|
2007 Cambridge
Candidate Pages
Barrios
Vacancy
State Senate - Middlesex, Suffolk,
& Essex
Primary
Election - Sept 11
Tim
Flaherty
Anthony
Galluccio
Paul
Nowicki
Jeff
Ross
General
Election - Oct 9
(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)
Grace Ross (Green-Rainbow)
Chris Gabrieli (Democrat)
Tom Reilly (Democrat)
Lt. Governor
Reed V. Hillman (Republican)
Tim Murray (Democrat)
John Sullivan
(Independent)
Martina Robinson (Green-Rainbow)
Deborah Goldberg (Democrat)
Andrea Silbert (Democrat)
Attorney General
Martha Coakley (Democrat)
Larry Frisoli (Republican)
Treasurer
Timothy Cahill (Democrat)
Ronald Davy (Republican)
Secretary of State
William Galvin (Democrat)
Jill Stein (Green-Rainbow)
John Bonifaz (Democrat)
Auditor
Joseph DeNucci (Democrat)
Earle Stroll (Republican)
U.S. Senate
Kenneth Chase (Republican) - 52% so
far
Edward Kennedy (Democrat)
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)
|
|
CCJ Goes National! .... not really
Feb 10 - 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, 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
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 - 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 - 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
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
|