Lobbyist Expenditures 2023

As the 2024 election approaches, and candidates are ramping up their campaigns, we want to draw attention to last year’s financial currents that influence legislative decisions. Through a detailed analysis of the lobbying expenditures for 2023, we’ve highlighted the industries with the highest spending and identified the most influential lobbying firms. Here we’ve disentangled the complex interactions between financial interests that influence the Commonwealth's legislative landscape by creating links between significant bills and significant donors. All numbers have come from the Secretary of State’s disclosure reports.

Education - $7,264,280.61

  • Interest in shaping policies related to schools, universities, and curriculum reforms.

 Business Associations & Organizations - $6,395,586.54

  • Businesses wield considerable influence, evident from their significant financial contributions.Topics of interest included employment laws, taxes, and finance.

Pharmaceutical Industry - $5,918,521.71

  • The pharmaceutical industry's substantial spending promoted policy in healthcare, public health, and drug regulations. Pharma lobbying is especially effective in Mass. considering the state’s leadership in the biotech world.

Energy: Petroleum, Hydro, Nuclear, Oil - $5,827,986

  • Connections between energy-related lobbying efforts and legislative initiatives focused on traditional energy sources as well as new renewable solutions like offshore wind and solar. 

Transportation - $3,581,661.79

  • Transportation is a critical aspect of any state's infrastructure -  the sector worked to influence legislation concerning public transit (a major hurdle especially with the MBTA), infrastructure development, and road safety.

Environment - $3,278,945.31

  • The robust investment in environmental lobbying signifies a substantial interest in legislative measures directed at sustainability and pollution reduction. As Mass. is a coastal state, many legislators and funds are focused on marine conservation.

Gov't: Agencies, Associations, & Organizations - $3,046,347.94

  • This broad category of governmental lobbying expenditures reflects a diverse range of interests in legislative matters. The significant investment from the industry underscores a widespread influence on legislative areas encompassing governance, quasi-state actors, and public services.

Legal Organizations & Services - $2,637,882.10

  • The legal sector's financial backing is intricately linked to workplace transparency and legal rights, in 2023.

Gaming - $2,583,512

  • The gaming industry's investments suggest a keen interest in regulatory frameworks that could hinder their potential economic growth. The industry’s continued lobbying efforts have proved to pay off though as Massachusetts started permitting sports betting in 2022.

Labor Unions & PACs - $2,315,372.41

  • Labor unions focused their funds to solidify workers' rights and employment-related policies. 

  • Political Action Committees (PACs) organize and collect money from a wide range of donors, commonly from labor unions and businesses.

Massachusetts Health & Hospital Association  - $1,215,928.03

This influential healthcare association has actively supported An Act ensuring access to behavioral health services for children involved with state agencies (HB146). This legislation aims to enhance mental health services for individuals under the care of the Department of Children and Families, covering various aspects such as inpatient services, community-based services, crisis intervention, residential programs, and crisis stabilization services. 

The association endorses the creation of emergency response plans for medical and behavioral health crises in congregate care settings, emphasizing de-escalation strategies, suicide prevention, etc. Moreover, it advocates for the development of comprehensive plans addressing access to mental and behavioral health services for children in state custody. 

On the other hand, the organization takes a stance against An Act to clarify the charitable purposes of certain organizations (HB1544). This bill proposes amendments to the charitable immunities clause related to tort claims, specifically targeting the recently increased cap from $20,000 to $100,000 for medical malpractice claims against nonprofit hospitals. According to HB1544, the association opposes the provisions that limit the cap only to nonprofits as they derive more than 50% of their income from charitable donations. It believes that these changes may adversely impact nonprofit hospitals, and thus, does not support the bill. 

The Massachusetts Health and Hospital Association's nuanced strategy extends beyond mere support or opposition to bills, reflecting a commitment to shaping legislation that promotes comprehensive and accessible healthcare services while considering the potential implications on the industry. By actively engaging in the legislative process, it strives to advance innovation and ensure the well-being of those under the care of state agencies.

