By Colin A. Young
State House News Service

For some people, Massachusetts is well behind the pack and cannot legalize sports wagering soon enough. But others say lawmakers should pump the brakes, learn from research conducted in mature gambling markets and take the time to ensure that as many of the unknowns around sports betting are addressed in any bill that moves forward.

While 25 other states, including neighboring Rhode Island, New Hampshire and New York, have already authorized gamblers to place legal bets on sports, Massachusetts has been considering whether to similarly legalize betting since the U.S. Supreme Court in May 2018 ruled that the nearly-nationwide prohibition on sports wagering was unconstitutional and gave states the ability to legalize the activity.

“I don’t think it’s a surprise that sports wagering is garnering as much interest and excitement as it is in the Legislature given what’s happening nationally and in the region, but we continue to want Massachusetts to do it right,” Massachusetts Council on Gaming and Health Executive Director Marlene Warner said. “We took a while and we took our time to implement placing casinos here in Massachusetts, so I think sports wagering should be no different. We really want to make sure all the public health elements are contained in whatever bill moves forward.”

The House approved sports betting last session and Gov. Charlie Baker, Sen. Eric Lesser, who chairs the Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies for the Senate, and almost a dozen others have already put forward proposals they hope will get attention early this session. The proposals offer various degrees and forms of consumer and public health protections.

Warner’s organization takes a neutral stance on sports betting, but is urging lawmakers to give the same kind of attention to responsible gambling measures and programs as they did before passing the 2011 expanded gaming law, which she said “went well beyond what any other state had ever implemented or proposed.”

Sen. Jamie Eldridge, who was part of a cadre of lawmakers who opposed casino gaming a decade-plus ago, is also drawing on experiences around the 2011 expanded gaming law as he considers a further expansion of gambling in Massachusetts. He said he is not opposed to sports betting generally but is worried about linking it directly to casino gambling.

“The argument back then, which I think continues to this day, is with people’s limited dollars for entertainment and for recreation, if it all goes into a casino then that’s money that’s not spent at the local restaurant or museum or in the community,” Eldridge said. “I just think it’s important to raise those questions with respect to sports betting because especially if it’s going to allow sports betting in casinos, at racetracks or simulcast or slots, is that only adding to people spending all of their money at a big corporate casino and not spending their money locally in their community?”

Online and Mobile Betting

Eldridge said he has been thinking of sports betting as mostly an online or mobile activity, and that allowing casinos, a slots parlor, racetracks and simulcast centers to accept bets as Lesser’s bill and others propose would further promote casino gambling.

He said he understands the concerns around the 24/7 nature of mobile betting, “but that’s not an atmosphere where everything is designed to keep you there spending more money and that’s where my concern is, people being drawn into the casinos and then spending more money than they expected at all the different places to spend money in a casino.”

Massachusetts currently has no form of legal online gambling (though some horse racing bets can be placed remotely with a particular account setup) and Warner said the state needs to think through both the pitfalls and opportunities presented by the online sports betting environment.

“The interesting thing about online gaming of any type … is there’s a lot more opportunity for intervention. But I think we have to determine what does that intervention look like,” she said. “A 45-year-old woman versus a 22-year-old man, they need different levels of intervention. It may be that a message needs to pop up at a different time, it may need to be fashioned differently. So those are the types of things we’re hoping to learn more about.”

Among the council’s priorities for any sports betting bill is a commitment to a robust research agenda and data collection, including a baseline study of sports betting activity and evaluations of responsible gaming measures. Massachusetts will also need to get a better understanding of who its bettors are. Many of the programs adopted by the Mass. Gaming Commission are geared towards the typical casino gambler and Warner said her organization and others don’t yet have segments of responsible gambling programs that they know will be effective with sports bettors.

“The reason folks want to implement sports wagering is because they’re going after a whole new or what they propose is a whole new gambler, people who are not typically going to walk into a casino … but are drawn to sports, are probably younger and more likely male, and interested in sports and placing wagers on sports,” she said. “We need to better understand who they are, how they play, what are the behavioral elements of their play that we really need to speak to when we think about prevention, intervention, treatment and recovery programs.”

Once regulators understand more about bettors, Warner said, online and mobile platforms provide many more chances to identify and interrupt potentially problematic betting. Some sports betting companies, Warner said, are working to develop algorithms they hope will be able to recognize the early patterns of problematic betting and flag accounts that may be headed in that direction.

“This is so much different from sticking a $10 bill into a slot machine where it’s really an anonymous process. We know so much about online play,” she said. “Online, you know every move they make, you know how much they’re spending, how quickly they’re making decisions in their games. So we’d get a lot more opportunity for intervention.”

Video Games as a ‘Training Ground’

Warner’s organization is well-positioned to focus on the attraction that sports betting holds for younger people and the possibility of it being available alongside games like Candy Crush or Words With Friends in the app store. Last fall, the council rebranded from the Massachusetts Council on Compulsive Gambling to the Massachusetts Council on Gaming and Health to reflect its increased focus on video gaming.

“Video gaming or iGaming often is a training ground for young gamers to start to understand and be drawn into gambling,” Warner said.

She pointed out that the latest NFL Pro Bowl did not take place in person because of the pandemic and was replaced by a livestream of NFL stars playing the popular Madden 21 video game against each other while millions of people watched on YouTube. “Certainly, there was an underlying sense that gambling was taking place there,” she said.

“All of these worlds are converging,” Warner said. “There is a ton of gaming in gambling and a ton of gambling in gaming.”

With that in mind, Warner said, lawmakers should be sure to put tight guidelines around sports betting advertising and “digigames” or free-to-play “practice” games that some apps offer before the user logs into their account.

Outright Opposition

Though Eldridge and the Mass. Council on Gaming and Health have not slammed the door on the idea of legalizing sports betting, others have. Stop Predatory Gambling, a Washington D.C. non-profit led by Les Bernal, a former aide to former Massachusetts state senator and expanded gambling opponent Susan Tucker, says commercialized sports betting is “a form of financial fraud, similar to loan-sharking, price-gouging, and false advertising that results in life-changing financial losses for millions of Americans.”

“If you pay for a hamburger, a ticket to a sporting event, or a glass of wine, that’s what you receive in return. In commercialized gambling, what you receive is a financial exchange offering the lure that you might win money,” the group says in a fact sheet on sports wagering. “But this financial exchange is mathematically rigged against you so inevitably you lose your money in the end, especially if you keep gambling. They make you feel good about losing your money.”

