Massachusetts Democrats seem used to having low standards of their legislative leaders, but this is truly extraordinary: Robert DeLeo, our Democratic House Speaker, is publicly saying he may turn his back on the candidate for governor selected by the voters of the Massachusetts Democratic Party and instead endorse the Republican candidate.
From WBZ’s Jon Keller @ Large on May 21:
Keller: Are you prepared to commit to supporting the Democratic nominee for governor?
DeLeo: I think I wanna see exactly who that nominee will be. I still think it’s a little bit early, in terms of thinking about next year’s race. So right now I just wanna see, wait and see attitude.
So, Massachusetts Democratic voters: The candidate you pick, and give money to, and knock on doors for, and ask your friends to support? One of your party’s top elected officials may be on the other side, working to undermine you and your candidate. Maybe! Wait and see attitude!
When Gov. Charlie Baker’s popularity is discussed, a factor that’s often left out is that *clears throat* DEMOCRATS KEEP PUBLICLY TELLING VOTERS THEY SHOULD LOVE THEIR REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR. There’s the constantly-publicized bromance between Baker and Boston Mayor Marty Walsh. Rep. Katherine Clark, rather than highlighting Baker’s failures to solve our transit and revenue crises, told the Boston Globe that Baker is a “hard worker … a really nice guy.” And now we have DeLeo.
This isn’t just a Massachusetts issue. National Democrats should be trying to defeat Baker in 2018 before he raises his sights. If Baker keeps riding this wave, buoyed by Democrats, could he flip red what should be a safely blue U.S. Senate seat? What about a spot on a presidential ticket?
Some local Democrats endorsed Baker in 2014, including Gloucester Mayor Caroyln Kirk and Quincy Mayor Thomas Koch. (The Boston Globe, whose “liberal” reputation belies its actual centrism, also endorsed Baker.)
But DeLeo, one of the state’s top Democrats, openly flirting with a Baker endorsement takes the question of what it means to be a Democrat in Massachusetts to a whole new level. (And let’s face it, no endorsement would be the same as endorsing Baker.) What does it send to voters about how much Democratic party leaders actually believe in their own party that DeLeo would publicly discuss the possibility?
There’s no Democratic candidate in the race who’s patently offensive. Shouldn’t our party’s leaders commit to supporting the candidate that Democratic voters select?
The reality is that in Massachusetts, while many of our elected officials are actual progressive or left-center Democrats, others are centrist “Democrats” much more closely aligned with wealthy and corporate elites than with working- and middle-class voters.
What Speaker DeLeo is tacitly admitting here is that his politics may be more closely aligned with Republican Gov. Charlie Baker than with Democratic voters.
If he won’t support the candidate chosen by Democratic voters, why should Democratic voters support DeLeo as our Democratic Speaker?
Once again, I’m mostly at a loss given our electoral system. Democratic voters don’t have much say in who the Democratic Speaker is unless they happen to live in his district. As for saying nice things about someone like Clark did, frankly our politics could use more of that and less vitriol, but that isn’t mutually exclusive with strong disagreements. Don’t forget that Mayoralities in MA are not partisan offices.
To address the rhetorical question of your conclusion: I suggest that Democratic voters do NOT support Mr. DeLeo as our Democratic Speaker.
He holds his position because of his success at frobbing the levers of power. He strikes me as an embarrassment to the party and the state.
This episode provides further evidence of how badly dysfunctional the current Massachusetts Democratic Party is. I understand the reasons why it is anemic and irrelevant. Surely it is time to do whatever is needed to change this sorry situation.
It’s not the party. It’s the Speakership itself, which is the same as ever: A completely top-down power structure. DeLeo, being a moderately conservative guy, feels a.) completely comfortable with Baker, and b.) completely comfortable that he’ll never lose his Speakership as long as he wants it. All Dems beneath him in the House are completely under his thumb; they speak out, they lose their chairs or positions. That’s the game.
If you want to pressure DeLeo, mount a primary in Winthrop.
Harder than it looks. Our candidate chickened out since he was worried about his liquor license request getting turned down. And he wouldn’t have even been on the same ballot line.
I hate to sound like a broken record, but what specifically would you propose to empower the MDP in situations like this?
1. Repeal the law blocking other groups from including the word “Democratic” in their name, so that competitive parties can emerge.
2. Make whatever changes are needed so that a party can vote to withhold campaign funds from candidate
3. Make whatever changes are needed so that a party can vote to block a candidate from claiming affiliation with the party
I’m sure there are others. I think that carrots and sticks are necessary. I think we must ensure that the Massachusetts Democratic Party has both.
To paraphrase Francis Urqhart (fictional character from the BBC House of Cards), “it’s time to throw a bit of stick about”.
#1 I would oppose as it can so easily be manipulated to deliberately confuse voters. Anyone who wants to compete for the Dem label can contest a primary.
#2 is already within the power of the party.
#3 is very fraught with the anti-democratic notion that party insiders can prevent voters from making their choice through a primary. I would only go as far possibly banning for the very objective reason of open support for a non-Dem in partisan races as we do now for delegates and committee members.
