MASSACHUSETTS FAMILIES ARE facing skyrocketing energy bills, and the Trump administration’s reckless energy and trade policies are making it worse.

Already, some Bay Staters are paying double what they did last year on their energy bills, largely thanks to an aging gas system struggling to respond to extreme weather fueled by climate change. And in New England, where approximately 10 percent of electricity and 80 percent of gasoline and diesel fuel come from Canada, Trump’s on-again, off-again approach to tariffs is creating significant uncertainty and instability in the energy market. 

The last thing Massachusetts families need is an administration lurching from one headline-driven policy to the next.  

In March, President Trump announced a 25 percent tariff on imports from Canada and Mexico and a lower 10 percent tariff on Canadian energy imports, with certain exemptions. If just the 10 percent tariff level on energy imports from Canada is fully implemented, Bay Staters could foot more than $370 million per year in additional costs, and New Englanders could be out over $1 billion.  

The temporary halt in March of electricity exports on a key transmission line carrying primarily hydropower from Quebec to New England underscored just how interconnected Massachusetts and the broader region are with Canadian energy.   

Then, earlier this month, Trump announced broad tariffs on top of those already in place. On Wednesday, he backed down and paused some of their implementation for 90 days. Once they go into effect, these tariffs will disrupt supply chains, shrink paychecks, and drive up energy costs across the country. The increasingly high tariff on China, and general uncertainty around the tariffs, is likely to still do just that.  

Yet this isn’t just about today’s energy bills — it’s about the future of our energy system and our planet. In Massachusetts, the climate crisis is no longer a distant threat. Cities like Boston are enduring more frequent extreme heat days and record-breaking temperatures. 

Sea level is projected to climb as much as four feet by 2070, threatening homes, businesses, and critical infrastructure from Cape Cod to the South Coast. And heavy rainfall is overwhelming stormwater systems and exacerbating environmental injustices in places like the Mystic River Watershed. These escalating impacts hit hardest in communities already grappling with unaffordable energy bills, aging infrastructure, and limited resources. Without urgent action to curb emissions and build resilience, the consequences — to lives, livelihoods, and our economy — will only grow. 

Tackling climate change requires a comprehensive energy strategy that invests in cost-effective and quick-to-deploy renewables, safeguards community health, and boosts resilience. Trump’s haphazard trade war — coupled with attacks on renewables and executive orders expediting oil and gas production and exports — does none of that.  

His tariffs exempt the oil and gas industry — the very industry that donated $1 billion to his campaign. And as oil and gas executives further invest in the dirty energy that fuels the extreme weather, consumers will only spend more on heating and cooling their homes while the wealthy continue to profit.  

Just as Massachusetts families must not be left at the mercy of chaotic trade policies, volatile fossil fuel markets, and greedy oil executives, neither should they be left at the mercy of utility profit seeking or price-gouging suppliers.  

While Bay Staters struggle to pay for heat, multibillion-dollar utility companies continue to hike rates and rake in massive profits for their shareholders, largely thanks to misaligned incentives for investor-owned utilities. At the same time, certain competitive electric suppliers disproportionately target low-income households and communities of color with tactics that lure many into contracts that promise savings but end up costing more.    

Families deserve long-term strategies that lower costs, ensure energy security and resilience, and protect ratepayers. That means deploying renewable energy and energy efficiency, upgrading our grid, and ensuring policies that serve working families — not corporate profits.  

While state officials work to provide immediate relief to consumers, we must fully invest in energy assistance that meets the scale of the crisis. In Massachusetts, more than 150,000 families depend on the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) to heat and cool their homes each month.  

My Heating and Cooling Relief Act would expand LIHEAP and ensure more families can afford to stay warm in the winter and cool in the summer. Yet the Trump administration just eliminated the federal staff responsible for LIHEAP — increasing the risk that more families will be forced to choose between paying their bills or putting food on the table. We must protect energy assistance for low-income households as energy prices increase.   

Massachusetts families shouldn’t have to bear the costs of Trump’s trade war and corporate greed. We must break our dependence on expensive and polluting fossil fuels by accelerating the transition to clean energy — no matter what Trump and his Big Oil barons try to do. As Massachusetts continues its climate leadership, I will keep fighting in DC for policies that put renewables over fossil fuels and people over profits — not the other way around. Together, we will deliver the energy security and affordability our communities deserve.  