A study that looked at gambling through the financial transactions of 6.5 million people over seven years in the United Kingdom found that the “UK public’s gambling losses have steadily increased over recent years, as mobile and online technologies make gambling more available than ever before.” In 2019, more than 24 million people in the UK collectively lost more than £14.5 billion (about $20.2 billion in U.S. dollars) to bookmakers, casinos, lotteries and other gambling platforms.

“Results show a negative association between gambling and self-care, fitness activities (for example, gym membership), social activities, and spending on education and hobbies,” the study, published last month in the online journal Nature Human Behaviour, found. “There is also an association between gambling, social isolation and night-time wakefulness — individuals spending more on gambling travel less and are more likely to spend at night. A 10% point increase in absolute gambling equates to an 11.5% increase in nights awake and 9% reduction in social activities.”

The researchers also pointed out that “high levels of gambling are associated with a likelihood of mortality that is about one-third higher, for both men and women, younger and older.”

Stop Predatory Gambling also maintains what it calls a “Hypocrite Hall of Fame” to highlight the policymakers who propose or support expanding gambling options but do not gamble themselves.

“Why don’t they gamble away their own money on state-sanctioned gambling?” the organization asked in a 2018 report that detailed times key lawmakers in Massachusetts and elsewhere said they were not gamblers. “Because they know it’s a big con and it can be dangerous to their health. State-sanctioned gambling is the only business where most of the people who profit from it and promote it don’t do it and don’t want to live near it.”

Lesser, who will play a key role in the advancement of any sports betting legislation this session and has been promoting his bill on the subject, said Tuesday that he is not a gambler either.

“Have I done an office March Madness pool? Of course, but I haven’t done anything beyond that,” Lesser said Tuesday during an interview with the Zolak and Bertrand Show on 98.5 The Sports Hub.

Colin A. Young
State House News Service

More than 44,000 employees from 107 municipal governments and public school systems across Massachusetts will be trained to better defend their organizations from cyber threats as part of the state’s Municipal Cybersecurity Awareness Grant Program.

“Cyber threats continue to evolve, making cyber awareness training an essential tool for municipalities and public schools in the Commonwealth to equip their employees with the knowledge on how to avoid the potentially costly missteps of falling prey to cyberattacks,” Gov. Charlie Baker said. The local officials will experience cyberattack simulations “that reflect malicious luring techniques commonly used by cybercriminals to gain access to IT systems and data” and will be trained to detect threats in the early stages.

Participants come from all over the state: 475 Pittsfield employees, 275 from Southwick-Tolland-Granville Regional School District, 3,500 employees of New Bedford and its school system, 1,000 Natick Public Schools employees, 600 Lawrence municipal employees, and just shy of 1,000 town and school employees from Falmouth.

“We are thrilled to extend this vital training to our partners in local government,” Secretary of Technology Services and Security Curt Wood said. “Building a culture of cyber awareness, local governments can grow their security teams to be the responsibility of all employees.”

The program is run by the Executive Office of Technology Services and Security and is funded with $250,000 of capital funding authorized in a 2020 bond bill.

The Baker-Polito Administration today announced $4.9 million in grants awarded to six agencies, including hospitals and treatment and behavioral health centers, for the creation of evidence-based and data-driven co-occurring substance use disorder/mental health response teams embedded in high schools in ten communities to offer intervention and treatment services, and provide alternatives to school suspension for substance use.

The six agencies were selected for grant funding based on their ability to provide access to these crucial services, both in school and in the community, as well as virtually due to instances of remote and hybrid learning. The awardees are:

– Heywood Hospital, providing services for Athol High School, Gardner High School, Gardner Academy of Learning and Tech, Ralph C. Mahar Regional School (Orange), Narragansett Regional High School (Templeton), and Murdock High School (Winchendon)
– High Point Treatment Center, providing services for New Bedford High School
– Institute for Health and Recovery, providing services for Malden High School
– North Suffolk Mental Health, providing services for Revere High School
– River Valley Counseling Center, providing services for Holyoke High School North Campus
– The Brien Center, providing services for Monument Mountain Regional High (Great Barrington)

This grant award will ensure these agencies are prepared to offer services to students suffering from co-occurring substance use disorder/mental health issues. The programs will respond to students’ and their families’ needs, increase collaboration with schools, and provide support to students in crisis.

“Disruptions to in-school learning due to the COVID-19 pandemic have taken a social and emotional toll on many students, and especially those most at risk for substance use and mental health issues,” said Health and Human Services Secretary Marylou Sudders, who directs the state’s COVID-19 Command Center. “This grant will allow much-needed resources to reach students remotely and offer a mental health-driven alternative to suspensions.”

The grant will be distributed over the course of 6 years, with each program receiving $136,864 per year, or $4.9 million over the life of the award. Funded through the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration’s (SAMHSA) State Opioid Response grant, the grant will serve to support the Commonwealth-wide adolescent addiction workforce that is specifically trained and certified to provide targeted substance use interventions and treatment to at-risk students, reducing their risk of developing an opioid or substance use disorder. These timely awards will support Massachusetts schools’ efforts to effectively respond to student substance use and mental health concerns, as access to high-potency marijuana products increases, rates of on-campus vaping surge, and the overall perception of harm associated with adolescent substance use decreases.

“Massachusetts is taking action to reinforce protections for children affected by substance use and mental health issues in these unprecedented times,” said Deirdre Calvert, Director of the Bureau of Substance Addiction Services at the Department of Public Health. “This grant program will ensure that at-risk youth receive the services they need to prevent substance use, help combat the opioid epidemic, and support families during the COVID-19 state of emergency.”

The following is a press release from United States Senator Elizabeth Warren:

United States Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), a member of the Senate Finance Committee, Representative Pramila Jayapal (D-WA-07), a member of the House Budget Committee, and Representative Brendan Boyle (D-PA-02), a member of the House Ways and Means Committee today unveiled the Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act.

The Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act would level the playing field and narrow the racial wealth gap by asking the wealthiest 100,000 households in America, or the top 0.05%, to pay their fair share. The Ultra-Millionaire Tax would bring in at least $3 trillion in revenue over 10 years – without raising taxes on the 99.95% of American households that have net worth below $50 million – according to a 2021 analysis from economists Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman from the University of California-Berkeley.

The bill would create a fairer economy through:

A 2% annual tax on the net worth of households and trusts between $50 million and $1 billion
A 1% annual surtax (3% tax overall) on the net worth of households and trusts above $1 billion
The Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act is cosponsored by Senators Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii.).

