Paul R. Feeney

Vote was on increasing the notice for hearings from 48 hours to 72 hours and requiring the posting of recorded votes taken in committee online.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was on providing representatives more notice when a Conference Committee produces a final bill for legislators to vote on (i.e., moving up the deadline from 8 pm to 5 pm the night before).

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was a conservative attempt to get the conversion therapy ban ruled unconstitutional. The ban, which passed, would prohibit licensed mental health professionals from “practicing” on minors the damaging and homophobic/transphobic fraud of “conversion therapy,” which has the goal of “changing” a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity of a minor.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on a proposal from Republican Governor Charlie Baker to make the adoption of a more stringent calculation of benefits (counting a parent's Supplemental Security Income in determining their children's eligibility for welfare benefits) a precondition of lifting the punitive "cap on kids."

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on making up to $8 million available for family planning clinics in Massachusetts at risk of losing federal funding under a new Trump administration rule that cuts support for providers that offer abortion services.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was on overriding the Governor’s veto on a bill to eliminate a punitive welfare policy that denies benefits to children who were born while a family is receiving state assistance. MA is one of the only states to still do this.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was on establishing a gender-neutral identity option for Massachusetts licenses, a recognition that some individuals may not identify as either male or female.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was on redundantly requiring the money from the Fair Share amendment to be spent on education and transportation, a conservative attempt to push anti-tax and anti-spending framing.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on creating a corporate tax carveout in the Fair Share amendment.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on attempting to enable future Legislatures to set the surtax in the Fair Share amendment below 4% -- or even negate it entirely.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on attempting to enable future Legislatures to set the surtax in the Fair Share amendment below 4% -- or even negate it entirely.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on lessening or negating the surtax—and requiring that every surtax on millionaires be matched with a tax cut.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on redundantly requiring the money from the Fair Share amendment to be spent on education and transportation, a conservative attempt to push anti-tax and anti-spending framing.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on advancing the Fair Share amendment, a 4% surtax on income above $1 million to fund education and transportation reinvestment, to the 2022 ballot.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was on enabling bosses to prevent public sector workers from hosting union meetings at the office.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on an amendment to make it more difficult for public sector workers to communicate while trying to form or operating a union.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on an amendment from Governor Charlie Baker to the Janus bill to make it more difficult for public sector workers to organize a union.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on increasing the frequency of reviews of the education funding formula from every 10 years to every 5 years so that it never gets too out-of-date.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was on increasing community and educator involvement in school districts' plans to reduce disparities -- and requires charter schools to create such plans as well.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was on requiring a study of the impact on this regressive tax law on municipalities' ability to provide a high-quality education to all students.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was on a regressive amendment to steer a greater percentage of total education spending toward more affluent districts.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on updating the outdated education funding formula and investing $1.5 billion in additional money in our public schools, especially for the neediest students.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was on removing the ban on menthol cigarettes from the underlying bill.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on the House version of the plastic bag ban, which would have allowed retailers to use thicker single-use plastic bags and eliminated the fee for other single-use bags.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on nullifying the enforcement of the ban on single-use plastic bags and levying a small fee on other single-use bags.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was to ensure that Massachusetts schools that offer sex education use an age-appropriate, medically accurate, and LGBTQ-inclusive curriculum

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was on an amendment that sought to paint the newly created Climate Policy Commission as a shady and secret bureaucracy when it would, in fact, be subject to the same standards as similar agencies.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was to require the executive office of energy and environmental affairs to conduct an annual report on the costs of the underlying bill, which would set efficiency standards for a range of products. The amendment was an attempt to falsely portral such measures as costly and to overburden an underfunded regulatory agency.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was to set energy and water efficiency standards for new faucets, showerheads, commercial dishwashers and ovens, and a dozen other products.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was to subject all regulations created by the Climate Policy Commission to legislative approval, creating a different standard for the agency and slowing down climate policymaking.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on a comprehensive climate mitigation bill that set a statewide net-zero emissions limit for 2050, created an independent watchdog commission on climate policy, required the implementation of a carbon pricing scheme, and built equity into utility reform and household solar expansion, among other things.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was to require the MBTA to purchase only zero-emissions vehicles after 2030, direct it to start purchasing zero-emission replacement vehicles in the interim. and require i to have a zero-emissions fleet by 2040.

Progressive Position: YES

Progressive Position: 

Vote was to scale back implementation of a bill enabling cities and towns to install red light cameras, out of concern for expanding surveillance.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was to strenghten the protections for in-person voting in 2020, including a clear deadline for guidance from the Secretary of State and a requirement that municpalities create their own preparedness plans.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was to streamline the vote-by-mail process by creating a standard form for absentee ballot requests and early-vote-by-mail requests. Such a change would reduce possible voter confusion and make the jobs of poll workers simpler.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was a conservative attempt to fear-monger about non-existent voter fraud by implying that counting ballots after 5 pm is somehow fraudulent.

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on requiring an unnecessary fiscal study of the bill to bog down implementation

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was to strike the language creating a commission on the use of force in juvenile detention facilities

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on clarifying and upholding the language reforming qualified immunity in the bill to remove any uncertainty about whether public officials remain indemnified

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was on delaying the qualified immunity reforms in the bill for 180 days

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on replacing the Police Officer Standards and Accreditation Commission in the underlying bill with a weaker and non-independent one as proposed by Governor Charlie Baker

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on protecting students from having school officials wrongfully enter them into a gang database and risking their deportation

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was on making it harder to decertify law-breaking police officers

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on replacing the overly narrow definitin of a chokehold in the bill

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was on weakening the already too weak language on chokeholds in the underlying bill

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on the Reform - Shift Build Act, which would create a Police officer Standards and Accreditation Commission, strenghten regulations on the use of force,reduce the school-to-prison pipeline, limit qualified immunity, and create a Justice Reinvestment Fund, among other steps.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was to eliminate most components of an amendment to expand equitable access to abortion

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on an amendment to increase equitable access to abortion by expanding access to abortion after 24 weeks of pregnancy in cases of a lethal fetal diagnosis; allowing 16 and 17 year olds to make their own decisions about abortion care without having to go before a judge; streamlining access for those under 16 years old by allowing remote hearings, eliminating the need for young people to travel to a courthouse and stand before a judge; and codifying a right to non-interference in access to reproductive health care.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was on capping third-party delivery fees for restaurants, a common-sense economic recovery measure during COVID that Senate Leadership wanted out of consideration because the House had already passed it.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was to accept the conference report of the police reform legislation

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was on an amendment from the Governor undermining equitable access to abortion services

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was to weaken the police reform legislation by eliminating the civilian majority on the Peace Officer Standards & Training commission

Progressive Position: NO

Vote was on the final version of the police reform bill. Although the bill was weakened due to pressure from the Governor, it was remarkable to see a number of Democrats still vote against it due to police pressure.

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was to override the Governor's veto and pass measures to expand equitable access to abortion services

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was to override Governor Baker's veto of budget language on taking safe and reasonable steps to release people in prison who are most vulnerable to the COVID-19 pandemic

Progressive Position: YES

Vote was on setting a roadmap for net zero by 2050 (with 5-year plans and benchmarks), establishing stronger emissions targets, increasing the Renewable Portfolio Standard, codifying Environmental Justice protections, and taking additional steps to encourage wind, solar, and geothermal energy as well as energy efficiency.

Progressive Position: YES