NEWS

VOLUME LXXXIV, ISSUE 10

Tuesday, November 8, 2022

MEDFORD/SOMERVILLE, MASS.

LOCAL

Public safety, immigrants’ rights on the ballot with Question 4

Medford City Hall is pictured on March 12, 2021.

GRACE ROTERMUND / THE TUFTS DAILY

by Aditya Acharya

News Editor

This election day, Massachusetts voters will determine on the fate of a bill that would allow undocumented immigrants to obtain driver’s licenses. On Nov. 8, Question 4 will ask voters to either accept or reject the Work and Family Mobility Act, a state law passed in June which would allow undocumented Massachussetts residents to apply for driver’s licenses, effective July 2023.

State representatives Christine Barber, Patricia Jehlen, Paul Donato, Sean Garballey, Mike Connolly and Erika Uyterhoeven — who represent Somerville, Medford and West Medford — have publicly advocated for a “Yes” vote, which would affirm the Work and Family Mobility Act.

“This was my bill,” Barber told the Daily. “I was a sponsor, worked on it for about four years … It was signed into law in June. The governor actually vetoed it and we overrode the veto in the House and Senate.”

Although the bill passed the Massachusetts State Legislature, the activist group Fair and Secure MA pushed to put the law on the ballot for a referendum. The group’s website claims Question 4 will increase undocumented immigration to the state and increase the likelihood of voter fraud.

Rep. Uyterhoeven, who represents part of Somerville, described

see LICENSE, page 2

UNIVERSITY LOCAL

student groups organize around midterm elections somerville school Committee, city councilors endorse millionaire tax ballot question

by Hannah Cox

Contributing Writer

Leading up to the midterm elections, Tufts political groups have organized across campus, urging their peers to head to the voting booths.

Tufts Democrats has been canvassing for a variety of causes, including “Yes on 1” which would apply a 4% surtax on personal income exceeding $1 million annually, and “Yes on 4” which would allow state residents to obtain driver’s licenses regardless of immigration status.

In addition, Tufts Democrats has been phone banking, holding discussions about the midterms and collaborating with other chapters of college Democrats for their canvassing initiatives. Tufts Republicans declined to comment on their midterms activities.

Mark Lannigan, the president of Tufts Democrats, is optimistic that the Democrats can turn out in substantial numbers on Nov. 8. He points to relatively high early vote totals and an increase in voter participation in recent years.

“What’s really been inspiring has been youth turnout, which we’ve seen increase pretty astronomically since 2016 and even 2018 and 2020,” Lannigan told the Daily. “Youth turnout has always been on the rise, and it’s continuing to be on the rise now.”

Lannigan also notes that emotionally charged issues like abortion provide reasons to be hopeful that people will vote in these midterms.

“What a lot of our membership is concerned about is what would happen if Congress flips to a very radical Republican party that has already said that they would support a national abortion ban [and] that would look into overturning the election,” Lannigan said. “I think the Supreme Court [and] abortion have been really scary issue areas that people have been motivat-

see ORGANIZE, page 2

by Evelyn Altschuler

Executive Newsletter Editor

The Somerville School Committee has unanimously endorsed voting “Yes” on Question 1, a ballot initiative proposing the Fair Share Amendment. If passed, the Fair Share Amendment would apply to Massachusetts residents whose annual household income is above $1 million. The so-called “millionaire’s tax” would impose an additional 4% income tax on income above $1 million.

Raise Up Massachusetts, an organization that pushes for higher wages and expanded social services for the working class, proposed the Fair Share Amendment to the Massachusetts state legislature. The amendment was subsequently approved and added as a ballot question for Massachusetts voters in the upcoming midterm elections.

“For years, the highest-income households in Massachusetts – those in the top 1 percent – have paid a smaller share of their income in state and local taxes than any other income group,” Raise Up Massachusetts states on their website.

According to the Tisch College’s Center for State Policy Analysis, the millionaire’s tax would affect about 0.6% of Massachussetts households. The cSPA predicts the tax would raise about $1.3 billion in 2023. All money raised by the tax would be reserved specifically for public education and the maintenance of roads, bridges and public transportation.

