Two years ago, 72 percent of Massachusetts voters approved a ballot question calling for an audit of the state Legislature, but auditor Diana DiZoglio has been frustrated in her attempts to put that vote into action. In the same election cycle, Evan Mackay nearly unseated incumbent state representative Marjorie Decker in the 25th Middlesex District in Cambridge, falling short by less than 50 votes.
DiZoglio endorsed MacKay on Monday – and they are set to appear together Thursday in a Harvard Square town hall on good governance – as MacKay tries again to replace Decker on Beacon Hill in a campaign focused on those issues.
Decker and MacKay debated last week in an event sponsored and moderated by the Cambridge Committee for Transparency and Accountability in Government. It was held Thursday at St. James Church Hall near Porter Square, the venue where the group hosted DiZoglio on Nov. 19.
Each candidates’ opening remarks addressed government transparency, and they sparred and roused their supporters – but mostly drifted from prepared questions and followed well-known, rehearsed remarks that have been heard more than a few times. There seemed to be a wilderness of substantive issues that were cited but unexplored by either candidate.
Decker, a former city councillor who grew up in Cambridge public housing with a single mother, opened her remarks with an emphasis on her attempts, through House debate and a weekly newsletter, to allow constituents to see how members of the Legislature vote in committee.
MacKay is a union leader and community organizer ideologically aligned with the Democratic Socialists of America. They emphasized their continuing crusade to end Massachusetts state government corruption and noted in passing their family’s commitment to foster care of more than 100 children.
Questions about transparency
Of the moderators’ six questions, three were about transparency, including public disclosure of legislators’ votes in committees – important because most bills die in committee with a simple majority vote, killing important legislation without a full House debate and vote.
The candidates agreed there should be public disclosure of committee votes, but Decker was accused by MacKay of keeping nondisclosure policies quietly in place. The Senate has voted yes to disclose votes but the House, including Decker, has voted no, MacKay said.
On another question, about public records and disclosure of legislators’ votes, MacKay advocated for public records reform and challenged Decker and the Legislature for not passing a bill before the House for just that. Decker said she voted for public record reform and put it on a ballot for a vote. But she is only one of 160 people and needed legislative colleagues’ help to get it done.
Decker argued in support of omnibus bills – which bundle a number of related issues but get a single vote – as a way to move more rapidly through mountains of legislation. MacKay countered that the bills are opaque, that even legislators do not read or know what is in them, and that any number of missteps, particularly budgeting problems, could pass without proper due diligence and judicious consideration.
Pay, powers and auditing
The remaining questions covered a range of topics.
Politicians’ salaries, benefits and perks. The base pay for a Massachusetts legislator is $82,000 per year. Committee chairs and other leadership positions, such as House speaker, are additionally compensated with money and staff. MacKay attacked Decker and the systemic stipend committee payout, particularly for committee chairs whose committees have never met; Decker, chair of the Public Health Committee and compensated monetarily and with three additional staffers, agreed. But she noted that she is the lowest paid of all chairs while overseeing one of the most important and busiest committees in the House. Both candidates urged stipend reform.
The state budget and how it is evaluated. MacKay noted that Massachusetts is the only state Legislature that does not have an independent auditor to help legislators read, evaluate and understand the budget and its outlays. Decker agreed and supports the recreation of an independent auditors office.
Speaker of the House powers. MacKay rose quickly to support a complete restructuring of the power of leadership in the House before using the rest of his allotted time on other topics. Decker used the time on other issues without answering the question.
Within 50 votes
Closing statements were basically boilerplate, as Decker recalled her experience and leadership role in the House. MacKay closed with hopes for Massachusetts to become a national model for government transparency, but noted that Massachusetts is the only “blue” state with a voluntary agreement with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
The forum, marking the start of a three-month push toward Sept. 1 primaries, drew about 100 enthusiastic attendees, mostly older and white. The event that recaptured some of the spirit and themes of 2024, when MacKay arrived on the campaign trail with critiques of Decker’s approach to transparency, while Decker highlighted her legislative accomplishments since 2012, when she took up the mantel and seat of mentor Alice Wolf. Massachusetts incumbents usually romp to reelection, and MacKay was a first-timer – yet came so close in votes that MacKay was comfortable declaring a win on election night.
That was premature. MacKay’s 40-vote lead was turned around the next day after a hand count of some ballots, and Decker wound up ahead by 41 votes. In a Sept. 4, 2024, recount, Decker maintained that lead, coming out ahead 3,471 to MacKay’s 3,430.
About The Author