PhARMA - $1,207,700.87

PhARMA, a company that conducts effective advocacy for public policies that encourage the discovery of new medications for patients by biopharmaceutical research companies. With a financial stake of $1,207,700.87, it staunchly opposes legislation like An Act relative to primary insurance (HB1133) and An Act relative to prescription drug pricing  (HB1148). The organization's opposition stems from concerns over potential regulatory measures that could impact the pharmaceutical industry, highlighting a commitment to safeguarding its business model in the current legislative landscape. 

Massachusetts Association of Health Plans - $1,196,922.76

The Massachusetts Association of Health Plans actively supports An Act reining in premiums through stronger rate review (HB944). This legislation focuses on enhancing the approval process for health insurance policies, ensuring transparency and affordability. It introduces measures for carriers to submit comprehensive information on medical loss ratios, administrative expenses, and financial details. The bill also empowers the Mass. Commissioner of Insurance to disapprove proposed changes that are deemed excessive or discriminatory, emphasizing consumer protection and affordability considerations. 

On the other hand, the association opposes An Act to reduce co-pays for people with chronic conditions (HB943). This bill establishes a drug access program within the Executive Office of Health and Human Services (EOHHS), aiming to enhance access to high-value medications for chronic conditions. This opposition may stem from concerns about potential financial implications and regulatory requirements associated with coverage mandates for specific drugs. The strategic engagement reflects a meticulous approach that considers both consumer interests and the economic considerations of health plans. 

Additionally, the association maintains a neutral stance on An Act alleviating the burden of medical debt for patients and families (HB347). This bill establishes consumer protections against actions by medical debt collectors and imposes requirements on providing notice to debtors. The neutral position may indicate a balanced approach, acknowledging the importance of protecting consumers from medical debt while potentially evaluating the bill's impact on healthcare financing.  

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company - $922,999.21

The R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company strategically maintains a neutral position on tobacco-related legislation, adeptly navigating lobbying efforts. This approach allows the company to shape discussions without explicitly endorsing or opposing bills, indicating a nuanced strategy that may involve underlying support for certain measures while mitigating potential public image concerns. Conversely it could also mean they are interested purely because it relates to their industry. 

A bill under the company's neutral stance is An Act Relative to tobacco harm-reduction (HB2141) which exempts certain tobacco products from retail sale. The company's standpoint on this bill implies a possible backing for harm reduction strategies, coupled with a genuine interest in understanding its damaging effects on the body. 

Similarly, the company maintains a neutral stance on An Act protecting youth from second hand smoke (HB2230), which broadly prohibits smoking in multi-unit residential buildings and attached commercial spaces, effective from January 1, 2023. This neutral position reflects the company's careful approach to smoking regulations without explicitly supporting or opposing measures impacting various settings. 

The company's position on these bills indicates a strategic balance, potentially supporting measures to protect youth while avoiding explicit endorsement of the bills that could harm their business growth. 

Massachusetts Biotechnology Council - $808,045.82

The Massachusetts Biotechnology Council actively endorses bills aligned with its commitment to education and student development. Notably, it supports An Act to create and expand student pathways to success (HB592), which emphasizes initiatives to align secondary school learning with workforce needs. The creation of a "Workforce Skills Cabinet," promotion of industry-recognized certifications, and focus on computer science courses underline the council's dedication to enhancing students' skills for future careers. Additionally, the endorsement of An Act for trauma informed and social and emotional learning supports and training expansion (HB593) highlights the council's commitment to holistic student well-being, mandating staff training on behavioral interventions and crisis management. 

In contrast, the council strategically opposes bills perceived as potentially detrimental to its objectives. It expresses resistance to An Act to ensure prescription drug cost transparency and affordability (HB945), which seeks to regulate pharmacy benefit managers, therefore  introducing regulatory challenges. Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs) have a large influence behind the scenes by engaging in negotiations with drug manufacturers and pharmacies, effectively managing drug pricing. Their role significantly impacts the overall drug costs for insurers, influences patients' access to medications, and plays a pivotal role in determining the compensation pharmacies receive. Furthermore, the council opposes An Act establishing Medicare for all in Massachusetts (HB1239). Concerns likely revolve around the proposed single-payer system's impact on the existing healthcare landscape, evident through the proposed taxes on employers, workers, and citizens.  