Edward Markey is a US senator from Massachusetts. He is a member of the Environment and Public Works Committee and co-author of the Green New Deal resolution.  

The post Energy prices are soaring in Massachusetts. Trump’s tariffs are making it worse.   appeared first on CommonWealth Beacon.

IN 1980, I met a mother named Anne Anderson, whose love for her son would ensure the protection of countless children for generations to come. She lived in Woburn and came to me looking for answers to the question of why so many children around town—including her three-year-old son Jimmy—had fallen sick from a rare leukemia. She asked me to listen to her, to help her, and to find out once and for all if the Woburn cancer cluster might be related to toxic chemicals that leached into their water from decades of industrial pollution.

Out of our partnership, in the 1980s we passed and strengthened the Superfund law, a bedrock environmental program to clean up some of the worst pollution in communities across the country. Anne’s advocacy also helped establish Massachusetts’s first-ever cancer database to ensure no cancer clusters would go unreported. And a week ago, we celebrated a new victory: a long-overdue proposed ban on the use of the chemical linked to her son’s cancer, trichloroethylene (TCE).

I announced the ban last week in Woburn, together with the Environmental Protection Agency, by Anne’s side.

While serving in the House of Representatives, I represented Woburn and was familiar with the famous “Woburn odor,” a mix of hydrogen sulfide, methane, and toxic sludge left over from more than a century of leather processing and chemical production. Hazardous waste was discovered in 1979 at the Woburn Industri-Plex—high concentrations of a murderers’ row of chemicals like arsenic, lead, chromium, benzene, and toluene. One of the chemicals that leaked into wells and water throughout Woburn was TCE.

We now know that TCE is extremely toxic to human health. It causes cancer, affects reproductive systems, is neurotoxic, and compromises immune systems, among other serious health harms.

Here in Massachusetts, we’ve known the devastating effects of this chemical for decades, but throughout the country, TCE is still commonly found in consumer products, such as arts and crafts spray coatings, furniture care and cleaning products, and car maintenance products. TCE is also used in industrial and commercial processes as a degreaser, putting workers and communities near factories at risk.

In 1981, federal and state health organizations published a report that confirmed the Woburn cancer cluster. That same year, Anne’s son, Jimmy, died of leukemia.

In 1983, I held a hearing in Woburn, where Anne testified, to raise awareness and question the corporate polluters that were using the neighborhoods of this city as a sewer. I worked to enact the Superfund law to clean up the nation’s most toxic waste sites, including Woburn. I released research reports in 1985 and 1995, to ensure that we never forgot Jimmy or Woburn or the action that still needed to be taken to clean up the site and protect families.

For decades, I fought to keep Republicans from gutting the Superfund program and its funding. When Congress updated the Toxic Substances Control Act in 2015 and 2016, I knew we had to pass a law that would prevent other mothers from going through what Anne went through. That meant banning toxic chemicals like TCE.

For nearly 45 years, the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed ban of all uses of TCE is the moment we’ve been fighting for. And we announced the ban at the James “Jimmy” Anderson Regional Transportation Center.

Thanks to the extraordinary work of Anne Anderson and the dedication of the Biden-Harris administration to protecting public health, we can finally say: no more sick kids, no more devastated families, no more TCE. 

As a fierce advocate and a loving mother, Anne was not ever going to be satisfied with just memories of her son; she demanded action.

We have come so far, but we still have more to do. We must resolve to act swiftly on all toxic chemicals, which have no place in our supply chain, in our communities, and in our bodies. In 1980, Anne asked me to listen to her plea and act—I hope my colleagues, both Democratic and Republican, will hear her voice and join this fight.

Edward Markey is a US senator from Massachusetts.

The post A victory for toxic-free communities and cancer-free childhoods appeared first on CommonWealth Beacon.

