Episode 232: Q4: Questions and Answers

10/20/22-- This week on The Horse Race the team finishes up the ballot question round-up! Before that, Steve and Jenn run through a new MassINC Polling Group transportation poll that covers everything from statewide elections to the state of the T.

This week we take a deeper look at ballot question 4 on driver's license eligibility. The ballot measure would keep or repeal a law passed earlier this summer allowing all residents of the state regardless of immigration status to apply for driver’s licenses and learner’s permits if they meet all standard qualifications.

We're joined first by State Senator Lydia Edwards to present the supporting viewpoint. Then John Milligan, of Fair and Secure Massachusetts, drops by the pod to present the opposing campaign's point of view.

--

Full Show Transcript Below:

Jennifer Smith: [00:00:25] This week on The Horse Race. We're wrapping up our ballot question rundown with a deeper look at question four. It's Thursday, October 20. [00:00:32][7.1]

Steve Koczela: [00:00:47] Welcome back to the Horse Race your Weekly look at politics, policy and elections in Massachusetts. I'm Steve Koczela. Here at the top with Jennifer Smith. Lisa Kashinsky will be by for a segment later in the show. Right here at the top, though, of course, there's lots of political news to get to, but there's an even bigger issue roiling Massachusetts right now. And that is, of course, the Boston Birkenstock. There was an article in the New York Times that we're going to go very deep on. Actually, we're not. We're going to touch on it here at the top. And the title is, If you want these Birkenstocks, you may have to pay up. The new classic, quote, Boston style has become a rare commodity and nearly impossible to find in stores. So this being as far as we can tell the first time that any style item that was called the Boston's anything has been desirable by anybody else. We thought we have to get into it. So our fashion correspondent Jennifer Smith joins us here at the top. Jenn, what is going on here? [00:01:37][50.1]

Jennifer Smith: [00:01:39] Okay. So I'm going to try and phrase this in a way that doesn't just involve me insulting anyone who wants to wear these shoes. But I do think they're ugly. And that is very important for me to get out there right up front. They are not only kind of just like, you know, they look like like little, little fuzzy mules mixed with some clogs. They cost like 160 to $170. The reason that you are seeing this really come to the fore right now is not strictly because of the Boston as much as we love the Massachusetts connection, but because tick tock and the way that we kind of consume fast fashion has really just grabbed the good ole hardy Birkenstock by the heel and dragged it through the thrift stores, through the online marketplaces. To the extent that it is now extremely difficult to find a pair of these like classic nineties shoes if you're trying to spend a ton of money on them. Steve, Does that make sense? [00:02:36][57.4]

Steve Koczela: [00:02:37] I mean, they look like something that people that I knew were in college. Like this looks like a nineties campus, like sort of clog ugly Birkenstock like that's what it is. [00:02:47][10.8]

Jennifer Smith: [00:02:48] So Steve, you have landed on exactly the reason that we're talking about this right now, which is, as everyone knows, fashion cycles kind of move through in these 20 year something periods. Right now, we're in peak rise of like nineties and aughts fashion all over again. And a lot of celebrities have been seen wearing kind of these allegedly very comfy shoes on, Tik Tok out in the world. And so you see this kind of corresponding rise where people say, well, if Kendall Jenner's feet look warm right now, my feet should probably look warm in the same way. And so you not only see a lot of demand online, but you also see this kind of really interesting interference with kind of traditional thrift store mechanics, which is like Birkenstocks, are hardy shoes. They last you for a long time. If you like them, you probably want to keep them for a while. And it used to be that there was a relatively easy way to, like, find these guys in brick stores over the decade. Maybe you get to buy them for $45 instead of, again, $160 for a pair of clogs. And now instead, you have this kind of thrift store to flip mechanic that has created this kind of gap in the mid-market recycling space for these shoes, which, again, if you like them, means that they're a little bit harder to get. Steve, I am so sorry that I have to tell you this, but you might be seeing more of them because I assume because The New York Times has raised this issue of critical public importance to our awareness men, Birkenstocks, restocked. There are tons of these available right now. You can go get them right now. [00:04:25][97.1]

Steve Koczela: [00:04:26] That's kind of what the article talked about was the rarity of them. And I like the fact I like even the thought that there's like a mid-market, like flip market for shoes. Like that's something that I can't get my head around. But anyway, as long as much as we'd love to do a whole episode on this, there are actually things happening here in Massachusetts that don't specifically pertain to fashion. Jenn, you also have a question three update, which of course, is one of the ones that we got to last week. [00:04:49][23.5]

Jennifer Smith: [00:04:50] That's right. So as you talked about with Jon Chesto of the Globe initially for question three, which is amending some restrictions to liquor licensing limits. There was almost no opposition in the early portion of this campaign. There is opposition now from Total Wine and More, basically saying that the way that it initially expands the liquor licenses is going to effectively on the long run, end up reducing the number of liquor licenses that businesses like theirs could actually apply for. So there is a kind of short term expansion, but then ultimately a cap that they feel will be harmful. They've put out an ad saying that question three reduces alcohol licenses for family owned businesses, which, of course, The Globe points out has a certain amount of irony to it. Because even though two brothers own Total Wine, it is the nation's largest independent retailer of wine, beer and spirits. So we have a classic kind of back and forth right now over question three, which had been avoiding some back and forth before. So if you would like to go and get a full recap on the very late in the game kerfuffle head on over. Jon Chesto wrote an entire update piece. [00:06:02][72.2]

