THE LEGISLATURE is taking a new approach this year in dealing with ballot questions, appointing one joint committee to hold hearings on all of the measures rather than parceling them out to individual committees with expertise in the particular topic.

House Speaker Ronald Mariano and Senate President Karen Spilka announced the new approach at the end of January and the first hearing – on a question seeking to abolish the MCAS graduation requirement – is scheduled for Monday.

Spilka and Mariano said the new approach was prompted by the large number of ballot questions filed this year that span the purview of several committees. The House and Senate leaders said in a statement that the special joint committee, headed by Sen. Cindy Friedman of Arlington and Rep. Alice Peisch of Wellesley, “is especially equipped to tackle the unique challenges presented by the legal and policy intricacies of the questions this year.”

But some wonder whether there might be other motives at work. John McDonough, a long-time observer of Beacon Hill and a former rep, said the subject matter of past ballot questions has often spanned the jurisdictions of several committees but never before spurred the creation of a special committee. He said the new approach makes the process more uniform and simpler and speculated that it might provide other advantages to legislative leaders.

“It’s a bit of a power play by the Senate president and House speaker because they now have more  control over the process,” he said.

Friedman, in a telephone interview, said she didn’t know why the new approach was taken or why she was selected to co-chair the committee. “I have no idea,” she said. Peisch could not be reached for comment.

The other members of the committee are Democratic Sens. Paul Feeney of Foxborough, who co-chairs the Legislature’s Financial Services Committee, and Jason Lewis of Winchester, who co-chairs the Education Committee, and Democratic reps Michael Day of Stoneham, co-chair of the Judiciary Committee, and Kenneth Gordon of Bedford, who co-chairs the Public Service Committee. There are also two Republicans – Sen. Ryan Fattman of Sutton and Rep David Vieira of Falmouth.

There are currently 10 ballot questions that have obtained the 74,574 signatures to put the measures before the Legislature. Five are variations of questions pushed by companies like Uber and Lyft that deal with the rights of app-based drivers. The other five give app-based drivers the right to unionize, legalize natural psychedelic substances, allow the state auditor to audit the Legislature, remove the MCAS graduation requirement, and allow the full minimum wage for tipped workers.

Friedman indicated the committee will try to hold hearings on each of the ballot measures by the end of March. She was unclear whether the panel would make an up or down recommendation to the full Legislature or just present findings. “We’re trying to figure that out,” she said.

There is no clear precedent for what a committee reviewing a ballot question should do. According to McDonough, who has written about the ballot question process and also participated in it as an activist and as a state representative, some questions are approved by the Legislature and enacted into law but more often they are rejected or no action is taken on them. Sometimes, he said, no hearing is even held.

One other option is for the parties promoting and opposing a ballot question to negotiate some sort of compromise that is then approved by the Legislature. That’s what happened in 2018, when three ballot questions never made it to voters because the sponsors and the opponents of the questions raising the minimum wage and ensuring paid medical and family leave decided a negotiated compromise was a safer bet than an up-or-down vote from the people.

Friedman said similar negotiations are likely to happen this year.

McDonough said that, when he was a rep in 1994, momentum was building for a campaign finance reform question being pushed by Common Cause. He said the speaker at the time appointed him as chair of the committee reviewing the bill to see if a compromise could be worked out with Common Cause. As McDonough recounts in his 2000 book, Experiencing Politics, the strategy worked.

McDonough raised the possibility that state Auditor Diana DiZoglio’s push for a question that would give her office the power to audit the Legislature could be one where the two parties negotiate a deal. DiZoglio has picked up significant backing for her question, but even if it were to pass it’s likely to prompt a lawsuit.

Attorney General Andrea Campbell in November said DiZoglio lacked the power under current law to audit the Legislature and said even if her initiative petition were to pass “we may need to consider whether, and the extent to which, constitutional limitations affect how the law would apply.”

Even though the Legislature and DiZoglio seem far apart on the audit issue, McDonough said they might be willing to explore some sort of compromise.

Under the rules governing ballot questions, those questions not passed by the Legislature require the sponsors to obtain another 12,429 signatures to put them on the November ballot.