WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

S 2032

Establishes the previously owned zero-emission vehicles rebate program

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Leroy Comrie and 2 co-sponsors

Massachusetts would run a 1,500-person pilot providing guaranteed monthly income to reach a living wage, funded with philanthropy and measured for health, work, and justice impacts

REFERRED TO WAYS AND MEANS
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · S 2032

Summary — S 2032 (Massachusetts): Universal Basic Income Pilot

Note: The bill header provided names a zero-emission vehicle rebate program, but the bill text and legislative docket establish a universal basic income (UBI) pilot. This summary follows the bill text, which would add a new Section 15 to Chapter 14 of the Massachusetts General Laws to create a UBI pilot program.

Purpose and intent

To create and evaluate a state-run pilot program testing the viability and effects of a guaranteed monthly basic income that ensures participating residents receive at least a living wage. The pilot is designed both to provide direct financial support and to generate rigorous evidence on health, labor, education, fiscal, and criminal justice impacts.

Key provisions

  • New law: insert Section 15 into Chapter 14, authorizing the commissioner (unnamed in the text) to establish the pilot in consultation with:
    • Executive Office of Health and Human Services (EOHHS)
    • Department of Transitional Assistance (DTA)
    • Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development (EOLWD)
  • Enrollment and design:
    • Population: at least 1,500 residents, randomly selected.
    • Monthly payment: designed so each participant’s total monthly income is at least equal to a calculated living wage. The Department will determine appropriate total income levels in consultation with the listed agencies.
    • Payments: if a participant’s monthly income falls short of the applicable monthly living income (which is adjusted for household size and other relevant characteristics), the program remits the difference to the participant.
    • The program must include mechanisms to account for month-to-month income changes.
  • Funding safeguards:
    • The pilot will actively solicit philanthropic supplementing funds.
    • Before remitting payments, the program must certify it has collected at least 3 years’ worth of funding and has a strong likelihood of full funding for at least 5 years of operation.
  • Governance and research:
    • The commissioner must convene an advisory committee of relevant experts (including higher education and administration) to advise on living income calculations and manage a research program.
    • Required outcome measurements include, but are not limited to:
    • Program cost and interactions with other public agency costs/savings.
    • Public health outcomes (e.g., cancer survival, nutrition/child malnourishment, low birthweight, hospitalization rates, mental health admissions, substance misuse, fetal alcohol syndrome).
    • Workforce and educational outcomes (hours worked, attainment, school attendance, test scores, material prosperity).
    • Criminal justice outcomes (crime rates, court system use).

Who is affected

  • Directly: at least 1,500 randomly selected Massachusetts residents and their households (particularly low-income households).
  • State agencies: EOHHS, DTA, EOLWD and other agencies that may experience fiscal or service-demand effects.
  • Higher-education researchers and expert advisors engaged in program evaluation.
  • Philanthropic funders potentially participating in upfront funding.

Procedural status and timeline (as provided)

  • Filed: Jan 15, 2025 (Senate Docket No. 1240).
  • Introduced / Read twice: June 11, 2025.
  • Passed Senate / Delivered to House: June 12, 2025.
  • Referred to Ways and Means (House): June 12, 2025.
  • Hearings scheduled/rescheduled for Nov 18, 2025 (times/locations listed in the docket). (Note: multiple entries in the docket indicate referrals to Finance and Revenue committees earlier in the process.)

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Evidence generation: The pilot is structured to produce detailed, multi-domain outcome data to inform future policy.
  • Fiscal implications: Requires significant upfront funding and risk mitigation (3-year collection + 5-year funding expectation) before payments begin; philanthropic participation is explicitly solicited.
  • Program design challenges: Defining “living income” across household types, adjusting for variable monthly incomes, and scaling beyond pilot size.
  • Equity and labor effects: Could reduce poverty and improve health/education outcomes, with uncertain effects on work incentives — the pilot’s research aims to measure this.

For implementation, the timing will depend on securing required funding, advisory committee formation, and regulatory design by the commissioner and partner agencies.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.