I would get more aggressive with #2 and at least do better communicating to legislators what the party positions are and to voters regarding adherence to those positions. I’d like to close primaries to party registrants as well.
Regarding your responses to my three proposals:
1. Perhaps there is some way to adjust the current law. What we have today is a state-enforced monopoly that paralyzes our ability to make meaningful change to an entity that many of us agree is anemic and dysfunctional.
2. I’m glad that this is already available. The party should use this power often and more publicly than it has until now.
3. Surely Mr. DeLeo, with his iron-clad grip on power, is already an insider who already prevents registered Democratic voters from having a voice in the governance of the state. If the state party had the ability to block candidates who reject our platform and who consistently vote against legislation supported by a majority of registered Democrats — especially when that legislation reflects the party platform — then the adoption of a platform would be much more meaningful.
Mr. DeLeo should have been spanked by the party when he embarrassed Deval Patrick by flatly rejecting the needed tax increase Mr. Patrick proposed. He should be spanked now for his waffling about his support for the Democratic gubernatorial nominee. Ms. Garry is no Democrat and should not be allowed to claim affiliation with our party. Period.
It’s time for us to stop making excuses for why the state party is so useless and take steps to solve the problem.
I meant to add that I wonder what extent this is an issue in other states and how they handle it.
Our state legislature is ranked as one of the least democratic in the United States. It is modeled on England in 1630. England moved on. Massachusetts did not, at least not in its legislature. The lack of competition.and the 1630s style speakership are just some of the problems. http://www.wbur.org/politicker/2016/10/13/competitive-state-elections
I was listening to a senator from California telling the reporter how California was going against Trump policy. He said California will be free of fossil fuels in a few years, welcomes immigrants who may not have the proper paperwork, will NOT lower emission standards on their autos, and so on. I read where states like NY & VT are pushing for single payer, and many states are pushing for higher minimum wages……..and then I keep hearing that my own Massachusetts is “Blue” and we are core Democrats.
Looks like we sold out a while ago and continue to sell out. It’s embarrassing.
It should be apparent by now Speaker DeLeo leans on the conservative side, and is more in tune with the true needs of the Commonwealth. He has been a thorn in the side of meaningful progress in this state. The only way to remove his influence is putting up a candidate in his district to oppose him. A more progressive candidate can at least put him on the spot. This will be hard work given his power in the legislature, and how his constituents feel about the time for change.
I don’t understand what you mean when you say that Mr. DeLeo “is more in tune with the true needs of the Commonwealth”.
In my view, the point is that he is not only not “in tune” with those needs, his actions are actively worsening the many issues. The Commonwealth desperately needs to be collecting more taxes from the wealthy and the very wealthy. We desperately need to be investing MUCH more in public transportation, in education, and in programs for our neediest and least powerful residents.
I think the point is that Winthrop is not representative of Massachusetts as a whole. I have no issue with Mr. DeLeo as the state representative of Winthrop. My issue is with Mr. DeLeo as the Speaker of the House.
He will not cease to be the former until he ceases to be the latter-which is our main dilemma. There are zero credible progressives in Winthrop capable (or willing) of taking him on-believe me I’ve done a lot of digging on this subject. Any hope lies on getting either a challenger from the left (a Hispanic from East Boston) or a challenger from the right (a Trump Republican from Winthrop or Revere to eat into DeLeos base). Ideally both.
If the Republicans were a real political party in this state-and not a heel for our conservative Democratic caucus to battle-they would run someone to topple DeLeo and make it a priority. They aren’t. If the progressive faction were a real player in our local sandbox they’d run someone to topple DeLeo and make it a priority-they aren’t.
The confusion, Tom, is a slip of the typing hand. “is more” should have been “is not”. As for challenging him, incumbents can be beaten. Mike Connelly did in Cambridge, but he had help. The last election bred grass roots groups who will bring major energy to get someone to replace him. I am a member of such a group, and intend to bring it up tonight.
Heh. I appreciate the clarification, your comment makes much more sense now and I agree with it.
Simply unacceptable and if he speaks at next week’s state convention, delegates should respond appropriately.
Thanks for including the exchange. I wonder what prompted Keller to ask the question? Had DeLeo just praised Baker, or did someone suggest to Keller that he ask?
Even with term limits, the natural power dynamics of the legislature should kick in at some point. Somebody with kids in college decides they need more cash, and they start wondering if they should be Speaker.
I have considered DeLeo a Democrat in name only since 2003, given his treatment of indigent defense when he was Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. He went right along with stripping the entire judicial branch of 20% of its funding and forcing the judiciary to balance their budget on the back of what he seemed to consider the undeserving poor by raising the counsel fee and various court fees and fines to the highest in the nation and using our prisons as debtors prisons .As DeLeo is an attorney himself, I considered that shameful as I do much else he has done. He is no friend to the indigent, the homeless, the desperate for a bed addict, or the child in foster care. There has been no compassion or interest in what I consider core Democratic values, ever from DeLeo.
By the way, thanks to HesterPrynne for flagging the interview in the comments of Charley’s Setti Warren post.