Massachusetts Voters Uphold Cannabis and Gun Laws in 2026 Election

Massachusetts voters have backed several major policy measures in the November 3, 2026, election, preserving recreational cannabis and existing gun restrictions while approving broader public records access and Election Day voter registration. The results reflect decisions on seven of nine statewide ballot questions, according to the Associated Press.

As of 6:45 a.m. Wednesday, November 4, two questions remained too close to call. Question 5 concerned changes to the conditions triggering taxpayer refunds, while Question 7 proposed reducing minimum lot sizes for single-family homes statewide.

Question 8, which sought to repeal recreational cannabis after a decade of legalization, was rejected. The Associated Press projected that opponents of the repeal would prevail, preserving Massachusetts' legal recreational cannabis market.

Industry supporters argued that ending legalization would threaten an industry employing tens of thousands of Massachusetts residents. They also cited approximately $2 billion in tax revenue generated since legalization and warned that repeal could replace regulated products with an illegal underground market.

Question 9 also appeared headed toward approval, protecting gun control legislation enacted two years earlier. At just after midnight, with 49% of ballots counted, the Associated Press reported that 69% supported retaining the law.

The legislation regulates firearms produced through 3D printing or assembled from kits, addresses weapons that can be difficult to trace because they lack serial numbers, prohibits modifications that convert semiautomatic firearms into automatic weapons, and strengthens licensing requirements.

Ruth Zakarin, chair of Yes on 9 for a Safe Massachusetts, celebrated the campaign's projected victory.

"This victory belongs to the people of Massachusetts, who through their votes said a resounding yes to protecting this legislation and keeping our communities safe from gun violence," said Zakarin.

Zakarin also credited collective support for the campaign and expressed confidence that the result would strengthen efforts to address gun violence across the state.

Question 4 received voter approval, allowing eligible residents to register to vote on Election Day. The Associated Press projected the measure's passage at 1:47 a.m. Wednesday. By 7 a.m., with 80% of votes counted, support stood at 56%, compared with 43% opposed.

Question 1, which expands public records requirements, also received overwhelming support. The Associated Press projected its passage late Tuesday, reporting that more than 80% of voters supported the measure as of 12:14 a.m. Wednesday.

The measure brings the governor's office and Massachusetts Legislature under the same public records requirements already applying to state agencies and municipal governments. Massachusetts had been the only state where all three branches of government were exempt from disclosing certain communications, reports and other public records.

Supporters, including State Auditor Diana DiZoglio, argued that the change would strengthen transparency and accountability in state government. A Tufts University think tank analysis indicated that the measure could increase access to administrative information, including vendor contracts, employee settlements and government spending records.

However, the measure preserves exemptions for certain private communications. These include correspondence between constituents and their lawmakers, as well as communications involving lawmakers' development of policy positions.

DiZoglio celebrated the result while continuing a dispute with Beacon Hill leaders over her authority to audit the state Legislature. She has maintained that voters granted her that authority through their approval of Question 1 in 2024.

"It's a huge, huge win for Massachusetts," DiZoglio told GBH News.

She also emphasized the public's demand for greater government oversight and openness.

State lawmakers have expressed opposition to the measure, arguing that it could discourage open communications. Beacon Hill leaders are also considering alternative legislation that would provide more limited access to public records.

Meanwhile, supporters of Question 3 conceded defeat after voters rejected a proposed overhaul of the state's primary elections. The Associated Press called the result at 1:37 a.m. Wednesday. With 80% of votes counted by 7 a.m., opposition stood at 61%, while support reached 39%.

Question 3 would have replaced party-based primaries with a single all-party primary. Under the proposed system, all candidates would compete in one election, with the two highest vote-getters advancing to the general election regardless of political affiliation.

The Yes on 3 campaign acknowledged the result in a written statement while thanking its supporters and maintaining that voters wanted meaningful choices in November.

"The people of Massachusetts want real choices in November and elected officials who have to work to earn all of our votes. That frustration doesn't go away tonight," the Yes on 3 campaign said.

The campaign also said it intended to continue pursuing changes to the state's electoral system following the defeat.

Jordan Berg Powers, chair of the No on 3 campaign, also celebrated the outcome in a conversation with GBH News.