“The Fair Share Amendment would finally move MA towards a more fair tax structure where the very richest top 0.6% pay a 9% rate on all of their income over $1 million per year to fund public

NICOLE GARAY / THE TUFTS DAILY A Somerville ballot drop box is pictured on Powder House Boulevard on Sept. 28, 2020.

see MILLIONAIRES, page 3

FEATURES ARTS OPINION

NEWS

1 FEATURES 4 ARTS & POP CULTURE 9 FUN & GAMES 10 OPINION 11 SPORTS BACK

Chloe Courtney Bohl Editor in Chief

– EDITORIAL –

Delaney Clarke Julia Shannon-Grillo

Managing Editors Ty Blitstein Abigail Vixama

Associate Editors

Emily Thompson

Aaron Gruen Ariana Phillips Madeline Wilson Aditya Acharya Madeleine Aitken Coco Arcand Peri Barest Olivia Field Skyler Goldberg Ella Kamm Maddy Mueller Michael Weiskopf Ava Autry Charlotte Chen Daniel Vos Executive News Editor Deputy News Editors

News Editors

Assistant News Editors

Mark Choi

Sam Dieringer Kaitlyn Wells Owen Bonk Jillian Collins Katie Furey Kendall Roberts Sam Russo Kate Seklir Tobias Fu Isabelle Kaminsky Maya Katz Layla Kennington Elizabeth Zacks Executive Features Editor Deputy Features Editors

Features Editors

Assistant Features Editors

Jack Clohisy

RaiAnn Bu Henry Chandonnet Ellie Lester Siavash Raissi Carl Svahn Emmy Wenstrup Blake Anderson Alexis Enderle Odessa Gaines Ryan Fairfield Nate Hall

Reya Kumar

Daniel Chung Idil Kolabas Gian Luca Di Lenardo Henry Murray Kristin Shiuey

Alexander Janoff

Brendan Hartnett Makenna Law Julian Perry Faye Thijssen Marianna Schantz

Keila McCabe

Arielle Weinstein Oliver Fox Ethan Grubelich Arnav Sacheti Bharat Singh Sam Dieringer Henry Gorelik Timothy Valk Michael Wallace-Bruce Executive Arts Editor Arts Editors

Assistant Arts Editors

Executive Opinion Editor Deputy Opinion Editor Opinion Editors

Editorial Editor Editorialists

Executive Sports Editor Deputy Sports Editor Sports Editors

Assistant Sports Editors

Ethan Steinberg Investigative Editor

Flora Meng

Peri Barest Avery Hanna Yanqing Huang Ian Lau Emilia Nathan Sarah Sandlow Chris Tomo Cindy Zhang Executive Science Editor Science Editors

Aaron Klein Executive Audio Producer

Natalie Brownsell Ian Lau

Executive Photo Editors

Julia Carpi Executive Video Editor

Odessa Gaines

Avery Hanna

Intentionality & Inclusivity Committee Chairs

Skyler Goldberg Education Committee Chair

Madeleine Aitken Mariel Priven

Social Committee Chairs

– PRODUCTION –

Charlene Tsai

Production Director

Maddy Noah Mike Kourkoulakos

Paavani Agrawal Max Antonini Brooke Chomko Alexa Hopwood Olivia Leviss Meghna Singha Olivia White Executive Layout Editors

Layout Editors

Avril Lynch Camilla Samuel

Executive Graphics Editors

Rachel Liu Christopher Vergos

Aedan Brown Sophie Dorf-Kamienny Marlee Stout Lucy Belknap Julieta Grané Merry Jiao George McGurkin Maddy Mueller Isabel Overby Executive Copy Editors

Copy Editors

Assistant Copy Editors

Liz Buehl Caroline Vandis

Executive Social Media Managers Evelyn Altschuler Executive Newsletter Editor

– BUSINESS –

Sam Berman

Business Director

Michelle Alizada Izzy Francis Erika Kim Ryan Sorbi

Kendall Roberts Kate Seklir

Ad Managers

Receivables Manager

Alumni Liaisons

LICENSE

continued from page 1 the overwhelming support for a “Yes” vote from her constituents.

“I have knocked thousands of doors and spoken with hundreds of my constituents about this ballot question, I have yet to meet a constituent planning to vote no on Question 4,” she wrote in an email to the Daily.

Barber explained that the main surprise for Massachusetts voters was that the question was put on the ballot.

“People don’t know it’s on the ballot because it was a last-minute addition,” Barber said. “Once people know it’s on the ballot, they are supportive, especially with hearing about it from a public safety lens.”

