In August, a variety of interest groups and individuals filed with the state attorney general 47 proposed ballot questions. After reviewing the proposals for form and constitutional issues, 44 questions were certified to go forward for signature gathering - the highest number of measures ever certified. Several proposals represent different versions of the same policy question, and others likely won’t have the grassroots or financial backing to qualify them for the ballot. Initiative sponsors typically need to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to collect more than 100,000 signatures, to feel confident that they have sufficient valid voter numbers to move the measure forward. From the costly process of signature gathering, to constitutional court challenges, to potential legislative action next spring to pass compromise legislation on these issues, that list of 44 will likely be reduced to less than ten proposals actually reaching the voters on the November 2026 ballot.

It will become clearer which questions are serious and which are not by early December. But there were some common themes among those proposed ballot questions—the most prevalent theme was the high cost of living in the Commonwealth. Several proposals look to lower taxes and government spending. And then there were proposals which at first glance were intended by proponents to lower the cost of housing—most notably a plan to reimpose rent control in the state (repealed by ballot in 1994)—but which could actually be counterproductive in housing availability and costs.
Besides the cost issues, there were other public policy issues aimed at elections and elected officials. And curiously, a measure was filed to repeal the recreational cannabis law, which was originally authorized by a ballot question.

On taxes, there were rollback proposals on the income tax, sales tax, and even the gas tax. Furthermore, tax expenditure control measures were filed with an aim to reduce the growth of the state budget and local government. Most of these proposals won’t go forward to the ballot, but could spur some momentum to reassess the proper tax and expenditure levels for a competitive Commonwealth.

Over the years, RAM has been active on ballot questions—primarily on the “No” side, but also on the proponent side for Blue Law reform in 1994, and in 2017-2018 a sales tax rollback proposal. RAM’s sales tax rollback initiative led to the so-called “Grand Bargain” in June of 2018, which created a permanent sales tax holiday, and repealed the Sunday and holiday retail premium pay law. The Grand Bargain also mitigated the proposed minimum wage increase by slowing the increase and creating a more favorable tip wage for restaurants; as well as implementing a far lower cost paid family and medical leave law than what was headed to the ballot.

Whether or not RAM engages in any “Grand Bargain” efforts to negotiate measures off the ballot; and supports or opposes certain ballot questions destined for the November 2026 ballot, will all be determined in the months to come.

A competitive economic playing field for Massachusetts businesses, employers, consumers and taxpayers will be the key objective for RAM public policy priorities for ballot measures over the next year. Just like legislative actions by our elected officials, Massachusetts laws passed on the ballot need to financially incent local investment, local jobs, and the retention of our future workers, our working families, and our retirees.