|
Calendar
for Special State Election
(to fill vacancy caused by the death of Senator Edward M. Kennedy)
2009
Cambridge
Candidate Pages
(municipal election)
Candidates
seeking to succeed State Representative Rachel Kaprielian (2008):
Stephen
Corbett – www.corbettforrep.org
Julia
Fahey
Jonathan
Hecht – www.jonhecht.com (elected)
Joshua
Weisbuch –www.electweisbuch.org
Barrios
Vacancy (2007)
State Senate - Middlesex, Suffolk,
& Essex
Primary
Election - Sept 11, 2007
Tim
Flaherty
Anthony
Galluccio (elected)
Paul Nowicki
Jeff
Ross
General
Election - Oct 9, 2007
(no other candidates)
2006 State
Election Candidates
[If you have more information about candidates and their
websites, please send them to Robert@rwinters.com]
Governor
Kerry Healey (Republican)
Christy Mihos (Independent)
Deval Patrick (Democrat) - elected
Grace Ross (Green-Rainbow)
Chris
Gabrieli (Democrat)
Tom Reilly (Democrat)
Lt. Governor
Reed V. Hillman (Republican)
Tim Murray (Democrat) - elected
John Sullivan (Independent)
Martina Robinson
(Green-Rainbow)
Deborah Goldberg (Democrat)
Andrea Silbert (Democrat)
Attorney General
Martha Coakley (Democrat) - elected
Larry Frisoli (Republican)
Treasurer
Timothy Cahill (Democrat) -
elected
Ronald Davy (Republican)
Secretary of State
William Galvin (Democrat) - elected
Jill Stein (Green-Rainbow)
John
Bonifaz (Democrat)
Auditor
Joseph DeNucci (Democrat) - elected
Earle Stroll (Republican)
U.S. Senate
Kenneth Chase (Republican) - 52% so far
Edward Kennedy (Democrat) - elected
Kevin
Scott (Republican)
U.S. Congress, 8th District
Michael Capuano
(Democrat)
Robert
Constantino (Republican)
Middlesex
County
Clerk of Courts
Michael A. Sullivan
(Democrat) - 71%
[ www.sullivanclerkofcourts.com
also works]
Bruce
Desmond (Democrat) - 29%
Register
of Deeds
Eugene C. Brune (Democrat)
Massachusetts Senate
1st Suffolk and Middlesex
Robert E. Travaglini (Democrat)
2nd Suffolk and Middlesex
Steven Tolman (Democrat)
Middlesex, Suffolk, and Essex
Jarrett Barrios (Democrat)
Massachusetts House
24th Middlesex
Will Brownsberger
(Democrat)
Libby Firenze (Republican)
[The incumbent, Anne Paulsen, Democrat, is not seeking
reelection]
25th Middlesex
Henry Irving (Republican)
Alice Wolf (Democrat)
Joseph P. Donnelly (independent)
26th Middlesex
Tim Toomey (Democrat)
29th Middlesex
Rachel Kaprielian (Democrat)
Keith Mercurio (Republican)
8th Suffolk
Martha "Marty" Walz (Democrat)
9th Suffolk
Byron Rushing (Democrat)
Governors Council
3rd District
Marilyn M. Petitto Devaney (Democrat)
6th District
Michael J. Callahan (Democrat)
William Barabino (Republican)
Rosemary A. Macero (unenrolled)
Ted Sarandis (unenrolled)
Ballot
Questions
1 - Sale
of Wine by Food Stores
2 - Nomination
of Candidates for Public Office (to allow fusion
voting)
3 - Family
Child Care Providers (Collective Bargaining for Childcare Providers)
|
Update
on the State Senate Special Primary (Apr 13, updated Apr 17):
The word
among politicos at the Cambridge Senior Center on April 13 where the
Cambridge votes were being counted was that Sal DiDomenico had a lead
of between 125 and 135 votes over Tim Flaherty in the entire
district. This estimate proved to be accurate with the unofficial totals
giving a 134 vote margin with just a handful of provisional and
overseas absentee ballots possibly still to be counted. The predictions
of several months ago proved to be accurate, namely that "Sal
DiDomenico has the best chance right now in this election with Tim
Flaherty driving hard for the hoop. Much of this is determined by the
fact that Everett is expected to generate 30% or more of the votes in
this election and Sal is the Everett candidate (with Cambridge
roots)."
In Cambridge's
11 precincts in this Senate district, the results were Tim Flaherty 1347
(46%), Denise Simmons 904 (31%), Dennis Benzan 371 (13%), Sal DiDomenico
173 (6%), Michael Albano 92 (3%), and Dan Hill 27 (1%). Voter turnout in
Cambridge appears to be about 15%.
In Everett,
the story was all Sal. The numbers were Sal DiDomenico 2599 (74%), Tim
Flaherty 681 (19%), Michael Albano 91 (3%), Dennis Benzan 74 (2%),
Denise Simmons 42 (1%), and Dan Hill 13 (0.4%).
In Somerville,
the breakdown was Sal DiDomenico 212 (48%), Michael Albano 98 (22%), Tim
Flaherty 71 (16%), Dennis Benzan 26 (6%), Denise Simmons 26 (6%), and
Dan Hill 5 (1%). Voter turnout was reportedly 13%.
Tim Flaherty
cleaned up in Allston-Brighton, though the numbers were initially
misreported by the Cambridge Chronicle. The Allston-Brighton
Tab provided accurate numbers: Flaherty 293 (62%), Simmons 61
(13%), DiDomenico 41 (9%), Albano 36 (8%), Benzan 33 (7%), and Hill 8
(2%).
Tim Flaherty
also did well in Charlestown, Chelsea, and Revere,
but Sal DiDomenico beat all others by a large margin in Saugus.
The numbers were relatively difficult to come by in most parts of the
district, but Cambridge had them all up on the City website within
hours. Four days later, Cambridge was the only city/town in the Senate
district that had their numbers posted.
Tim Flaherty
initially called for a recount, alleging irregularities in Everett, but
has since backed off from that plan - a long shot in this district
where, I believe, almost all of the votes are reliably machine counted.
Flaherty has made it clear that he will challenge Sal DiDomenico (and
any other candidates) in the do-over Democratic primary in
September. - RW
Complete
State Senate Unofficial Election Results (Middlesex, Suffolk, &
Essex)
[The table can be sorted by any column.]
|
What's
Missing from this Picture?
Apr 5 - With the
State Senate Special Primary Election just a week away, one might
expect good Cantabrigians to be pulling together for their
favorite sons and daughters in this race to fill the seat vacated
by Anthony Galluccio. Certainly former mayors would be pulling for
their fellow former mayors, right? Perhaps not. Shown here is the
signage in front of the home of City Councillor Kenneth E. Reeves.
Dennis Benzan is now back from Belmont and living in Cambridge
(even if only formally) and Tim Flaherty is a favorite son. Wasn't
there another Cambridge candidate in this race?
It
would appear that the mayoral deadlock continues in the minds of
some.

Apr 9 -
Apparently, Mr. Reeves must have realized that he'd neglected
another State Senate candidate with Cambridge roots - Sal
DiDomenico. That oversight has now been rectified with another
sign. Now wasn't there another Cambridge candidate..... a former
mayor..... somebody named Denise, perhaps?
I
suppose if you're going to rub someone's nose in it, you may as
well really go all out. There may be other jobs out there waiting
for Mr. Reeves, but diplomat is not one of them.
This
should be a delightful City Council term with payback all around.
Let's not forget that Marjorie Decker was also a candidate for
this seat for a time but withdrew supposedly because of other
Cambridge candidates that greatly diminished her chances.

|
|
March
1 - Marjorie Decker has withdrawn from the State Senate race to
replace Anthony Galluccio.
Here's what she had to say:
After
consulting with my family, friends, and close supporters over this
past weekend, I have decided to withdraw from the Special Election
for the Mass State Senate to replace Anthony Galluccio.
