We are two advocates for people living in poverty in Massachusetts. In our experience, state Rep. Marjorie Decker has been a tireless and strategic advocate for progressive reforms. We urge you to support her – and tell your family and friends to support her – in the Sept. 3 primary for reelection to the Massachusetts House of Representatives.
Within a few years of first being elected to the House in 2012, Decker quickly became a passionate and effective leader on behalf of very low-income people in Massachusetts and many other progressive issues.
Many warned that “welfare” was the third rail of politics – touch it and you die. Decker didn’t hesitate to do what she thought was right. First, she took on the welfare family cap, the rule that barred benefits for children if they were conceived after their family first got assistance. With Decker as lead sponsor, the House voted to repeal this noxious and racist rule in 2018. When the governor vetoed the repeal, she worked with the House speaker and colleagues to override the veto. Thanks to Decker, thousands of children now get cash assistance benefits instead of being treated as if they didn’t exist.
After the family cap repeal victory, Decker took on Massachusetts’ abysmally low cash assistance grant levels. When she started this campaign in 2019, cash assistance for families had gotten one 10 percent increase since 1988. Cash assistance for older adults and people with disabilities had not been increased at all in 30 years. Thanks to Decker, the House passed the first cash assistance increases in decades in 2020 and the Senate followed, with more increases in 2021 and 2022. A fourth increase is scheduled to go into effect next April. At that point, Decker will have been instrumental in raising grants 45 percent since 2020.
It hard to get things done in the House. It isn’t enough to elect people who support progressive policies. To be effective, a Massachusetts legislator needs to be pragmatic. Sometimes that means deciding not to vote in favor of a progressive initiative that isn’t going to get enacted for the sake of getting something positive done. The progressive votes she is criticized for not supporting didn’t come close to passing. We may loathe tax breaks for corporations, but why demand a “suicide vote” when the tax break is going to pass anyhow, and the package includes benefits for older adults and families with children?
We need Decker’s experience and passion and tactical know-how to continue to make progress in the face of competing priorities. Having grown up in Cambridge public housing, Decker is the real deal when it comes to getting things done for our neighbors struggling in poverty. She is also a superstar at getting through many pieces of the progressive agenda, including – most recently – gun safety and removing barriers to maternal health.
Please vote for Marjorie Decker on Sept. 3.
Jamie Sabino, Western Avenue, Cambridge
Deborah Harris, Massachusetts advocate
A stronger
Please consider making a financial contribution to maintain, expand and improve Cambridge Day.
We are now a 501(c)3 nonprofit and all donations are tax deductible.
Please consider a recurring contribution.
“To be effective, a Massachusetts legislator needs to be pragmatic. Sometimes that means deciding not to vote in favor of a progressive initiative that isn’t going to get enacted for the sake of getting something positive done. The progressive votes she is criticized for not supporting didn’t come close to passing. We may loathe tax breaks for corporations, but why demand a “suicide vote” when the tax break is going to pass anyhow, and the package includes benefits for older adults and families with children?”
What an insane paragraph. This is like saying if the majority of representatives supported murder, your representative might as well vote”yes” with them, since it comes with a complimentary lollipop for low income families.
Besides the insane notion of a “suicide vote”, even if the bill was going to pass anyway, why should it matter that they vote “no”? It matters because it’s a significant signal of what the representative supports.
Why should Representative Majorie Decker get my vote if they just vote with the majority? I want my state representative to not only be pragmatic but also have a backbone when it comes to the things they believe in. And even if Decker’s votes were political maneuvers, she has done a terrible job of explaining her votes by covering them up with lies instead of genuine explanations (https://www.reddit.com/r/CambridgeMA/comments/1ex5xdc/rep_decker_misleading_constituents_with_deceptive/).
And somewhat recently, Decker’s “experience and passion and tactical know-how to continue to make progress in the face of competing priorities” was notably when it came to the closing of Memorial Drive and the private communications with the DCR (https://www.reddit.com/r/CambridgeMA/comments/1etu190/a_contempt_for_constituents_why_you_should_vote).
For the above reasons and many more, Representative Marjorie Decker will not be getting my vote.
Such an effective legislator that our subway is a dumpster fire under investigation by the federal government. Unbelievable
Such an effective legislator that she adjourned this year without passing the desperately needed climate bill, economic development bill, or funding the MBTA.
Doesn’t seem like she’s working too hard, or maybe she is, but not for us, but for whatever that law firm is paying her more than $100,000 a year to do.
I hope she has more time to focus on that, so we can have someone actually focus on the Commonwealth’s urgent problems.
This letter makes little sense. Massachusetts legislature is one of the least productive bodies in the country, passed laws regularly die in the committees without any information on why (this year climate bills passed in the house and senate and died without being reconciled), Rep Decker gets really angry when asked about it. I guess she is fine with it, but I’m not. Voting for the challenger on September 3rd
Just to add more context: Rep Decker’s achievement (children health) is now undercut by the budget cuts for millionaires Rep Decker voted for: https://childrenshealthwatch.org/transitional-aid-for-families-with-dependent-children-tafdc-budget-cuts/ This was after mass citizens voted for the small tax on the super rich. I guess the Massachusetts leadership including Rep Decker represents the interests of the rich rather than children after all.