Massachusetts recently became the eighteenth state to offer drivers’ licenses to illegal immigrants.  Up until 2022, a variety of pro-illegal immigration bills, including the drivers’ license bill, were introduced into the Legislature but Democratic leaders bottled these bills up in committees, realizing that even in Massachusetts priorities of open-border activists are not widely shared.  A 2019 Harvard/Harris Poll found that nationwide 72% of voters oppose driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants. Just before the House vote in May 2022, a Suffolk University/Boston Globe poll found 47% of Massachusetts voters in opposition and 46% in favor.

Democrats and progressives, who have become increasingly radicalized on immigration over the past decade, initially felt obliged to make perfunctory statements about securing the borders. However, after the anti-Trump mobilization of 2016-20, most Democratic politicians and their media allies abandoned all restraint, adopting a full open borders stance.  Consequently, the drivers’ licenses bill was allowed to reach the Legislature floor where it passed 119-36 in the House and 32-8 in the Senate.  Governor Charlie Baker’s veto was overridden almost immediately.

In response, a Republican-led citizens group quickly gathered more than 100,000 signatures to place a ballot question to repeal the law before the voters in November and launched a grassroots campaign with standouts at traffic intersections and shopping malls as well as door-to-door canvassing.  Open border forces, meanwhile, demonstrated their awesome capability to organize and raise money.  The committee opposing repeal (Vote YES for Family and Work Mobility) received $3.7 million — 16 times more than the committee favoring repeal (Fair and Secure Massachusetts had $224,000).  Unions were among the main contributors: Service Employees International Union ($1.7 million); AFL-CIO ($78,000); and the Massachusetts Teachers Association ($110,000).  The largest corporate contributors included Arbella Insurance ($200,000), Eastern Bank ($100,000), and State Street Bank ($50,000). The overwhelming funding advantage was used to launch a media blitz emphasizing “road safety.”

Union members might be shocked to learn that their dues are being used to enable employers to hire cheap unauthorized workers. Customers and shareholders of the financial institutions probably would be surprised that institutions with whom they maintain cordial business relationships are using their money to take sides in contentious political campaigns.

In November, the voters retained the law by a margin of 54-46%, an undeniable victory for open borders forces. By espousing unpopular policies at a time when a nationwide “red wave” was predicted, the Legislature risked repudiation by the voters but, in the end, it cost them nothing.  Emboldened by the success of open borders activists in Massachusetts, other states are now contemplating similar laws.

While the organizers of the repeal effort made a heroic effort, they may have made a tactical error by identifying the ballot question too closely with the outnumbered and badly factionalized Republican Party which had a very bad year — even for Massachusetts: Democrats’ seats in the 160-member House rose from 125 to 133 while Republicans sank from 26 to 25.  Democrats held 37 of 40 seats in the state Senate. Most legislative races were sill not contested.  Arguably, the ballot question went down in the Republican rout, losing by less than 8 points as the GOP gubernatorial candidate lost by almost 30 points (64-35%).

The 2022 disaster is a question that Massachusetts Republicans are now contemplating, but it is in no way comparable to the relatively mild Republican disappointment on the national level where GOP Congressional candidates increased their share of votes 6 points from 2020 and gained control of the House of Representatives.

Nationally, the results from Massachusetts reveal that measures condoning illegal immigration are less popular than progressive politicians and media would have us believe.  Furthermore, grassroots mobilization enabled motivated and informed citizens to overcome huge disadvantages in party identification, media coverage and funding, which suggests that ballot initiatives may be an effective way to push back.  When ordinary citizens can come this close to defeating an open borders law in one of the bluest states, it is very likely that these laws can be defeated anywhere throughout the country.

This article was written by John Thompson, Co-Chair of the Massachusetts Coalition for Immigration Reform.