Steve Koczela: [00:06:03] Yeah, very interesting. And also, I think calls into question something that we're going to be looking at here on The Horse Race a few weeks from now. Not exactly sure of the specific date, which is what is the ballot question in Massachusetts actually for at this point, know who's taking advantage of it? Who is benefiting from it? Is it still does that work in the way that it was designed to or does it need to be updated? So definitely keep an eye out for that. [00:06:25][22.1]

Jennifer Smith: [00:06:26] And I think this is our chance to pivot away from Birkenstocks and booze to the real love of your life. Steve, which is also, I hear your profession polling. [00:06:35][8.9]

Steve Koczela: [00:06:36] Yes. Got to always pivot to the polls. [00:06:37][1.8]

Jennifer Smith: [00:06:38] So you all at the MassINC Polling Group have released a new poll. Walk us through it. What did it cover and what was interesting? [00:06:44][5.8]

Steve Koczela: [00:06:45] Yeah, we did kind of two main things with this. One was a lot on transportation. You know, we've been doing transportation for years and have a lot going back a long way. Then we also took a look at some issues that are going to be on the ballot. Of course, we've got the governor's race that's going to be decided here in just a couple of weeks. Then we also looked at question one. That, of course, is fair share, which we covered two weeks ago. Then we also got the question for which is, of course, a repeal referendum, which, if it passes, the law that has already passed, would stay on the books. If the no vote wins, then the law would be repealed. So definitely make a flowchart if you're unsure of that before you go to the ballot. [00:07:20][34.5]

Jennifer Smith: [00:07:21] Definitely. Okay. Well, let's let's head on through this question. One fair share amendment. How did voters in Massachusetts feel about it? [00:07:28][7.5]

Steve Koczela: [00:07:29] Yeah, that's one we've been keeping a close eye on because we had seen support drop from kind of years past all the way through to the beginning of this year, when it had been sort of around 70 down to about the mid fifties when you looked at polls done in August. So had it gone down further, that was the big question. But it seems that the slide has stopped and I'm basing that both on our poll and that one released yesterday by Suffolk University, ours found 59% support for question one, 31% opposition. So, you know, it's getting close to 50 or it is close to 50, and that's not a place you want to be if you're a ballot question. But it doesn't seem to be declining any more at this point. [00:08:06][37.9]

Jennifer Smith: [00:08:07] And then give us a little special sneak preview when we talking about question for today, that one is also not looking like a blow out in either direction right now, despite there being an existing law already on the books. [00:08:19][11.5]

Steve Koczela: [00:08:20] Right. That's the one that is close. It's fairly close both in our poll and in the Suffolk poll. We found it with a 12 point margin. Suffolk found out with a 17 point margin. You know, if you're talking about a candidate in election, that's borderline landslide in a lot of races. But in a ballot question where support can change very significantly and often does at the last minute and often changes toward the know side, that's not as much of of a comfortable margin as you'd like to see if you're the yes side of that one. [00:08:46][26.7]

Jennifer Smith: [00:08:47] Definitely. All right. Well, you started by raising the traumatizing flag for me of transportation. So let's get into some of those numbers. You asked voters to pick three transportation priorities for the next governor from a list. So what did people want to see and how badly did they want to see it? [00:09:07][19.5]

Steve Koczela: [00:09:07] Yeah, these priorities included things like improvements to the roads, improvements to transit, making roads safer, etc. By far, the top two were improving the condition of highways, roads and bridges. That was the top one. Right behind that was improving existing public transportation like trains, subways and busses. So we also put in things like reducing carbon emissions, expanding rail travel and so forth. And it's not that people are opposed to either of those things or to any of the things that are also on the list. It's just that conditions are such a big issue right now that those two really surpassed any of the other ones. We also saw that show up when we asked about just on an open ended basis, like you tell us exactly in your own words what you think the top priority should be. Roads, highways and bridges at the top, the MBTA and commuter rail at number two. [00:09:54][46.9]

Jennifer Smith: [00:09:55] I mean, speaking of the current conditions, they didn't think they were great. I think is a safe way to characterize this. I am not trying to beat up on anyone. The people responding did not think that these were excellent transit options. [00:10:11][16.4]

Steve Koczela: [00:10:12] Yes, I think that that's that is a fair characterization, Jenn. As you said, we found 78% said that the condition of the system is either fair or poor. Only about one in five said it was good or excellent. I'd love to meet the people, the 3% who said excellent. I really would love to know and sort of exist in their infrastructure world for a few weeks and just see what are they looking at? What are they perceiving? You know, that makes everything seem excellent. But yes, mostly mostly people thought, you know, things aren't that great. Interestingly, it didn't really rub off that much on Charlie Baker. You know, that's kind of always the question is something goes wrong. What role does the governor play or to what extent does that impact the numbers for the governor or his support? And we've been asking these kinds of questions for a while, too. We found, as we always have, that it hasn't really impacted Charlie Baker very much. Still, 64% of voters say that they either strongly or somewhat approve of Charlie Baker's management of the transportation system in Massachusetts. It's not entirely always clear sort of what that means, because, you know, when you ask about the media, for instance, you see most people think it's either worse or just as good as it was in 2015. And of course, 2015 was the year of the historic snowstorms. It was very bad in 2015 and really only about a quarter think that it's gotten better since then. [00:11:36][83.3]

