Massachusetts Question 1, Authorization of State Auditor to Audit General Court Initiative (2024)

Massachusetts Question 1
Election date November 5, 2024
Topic State legislatures measures and Government accountability
Status a Approved
Type State statute	Origin Citizens

Massachusetts Question 1, the Authorization of State Auditor to Audit General Court Initiative, was on the ballot in Massachusetts as an indirect initiated state statute on November 5, 2024. The ballot measure was approved.

A "yes" vote supported explicitly authorizing the state auditor to audit the accounts, programs, activities, and functions of all departments, offices, commissions, institutions, and activities of the state legislature and any authorities or districts created by the state legislature.

A "no" vote opposed explicitly authorizing the state auditor to audit the accounts, programs, activities, and functions of all departments, offices, commissions, institutions, and activities of the state legislature and any authorities or districts created by the state legislature.

Election results

Massachusetts Question 1
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		2,326,932	71.57%
No		924,294	28.43%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Overview

What did Question 1 authorize the state auditor to do?

See also: Text of measure

Question 1 added a new section to state law authorizing the state auditor to audit the accounts, programs, activities, functions of all departments, offices, commissions, institutions, and activities of the state legislature and any authorities or districts created by the state legislature. The state auditor and employees of the state auditor department were also given access to accounts, books, documents, vouchers, and other records relating to the scope of the audit. Tax returns were excluded from state auditor access.

As of 2024, the state auditor was not authorized to audit the state legislature without its consent.

Who supported and opposed Question 1?

See also: Support and Opposition

Committee for Transparent Democracy led the campaign in support of Question 1. The initiative was endorsed by State Auditor Diana DiZoglio (D), Democratic Party of Massachusetts, and Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance. State Auditor Diana DiZoglio (D), said, "Certain legislative leaders who hold the keys to the books, and the information we’re seeking, are twisting and manipulating the [state] Constitution and the current statute. This is an effort to make it crystal clear that the Legislature is mandated to receive an audit — since those leaders seem to be confused about what the law says ... We’re not doing anything that doesn’t occur in every other state entity ... Folks will have to wonder what they are hiding if they are not complying with an audit that every other state entity complies with."

Jerold Duquette, professor of political science at Central Connecticut State University, wrote the opposition argument in the voter's guide, which said, "A legislative audit conducted by the State Auditor, who is an executive branch official, without the Legislature’s consent would violate the separation of powers and legislative supremacy described in and required by the Massachusetts Constitution. ... If enacted Question 1 would make the State Auditor into a political actor and a potentially influential participant in the legislative process, two roles that would clearly compromise. the State Auditor’s ability to carry out her fundamental constitutional duty to conduct credible, independent, objective, and non-partisan audits of state government departments and programs."

Aftermath

In August 2025, Massachusetts State Auditor Diana DiZoglio hired a law firm to sue the state legislature due to their failure to comply with Question 1. Members of the state legislature have argued that Question 1 violates the separation of powers written in the state constitution.

In response to the lawsuit, the Massachusetts Attorney General's Office released a statement stating, "State law is clear. Any lawful litigation brought by state officials or state entities must be authorized by the Attorney General's office. Any unauthorized litigation by the auditor will be dismissed immediately."

DiZoglio released a statement on social media, stating, "We have a right to an attorney and have secured a law firm to sue the Legislature since AG (Andrea) Campbell is opposed to the audit. Even though this move frees the Attorney General from having to enforce the law herself—that’s not enough. The Attorney General is working to block us and seeking to ensure the courts immediately dismiss our case—so that (House Speaker) Ron Mariano can forever break the law that 72% of the Commonwealth voted for. Please call the Attorney General and tell her to approve litigation and to stop working with the Legislature behind the scenes to block us from accessing the courts. We the people have a right to an attorney."

Text of measure

Ballot question

The ballot question was as follows:

“

Do you approve of a law summarized below, on which no vote was taken by the Senate or the House of Representatives before May 1, 2024?

”

Ballot summary

The final ballot summary for Question 1 was as follows.

“

This proposed law would specify that the State Auditor has the authority to audit the Legislature.

”

Full text

The full text of the ballot measure is below:

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2024

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The secretary of state wrote the ballot language for this measure.

The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 11, and the FRE is 59. The word count for the ballot title is 24.

The FKGL for the ballot summary is grade level 12, and the FRE is 37. The word count for the ballot summary is 16.

Support

The Committee for Transparent Democracy, also known as Audit the Legislature, led the campaign in support of Question 1.