I
chose to run for Senate for many of the same reasons that motivate
me to serve on the Cambridge City Council. To me, public service
is advocating for good jobs, affordable housing, better access to
health care and equal opportunity.
Last
year I called on my family, friends and constituents to give me
their time, effort and financial support for my re-election to the
City Council. They worked hard and sacrificed much to help me win
that election. I have never run for office just for the sake of
running.
When
the Special Election for State Senate was first announced, I
considered the prospects for victory extremely promising. Since I
announced my candidacy, the number of candidates has increased
dramatically – more than doubling – thus my chances of winning
have been greatly reduced.
In
good conscience, I cannot ask my family, friends and supporters to
give more time, effort and financial support if there is no
realistic prospect of success.
Consequently,
I have decided that at this time I can best serve by focusing all
of my energies and efforts toward my role as a Cambridge City
Councilor. As the effects of the recession continue to devastate
working families, we have many challenges that must be addressed.
I
want to thank my family, friends – new and old, and supporters
–from Cambridge, Charlestown, Chelsea, Somerville, Revere,
Saugus, Somerville, Allston and Brighton for their willingness to
consider my candidacy and to offer their support to me.
It's
worth noting that, up to a point, it was the fact that there were
many candidates in this race that helped make Marjorie's campaign
viable - as the only woman in an election that would likely be
determined by vote-splitting and personal identity. Denise
Simmons' entry into the race changed the equation substantially,
and now Simmons' candidacy becomes immediately viable for the same
and related reasons. Denise is now the only woman in a six-way
race and she will likely be able to use her status as an
African-American woman, an openly gay woman now legally married to
her partner, and as the most recent Mayor of Cambridge to her
advantage. This should translate into campaign donations from
within the Senate district and from outside the district from
various interest groups just as Jarrett Barrios was able to draw
those donations a number of years ago for this same seat.
Whether this helps her to succeed throughout this district remains
an open question.
One
factor worth considering in Marjorie's decision to withdraw
(though you'll have to ask her!) is that she would have to share
the support of labor unions with several of the other candidates.
Another important factor is that this April/May election will have
to be done all over again in September/November and you can only
spend your campaign donations once. It is likely that, regardless
who wins in the special election, many of the same candidates will
do it again this fall, and short-term incumbency is not likely to
provide that much of an advantage. It's entirely possible that
Marjorie will keep her resources intact and try again in September
under more favorable conditions. If not, she really does have the
potential to be a very good city councillor if, as we teachers
like to say, she would only apply herself.
Regarding
the Simmons vs. Decker aspect to this, I ran some numbers
yesterday using the November 2009 municipal election ballots from
the 11 Cambridge precincts in this Senate district. Denise Simmons
was ranked somewhere on 48.9% of those ballots compared to
Marjorie Decker being named on 21.1% of those ballots. Certainly,
Marjorie's status as a write-in candidate was a factor, but it's
reasonably clear that Denise Simmons would have the greater degree
of Cambridge support in this election. Denise will, of course,
have to share that Cambridge support with Tim Flaherty, Dennis
Benzan, and Sal DiDomenico, each of whom have some base of support
in the Peoples Republic.
Most
of the speculation continues to be that Sal DiDomenico has the
best chance right now in this election with Tim Flaherty driving
hard for the hoop. Much of this is determined by the fact that
Everett is expected to generate 30% or more of the votes in this
election and Sal is the Everett candidate (with Cambridge roots).
However, the likelihood in this race where vote-splitting will
determine the outcome as much as anything is that the winner will
largely be dictated by who can raise the most money and assemble
the strongest get-out-the-vote effort on April 13. -- Robert
Winters |
|
Jan 22 - The Plot
Thickens.....
The
contest to determine who will fill the State Senate seat formerly
occupied by Anthony Galluccio is getting interesting. It exhibits
all the worst aspects of a plurality election without
runoffs and with vote-splitting, strategic voting, and
ulterior motives. Here's the latest roster of possible candidates:
| ID |
Name |
Address |
Office Sought |
Party |
| 15031 |
DiDomenico, Sal |
125 Clarence Street, Everett |
Senate, Middlesex, Suffolk &
Essex |
Democratic |
| 15001 |
Hill, Daniel C. |
60 Sullivan Street, Charlestown |
Senate, Middlesex, Suffolk & Essex |
Democratic |
| 13783 |
Simmons, E. Denise |
188 Harvard Street #4B, Cambridge |
Senate, Middlesex, Suffolk & Essex |
Democratic |
| 13736 |
Decker, Marjorie C. |
61 Walden Street, Cambridge |
announced, not yet filed |
Democratic |
| 13239 |
Flaherty, Timothy |
5 Concord Avenue, Cambridge |
Senate, Middlesex, Suffolk & Essex |
Democratic |
| 15023 |
Albano, Michael J. |
32 Crest Avenue, Chelsea |
Senate, Middlesex, Suffolk & Essex |
Democratic |
We'll
likely learn on Monday whether or not Denise Simmons' bid is a
real one or just a poker move for leverage in the still unsettled
mayoral sweepstakes in Cambridge. Marjorie Decker is seen by many
as a long-shot candidate whose hope rests in being the only woman
candidate in a field where they may be significant vote-splitting.
She'll also have to share the union and real estate money with
some of the other candidates, but they all have the advantage of a
new calendar year with a blank ledger for campaign finance
donation limits. Denise Simmons's chances are between slim and
none for this Senate district, but she would likely harm Decker's
chances among Cambridge voters. Though Decker has not yet
officially filed as a candidate for the seat, she made it clear at
a Jan 14 meeting of the Cambridge Democratic City Committee that
she was running for the seat and had her campaign manager Jeni
Wheeler in tow.
It's
worth noting that about 30% of the district is in Everett and only
20% is in Cambridge with the remainder spread across portions of
Allston-Brighton, Somerville, Chelsea, Saugus, and Revere. Anthony
Galluccio was able to build substantial support in Everett which
was pivotal in his winning the seat in the 2007 Special Election
to replace former rival Jarrett Barrios. Much of that Galluccio
support will likely transfer to Everett City Council member Sal
DiDomenico who also has deep
roots in Cambridge. Tim Flaherty also ran for this seat in
2007 and should be able to quickly reassemble some of his campaign
apparatus for this relatively short election cycle. He also
retains some name recognition as a result of his previous run and
his family's history in Massachusetts politics. The other
Cambridge candidates are basically unknown outside the Peoples
Republic.
There's
no word yet on any challengers from any other political party, so
(as usual) the contest should be decided at a low-turnout party
primary on April 13. Then again, maybe Scott Brown has a cousin in
Revere who drives a pickup truck.
300 valid nominating
signatures due with local city and town officials - March
2, 2010
Primary Election - April
13, 2010
Special Election - May
11, 2010 |
|
Calendar for Special State
Election (U.S. Senate)
(to fill vacancy caused by the death of Senator
Edward M. Kennedy)
|
Calendar of Events |
Deadline Dates |
| Party
Candidates |
Non-Party
Candidates |
| Last day for a person running
in the state primary to enroll in a party or for a person
running only in the state election to unenroll from a party,
except for newly registered voters. |
August
5, 2009 |
August
5, 2009 |
| 5:00pm - last day and hour
for submitting nomination papers to local Registrars of
Voters or Election Commissioners for the certification of
signatures. |
October
20, 2009 |
November
24, 2009 |
| Certification of nomination
papers must be completed. |
October
29, 2009 |
December
3, 2009 |
| 5:00pm - last day and hour
for filing nomination papers, including enrollment
certificate, with the Secretary of the Commonwealth. |
November
3, 2009 |
December
8, 2009 |
| 5:00pm - last day and hour for
filing withdrawals of or objections to all nomination papers
and certificates of nomination with the Secretary of the
Commonwealth. |
November
6, 2009 |
December
11, 2009 |
| 5:00pm - last day and hour for
filling vacancies caused by withdrawals for primary
candidates. |
November
12, 2009 |
|
|
PLEASE NOTE: ALL
DATES AND DEADLINES BELOW ARE THE SAME FOR ALL CANDIDATES |
| Last day to register voters for
the state primary; registration hours 9:00am to 8:00pm
(except in towns under 1500 registered voters, registration
hours 2:00-4:00pm and 7:00-8:00pm). |
November
18, 2009 |
|
State Primary |
December
8, 2009 |
| 5:00pm - last day and hour for
filing withdrawals of or objections to nominations made at
the state primary and for filing written acceptances by
write-in or sticker candidates who won in the state primary
with the Secretary of the Commonwealth. |
December
14, 2009 |
| 5:00pm - last day and hour for
filling vacancies caused by withdrawals at the state
primary. |
December
17, 2009 |
| Last day to register voters for
the state election; registration hours 9:00am to 8:00pm
(except in towns under 1500 registered voters, registration
hours 2:00-4:00pm and 7:00-8:00pm). |
December
30, 2009 |
|
State Election |
January
19, 2010 |
10,000
certified signatures required for all candidates.
