The Scorecard 2025-2026

Mass. Legislative Scorecard 2025-2026 (sponsorship of bills)

Legislators can co-sponsor new legislation at the beginning of the session. This spreadsheet is meant to assist you in learning a bit about your state legislators, through their sponsorship or co-sponsorship on select animal-related bills and amendments this year. We will add votes and other information once more actions occur in the legislature. The chart and explanation should be helpful; however, it does have limitations. It doesn’t reflect past actions a legislator may have taken to help or harm animals. It also is only using measurement we can measure — such as sponsor/co-sponsorship — which won’t give a clear indication on where a legislator stands on many issues or other actions he or she has taken.

We also were unable to include every helpful or harmful animal-related bill. Also, people in certain leadership positions rarely sponsor or co-sponsor bills. Therefore, as always, we encourage you to meet with your legislators (in either the State House or district office), write to them, and ask about positions on specific animal issues. If your legislators have been supportive of animal issues, please take a few minutes to thank them.

KEY:

EXPLANATION OF SCORECARD ACTIONS

EXPLANATION OF CO-SPONSORSHIP OF BILLS

Legislators can co-sponsor new legislation at the beginning of the session. If a bill is late-filed, they can also co-sponsor a bill at the time it is filed. The bills below were filed during the 2025-2026 session.

Bills We Support:

S. 1277/HD 2591: Preventing animal cruelty
These bills will create alternate pathways to ensure animals are safe without a felony charge. Massachusetts only has a felony animal cruelty penalty. However, there are times when such a penalty may not be appropriate or helpful (when mental health may be an issue, for example) but animals are still suffering or otherwise kept in violation of the cruelty statute. These bills would allow animals, when other resolutions have failed, to be removed for their health and safety. The goal is to ensure animals are safe from cruel situations – allowing the need for cruelty charges to be evaluated depending on the situation and what would be most effective and just.

• Sponsors: Senator John Velis; Representative Ted Philips
• Status: Referred to Joint Committee on the Judiciary
• Read more

S. 1190/HD 810: An Act enhancing the issuance of citations for cruel conditions for animals 
This legislation expands upon current law, found in Ch. 140 sec. 174E, which allows civil citations to be issued when dogs are kept in cruel conditions. This legislation extends this protection to all domestic animals. Broadening the current statute’s scope in this way allows an effective response to problematic situations before they escalate to criminal animal cruelty.

• Sponsors: Senator Mark Montigny; Representative Angelo Puppolo
• Status: Referred to Joint Committee on the Judiciary
• Read more

S. 1207/HD 336: Protecting animals from convicted animal abusers
This legislation would prohibit a person who is convicted of animal cruelty from owning or possessing an animal for a period of time determined by the court. Fines would be directed to the Massachusetts Animal Fund for the purpose of spaying/neutering and vaccinating homeless dogs and cats or to help animals whose families could not otherwise afford those surgeries.

• Sponsors: Senator Mike Moore; Representatives Tram Nguyen and Vanna Howard
• Status: Referred to Joint Committee on the Judiciary
• Read more

Banning the retail sale of certain animals in pet shops
These bills will prohibit the sale of certain animals in pet shops unless the animals are from shelters or rescue organizations. Typically, pet shops obtain animals from substandard breeding facilities, which results in consumers unknowingly purchasing sick or genetically compromised pets. Massachusetts state records document such complaints from across the Commonwealth. State and federal records have also demonstrated that puppies from the worst “puppy mills” in the country have been sold to Massachusetts consumers via pet shops. These bills thus protects both animals and consumers, while having no impact on responsible breeders.

• Sponsors: Senator Patrick O’Connor (S.650 and S. 651); Representatives Natalie Higgins and Kimberly Ferguson (HD 1530); Senator Lewis (S. 618); Representative Adam Scanlon (HD 4490).
• Status: Referred to Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources
• Read more

S. 1022/HD 1706: An Act to maintain stable housing for families with pets
This legislation ensures that certain state-aided housing cannot discriminate against, or include language that limits, a tenant or resident’s ability to live in that type of housing based on the size, weight, or perceived breed of a dog owned by a tenant/resident. It also puts a cap on the amount for pet rent a landlord can charge and prevents insurance companies from discriminating based on dog breed. Housing is the number one reason dogs are surrendered and impacts the length of stay for dogs at shelters who spend more time waiting for homes.

• Sponsors: Senator Pavel Payano; Representatives Dave Rogers and Sam Montaño
• Status: Referred to Joint Committee on Housing
• Read more

S. 640/HD 1914: An Act promoting humane cosmetics and other household products by limiting the use of animal testing
This legislation requires the use of non-animal test methods when available. Alternatives provide information of equivalent or superior quality and relevance to humans in comparison to animal tests. This bill applies to products such as cosmetics, household cleaners, and industrial chemicals, like those in paint; it does not apply to testing done for medical research, including testing of drugs or medical devices.

