My name is Katie Forde I am a progressive Democrat running to be the first female Register of Deeds in Suffolk County history and I am asking for your investment in my campaign.
For me, the worst part of 2017 was that there was so much to be enraged about; the best part was feeling that the Women’s March never really ended. We have been channeling the energy and activism created by that event into a surge of female candidates up and down the ballot because local government is incredibly important to residents’ every day quality of life. The work of the Register of Deeds affects every homeowner, and can transform and empower communities by helping to create more homeownership. It must be led by someone with a vision for using the office as more than a retirement plan for ousted city councilors.
I first ran for Register of Deeds in 2016, as a first-time candidate with zero name recognition. I was endorsed by both the Boston Globe (the first time it has ever endorsed in the Register of Deeds race) and the Boston Herald. I fell short by less than 5% in a 7-way competition. In 2018, I will take on an entrenched incumbent and win.
These are different times. We cannot wait for others to act. Electing strong women candidates locally helps to build a pipeline that gets us closer to our shared vision of gender parity in government. Initial support and early investment is critical to beating out the Old Boys Network and electing the first female Suffolk County Register of Deeds.
Women should be running for every office on the ballot. No more waiting in line and no more asking for permission to run for an office that is occupied. Candidates should not be elected to office because their name is familiar, because the establishment supports them, or because it is their turn. Candidates should be elected to work for us. My commitment to the community is well-documented and I am the best candidate for the office.
Early support is critical – our opponent knows it’s a real race and he has always had the resources to fight off a challenge. With your support, we can match him dollar for dollar.
We persist because that is what strong women do. Bringing progressive values to this office will change lives and change our communities.
Onward,
Katie Forde
Good luck! But I want a candidate for register of deeds whose platform is, “it’s ridiculous that this is an elected position, and my platform that registers of deeds should be appointed civil servants with expertise in management and in real estate conveyancing.” Along those lines, what is your background in management or in real estate conveyancing?
I was quite familiar with this race since I worked with the unenrolled candidate who ran against Steve Murphy in the general. I have never met Katie Forde, but he told me she was his smartest competitor in the debates and brought a lot of great experience to the position. I think it’s great that she is taking on Steve Murphy again. He was a candidate who openly was unfamiliar with what the job required and admitted to friends he was doing it to maintain the nice pension, salary, and benefits that came with the position after he lost similar benefits when he failed to get re-elected to the Boston City Council.
I agree that these offices should be appointed, but until they are, they should be staffed with the most passionate and dedicated professionals we can elect. Katie Forde and Josh Zakim are both people I intend to vote for in the 2018 primary as they take on entrenched incumbents. They are both people who are in public service to make a difference, not make a living.
Hooray for passion and dedication, but I still want to know what her qualifications are for this job. No one can fault Doug Bennett for a lack of passion and dedication.
I’m a senior paralegal at a medium size Boston firm and have the experience needed to manage an office that will always be an elected position. Making it an appointed position does not give voters the choice they deserve and leaves the door open for the political patronage that makes people not trust their government. We need progressives elected to all offices and I’m starting with Register of Deeds because it is at the bottom of the ballot. Progressives believe in good government and it is not always exciting. This position should be a launching pad for fresh ideas – not a landing pad for politicians that are padding their pension.
I don’t want to harp on Ms. Forde, but this comment makes me less, not more, likely to vote for her. She clearly has her eyes on other things: she’s “starting with” the Register’s office because it’s at the “bottom of the ballot,” which tells me that what she’s really interested in is, say, the legislature or something else. And I find her views on patronage problem odd: she thinks that an appointed register would “leave the door open for political patronage.” My read is that the reason someone with an eye on higher office would run for an office like Register of Deeds is to control some patronage, and thereby build a political organization that can help elect her to her next office. I frankly don’t see much difference between a politician on the way down using the office as a landing pad and a politician on the way up using the office as a springboard. The basic problem is that no real politician is that interested in the mission of the Registry, which is precisely why it shouldn’t be an elected office.
I’m confused as to why push ideology for this kind of office. I’m all for new people taking a shot, but how progressive do you really have to be to keep records? I’m also not sure how a Register can influence the rate of home ownership. If the office needs to be brought into the 21st century and you are looking for ideas on that I would suggest reaching out to Northern Middlesex Register of Deeds Richard Howe.
I don’t see why a candidate who is promising competence, transparency, and technology for an office lacking in all three is ideological. I also don’t see why a woman saying we need more women in office is advancing an ideological goal. That said, to the extent it is an ideology it’s progressive good government matched with progressive feminism which are ideologies we all welcome and support here. Including you. I also doubt you’ve ever supported a non-Democrat for one of these offices, so obviously some ideological considerations matter to you. I have no idea why you are always allergic to primary challenges, they help the party build its bench and grow its grassroots support. Every time.
Katie Forde is a second time candidate and first time BMG poster. I also want to note that Sen. Eldridge is posting here today for the first time in awhile along with Harmony Wu from Progressive Mass. Sam from the Melrose Democrats also posted last week and stomv who announced his candidacy for state rep yesterday. This is exactly the kind of new blood, new posts, and local engagement BMG has desperately needed as of late. I have no idea why some automatically leap to nitpick every new poster or candidate who comes here, it’s hardly what our community needs at this critical time.
I hope it’s not nit-picky to ask a candidate for her qualifications! Really, I just want to know why she is less hacky than the incumbent.
And I think that as a community, we should be pushing for the abolition of these elected posts. Now that’s “progressive!”
She was the one who said in her first line that she was progressive, and I’m all for competence and such, but I agree it’s not ideological. That’s why I asked why it sounded like she was trying to make it so. I can take or leave more women; I just pick the best candidate of whatever gender. I don’t understand why you keep trying to peg me as anti-primary when I have been known to say precisely the opposite. I have no dog in this fight nor any knowledge of the incumbent. I probably have voted D over R when given the choice and knowing nothing else because why not, but I’d be happy if these were non-partisan races or not elected at all (the latter I believe would require a constitutional amendment, BTW).
Fair enough and sorry for being grumpy. It seemed you were dismissing her for bringing up being a progressive woman, but asking for more details makes sense.
Anyone but the incumbent would be fine in this race, but she had a lot of similar ideas to our candidate last time around and struck me as the most committed reformer of the non-Murphy choices that primary. Hope she comes back here to take more questions!
Dick Howe is a great Register and good example of someone who takes the position seriously and is always making it better. He is not a political hack.
Sure. In an ideal world all statewide office holders short of governor would be appointed, all county office holders would be appointed, and the Governors Council would be appointed or eliminated entirely.
LG selected by the gubernatorial nominee rather than elected by the party, etc. Until then, if we are electing people we should elect smart people dedicated to modernizing the office and making it accessible to everyone. Katie pledged to do that, and I welcome her adding more details here.
These are county officers so I’m not sure it makes sense for a Governor to appoint. NH has the county delegation model which is essentially all House members from a given county govern that county so maybe that would work. I of course envision if anything a greater role for the GC and appointing them would if anything be a step backwards. I like that LGs compete for the nomination separately, but am glad we ticket them for the general so that succession stays within the same party.