A
Candidate's Guide to Special Elections (PDF, 670k)
also
available from:
Elections Division
One Ashburton Place, Room 1705
Boston, MA 02108-1512
Telephone 617-727-2828 or 800-462-8683
For
information about campaign contributions and expenses
contact:
Federal Election Commission
999 East Street N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20463
800-424-9530
This Calendar
was announced on Monday, August 31, 2009 by the Secretary of the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. |
|
CCJ
Goes National! .... not really
Feb
10, 2008 - It's been entertaining to watch how CNN and Faux
News have been giving saturation coverage to this year's
presidential race. You would think that with that many talking
heads at least a few of them might actually try to quantify their
data juggernaut. Perhaps it's the proximity of Super Tuesday and
the Super Bowl, but it seems to me that it's all been treated like
a sports event and the news stations are obsessed with declaring
who the winners are.
Here
are a few observations I would make about the whole show:
1
- Apparently, the George Bush era has left Democrats lost in the
desert in search of meaning. Now that the Bush era is finally
coming to a close, many Democrats are seeking not so much a
president but a messiah. Enter Barack Obama. In the lexicon of
politics, this is a fabulous example of ultra-sandbagging, i.e.
raising expectations to such stratospheric levels that the
candidate can never live up to the hype. I think Obama's a decent
guy with a decent head on his shoulders, but to paraphrase Lloyd
Bentzen, “Senator, I served with the Messiah. I knew the
Messiah. The Messiah was a friend of mine, and Senator, you're no
Messiah.” Can you image any way that Obama can live up to the
expectations of his disciples?
2
- What exactly did Hillary Rodham Clinton ever do to inspire so
many right-wingers and left-wingers to hate her so much? The
right-wingers seem to never have gotten over Hillary's famous “You
know, I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had
teas...” quote. While the right-wingers see Hillary as the
ultimate liberal, the lefties have never gotten past husband
Bill's “end welfare as we know it” remarks in his first State
of the Union speech. Social welfare programs, after all, have been
the mother's milk of Democratic politics for 70+ years, so I
suppose anyone who advocates welfare reform surely must be a
conservative. But wait... wasn't that Bill Clinton's policy? Oh,
yeah, it's “The Clintons” who are running for the presidency.
Hillary Clinton has to answer not only for anything she's ever
said and done but also for Mister Bill's every action. Personally,
I don't know a whole lot about feminism, but it's not hard to see
the misogyny in most of the Hillary-haters on the right and on the
left.
3
- On the Republican side of the circus, John McCain is being
subjected to a similar crossfire from left and right. Many
conservatives hate him for his positions on campaign finance
reform, on his realistic views on immigration, and more. I suspect
they also worry that he might, God forbid, want to keep the
separation between church and state. Meanwhile, the lefties have
become convinced that McCain is the ultimate war hawk, possibly
based on his comments about the US keeping some military presence
in Iraq for the next 50 years. Let's see now... we still have
military bases in Germany even though World War II ended in 1945,
and US soldiers can still be found in Korea over 50 years since
the end of the Korean War. I believe the McCain-haters from both
sides hate him because, like Clinton, he's a centrist - a moderate
- and a reasonable moderate is the greatest threat to those who
dwell at either end of the political spectrum.
4
- Personally, I don't pay a whole lot of attention to the
professed positions of any of the candidates. Once a candidate is
elected, the realities of the job generally take precedence over
any prior positions. The intelligence and character of the actual
person are really the only things that matter. I would like to
know that if a crisis came, the next president would be able to
exhibit the right mix of sense and fortitude to take the country
through it. I'm no fan of the Iraq War and would like to see a
reduction of US presence there, but I certainly wouldn't want the
next president to build foreign policy entirely out of the need to
fulfill a campaign promise. Some things should transcend political
posturing. I'm reminded of Reagan's quote “You got to dance with
the one that brung you.” This refers to the political practice
of doing the bidding of whatever constituency helped get you
elected. Bill Clinton routinely broke that rule and infuriated the
left wing of the Democratic Party. It's an open question whether
Barack Obama would stand up to The Left or if John McCain would
stand up to The Right. If Hillary Clinton is anything like her
husband Bill, she'll piss off The Left and The Right. That might
not be such a bad thing.
5
- I've been looking over the numbers from the Democratic primaries
and caucuses. Generally speaking, Clinton's done well in the
primaries and Obama's done well in the caucuses. Why the
difference? My hypothesis is that caucuses are generally the
province of the hardcore - for both parties. That's certainly
been my experience with local caucuses in Cambridge. They are
about the least representative political sample, but the party
power brokers love them because they are easier to manipulate than
the electorate. In Massachusetts, those who attend the Democratic
Party State Convention have about as much in common with
registered Democrats as a fish has with a bicycle. I can only
assume that other states have a similar disconnection between
party animals and the electorate. Here are some numbers:
| Caucus
states for Democratic Party |
| State |
“Winner” |
Percentage of
registered voters who participated |
| Minnesota |
Obama |
6.9% |
| Colorado |
Obama |
4.1% |
| North Dakota |
Obama |
3.8% |
| Nebraska |
Obama |
3.4% |
| Idaho |
Obama |
3.1% |
| Kansas |
Obama |
2.2% |
| Nevada |
Clinton |
1.0% |
| Washington |
Obama |
0.86% |
| Maine |
Obama |
0.35% |
| Iowa |
Obama |
0.12% |
| Alaska |
Obama |
0.09% |
| Note:
In caucus states, Obama leads in delegates 278-148
(margin of 130) as of Feb 16, 12:20am. Only Hawaii
(Feb 19) and Wyoming (Mar 8) remain for the caucus states. |
| Primary
states for Democratic Party |
| State |
“Winner” |
Percentage of
registered voters who participated |
| New Hampshire |
Clinton |
33.4% |
| Massachusetts |
Clinton |
31.2% |
| Dist. Of Columbia |
Obama |
30.5% |
| Illinois |
Obama |
27.0% (Obama's home
state) |
| California |
Clinton |
26.2% |
| Maryland |
Obama |
24.0% |
| New Jersey |
Clinton |
23.1% |
| South Carolina |
Obama |
21.2% |
| Virginia |
Obama |
21.2% |
| Georgia |
Obama |
20.3% |
| Alabama |
Obama |
19.8% |
| Missouri |
Obama |
19.6% |
| Oklahoma |
Clinton |
19.3% |
| Arkansas |
Clinton |
18.5% (Clinton's former
home state) |
| Connecticut |
Obama |
17.6% |
| Delaware |
Obama |
16.9% |
| Tennessee |
Clinton |
16.8% |
| Florida |
Clinton |
16.5% (The state's 210
delegates are currently disqualified.) |
| New York |
Clinton |
15.3% (Clinton's
current home state) |
| New Mexico |
Clinton |
13.0% |
| Arizona |
Clinton |
12.8% |
| Louisiana |
Obama |
12.6% |
| Michigan |
Clinton |
8.3% (The state's 156
delegates are currently disqualified.) |
| Utah |
Obama |
7.2% |
| Note:
In primary states, Clinton leads in
delegates 1065-984 (margin of 81) as of Feb
16, 12:20am. Upcoming primaries include Washington, Wisconsin
(Feb 19); Ohio,
Rhode
Island, Texas,
Vermont (Mar 4); Mississippi (Mar 11); Pennsylvania
(Apr 22); Indiana, North Carolina (May 6); West Virginia
(May 13); Kentucky, Oregon (May 20); Montana and South
Dakota (June 3). |
| Note: Statistics
derived from CNN website. |
-- Robert Winters |
|
|
Sept
22, 2007 - Final Official Results in
the Special Primary Election to succeed Jarrett Barrios in the
State Senate.