Supporters

Officials

• State Auditor Diana DiZoglio (D)

Political Parties

• Democratic Party of Massachusetts

Organizations

• Act on Mass
• Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance
• Our Revolution Massachusetts
• Progressive Massachusetts

Arguments

• State Auditor Diana DiZoglio (D): "Certain legislative leaders who hold the keys to the books, and the information we’re seeking, are twisting and manipulating the [state] Constitution and the current statute. This is an effort to make it crystal clear that the Legislature is mandated to receive an audit — since those leaders seem to be confused about what the law says ... We’re not doing anything that doesn’t occur in every other state entity ... Folks will have to wonder what they are hiding if they are not complying with an audit that every other state entity complies with."
• Neil Morrison, treasurer for Committee for Transparent Democracy: "The State Auditor is independently elected by the people of Massachusetts to audit every state entity to help make government work better. The State Legislature is the only state entity refusing to be audited by the State Auditor’s office. Legislative leaders claim it is sufficient for the Legislature to conduct audits of itself through a procured private vendor. However, the Massachusetts Legislature is continuously ranked as one of the least effective, least transparent legislatures in America and is one of only four legislatures that exempts itself from public records laws."

Opposition

Ballotpedia did not locate a campaign in opposition to the ballot measure.

Opponents

Former Officials

• Former State Auditor Suzanne Bump (D)

Arguments

• Jerold Duquette, Professor of Political Science at Central Connecticut State University: "A legislative audit conducted by the State Auditor, who is an executive branch official, without the Legislature’s consent would violate the separation of powers and legislative supremacy described in and required by the Massachusetts Constitution. ... If enacted Question 1 would make the State Auditor into a political actor and a potentially influential participant in the legislative process, two roles that would clearly compromise. the State Auditor’s ability to carry out her fundamental constitutional duty to conduct credible, independent, objective, and non-partisan audits of state government departments and programs."

Campaign finance

The campaign finance information on this page reflects the most recent scheduled reports that Ballotpedia has processed, which covered through December 31, 2024.

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Massachusetts ballot measures

One committee registered in support of Question 1—Committee for Transparent Democracy.

	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Support	$418,713.70	$22,123.44	$440,837.14	$414,807.97	$436,931.41
Oppose	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
Total	$418,713.70	$22,123.44	$440,837.14	$414,807.97	$436,931.41

Support

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committee in support of the ballot measure.

Committees in support of Question 1
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Committee for Transparent Democracy	$418,713.70	$22,123.44	$440,837.14	$414,807.97	$436,931.41
Total	$418,713.70	$22,123.44	$440,837.14	$414,807.97	$436,931.41

Donors

The following table shows the top donors to the committee registered in support of the ballot measure.

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
Diana Dizoglio	$105,000.00	$0.00	$105,000.00
EAB Business Trust	$75,000.00	$0.00	$75,000.00
Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, Inc.	$0.00	$21,783.63	$21,783.63
Robert May	$20,000.00	$0.00	$20,000.00
David Diantonio	$10,000.00	$0.00	$10,000.00

Media editorials

See also: 2024 ballot measure media endorsements

Support

The following media editorial boards published an editorial supporting the ballot measure:

• Boston Globe Editorial Board: "Question 1 on the November ballot, which would specifically allow the state auditor to audit the Legislature and its accounts, won’t solve all of those problems. It isn’t a magic wand. But it sure wouldn’t hurt to shine a little light in at least some of those dark corners the Legislature has created for itself. At a time when the Legislature has grown ever more secretive in the way it conducts its business — the public’s business, let’s not forget — a yes vote on Question 1 is simply the right thing to do."
• Sentinel & Enterprise Editorial Board: "If passed, this question would allow State Auditor Diana DiZoglio’s office to delve into some operational aspects of the Legislature, which currently isn’t subject to such scrutiny. DiZoglio, a Methuen Democrat, backed this initiative after Attorney General Andrea Campbell thwarted her attempt to directly exercise this authority through her office. ... We wholeheartedly agree that some accounting of how the Legislature operates is long overdue."

Opposition

The following media editorial boards published an editorial opposing the ballot measure:

You can share campaign information or arguments, along with source links for this information, at editor@ballotpedia.org.

Polls

See also: 2024 ballot measure polls

Are you aware of a poll on this ballot measure that should be included below? You can share ballot measure polls, along with source links, with us at editor@ballotpedia.org.

