Mass. Senate Adopts Expansion Of Dangerousness Law

Senators voted in the early hours Monday morning to expand the list of crimes for which a defendant can be deemed dangerous and detained, in the process imperiling a no-cost prison phone calls measure both branches approved.

After more than an hour of late-night debate, the Senate adopted language filed by the chamber's top Republican that wove a trio of provisions from Gov. Charlie Baker's controversial dangerousness bill into a fiscal year 2023 budget rider that would make phone calls free of costs for prisoners and their families.

The Senate approved the amendment from Minority Leader Bruce Tarr with a 30-8 vote. Twenty-seven Democrats joined the chamber's three Republicans to vote yes, bucking members of Senate President Karen Spilka's leadership team and diverging from their colleagues in the House, who on Saturday roundly rejected Baker's broader proposal without considering any narrower versions.

Sen. Lydia Edwards, a Boston Democrat, described her work with victims of violent crimes and said she herself had to seek a harassment order against someone whom she "would want to know" might be released from custody.

"I'm surprised to say this, but I actually think this is somewhat reasonable and protective," Edwards said. "It's speaking to me and my lived experience."

"There's lots of us that have met with victims. These crimes shock the conscience," added Democrat Sen. John Velis of Westfield. "We would be really remiss if we didn't take this opportunity."

Democrat Sens. Michael Barrett of Lexington, Sonia Chang-Diaz of Boston, Jo Comerford of Northampton, Cynthia Creem of Newton, Jamie Eldridge of Acton, Adam Hinds of Pittsfield, Patricia Jehlen of Somerville and Jason Lewis of Winchester voted against Tarr's amendment.

The vote, which wrapped up shortly after 1:30 a.m., puts lawmakers at risk of failing to steer the free phone calls proposal across the finish line. Representatives voted down Baker's amendment, and it was not immediately clear at the late hour if they would be open to the sections of it the Senate backed.

Creem, the Senate's number-two Democrat, did not give her colleagues an optimistic outlook.

"By voting (for) this amendment, we're likely to make sure prisoners don't have the phone calls we voted they'd be able to have. As we do this today and the hour is late, the House rejected this," Creem said. "There are many prisoners sitting in jail who are unable to speak with their children, their parents, their friends, and this body voted they should have those calls. This late hour, if we vote (for) this, we can be sure they won't have that opportunity."

The language senators backed would allow prosecutors to seek a dangerousness hearing for additional criminal offenses, create a new offense for removing a GPS bracelet, and require any victim to be notified before release of a defendant deemed dangerous.

Tarr carved that down from a slightly broader budget amendment Baker returned to lawmakers, tacking on sections of his standalone dangerousness bill (H 4290) to a budget outside section eliminating communication costs for incarcerated people and their families.

"These are things that make common sense, that are imperative, and that will make a difference to prevent further victimization," the Gloucester Republican said.

Civil rights groups and members of the Black and Latino Legislative Caucus criticized Baker's maneuver, alleging that it would pit survivors of violent crimes who want additional protections in state law against inmates who cannot afford the existing costs to keep in touch with their loved ones.

Barrett, who was first elected to the Legislature in 1979, argued his colleagues were focusing too closely on a handful of harrowing anecdotes that would lead them to "overlegislate just as we did during the Bill Clinton years."

"We are going too far. We will regret this," he said. "This is why too many people wind up in jail. This is why our incarceration rates in this country are the greatest of any democracy on the face of the earth. This is why, because we're going to go too far, we don't have the time, we feel boxed in, we feel the political pressure. We're going to go too far."

It's not clear how the House will respond, but if representatives do not agree to the Senate's additions, it would likely doom the prison phone calls measure and force lawmakers to restart work on the idea when the new term starts in January.

Judiciary Committee Co-chair Rep. Mike Day, who led his panel's vote to send Baker's original bill to study and on Saturday urged his colleagues to reject the governor's budget amendment, could not be reached immediately in the wake of the Senate's vote.