There were no roll call votes in the House or Senate last week. This week, Beacon Hill Roll Call reports local senators’ roll call attendance records for the 2024 session through Aug. 30.

The Senate has held 150 roll calls so far in the 2024 session. Beacon Hill Roll Call tabulates the number of roll calls on which each senator voted and then calculates that number as a percentage of the total roll call votes held. That percentage is the number referred to as the roll call attendance record.

Thirty-six (90%) of the current 40 senators did not miss any roll calls and have 100% roll call attendance records. Four (10%) of the 40 senators missed one or more roll calls.

It is a Senate tradition that the Senate president only votes occasionally. Current Senate President Karen Spilka follows that tradition and only voted on 28 (18.7%) of the 150 roll calls while not voting on 122 (81.3%) of them.

Sen. Mike Rush, D-West Roxbury, missed 14 roll calls for a roll call attendance record of 90.6%. Sen. Mike Barrett, D-Lexington, missed three roll calls resulting in a 98% roll call attendance record. Sen. Liz Miranda, D-Boston, missed one roll call resulting in a 99.3% roll call attendance record.

Beacon Hill Roll Call contacted Rush, Barrett and Miranda asking why they missed some roll calls. Here are their responses:

Sen. Mike Rush: “I am one of three members of the Senate who are active reservists. On April 25, June 6 and June 13, I was on orders with the United States Navy and as a result was unable to participate in roll call votes during session. I had submitted letters to the clerk of the Senate to be included in the Senate Journal stating this fact and recording how I would have voted had I been present.”

Sen. Mike Barrett: “I was drafting the Senate’s climate bill, exacting work that occasionally had me missing a roll call.”

Sen. Liz Miranda: “I missed one roll call because I actually came late into the chamber, from my office while dealing with an emergency constituent issue. I submitted a letter when I arrived moments after.”

The percentage listed next to the senator’s name is the percentage of roll call votes on which the senator voted. The number in parentheses represents the number of roll calls that he or she missed.

Sen. Joanne Comerford — 100% (0)

Sen. Paul Mark — 100% (0)

Also up on Beacon HillPublic safety personnel (S 1666)

The House gave initial approval to a bill that would allow public safety personnel with impaired health, presumed to have suffered in the line of duty, to submit an affidavit attesting that he or she did undergo a physical examination on entry into service, if their employer failed to maintain such records.

“Public safety personnel like police and firefighters that are injured in the line of duty or suffer illness due to their occupation shouldn’t have to jump through hoops or navigate red tape if their employer fails to maintain proper medical records documenting their service,” said sponsor Sen. Paul Feeney, D-Foxborough. “I am proud to have filed this legislation to help relieve public safety officials of the undue burden of proving an occupational presumption when through no fault of their own, their medical records have been lost or damaged by their employing department.”

Protect cats and dogs (S 2908)

The House gave initial approval to legislation that would prohibit the sale or transfer of any puppies and kittens under 8 weeks old. Violators would be fined $100 per animal.

When the animal is more than 8 weeks old, the outright ban is lifted and replaced with a section that would prohibit the sale or transfer of any dogs or cats at specified outdoor locations, such as flea markets and roadsides. This prohibition would not apply to the transfer of a dog or cat by, or to, a shelter, animal control or animal rescue; or to the display of a dog or cat as part of a state or county fair exhibition, a 4-H program, or similar exhibition or educational program. Violators would be fined $50 per animal for a first offense, $100 for a second offense, and $300 for third and subsequent offenses.

“Passing this legislation would represent an end to the supply-and-demand relationship between Massachusetts and puppy mills and give these animals a better opportunity at finding a home,” said Sen. Patrick O’Connor, R-Weymouth, a sponsor of an earlier version of the measure. “I am a longtime supporter of animal protection issues, even before I ran for Senate. I have co-sponsored many animal protection bills and I am focused on protecting animals as some of the most vulnerable members of our society. All animals deserve to be treated with respect and dignity, and I am proud to be a voice for animal rights on Beacon Hill.”

“As an animal lover I have been proud to support animal welfare legislation throughout my legislative career, including sponsoring [this bill],” said Sen. John Velis, D-Westfield, another sponsor of an earlier version of the measure. “At the most fundamental level this bill seeks to prevent a variety of health issues among dogs and cats because they were prematurely separated from their mother or sold at inappropriate locations such as along the side of a road. I am thrilled that this bill is currently being considered by the House of Representatives following its passage in the Senate a few weeks ago.”

The bill still needs additional approval by both the House and Senate prior to it going to Gov. Maura Healey for her signature.

Rename the Massachusetts Rehabilitation Commission (S 2941)

The Senate approved legislation that would rename the Massachusetts Rehabilitation Commission to MassAbility, a change that supporters say will better and properly define the agency’s role in supporting residents with disabilities to live independently. In April, the House approved a different version of the bill and the Senate version now goes to the House for consideration.

Supporters said the name change reflects the intention of the commission to empower individuals living with disabilities and move away from outdated terminology as the office undergoes broad changes toward a more expansive model for disability employment services and independent living. They noted that the legislation also removes offensive terminology in current state law referring to people with disabilities.

“This legislation is not just a name change but a mission enhancement,” said Sen. Nick Collins, Senate chair of the Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight. “By defining the commonwealth’s response now with emphasis on the abilities of our citizens, we are taking the MassAbility Commission in a new proactive, positive direction to better serve the community’s needs.”