Jennifer Smith: [00:11:37] You know what? I'm trying to see if people approve of the job I'm doing. I always ask, Do you think I'm a better conversationalist now than when I was like 21 years old and extremely drunk at a bar? I like to set those standards low. Speaking of the MBTA, which is how I got back from bars back in the day is the orange line shutdown. We've been talking for a while about just how slow all these trains are still going. But you asked, how do people feel about the fact that they had to go without an orange line for about a month? [00:12:07][30.2]

Steve Koczela: [00:12:07] Yeah, we haven't asked about, you know, that slows zones specifically. We have to zoom in pretty closely on that, though. I would love to know, having just gotten off the orange line, which is why I was like running into the room 2 minutes before we started the podcast today. But we found 59% said that the orange line shutdown was worth it. Just 15% said it was not worth it. And similar numbers said when we asked, you know, if we have to do this in the future, do you think we should shut down entire lines so we can go as quickly as possible or keep them open if it means repairs take much longer. And found by about a 2 to 1 margin, people said do it as fast as you can, even if it means shutting things down. [00:12:43][36.0]

Jennifer Smith: [00:12:44] And it seemed really interesting that that was true in both the Boston area, which is obviously heavily MBTA subway dependent and those outside of Boston. [00:12:53][8.6]

Steve Koczela: [00:12:54] Yeah, that's always the question is do you use, you know, kind of in the Boston area completely differ from views elsewhere. I mean, one thing is that, you know, if you would take a very expansive view of the MBTA service area, it covers most of the population of the state. You know, it doesn't cover most of the land in the state. But, you know, the majority of people live in what some definitions would consider to be the MBTA service area. [00:13:17][23.5]

Jennifer Smith: [00:13:18] And then speaking of shutdowns and improvements, the question we always have to grapple with here is the dollars and cents version. How do we pay for this, Steve? How do you think we should pay for this? [00:13:29][10.3]

Steve Koczela: [00:13:30] That is always one of the questions. And, of course, one of the things that that would potentially help to pay for it would be the Fair Share Amendment. That's something that, you know, we saw strong support for in this poll. We also just asked on an open ended basis, you know, what would you like to see? We've asked many times, would you support or oppose these ten items? This time we did it a little bit differently where we just asked in a few words, How do you think the state should pay for changes to transportation that you would like to see? We found Fair Share actually came up a lot. Raise taxes on wealthy and corporations was also up there. We found, you know, use existing funds and cut wasteful spending. This is sort of a popular idea that's out there that there really is this pile of money if we just knew how to do it better or if we didn't waste all this money, you know, the Big Dig comes up a lot, that sort of thing. But there wasn't like everybody didn't immediately go to one thing except for raise taxes, but do it on wealthy people and corporations and pass Fair Share. [00:14:26][56.0]

Jennifer Smith: [00:14:27] All right. Well, what about the top of the ticket? Maura Healey, Geoff Diehl. How to voters feel right now about two weeks out? [00:14:34][7.1]

Steve Koczela: [00:14:34] Yeah. Our poll echoed what Suffolk found, which is basically that this, I think, surprising nobody. Maura Healey has a pretty comfortable lead. You know, it depends on which poll you read, whether it's kind of in the twenties or even 30 points. The Suffolk poll also asked about the other constitutional offices. And the only one that looks even remotely close, of course, is the race for auditor, which we've touched on a few times in the past. [00:14:55][20.6]

Jennifer Smith: [00:14:56] All right. Well, we'll see if any of those end up panning out. Some of them have to do with ballot measures we're dealing with in this season. But speaking of this season, this day, this year, this flat circle of time, what are we doing here today and ever? [00:15:14][17.5]

Steve Koczela: [00:15:15] Well, we don't know. We've been trying to figure that out for a long time now. We still don't know. But as long as we're here together today, we're going to take a tour through the final ballet question as the script actually says, I assume it meant to say ballot question this time looking at both sides of ballot question four that deals with eligibility for driver's licenses, this ballot measure would keep a repeal. A law passed earlier this summer allowing all residents of the state, regardless of immigration status, to apply for driver's licenses. And. Learner's permits if they meet all standard qualifications. So Jenn So we combine ballet and horse racing and dressage our way through this episode? [00:15:50][35.0]

Jennifer Smith: [00:15:50] We're going to look real ungainly while doing it, but let's go. We continue our ballot question education with a look at question for joining us in support of the ballot measure is State Senator Lydia Edwards. Welcome back to the horse race, Senator. [00:16:09][19.0]

Lydia Edwards: [00:16:10] Hello. How are you? [00:16:11][0.7]

Jennifer Smith: [00:16:12] Not bad. Thanks for being here. Especially because this ballot question is structured a little bit differently than people might be used to with the other ballot questions, because this would be repealing a law that was passed earlier in the summer. Only if you say no. So can you give us a brief summation of the laws journey to this point, which included an override of Governor Baker's veto? [00:16:33][21.7]