“The ultra-rich and powerful have rigged the rules in their favor so much that the top 0.1% pay a lower effective tax rate than the bottom 99%, and billionaire wealth is 40% higher than before the COVID crisis began. A wealth tax is popular among voters on both sides for good reason: because they understand the system is rigged to benefit the wealthy and large corporations,” said Senator Warren. “As Congress develops additional plans to help our economy, the wealth tax should be at the top of the list to help pay for these plans because of the huge amounts of revenue it would generate. This is money that should be invested in child care and early education, K-12, infrastructure, all of which are priorities of President Biden and Democrats in Congress. I’m confident lawmakers will catch up to the overwhelming majority of Americans who are demanding more fairness, more change, and who believe it’s time for a wealth tax.”

“As working families struggle to put food on the table, keep the heat on, and pay the rent during this devastating economic crisis that has caused the poverty rate to jump by the largest amount in at least 60 years, the rich have only gotten richer and the wealth of billionaires has jumped by 40%,” said Congresswoman Jayapal. “The Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act will help level the playing field, narrow the racial wealth gap, ensure the wealthiest finally begin to pay their fair share, and invest trillions of dollars into our communities so we can make a real difference in the lives of people across America.”

“The hyper concentration of wealth among a tiny number of multimillionaires and billionaires is a crisis for American capitalism and the American Dream,” said Congressman Boyle. “Wealth inequality is at its highest level since the Gilded Age. The wealth share of the richest 0.1% has nearly tripled since the late 1970s. It is time for the ultra-millionaires to pay their fair share so that critical government programs can be bolstered to help the everyday American. Our proposal will make a meaningful difference in the lives of Americans who need the most help and bolster our country’s shrinking middle class.”

“When I was growing up, my dad’s job as a union machinist was enough to buy a modest house, pay our family’s bills, and take us on annual camping vacations. But since then, costs have gone through the roof and wages have stayed the same, making stories like my family’s fewer and farther between,” said Senator Merkley. “The powerful and privileged have spent decades bending Congress around their wishes to give themselves tax giveaway after giveaway, while cutting investments in the things working families need to thrive, like living wage jobs, affordable health care, a good education, and a home they can afford. We need to level the playing field, and that means the richest of the rich must pay their fair share in taxes, just like working families already do.”

The Ultra-Millionaire Tax includes robust anti-evasion and avoidance measures, including:

A $100 billion investment to rebuild and strengthen the IRS, ensuring the agency has the resources to hire and train additional personnel, modernize IT systems, and implement the new asset valuation, reporting, and enforcement requirements for the Ultra-Millionaire Tax
A 30% minimum audit rate for taxpayers subject to the Ultra-Millionaire Tax
A 40% “exit tax” on the net worth above $50 million of any U.S. citizen who renounces their citizenship in order to escape paying their fair share in taxes
New tools to determine the value of hard-to-value assets, enabling the IRS to tighten and expand upon existing valuation rules
Systematic third-party reporting that builds on existing tax information exchange agreements adopted after the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, and penalties for underpayment
“Wealth at the top has boomed during the COVID crisis. Billionaires’ wealth has literally exploded while many Americans struggle with job and income loss. The ultra-millionaire wealth tax is the most direct and powerful tool to curb growing wealth concentration in the US and make sure the ultra-wealthy pay their fair share in taxes. It will also bring substantial and much needed tax revenue to address the many challenges the country is facing,” wrote Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman, economists from the University of California-Berkeley

The Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act has been endorsed by: Action Center on Race and the Economy, AFL-CIO, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), Americans for Financial Reform, Americans for Tax Fairness, Center for Law and Social Policy, Climate Hawks Vote, Communications Workers of America, Data for Progress, Democracy for America, Jobs with Justice, Justice Democrats, Indivisible, Institute for Policy Studies – Program on Inequality, Liberation in a Generation, National Domestic Workers Alliance, People’s Action, Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Public Citizen, SEIU, Sunrise Movement, Take on Wall Street, Tax March, Unemployed Workers United, UNITE HERE, United for Respect, Working Families Party.

“Wall Street billionaires have escaped paying their fair share of taxes for decades, thanks to laws they themselves have had an outsize influence in shaping. This bill requiring the ultrarich to pay some tax on their wealth, which was too often accumulated through predatory business models that extracted wealth from workers and communities, is an important step forward for economic justice,” said Lisa Donner, executive director, Americans for Financial Reform.

“The Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act will narrow the country’s extraordinary wealth gap, raise trillions of dollars from the super-wealthy and help fund the recovery our nation so desperately needs. We’ve calculated that U.S. billionaires have increased their wealth by nearly 50 percent since the pandemic began while tens of millions of people have lost their jobs, can’t pay their rent, and go to bed hungry at night. We estimate the Ultra-Millionaire tax will raise $1.4 trillion from billionaires alone over the next 10 years; even more will be raised from the simply super-rich. That’s why this legislation is critical to creating a fair-share tax system,” said Frank Clemente, Executive Director, Americans for Tax Fairness.

“A tax on wealth above $50 million is very popular, and is even more popular when it funds priorities like child care, health care, and jobs in our communities. As President Biden calls for a Build Back Better plan that invests in American infrastructure and jobs, every senator should be proud to fund these investments by signing on to Senator Warren’s wealth tax legislation,” said Stephanie Taylor, PCCC co-founder.

“The pandemic has shone a harsh light on America’s staggering inequalities-the fortunes of the richest Americans are ballooning while huge swaths of America suffer. It’s time to level the playing field and passage of the Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act would be a monumental step toward addressing wealth inequality. 99.9% of Americans won’t owe an extra dime in taxes under this proposal while the super-rich who have benefitted from a rigged system will finally start paying their fair share in taxes,” said Susan Harley, managing director of Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division.

“The wealth tax introduced today by Senator Warren and Representatives Jayapal and Boyle would help narrow the racial wealth divide in this country, at the same time as it raises money to invest in caregiving for our youngest and oldest Americans, rebuilding infrastructure, and paying for high quality k-12 education and tuition-free public college. At this moment in our history, it would be reckless not to pursue a policy that supports both of these goals,” said Mandla Deskins of the Take on Wall Street campaign.

“Tax March started in a moment of national outrage at corruption and inequality, and has since grown into a national movement with a simple demand: Tax the rich. We’re proud to support Sen. Warren and the bill’s cosponsors as they fight to do exactly that. Right now, the American economy is at a crucial decision point between recovery and further disaster. To revive America’s middle and working classes again, safeguard the country from future collapse, and build a new economy that truly works for everyone, Congress must tax the trillions of dollars in wealth hoarded by a few ultra-millionaires,” said Tax March Campaign Director Dana Bye.

