Beacon Hill Roll Call
Volume 49 – Report No. 43
October 21-25, 2024
Copyright © 2024 Beacon Hill Roll Call. All Rights Reserved.
THE HOUSE AND SENATE. Beacon Hill Roll Call records local senators’ votes on the only roll call from the week of October 21-25. There were no roll calls in the House last week.
During the week of October 21-25, the House met for a total of five hours and 17 minutes and the Senate met for a total of seven hours and 46 minutes.
CLEAN ENERGY AND CLIMATE (S 2967)- Senate 38-2, approved and sent to the House climate/energy legislation that supporters say will make systemic changes to the state’s clean energy infrastructure that will help the state achieve its net zero emissions by 2050 goals. They say it will also expand electric vehicle use and infrastructure and protect residents and ratepayers. A House-Senate conference committee drafted the compromise version to resolve the differences in the competing versions approved by the House and Senate earlier this year.
(A “Yes” vote is for the bill. A “No” vote is against it.)
Sen. Jason Lewis Yes
ALSO UP ON BEACON HILL
BALLOT QUESTIONS – Here is an in depth look at Questions 4 and 5 that will be decided directly by the voters on the November 5th ballot.
QUESTION 4: LIMITED LEGALIZATION AND REGULATION OF CERTAIN NATURAL PSYCHEDELIC SUBSTANCES.
This question asks voters if they approve of a proposed law that would allow persons aged 21 and older to grow, possess and use certain natural psychedelic substances in some circumstances. The psychedelic substances allowed would be two substances found in mushrooms (psilocybin and psilocyn) and three substances found in plants (dimethyltryptamine, mescaline and ibogaine). These substances could be purchased at an approved location for use under the supervision of a licensed facilitator. This proposed law would otherwise prohibit any retail sale of natural psychedelic substances and would also provide for the regulation and taxation of these psychedelic substances.
OFFICIAL ARGUMENTS: Here are the official arguments, gathered by the secretary of state, for each side of the question:
IN FAVOR: Written by Mental Health Counselor Lt. Sarko Gergaria, https://maformentalhealth.org
“Vote yes on 4 to provide safe, regulated access to promising natural psychedelic medicines for treatment-resistant PTSD, anxiety and depression. Psychedelics will be available in approved therapeutic settings under the supervision of trained and licensed facilitators, not sold in stores to take home.
Research from leading medical institutions including Mass General Brigham, Dana Farber Cancer Institute and Johns Hopkins shows that psychedelic medicines can be effective treatments for depression and anxiety. In fact, the FDA recently granted psilocybin a breakthrough therapy designation.
For many people who are suffering, daily medications and other standard treatments aren’t working. Over 6,000 veterans die by suicide annually, and countless more struggle from service-related trauma. Natural psychedelic medicine can also offer patients with a terminal diagnosis relief from end-of-life anxiety and help them find peace.
That’s why Question 4 is supported by doctors, mental health providers and veteran advocates. Vote yes to expand mental health options.”
AGAINST: Written by Dr. Anahita Dua, Surgeon, Massachusetts General Hospital, www.SafeCommunitiesMA.com.
“Question 4 would decriminalize psychedelics, open for-profit centers, allow for growth in a 12-foot by 12-foot area in homes and distribution statewide. A black market is inevitable with this amount of home growth.
In recent years, driver’s license revocations for drugged driving rose 65 percent and fatal DUI crashes increased over 50 percent. With one in three frequent psychedelic users reporting driving under the influence of psychedelics in the past year, this will increase.
The psychedelic ibogaine has life-threatening cardiotoxicity. Heart failure can occur days after one dose. Accidental consumption of edibles is especially dangerous to children and pets. The centers aren’t required to be run by medical professionals, cannot provide critical care during adverse reactions and aren’t prohibited from giving psychedelics to high-risk patients like those with schizophrenia, bipolar illness and pregnant or breastfeeding women.”
QUESTION 5: MINIMUM WAGE FOR TIPPED WORKERS
This proposed law would gradually increase, over the course of five years, the current $6.75 per hour minimum hourly wage an employer must pay a tipped worker, as follows: To 64 percent of the state minimum wage on January 1, 2025; 73 percent of the state minimum wage on January 1, 2026; 82 precent of the state minimum wage on January 1, 2027; 91 percent of the state minimum wage on January 1, 2028; and 100 percent of the state minimum wage on January 1, 2029.
OFFICIAL ARGUMENTS: Here are the official arguments, gathered by the secretary of state, for each side of the question.
IN FAVOR: Written by Estefania Galvis, of “Yes on 5,” www.yeson5ma.com
“Instead of being paid the current tipped worker wage of just $6.75 an hour, Massachusetts tipped workers deserve the full minimum wage with tips on top. Workers in seven other states earn a full wage plus tips, and they enjoy robust tips and growing restaurants where menu prices are comparable to Massachusetts. This law would create greater financial stability and predictability, acknowledging workers’ skills and professionalism.
Many Massachusetts small businesses are already paying the full minimum wage plus tips. Big restaurant corporations should do the same. This would reduce employee turnover and improve service quality.
Big restaurant corporations are not paying their fair share and are forcing consumers to cover their employees’ wages through tips. Tips should be a reward for good service, not a subsidy for low wages paid by large corporations.”
AGAINST: Written by Doug Bacon, former server and bartender and current restaurant owner, www.ProtectTips.org
“This question is funded by a radical group from California.
Tipped employees have made it abundantly clear the way they earn money does not need to be changed. State and Federal law guarantee them the $15 hourly minimum wage with many earning over $40 per hour and 90 percent reporting at least $20 per hour. A recent survey also showed that 88 percent oppose ‘tip pools’ where tips are shared with non-service employees and 90 percent believe that if tipped wages are eliminated, they will earn less.
Other attempts to implement this have seen catastrophic results. In Washington, D.C., nearly 10 percent of tipped employees have lost or left their jobs. This follows increases in menu prices, the implementation of 20 percent service fees and a wave of closures.
This would reduce overall wages for servers, increase costs for restaurants and skyrocket the cost of eating out. It will be disastrous with many neighborhood restaurants being forced to close.”
For more information and details on each bill, roll call attendance, and other relevant information, please visit the Wakefield Daily Item at www.localheadlinenews.com.
