Topline results and crosstabs for the poll can be found at www.umass.edu/poll

A new University of Massachusetts Amherst/WCVB Poll has found that 6 in 10 Massachusetts residents continue to support the “Right to Shelter” law, though majorities also support a number of proposals that would place limits and requirements on the system that provides emergency shelter to migrants, asylum seekers and refugees in the Bay State.

“Since the passage of the state’s ‘Right to Shelter’ law in 1983 by then-Gov. Michael Dukakis, the state has been required to provide shelter, food and basic necessities to homeless parents with children, pregnant women and migrant families,” explains Tatishe Nteta, provost professor of political science at UMass Amherst and director of the poll. “The influx of migrants, asylum seekers and refugees in recent years has strained the shelter system and the state’s budget. According to state officials, the state now houses close to 6,000 families, costing the commonwealth an estimated $1 billion this fiscal year. The high costs associated with the ‘Right to Shelter’ law coupled with a number of violent incidents occurring in the state shelters have led some to question whether the public still supports this 42-year-old commitment to immigrant newcomers. Our results suggest that the law remains popular in the Bay State with 6 in 10 expressing support for the ‘Right to Shelter’ law, a four-percentage point increase in support since October 2024. 

“Additionally, we find majoritarian support for the law across gender, generational, income and racial groups, further pointing to the popularity of the law,” Nteta continues. “The only groups who express less than majoritarian support for the law are Republicans (34%), conservatives (31%), Trump voters (38%) and those with less than a high school education (48%). Given the paucity of strong opposition to the law, it is likely that Massachusetts will continue its unique role as the only state in the nation who, in the words of Dukakis, ‘provides the necessities of life to those in desperate need.’”

“Although the ‘Right to Shelter’ law enjoys majority or plurality support among many groups in the commonwealth, there are important social divides on this salient issue,” says Jesse Rhodes, professor of political science at UMass Amherst and co-director of the poll. “For example, women are much more supportive than men and younger people are much more supportive than older people. Moreover, those with more education are far more supportive than those with less education. These patterns likely reflect broader patterns of demographic polarization in many areas of policy, in which women, younger people and those with higher incomes are trending toward the Democratic Party, while men, older people and those with less income and education are moving toward the GOP.”

Views on changes to the “Right to Shelter Law”

The University of Massachusetts Amherst/WCVB Poll also asked respondents about changes to the “Right to Shelter” law, both those that have already been implemented and those that have been proposed in an effort to alleviate the burden on the state’s budget while still meeting the law’s goal of assisting those in need.

“With the skyrocketing cost associated with maintaining the state’s shelter system, Gov. Maura Healey and the Massachusetts State Legislature have proposed a number of reforms to the law,” Nteta explains. “We find a plurality of residents (46%) support limitations on the number of families in the systemand a majority (51%) support limiting the time that individuals and families can reside in the system. Unsurprisingly, these changes to the system are most popular among Republican, conservative and Trump voters in the state, but also garner majority support from older residents, independents, moderates and people of color. Given the broad coalition in favor of these proposed reforms, it is likely that these changes to the system are coming for the thousands of families in the state’s shelters.”

Raymond La Raja, professor of political science at UMass Amherst and co-director of the poll, notes that while the poll’s respondents support these recent changes, they don’t believe that they have improved the situation.

“The public does not seem convinced that changes to the state’s ‘Right to Shelter’ law have made things better,” La Raja says. “For example, most think the new policies have made things worse for state and local police (42% say worse, 34% say better). For other groups, they feel more divided about the outcome. This includes the situation for health care providers (41% worse, 36% better), public schools (40% worse, 36% better) and taxpayers (41% worse, 40% better). Of one thing voters seem sure – under the new policies migrants are worse off. Fifty-nine percent say this, compared to just 22% who say they are better off, with 20% saying they don’t know.”

Rhodes agrees, saying “Massachusetts residents appear deeply divided about the impact of these changes for all stakeholders, whether they be migrants, taxpayers, police or social service providers. This likely reflects a deep ambivalence about these policy changes. On one hand, many Massachusetts residents likely perceive that cuts to the shelter system are necessary from a budgetary perspective; on the other hand, they are under no illusions that these policy changes help vulnerable people or address the underlying problems that create strain on the shelter system. These attitudes likely reflect concerns about burgeoning costs during tough economic times. The implication is that, while Massachusetts residents support assisting people who are housing insecure, there are also limits to their generosity.”

Nteta points to the poll’s finding that a number of further proposed changes garner high levels of support in the new poll.

“In the past few months, there have been a number of violent incidents occurring in the state shelter system leading to questions as to why criminal background checks to ensure the safety and well-being of shelter residents were not conducted,” he says. “In response, Gov. Healey and leaders in the Massachusetts State Legislature have proposed full criminal background checks on all adult shelter residents and beefing up security at the shelter sites. These changes are wildly popular among residents of the state, with more than three-quarters of residents (76%) in favor of full criminal background checks and close to 7 in 10 (68%) in favor of increased funding for on-site security at shelters. These changes are favored by strong majorities of Democrats, independents and Republicans, and even both Trump and Harris voters support these changes. With the Legislature currently debating changes to the state’s shelter system, ensuring the safety of shelter residents is an issue that unifies residents of the Bay State.”