Lydia Edwards: [00:16:34] So I want to say a couple sessions ago, the Brazilian immigrants center, worker center excuse me, and 32BJ. kicked off a coalition for the Working Family Mobility Act. And I want to say, the sponsors in the Senate and in the House, they file it, we get it going. And I think this time there is a whole, There was a different coalition that was safety based. And we pulled in a lot of people, police chiefs, individuals who really just understood that. The practical matter is that we want drivers to know how to drive and we want to know that they can know how to drive. So the bill makes it through, gets through both houses, which is hard enough to do. There are some edits and changes and making sure that it is as streamlined as possible, that there is time built in for the RMV to adjust, to make sure that the licenses are correctly put out, and that there's certain documents, you know, from all over the world that we can recognize that time is still there. And ultimately, it passes both houses. It goes to the governor's desk. He vetoes it. I think he was looking for some sort of assurance that there was not a likelihood that they could vote with this. Meanwhile, we don't require driver's licenses to vote anyway. But okay. So he vetoed it, sent it back, and both of the houses overwhelmingly overrode his veto, 75% in order to make sure that it became the law was signed into the law. Again, you have that your buffer zone. And unfortunately, now we're here because enough people gathered signatures to repeal the law before it's even been really enacted to even see if there's a real concern. So that's where we are. And that's that's what we're fighting for. Yes on 4. Yes, we want to keep the law. [00:18:21][107.0]

Lisa Kashinsky: [00:18:23] And so we're going to get back to some of the things that you just mentioned in a second, particularly voting. But I just want to make it clear for people if they want to keep the law, which way do they vote on this question? Because these ballot questions can get a little confusing with the yes versus no. [00:18:38][15.2]

Lydia Edwards: [00:18:39] Yes, you want to keep the law. So, yes, on four. [00:18:42][2.9]

Lisa Kashinsky: [00:18:43] Let's get back to some of the misconceptions around this and let's start with what you've already mentioned, and that is what would happen with regards to voting. [00:18:51][8.3]

Lydia Edwards: [00:18:53] Nothing. The same laws that apply today would apply after this is implemented, which is that you have to be over 18 and a U.S. citizen in order to vote. So what you will find is that we already have non-citizens driving with licenses every single day who are not voting people on student visas, people who are on have TPS, temporary protected status. There's so many people who have different levels of permission to be here who get licenses and do not vote because they are not U.S. citizens. [00:19:27][33.8]

Jennifer Smith: [00:19:28] One of the other objections that has come up in this process, and if possible, I'd like you to clarify whether or not these are new objections or whether the governor was also kind of in line with these. As you've got the voting concern, you've also got kind of road safety general objections, which aren't necessarily tied to states with similar laws in terms of increases and in driving felonies. And then another kind of looming question is just an objection based on supporting immigrants who came in without normal immigration documents. So all three of those have been kicked around as reasons to repeal the law. How do you feel about each of those arguments? [00:20:13][45.2]

Lydia Edwards: [00:20:14] So the first one was the voting, right? [00:20:18][3.7]

Jennifer Smith: [00:20:19] Yeah, the automatic enrollment concern. [00:20:21][2.0]

Lydia Edwards: [00:20:22] So it does not happen. You can opt in by clicking on that you're a U.S. citizen. If you don't click that, you will not be given the option to automatically be registered. And if you do click that, you still have to prove that you're a U.S. citizen somehow. So there's a there's a safety check. And I think the secretary, Secretary Galvin, has been very clear. It cannot happen. It does not happen. It cannot happen. It doesn't happen that you automatically get registered to vote as a non-citizen. That's fine. Then we move into the second bucket of public safety. And I've said before and I'll say again, the public safety experts, which are our law enforcement individuals, our police chiefs, RDA, is the majority of them support this because it is a matter of public safety. They want to know who is driving. They want to know. They pull somebody over. They will find out who was driving, whether they were driving and took too fast but too slow, whatever the reasons were. That is the best way to find that out is by having a license. And then I want to get your insurance and they'll pull that out and the registration. So it's a matter of public safety to make sure everybody can read the sign and understand what the signs are saying in English. It's a matter of public safety for everyone to know that not only can they read it, but they know how to drive and understand the ebbs and flows of our roads and the rules of driving. And finally, that they're insured. That's what a driver's license is. It's just permission to drive. It is not permission to be in this country. There's not permission to to go to work. It is just permission to drive in Massachusetts. Which brings us to the final bucket, which is that I guess people are concerned, individuals who are undocumented somehow will get, I don't know, self esteem or sense of belonging or sense of pride or joy, I can assure you a driver's license didn't do that much for me. I highly doubt is going to do that much for them. But I do think what it will do is what every other right that they already have does for them. They have the right to free speech. You have the right to remain silent. You have all these rights right now because you are physically here regardless of your immigration status. So if you think that having the First Amendment right somehow makes them have higher self esteem and validates their position to be here, are you going to repeal the First Amendment? You know, so that that's the kind of nonsensical mess that I would say that that argument is that somehow some way that by giving them a license and I'm sorry, that's the wrong word, allowing them to earn a license, no one's given I'm not given a license and neither are you. I have to pay every year. I have to prove I had to prove that I could drive and another state had to show it, but so on and so forth have to take the test and they will all have to line up to do that. There is no no automatic just going along like I have because I came from Maryland or came from another place with my driver's license. They don't get that. You got to get in line, pay the fee so you can drive. So I don't know what giving an opportunity to get I don't know parking tickets, get pulled over, all these other things that happen, the responsibility of having a car, it doesn't do anything. It actually raises money for the state. We can raise $5 million, I think, in fees and $6 million in taxes on an annual basis just by making sure our roads are safer. [00:23:29][187.0]