| Candidate |
Cambridge |
Boston |
Everett |
Somerville |
Chelsea |
Revere |
Saugus |
Total |
Pct |
| Galluccio |
1178 |
836 |
1584 |
188 |
331 |
386 |
187 |
4690 |
42.09% |
| Nowicki |
29 |
414 |
751 |
12 |
1414 |
206 |
142 |
2968 |
26.63% |
| Flaherty |
671 |
735 |
571 |
74 |
186 |
66 |
60 |
2383 |
21.20% |
| Ross |
380 |
192 |
208 |
58 |
178 |
21 |
68 |
1105 |
9.92% |
| Write-ins |
4 |
6 |
6 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
18 |
0.16% |
| Total |
2262 |
2183 |
3120 |
332 |
2109 |
679 |
459 |
11144 |
100% |
| Blanks |
1 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
36 |
3 |
1 |
45 |
- |
Source:
Massachusetts Secretary of State's Office
Sept
11, 2007, 9:43pm - According to the Cambridge Chronicle, it
appears that Anthony Galluccio has prevailed
in the Special Primary Election to succeed Jarrett Barrios
in the State Senate. Details as they come in may be found at http://blogs.townonline.com/campolitics/
The
news story is here: http://www.townonline.com/cambridge/homepage/x1822773381
Preliminary
results as of the day after Election Day, as reported by the
Cambridge Chronicle:
| Candidate |
Cambridge |
Allston/Brighton |
Charlestown |
Everett |
Somerville |
Chelsea |
Revere |
Saugus |
Total |
Pct |
| Galluccio |
1119 |
170 |
644 |
1451 |
188 |
322 |
386 |
187 |
4467 |
41.76% |
| Nowicki |
28 |
25 |
380 |
691 |
12 |
1387 |
206 |
142 |
2871 |
26.84% |
| Flaherty |
666 |
227 |
496 |
507 |
74 |
176 |
66 |
60 |
2272 |
21.24% |
| Ross |
370 |
99 |
91 |
195 |
58 |
175 |
21 |
68 |
1077 |
10.07% |
| Write-ins |
4 |
* |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
0.09% |
| Total |
2187 |
521 |
1617 |
2844 |
332 |
2060 |
679 |
457 |
10697 |
100% |
| Blanks |
|
* |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
The
Middlesex, Suffolk, & Essex State Senate Race gets ugly
What
started out as a sleepy little filling of a vacancy in the State
Senate has, as Primary Election Day (Tues, Sept 11) approaches,
begun to show signs of a schoolyard fistfight - a fight primarily
waged not only by the candidates but by various surrogates and
other interested parties. We've all heard by now about the
well-orchestrated campaign to portray Anthony Galluccio in the
harshest possible light over his past indiscretions. One need look
no further than Blue Mass
Group to see how three
bloggers will pull out all stops to torpedo a candidate and
put all Democratic Party candidates on notice as to whose rings
must be kissed. The BMG Three decided to
whack Galluccio early, and the only thing left to decide was
which candidate to back who could hurt Galluccio the most. They
chose Tim
Flaherty to be that candidate. Blue Mass Group has often been
a good source of current information on political matters, but the
BMG environment has grown increasingly hostile of late, and a
principal focus has been on explicit and implicit endorsements of
candidates by the owners of the weblog.
Not
to be outdone by the arbiters of democracy on BMG, one commenter
on that blog recently posted
comments that attempt to connect Tim Flaherty's candidacy with
proponents of casino gambling in Massachusetts. It's true that
Flaherty has accepted some large donations from people associated
with the gaming industry and his responses to questions on casino
gambling have been that it's a done deal and that the only things
left to decide are when, where, and how. The fact that Flaherty's
father, former House Speaker Charlie Flaherty, is a lobbyist for
the gaming industry did not go unnoticed by this blogger. Recent
literature from Jeff Ross, by the way, has focused on
distinguishing himself from his opponents as being the only one
unambiguously opposed to casino gambling.
Perhaps
the biggest blockbuster is the posting that appeared on BMG early
Sunday morning (Sept 9) that reads like an indictment of Jeff
Ross. In this very long post, entitled simply “Questions for
Jeff Ross”, writer Larry Lopez laid out a scathing criticism of
the financial, professional, and personal life of Ross. I have no
idea about the validity of the claims, but it does hang together
pretty well and it's hard to ignore. It definitely offers a
decidedly different view of "The Progressive Democrat"
in this race. [Update: The Larry
Lopez posting about Jeff Ross was expunged mid-day Sunday
without explanation but has now been restored on Sunday evening.
(I had the foresight to save it - just in case). Since all four
candidates are lawyers, one could easily see how threats of libel
could be a factor in its temporary disappearance. Curiously, any
and all allegations about Galluccio remain and have been
consistently promoted at BMG.]
My
preference would be for candidates to be measured on the merits
rather than on any real or alleged personal failings. Wasn't that
the original motive of "MoveOn.org" when they got
started during the Republican campaign to destroy Bill Clinton?
They advocated that we should "Move On" from all the
scandalizing tactics. MoveOn now seems to have declared themselves
to be the arbiters of all that is right and wrong in America.
Under current quasi-journalistic “gotcha” standards, every
indiscretion is potentially a political death sentence. Joe
McCarthy would be proud.
And
then there are the newspapers. Tim Flaherty has invested a good
deal of money in surveys and media consultants as part of what
I've heard referred to as his “smash and grab” strategy to win
this election. He managed to win the Boston Globe
endorsement, but there's no knowing who was involved in that
process, i.e. who was talking to whom, and many have noted that
the endorsement was light on details. The local paper, the Cambridge
Chronicle, also gave Flaherty the nod, but the combined
institutional memory at that paper is quite short. A well-packaged
load of BS can have a lot of impact under those conditions. Sadly,
the Chronicle seems to place a lot of weight on Galluccio's
storied past and on Flaherty's pretended future. Cambridge's other
little North Cambridge paper, The Alewife, gave the nod to
Galluccio but strangely used the unrelated (and silly) issue of
having a directly elected mayor in their reasoning to move
Galluccio out and up the political ladder.
And
then there's the Wolf factor. When all four candidates were asked
by Scott Harshbarger at a recent forum which of the two previous
occupants of the Senate seat, Tom Birmingham or Jarrett Barrios,
they might want to emulate, Paul Nowicki stole the show by joking
that he was “better-looking than both of them.” Galluccio said
something like "I'll be a flaming liberal in Cambridge and
Italian as hell in Chelsea" and got some well-deserved laughs
for that. However, when it was Flaherty's turn, he said he would
want to emulate State Representative Alice Wolf - and bowed to her
as he said it. Anyone who's been watching Cambridge politics for a
while knows that Galluccio and Wolf were opponents on two
occasions for the seat now occupied by Wolf, and that Wolf
defeated Galluccio on both occasions. It is also common knowledge
that Wolf at least feigned interest in running for this Senate
seat not only when Barrios was considering running for District
Attorney, but also when Barrios resigned to initiate the current
contest. It would seem that Wolf feels compelled to defeat
Galluccio even when she's not willing to risk being a candidate.
