Does anyone own our current transportation crisis like Speaker Robert DeLeo? Nope, nobody. The reality we’re all living in now — DeLeo downright insisted on it in 2013. Governor Patrick had proposed a major investment that would have avoided many of our current problems — but Bob DeLeo just said nah.
It wouldn’t surprise you to hear, then, that DeLeo’s intransigence did not go over well with some of his membership. And the stories are just now starting to come out. This interview with former State Rep Jay Kaufman (Lexington) is, as they say, straight fire.
“He made it very clear to me that my options were to vote for it or not be part of any conversation going forward,” Kaufman said. “He said, ‘If you can’t vote for this, I can’t have you as part of my team.’”
DeLeo is not taking this well! He actually calls Kaufman a “liar” — even when this is the most believable thing imaginable.
“Representative Kaufman’s statement is flat-out false. He is a liar,” DeLeo said in a statement. “The events described never happened, and it is disappointing that he would make unfounded accusations, six years later, in an attempt to disparage the House. It is no coincidence that this interview comes at a time when this former representative seeks to advance his private business interests.”
Kaufman is backed up now by Cleon Turner, who was in the House at the time; and by a contemporaneous account from Governor Patrick himself — which Kaufman ironically denied at the time:
[Patrick] said he spoke to Kaufman several times about tax policy. The governor said Kaufman even wanted to support his $1.9 billion tax increase. But like other members of DeLeo’s leadership team, Kaufman ultimately opposed the tax increase because, Patrick said, that’s “what the leadership tells them to do.”
Again, there’s nothing surprising about any of this. Everyone knows that’s how the House works — and has at least since Finneran.
DeLeo has announced his intention to run for Speaker again. Obviously the odds are heavily in his favor for re-election. But I can’t help but notice that things are getting decidedly messier for him than previously was the case. Two of his lieutenants in progressive districts lost primaries due to their closeness to DeLeo — and relatedly their inability to deliver for those very districts. Shouldn’t proximity to power make you powerful? In the case of Kaufman, Sanchez, and Rushing — it was the opposite. If you’re a state rep, you have to ask yourself: What are you getting for your loyalty?
In Stephanie Ebbert’s magnificent recounting in the Globe, we’ve seen several newly-elected female reps refuse to yield their time, nevertheless persisting, and speaking up — and bringing down a sketchy tax break with the bad publicity they caused. They’re not here to go along and get along.
“Some of us have been told, ‘you’ll lose this vote and it will look bad for you,’ ” said Gouveia, an Acton Democrat. “I have a very different measure of success.”
Gouveia would rather register her viewpoints about issues, and she feels she has a mandate to speak up. She’s representing constituents whose sense of civic duty has been heightened over the two years of the Trump administration.
[Dear Globe: This stuff is absolute gold. MOAR plz.]
If DeLeo thought he could isolate and pick off reps one by one, by withholding chairmanships and other favors … what if everyone starts acting up? What if the heretofore-feckless “progressive caucus” starts to use whatever powers it might have? What if it’s a movement? What if we don’t yield?
Christopher says
I’ve long thought committee chairs should be elected by the House rather than appointed by the Speaker.
jconway says
One of my many issues with DiMasi defenders is that they implicitly back the autocrat model of Speakership. We know from him that this model tends to lead to the kind of absolute power that corrupts absolutely, but it also prevents the House from being more progressive in the long run. Had a more small-d democratic house existed under a less autocratic progressive speaker, it would have been easier to weather the storm when a moderate was elected in his place.
Christopher says
As I recall DiMasi defenders did so largely on the basis of the merits of the policies he championed rather than his leadership style.
jconway says
Kaufman is not alone. I’ve talked to numerous reps, both during my UIP days and as a mere constituent and it is amazing how candid they are about the quid pro quo and the fear. What bothers me is they capitulate so easily for what? Chairmanships? Parking spaces? Extra per diem cash? What good did Kaufman actually do with his chairmanship? What did he accomplish on the revenue front from his perch?
Mike Connolly has been far more effective at getting his issues addressed by being a bomb thrower and it has only helped to raise his profile. Jon Santiago is now the top Joe Kennedy surrogate and Nika Elguardo is being regularly and publicly courted by the Speaker while maintaining her independence from him. They are both Greater Boston regulars. It’s almost as if DeLeo and the wider media respects legislators who assert themselves more than toadies who bend the knee. As Mike Deehan pointed out, only 21 bills of substance have actually been passed by this House.
So thanks for finally being honest Jay, it would have been great if you had done so when you actually were empowered by the voters of your district to get these priorities accomplished. It should not take losing an election or a retirement to defy the way business is done in the House. These new reps are showing us how it’s done. As Pressley and AOC should have taught us, waiting your turn and deferring to power is not going to get anything accomplished.
Christopher says
The tightrope they have to walk is that punishing them also has the effect of punishing their constituents.
petr says
DeLeo is lying. He should be impeached.
There is evidence that supports the contention that the events occurred exactly as described by Kaufman: He was the Chair of the Revenue Committee leaned upon to vote against a bill regarding revenue that was deliberately kept away from the Revenue Committee. Why keep it away from the Revenue Committee unless it was solid that the Chair of the Committee was against it? How it the world could you legitimately justify a revenue bill that didn’t go through the Revenue Committee? What other blandishments would work against the Chair of the Revenue Committee? Duh.
DeLeo, quite clearly, believes that many of us are stupid. He believes he can machinate at will and we won’t see through him. As Jesus said, ‘by their deeds, ye shall know them.’
But let us not praise Kaufman all that heartily here… He capitulated. He folded like a cheap plastic beach chair in a light breeze. In fact, it’s worse than mere capitulation: he participated in the emasculation of his own committee for the sake of the chairmanship of an emasculated committee.
Christopher says
You don’t impeach a Speaker, but I’m pretty sure a motion to vacate the Chair can be made at any time.