A recent UMass Amherst/WCVB poll found that 51% of voters plan to vote “Yes” on Question 4, with 39% planning to vote “No” and 10% undecided.

Among those opposed to the bill is Republican gubernatorial candidate Geoff Diehl; his opponent, Maura Healey, supports the bill.

In an op-ed for The Somerville Times, Barber, Jehlen, Donato, Garballey, Connolly and Uyterhoeven, underscored the law’s public safety importance and the support it has garnered from local law enforcement.

“Yes on 4 has overwhelming support from law enforcement, including Somerville and Medford Chiefs of Police, Middlesex District Attorney Marian Ryan and Sheriff Peter Koutoujian,” they wrote in the op-ed. “They understand that our roads are safer with more licensed drivers … ensuring that every Massachusetts driver has fulfilled our state’s testing, training, and insurance requirements.”

The op-ed cites the adoption of similar laws by 16 other states, including Connecticut, New York and Vermont.

“We’ve seen impressive results, including a 9% decrease in hit and run accidents in Connecticut, and an 80% decrease in the rate of uninsured drivers in Utah,” the op-ed states. “With more insured drivers on the road, the cost of auto insurance drops for all drivers.”

In addition to improvements in public safety, the op-ed cites an estimated expansion of the state economy by $11 million in the first three years of the law’s implementation from taxes and license fees, plus vehicle registration and inspection.

Barber noted that since the law would not go into effect until next year, there is time to plan some of the logistics of its implementation. “People don’t actually start getting their licenses until July of 2023 and that’s because there are things the [Registry of Motor Vehicles] has to do to get ready,” she said.

Mark Lannigan, president of Tufts Democrats and a member of the Massachusetts Democratic State Committee, said Question 4 pertains to immigrant justice. He noted the recent transport of migrants to Martha’s Vineyard by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is an example of the increased national attention to immigrants’ rights issues.

“There’s a lot of bureaucratic red tape that people have to go through all the time that needs forms of ID, and it is a more valid form of ID … to have a driver’s license,” Lannigan said. “People need to get places. They should be able to have access to a car if they need one.”

Rep. Barber cited beliefs about federal immigration policy as a primary reason for opposition to a “Yes” vote.

“There are some who talk about federal immigration policy, and what I say to that is this isn’t about [that],” Barber said. “There’s lots of challenges with federal immigration policy, [but] this is really about the state’s role in who drives and who doesn’t. That’s a state policy.”

The Center for State Policy Analysis at the Jonathan M. Tisch College of Civic Life released a report in October on the potential impacts and implications of Question 4. The report, written by cSPA’s Executive Director Evan Horowitz, concluded that passing the ballot question could increase the number of law-abiding drivers and “offer some new legitimacy to unauthorized immigrants.” However, the law could also pose a risk to undocumented immigrants if a federal administration seeks RMV records in an effort to track them down.

“Question 4 lets voters decide where driver’s licenses fit in this broader picture, weighing issues like the safety of our transportation system and the impact on immigrants’ daily lives,” the cSPA report states.

Tufts campus abuzz with student organizers

ORGANIZE

continued from page 1 ed by to make sure [Democrats] maintain a majority.”

Tufts J Street U, which supports a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine, has endorsed a slate of anti-occupation candidates for the midterms and hosted phone and text banks to garner support for their candidates.

Junior Violet Kopp, a co-chair of Tufts J Street U, urged students to vote in the midterms.

“Elections can feel really draining [and] removed and bureaucratic and frustrating, but think about abortion rights,” Kopp said in an interview with the Daily. “This country is looking really dangerous right now, and it could really easily flip and take a turn in the direction that we don’t want it to go down. If your vote is one thing that even might affect [the outcome], you might as well do it.”

J Street U’s candidate slate, titled “4-in-4,” highlights their goal to elect four candidates in the four weeks before the election. According to Kopp, J Street took each candidates’ entire agenda into consideration during the section process.

“We support these candidates as [an] anti-occupation club because they’re anti-occupation, but they’re also pro-abortion and pro-gun control and they believe in climate justice,” Kopp said. “For so many people, there’s something to get behind about these candidates.”

Kopp elaborated on J Street’s holistic evaluation of candidates.