“The Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act will capture a portion of the tremendous windfall that billionaires have reaped during the pandemic. It will both restore lost fairness and progressivity to the U.S. tax system and will also slow the build-up of democracy-distorting concentrations of wealth and power,” said Chuck Collins, Program on Inequality at the Institute for Policy Studies, and author of The Wealth Hoarders: How Billionaires Pay Millions to Hide Trillions.

By Colin A. Young
State House News Service

Gov. Charlie Baker spoke about the state’s COVID-19 vaccine rollout and engaged in a back-and-forth on the particulars of the effort with the Legislature’s COVID-19 committee for an hour Thursday, but co-chair Rep. Bill Driscoll thought the gravity of the issues residents have faced in securing a vaccine had not gotten through to the state’s chief executive.

“I just really want to stress that I think you’re missing how broken the system is right now and the approach is not working for the citizens of the commonwealth,” the Milton Democrat said as Baker prepared to log off from the hearing. “It needs to be addressed.”

Baker logged onto the Legislature’s first COVID-19 oversight hearing Thursday morning armed with statistics about the state’s improving virus conditions and his administration’s efforts to get COVID-19 vaccines into the arms of more residents.

Massachusetts is tops in the nation for first doses administered per capita among states with five million or more people; the Bay State has administered more than three times more doses per capita than the European Union and more than five times more per capita than Canada; the state ranks second in the country for percentage of Black residents who have gotten at least one shot; and “much of the news on COVID is better than it’s been in quite some time,” the governor said from his ceremonial office in the State House.

That wasn’t exactly the conversation the new Joint Committee on COVID-19 and Emergency Preparedness was interested in having, though the chairs also acknowledged the improving conditions.

“Unfortunately, these hopeful figures do not tell the whole story,” Driscoll said after himself referencing recent improvements in COVID-19 metrics here in his opening remarks. “These numbers hide the confusion caused by frequent pivots and course corrections, and the daily frustrations residents face trying to access the vaccine. Residents must book their appointments on cumbersome and flawed websites and hope their internet connection is stronger than the thousands of others competing for the same batch of limited appointments. The system benefits those with time, resources, and mobility and disadvantages those most vulnerable populations that have suffered disproportionately from this pandemic. It tries to prioritize efficiency over equity.”

Baker, in his prepared remarks and in response to questions from lawmakers, cited the constraints in the supply of the two federally-approved vaccines as the primary challenge and defended his administration’s decisions to prioritize groups that other states did not, like group home residents and staff, inmates and staff at prisons and jails, and all hospital workers.

“I think many states chose to pursue a variety of different approaches to this which makes it hard to draw really broad comparisons between states,” the governor said. “As I said in my remarks, Massachusetts chose early on to prioritize a number of communities and a number of professions that weren’t prioritized in other states that did make us look, if you just based it on the numbers, like a low performer relative to many other states that didn’t focus on those hard-to-reach populations that we chose to focus on.”

More than 1.5 million doses of COVID-19 vaccine had been administered in Massachusetts as of Wednesday, the Department of Public Health said.

There were 1,084,888 people as of Wednesday who had received at least one dose of a vaccine — an increase of 23,553 people since Tuesday — and 433,593 people have gotten both doses of the vaccine, an increase of 18,652 people from Tuesday’s report. In all, Massachusetts has administered 1,518,481 doses of the vaccine, which is 76.9 percent of the 1,973,900 doses the federal government has shipped here.

In his prepared remarks, Baker acknowledged the frustration that many residents have experienced as they try to use the state’s website to get a vaccination appointment for themselves or a loved one but he defended the site as an important reason for the state’s vaccination numbers and suggested some of it was inevitable given that “demand outstrips supply 10 times over.”

“I understand the enormous frustration when so many people are attempting to secure a small number of appointments. However, for all its faults, people from every corner of the commonwealth have managed to book over 300,000 vaccination appointments on that site since it went live back in January,” he said. “And that does have something to do with why Massachusetts has been able to vaccinate more than a million people since the start of this effort.”

Last Thursday, as more than 70,000 appointments were to be made available to the seniors and people with multiple health complications who newly qualified for a vaccine, heavy traffic torpedoed the state’s vaccination scheduling system and website. Baker said he was “pissed off” about the fiasco and vowed that “it’s gonna get fixed.”

Though this week’s release of 50,000 vaccine appointments for eligible residents did not appear nearly as chaotic as last week’s fiasco and the Baker administration had made changes to the website and scheduling system like adding a virtual waiting room, some vaccine hunters reported estimated wait times measured in days.

The most confrontational moments during Baker’s appearance before the joint committee came during questioning from Sen. Eric Lesser, who pressed the governor on his previous comments about the website and said the rollout “has not been lumpy and bumpy” as Baker often describes it. “It has been a failure,” Lesser said.

“The biggest challenge with the website, from the beginning, has been supply and the fact that people get frustrated — and I understand why — when they can’t access an appointment,” Baker said, adding at various points during the hearing that his team plans to roll out improvements to the website as they become ready.

Lesser countered that “nobody disagrees with you that the supply is limited” but said that “it wouldn’t have made a difference” if Massachusetts had 1 million doses available and the website still crashed. He then asked Baker if his administration had conducted a “load analysis” before announcing that 1 million more people would become eligible last week.

“What happened to the website is on us,” Baker said.

Lesser asked, “Will you say sorry for the million people?”

“Of course, absolutely. Definitely. Yes, of course,” Baker said. “And it’s going to be a constant challenge going forward that we don’t have enough supply to serve the population that wants to get vaccinated. I hope at some point that’s not true anymore.”

The website and scheduling system snafu of last week and Thursday’s waiting room frustration were the latest stumbles in the Baker administration’s vaccine rollout. House Speaker Ronald Mariano has said the rollout “has been marked by both logistical and communications shortcomings” and Senate President Karen Spilka called it a “constantly changing and confusing” plan.

Complaints from residents in the earliest phases of the plan prompted changes to the appointment website, which was initially just a map of vaccination sites. The administration established a call center to help people access appointments, but only after seniors 75 or older became eligible and reported difficulties using the website.

Baker also announced a system in which anyone who brings a senior 75 or older to a mass vaccination site can get vaccinated themselves, regardless of their age or risk factors. The goal was to help ensure that those most at risk of dying from COVID-19 get vaccinated, but critics said it also effectively created black market for senior citizen companions and questioned the sudden vaccination eligibility for healthy companions.