Lisa Kashinsky: [00:23:30] So who is joining you in this effort to keep this law? And what has the public response been to it as you've kind of been getting out there, going around the state with voting already underway? So joining me, of course, are the lead sponsors and majority of the House and Senate who voted for this law. Law enforcement officials, DA's as well as major city police chiefs, they've endorsed this. Individual police officers are endorsing this, as well as unions, 32BJ worker centers, immigrant rights groups, overwhelmingly with Democrats. There's just a huge coalition that is multiracial, multilingual, includes citizens, includes non-citizens. And so the coalition is actually very broad and diverse, unlike, I would say, the other side. So when I'm knocking on the doors and I'm done, so almost every weekend, most people, they have a question. They usually say, what question? I thought there were only three. That's the first thing because as you know, the statewide book explaining all of the questions only had three in them. So I think that's a little frustrating for some of us because, you know, I would love to be able to say go and look at, but I can't. So sometimes the first time they're hearing about question four is from us. Right. So that's a little bit nerve racking. And then I explained that the law has already passed and I said, oh, it's a law already? Yeah, so this is. And I'm like, What's this for? I was like, Well, if you vote yes, it's to keep the law. And most of them move on from then and they want to know what? Well, tell me, what do dentists have to do with this? I'm like, nothing. That's another question. This is question four. And then I you know, if I do get any, I won't even call it pushback. There's a general concern, well, will this allow them to get public benefits? Will they be able to go? And I no again, this is permission to drive only. Well, will this allow them to do anything? And I said, just drive. That's it. That's all it can do. That's all this this is a state matters. The state permission to drive. [00:25:33][123.0]

Jennifer Smith: [00:25:34] All right. Well, I think we have to leave it there, but thank you so much, State Senator Lydia Edwards, for coming on to walk us through this. [00:25:42][7.2]

Lydia Edwards: [00:25:42] Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity. [00:25:44][1.1]

Jennifer Smith: [00:25:51] So now that we've. [00:25:52][0.5]

Lisa Kashinsky: [00:25:52] Heard from proponents of ballot question four, we're going to hear from the opposition. Joining us is John Milligan from Fair and Secure Massachusetts to talk us through the other side of the question. John, thanks for joining us. [00:26:04][12.0]

John Milligan: [00:26:05] Thanks for having me on. [00:26:06][0.7]

Lisa Kashinsky: [00:26:07] So tell us very simply, what would a no vote on Question four do? [00:26:11][3.8]

John Milligan: [00:26:13] So a no vote on question four would suspend the law that the Work and Family Mobility Act that gives licenses right now to illegal immigrants so that the law hasn't been implemented yet. But a no vote on question four would stop the law from being implemented. [00:26:29][16.6]

Jennifer Smith: [00:26:31] So could you summarize your objections to the current law? Our understanding, based on public statements by the GOP so far throughout this process is that the issues are kind of a few buckets. We've got road safety, voter registration, and then what seems like a bit more of a general objection to rewarding or somehow encouraging unauthorized immigration by offering the licenses or an opportunity to earn these licenses. So we'll get into each. But is that an accurate overview of kind of the three buckets? [00:27:01][30.0]

John Milligan: [00:27:02] Yes, definitely so. I mean, I think the first point is what's fair is fair, right? So when we first started the ballot initiative and we had to go out and get some original signers, the majority of our original signers are immigrants in this country, right? From kind of across the globe, folks who came here legally and objected to the idea of people who came here kind of obviously illegally being rewarded with licenses, something that they kind of had to go through the legal and at times lengthy process to achieve. So that was the that's the foremost thing, right? This is just what's fair is fair. People did it the right way. They want to preserve that. Our immigration system, what integrity it has, needs to be preserved. Governor Baker highlighted his concerns about the RMV being able to kind of handle this sort of thing, especially around election integrity and kind of correctly identifying who these people are. That's that's a big concern of the ballot committee as well. And then finally, the the road safety issue is something that that we're concerned about as well. You know, we have some data that suggests that when states like California have have passed laws like this, that fatalities on the road hit and runs, all of those things go up. They increase by 20 to 30%. [00:28:15][72.7]

Lisa Kashinsky: [00:28:16] So I want to take us back to what you said about voting for a second, because that's something that we hear a lot on both sides of this ballot question. So certain non-citizens can already get driver's licenses and legislators say the system established, you know, ensures that a person who's not a citizen isn't automatically enrolled to vote. So what do you perceive as the issue here? [00:28:38][21.8]

