Purpose

The purpose of this post is to explain what happened with the Massachusetts legislative audit initiative: what voters approved, what has (or hasn’t) happened since, why it matters, and how we can respond. (Skip to the end if you already know the context and just want to help!)

Background

On November 5, 2024, nearly 72% of Massachusetts voters approved Question 1, a ballot initiative that gave the State Auditor explicit legal authority to audit the state Legislature–something the office historically could not do without the Legislature’s permission.

This was not an abstract issue. For decades, the Massachusetts Legislature has exempted itself from public records laws, operates with minimal transparency, and has resisted scrutiny that every other state agency is subject to. Question 1 was a response to that closed-door culture, and voters sent a clear, bipartisan message: no branch should be above oversight.

The law now states plainly that the Auditor can examine “the accounts, programs, activities, and functions” of the General Court (the formal name for the MA Legislature).

Intent

The intent of the ballot initiative was simple: bring transparency and accountability to the most opaque branch of state government. It doesn’t take a stretch of the imagination to see why voters supported this.

There have been persistent allegations of:

  • Misuse of taxpayer funds
  • Secret NDAs paid for with public money
  • Lack of documentation or rationale for legislative decisions
  • Committee votes that happen behind closed doors or don’t happen at all

This isn’t partisan. Whether you’re left, right, or independent, you probably agree that your elected officials should not be able to spend millions in public funds without some level of review.

This is exactly what the State Auditor is for–and Question 1 gave her the power to do it.

Counterargument

The Legislature has refused to comply. Their argument, in essence, is “separation of powers.” Specifically, House Speaker Ron Mariano and Senate President Karen Spilka have claimed that allowing an independent audit would violate the independence of the legislative branch.

This is a selective use of constitutional theory. The Legislature happily subjects every other department, agency, and public authority to audit–and they vote on funding for all of them. The “co-equal branch” excuse reads more like a dodge than a defense.

Meanwhile, Auditor Diana DiZoglio, who championed the ballot initiative, is stuck. She asked the Attorney General, Andrea Campbell, to represent her office in court so they can compel compliance. Campbell, though she supported the initiative publicly, has declined to take legal action so far. As a result, 9 months past the vote, we have no audit, no lawsuit, and no movement.

Calls to action

If you’re a Massachusetts resident and want to see this audit happen, you’re not powerless. Here are direct, non-performative things you can do:

Contact the Attorney General

  • Ask Andrea Campbell why her office has not filed a lawsuit to enforce the law voters passed.
  • Phone: (617) 727-2200
  • Mail:

1 Ashburton Place

20th Floor

Boston, MA 02108

  • Script idea: “I voted for Question 1 in 2024. I’d like to know why your office hasn’t supported enforcement of the new audit law. Can you clarify your position?”

Amplify the issue

  • Most people have no idea this is happening. The vote passed by a landslide, but coverage since then has been limited.
  • Share stories from WGBH, Politico, and Horizon Mass.

Contact your own legislator

  • Ask whether they support implementation of Question 1.
  • You can find your rep or senator here.

Support legal pressure

  • If DiZoglio decides to pursue legal action independently, she’ll need public and possibly financial backing. Stay tuned for legal funds or civil rights orgs that might take up the case.

Keep watching

  • The longer this drags out without consequence, the more it signals to other branches (in other states, even) that voter mandates can be ignored.

This is one of those moments where transparency itself is on the line. The vote already happened, and the public already spoke. Yet, without enforcement, it’s just another paper victory that lawmakers can bury under legal theory and delay.

EDIT: Updated contact details.