“While our focus is IsraelPalestine, we recognize the intersectionality of issues and know that … the way that we do peaceful and just and demilitarized diplomacy is so related to gun violence prevention, and to ending police brutality and to climate justice,” Kopp said.

Neelan Martin, a sophomore member of Tufts Young Democratic Socialists of America, expressed enthusiasm about YDSA’s organizing efforts with a focus on local issues.

Martin pointed out that while this is YDSA’s first full year as a TCU recognized club, it has kicked off a free laundry for Tufts campaign and collaborated with Defund Somerville Police Department, Mutual Aid for Medford and Somerville and have advocated for “Yes on 1” in Massachusetts.

Tufts ACTION, a student-run group that promotes civic action in greater Boston, hosted a letter-writing event on Oct. 21 in which they partnered with Vote Forward to comprise a list of voters in swing states who are at risk of not voting and wrote letters encouraging them to vote.

Sophomore Alison Cedarbaum and senior Danielle Piccoli detailed ACTION’s nonpartisan efforts to educate future voters who are too young to vote in these elections, while highlighting the importance of immediate engagement for the midterms just around the corner.

“[We’re] very focused around civic empowerment and making sure that both young people in the Tufts community, as well as people in the broader surrounding community who will be able to vote in a few years … have other ways of making their voices heard,” Cedarbaum said.

JumboVote has been tabling in the Campus Center to help students register to vote and provide voting information to mitigate barriers to voting in these upcoming midterms. Junior Safi Chalfin-Smith, a co-chair of JumboVote, detailed how JumboVote is working to increase voter turnout.

“I think [the midterms are] missing in the conversation on campus, especially compared to 2020,” Chalfin-Smith said. “[In 2020], everyone was talking about the election, whereas now, I don’t think it’s as big of a topic. … Once we say, ‘There is an election, this is what’s going to be on the ballot, and this is why it’s important,’ people are definitely receptive.”

JumboVote will be offering rides to polling stations from the campus center on election day in addition to hosting an election watch party with other Tisch-affiliated groups.

BOWIE BELLO / THE TUFTS DAILY An informational postcard and packet about the 2022 midterm elections are pictured in Barnum Hall, home of the Jonathan M. Tisch College of Civic Life, on Oct. 30.

Proposed Fair Share Amendment would raise funds for infrastructure, education

MILLIONAIRES

continued from page 1 education and transportation,” Medford City Councilor Zac Bears wrote in an email to the Daily

In contrast, Eitan Hersh, an associate professor of political science at Tufts, voiced doubts that the state would be able to spend the money in an effective manner.

“Many people see the problems in transit and education as not problems that money can easily solve,” Hersh wrote in an email to the Daily.

Somerville City Councilor Ben Ewen-Campen said that the millionaire’s tax would help reduce inequality in Massachusetts.

“Passing this amendment would be the crowning achievement of decades of progressive activism in Massachusetts,” Ewen-Campen wrote in an email to the Daily. “Our state is a wealthy one, and we do very well by wealthy residents – the problem is inequality, and the gap between the government serves the rich versus everyone else. The way to fix this is to tax the very wealthy in order to lift up the 99%, and this amendment does just that.”

Bears believes that voting “Yes” on Question 1 would have a positive impact on both local and state finances.

“Cities and towns need more funding for public schools, transit, and road repairs, and the YES on 1 Fair Share Amendment is the fairest way possible to raise those funds,” Bears wrote.

Bears, Ewen-Campen and Somerville City Councilor Matthew McLaughlin view the amendment as critical to ensuring that necessary local initiatives are well-funded and public transportation is efficient and safe.

“I support the Fair Share Amendment because Massachusetts needs revenue to repair our crumbling infrastructure and fund quality public education,” McLaughlin wrote in an email to the Daily.

To McLaughlin, who represents the neighborhood of East Somerville, poor infrastructure is extremely personal to him and his community.

“In the last few months, we had an Orange Line train catch on fire, which caused residents to leap from the train, risking their lives,” he wrote. “The entire Orange Line was shut down for almost a month because of decades of neglect. I believe Question 1 will provide a much needed stream of revenue to address this longstanding problem.”

Ewen-Campen wrote that the City of Somerville “would directly benefit from desperately needed additional revenue for public transit, safe street initiatives, and our public schools.”

Bears agreed with this sentiment.