“Frankly, I am just baffled at what we’ve been through and my experience of this is very different than the one you’ve laid out,” Sen. Cindy Friedman told Baker. “The twists and turns, the change in plans, the communication that changes depending on who you are talking to and from day to day, the utter uncertainty of how this vaccine rollout was going to roll out and is rolling out — I can say as someone who has been involved in this process, and deeply involved since last March, that even I, with all my knowledge, am completely at a loss as to what is going on at times and what is going to come next.”

Driscoll and his Senate co-chair, Sen. Jo Comerford of Northampton, each asked Baker to provide the committee with specific information and various documents. Driscoll requested details on and a timeline for the website improvements Baker mentioned.

Comerford asked for a “vaccine leadership organizational chart,” a detailed picture of the hierarchy at the state’s COVID-19 Command Center, the contracts for myriad vendors the state is working with on vaccine distribution, and a detailed accounting of federal funds that have flowed to Massachusetts during the pandemic and recovery.

The governor was happy to fulfill the request for the federal aid details during Thursday’s hearing, though Comerford soon cut him off and asked that he present the information in writing so as to not take away time for lawmakers to ask him questions.

“I actually did spend a little time because I thought that might be important to you guys … $71 billion has come to Massachusetts one way or another, through the four major federal relief programs. Twenty billion six hundred thousand of that went to unemployment insurance, $27 billion of that went to the PPP program for businesses, $8 billion went to stimulus checks,” Baker said. He added after Comerford made note of the time and asked him to submit the rest in writing, “OK, either way.”

During the livestream, Driscoll also requested that Baker make time in two weeks to again testify before the Joint Committee on COVID-19 and Emergency Preparedness as it embarks on a series of hearings.

“Well this one’s been so much fun, I’ll certainly look forward to coming back,” the governor said. He added, “Yeah, sure, I’ll come back in a couple of weeks. But part of the reason for that is because I recognize and understand that these challenges are ones that whether you’re in state government, local government, federal government, this thing is a bear to wrestle to the ground and we all, in our own way, have had to deal with that on behalf of our constituents over the course of the past year.”

As part of the federal response to the COVID-19 outbreak, the U.S. Attorney’s Office is reminding landlords of their obligations and tenants of their rights under the Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC) Order temporarily halting residential evictions of tenants who meet certain income eligibility requirements and who are unable to pay their full rent due to substantial loss of household income, loss of compensable hours of work or wages, a lay-off, or extraordinary out-of-pocket medical expenses. The Order prohibits landlords from evicting such tenants for non-payment of rent from Sept. 4, 2020 to March 31, 2021.

In September 2020, the CDC issued a federal Order imposing a Temporary Halt in Residential Evictions to Prevent the Further Spread of COVID-19. The Order aims to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 by enabling people who get sick or who are at risk for severe illness from COVID-19 to protect themselves and others by staying in one place to quarantine.

Under the CDC Order, tenants who meet income eligibility requirements (generally, those earning less than $99,000 per year, or $198,000 if filing jointly) and who are unable to pay their full rent due to substantial loss of household income, loss of compensable hours of work or wages, a lay-off, or extraordinary out-of-pocket medical expenses can obtain protection from eviction by providing a sworn declaration regarding their situation to their landlord. Once this declaration is provided, a landlord is prohibited from evicting the tenant while the moratorium remains in effect, and is subject to substantial penalties, including fines of up to $250,000 and up to a year in jail.

The Order is not intended to prevent landlords from starting eviction proceedings, but rather to stop the actual eviction of a covered person for non-payment of rent. Moreover, the Order does not affect the obligation of tenants to pay rent, nor does it bar the collection of fees, penalties, and interest.

For questions or reports of violations of the Order please email USAMA.CivilRights@usdoj.gov or call 617- 275-8756 and leave a message. More information on the CDC Order is available here.

Federal resources are available through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to assist landlords with mortgage relief here.

The Civil Rights Unit of the U.S. Attorney’s Office was established in 2015 with the mission of enhancing federal civil rights enforcement. For more information on the Office’s civil rights efforts, please visit www.justice.gov/usao-ma/civil-rights.

New Bedford Public Schools is set to launch the next phase of increased in-person instruction in classrooms, Superintendent Thomas Anderson announced at a press conference today. This new phase in the district’s year-long comprehensive response to prioritize the health and safety of all students and staff will start on Monday, March 1, 2021, beginning initially with seven elementary schools – Carney, Gomes, Hayden-McFadden, Renaissance, Rodman, Taylor and Winslow. Each school has been working with their parent community for the notification of which grade levels. Superintendent Anderson stated, “We are excited to be able to expand Cohort A, which has been 5-days in-person since September. This expansion will include a range of grades, but the priority starts with Kindergarten and First Grade. Schools are assessing class sizes, space, and other factors to consider other grades. An additional six schools are expected to be ready on March 8 with others to follow on the subsequent weeks.”

Mayor Jon Mitchell acknowledged the extensive planning and preparation required to increase in-person instruction. “Returning to in-person instruction is important for our students’ education and well-being, and thanks to thoughtful, deliberate planning by our schools, it will be done safely for students and staff. This has been a challenging year for everyone, including students and their families, and returning to safe in-person instruction is a positive step as we move further toward returning to normal,” said Mayor Mitchell.
Superintendent Anderson noted, “Our plan to expand Cohort A students will allow for students who are already in school 2-days per week – those in Cohorts B/C – to participate in 5-days of in-person learning beginning as early as March 1, 2021 for several elementary schools. All current requirements including CDC and DESE guidance will remain in place. This expansion will first prioritize elementary students with the highest needs and at the earliest grades. There will be no changes to Cohort D – the fully distance cohort at this time.”

All health measures will remain strictly enforced. The current 6-foot distancing and proper airflow will continue to dictate the number of students who will be placed in classrooms. “Increased in-person instruction will not look the same for all schools and schools cannot be compared to one another in how their logistics will be addressed. For example, available classroom space in schools vary based on several factors including room configurations with cabinets, desk sizes, etc.”, Superintendent Anderson said.

Districtwide mitigation strategies are effective, including mask wearing, which will remain a requirement of attendance, as well as frequent handwashing and sanitizing in addition to the continual disinfecting process currently being used in schools. More than 800 air exchange units – air scrubbers were placed in classrooms at the start of the school year enabling 9,000 student students to receive in-person learning this school year.

Noting that COVID-19 rates have been declining in New Bedford, with the percent of positivity decreasing for more than the last 6 weeks to approximately 5.4% percent, Superintendent Anderson noted, “We are moving with a sense of urgency to Prevent, Recover, and Accelerate student learning. This is our intense focus as schools are identifying learning gaps to minimize learning loss. To recover by assisting to remediate those students who need support – academically and socio-emotionally) AND accelerate – push those students who are already proficient to maximize their strengths.