MassBio’s legislative positions underscore its commitment to shaping education and student pathways, while also strategically opposing bills that may have adverse effects on the pharmaceutical industry’s profit-model. 


Association for Behavioral Healthcare - $676,292.29

The Association for Behavioral Healthcare actively champions transparency in consumer health insurance rights and mental health accessibility, evident by its support behind related legislation.

One such bill is An Act relative to transparency of consumer health insurance rights (HB937), which seeks to enhance transparency on consumer healthcare rights by displaying the name and telephone number of health service managers on enrollment cards of carriers, thereby mandating additional categories of information on enrollment cards. This aligns with the association’s commitment to empowering consumers with comprehensive details about their health insurance. 

Another supported bill, is An Act to further define medical necessity determinations (HB1068), which demonstrates the association’s dedication to mental health accessibility. This legislation requires contributory group insurance coverage for various entities, including public employees and health insurance corporations, to provide coverage for medically necessary mental health acute treatment without requiring preauthorization. The bill aims to facilitate timely access to crucial mental health services, echoing the organization's focus on improving mental health care accessibility. 

Furthermore, the organization endorsed An Act relative to preventing overdose deaths and increasing access to treatment (HB1981). This bill establishes a 10-year pilot program for overdose prevention centers, emphasizing clinical monitoring and providing a hygienic space for the consumption of pre-obtained controlled substances. The organization's support for HB1981 reflects its dedication to preventing overdose deaths and expanding access to treatment through unconventional yet evidence-based methods. 


Point32Health - $584,196.78

Point32Health actively supports An Act prohibiting discrimination against 340b drug discount program participants (HB959) which advocates for affordable drug access for specific healthcare entities. The bill amends various provisions to ensure that health insurers participating in the federal 340B program do not discriminate against covered entities (health centers, hospitals, and/or specialized clinics). The 340B program, requires Medicaid-participating pharmaceutical manufacturers to sell discounted outpatient drugs to eligible healthcare organizations, including various hospitals serving uninsured and low-income patients. This program enables 340B hospitals to extend federal resources, reducing drug prices and facilitating the expansion of health services for their communities, including free care, vaccinations, mental health services, and community health programs. This legislative support underscores the organization's dedication to maintaining the integrity and accessibility of the 340B program. 

Similarly, the insurance agency backed An Act relative to transparency of hospital margins & ensuring hospital efficiency (HB979) which emphasizes transparency in hospital finances. The bill mandates public hearings for acute hospitals reporting an operating margin above 5%, fostering accountability in cost containment and healthcare quality improvement. By supporting HB979, Point32Health aligns itself with measures promoting transparency and accountability within the healthcare system.

Additionally, Point32Health endorsed An Act to ensure protect health care consumers from surprise billing (HB997), a bill focused on preventing unfair facility fees charged by healthcare providers. Specifically, it targets fees unjustly incurred because such services could be safely provided in non-hospital settings. This aligns with the organization's stance on affordability and fairness in healthcare, as it seeks to protect patients from unjust facility fees and surprise billing practices. 

Alternatively, Point32Health opposed An Act to ensure prescription drug cost transparency and affordability (HB945) just like MassBio, which introduces regulations for pharmacy benefit managers. This opposition may stem from concerns about potential regulatory hurdles and financial implications within the pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors. By taking a stance against increased regulation of the pharmacy benefit managers, the organization prioritizes protecting its competitive position and profitability in the pharmaceutical industry. 

Furthermore, the health insurance company is in opposition to An Act relative to telehealth and digital equity for patients (HB986), as it would amend health insurance regulations to enhance accessibility for patients with limited English proficiency or those who are deaf or hard of hearing. The opposition may be rooted in concerns about the financial impact and operational adjustments required by carriers to comply and not the actual intent of the bill.

