Enforcing the Will of the People – Mandating a Full Audit of the Massachusetts Legislature

As a Republican candidate for State Senate in the First Bristol and Plymouth District, I am committed to upholding the rule of law, promoting transparency in government, and ensuring that taxpayer dollars are used responsibly and efficiently. One of the most pressing issues facing our Commonwealth today is the Massachusetts Legislature's refusal to comply with a clear mandate from the voters: the requirement for an independent audit of legislative operations. This mandate comes directly from Question 1 on the 2024 ballot, which was overwhelmingly approved (72%) by Massachusetts citizens. I strongly support enforcing this law through a comprehensive audit, and I pledge to fight for its implementation if elected. In contrast, my opponent, incumbent Senator Michael Rodrigues, is on record opposing efforts to allow such oversight, prioritizing the status quo over accountability to the people we serve.

Background on the Referendum and Its Legal Mandate

In November 2024, Massachusetts voters decisively passed Question 1, a citizen-initiated referendum that amended state law to explicitly authorize the State Auditor to conduct performance audits of the General Court (the Massachusetts House and Senate). This measure was not a suggestion or advisory opinion—it became binding law upon passage, empowering Auditor Diana DiZoglio (or her successors) to review legislative practices, expenditures, and operations for efficiency, effectiveness, and compliance with ethical standards.

The referendum addressed a long-standing gap in oversight: while executive agencies and local governments are routinely audited, the Legislature had historically shielded itself from similar scrutiny, claiming immunity under separation of powers. Question 1 rejected this exemption, affirming that no branch of government is above accountability. With 72% voter approval statewide—including strong support in our district—this law reflects the collective will of the people to demand better governance.

Yet, despite this clear directive, legislative leaders in both the House and Senate have stonewalled the Auditor's office, refusing access to records and facilities necessary for the audit to proceed. This defiance not only undermines democracy but also violates the spirit and letter of the law we all swear to uphold.

Why an Audit is Essential: Transparency, Accountability, and Fiscal Responsibility

An independent audit of the Legislature is not just a legal requirement—it's a moral and practical imperative for restoring trust in our institutions. Here's why I believe it must happen without further delay:

1. Upholding the Rule of Law and Voter Sovereignty

When citizens pass a referendum, it becomes law. Ignoring it sets a dangerous precedent, eroding the foundational principle that government derives its power from the consent of the governed. As a State Senator, I would introduce or co-sponsor legislation to enforce compliance, including measures to compel document production and impose penalties for obstruction. We cannot allow elected officials to pick and choose which laws they follow—especially when those laws were enacted directly by the voters.

2. Promoting Transparency in a Time of Distrust

Public confidence in government is at historic lows, fueled by perceptions of insider dealings and wasteful spending. An audit would shine a light on opaque practices, such as how legislative budgets are allocated, the use of per diems and travel reimbursements, hiring and promotion processes, and compliance with ethics rules. For instance, revelations from past partial reviews have highlighted issues like unchecked expense accounts and potential conflicts of interest. By supporting a full audit, we can identify and eliminate inefficiencies, ensuring that every dollar from hardworking taxpayers in Fall River, Somerset, Westport, and beyond is spent wisely.

3. Ensuring Fiscal Responsibility and Efficiency

Massachusetts faces significant fiscal challenges, including rising costs for education, healthcare, and infrastructure. The Legislature controls a budget exceeding $50 billion annually, yet its own operations—totaling hundreds of millions in administrative costs—escape routine scrutiny.

An audit could uncover savings through streamlined processes, reduced duplication, and better resource allocation. As a Republican, I align this with core conservative values: limited government, fiscal conservatism, and accountability. Why should the Legislature exempt itself from the same standards applied to other branches? An audit isn't about partisanship; it's about good governance that benefits all residents, regardless of political affiliation.

4. Addressing Ethical Concerns and Preventing Abuse

Without oversight, risks of misconduct increase. Historical examples in other states show how unaudited legislatures can lead to scandals involving misuse of funds or favoritism. In Massachusetts, concerns have been raised about "leadership accounts," remote work policies during sessions, and the handling of public records requests. An independent audit by the State Auditor's office—staffed by nonpartisan professionals—would evaluate these areas objectively, recommending reforms to prevent abuse and enhance ethical standards. This is particularly vital in our district, where working families deserve representatives who prioritize integrity over self-preservation.

5. Learning from National Best Practices

Many states, including California and New York, subject their legislatures to regular audits, leading to improved operations and public trust. Massachusetts should join them, not lag behind. An audit could also benchmark our Legislature against peers, identifying innovative ways to modernize, such as adopting technology for better constituent services or reducing bureaucratic red tape.

Contrasting Positions: My Commitment vs. the Incumbent's Opposition

My opponent, Senator Michael Rodrigues, has consistently opposed allowing the audit to proceed, aligning with Senate leadership's resistance. As Chair of the Ways and Means Committee, he wields significant influence over budget decisions, yet he has not used that power to advocate for compliance with Question 1. This stance reflects a broader pattern of protecting entrenched interests over the voters' mandate.

In contrast, I will make enforcing the audit a top priority in my first term. If elected, I will:

• Push for immediate legislative action to grant the Auditor full access.
• Support funding for the audit process to ensure it's thorough and timely.
• Advocate for annual audits moving forward, making oversight a standard practice rather than a one-time event.
• Engage with constituents through town halls in our district to keep them informed and involved.

Conclusion: A Call for Action and Reform

The passage of Question 1 was a victory for democracy, but its implementation requires bold leadership. As your next State Senator, I will stand firm in support of the audit, fighting to enforce the law and deliver the transparency our Commonwealth deserves. This isn't about politics—it's about principle. By auditing the Legislature, we can build a more accountable, efficient, and trustworthy government that truly serves the people of the First Bristol and Plymouth District.

I urge voters, whether they be Democrats, Republicans or unaffiliated, to join me in this effort. Together, we can ensure that no one on Beacon Hill is above the law. For more information on my campaign or to get involved, visit votesilva.org. Let's make Massachusetts a model of good governance.