[By the way, a pretty good account (without spin) of the most
recent State Senate debate is available here.]
From
this writer's perspective, the two candidates who have shined
brightly through all of this process have been Paul Nowicki
and Anthony Galluccio. There's been barely a hint of BS
from either of them, they have very comparable experience as city
councillors and as Chairs of their respective city councils, and
they both exhibit a wealth of detail in the mechanics of what
works and doesn't work in their respective parts of the district.
Experience matters a lot more than talking points written by media
consultants.
--
Robert Winters Sept 9, 2007 |
|
Thurs, Sept 6, 2007
7:00pm Democratic
Candidates for State Senate Forum - moderated by Scott Harshbarger
(Lesley University in the Porter Exchange Building, 1815 Mass.
Ave., Porter Square)
The
Cambridge Democratic City Committee will hold a public
forum on September 6, 2007 featuring the four Democratic
candidates seeking to replace Jarrett Barrios as the state senator
representing the Middlesex, Suffolk, & Essex District (MSE).
Moderated
by Scott Harshbarger, former Attorney General of Massachusetts and
Democratic nominee for Governor in 1998, the forum will be the
last debate before the special Democratic primary election on
Tuesday, September 11, 2007.
The
four Democratic candidates are: Tim Flaherty, Anthony
Galluccio, Paul Nowicki, and Jeff Ross. The
senate seat opened in July when Sen. Jarrett Barrios resigned to
become President of the Blue Cross Blue Shield Foundation.
The
candidates will answer questions submitted by the audience and
posed by the moderator, as well as ask and answer questions from
each other. From 7 to 7:30 p.m., the audience will be able to meet
the candidates. The debate will begin promptly at 7:30pm and end
at 9:00pm. The event will be held at Lesley University, in the 2nd
floor Amphitheatre of University Hall (formerly Porter Exchange).
The
MSE District includes parts of Cambridge (11 of 33 precincts), as
well as Charlestown, Chelsea, Everett, and parts of
Allston-Brighton, Revere, Saugus and Somerville. The District
includes voters who vote at the following Cambridge polling
places: DPW Headquarters, City Hall Annex, Vernon Hall, Youville
Hospital, Baldwin School, Gund Hall, Graham & Parks School,
Friends Center or Lexington Fire House.
The
Cambridge Democratic City Committee is the grassroots arm of the
Massachusetts Democratic Party in Cambridge. Meetings are open to
the public and any Democrat registered to vote in the city is
eligible to become a member or associate member.
This
event will be held from 7:00pm to 9:00pm at Lesley University, 2nd
floor Amphitheatre of University Hall (formerly Porter Exchange),
located at 1815 Massachusetts Avenue in Cambridge and one block
from the Porter Square T stop. The event is free and open to the
public.
Special
Election Calendar |
Aug
7, 2007 - Four candidates on the ballot for the Sept 11 primary to fill
the State Senate seat vacated by Jarrett Barrios
According
to the Mass. Secretary of State's Office, four candidates have met the
required minimum of 300 certified voter signatures to qualify for the
Sept 11 Democratic primary election. They are Cambridge City Councillor Anthony
Galluccio, Cambridge resident Tim Flaherty, Jeff Ross
(who only moved to Cambridge when Barrios announced he was vacating his
seat), and Chelsea City Councillor Paul Nowicki. At least two
other potential candidates filed signatures but failed to meet the
minimum. To the best of my knowledge, there are no Republican or
independent candidates at this time for the Oct 9 general election, so
the winner on Sept 11 will almost certainly be the one to succeed
Barrios.
It
is in the nature of special elections that the winner is often the
candidate who can conduct the most effective get-out-the-vote campaign
to get "their voters" to the polls on election day. In this
race, that advantage probably goes to Galluccio who has built up a
substantial organization in Everett and elsewhere in addition to his
home town. Other candidates, notably Nowicki and Ross, are resorting to
"robo-calls" - pre-recorded phone messages delivered to every
available phone number in the district like e-mail SPAM. It's not clear
how effective these calls are, but it seems like a popular alternative
for candidates with little or no field organization. Time will tell how
much money is sunk into this race by the four candidates, but the word
on the street is that Mr. Ross has already committed to pulling
$100,000+ of his own money out of his carpetbag to buy this seat - a
very "progressive" sum indeed.
A
most unfortunate outcome in this race would be for the three Cambridge
candidates to split the Cambridge vote and hand the election to the
other candidate with less than a majority vote. This most unfortunate
side-effect of plurality elections is preventable by having a runoff
election (or using "Instant Runoff Voting"), but a this is not
an option for this election and will likely never be available as an
option as long as our head-in-the-sand Mass. Democratic Party remains
comfortable with the devil they know. Neither the Democratic nor
Republican parties in Massachusetts have expressed much interest, if
any, in reforms proposed in the name of achieving fair elections. -- RW
June 12,
2007 - Galluccio's Running.... Wolf is Not
The
Cambridge Chronicle today reported that State Representative Alice
Wolf sent a fax saying, “After much thought, I have decided not to
run for the senate seat being vacated by Senator Barrios. There are many
factors that played a part in my decision, and the strongest factor is
that I love my job serving in the House of Representatives and
representing the people of Cambridge and the 25th Middlesex district. I
appreciate all the support and encouragement I have received from my
constituents and from people across the senate district. I look forward
to continuing to work with them on common goals.”
Later
in the day, Anthony Galluccio told the Chronicle that he would be
seeking the seat.
Here's
the Chronicle
story on Galluccio's entry into the race for the seat being
vacated by Jarrett Barrios.
It
is my understanding that Chelsea City Council President Roseann “Rosie”
Bongiovanni will also be a candidate for the seat. [Nope - not
registered as a Democrat]]
|
2007
Municipal Election Calendar (and Advice for Candidates)
Mon,
July 2: Municipal Election Nomination
Papers available at Election Commission office,
8:30am-8:00pm. Nomination papers will be available through the
July 31 submission deadline, but it is advisable that a candidate
pick up papers early and get started collecting signatures. The
process is an excellent way for a new candidates to “get their
feet wet” and acclimate to the process of asking for support.
The first page of your nomination papers must be notarized, by the
way, and there are a total of three sheets. [Kinko's will notarize
documents, by the way.]
You will also want to get a current database of registered voters.
This is available from the Election Commission free of charge to
any candidate who has pulled nomination papers. Voter history
files and the street listing are also available. If you are a
legitimate candidate and want a merged file showing all currently
registered Cambridge voters with their ten year voting history in
Cambridge elections (if they voted - not who they voted for!!),
you can request
it from me free of charge.
Tues,
July 31: 5pm deadline to submit
nomination papers & statements of financial
interest for candidates. A minimum of 50 valid signatures must be
filed and a candidate may submit up to 100 signatures. Once a
voter's signature has been recorded for a particular candidate, it
cannot be used for another candidate in the same race. That is, a
voter should sign for exactly one candidate for City Council and
one candidate for School Committee. Candidates should submit as
many signatures as possible over the minimum of 50 because it is
very likely that some signatures will not be certified. It is
advisable that all signatures be checked against the voter
registration list before submitting them. Candidates do not have
to submit all their signatures at one time, and it is advisable
that signatures be submitted as each sheet becomes full. The
Election Commission staff traditionally checks signatures soon
after they are submitted, so it is possible to know how many
signatures have been tentatively certified in case it is necessary
to obtain more signatures to reach the minimum of 50 certified
signatures. Actual certification is only official when the
Election Commission votes to approve them.
Tues,
Aug 14: 5pm deadline for Election Commission to certify
signatures on nomination papers.
Thurs,
Aug 16: 5pm deadline for municipal candidates to file
withdrawal of nomination.
Wed,
Oct 17: 8pm deadline to register to vote in municipal
election. In person registration hours are 8:30am to 8:00pm at the
Election Commission office only. (Mail in registration must be
postmarked by October 17).
