Massachusetts lawmakers, led by Senate assistant majority leader Sal DiDomenico, are pushing to end the so‑called “dark period” by requiring ballot-question campaigns to reveal their financial backers earlier, arguing that transparency is needed as campaigns influence voters through advertising.

The current rule allows eight months in which ballot campaigns do not report contributors, until 60 days before an election, a gap lawmakers and the public want to close.

The proposed legislation would create a special review board to assess whether a constitutional amendment should alter Massachusetts' ballot-question process, with recommendations due by the end of 2027; any constitutional amendment would still require a ballot vote.

Secretary of State William Galvin says the large number of ballot questions reflects legislative inaction, noting that a ballot measure must have been sent to and potentially acted upon by the Legislature before appearing on the ballot.

A compromise between the House and Senate is needed to turn the transparency reforms into law, signaling that changes to the ballot-question system are imminent.

CBS Boston frames the issue as a balance between empowering voters and ensuring accountability for who funds ballot campaigns and how ballot questions are initiated and reviewed.

Massachusetts voters in 2026 will face nine ballot questions, the most since 1992, spanning topics from cannabis and elections to conservation and voter registration.

House and Senate leaders, including Senate President Karen Spilka and House Speaker Ron Mariano, describe the existing process as broken and push for greater transparency and accountability in ballot-question campaigns.

Support for transparency comes from both parties: Democrats emphasize public disclosure, while Republican Senator Peter Durant supports providing voters with access to information and recognizes some legislative inertia.