EVERY YEAR, as countless endangered sea turtles migrate south along the Massachusetts shore to escape the cold, they become trapped in Cape Cod Bay’s freezing waters. Dedicated staff and volunteers with Mass Audubon carefully walk along the Cape’s beaches to rescue the stranded turtles and deliver them to the New England Aquarium to receive treatment, where they join the more than 5,000 sea turtles that have been rehabilitated and released since 1997.

These conservation heroes are on the frontlines of the effort to save our turtles, a challenge that has deepened in recent years as ocean temperatures rise and alter the historical migration patterns of sea turtles. When turtles chart a new migratory path through colder waters, it throws off their internal body temperatures, causing more turtles – most often the endangered Kemp’s ridley sea turtle – to wash ashore in fragile states of health. In 2000, 49 trapped sea turtles were rescued on the Cape. In 2022, that number ballooned to 866. This more than 10-fold increase is a warning sign: we have to throw a lifeline to sea turtles before it’s too late.

More than $67 million in federal funds and grants have been directed toward the marine mammal stranding network for whales and dolphins over the last 20 years, but sea turtle rescue teams have been left out in the cold. The New England Aquarium and others like National Aquarium in Baltimore and South Carolina Aquarium in Charleston are among eight sea turtle stranding and response institutions nationwide that voluntarily and collectively spend $5 million each year to save our turtles.

This mission is as costly as it is critical. When turtles are rescued and transported to the Aquarium’s Sea Turtle Hospital in Quincy for treatment, they often receive fluids, antibiotics, X-rays, and monitoring as they are slowly warmed 10 degrees every 24 hours in the hospital’s tanks for days or weeks. Some turtles require months of rehabilitation. Right now, the federal government does not have a dedicated grant program to support this effort, but the problem is only getting worse.

That is why Congress must pass the Sea Turtle Rescue Assistance Act. This legislation would provide $30 million to support institutions in Massachusetts and across the country working to save endangered sea turtles. From coast to coast, these federal dollars would be a boon to recovery, rescue, and rehabilitation efforts for years to come.

The Sea Turtle Rescue Assistance Act will ensure that sea turtle champions like those at the New England Aquarium aren’t merely treading water. It’s time for lawmakers to come together and pass this critical legislation.

Vikki Spruill is president and CEO of the New England Aquarium and Edward J. Markey is a senator and Bill Keating is a US representative from Massachusetts.

The post As strandings of sea turtles rise, voluntary rescue efforts won’t cut it appeared first on CommonWealth Beacon.

AMERICANS CAN FINALLY breathe clean air and a sigh of relief as we see the path ahead to our clean energy future. For decades, the prospects for a livable future looked dim as we fought an uphill battle to make sure the United States would fully embrace climate action and clean energy. Congress has been holding hearings on climate change since at least the 1960s, Exxon was secretly studying its dangerous effect on the climate since at least the 1970s, and the Waxman-Markey climate legislation passed the House of Representatives in the late 2000s before dying in the Senate. But finally, Congress has taken a meaningful step toward a clean, green future. The clear and present danger of climate change is more visible and visceral than ever, but the Inflation Reduction Act represents a major victory over the physical and political machinery that created the climate crisis.

While the new law is not a panacea, it puts us unquestionably on the road to a sustainable society. It will take time to get us there, but the federal legislation lays the foundation for a domestic clean energy revolution in Massachusetts and across the nation. This revolution will be built around domestic manufacturing, lower-cost clean energy, and public financing for projects in communities like Brockton and Lawrence.

The Inflation Reduction Act will unleash dramatic advances in how we power our communities and how we build new economic opportunity in this country. It’s like the telecommunications revolution Congress enabled in the 1990s—everyone didn’t buy a cell phone at once, but that began the tectonic change in what a phone could be, and now it’s rare to find an American without one.

The same scenario is ready to unfold with clean energy. The new law makes it easier to build new offshore wind and solar power, as well as the energy storage necessary to operate a reliable, affordable, clean system. Along the way, we will create good-paying, clean energy jobs in communities like Chelsea and Springfield to power that future.

This bill gives the energy industry the tools it needs to make sound investments in the clean technology that can protect public health and lower costs for everyday consumers, rather than waste money on outdated fossil fuel technology that is destined to become a stranded asset. Every year, climate change will bring new record-breaking heat, storms, floods, and drought. As a result, every energy asset we build must be built with the future of our planet in mind.