Mon,
Oct 29: 5pm deadline for School Committee candidates and
Political Committees to file Municipal Campaign & Political
Finance Reports. (City Council candidates should consult their
OCPF packets regarding depository-filing requirements). City
Council candidates are required under state law to set up a
depository account at a bank. The bank will report all deposits
and expenditures directly to the state's Office of Campaign and
Political Finance (OCPF). School Committee candidates are not
required to set up a depository account, but they must file a
campaign finance report in mid-October and at the end of the year.
Sat,
Nov 3: Election Commission office will be open 9am to 5pm for
over-the-counter absentee voting.
Mon,
Nov 5: Noontime deadline to apply for absentee ballot, either
for mail-in or over-the-counter voting.
Tues,
Nov 6: Municipal Election.
Polls are open 7:00am until 8:00pm. All absentee ballots must
arrive at the Election Commission office by 8:00pm to be counted.
Ballot count begins at the Cambridge Senior Center, 806 Mass.
Ave., Central Square after the polls close. It is expected that
the Election Commission will report preliminary election
results Tuesday evening, but this tally does not include
write-in ballots and other ballots not counted for a variety of
reasons.
Wed,
Nov 7: 9am-5pm. Ballot count resumes at Senior Center, 806
Mass. Ave., Central Square. The entire process is usually complete
by early evening and the unofficial election results will
be announced upon completion. Federal law requires an additional
ten days to allow for any overseas military absentee ballots to
arrive, and the final official election results will be
announced then. [There were no such ballots in the 2005 election.]
The
Election Commission Office is open Mon, 8:30am-8:00pm; Tues-Thurs,
8:30am-5:00pm; and Fri, 8:30am-Noon (except July 4, Sept 3, and
Oct 8).
The
2007 Cambridge Candidate
Pages are now under construction. Check back as the
campaign season progresses. |
Q:
Who's to succeed Robert Travaglini in the Mass. Senate? The Special
(Democratic) Primary Election is May 29. The uncontested state election
is June 26. - Answer: Petrucelli
Anthony Petruccelli: http://anthonypetruccelli.com
Dan Rizzo: http://danrizzo.org
|
Mar
27 - NEWS RELEASE - Toomey Will Not Seek Senate Seat
Cambridge,
MA -State Representative Timothy J. Toomey, Jr. (D -
Cambridge/Somerville) has decided not to run for the State Senate
seat vacated by former Senate President Robert Travaglini.
“I
am incredibly appreciative of the many people that offered their
support and backing,” Toomey said. “In the end, however, I
realized that what I love most about being in politics is the
daily interaction with my friends, neighbors and constituents in
Somerville and Cambridge.”
“I
have proudly served the people of the 26th Middlesex District for
the last 15 years as their State Representative and I've been a
Cambridge City Councilor for the past 18 years. The people of
Somerville and Cambridge have supported me time and time again,
election after election. If I had entered this race, all of my
energy and focus would have been on the campaign. I feel that the
campaign and demands of representing an expanded district would
detract from the attention and care I am used to giving to my
constituent base in Cambridge and Somerville, and today I reaffirm
my commitment to the families of Somerville and Cambridge.”
“A
victory in the special election would have pulled me away from
projects and issues in Somerville that I have been involved in for
years,” Toomey said. “The Green Line extension and
redevelopment of Assembly Square will have a major impact on the
future of East Somerville and Union Square and I am determined to
continue to make sure that the interests of my constituents are
considered. New Americans face tremendous social and economic
injustices; I want to remain a leader in the fight for immigrant
rights at the local and state level. My constituents need more
affordable housing, better access to quality health care and help
in keeping their neighborhoods safe. Those are their priorities
and those are my priorities.” |
Nov 1 - What
the gubernatorial election it's really all about: Speculating
rampant on filling state positions (Boston Globe)
|
Ex-Boston
City Councilor Scondras nabbed in underage sex sting
(Boston Herald, Oct 10, 2006)
It's
nice when a first-rate fraud and total jerk like Scondras gets
what's coming to him. Do you think maybe the Area 4 crowd will
want their award back? Perhaps they'll make half an effort to
find out more about their recipients in the future. I guess the
“Progressive Democrats of Cambridge” will have to find
someone else's house for their barbecues.
Boston
Globe article (Oct 11,
2006) Boston Herald article
(Oct 11, 2006 - link expired)
Oct
12, 2006 update - Scondras seems determined to drag others
down into his personal cesspool. Here's what
he said to Margery Eagan of the Boston Herald on Oct 11: “I
would love to tell you everything - I really would - and I’ve
been ordered not to, but I’m assuming that when I’m able to
talk you’ll still be interested. Ken Reeves (Mayor of
Cambridge) might give you something.” Full
article by Margery Eagan
This
is really something. As Scondras self-destructs, he chooses to
drag his friends down with him. He's now drafting Ken Reeves to
be his personal press secretary. [For those who don't know,
Scondras was planning to run for a City Council seat in 2007.]
And
now there's more. The
Herald is reporting on Deval Patrick visiting Scondras'
house with Ken Reeves for an Aug 27 barbeque. No fault of the
candidate, mind you, but on what planet does visiting trash
like Scondras help someone's political career?
The
Cambridge Chronicle (which wrote a puff piece on Scondras on
August 24) is also reporting
the story. The Eagle Tribune (N. Andover) provides additional
details.
Oct
13 update - Scondras' contract with the City of Cambridge as
Area 4 Community Liaison ($20K/yr) was terminated on
October 10. |
September Primary -- Cambridge
Election Results (33 of 33 precincts - 100%) - These
are just the Cambridge results!
|
Governor
(Democratic)
Deval L. Patrick 12,315 (72.33%)
Christopher F. Gabrieli 2554 (15.00%)
Thomas F. Reilly 2141 (12.57%)
Lieutenant
Governor (Democratic)
Andrea C. Silbert 5201 (34.44%)
Timothy P. Murray 5124 (33.93%)
Deborah B. Goldberg 4746 (31.43%) |
Secretary
of State (Democratic)
William Francis Galvin 9659 (70.81%)
John Bonifaz 3939 (28.88%)
Clerk
of Courts (Democratic)
Michael A. Sullivan 11,662 (85.52%)
[and he won BIG everywhere - good
going, Mike!]
Bruce M. Desmond 1949 (14.29%)
United
States Senator (Republican)
Kenneth G. Chase 177 (62.54%)
Kevin P. Scott 101 (35.69%) |
|
|
Today's
Quiz Questions - Sept 15, 2006
I just
compiled the merged database of all currently registered
Cambridge voters with their voting histories since 1997. There
are now 58,068 registered voters in Cambridge. Of these, 45,680
have voted at least once in Cambridge since 1997.
Quiz
#1 -- How many of these registered voters have voted in
Cambridge in the last 14 consecutive elections, including
primaries?
Quiz
#2 -- How many have voted in Cambridge in the last 5
consecutive general elections (Nov 2001 - Nov 2005)?
Let
me know your answers to the quiz questions. [click to send
e-mail]
Sept
16 addendum: Here's the breakdown of Cambridge registered
voters by party designation:
| 33,670 - Democrat |
262 - Libertarian |
3 - Natural Law Party |
1 - Reform Party |
| 20,072 - Unenrolled |
57 - Independent 3rd Party |
2 - Conservative Party |
1 - Rainbow-Coalition |
| 3,447 - Republican |
34 - Green Party USA |
2 - American Independent |
1 - Prohibition Party |
| 503 - Green-Rainbow |
10 - Socialist |
2 - America First Party |
1 - World Citizens Party |
|
Sept 6,
2006 - Recommended reading: Elections
aren't about issues (Boston Globe Op-Ed by Paul Waldman)
Do you really
want to read up on the defining issues in the Massachusetts
gubernatorial election?