John Milligan: [00:28:39] So a couple of things. A, the folks who are eligible right now for licenses who are here legally have documentation, right? They have documentation that's issued by the by the U.S. government. And that is, you know, they're able to provide that to the RMV when they're going through the process of getting a license. Folks who are here illegally, for whatever reason, don't, you know, obviously don't have that. They might have some documents from their home country, whatever it is. The RMV isn't going to be able to handle. And this is what, again, Governor Baker's concern is, is that kind of the influx of new people who without any form of documentation from the state or federal government that are going to be looking to get licenses. Secondly, the the idea that the legislature knows what they're doing right there. You know, for for all my disagreements with them up on Beacon Hill, they're not done. So when they want to do something, they know exactly how to do it right. If they wanted to prevent this, they would have written it into the law. They purposely kept it vague. They kind of kicked the can down to the secretary of state, to the RMV will. Of course, you know, some provisions are going to have to be put in place. Something is going to have to be done here. But they didn't outline exactly what those provisions are or what they were going to do to prevent this. And I think if we know anything about Beacon Hill, when there's some wiggle room, they will they'll use it to make sure that their their agenda kind of gets through whatever loopholes they can. So from my perspective, I think just their their failure to explicitly say this is how we are going to prevent, you know, non-citizens and illegal immigrants from being able to vote, being automatically registered to vote, highlights the fact that they're leaving that loophole open. And as much as they say right now, well, that's not going to be an issue. I think if we're you know, when you guys invite me back and if if for some reason, you know, we get a yes vote on four, you can invite me back in 2 to 3 years when we see the bills come up for non-citizens voting in our local elections in certain cities, and then it become a push for them to go statewide. I definitely think that the legislature here knows what they're doing and they've left it open, open ended on purpose. [00:30:41][122.3]

Jennifer Smith: [00:30:42] So what's the response then, Secretary of State Bill Galvin has said he's confident that the secretary of state's office will be able to interact with the RMV and make sure they understand what kind of documents they're looking for. You know, I my two home states are California and Utah, both of whom have similar measures in place that allow people who are unauthorized immigrants to drive, basically. And they haven't seen any kind of widespread voter fraud issue. And all of those RMV's have said they had a decently easy time implementing these document checks. So I guess where is the concern coming from if the secretary of state's office says it's not worried about making sure that the RV can handle it? [00:31:27][45.2]

John Milligan: [00:31:29] Yeah. I mean, I would like to make sure that the secretary of State's office gets a handle on the elections we have going on right now. And, you know, I see the mistakes that are made. We have a race in the first school district. Tim Whalen, the Republican, is vacating the seat. The secretary of state's office sent out ballots in printed. The incumbent candidate for reelection next to the democrats an open seat. It just so happens that the the democrat shows up on the ballot as a candidate for reelection. I'd like to see the secretary of state's office focus on getting control of the elections we have right now and not making mistakes there before we open the door to you. Well, I'm sure we can handle this additional responsibility of processing illegal immigrants with licenses. I'm just not confident that they have the ability to do that right now, especially with the influx. I mean, I don't know how much time you've spent talking to town clerks recently. I did spend a tremendous amount of time with our town clerks, went through this whole signature process. And I can tell you my experience is that they are overwhelmed with the mail in ballots for the primary, with the mail in ballots for the general. I just think that right now, I think the secretary needs to focus on locking down the election, spending, the mistakes that we see happening here before we kind of have this influx of additional responsibility. [00:32:40][70.9]

Jennifer Smith: [00:32:42] So I'm curious as well, because when something goes to ballot measure, rather than trying to push for kind of changes in the legislative process, as you mentioned, this hasn't gone into effect yet. Why when this initially started coming down the pike, since these RMV concerns, since the kind of staffing concerns have been again raised for quite a while at this point, hasn't there been a pivot toward addressing those rather than a kind of straightforward appeal approach? [00:33:10][28.3]

John Milligan: [00:33:11] Right. Yeah. So frankly, I wish we had the numbers in the legislature, you know, to to kind of oppose something like this. You know, the party the Republican Party can't sustain the governor's veto at this point. Right? I think the last time they were able to sustain a gubernatorial veto was in 1990. Not to say that there aren't Democrats who are against this law. You know, one of our original signers is is a is a member of the House of Reps, a Democrat member of the House of Reps. But frankly, they're just there aren't the numbers in the legislature that are going to break with leadership on an issue like this to to kind of fight it there? So what we've taken to calling is this is really a people's veto, right? The governor vetoed it. The veto was overridden. And we said, okay, you know, we had a couple of weeks to go out and get 40,000 signatures. We collected over 100,000 signatures, 91,000 certified signatures, just over 91,000 certified. The signatures to show kind of this is an issue people care about. And I think that that's why we did this right, that the numbers in the legislature are not there to break with the Democrat leadership who we're pushing this agenda. So we have to take it to the people. Right. And I think you have kind of a split here. You have the most popular governor in the country, vetoed it. Right? Elected by the citizens of Massachusetts. You have a legislature also elected by the citizens of Massachusetts, I would say slightly less popular than the governor. But so you have both you know, both they voted for both of these people. They have conflicting interests. Let's put it on the ballot and see how the people vote up or down. And that's what we want it to do. We want to give people a chance to say, all right, here's the law. You know, we have two competing interests here. Let's let's have an up or down vote on it. [00:34:45][93.7]

