I recommend everyone tune it to watch it regardless of who they are backing. It’s on Wakefield Community Television and local newspapers should have summaries posted afterward.
Here is the press release from the Friday kickoff
Let me reiterate the reasons I am backing Anthony;
-Transit,education, and healthcare are the three most important issues facing our state
-Anthony Guardia is the only candidate who has consistently supported the Governors revenue package which will ensure we have the funds to meet these priorities, both of his opponents voted against it in the House. Like Katherine Clark he will vote for it in the Senate
-Like Katherine Clark, Anthony was a School committee rep and knows first hand that we need to reform education findig in this state to ensure all our communities get the funding they need-not just the wealthiest
-Anthony Guardia wants to implement VT style single payer and will fight for that in the State Senate
-He also wants to look closely at OR style higher ed reform and is the only candidate talking about reducing the cost of higher ed and reforming our state colleges
-Only candidate talking about increasing funding and improving vocational ed
-Only candidate with a real plan to tackle homelessness statewide and actually end it rather than shifting the populations to Western MA
-only candidate with direct social service and non profit experience
He brings youthful energy, experience in local government and the non-profit sector, willingness to embrace new ideas, independence from broken Beacon Hill leadership, and is unafraid to challenge the status quo and entrenched incumbents in either party. Only candidate to consistently support Katherine Clark.
He is the revenue candidate, the education candidate, the immigrants candidate, the labor candidate, and the most electable progressive candidate for the primary and the general.
abs0628 says
First, just an FYI — the debate on Feb 12 will air from 9:00-10:30pm on Wakefield public access TV: http://wcatwakefield.org/government-programming/
Second, not to go down the rabbit hole again, but a few quick fact checks & responses re: the above…
Not true. Jason Lewis and Katherine Clark both ultimately voted for the leadership compromise on revenue, after both of them supported & strongly advocated for the original proposal put forth by the Governor. As the leader of the House Progressive Caucus, Jason worked especially hard to convince leadership and his colleagues to support the original proposal.
Glad to hear Guardia supports the original Act to Invest too, that’s great. But I think sticking to the facts is usually a good rule.
Agreed. That’s why Jason Lewis is the LEAD SPONSOR on legislation to reform Chapter 70. One of the main reasons Jason got into politics was his concern about education cuts and how we fund education. He led the Prop 2 1/2 override campaign in Winchester — and won big. Glad to hear Guardia agrees with Jason on the need for education funding reform, but I frankly think Jason’s record of accomplishment on this issue sets him apart.
Glad to hear it. So does Jason. That’s why he’s the LEAD SPONSOR of the single payer bill in the House and will continue to lead on this issue if he’s elected to the state senate. He’s been a leader on public health as well in the Legislature, helping to implement innovative laws to improve public health and hopefully cut health care costs as well.
Believing in an issue is one thing. Having the experience of sponsoring and passing legislation on that issue is another. Jason’s experience and record on this issue, imo, is one of his greatest strengths and really sets him apart.
In addition, Jason’s impressive work ethic and record of delivering for his district on a whole host of issues stands in stark contrast with Chris Fallon, who’s been in office for almost 2 decades and doesn’t have a ton to show for it, in my opinion. We need a state senator who’s going to be responsive and work his behind off for the district — and Jason has proven that he will because he’s done just that for the past 5 years.
All good stuff, but Guardia’s not the only one in this race who can say this. Also it’s pretty easy to say you’re independent from Beacon Hill leadership when you’ve never served on Beacon Hill…just sayin’.
But to your point, Jason has in fact taken on House leadership during his time on Beacon Hill.
Jason cast a very brave vote along with some (but not all) of the other progressives in the House against new restrictions on EBT cards. That vote was directly against the Speaker of the House — and Jason’s vote on that measure was used against him by his Republican opponent in the 2012 election.
Compared to Chris Fallon, Jason has shown he has the backbone to stand up to House leadership even on tough, politically charged votes.