Massachusetts Question 1, Authorization of State Auditor to Audit General Court Initiative (2024)
Poll	Dates	Sample size	Margin of error	Support	Oppose	Undecided

Emerson College Polling/WHDH	10/24/2024-10/26/2024	1,000 RV	± 3.0%	67%	13%	20%
	Question: "Would you vote yes or no on Massachusetts Question 1, which expressly authorizes the State Auditor to audit the Massachusetts Legislature?"

University of Massachusetts Amherst/WCVB	10/03/2024-10/10/2024	700 RV	± 4.8%	63%	11%	26%
	Question: "Question 1 - would specify that the State Auditor has the authority to audit the legislature."

WBUR & CommonWealth Beacon Poll	09/12/2024-09/18/2024	800 LV	± 4.1%	70%	8%	22%
	Question: "There will be a question on the November 2024 ballot in Massachusetts regarding auditing the state legislature. A yes vote would specify that the State Auditor has the authority to audit the State Legislature. A no vote would make no change to existing law. If the election were held today, how would you vote on this proposal?"

Emerson College Polling/ Pioneer Institute	8/15/2024-8/17/2024	1,000 RV	± 3.0%	80%	6%	14%
	Question: "The job of the State Auditor is to audit state agencies, report on how well they are functioning and make recommendations for improvement. In Massachusetts, the legislature is exempt from these audits. The current State Auditor is seeking to gain the ability to audit the legislature. Do you approve of this?"

Note: LV is likely voters, RV is registered voters, and EV is eligible voters.

Background

Massachusetts Auditor of the Commonwealth

See also: Massachusetts Auditor of the Commonwealth

The Massachusetts State Auditor is a state executive position in the Massachusetts state government. The auditor's office is responsible for conducting financial, performance and technical audits of state programs, departments, agencies and other uses of public money. According to Article XVII of the Massachusetts Constitution, an executive officer of the commonwealth must "have been an inhabitant of this commonwealth five years next preceding his election or appointment."

Attorney General Andrea Campbell (D) letter to State Auditor Diana DiZoglio (D) on authority to audit state legislature

On November 2, 2023, Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell (D) issued a letter to State Auditor Diana DiZoglio (D), who is a primary sponsor of Question 1, in response to the state auditor asking the attorney general to recognize the office's authority to audit the state legislature despite its objection. Attorney General Campbell determined that the state auditor did not have the authority to audit the state legislature despite its objection. She wrote that the statute that authorizes the state auditor to audit state programs, departments, and agencies does not include the legislative branch.

State auditors

See also: Auditor (state executive office)

State auditors exist as a statewide position in 44 states. A total of 28 states specify an auditor's position in their state constitutions; of these, 20 are elected and eight are appointed. Auditors serve an oversight function, carrying out audits and investigations of other state agencies. Auditors are also usually the officers who handle concerns of fraud and waste brought forward by citizens.

Terms of office range from four to 10 years and may be indefinite, served at the pleasure of the appointing body. In instances where the auditor is an appointee, an appointment is usually done through some form of nomination in a subcommittee of the legislature and a confirmatory vote before the General Assembly.

Elected vs. appointed

While most states that do have a statewide governmental auditor position authorize the governor to appoint an individual to the office, there are at least 24 others who have opted to have public voters select these officeholders. These states include: Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming.

Two states—New York and Tennessee—do not have an official auditor. Audit functions in these states mostly fall to the state comptroller.

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in Massachusetts

The state process

In Massachusetts, the number of signatures required to qualify an indirect initiated state statute for the ballot is equal to 3.5 percent of the votes cast for governor in the most recent gubernatorial election. No more than one-quarter of the verified signatures on any petition can come from a single county. The process for initiated state statutes in Massachusetts is indirect, which means the legislature has a chance to approve initiatives with successful petitions directly without the measure going to the voters. A first round of signatures equal to 3 percent of the votes cast for governor is required to put an initiative before the legislature. A second round of signatures equal to 0.5 percent of the votes cast for governor in the last election is required to put the measure on the ballot if the legislature rejects or declines to act on a proposed initiated statute. Signatures for initiated statutes in Massachusetts are collected in two circulation periods. The first period runs from the third Wednesday in September to two weeks prior to the first Wednesday in December, a period of nine weeks. If the proposed law is not adopted by the first Wednesday of May, petitioners then have until the first Wednesday of July (eight weeks) to request additional petition forms and submit the second round of signatures.

