Healey and Minogue split on nine Massachusetts ballot questions

Nine ballot questions will appear on the November ballot in Massachusetts, forcing voters to choose between positions held by Democratic Governor Maura Healey and Republican challenger Mike Minogue. The two candidates recently outlined their stances during separate interviews, revealing where they align and where they differ on the state's legislative agenda.

Both Healey and Minogue support Question 1, which expands the Public Records Law to include most records held by the Legislature and the Office of the Governor. They also generally support Question 7, which allows single-family homes on residentially zoned land that is at least 5,000 square feet and has 50 feet of street frontage, provided there is access to public sewer and water. Healey called this a hard yes, stating the state needs more housing. Minogue said he is open to the measure but noted that the problem will not be fully solved.

The candidates agree on Question 8 as well. Both plan to vote no on repealing the laws that legalize, regulate, and tax the retail sale of adult recreational marijuana. Healey emphasized that the cannabis industry is important, while Minogue stated he is not in favor of repealing the current statutes.

Differences emerge on Question 9 regarding firearms regulation. Healey plans to vote yes to keep the current laws in place, describing the issue as a major difference in the race. Minogue signaled he would vote no, arguing that the current system assumes people are guilty until proven innocent. He suggested letting people go back through the process to fix the rules.

On Question 5, which addresses the state revenue limit, Healey supported the current 62F clause, noting its impact on funding schools, roads, and bridges. Minogue also supported the clause, describing it as a cap to prevent the government from taking all available money. However, their approaches to implementation vary, with Healey focusing on frequency of changes and Minogue focusing on the cap's protective function.

The pair showed mixed positions on the remaining items. On Question 6, a fund for natural resource conservation, Healey gave a strong yes. Minogue opposed the measure, citing a lack of trust in government spending and a desire to avoid new taxes. On Question 2, collective bargaining for public defenders, Healey said she was still looking at the issue. Minogue said he would learn more but disliked the previous negotiation, noting that bar advocates were only getting $68 an hour during a work stoppage.

Healey and Minogue also addressed primary elections and registration. On Question 3, which proposes all-party primary elections, Healey expressed concerns that the system would disadvantage women, people of color, and candidates who cannot self-fund. Minogue, an independent for 19 years, said he was against the concept in a one-party dominated state. On Question 4, regarding Election Day registration, Healey said absolutely. Minogue supported it only if there is a requirement for identity validation, warning that it can change the vote without such checks.