Read
the MassINC Briefing Book.
|
Sept
2 - A few electoral thoughts for a September Day
Mexico
Elections - I have not yet seen a news report noting that
the real problem with the disputed Mexican presidential election
is that it's a plurality winner-take-all system with no runoff
provision. Obrador is claiming that he is the legitimate victor
in the election due to irregularities in the vote, but there
were actually five candidates in this election and there's no
way Obrador would have even been close if there had been any
kind of runoff, be it Instant Runoff or a typical "top
two" runoff election. The preliminary totals were: Felipe
Calderón 35.89%, Andrés Manuel López Obrador 35.31%, Roberto
Madrazo 22.26%, Patricia Mercado Castro 2.70%, Roberto Campa
Cifrián 0.96%. The remaining 2.88% consists of write-ins and
invalid ballots. I'm no expert in Mexican presidential politics,
but it seems certain that the Madrazo voters would be much more
likely to choose Calderón than Obrador as their next choice.
Recent polls indicate that if a head-to-head contest between the
two leading candidates were held today, Mexican voters would
choose Calderón over Obrador by a 25% margin.
The
most amazing thing is not the continuing controversy of the
election result, but the fact that no media outlet even mentions
the issue of the flawed election mechanism. This is yet more
evidence that elections are, in the minds of most voters, more
about sports than governance or democracy. If people really
believe in majority rule, they should insist on runoff elections
of one form or another.
Massachusetts
Gubernatorial Primary Election - Cambridge is quite a little
fishbowl. If you follow local Democratic party politics, you'd
think that Saint Patrick (Deval Patrick, that is) and Andrea
Silbert were the only legitimate choices among the Democratic
hopefuls for governor and lieutenant governor. I guess this will
make me a pariah among local Democrats, but I just don't see the
appeal of Deval Patrick. He tells all the lefties everything
they want to hear and they fawn over him as if he were the
second coming of Christ (or the first, depending on your
perspective). I haven't yet decided how I'm voting in the
primary, but I find a policy wonk like Chris Gabrielli or a guy
who worked his way up through the ranks like Tom Reilly a lot
more appealing than a self-anointed saint exalted by a
constituency of lost souls, i.e. the Cambridge Democratic City
Committee. [I am a member of the CDCC, but I see myself as a
representative of the moderate minority. The compositions of the
Democratic City Committee and all registered Democrats in
Cambridge have little in common, in my opinion.]
Regarding
the upcoming Democratic primary (Sept 19), my prediction is that
Patrick's statewide total is capped at about 36-38% of the vote
and he wouldn't have a chance in a two-person race. His best
chance is for Reilly and Gabrielli to remain in a dead heat in
the days leading up to the election. If one of them falls behind
in the polls in the closing days before the primary, voters will
switch to the other to increase the margin and eclipse Patrick.
If this happens, you may see a final result like Gabrielli 38%,
Patrick 36%, Reilly 28% (assuming Gabrielli is the one in
front). Then again, I could be full of beans. In any case,
there's a very real chance that the winner of the primary will
be someone who would not have won had there been a runoff
election mechanism.
In
Europe, people think about the mechanics of elections.
Proportional representation and runoff elections are standard
practice. It's funny to think that in the USA we talk about
exporting democracy to places like Iraq and Afghanistan, yet we
never propose election systems there like our own. I guess
that's a good thing. - RW |
|
July
12, 2006 Constitutional Convention - The Mass. Senate and
House are meeting today in joint session for the Constitutional
Convention to consider numerous proposed initiatives, including
the first round for the proposed constitutional amendment to
prohibit same sex marriage. Click
here for the complete agenda for the session.
The
agenda gives the full text of the proposed amendments and
special rules governing the constitutional convention. The short
list of initiatives is as follows:
1.
Proposal for a Legislative Amendment to the Constitution
creating a permanent "Rainy Day" fund to provide
stable revenues for the Commonwealth.
2.
An Initiative Amendment to the Constitution relative to the
provision of health insurance.
3.
Proposal for a legislative laws created by the people using the
Initiative process.
4.
Proposal for a legislative amendment to the Constitution
relative to Constitutional officers.
5.
Proposal for a legislative amendment to the Constitution
allowing absentee voting.
6.
Proposal for a legislative amendment to the Constitution
electing the Lieutenant Governor and Governor separately.
7.
Proposal for a legislative amendment to the Constitution
increasing the term of the General Court from two to four years.
8.
Proposal for a legislative amendment to the Constitution
establishing an independent redistricting commission and
criteria for redistricting.
9.
Proposal for a legislative amendment to the Constitution
promoting the representative character of ballot questions.
10.
Proposal for a legislative amendment to the Constitution
relative to vacancies in the Governor’s Council.
11.
Proposal for a legislative amendment to the Constitution
relative to the certification of judges.
12.
Proposal for a legislative amendment to the Constitution
establishing county government.
13.
Proposal for a legislative amendment to the Constitution
relative to emergency appointments of elected officials.
14.
Proposal for a legislative amendment to the Constitution
authorizing the General Court to provide for absentee voting.
15.
Proposal for legislative amendment to the Constitution relative
to a vacancy in the office of Governor or Lieutenant-Governor.
16.
Proposal for legislative amendment to the Constitution to change
the length of term for Representatives and Senators from two
years to four years.
17.
Proposal for legislative amendment to the Constitution relative
to redistricting for the House of Representatives, Senate and
Governor’s Council.
18.
Proposal for legislative amendment to the Constitution to define
marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
19.
An Initiative Amendment to the Constitution relative to the
definition of marriage.
20.
A Proposal for a Legislative Amendment to the Constitution
prohibiting eminent domain takings for the purpose of economic
development.
Addendum
- The Constitutional Convention adjourned (by design) before
getting to the controversial item regarding prohibition of
same-sex marriage. Conveniently, the legislators chose to delay
the vote until after Election Day. Regardless of how one feels
about the underlying issue, it's insulting to voters and
democracy itself to push this past Election Day. If the
opponents felt a delay was needed to convince fence-sitting
legislators to vote this down, then they could have reconvened
in October. |
June 3,
2006 - The good folks at the Boston
Globe hit the nail on the head in today's editorial (see below).
Let's not forget that when voters had an actual choice between Jarrett
Barrios and Gerry Leone for District Attorney, Barrios dropped out. Then
when voters had a choice between Anthony Galluccio and Jarrett Barrios
for State Senate, Galluccio dropped out. Could there be anything more
insulting to voters? The Democratic Party delegates at this weekend's
convention will have an opportunity to deliver the worst insult of all.
If they prevent either Tom Reilly or Chris Gabrielli from being on the
September primary ballot, they will have raised a middle finger at all
registered Democrats and unenrolled voters in Massachusetts. Same goes
if they fail to give John Bonifaz a place on the September primary
ballot for Secretary of State. – RW
Addendum
- Gabrielli, Patrick, and Reilly will all be on the September Democratic
Primary ballot for governor. Tim Murray, Andrea Silbert and Deb Goldberg
will all be on the ballot for Lt. Governor. Both John Bonifaz and
William Galvin will be on the ballot for Secretary of State. Now, if
only we had Instant Runoff Voting for the three-way races we could
determine a majority winner and not have to worry about vote-splitting.
Look to Vermont if you're really a progressive.
Incumbents
rule – June 3, 2006 Boston Globe Editorial
RESULTS
ARE in from the candidate filings with city and town clerks statewide,
and the winners are: the incumbents. And the losers are: the voters.
Only
14 of the Senate's 40 seats, and only 58 of the 160 seats in the House,
are being contested this year, raising the question of where democracy
has gone.
If
you think of it, to “elect” means to choose. If there's no choice,
how can there be an election? And if there's no true election, where's
the democracy?
The
fact is that Massachusetts has a disgraceful record of
non-competitiveness in its legislative races, ranking worst, or next
worst, of all the states over the last two decades. The 2004 state
election saw what appeared to be a healthy spike, with 125 of the 200
seats contested, largely due to Republican Governor Mitt Romney's
efforts to recruit Republican challengers. But most were ineffective.