The $369 billion in total climate and clean energy spending will open the door to a new era where climate response becomes the engine driving our economy. The Inflation Reduction Act contains revolutionary funding for residential energy improvements, clean energy manufacturing tax credits, and rebates for electric vehicles and energy-efficient technology.

States across the region are moving alongside federal action. Massachusetts just passed a sweeping climate bill that will serve as a climate economy blueprint for other states. Rhode Island passed a bill committing to 100 percent renewable electricity by 2033. Connecticut and New York are both set to not just meet, but exceed their 2040 clean electricity targets.

The promise of the Inflation Reduction Act depends on whether we can deliver on the state, regional, and local levels. We have to turn these historic federal resources into the climate-friendly future we want and need.

Finally, we must be deliberate in building a more diverse, equitable and inclusive future through this work. Unlike previous economic booms, we cannot decarbonize the wealthiest half of our society, help out executives’ stock portfolios, and declare the job done. Climate response requires a whole-of-society effort and the benefits of action must accrue to all—especially those that are on the front lines of the climate crisis.

To ensure the broadest possible adoption and to repair historic harms in our environmental justice communities, the law opens up tax credits to smaller operators and communities that often have found themselves last in line when it comes to new clean technology. It contains $27 billion for a first-of-its-kind national climate bank effort, modeled on Sen. Ed Markey’s National Climate Bank Act, which is targeted specifically toward unlocking investments and building wealth in disadvantaged communities. It also provides historic levels of funding for an environmental justice mapping tool, local air monitoring provisions, and grants to reduce pollution from transportation. We are writing full participation into the law rather than leaving it to chance.

It’s not just that we’re trying to do the right thing when it comes to climate, we’re also trying to do it the right way so that progress becomes a palpable positive force in people’s lives. So, get ready, because the climate economy is about to unleash a wave of innovation, opportunity, and equity—right here in Massachusetts.

Ed Markey is a US senator from Massachusetts and Joe Curtatone is the president of the Northeast Clean Energy Council and the former mayor of Somerville.

The post Federal funds, used wisely, can tackle climate change appeared first on CommonWealth Beacon.

THE COVID-19 pandemic brought education to computers and tablets, business to online marketplaces, and social activity to Zoom – all while bringing deep, systemic digital inequity fully to light. As education, jobs, and critical services moved increasingly online over the last two years, serious and persistent gaps in who has access to the internet, connected devices, and digital skills have become glaringly apparent.

Data from the ACLU show that today in Massachusetts, more than 500,000 residents either do not have a computer or access to the internet. Over a million residents don’t have a fixed broadband internet connection. And even when devices and the internet are available, tens of thousands of people in Massachusetts still lack the digital skills they need to easily attend school, find employment, connect with loved ones, and participate in other essential activities online. These barriers disproportionately impact low-income communities, communities of color, immigrants, seniors, and people living with disabilities – deepening systemic inequities in education, health, and economic opportunity.

But the truth is that digital inequity isn’t new, and policymakers, advocates, and community-based organizations have been working together to address the challenge for decades. Right now, in the context of COVID-19, we have a unique opportunity to create more robust funding streams and advance comprehensive, inclusive solutions that result in closing the digital divide once and for all.

Federal attention to digital inequity issues goes all the way back to the creation of the E-Rate program in 1996, which has since invested more than $54 billion nationwide to connect our physical schools and libraries to the internet, including nearly $770 million in Massachusetts. When the coronavirus pandemic began, we fought to expand the E-Rate to provide internet connectivity and devices to students who were now learning at home. These efforts resulted in the March 2020 American Rescue Plan including a new Emergency Connectivity Fund, which is now providing more than $7 billion in E-Rate home connectivity funding across the country. To date, the Emergency Connectivity Fund has delivered more than $63 million to Massachusetts during the pandemic to help students, families, and other school community members get online. In Boston, Mayor Michelle Wu has announced a $12 million investment to bring digital equity and inclusion to nearly 23,000 Boston public housing residents, library users, and school-age families.

