couple of days. That's masslegislature.gov. For anybody who wants to submit written testimony, they may do so up until April 8, Tuesday, April 8th. That would go to emerson.ganyu@masenate.gov and karen.zirko@mahouse.gov. And with that, I would entertain a motion to adjourn.
HUNT - Motion to adjourn.
KEENAN - Motion made. Second. Second. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. Hearing to adjourn. Thank you, everybody, for being here. Appreciate your testimony. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER5 - Thank you.
KEENAN - And, mister Burgess, thank you.
© InstaTrac 2025