And those who followed the advice of Romney's hired consultants ran
bruising attack campaigns that were rightly and soundly squashed by the
voters. The GOP lost seats in both branches.
Romney
could have tried again, with better technique, but he did not. So now
the ledger is back near its low point, with candidates in nearly
two-thirds of the districts running completely unopposed. One reason is
that the General Court is full of legislators who think the current
system is fine -- after all, it put them in office. So when a reform
such as the public-financing Clean Elections Law comes along seeking to
give challengers a better chance, legislators kill it, even though it
was approved by the voters. It is an equal-opportunity travesty: Despite
the dominance of the Democratic Party in the Legislature, Republican
incumbents are almost as likely to escape challenge as the Democrats.
The
phenomenon is not confined to the Legislature. In an extraordinary
development, the high office of attorney general, being vacated by Tom
Reilly, will apparently go to Middlesex District Attorney Martha Coakley
uncontested by a challenger from either party. [Correction:
Coakley will face Republican challenger Lawrence Frisoli, a Cambridge
attorney.] Voters will not be asked to express an opinion.
Massachusetts
enjoys a reputation as a birthplace of democracy and a hotbed of
politics. But for legislative incumbents, and some others, the home of
the Freedom Trail has become the home of the free ride.
The Year of
the Unelection – Galluccio Drops Out of Senate Race (2006)
Just
as Jarrett Barrios bailed out of the Middlesex County DA race when the
hill became too steep, Anthony Galluccio yesterday bailed out of the
State Senate race against Barrios. The theme is no longer "let the
people decide," but instead "I've decided for you."
Uncontested (or barely contested) elections have become the new
standard.
Here's
what Galluccio had to say:
“Over
a year ago, I began my campaign for the Middlesex, Suffolk and Essex
State Senate seat, which at the time was being vacated by Senator
Jarrett Barrios. As you have seen over the past few months, our campaign
had gained considerable momentum, garnering widespread support from
elected officials, community leaders, organized labor and thousands of
residents across this district.”
“Over
the past few weeks, I have carefully analyzed what the impact of the
re-entry of Senator Barrios – a well-financed, incumbent, Democratic
State Senator - into the race would mean for my candidacy. It became
increasingly evident to me that we were facing an uphill climb that
would turn into a divisive battle that would divide our communities and
the party. After careful consideration with my family and key
supporters, I have made a decision to withdraw from the race, instead
choosing to build on the strong foundation that our campaign has formed
so that one day, I will be able to represent you in the State Senate.”
“The
outpouring of support that I have received during my campaign has been a
truly humbling experience. I feel no regrets, only appreciation for the
support I have received and friendships that I have made. While my
campaign for State Senate ends today my determination to help people
remains intact. I consider myself one of the most fortunate elected
officials in the world.”
Your
friend, Anthony D. Galluccio
I
hear Senator Travaglini may be hitting the road soon. Could it be that
Anthony is waiting in the on-deck circle? - RW
Barrios
drops out of DA race
April
5, 2006 – It's official. Jarrett Barrios has dropped out of the
Middlesex County District Attorney race leaving a clear path for Gerald
Leone to win the primary and the general election. Instead, Barrios will
seek reelection to his Senate seat, the same seat now being sought by
Anthony Galluccio. In Barrios' message, he says, "I have no doubt
that we would have been successful on Election Day." He states that
his primary motivation for dropping out of the DA race is the need to
spend more time with his children.
This
is going to be an unusual race. I don't know anything about the other
candidates who are considering running for this Senate seat, but I do
know Anthony Galluccio and Jarrett Barrios. Both are very good men and
both would serve us well in the State Senate. However, why can't anyone
just speak openly and honestly any more? It is OBVIOUS that Jarrett is
dropping out of the DA race because he would be slaughtered in the
primary. There's no shame in admitting this. To claim otherwise is “slippery.”
I used this same term last week at a Democratic ward committee meeting
at which Anthony spoke. Anthony is a great guy who belongs in the state
legislature. He's also a human being, just like you and me, and he
occasionally screws up. Rather than dodge questions on his several
episodes of bad judgment behind the wheel of a car, he would be much
better off giving a sincere apology, admitting his mistakes, and moving
on to where he stands on the issues - and he's VERY GOOD on the issues.
It
could be worse. There are two other Cambridge candidates who previously
expressed interest in the Senate seat. Thankfully, one chose to hold
onto her (uncontested) state rep. seat and the other turned around and
ran back to the relative safety of the Cambridge City Council.
Feb 24,
2006 - Edward J. Sullivan, Middlesex County Clerk of Courts, has
announced he will not seek reelection later this year. City
Councillor Michael A. Sullivan, has indicated that he will run for
the office to succeed his uncle. [Courting
retirement, by Brian Mooney, Feb 24 Boston Globe]
With
Councillor Anthony Galluccio running [unopposed so far] to succeed
Jarrett Barrios in the State Senate and Councillor Tim Toomey already
serving as a State Representative, this raises the question of what
limits there may be to holding multiple government positions. Speaking
personally, I would like to see all three of these men remain on the
City Council. Opinions will vary on this and there may even be some
fundamental reasons why two jobs may be incompatible. Nonetheless,
Councillor Sullivan knows more about how the Cambridge City Council
should operate than anyone else in the (appropriately named) Sullivan
Chamber, and I'd hate to see him exit the chamber. He's also a hell of a
nice guy and I would prefer to see the 70+ year tradition of electing a
member of the Sullivan family remain intact. I'm a sucker for history.
Any Sullivans out there interested, just in case?
The
issue of holding multiple positions also begs the question of how
burdensome is the job of a city councillor. When controversial issues
arise and there is a flood of phone calls, e-mail, and meetings to
attend, then the burden rises. However, this is not the rule most of the
time. The fact that city councillors have successfully held multiple
offices and additional jobs supports this view. In fact, most city
councillors - past and present - have held other jobs, and that's the
way it ought to be.
A
related issue, and one which we may be hearing more about in the near
future, is whether city councillors should have personal staff in
addition to the current shared staff of the City Council Office. I
believe the answer is an emphatic NO. The people are not well served in
a moderate-sized city like Cambridge when contact with their elected
representative is filtered through unnecessary staff. Elected officials
should return their own phone calls and e-mails and write their own
letters. The responsibility of submitting orders and resolutions should
also be in their hands and not in the hands of others. The existing
staff of the City Council Office and the Office of the City Clerk are
capable and available when the need for additional support arises. They
are also not tied to the political campaigns of any councillor - and
that's an important distinction when we're talking about the expenditure
of public funds for staff.
This
matter came before us several years ago in the wake of resentment among
some city councillors when Frank Duehay was Mayor and then Vice-Chair
Anthony Galluccio received additional support from the Mayor's Office
beyond what other councillors were granted. At the time, this was seen
as a reward for the mayoral vote. During the following term when Anthony
Galluccio was mayor, Vice-Chair David Maher (I believe) received no
additional staff support. However, the controversy led other councillors
to call for their own personal staff, a proposal which the City Manager
strongly opposed based on cost and potential conflicts with the Plan E
Charter. Hearings were held and the matter was put to rest, perhaps
coincidentally, when councillors were granted a significant pay raise
with permanent cost-of-living adjustments built into the ordinance so
that they would never again have to vote on their own salary increases.
Two
years later, during the first mayoral term of Michael Sullivan,
Vice-Chair Henrietta Davis did get additional staff support. Last term,
the practice was taken to a new level when we saw the use of the phrases
"Office of the Vice-Mayor" and "my assistant" from
the Vice-Chair of the City Council. There are indications this term that
a deal may have already been struck to grant personal staff out of the
Mayor's Office to some councillors - possibly justified by appointment
as chair to more Council subcommittees than other councillors. This
back-door effort, if true, is troubling.
I
guess we would all like to have personal secretaries and/or other
assistants to cater to our every need. That wish, however, doesn't
necessarily translate into good fiscal sense or better representation by
our elected officials.
–
Robert Winters |