But we know this emergency funding won’t last forever, and that’s why we’re advocating for additional legislation like the Securing Universal Communications Connectivity to Ensure Students Succeed (SUCCESS) Act, which would provide schools and libraries with $8 billion a year over five years – for a total of $40 billion – to continue to connect students to the internet and to digital opportunities well after the coronavirus pandemic. We’re committed to advancing permanent and sustainable funding for digital equity.

Hand-in-hand with the critical need for these government programs is the vital importance of supporting community-led resources and programs that address all three legs of the digital inequity stool – internet, devices, and the skills to use those tools. We must ensure that once we get devices into the hands of our community members, they have the training, skills, and support to be connected to an increasingly online society and economy.

The solutions to persistent digital inequity must be thoughtful and co-created in deep partnership with the individuals and communities that are most impacted. We’ve seen the impact of community-based approaches firsthand – in 2021, thousands of learners who participated in the Tech Goes Home program, which combines access to the internet and devices with digital skills training and is tailored specifically by community-based partners to the needs of the people they serve, reported using newfound access to communicate via email, access telehealth, participate in online learning, and more. Expanding and sustaining this impact starts with delivering critical resources, and then, working with people and organizations on the ground, who’ve built deep trust and relationships in the community, to meet individuals and families where they are.

That’s why it’s critical that policymakers, advocates, and community-based organizations continue to work closely together and are intentional about seeking out and uplifting the voices of students, workers, elders, and others in our community who are still grappling with digital inequity.

Working together, we’ve made important progress – delivering billions of dollars and identifying effective strategies for narrowing the digital divide. Our priority now, when the COVID-19 pandemic has worsened existing gaps and drawn unprecedented attention to issues of digital inequity, is to seize this moment to expand effective, community-level efforts to connect individuals and families with the internet services, devices, and digital skills they need to fully participate in our increasingly online world.

Ed Markey is a US senator from Massachusetts and Daniel Noyes and Theodora Hanna are co-CEOs of Tech Goes Home, a Boston-based nonprofit working to advance digital equity.  

The post Progress being made on digital inequity — but more needed appeared first on CommonWealth Beacon.

A 72-YEAR-OLD woman went in for surgery to remove a brain tumor in 2019. The last thing she remembers before her surgery was a doctor putting her to sleep. When she awoke, she was missing her dentures, her glasses, and had no memory of how she got home.

Shortly after, the COVID-19 pandemic hit, and for a year thereafter she had no teeth or glasses.

Most seniors are surprised to learn that when they retire and begin to rely on Medicare for their health coverage, they are left without oral health care. In fact, of the 60 million Medicare beneficiaries, more than two-thirds don’t have any dental coverage at all. Medicare doesn’t cover vision or hearing health services either. Nearly half of all Medicare patients haven’t visited a dentist within the past year. Those numbers are closer to 70 percent for Black, Hispanic and lower-income Medicare beneficiaries. One in five rural seniors haven’t seen a dentist in the past five years.

Poor health coverage has unsurprisingly led to poor health outcomes. Poor oral health is directly linked to conditions such as diabetes, heart disease, respiratory illness, and even Alzheimer’s – all diseases that particularly impact our older citizens and put them at even greater risk of COVID-19.

This is just one example of how gaps in coverage and access to care that have existed for generations were exacerbated during the pandemic, leaving some of the most marginalized populations to bear the brunt of our health crisis.

As we work to emerge from this pandemic, we cannot ignore these gaps in coverage any longer. As we continue to negotiate a budget reconciliation proposal for working families, we’ll be fighting to make sure our seniors get the dental, hearing, and vision coverage they deserve as part of a strengthened Medicare program.

Closing gaps in this coverage will not only improve access to quality care, it will help save money in the long run. Currently, more than 2 million people visit emergency rooms each year due to oral health complications, many of whom could have been treated in a preventive, less-expensive primary care setting. One study identified $65 billion in medical savings over 10 years simply by providing dental and periodontal treatment through Medicare.

There is momentum to change the unacceptable status quo for our seniors. Earlier this month, the Senate pushed through a $3.5 billion budget resolution that included Medicare dental, vision, and hearing coverage. Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland introduced legislation to guarantee Medicare coverage for dental health under Medicare Part B, which I’m proud to support. In the House of Representatives, Congressman Lloyd Doggett of Texas introduced legislation to include these benefits supported by an additional 75 members of Congress. President Biden has also proposed including these benefits during his campaign for president.

