JP Progressives members have voted to endorse the full Democratic Party ticket — with the exception of the office of Suffolk County District Attorney.
We are excited about a slate that includes so many women, and with this blanket endorsement, we want to ensure support of Democratic candidates at the federal level and further down the ballot.
We have also voted to endorse:
- Yes on Question 1, the Fair Share Amendment
- Yes on Question 2, which concerns loss ratios for dental insurance
- Yes on Question 4, the Work & Family Mobility Act (Driver’s Licenses for All)
- Yes on Question 5, which directs legislators to vote in favor of single-payer healthcare
- Yes on Question 6, which pushes for greater transparency in the MA State House, specifically around publishing each legislator’s vote in committees
In particular we urge support for:
- For Governor and Lt. Governor: Maura Healy and Kim Driscoll
- For Attorney General: Andrea Campbell
- For Secretary of State: William Galvin
- For Auditor: Diana DiZoglio
- For 7th Congressional: Ayanna Pressley
- For 2nd Suffolk Senate: Liz Miranda
- For 15th Suffolk Representative: Samantha Montaño
Full Endorsement Recommendation Text
The JP Progressive Steering Committee strongly recommends to our membership an endorsement of the full Democratic Party ticket — with one exception. We are especially excited about the potential of this election breaking so many important electoral barriers: first female governor; first LGBTQ+ governor; first woman of color in statewide office; and a nearly-all female statewide Democratic slate including Maura Healy for Governor, Kim Driscoll for Lieutenant Governor, Andrea Campbell for Attorney General, Deb Goldberg for State Treasurer, and Diana DiZoglio for State Auditor. Each of these statewide candidates have had the opportunity to advance certain issues on the progressive agenda, and we look forward to working with all of them to do even more. We also recommend our members support Democratic candidates at the federal level and further down the ballot, especially progressive champions Ayanna Pressley for the MA-07 House, Liz Miranda for State Senate, and Sam Montaño for State Representative. Additionally, we recommend supporting the incumbent Secretary of State Bill Galvin over his Republican challenger, the confusingly named Rayla Campbell—do not confuse her for Attorney General candidate Andrea Campbell!
The exception to our full ticket endorsement is the Democratic candidate for Suffolk County District Attorney. Kevin Hayden has already shown he is ready to set back the cause of criminal justice reform by decades, moving our state back to the days of mass incarceration. He has abused his office in dropping a case against a police officer, soliciting a campaign donation for the action, and then lying about it. He has shown a particular lack of character in apparently directing his primary campaign to leak information about female victims who allege decades-old sexual traumas. And most recently, the chief of his juvenile unit was fired literally weeks after Hayden campaigned on this unit’s very accomplishments. For these reasons we find ourselves unable to include him in our endorsement recommendation.
The origins of Ballot Question 2 are certainly unique, arising from an orthodontist’s interactions with dental insurers. However, the substance of the ballot question is whether or not a standard that has been around for more than 10 years in Massachusetts and the US for medical insurance should also apply to dental insurance. The insurance loss ratio is a regulatory tool that says if an insurer takes too much premium (cost) from consumers compared to the cost of providing care, it must refund the rest back to consumers rather than keep the excess as profits. The Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare, set loss ratios of 80 to 85% for health insurance. The insurance companies can run their operations and profit out of the rest, but must spend on actual health care or refund the 80 to 85% mark. Ballot 2 would extend this to dental insurance. Though there are further technicalities between what is in and out of the ratio in this ballot initiative, we believe those could ultimately be adjusted for best implementation. We also acknowledge that voters in the 15th Suffolk district will see the non-binding vote regarding single-payer healthcare. We see that Yes votes for both that and Question 2 would move our healthcare system in a more accountable direction. The JPP steering committee recommends that JPP endorse a Yes vote for Question 2.
The JPP is not seeking a new vote on Ballot Measures 1 and 4, which we are already actively supporting, as our members have already voted in favor of past initiatives that show our ongoing and strong support for the Fair Share Amendment (Yes On 1) and the Work & Family Mobility Act (Yes On 4, drivers licenses for all regardless of immigration status). We do not currently have a recommendation regarding Question 3. You can read more about Q3 here.
Specifically for JP residents who are in the 15th Suffolk district, there will be two non-binding ballot questions. Question 5 concerns single-payer healthcare (as mentioned earlier) and Question 6 is about transparency in the MA State House, specifically around publishing each legislator’s vote in committees.
Question 5 asks, “Shall the Representative from this District be instructed to vote for legislation to create a single payer system of universal health care that provides all Massachusetts residents with comprehensive health care coverage including the freedom to choose doctors and other health care professionals, facilities, and services, and eliminates the role of insurance companies in health care by creating an insurance trust fund that is publicly administered?”
Question 6 asks, “Shall the representative for this district be instructed to vote in favor of changes to the applicable House of Representative rules to make each legislator’s vote in that body’s Legislative committees publicly available on the Legislature’s website?”
As long-time supporters of single-payer healthcare and greater transparency in government, the steering committee recommends that JPP endorse a Yes vote for both Questions 5 and 6.