• Sponsors: Senator Mark Montigny; Representative Jack Patrick Lewis
• Status: Referred to Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources
• Read more

S. 263/HD 1908: An Act to protect consumers from contributing to inhumane animal testing for cosmetics
It is estimated that half a million animals, including rabbits, guinea pigs, and mice, suffer in cosmetic testing every year. Substances are forced down their throats, dripped into their eyes, or smeared onto their skin. This legislation would prohibit the sale of most cosmetics newly tested on animals. Twelve other states and more than 40 countries worldwide have already passed similar bans.

• Sponsors: Senator Mark Montigny; Representative Jack Patrick Lewis
• Status: Referred to Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure
• Read more

S. 644/HD 1721: An Act restricting the use of rodenticides in the environment
These bills restrict the use of Anticoagulant Rodenticides (ARs). ARs are a particularly toxic group of poisons used as a form of rodent control. When ingested, ARs prevent the clotting of blood, and cause the animal who ingested it to sustain heavy internal bleeding, eventually causing death. The poison remains in the dead or dying rodent’s system for days. ARs impact non-targeted pets and wildlife populations, such as birds of prey, who rely on the poisoned rodents as a food source. As a result, the cats and dogs, hawks, eagles, owls, and bobcats who are exposed often suffer the same fatal hemorrhaging.

• Sponsors: Senator Michael Moore; Representative Jim Hawkins
• Status:Referred to Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources
• Read more

S. 551/HD 2107: An Act prohibiting the sale of newly farmed fur products
This legislation would prohibit the sale of new fur products sourced from factory farms. On fur factory farms, wild animals spend their entire lives in cramped cages, deprived of the ability to engage in natural behaviors. The stress from living in a tiny cage causes serious welfare problems, such as self-mutilation and infected wounds, and can increase pathogen shedding and the risk of zoonotic disease transmission, such as COVID-19.

• Sponsors: Senator Cynthia Creem; Representative Jack Patrick Lewis
• Status:Referred to Joint Committee on Environment and Natural Resources
• Read more

S. 1458/HD 2408: An Act relative to updating animal health inspections
These bills would ensure that dog breeders, similar to other categories of entities that work with animals/provide them to the public  — like shelters/rescues, pet shops, dog boarding kennels — have minimum regulations to protect animals and consumers.

• Sponsors: Senator Mark Montigny; Representative Dan Cahill
• Status: Referred to Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government

Bills We Oppose:

HD 427/HD 95/HD 2292/HD 1604/HD 1714/SD 415: Sunday hunting legislation
These bills would, in various ways, end the statewide ban on Sunday hunting. 86% of Massachusetts residents want to maintain the ban on Sunday hunting while hunters represent just 1% of the Massachusetts population. These bills prioritize a small minority over an overwhelming majority of Massachusetts residents who rely on Sunday to be the one day of the week during hunting season when they can safely venture into the woods without fear of an accident. As the third most densely populated state, lifting our Sunday hunting ban would introduce unnecessary risk to the public, as well as to the companion animals with whom they spend time in the outdoors.

• Sponsors: Representative Lombardo (HD 427); Representative Pease (HD 95); Representative Sullivan-Almeida (HD 2292); Representative Frost (HD 1604); Representative Vieira (HD 1714)
• Status: Filed
• Read more

SD 2179/HD 1597: Trapping legislation
These bills would remove or weaken current restrictions on cruel body-gripping Conibear and leghold (sometimes called foothold) traps, which are used to capture fur-bearing animals, such as beaver and coyote. These changes would effectively allow a return to the days of recreational trapping with these inhumane and indiscriminate devices, something that 64% of Massachusetts voters rejected when they voted in favor of the Wildlife Protection Act ballot initiative.

• Sponsors: Representative Frost (HD 1597); Senator Mark (SD 2179)
• Status: Filed
• Read more

SD 415/HD 1714: An Act relative to outdoor heritage
This legislation removes certain prohibitions on carrying firearms, making the enforcement of poaching laws more difficult; permits hunting with dogs of upland game or waterfowl, as opposed to hunting with dogs of only waterfowl and only in coastal waters and salt marshes; and permits bow hunting of deer on Sundays.

• Sponsors: Senator Peter Durant; Representative David Vieira
• Status: Filed

HD 1127: An Act relative to hunting with artificial light
This bill would expand an already-archaic Massachusetts state law that permits spotlighting, which involves shining a bright light at a target animal to temporarily blind and paralyze them, at which point they are shot. Most states ban spotlighting because it is considered unsporting as it provides an opportunity to shoot an animal without giving chase. Currently, only racoon and opossum can be hunted with artificial light, while this bill would include coyote as well. Spotlighting is also dangerous to public health because hunters often spotlight not far from dark roads and the concentrated bright light makes it difficult to see beyond the illuminated animal.

• Sponsor: Representative David Vieira
• Status: Filed

While not represented on the chart, click here to see legislators who supported the Mass. Animal Fund in the FY24 budget.