“This historic legislation represents the state’s commitment to propelling the disability movement forward,” said Massachusetts Rehabilitation Commissioner Toni Wolf. “Language has the power to shape people and culture, tackle stigmas, biases and stereotypes. For too long, the words we’ve used have not reflected the strengths, resilience and determination of the disability community. This legislation changes that. We are changing life in Massachusetts for the better, making it more equitable, accessible and inclusive for people with disabilities.”

“Every person has the right to live an independent and meaningful life regardless of ability, with the same access to work, housing and services that every resident deserves,” said Senate President Karen Spilka, D-Ashland. “This name change reflects the strong work of MassAbility to deliver that access to every individual who works with them. In removing archaic laws, we are taking an important step toward making our laws reflective of the equitable commonwealth we continue to strive for.”

Long-term care and assisted living (H 5033)

The House and Senate approved and sent to Gov. Healey a new version of a bill making changes to the state’s long-term care and assisted-living industry that supporters said will take a powerful step toward delivering high-quality and safe care for older residents across the state.

The bill includes provisions related to basic health services administered in assisted-living facilities and oversight of long-term care facilities, including creation of a program for the certification, training and oversight of certified medication aides who would be authorized to administer medications to residents of long-term care facilities; several new initiatives to recruit and retain a dedicated long-term care workforce; allowing assisted-living residences to offer basic health services such as helping a resident administer drops, manage their oxygen or take a home diagnostic test; giving the Executive Office of Elder Affairs new powers to penalize non-compliance by allowing it to fine assisted-living residences up to $500 per day; and authorizing the attorney general to file a civil action against a person who commits abuse, mistreatment or neglect of a patient or resident.

Other provisions allow the Department of Public Health (DPH) to limit, restrict or revoke a long-term care facility’s license for cause, such as substantial or sustained failure to provide adequate care, substantial or sustained failure to comply with laws or regulations or lack of financial capacity to operate a facility; streamline the process for small house nursing homes to be licensed; direct the DPH to establish and implement training and education programs on topics such as infection prevention and control, resident care plans and staff safety programs; and require long-term care facilities to develop individualized outbreak response plans to contain the spread of disease and ensure consistent communication with the DPH, residents, families and staff.

The measure also would require each long-term care facility to provide staff training on the rights and care of LGBTQ older adults and older adults living with HIV; and forbid any long-term care facility and its staff from discriminating based in whole or in part on a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, intersex status or HIV status, whether that’s through the denial of admission, medical or non-medical care, access to restrooms or through room assignments.

“This legislation couldn’t have come at a more critical time when more oversight and accountability are needed in long-term care,” said Rep. Tom Stanley, D-Waltham, House chair of the Committee on Elder Affairs. “[The bill] marks the first major legislative reform to our long-term care and assisted-living industries in over a quarter of a century. This legislation enhances both access to and quality of care in long-term care settings, tightens suitability standards for operators, strengthens supports for the long-term care workforce and permanently allows assisted-living residences to offer basic health services.”

“This landmark legislation is the culmination of years of advocacy and collaboration among so many people committed to improving life for our family, friends and neighbors residing or working in long-term care, assisted living and the community,” said Sen. Pat Jehlen, D-Somerville, Senate chair of the Elder Affairs Committee. “There is always more work to do but we have agreed on policy that will surely have a positive impact on quality of care, transparency and oversight, and planning for the future.”

Child sexual abuse (S 2932)

The House last week gave initial approval to a bill, approved by the Senate in July, that would allow victims of child sexual abuse to file a civil suit, anytime after the abuse took place, against an individual who sexually abused a minor or negligently supervised a person who sexually abused a minor. This would replace current law with a statute of limitations that limits the time period during which a victim can sue to either 35 years after the abuse or seven years after discovery of damages relating to the abuse, with both timeframes beginning to run when the minor turns 18.

Prior to 2014, the law allowed even less time to file a suit. The statute of limitations was limited to three years after a victim turned 18.

When the Senate first approved the bill on July 31, sponsor Sen. Joan Lovely, D-Salem, said, “Back in 2014, we passed a statute of limitations for civil claims of child sexual abuse that would allow claims up to 35 years after the victim turned 18, or until 53 years old. I questioned then, and over the last decade, what was the magic number of 53, and I couldn’t find one. I couldn’t find that answer. So I decided to dig in, to talk to advocates, to talk to survivors, to talk to the public safety [officials].”

Lovely continued, “I want to thank all of the survivors in and out of my district who have come to me, including colleagues, who disclosed to me that at some point in their life they were sexually abused, but they choose not to come forward and disclose because of how painful it is. It really is lifelong pain and trauma.”

The bill is a “great thing” for survivors in Massachusetts, said Sandi Johnson, senior legislative policy counsel at the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network.

“We believe that survivors should have access to justice, regardless of when they’re able to access that justice,” Johnson said. “Eliminating that statute of limitations puts the focus back on whether or not there’s enough evidence, rather than just arbitrary timelines. Trauma is not a timeline and can’t be governed by a timeline.”

Reps. Ken Gordon, D-Bedford, and John Lawn, D-Watertown, who filed earlier versions of the bill, did not respond to repeated requests by Beacon Hill Roll Call asking them to comment on this bill.