Jennifer Smith: [00:34:46] And then pivoting over to the driving component as well. I did want to push back or ask for clarification. My understanding is The L.A. Times, when reviewing the results of the California measure around driver's licenses, found that hit and runs had actually decreased. That kind of aside, I am curious about the response to the proponents argument that this would increase, for instance, the number of insured drivers on the road and that it's not giving a driver's license, it's allowing people to go through the same process that we already use for licensing drivers. So is there a particular reason why you think this would impact road safety in a negative manner? [00:35:32][45.9]

John Milligan: [00:35:33] Yeah, definitely. So I'd be interested to see and we can connect offline as well about this the L.A. Times article. And I'm happy to provide the underlying data that we're looking at. But our data suggests that hit and run in California went up after they passed this law and fatalities on the road went up. So I don't think that this is something that's going to make our our roads more safe. You know, frankly, you can you can have a license and still drive a car uninsured. Right. And so the idea that everyone who is, you know, who has already broken the law, who has already kind of circumnavigated the system, is then going to say, well, now I know that I need insurance. I'm going to go out, make sure I have insurance before I drive my car. I think I don't think we can rely on that. [00:36:14][40.9]

Jennifer Smith: [00:36:14] And then kind of that third bucket, it seems that part of the meat of this issue is is sort of an objection to people not lawfully in the country having a certain suite of rights. Jim Lyons Mass GOP press releases since the start of this, characterized it as rewarding illegal immigrants with driver's licenses. And then national conservative immigration lobbying groups have said their primary objection to this is that they don't think unauthorized immigration should be incentivized. And I just want to make sure our listeners can kind of get to the core of the objection from an immigration standpoint. So is it the no on 4's position that undocumented people should not be allowed to drive fundamentally? [00:36:53][38.1]

John Milligan: [00:36:55] Yes, I think that that's definitely the position. And I think to you know, to what you were saying. Right, right before, this is it's not as if you're given a license when you turn 16. Right. It's something you earn. You're one of the first things they tell you is this isn't a right. It's a privilege. Right. And so I think that there is something of fairness in that. And the idea that people who pay taxes, right where here they pay taxes to maintain the roads, you know, infrastructure is a big thing in Massachusetts, as we know that that you kind of go through this process, that you're allowed to drive, that you're given that you earn a license and it's a privilege. I think that one of the big objections and like I mentioned, we had the majority of the original signers for our petition drive were immigrants. And their objection was was that exactly that, that they had gone through a process, a long and arduous process. And I'm not saying our immigration system right now is perfect by any means, but they had gone through a long and arduous process to kind of earn this this driver's license and their immigration their legal immigration status, and that people who cut the line are being rewarded. I mean, there's also just frankly, you know, we have an issue of fentanyl coming over our border, things like that. Massachusetts, will we if we become the first state in this area to to allow this sort of thing and give driver's licenses to illegal immigrants? We're going to become a hub of people coming here, getting their Massachusetts driver's licenses and then going wherever throughout New England to continue to you know, we have a huge addiction problem, obviously, as people know. And this is something that's going to help perpetuate that. As we see, there's a huge flow of illegal drugs that are coming over our southern border. And we're going to allow people who are in this in this country illegally to obtain a Massachusetts driver's license. And kind of once once they have driver's licenses, you know, you can get in your car, you go wherever you want. So we don't know kind of where what else, who else this is going to affect our bordering states, our neighboring communities. All of that stuff is kind of directly tied into this. So to answer your question, yeah, I think that definitely the position of no one, no on Foour Fair and Secure Massachusetts is that people who are here illegally, illegally should not be rewarded with a driver's license. [00:38:58][123.9]

Lisa Kashinsky: [00:38:59] So, you know, making people understand that you are the no side of this and you're also being very much outraised and outspent at this stage. So how are you getting your message across to people? [00:39:10][11.1]

