The final debate between state Rep. Marjorie Decker and Evan MacKay drew a capacity crowd to Street Theory Collective on Tuesday night in Central Square, with close to 150 people gathered in the art gallery among prints and installations.
Affordability and economic revitalization were significant themes in the debate, sponsored by Cambridge Day and moderated by its editor-in-chief Michael F. Fitzgerald and senior reporter Ruth Tam. Decker and MacKay had previously met in a forum on transparency and accountability and a debate on racial and social justice.
The two are competing to represent the 25th Middlesex District.
MacKay opened first after winning a coin toss, leading with a promise for transparency in the state legislature and ensuring constituents that “every single level of government is working toward justice.” They shared how growing up in a family that fostered over 100 children in South Florida influenced their current work as a Harvard University PhD-JD candidate and student advisor to “build a better world for all students.” Decker followed with a recap of her record of “fierce advocacy” for marginalized communities, beginning as a high schooler at Cambridge Rindge and Latin School.
Rehashing rhetoric and voting records
When asked what they had learned since the 2024 election, Decker drew attention to her legislative record under the current Trump administration, passing bill protecting LGBTQ+ health, vaccine access, abortion rights, and healthcare access. “We have the ability to continue to make lives better by passing legislation that inoculates and stands up to what’s happening at the federal level,” Decker said, emphasizing a need for “not just rhetoric, but a real plan to make change happen.”
MacKay said they raised awareness for legislative transparency on Beacon Hill in their 2024 campaign and called for “more urgency from state house leadership” to pass bills that tackle affordability, to limit collaboration between law enforcement and the U.S. Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Massachusetts, and increase state auditor Diana DiZoglio’s access to legislative records. When asked why some described them as impatient, MacKay pointed to Massachusetts’ unproductive legislature and accused Democratic leadership of corruption as the reason for their impatience.
Decker distanced herself from the attack by saying, “My opponent isn’t running against my record. They are fighting against the legislature.”
Decker did not address critics calling her a “secretive insider,” but instead focused on her strength as a “pragmatist” when advocating for programs like Food For Free, which provides weekend meals for students at no cost.
Decker described state government as a “firewall against what’s happening at the federal level” and framed her legislative approach as grounded in constituent concerns. “I have had legislation passed because I spend time talking to people,” Decker began, citing a step therapy bill she co-sponsored after hearing a resident’s story about being denied medication due to insurance policies.
MacKay made clear that their role as state representative would be to root out corruption and end secretive voting on Beacon Hill by forcing roll call votes, so the public could see what legislators support. They accused Decker of voting against public committee votes. However, Decker has spoken in favor of them and said her committee’s votes are public.
The economy on tap
Affordability and economic downtown featured next in the debate, candidates sharing their strategies to address economic challenges faced by Cambridge residents and businesses. MacKay described Massachusetts state legislature as lacking urgency, putting forth social housing, land trusts, real estate transfer fees, and pied-à-terre taxes as potential strategies. “On Beacon Hill, they kick the can down the road. Maybe they’ll get to housing in this decade,” they said, ending with a jab at Decker, whom they accused of taking money from real estate developers.
According to public campaign finance data, Decker did receive in December a $200 contribution from Cross and Shield Political Action Committee, funded by Blue Cross Blue Shield, but does not appear to have received money from PACs funded by real estate groups. However, her individual contributions show contributions of at least $11,000 in donations from eight individual real estate agents, investors or developers. Decker has raised $215,000 overall in individual contributions.
Decker countered that the legislature was “not stagnant,” citing her bill defending the right-to-shelter. Decker has also proposed bills that MacKay has also expressed support for, such as a local real estate transfer fee to fund affordable housing, but that bill has been pushed until January of next year.
Wildfire haze sparks concern over the climate crisis
Tuesday’s debate began after a haze crept into the city due to wildfires, coupled with the beginning of the second heat wave of the summer. A question on climate strategies they’d champion drew a proposal from MacKay to invest in tree canopy in lower income communities and communities of color, cooling centers, renewable energy and moratoriums on new fossil fuel infrastructure. MacKay noted they are an executive member (a volunteer chapter leader) of the Sierra Club.
Decker agreed with many of MacKay’s proposals and pointed to legislation she has passed toward increasing renewable energy, reducing flame retardants in children’s products and requiring a career support for gas company workers during the energy transition. “My record shows you who I care about and the work I get done,” Decker added.
Candidates ask a question
Cambridge Day had solicited a question from each candidate to be posed during the debate. MacKay’s question for Decker mentioned her “two full-time jobs” as a legislator and employee of law firm Berman Tabacco, asking her for the salary she earns from the law firm and her weekly time commitment. Decker did not offer specifics, instead stated that she was “proud” that she “had to work two jobs to afford to work for this city.” She also noted that Berman Tabacco works against large pharmaceutical companies, not for them. According to Berman Tabacco’s site, the law firm has represented plaintiffs in the past against pharmaceutical companies over cases of antitrust, fraud and damages.
Decker then took a jab at MacKay for being able to “afford to be sent to Harvard for 11 years.” She questioned whether MacKay’s “last decade as a student” could equip them to “understand the challenges [voters] face.”
Decker also asked why MacKay had been registered as a Republican, claiming that was their voting registration as recently as six years ago. MacKay said closed Florida primaries forced them to register as a Republican to vote at all in races lacking Democratic candidates. Decker also put forth that MacKay has accepted campaign money from “people who own data centers” and “build bombs.” Though MacKay did not address their campaign finances directly, in a separate debate they had shared they had signed the People’s Pledge refusing all lobbyist contributions above $200. Cambridge Day did not find any registered PACs affiliated with data centers that had donated to MacKay’s campaign, but identified a single total individual donation of $500 by a technician who worked at a data center.
In their closing statements, MacKay vowed to be “a role model” in the face of the Trump administration by fighting federal policies from the Trump administration, promoting legislative transparency, and advocating for campaign finance reform.
Decker chose to note the similarities between her platform and MacKay’s before reiterating her commitment to reducing income inequality and improving healthcare in the state.
“My opponent would like to think there is more space between us than there is,” Decker said.
Cambridge Day does not endorse candidates. Street Theory Collective has not endorsed either candidate.
A recording of the debate by CCTV will be made available after the debate.
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.