Well, obviously we disagree on this one đŸ™‚ But so do a lot of other folks, frankly. A few examples:
(1) Mass Alliance, an umbrella coalition of progressive organizations and unions, met with all 3 candidates one-on-one. They endorsed Jason.
(2) Progressive Mass overwhelmingly endorsed Jason.
(3) Basically just about every strong progressive elected official in the House and Senate has endorsed Jason.
So I suppose all of these groups & individuals could be wrong in their assessment of this race, but they have put a lot of thought into their endorsements and/or based their support on a history of working with Jason as a colleague — and many/most of them are backing their support up with donations and volunteer work (knocking on doors, making phonecalls). So that seems pretty convincing to me. But we shall see…
Anyway, thanks for posting the info. Looking forward to a spirited debate tomorrow night.
fenway49 says
You two obviously are backing different candidates in this primary, and I’ll admit I’ll be happier when we’re all back to pulling in the same direction. In the meantime, it’s important to avoid misleading characterizations.
I’m particularly concerned about this one:
We all remember that the House leadership came up with a severely inadequate bill. As abs0628 points out, Jason Lewis voted for the House bill after lobbying within the House for more. You and I, and organizations like Progressive Mass., might have hoped last April that Reps would vote it down and hold out for more revenue. It didn’t happen. But let’s be clear that voting for the House bill is not the same as voting “against” the Governor’s revenue package. The Governor’s bill, unfortunately, never came up for a vote.
Anthony Guardia is welcome to say that Rep. Lewis should have voted “no” on the leadership’s bill and held out for a better one. In making that case, though, let’s be careful not to misrepresent what actually happened through lack of precision. As this thread demonstrates, it’s easy to mischaracterize legislative votes. Let’s let that be the province of the other side of the aisle.
markbernstein says
My first concern is not whether we get Jason Lewis or Anthony Guardia, but rather how on earth we are to avoid having these two good candidates split the vote and, in effect, give the seat to Chris Fallon — the fellow who thought Scott Brown would be a far better senator than Elizabeth Warren.
jconway says
Thanks for the link ABS, was in Korea when I posted that on a layover and the wifi wasn’t too good so I had trouble embedding it. Isn’t too good now in the Philippines and I probably won’t be posting again until I get back to Manila in three days. Lots of fun and a few posts related to that trip are forthcoming.
Onto the campaign. I’d argue the vote splitting risk is there, but we are also talking about three candidates with three different constituencies. Much like the race to succeed Markey-that Clark ultimately won-was a race to see who got to 25% first-this is a race for who gets to 35%.
Geography and personal connection may ultimately matter more than ideology. Lewis has solid support in Stoneham and Winchester, Fallon in parts of Malden that he represents and Guardia in Wakefield where he was a School Committee Chair and ran a strong race for State Rep a few years ago. Melrose, Clark’s hometown, will be a big battleground along with the parts of Malden Fallon does not have a foothold in. Guardia has to contest Stoneham as well.
I would argue Guardia, due to his Malden roots, hard campaigning in Stoneham and Melrose with Clark veterans (Fred La Riccia and Festa to name a few) has the best potential to get second place to Fallon and Lewis on their turf while winning Melrose closely and Wakefield decisively.
He has been door knocking quite hard and activating a lot of the local town committeemen and women he has known after over a decade of working for Clark. He is also encountering a strong thirst for someone new not affiliated with Beacon Hill’s business as usual and prioritizing issues like local aid, transit, and college affordability of that hit at voters pocketbooks that were not on his opponents agenda at the start of the campaign. Local aid dominated the debate and it’s because Guardia brought the issue front and center. While I agree with Fenway and ABS it’s unfair for voters to judge some of the procedural votes out of context, the records are there and one of the only ways we can contrast the candidates. Labor seems to be breaking for Guardia or Lewis which is also a good sign. Even though they are splitting endorsements they are not going to Fallon which was a concern earlier in the race.
We got one more debate before March 1st and whoever has the best ground game in Melrose will likely be the winner. I expect it to be Guardia.