“Many Massachusetts residents appear concerned about crime in the shelter system, and want policies to increase security,” Rhodes says. “One likely reason for this is that Massachusetts residents are concerned about the safety of shelter residents, particularly children. However, it’s also possible that these attitudes reflect negative stereotypes about shelter residents as inclined toward criminal behavior.”

Ultimately, though, Rhodes sees a continued future of “Right to Shelter” in the commonwealth.

“Despite economic and political headwinds that tend to erode public support for immigration and policies benefiting those who are less well off, support among Massachusetts residents for the state’s ‘Right to Shelter’ law remains strong,” he says. “Moreover, with the exception of Republicans and conservatives, the policy enjoys majority or plurality support among Massachusetts residents of different ages, incomes, education levels and races. Although the policy faces significant implementation challenges, Massachusetts residents seem committed to providing basic support for vulnerable migrants and homeless people.”

Views on immigration policies

Respondents to the new University of Massachusetts Amherst/WCVB Poll were also asked about their views of the root cause of the migrant situation, the nation’s immigration laws and their opinion of who is most responsible for the increased immigration at the country’s southern border. 

“Since the beginning of the historic influx of migrants to the Bay State, Gov. Healey has made the case both publicly and privately that responsibility for the purported migrant crisis is with elected officials and federal bureaucrats in Washington who have done little to address the root causes of the migration of asylum seekers and refugees to the U.S.,” Nteta says. “For years residents of the state appeared to believe Healey, and blamed President Joe Biden and congressional Republicans for the state’s shelter crisis. However, our results suggest that Healey is now viewed by the public as the political figure most responsible for the influx of migrants and the financial consequences that this has had for the state. With the 2026 gubernatorial election on the horizon, it is likely that Healey’s challengers will jump on this issue and will paint the incumbent governor as responsible for the state’s current predicament.”

La Raja notes how the Bay State is not insulated from the national debate over what should be done about immigration.

“Immigration is a highly divisive issue in the U.S., and it’s no different here in Massachusetts as voters are clearly divided on several policies,” he says. “Roughly equal parts say that the U.S. should deport the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants (41% support, 42% oppose), use the U.S. military to enforce immigration law (40% support, 45% oppose) or allow local and state police to assist the federal government in deportation (43% support, 41% oppose). Women stand out as being much less supportive of using enforcement by state and local police, with only 36% women in favor of this proposal compared to 50% of men.”

Nteta notes that other promises made by President Donald Trump to address immigration are particularly unpopular.

“While on the campaign trail, Trump promised to return to a more conservative immigration policy to combat the record number of migrants coming to the United States,” he says. “Hours into his second presidency, Trump signed an executive order that sought to revoke the citizenship of children born in the U.S. to undocumented parents as well as the citizenship of children born in the U.S. to immigrant parents in the country legally. Neither of these proposals garner much support in the state, as less than one-third of residents support revoking the citizenship of children with parents in the country illegally and less than 2 in 10 support rescinding the citizenship of children born to immigrant parents here legally. Interestingly, while about 7 in 10 Republicans, conservatives and Trump voters are in favor of ending the citizenship rights of the children of undocumented parents, when asked about children of legal immigrants, only 4 in 10 of these groups are in favor of this change. On the issue of citizenship, the president may have overstepped his boundaries even with the groups who have historically been in his corner.”

Conversely to Trump’s proposals, La Raja says of the state poll’s respondents that “It is clear that significant majorities support measures to accommodate migrants. Sixty-four percent of Massachusetts voters say immigrants living in the U.S. illegally should become citizens if they meet citizenship requirements and commit no crimes, and 60% say that refugees and asylum seekers should be allowed to live and work in the U.S. for a temporary, but extendable, period of time. Younger voters under 30 are especially supportive of this policy (72%).”

He notes, however that “Massachusetts voters on the low end of the income scale are much less supportive of allowing refugees and asylum seekers to work temporarily in the U.S. Fifty-one percent of them support this policy compared to 69% of those making more than $100,000. These lower income voters are most likely to believe they face competition with these migrants for jobs and public services, like schools and social support.”
 

Methodology

For this University of Massachusetts Amherst/WCVB Poll, YouGov interviewed 733 Massachusetts respondents who were then matched down to a sample of 700 to produce the final dataset. The respondents were matched to a sampling frame on gender, age, race and education. The sampling frame is a politically representative “modeled frame” of Massachusetts adults, based upon the American Community Survey (ACS) public use microdata file, public voter file records, the 2020 Current Population Survey (CPS) Voting and Registration supplements, the 2020 National Election Pool (NEP) exit poll and the 2020 CES surveys, including demographics and 2020 presidential vote.

The matched cases were weighted to the sampling frame using propensity scores. The matched cases and the frame were combined and a logistic regression was estimated for inclusion in the frame. The propensity score function included age, gender, race/ethnicity, years of education and home ownership. The propensity scores were grouped into deciles of the estimated propensity score in the frame and post-stratified according to these deciles.

The weights were then post-stratified on home ownership, 2020 and 2024 presidential vote choice as well as a four-way stratification of gender, age (4-categories), race (2-categories) and education (4-categories), and a two-way post-stratification on race (4-categories), and education (4-categories), to produce the final weight.

The margin of error of this poll is 4.8%.

Topline results and crosstabs for the poll can be found at www.umass.edu/poll