“Over these last twelve months our priority has remained the same – balance the health and safety needs of all students and staff and while working to ensure that our academic program remains strong.”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines for reopening schools state that schools can provide in-person instruction when they implement protocols that prevent the spread of COVID-19, maintain healthy environments and healthy operations, and have preparations in place for any members of the school community who may contract COVID-19. New Bedford Public Schools as of late January has been the largest school district in Massachusetts to retain in-person instruction in a hybrid model since the beginning of the current school year.

The press conference was held at the Alfred J. Gomes Elementary School and attended by city and school officials.

Today, the Baker-Polito Administration announced that Massachusetts would advance to Step 2 of Phase III of the state’s reopening plan on Monday, March 1, and also announced its plan to transition to Step 1 of Phase IV on Monday, March 22. With public health metrics continuing to trend in a positive direction, including drops in average daily COVID cases and hospitalizations, and vaccination rates continuing to increase, the Administration is taking steps to continue to reopen the Commonwealth’s economy.

The Administration also announced more than $49 million in awards to 1,108 additional small businesses in the eighth round of COVID-19 relief grants administered by the Massachusetts Growth Capital Corporation (MGCC). These new awards are the result of work by MGCC to engage with applicants that meet sector and demographic priorities but are missing certain documents that are necessary to be considered for an award.

Phase III, Step 2:

On May 18, 2020, the Baker-Polito Administration released a four-phased plan to reopen the economy conditioned on sustained improvements in public health data. As of October, 2020, the reopening had proceeded to Step 2 of Phase III of the plan. On December 13, 2020, in response to an increase in new COVID-19 infections and hospitalizations following the Thanksgiving holiday, the Commonwealth returned to Step 1 of Phase III, reducing capacities across a broad range of sectors and tightening several other workplace restrictions.

Since the beginning of this year, key public health data, such as new cases and hospitalizations, have been closely monitored and a significant decline has been documented, allowing for a return to Step 2 of Phase III, effective March 1 for all cities and towns. This includes the following updates to businesses, activities and capacities:

Indoor performance venues such as concert halls, theaters, and other indoor performance spaces will be allowed to reopen at 50% capacity with no more than 500 persons

Indoor recreational activities with greater potential for contact (laser tag, roller skating, trampolines, obstacle courses) will be allowed to reopen at 50% capacity

Capacity limits across all sectors with capacity limits will be raised to 50% and exclude employees

Restaurants will no longer have a percent capacity limit and will be permitted to host musical performances; six-foot social distancing, limits of six people per table and 90 minute limits remain in place

Residents must continue to wear masks to prevent the spread of COVID-19, and are encouraged to avoid contact outside of their immediate households. The Travel Advisory and other public health orders remain in effect.

Gathering Changes and Phase IV Start

Provided public health metrics continue to improve, effective on March 22, all communities in Massachusetts will move into Step 1 of Phase IV of the state’s reopening plan. This will open a range of previously closed business sectors under tight capacity restrictions that are expected to be adjusted over time if favorable trends in the public health data continue. Effective on the planned advancement to Step 1 of Phase IV, the following industries will be permitted to operate at a strict 12% capacity limit after submitting a plan to the Department of Public Health (DPH):

Indoor and outdoor stadiums
Arenas
Ballparks

Also effective on March 22, gathering limits for event venues and in public settings will increase to 100 people indoors and 150 people outdoors. Outdoor gatherings at private residences and in private backyards will remain at a maximum of 25 people, with indoor house gatherings remaining at 10 people.

Additionally, dance floors will be permitted at weddings and other events only, and overnight summer camps will be allowed to operate this coming summer. Exhibition and convention halls may also begin to operate, following gatherings limits and event protocols. Other Phase IV sectors must continue to remain closed.

COVID-19 Business Relief Grants

Today, an additional 1,108 businesses are receiving COVID-19 relief grants totaling more than $49 million in awards to help with expenses like payroll, benefits, utilities and rent. To date, the Baker-Polito Administration has awarded more than $563 million in direct financial support to 12,320 businesses impacted by the pandemic through the Small Business and Sector-Specific Grant Programs.

Each business meets sector and demographic priorities set for the two grant programs. More than half of grantees are restaurants, bars, caterers, operators of personal services like hair and nail salons, and independent retailers. Over half of the businesses receiving relief are women-and-minority-owned enterprises.

Today’s awards are the result of a process by MGCC to engage directly with applicants that met sector and demographic priorities but were missing documents necessary to be considered for an award. MGCC is continuing to work with business owners in targeted sectors and demographic groups to allow for applicants to submit necessary documents.

By Chris Lisinski
State House News Service

A three-step, 12-cent gas tax increase, fare-free MBTA and regional transit authority buses, new surcharges on parking space rentals and purchases, higher ride-hailing fees and more all featured in a new overhaul bill proposed by the Massachusetts Senate’s point person on transportation.

Transportation Committee Co-chair Sen. Joseph Boncore filed his omnibus proposal on Friday, igniting debate on how to relieve the returning dread of traffic, upgrade unreliable public transit infrastructure, and pay for a range of investments after his branch scuttled a House-approved set of transportation taxes and fees last year.

The 49-page bill (SD 2315) weaves together major changes to the funding landscape and commuting experience for roads, bridges and transit.

Some provisions, such as a net 50 percent increase in the state’s gas tax by 2025, will prove contentious among lawmakers wary of raising taxes and taking a potentially unpopular vote.

New ideas include language requiring the MBTA to put between 5 and 10 percent of federal stimulus funding toward planning and designing capital projects and a 6.25 percent statewide surcharge on the lease or sale of many parking spaces.

The bill also calls for creation of a new seven-member MBTA board of directors to succeed the five-member Fiscal and Management Control Board that is scheduled to expire at the end of June, a topic that may emerge as standalone legislation given the deadline.

It revives several ideas both branches approved last session before Gov. Charlie Baker vetoed them from a late-arriving transportation bond bill, including a higher fee structure for services such as Uber and Lyft and a study of congestion pricing.

Boncore declined to discuss the bill’s finances in any detail beyond saying its revenues would cover its proposed spending. He did not specify how much it would raise through a combination of gas tax hikes, transportation network company fees, parking surcharges and more, nor how much spending it proposes.

“I’m not so naive as to think there’s no cost associated with this bill,” he told the News Service. “But what I really want to talk about is what’s the cost of doing nothing. When our transportation system is in such dire need of modernization and we choose to do nothing, the price of those actions falls on our economy and falls on those who rely on public transit.”