These policies are overwhelmingly supported by Americans from all demographics, regions, and political parties. According to a nationwide survey by CareQuest Institute, 93 percent of Americans supported the inclusion of dental coverage under Medicare. In a recent Morning Consult/Politico poll, 84 percent of voters – 89 percent of Democrats and 79 percent of Republicans – favored adding dental, vision and hearing coverage. Similar numbers supported allowing the federal government to negotiate drug prices.  The need and support for these benefits to be covered under the Medicare program is crystal clear.

Strengthening Medicare to include dental, vision, and hearing is a no-brainer from a care, access, equity, and cost perspective. And it’s supported by, well, everyone.

By closing this giant gap in our Medicare system, we’ll finally be building a path to a healthier future for our seniors and all those who have been left behind by a broken health system. This pandemic has presented us with enormous public health challenges, but it has also given us the opportunity to rewrite the book and recover stronger, healthier, and more equitable than ever before.

Edward Markey is a senator from Massachusetts and Dr. Myechia Minter-Jordan is the president and CEO of the CareQuest Institute for Oral Health. 

The post Time to plug gaps in Medicare coverage appeared first on CommonWealth Beacon.

WARM WEATHER, open storefronts, and one of the nation’s highest vaccination rates have given many the feeling that life is returning to normal here in Massachusetts. Unfortunately, going back to business-as-usual also means getting back to the same—or worse —amount of sitting in traffic. Boston has some of the country’s worst traffic levels in the country, and we are already exceeding pre-pandemic levels in some parts of the city. Rather than return to the status quo, we can and must reimagine what a transportation system that protects people and the climate could look like for Massachusetts.

Traffic doesn’t just make us late to work or short of temper—it can also make us short of breath. Too many cars and trucks on the road means dirtier air and more dangerous streets, especially for those without a car. On top of deadly air pollution, hundreds of people die in vehicle crashes in the Commonwealth every year, while thousands more are left severely injured.

Our transportation system causes pain, both personal and planetary. Transportation is now the number one source of greenhouse gas emission in Massachusetts. Unless we change the way Bay Staters get around, we will not be able to begin to tackle the climate crisis nor improve the safety of the roads running through our communities.

The current federal infrastructure discussion has the potential to transform our transportation network both in Massachusetts and across the country. President Biden’s American Jobs Plan presents us with a roadmap to leave our state’s history of car-centric transportation infrastructure investments in the rearview mirror and invest in healthier and more sustainable ways to get around. The reauthorization of the long-term transportation spending plan, which just passed out of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee with unanimous bipartisan support, makes some necessary progress on safety, climate emissions, and walking and biking, although it preserves our car-centric status quo in many ways and can be improved.

By tying our transportation goals to our climate goals, we can give people across our state viable, sustainable alternatives to dangerous, carbon-spewing cars. The GREEN Streets Act is one way to do just that—this legislation would require state departments of transportation to set greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled reduction goals, and use federal funding to meet them.

But it’s not enough to simply decrease the amount people drive. We need to pair this with an effort to improve safety and accessibility for all travelers so that alternatives to driving can truly thrive. In our initial consideration of the surface transportation reauthorization bill in the Senate, we were able to pass a bipartisan amendment that would provide $1 billion to connect active transportation routes—trails, walking paths, and more—into a comprehensive system that allows individuals of all ages and abilities to reach their destinations within and between communities. But we must now build on that amendment and keep promoting safer, more equitable, and more climate positive infrastructure as this debate continues.

As we emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic, we cannot return to the transportation status quo in Massachusetts, which included rising air pollution, dangerous and pothole-filled roads, and nation-topping traffic congestion—especially as the link between COVID-19 cases and poor air quality shows the dangers of ignoring mobile pollution sources. Instead, we need more decision-makers in Washington to seize this once-in-a-generation opportunity to create policies that will transform transportation here in Massachusetts and beyond. By providing clean, healthy and safe alternatives to personal car travel, we can create a new “normal” in which the easiest, cheapest, and most pleasant ways to get around don’t involve being stuck behind the steering wheel.