The requirements to get an initiated state statute certified for the 2024 ballot:

• Signatures required (first round): 74,574 signatures
• Signatures required (second round): 12,429 signatures
• Deadline (first round): The deadline to submit the first round of signatures to the secretary of state was December 6, 2023. Signatures needed to be submitted to local registrars by November 22, 2023.
• Deadline (second round): The deadline to submit the second round of signatures was July 3, 2024.

If enough signatures are submitted in the first round, the legislature must act on a successful petition by the first Wednesday of May. The measure only goes on the ballot if the legislature does not pass it and if the second round of signatures is successfully collected.

Sponsors of the measure hired Signature Drive to collect signatures for the petition to qualify this measure for the ballot. A total of $340,000.00 was spent to collect the 87,003 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a total cost per required signature (CPRS) of $3.91.

Details about this initiative

• The initiative was filed in August 2023 by Doug Rubin.
• On September 6, 2023, the initiative was cleared for signature gathering.
• On November 22, 2023, Politico reported that the campaign had submitted signatures to local registrars.
• On January 3, 2024, the secretary of state reported that the campaign filed 94,404 valid signatures.
• The state legislature did not pass the initiative by the May 1 deadline. The campaign was cleared to gather a second round of signatures.
• The campaign submitted 21,551 valid signatures for the second round by the deadline.
• On July 10, the secretary of state announced that the campaign had qualified for the ballot.

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in Massachusetts

See below to learn more about current voter registration rules, identification requirements, and poll times in Massachusetts.

How to vote in Massachusetts

Poll times

In Massachusetts, most polling places are open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. However, municipalities may open their polls as early as 5:45 a.m. An individual who is in line at the time polls close must be allowed to vote.

Registration

Check your voter registration status here.

To vote in Massachusetts, one must be a United States citizen, a resident of Massachusetts, and at least 18 years old on or before Election Day.

The deadline for registration is 10 days prior to the election. A voter can register online, by mail, or in person at any registration office or the Registry of Motor Vehicles. A form of identification is required to register. The following are acceptable forms of identification:

• Valid driver's license
• State-issued identification card
• Current utility bill
• Bank statement
• Paystub
• Government-issued check
• Any other government document displaying the voter's name and address

Automatic registration

Massachusetts automatically registers eligible individuals to vote through the Department of Motor Vehicles, division of medical assistance, health insurance connector authority, and other agencies that collect what state law defines as reliable citizenship information.

Online registration

See also: Online voter registration

Massachusetts has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website.

Same-day registration

Massachusetts does not allow same-day voter registration.

Residency requirements

To register to vote in Massachusetts, you must be a resident of the state. State law does not specify a length of time for which you must have been a resident to be eligible.

Verification of citizenship

See also: Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States

Massachusetts does not require proof of citizenship for voter registration. An individual must attest that they are a U.S. citizen when registering to vote. According to the state's voter registration application, the penalty for an illegal registration is a "fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than five years or both."

All 49 states with voter registration systems require applicants to declare that they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in state and federal elections, under penalty of perjury or other punishment. Seven states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Wyoming — have laws requiring verification of citizenship at the time of voter registration, whether in effect or not. In three states — California, Maryland, and Vermont — at least one local jurisdiction allows noncitizens to vote in some local elections. Noncitizens registering to vote in those elections must complete a voter registration application provided by the local jurisdiction and are not eligible to register as state or federal voters.

Verifying your registration

The Elections and Voting page, run by the Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth office, allows residents to check their voter registration status online.

Voter ID requirements

Massachusetts does not require voters to present identification (ID) while voting, in most cases.

However, voters will be asked to show ID in the following circumstances:

“

You are voting for the first time in Massachusetts in a federal election; You are an inactive voter; You are casting a provisional or challenged ballot; The poll worker has a reasonable suspicion that leads them to request identification.

”

The following list of accepted ID was current as of August 2024:

• A driver's license
• A state ID card
• A recent utility bill
• A rent receipt or lease.
• A copy of a voter registration affidavit
• A letter from a school dormitory or housing office
• Any other printed identification which contains your name and address

Click here for the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts' page on accepted ID to ensure you have the most current information.

“

Acceptable identification must include your name and the address at which you are registered to vote. Examples of acceptable identification include: a driver's license, state-issued ID card, recent utility bill, rent receipt, lease, a copy of a voter registration affidavit, or any other printed identification which contains the voter's name and address.

”

See also

2024 measures

• 2024 ballot measures
• State legislatures measures on the ballot
• Government accountability on the ballot
• 2024 petition deadlines

Massachusetts

• Massachusetts ballot measures
• Massachusetts initiative laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls
• Ballot measure signature costs

External links

• #23-34