Local News

Order for statewide ballot questions finalized

In November, voters will weigh in on legalizing psychedelics, MCAS testing, wages for tipped workers and more.

A ballot drop box outside Haverhill City Hall. Elise Amendola/AP

By Ross Cristantiello

Last week, Mass. Secretary of State William Galvin’s office finalized the order in which the five statewide ballot questions will appear on ballots this November. This is the highest number of ballot questions to be put in front of voters since 2000. 

The way these measures appear on ballots is left to the discretion of Galvin, with the order “typically assigned in a manner that will ensure the best possible ballot layout, given the length of the question summaries,” according to his office. 

In September, all households in the state will receive booklets containing detailed information about each proposal.

Advertisement:

Below, each question is summarized in the order in which they will appear on ballots. 

Question 1: State Auditor’s Authority to Audit the Legislature

State Auditor Diana DiZoglio, a former state representative and senator, campaigned on promises to audit the legislature for the first time in decades. She has been prevented from doing so by lawmakers and Attorney General Andrea Campbell, amid concerns that it could violate the constitutional separation of powers. Campbell has warned about the potential for “constitutional limitations” if voters approve the measure and grant DiZoglio the authority to conduct an audit. But Dizoglio pulled together a unique coalition of supporters to get a question in front of voters this fall. Proponents say that an audit is needed to bring transparency to a body often criticized for being too opaque. 

Question 2: Elimination of MCAS as High School Graduation Requirement

The Massachusetts Teachers Association has thrown its full weight behind a push to replace standardized MCAS tests as a high school graduation requirement. Currently, students have to pass English, math, and science MCAS exams to earn their diplomas. Those pushing for a “yes” vote say that the graduation requirement disproportionately harms low-income students, makes teachers overly tailor their lessons to the test, and can be replaced by other means of better preparing students for the rest of their lives. Mass. Gov. Maura Healey has opposed the idea, saying that the test is still an important way of assessing students, and that eliminating the graduation requirement would lead to uneven standards that vary by school district. 

Question 3: Unionization for Transportation Network Drivers

If approved, this measure would allow ride-share drivers to form unions and to collectively bargain with companies like Uber and Lyft. Last month, the state settled with the two companies, ensuring drivers earn a minimum pay standard of $32.50 per hour and receive other benefits. A coalition backed by the ride-share companies had been pushing for a ballot measure that would classify drivers as independent contractors that would be eligible for some benefits. Building on that settlement, drivers say they deserve the power of collective bargaining and that existing labor laws do not adequately account for gig workers. Campbell is backing the measure. 

Question 4: Limited Legalization and Regulation of Certain Natural Psychedelic Substances

If passed, the measure would legalize the possession and supervised use of plant-based psychedelics like psilocybin mushrooms. A growing body of research shows that “shrooms” can help treat depression, anxiety, PTSD, and more. Those behind the ballot initiative say that psychedelics could be a “breakthrough therapy for mental health.” Psilocybin has been decriminalized in Cambridge, Somerville, and Northampton in recent years. The measure would also legalize home cultivation, something opponents have argued is unsafe. 

Question 5: Minimum Wage for Tipped Workers

This measure seeks to gradually increase the minimum wage for tipped workers over five years, bringing it in line with the state’s minimum wage by 2029. Proponents argue that this would not only benefit workers, but benefit employers by reducing turnover and improving service quality. Opponents, like the Massachusetts Restaurant Association, say that the idea is untenable for the restaurant industry and could lead to workforce reductions, increased menu costs, and extra service charges.