“The bottom line number is what the bottom line number is,” Boncore said. “Whatever the number is, if we’re serious about making public transit a public good and shifting the paradigms in Massachusetts, I think we’re going to have to come up with ways to fund this bill.”

It is not clear if Boncore’s proposal has the full backing of Senate President Karen Spilka, but given his stature atop the Transportation Committee last session and this session, his support is a significant marker for where the policy debate may head.

Boncore’s co-chair, Rep. William Straus, said he is still reviewing the bill, but he expressed optimism about its scope and its inclusion of gas tax increases after the Senate declined to take up the House’s revenue-focused plan in 2020.

“Given Senator Boncore’s leadership position, I do take this as an indication that the Senate is now prepared to follow the House’s lead from last session,” Straus said in an interview. “The details of timing and how much, of course, are part of the legislative process, but I take it as a significant step.”

Baker has mostly taken a dim view of tax increases, so if Democrats intend to make a push this session on new taxes they may need to amass super-majorities in both chambers in case tax hikes run into vetoes.

Sea Change to Public Transit

In a dramatic shift, all MBTA and RTA bus trips would be fare-free under Boncore’s bill.

That change would encompass a universe of millions of riders, even with the changed travel patterns during the pandemic. The state’s 15 RTAs had a combined fixed bus and on-demand ridership of more than 23 million in fiscal year 2020, while the T counted more than 93 million in the same span, according to MassDOT.

“It’s the most equitable mode of public transit,” Boncore said of buses. “When you look at worst-in-the-nation congestion, our trains and ferries aren’t sharing the roads, so if we’re taking people out of their cars and putting them on buses, incentivizing that behavior, it’s a multi-pronged approach. It’s going to alleviate congestion on our roadways, reduce our carbon footprint, and will help people most on the lower end of the socioeconomic scale.”

Although he did not provide a broader financial picture for the bill, Boncore estimated that offering free bus fares at all transit agencies would cost the state between $30 million and $60 million per year.

Straus disagreed, saying he believes the actual cost would be hundreds of millions per year partly because of costs associated with the RIDE paratransit service.

The T would also be barred from raising fares for five years in Boncore’s proposal, blocking off increases the agency has implemented every two or three years recently, and would need to implement a low-income fare program for qualifying riders.

Boncore, a Winthrop Democrat, also pitched a late-night service pilot to keep trains and buses running until 2 a.m. on weeknights and 3 a.m. on weekends as well as another pilot to reduce fares at off-peak travel times.

His bill, which he dubbed the “New Deal for Transportation,” would reshape how the state manages its public transit infrastructure and comes as the Baker administration imposes service cuts across much of the T amid an extended, COVID-era period of low ridership.

Gov. Charlie Baker has argued that it would be “bad public policy” to run a full pre-pandemic schedule with average ridership at only about 30 percent, and the T faces a multi-year budget crunch inflicted by the sharp drop in fare revenue.

Asked if the state could afford to make buses fare-free to riders, Boncore replied, “What’s the cost of not doing it and not incentivizing people to get back on our system?”

Officials should focus on “shifting the paradigm to looking at public transit as a public good and not as a tax on the people using it,” Boncore said.

Gas Tax Debate Re-emerges

Under Boncore’s bill, the state gas tax would rise from its current 24 cents per gallon to 28 cents in 2023, 32 cents in 2024 and then 36 cents in 2025.

The proposal is a sharp pivot from the Senate’s approach last session, and it also goes significantly further than a one-time gas tax hike the House passed with what then-Speaker Robert DeLeo called a “tough vote.”

In March 2020, shortly before the COVID-19 state of emergency began, the House approved a 5-cent gas tax increase and a 9-cent diesel tax increase. The Senate never advanced the tax bill, though, with leaders pointing to the ongoing economic crisis.

Boncore said in July that he would prefer to revisit the topic of transportation revenue “when the long-term economic outlook becomes clear and we can better assess what the state needs as a whole, post-COVID.”

He said Tuesday that the timing of last year’s debate — with a House vote one week before Baker declared a state of emergency — “tied the Senate’s hands.”

“Now, we can take a holistic approach to it, and this conversation can be had again about how low our gas taxes are compared to neighboring states,” Boncore said. “The gas tax is by no means a silver bullet, but it’s part of a plan to pay for the modernization of our system and make sure our system is accessible and equitable and reliable.”

Infighting between the two branches has at times torpedoed momentum on legislation and bled over into successive sessions. Straus said Tuesday, though, that he does not see any lingering tension after the Senate stifled the House’s massive bill last time around.

“There are no bruises,” Straus said. “This is a new session. We’re all skilled enough to be forward-looking, so I take it as a positive when the Senate comes toward a position that the House had adopted last session.”

U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) joined Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) and Congresswoman Linda Sánchez (D- Calif.) today in introducing the bicameral U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021, President Biden’s bold, inclusive, and humane framework for the future of the United States immigration system.

“Even before the cruelty of the last four years, our country desperately needed to take big, bold steps for an immigration system that reflects our values. By providing a path to citizenship for 11 million undocumented people and instituting a host of other reforms, the U.S. Citizenship Act helps accomplish that critical goal,” said Senator Warren.

The legislation would provide millions of hardworking, undocumented immigrants with a pathway to citizenship, including Dreamers, Temporary Protective Status (TPS) recipients, and essential workers who have made enormous sacrifices during the pandemic; prioritize family reunification and keeping families together; and bolster the country’s long-term economic growth. The bill would also equip the country to responsibly and effectively manage the border with smart and effective investments, address root causes of migration that force people to leave Central America, and restore the United States’ commitment to human rights.

“As the son of Cuban immigrants who fled an oppressive regime for a better life in the United States, I have dedicated much of my career in Congress, both in the House and the Senate, fighting for the dignity of immigrant families in New Jersey and all across America. Immigrants contribute greatly to our country and society; they own businesses, pay taxes and teach our children, they are our coworkers, neighbors and friends,” said Sen. Menendez. “We have an historic opportunity to finally enact bold immigration reform that leaves no one behind, addresses root causes of migration, and safeguards our country’s national security. We have a moral and economic imperative to get this done once and for all.”