National Grid
- $551,146.61

National Grid actively supports An Act advancing renewable heating solutions for the Commonwealth (HB2938). This legislation mandates compliance with renewable heating standards by entities selling natural gas to end-use customers starting in 2027. The bill establishes tax credits for consumers for renewable heating systems, geothermal heating equipment, and the production of qualified renewable heating fuels. Furthermore, it would create the Renewable Heating Solutions Development Fund administered by the Department of Energy Resources to stimulate investment in qualified renewable heating fuels and thermal resources. 

In contrast, the utility giant takes a different stance on solar panel installations at K-12 public schools, opposing bills like An Act to promote solar panel installations on school property (HB3136). The proposed legislation introduces new provisions to establish a program promoting the construction, installation, and operation of solar panels in schools across the Commonwealth.This program aims to increase renewable energy generation, enhance energy efficiency, and maximize energy use savings. It includes incentives for solar panel installation, expands solar panel usage, and promotes the availability of solar panel electric vehicle charging infrastructure. The opposition to HB3136 may be attributed to concerns about the financial implications of solar installations on school properties, suggesting a strategic approach that weighs the company’s support for renewable energy goals against specific financial reservations. 


Massachusetts Nurses Association - $538,983.85

The MNA actively endorses bills such as, An Act to reduce racial and ethnic health disparities through commercial rate equity for safety net hospitals (HB1227). The bill reveals provisions requiring healthcare facility operators to conduct workplace violence risk assessments, develop prevention plans, and provide paid leave for victims. This aligns with the organization's support for improvements in hospital services and labor law reforms, thus emphasizing a comprehensive approach to employee well-being. 

However, the organization opposes bills like An Act relative to nurse licensure compact in Massachusetts (HB1211), which streamlines interstate licensing for nurses. The organization's resistance might stem from concerns about potential impacts on existing licensing regulations. In the case of another bill, An Act providing for diabetes management in schools (HB539), the opposition could indicate reservations about additional healthcare responsibilities. Risk may be involved in delegating such responsibilities to non-medical personnel, compromise patient safety, or lead to challenges in ensuring proper medical care for students with diabetes. Additionally, the organization may have concerns about the clarity and consistency of regulations surrounding the delegation of healthcare tasks in a school environment.

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts - $537,599.52

The health insurance company actively championed the fiscal appropriations for FY2024, demonstrating a steadfast commitment to enhancing healthcare-related funding. The budget (HB4040) allocated substantial funds, including provisions for MassHealth. Prominent additions involve a two-year pilot program extending eligibility for ConnectorCare and addressing diverse aspects of healthcare funding and support. Overall, the organization's support for the FY24 budget underscores a comprehensive strategy to advance healthcare, improve community well-being, and address affordability concerns.  

  • Brian S. Hickey Associates - $310,619.57 

  • Smith, Costello, & Crawford Public Policy - $302,314.45 

  • Dempsey Associates - $296,919.19 

  • Tremont Strategies Group - $280,847.19 

  • O'Neill & Partners - $200,529.21 

  • TSK Associates - $188,252.71 

  • ML Strategies - $177,225 

  • Kearney, Donovan, & McGee - $172,161.5

  • Preti Strategies - $168,635.87 

  • Bay State Strategies Group - $163,076.78 

The significant financial support from these lobbying firms can suggest a collective effort to influence and secure favorable budget allocations, potentially contributing to the organization's satisfaction with the budgetary decisions.

As major bills intersect with major lobbyist expenditures, the connections become apparent, showcasing how financial support translates into legislative movement. The diverse range of industries and lobbying firms contributing significant sums underscores the multifaceted nature of policy making, where stakeholders from education, healthcare, energy, and more vie for influence.

This data is easily accessible on MassTrac where you can see what other stakeholders in your industry are interested in, thus helping you plan your legislative priorities. For real-time updates on these developments and more, subscribe to MassTrac! Email us at info@instatrac.com or visit our website to start your free trial!








Previous
Previous

Case Study: The Professional Fire Fighters of Massachusetts Analyzes Legislation and Tracks Changes with InstaTrac

Next
Next

Final Senate FY25 Budget