Ed Markey is a senator from Massachusetts and John Stout is the MassPIRG transportation advocate.

The post Less driving = better lives appeared first on CommonWealth Beacon.

WHY ARE REPUBLICANS so desperate to ram through a Supreme Court nomination that will impact Americans’ lives for decades?

They’re scared that come November 3 they will lose. That despite their attempts to subvert democracy through false attacks on mail-in voting, felony disenfranchisement of 5.2 million people, and reduction of available voting locations, Americans will reject their unpopular policies and hateful rhetoric.

President Trump and his far-right allies have taken extremism to a level this country has never experienced. We are more polarized than ever before. Instead of taking steps toward bringing us together, Trump and his allies are digging in and driving us further apart. Senate Republicans seem motivated to quickly jam through the illegitimate nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, but when millions of workers and families remain unemployed or can’t make rent because of the pandemic, action to provide them relief is nowhere to be found.

And so Republicans, having already packed the federal judiciary at all levels with right-wing judges, are now attempting to pack the Supreme Court with a right-wing majority that will outlast their viability at the ballot box. They want to steal your input on who will issue rulings on affordable healthcare, LGBTQ rights, reproductive rights, environmental protections, and more.

It’s clear where Judge  Barrett stands on these issues. Her record and statements indicate she would vote to deport Dreamers, to strip LGBTQ couples of their ability to marry, to deny Americans with pre-existing conditions accessible healthcare, to deprive people of the right to make decisions about their own bodies, and to dismantle protections for vulnerable environmental justice communities like East Boston.

But our fight to stop President Trump’s nomination isn’t just about how a Justice Barrett would harm Americans’ life, liberty, and happiness. It’s about a process that should prioritize democratic norms over political expediency and that respects people’s preferences rather than attempting to undermine them.

In 2016, Sen. Mitch McConnell stalled President Obama’s nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court, claiming that an upcoming election meant “the American people should seize the opportunity to weigh in on whom they trust to nominate the next person for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.” Republicans’ hypocrisy is proof that we must do more to protect the Supreme Court from partisan aims. Expanding the court and abolishing the filibuster will strengthen our judiciary, not weaken it.

McConnell is ignoring the precedent that he set. Instead, he now argues that Republican control of the Senate and White House implies a mandate to fill the empty seat.

What better reflects Americans’ preferences: the way they voted in the past or the way they’re voting in the present, right now? The majority of Americans believe the winner of the 2020 election should be the one to appoint the next Supreme Court justice.

The only reason for Republicans to rush an appointment is an expectation that they will not be able to once Americans make their voices heard. And given that votes have begun to be cast and counted, this suggests Republicans know they have already lost the mandate they outwardly claim to have.

We promise to fight for the people of Massachusetts. We will continue fighting against injustices in Boston and across our Commonwealth. We will fight to stop Judge Barrett’s immoral nomination. But if Republicans succeed in packing the court with Judge Barrett, Democrats shouldn’t rest until we abolish the filibuster and add justices to the Supreme Court to re-establish majority rule.

Adding justices is a corrective action Republicans will force Democrats to take should they violate established norms and pursue their own party’s political interests at the expense of democracy. Crocodile tears that expanding the court is anti-democratic are simply attempts to deflect attention from the egregious attempts to skirt due process and forsake justice in Barrett’s nomination.

Restoring balance to a court that has been manipulated through the hypocrisy of McConnell and the Republican Party would validate its integrity. Stopping Republican efforts to circumvent democracy would create a court that safeguards the rights of the people on whose behalf it interprets the law.

Republicans can still respect the American people. They can honor Justice Ruth Ginsburg’s dying wish that she “will not be replaced until a new president is installed.” But if Republicans abrogate their civic duty through this sham process, we cannot and will not stand by.

Edward Markey is the junior US senator for Massachusetts and Lydia Edwards is a Boston city councilor representing District 1.

Markey’s opponent, Republican Kevin O’Connor, adopted a different stance on court packing in an earlier op-ed.

The post If Barrett is confirmed, we’re for packing the court appeared first on CommonWealth Beacon.