THE EVERETT ADVOCATE – FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 2022 Page 23 BHRC | FROM PAGE 22 housed before being incarcerated.” Amendment opponents offered no arguments on the House fl oor. Beacon Hill Roll Call made repeated attempts to get a comment from the fi ve legislators who opposed the amendment but only one responded. “I felt it was too costly and placed an undue burden on correctional offi cials,’ said Rep. Peter Durant (R-Spencer). The other four representatives who voted “No” and refused to comment are Reps Donald Berthiaume (R-Spencer), Nick Boldyga (R-Southwick), Shawn Dooley (R-Norfolk), and Marc Lombardo (R-Billerica). (A Yes” vote is for the amendment. A “No” vote is against it.) Rep. Joseph McGonagle Yes SAME DAY REGISTRATION (H 4359) House 93-64, approved an amendment to a measure that would implement same day registration (SDR) that allows people to register to vote at the polls on Election Day and on any of the early voting days prior to the election. The amendment would replace SDR with a requirement that Secretary of State Bill Galvin complete a study that would analyze the cost of the proposed policy to the state and cities and towns and what it would take for local city and town clerks to implement SDR. Under House rules, the approval of the study amendment prohibits a roll call vote on the straightforward establishment of SDR. Supporters of SDR said that the study is simply a tactic by SDR opponents to delay the implementation of SDR and also avoid a direct vote on SDR itself. Rep. Lindsay Sabadosa (D-Northampton), the sponsor of SDR, said it is an important tool that Massachusetts can use to increase voter access to the polls. “In 2021, we had one day of overlap when voters could vote early and register. There was not a fl ood of applications; just a few more people across the state who were able to exercise their civic duty. That small data point shows that this can work and [this roll call] vote shows that support for same day registration, already popular with voters, is growing amongst legislators as well.” Some supporters of the amendment to replace SDR with the study by the secretary of state said the House should not implement SDR without having suffi cient facts on its eff ects. Others expressed concerns about the ability of cities and towns to implement SDR rules without disruption. (Beacon Hill Roll Call urges readers to read the following carefully and understand what a “Yes” and “No” vote mean on this roll call. The roll call was on replacing SDR with a study. Therefore, a “Yes” vote is in favor of the study of SDR. A “No” vote is against the study and in most cases in favor of SDR itself.) Rep. Joseph McGonagle Yes PROOF OF VACCINATION (H 4359) House 31-127, rejected an amendment that would prohibit any city or town from requiring that a voter show proof of vaccination as a condition of entering a polling place to vote or to register to vote. “If any voting location required a vaccination, then a sizable portion of the population would be prevented from entering the facility to exercise their constitutional right,” said sponsor Rep. Peter Durant (R-Spencer). “Since statistically the majority of people not vaccinated are minorities, a major constituency this bill sought to protect, any vaccine requirement would not only be unconstitutional, but also seen as an eff ort to suppress the vote.” Amendment opponents said this is a solution in search of a problem. They noted that voters are not being asked to show proof of vaccination. (A “Yes” vote is for the amendment banning cities and towns from requiring voters to provide proof of vaccination. A “No” vote is against the ban.) Rep. Joseph McGonagle No REQUIRE VOTER ID (H 4359) House 32-126, rejected an amendment that would require voters to show a federal or Massachusetts picture identifi cation at their polling places in order to be allowed to vote. The state would also be required to establish a waiver of the fee for obtaining the ID for indigent persons. Supporters said it is illogical that all voters are not required to show identifi cation prior to voting and noted that 24 other states have laws requiring IDs. They argued that people cannot cash a check, rent a car, fl y on a plane or even enter some government buildings without showing an ID. BHRC | SEE PAGE 25
24 Publizr Home