“I am deeply proud to introduce the U.S. Citizenship Act in the House of Representative today, a vision that provides long-overdue permanent protections, and restores humanity and American values to our immigration system,” said Rep. Sánchez. “I am the daughter of immigrant parents from Mexico, this is personal to me. I have dedicated my career to building an immigration system that lets people live without fear, and a system that gives immigrants – like my parents – who sought a better life and contribute to our nation a fair opportunity to thrive. After all, immigration reform isn’t just about policy changes and politics-as-usual, it’s about people: our loved ones, friends, and neighbors who have been living in our communities and contributing to our country for decades. They deserve real relief. With President Biden’s leadership and vision, Democratic majorities in both Chambers, and the support of the majority of Americans: this is our moment to finally deliver big, bold, and inclusive immigration reform that our nation and its people deserve.”

The U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021 establishes a moral and economic imperative and a vision of immigration reform that is expansive and inclusive:

– Creates an earned roadmap to citizenship for all 11 million undocumented immigrants, providing Dreamers, TPS holders, and some farmworkers with an expedited three-year path to citizenship, and giving all other undocumented immigrants who pass background checks and pay taxes with an eight-year path to citizenship without fear of deportation.

– Reforms family-based immigration system to keep families together by recapturing visas from previous years to clear backlogs, including spouses and children of green card holders as immediate family members, and increasing per-country caps for family-based immigration. It also eliminates discrimination facing LGBTQ+ families, provides protections for orphans, widows and children, allows immigrants with approved family-sponsorship petitions to join family in the U.S. on a temporary basis while they wait for green cards to become available.

– Grows our economy by making changes to the employment-based immigration system, eliminating per-country caps, making it easier for STEM advanced degree holders from U.S. universities to stay, improving access to green cards for workers in lower-wage industries, and giving dependents of H-1B holders work authorization, and preventing children of H-1B holders from aging out of the system. The bill also creates a pilot program to stimulate regional economic development and incentivizes higher wages for non-immigrant, high-skilled visas to prevent unfair competition with American workers.

– Increases funding for immigrant integration initiatives and supports state and local governments, NGOs, and other community organizations that conduct inclusion programs, provide English language assistance, and make available naturalization resources to immigrant communities.

– Protects workers from exploitation and improves the employment verification process by requiring the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Labor to establish a commission involving labor, employer, and civil rights organizations to help improve the employment verification process and granting workers who suffer serious labor violations greater access to U visa relief.

– Supports asylum seekers and other vulnerable populations by eliminating the one-year deadline for filing asylum claims, reducing asylum application backlogs, increasing protections for U visa, T visa, and VAWA applicants, including by raising the cap on U visas from 10,000 to 30,000.

The U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021 also addresses the root causes of migration and prioritizes U.S. national security:

– Addresses the root causes of migration from Central America by funding the President’s four-year plan to increase assistance to El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras conditioned on their ability to reduce the corruption, violence, poverty, and famine that now causes people to flee.

– Creates safe and legal channels for people to seek protection, so they can apply for legal status in Central America instead of making the dangerous journey north. The bill also re-institutes the Central American Minors program to reunite children with U.S. relatives and creates a Central American Family Reunification Parole Program to more quickly unite families with approved family sponsorship petitions.

– Cracks down on bad actors by enhancing the ability to prosecute individuals involved in smuggling, narcotics and trafficking networks who are responsible for drugs flowing into our country and the exploitation of migrants. It will also expand transnational anti-gang task forces in Central America.

– Improves the immigration courts and protects vulnerable individuals by expanding family case management programs, reducing immigration court backlogs, expanding training for immigration judges, and improving technology for immigration courts. It also restores fairness and balance to our immigration system by providing judges and adjudicators with discretion to review cases and grant relief to deserving individuals, and also gives funding for school districts educating unaccompanied children.

– Modernizes and manages the border effectively through the use of technology that enhances our ability to detect contraband and counter transnational criminal networks since illicit drugs are most likely to be smuggled through legal ports of entry. It also authorizes and provides funding for plans to improve infrastructure at ports of entry to enhance the ability to process asylum seekers and detect, interdict, disrupt and prevent narcotics from entering the United States.

– Protects border communities by providing for additional rescue beacons to prevent needless deaths along the border, requiring agent training and oversight to investigate criminal and administrative misconduct, and requiring department-wide policies governing the use of force. It also authorizes and provides funding for DHS, in coordination with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and nongovernmental experts, to develop guidelines and protocols for standards of care for individuals, families, and children in CBP custody.

This legislation is also cosponsored by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Majority Whip Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Sens. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.), Michael Bennett (D-Colo.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), and Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.).

In the U.S. House of Representatives, this legislation is cosponsored by Representatives Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-Calif.), Nydia M. Velázquez (D-N.Y.), Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.), Karen Bass (D-Calif.), Judy Chu (D-Calif.), Raul Ruiz (D-Calif.), Grace F. Napolitano (D-Calif.), Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.), Salud Carbajal (D-Calif.), Juan Vargas (D-Calif.), Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), J. Luis Correa (D-Calif.), Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.), Veronica Escobar (D-Texas), Sylvia R. Garcia (D-Texas), Tony Cárdenas (D-Calif.), Teresa Leger Fernández (D-N.M.), Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), Nanette Diaz Barragán (D-Calif.), Filemon Vela (D-Texas), Darren Soto (D-Fla.), Mike Levin (D-Calif.), Jim Costa (D-Calif.), Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.), Albio Sires (D-N.J.), Lori Trahan (D-Mass.), Gregorio Kilil Camacho Sablan (D-M.P.), Michael F.Q. San Nicolas (D-Guam), Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), James P. McGovern (D-Mass.), Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.), Mary Gay Scanlon (D-Pa.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Kathy Manning (D-N.C.), Steven Horsford (D-Nev.), Gerald E. Connolly (D-Va.), Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif.), Mark Takano (D-Calif.), Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), Brenda L. Lawrence (D-Mich.), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.), Bradley Schneider (D-Ill.), Ted W. Lieu (D-Calif.), Frederica S. Wilson (D-Fla.), Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.), Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), Betty McCollum (D-Minn.), Val B. Demings (D-Fla.), Al Green (D-Texas), Tom Suozzi (D-N.Y.), Marie Newman (D-Ill.), Dwight Evans (D-Pa.), Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.), Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.), Anthony G. Brown (D-Md.), Nikema Williams (D-Ga.), Joe Neguse (D-Colo.), Donald S. Beyer, Jr. (D-Va.), Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), David Trone (D-Md.), Lois Frankel (D-Fla.), Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N.J.), John Garamendi (D-Calif.), Dina Titus (D-Nev.), Danny K. Davis (D-Ill.), Doris Matsui (D-Calif.), David N. Cicilline (D-R.I.), Deborah Ross (D-N.C.), Mondaire Jones (D-N.Y.), Marc A. Veasey (D-Texas), Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (D-Ga.), and Stacey E. Plaskett (D-V.I.).