In Massachusetts, legislative leaders have expressed strong reservations about the state’s ballot question system, which allows voters to directly decide on laws through statewide referendums. House Speaker Ron Mariano has described the process as “fraught with peril,” and Senate President Karen Spilka criticized it as dominated by special interest groups. Both leaders have raised concerns about the ease with which initiatives qualify for the ballot, including the use of paid signature collectors.

Despite lawmakers’ unease, a recent Suffolk University/Boston Globe poll reveals that approximately two-thirds of likely voters favor maintaining the ballot question process, significantly outnumbering the 14 percent who believe the legislature alone should handle lawmaking. Supporters argue that while elected officials are expected to represent constituents’ interests, direct voter input provides an important check when legislative priorities do not align with public preferences.

Mary Devlin, a 77-year-old independent voter from Cape Cod, expressed the view that voters need a balance of power with elected officials, noting occasional mistrust in lawmakers’ decisions. Paul Dratfield, a Democrat from South Hadley, said he generally trusts the legislature but values voter participation in shaping laws.

This year, Massachusetts faces a record-tying nine ballot questions covering diverse issues—from technical adjustments to state tax policies to efforts to overturn marijuana legalization approved by voters a decade ago. Legislative leaders have criticized the initiatives as selectively advancing narrow interests and challenging lawmakers’ traditional control over the state’s legislative agenda.

Backers of ballot initiatives include a varied coalition of elected officials, unions, business leaders, and advocacy groups. Many claim they resorted to the ballot after unsuccessful attempts to enlist legislative support, arguing that lawmakers themselves are influenced by special interest pressures.

However, even successful ballot measures are not immune to interference from legislators. Lawmakers retain the authority to amend, delay, or repeal laws passed by voters, leading to skepticism among the public about the effectiveness of direct democracy. A prominent example is the stalled legislative audit process. In 2024, voters overwhelmingly approved a measure granting State Auditor Diana DiZoglio expanded auditing powers over the legislature. Since then, political and legislative resistance has impeded the audit’s implementation, with ongoing closed-door negotiations concerning the scope of DiZoglio’s authority.

This ongoing impasse has left some voters questioning the real impact of their vote. Eric Corey, a registered Republican and traffic control officer from Taunton, questioned the tangible results of the approved audit, arguing that voter mandates should be unequivocal and not subject to legislative override.

Similarly, Norman Sczepanski, a 75-year-old independent voter from Natick, stated that legislators who disregard the will of the voters should not hold office. Some advocates, including Dratfield, call for faster, clearer mechanisms to enforce voter-approved laws without prolonged litigation, noting that elections remain the principal method of political accountability, albeit with limited competition for many seats.

Despite the complexity and volume of this year’s ballot questions, most voters appear engaged. The poll found that 65 percent of respondents said the presence of multiple questions made them more likely to vote on each rather than abstain. Still, understanding the implications of each proposal remains a challenge for some voters navigating extensive information ahead of the November 3 general election.