“The Fair Share Amendment is likely to have a highly positive impact on state aid that helps support Medford’s city budget,” he wrote.

Ewen-Campen called for voters to vote “Yes” on Question 1.

“Corporate interests are pouring money into aggressive disinformation campaigns to attack the Fair Share Amendment, so it is critical that we turn out to vote Yes on 1,” he wrote.

Despite support from progressives, there is opposition to the amendment. Hersh explained the arguments against the proposed tax.

“As the law is written, it might have unintended consequences and affect more people than the targeted group,” Hersh wrote. “We’re losing population and business to states like Texas and Florida. If the tax burden is too high on the wealthy, the concern is that we’ll lose out in economic competitiveness to other states. That will have downstream consequences for everyone.”

UNIVERSITY

department of Political science hosts panel ahead of November elections

by Amelia Colafati

Staff Writer

Editor’s note: Emily Thompson is the Executive News Editor of The Tufts Daily. Thompson was not involved in the writing or editing of this article.

On Nov. 2, the Tufts Political Science department hosted a panel discussion on the upcoming midterm election. The discussion, titled “What to Look for on Election Night: A Political Science Pre-Election Panel Discussion,” included Tufts political science Professors Deborah Schildkraut and Brian Schaffner, Boston College political science Professor Masha Krupenkin and Tufts Cooperation and InnoVation in Citizenship club Co-President Magali Ortiz.

The panel was chaired by junior Emily Thompson, who began the night by noting that this election is the first in which the response to COVID-19 is not a major part of candidates’ platforms. Thompson asked about the impact of this societal change on voter turnout.

Krupenkin responded by speaking about the increased popularity of voting by mail.

“A lot of people who have been elected today … for the Republican party … have been very benefited by the robust vote-by-mail infrastructure,” Krupenkin said.

Thompson then asked about political violence amid the recent attack on Paul Pelosi, husband of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

Schaffner spoke of the divisions between Republicans and Democrats, and how these divisions are most visible in the differences of key issues that both parties are advocating for. Schaffner said Republicans focused on issues surrounding the economy, such as inflation, while Democrats focused on recent attacks on democratic processes.

Schildkraut added that it is hard to gauge people’s views of political violence.

“We haven’t polled on this very much for very long,” Schildkraut said. “We started asking about how much we cared about political violence once there [was] political violence. … If you ask people, ‘How important is it that there’s this violence?’ and you say 48% say yes — is that a lot? A little? Is it changing? We don’t know, because we’re only asking about it now.”

Asked about the effects of inflation and the health of the economy on voters’ decision-making processes, Schildkraut explained the impact of the economy on the incumbent party.

“At the presidential level, … if the economy is doing well, it is assumed to benefit the incumbent or the incumbent’s party,” Schildkraut said. “If the economy is doing poorly, the challenger will try to make the election be about the economy.”

Thompson asked whether political action the week before Nov. 8 could determine the outcome of the election. Schaffner suggested that the week before the election may have minimal effects on its outcome, citing a national survey which revealed only a low percentage of voters are undecided on whom they will vote for.

Krupenkin offered a different perspective, referencing the letter from James Comey to Congress in 2016 that may have shifted the balance in the election from Hillary Clinton to Donald Trump, suggesting that late-in-the-game actions can have large impacts.

Schildkraut added that she believed that voter mobilization — actions like knocking on doors, calling people and encouraging them to vote — can matter.

“One other late thing that I think can matter is mobilization,” Schildkraut said. “Encouragement to vote … [for example] let me give you a ride to the polls, … and so it’s important to [focus on] not dropping the ball on that sort of stuff later in the game.”

Thompson then asked whether we should be able to trust the polls this election.

Schaffner responded that pollsters have been having a hard time producing accurate representations of the American voting populace because response rates have been low. He also added that even given the uncertainty, the election outlook looks poor for Democrats.

“Even if Democrats won the generic House ballot, … they would still probably lose about 14 seats in the House,” Schaffner said.

He later added that he believes President Biden can win again if he runs in 2024.

“If I were to give advice to the Democratic party, I would probably say: run the incumbent [in 2024],” Schaffner said. “Democrats were always going to lose seats in [this] election … because most people are going to vote Democratic or Republican, and the ones in the middle … are just reacting to what’s happened in the last few years.” Packard Hall, home of the political science department, is pictured on Nov. 4.