John Milligan: [00:39:12] Yeah, good question. So I'd like to talk a little bit about the signature drive to start, if I could, because I think we definitely exceeded expectations and we exceeded expectation in the in the face of very organized opposition. You know, if if folks who were following it through the summer, not only the temperature, but it got heated out there on collecting signatures and there was an organized opposition against it. You know, we kind of blew that number out of the water in a couple a couple figures of folks who signed a petition. 40% of people who signed the petition didn't vote in the 2018 election. So these aren't people who are, you know, are out there super voters. They didn't vote in our the general election here in Massachusetts, about 23% of the folks who signed our petition were Republicans, 63% were our unenrolled voters and 14% are Democrats. So, you know, we've had kind of a wide range of people who who have signed a petition. And we think this is a tossup, an issue that appeals kind of across the aisle. To your point about the campaign. We definitely have to educate people about that, that we are the no vote. You know, again, the secretary says that he's going to be able to handle this increased responsibility. It would have been helpful if the secretary were able to put out an addendum to his book on the ballot questions. Right. You know, because of the timing of this this sort of thing, we weren't able to make the original printing, which I understand, you know, supply chain issues. You need to get the paper to print the book. But again, these are things, you know, there could be an addendum sent out by his office. So we are a little you know, we're late to the game in the sense of our our clock started taking when they they vetoed the law. We are being outraised by our opponents. The vast majority of our opponents. Donations are donated union labor time. We have a tremendous base of small dollar donors. We also have some very large donors. I don't know. I can't tell you if this is true as we sit here today. But about two weeks ago or three weeks ago now, I was at a breakfast trying to raise money for an on No on Four. In one of the pitches we have is that not a single individual had given to to the yes side. Right. No actual real person had donated to. Yes. Yes. On for that. It was all kind of donated union labor time or donations in the form of obviously cash donations. So we have a we have a big project. We have a pretty robust campaign right now. We're spending between 15-20 thousand a week on digital advertising. Our first mailing is is on its way out. That's going to hit about 150,000 targeted households. And we have a huge kind of grassroots effort across the state that we're doing to targeted voters. We have about 200, what we call town captains who have taken lists of targeted voters in their communities. And they're out knocking doors every you know, every afternoon, every weekend. We have organized canvasses. So we've taken that army that kind of exceeded expectations in collecting signatures. And we've turned it over into voter contacts. You know, those same folks that were out at the tables every Saturday and Sunday, Market Basket collecting the signatures are now knocking on their neighbors doors, asking them to get out and vote no on court. So we are we definitely know what we have to do. And I think we're we're well on our way to making sure that we we we cover everything that we want to do with this campaign. [00:42:34][202.4]

Lisa Kashinsky: [00:42:35] All right. Well, luckily, it looks like we do have some new campaign finance reports out just in the past day. They do show quite a few individual contributions. So we will check that out. But, John, that is all the time we have for today. So thanks so much for joining us. [00:42:49][13.5]

John Milligan: [00:42:49] Thank you very much. Thanks for having me, folks. [00:42:51][1.5]

Jennifer Smith: [00:42:54] And that brings us to our final segment this week, which features I don't know if we call it a special musical guest. Lisa, you witnessed something possibly incredible today. Feel free to tell us about it, either in prose or in song. [00:43:09][14.6]

Lisa Kashinsky: [00:43:10] Let's start with the non lyrical recounting of events. So let's rewind a couple hours ago. I am outside the State House for an endorsement event where Governor Bill Weld, former Governor Bill Weld is endorsing Anthony Amore for auditor. And yes, everyone makes the that's Amore jokes all that stuff. But he actually sang it broke out in song. [00:43:37][27.2]

Jennifer Smith: [00:43:38] Can we do we do we have a clip of this do we have to hallucinate it? Do we have we have we have audio. [00:43:43][4.9]

Lisa Kashinsky: [00:43:43] There is audio and it went something like da da da da da da da da da da da da. That's all right. That's. [00:43:52][8.3]

Jennifer Smith: [00:43:52] I'm already. [00:43:52][0.2]

Lisa Kashinsky: [00:43:56] In the heart. [00:43:56][0.6]

Bill Weld: [00:43:56] Of a smart guy. It will make a bigger pie. [00:44:00][3.6]

Lisa Kashinsky: [00:44:02] And I don't know the words to it, but there are, you know, beyond obviously that some more. But there are apparently multiple verses of this that Bill Weld just broke out into song in, you know, the middle of the street outside the statehouse. And Charlie Baker is just over to the side cackling. Anthony Amore. He doesn't quite know what to do with himself. It would make sense. Apparently hated the song as a kid because he used to get, as he said, razzed for it. But now, you know, people named more are using it, you know, in, I think, a campaign ad in Rhode Island or something like that for a candidate with the last name down there. So I don't think I'll ever be able to get the song out of my head. [00:44:44][42.2]

Jennifer Smith: [00:44:45] And I would like to make such an enthusiastic plug for going over to Lisa's Twitter and looking at the video, because Governor Charlie Baker is straight up losing it in the background, which is which is just a real delight. Because, you know, Lisa, it took you a little while to to to crack, like what was actually happening. But then once it connected, everyone, everyone was in a similar place mentally, I'd imagine, which was oh. [00:45:13][27.7]

Lisa Kashinsky: [00:45:13] Gosh, pretty much. And you know, as Baker put it, when he took good took to the podium, you know, he wanted to come down and join the chorus of people endorsing Anthony Morais, of which Baker endorsed some very long ago. But he didn't think that he'd have to join an actual chorus in doing so. [00:45:32][18.5]

Jennifer Smith: [00:45:33] My gosh. All right, look, maybe everyone can stop running for office and just start maybe like a barbershop quartet. And also, I'll go on Bachelor in Paradise. Like. Like we do keep proposing alternatives for people running for office. Go to a beach, get yourself some pinstripe suits, and start caterwauling. All of these options are available to you. But as for us, that is all the time we have for today. Thank you for hanging out with us while we post through all the ballot questions over this month. I am Jennifer Smith signing off with Lisa Kashinsky and Steve Koczela. Our producer is Elena Eberwein. Don't forget to give The Horse Race a review wherever you're hearing us now, subscribe to the Massachusetts Politico Playbook to see who's endorsed who and who's singing what, which Lisa will dedicatedly cover and reach out to the MassINC Polling Group if you need any polls done. Thank you all for listening. See you next week. [00:45:33][0.0]

[2606.9]