Charles D. Baker, the Republican candidate for governor, who has criticized unions as special interests that block reforms and waste taxpayer money, has quietly accepted his first union endorsement. Baker on Saturday accepted the endorsement of the State Police Association of Massachusetts [SPAM – srsly -ed.], which voted to endorse him….
Baker did not hold any media event or release any statement upon receiving the backing of the State Police Association, which has a history of supporting Republicans for governor. The union endorsed Kerry Healey over Patrick in 2006, and Mitt Romney over Shannon P. O’Brien in 2002.
Funny that Baker seems embarrassed about the endorsement. Maybe that’s because…
Baker has also blasted Patrick, a Democrat, and Timothy P. Cahill, the independent candidate, for accepting union endorsements, arguing the endorsements make them beholden to special interests, not taxpayers.
Oh, but I’m sure Baker would never do anything to suck up to a special interest….
The union has criticized Governor Deval Patrick for not authorizing a new class of state troopers during the economic downturn and for changing state rules to allow civilian flaggers rather than uniformed troopers to direct traffic at some construction sites.
Baker has criticized the move to flaggers, arguing that they do not save enough money, and has said he supports funding for a new class of state troopers.
Ah. So Baker, who “has criticized unions as special interests that block reforms and waste taxpayer money,” is in this case in favor of blocking reform (flaggers) and spending more taxpayer money (on a “new class of state troopers” – I don’t know anything about that issue, so I don’t know if it’s fair to say it’s “waste,” but it’s certainly new spending).
Baker’s comments on flaggers date back to the summer when he was courting other police unions, most of whom ended up backing Tim Cahill. Nice that Baker’s pandering has finally paid off; too bad he’s too embarrassed about the endorsement to do anything with it.
Oh, and who names their union “SPAM,” anyway?