Blue Mass Group

Is the GOP’s House Budget Debate Schtick Running Out of Steam?

April 26, 2018 By hesterprynne 2 Comments

For years, going back into the Patrick administration, the Republican members of the House of Representatives have staged a show during that chamber’s annual budget debate in which they offer an amendment to focus universal opprobrium on immigrants living in Massachusetts, whom they also misleadingly depict as criminals who are taking advantage of public benefits.

They then invite Howie Carr into the mix. He uses one or both of his platforms to stir the consumers of his content into a frenzy of angry telephone calls to House members urging them to support whatever odious amendments are on tap that year. Viz:

These shows have rewarded the GOP not only with a media spotlight, but also with a record of roll-call votes to be used in the next election against those Democratic incumbents who were not cowed into voting in favor.

But this year, something different happened. GOP Representative James Lyons (yes, that “gun-loving, immigrant-bashing Tea Partier“) had followed the script by filing an amendment to allow federal ICE agents to hold immigrants without an arrest warrant (which is now not permissible in Massachusetts), and had appeared on Carr’s radio show to stir up the listeners. Lyons was joined by GOP reps Geoff Diehl and Peter Durant in arguing for the amendment. Democratic Representatives Tucker, Provost and Decker spoke eloquently of the many reasons why the amendment ought to be defeated.

In the surprising roll-call vote that followed, only nine Republicans supported the amendment. Twice as many of them voted with the Democrats in opposition. (Roll call vote #334, link here.)

Is it too soon to hope that the GOP’s xenophobic fever is breaking?

Setti Warren drops out of #MAGOV

April 26, 2018 By Charley on the MTA 19 Comments

I have to admit, I’m stunned — not at the decision itself, but that it has to be made:

With only $51,644 in his account after a year of campaigning, Warren was expected to send an e-mail to his supporters Thursday morning explaining that he did not have the resources to take on the popular Republican, who has a $7.9 million campaign account and consistently high standing in public polls.

“We took a hard look at the numbers and what it would take to run a winning campaign against the incumbent governor,’’ Warren said in a telephone interview Wednesday. “I just saw the challenge was insurmountable, based on the ability to raise the money and the resources.”

The money situation is just untenable, I get that. People have to get paid; ads have to be bought, mailers printed, etc. But I’ve simply never felt that the political situation was impossible: Charlie Baker’s enduring and broad popularity seems impenetrable — he gets mild to strong support even from Democrats. He certainly gains from a favorable comparison to the President, which is not saying much at all. But then (for example) you get this, from MassINC Polling:

Baker ought to be vulnerable. That’s not even an exceptional statement about any politician, but as a transit user and a climate-aware person, to me his shortcomings are especially acute. Massachusetts is doing OK in many respects — cruising on the bolder leadership of past eras — but faces vast challenges of climate readiness and energy transformation; transportation; housing; economic inequality; health care costs; institutional racism; and on and on. Baker doesn’t boldly or even adequately lead on any of these. I don’t think he deserves the support of Democrats. I think a Democratic governor — any of the candidates — would be a lot better.

But even though I don’t understand or agree with Baker’s popularity, I can’t really dispute its legitimacy. People think what they think. But $7.9 million to $50K … that’s tough. Regardless of the polls, you can stay in a race if you have money.

Forget about Democratic politics for a moment; this moment is just bad for accountable government.

Bad legislation from the Bad Markey

April 23, 2018 By uncaffeine 2 Comments

Dartmouth (MA) Rep. Chris Markey’s Amendment #1174 to H4400 (the FY2019 budget) was written to broaden wiretapping in the Commonwealth because — he claims — rising crime rates make it necessary:

“The general court further finds that within the commonwealth there has been an increase in violence, with and without weapons, that has taken the lives of many. Such acts are not the product of highly organized and disciplined groups. […] Therefore, the general court finds that the use of [modern electronic surveillance devices] devices by law enforcement officials, as it relates to investigations of violent offenses, must be conducted under strict judicial supervision and without the need to prove that a highly organized and disciplined group committed such violent acts.”

But Markey’s amendment is based on fiction. Crime in Massachusetts is not increasing. It is actually falling and has been since about 1992. Last September the Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety released figures from the FBI showing that, once again, Massachusetts crime had fallen by 6.3%. The MetroWest Daily News dug into the FBI’s figures and showed that, while violent crime has risen nationally, it remains static in Massachusetts with rates significantly lower than national averages. For example, the national murder rate is 5.3 per 100,000. In Massachusetts that number is 2.0. In 2016 the Commonwealth (with a population of almost 7 million) had 134 murders compared with 486 in Tennessee, a state with roughly the same population.

But worse than being dishonest with the public about crime rates, Markey’s amendment lowers the bar on legal requirements for wiretaps and electronic surveillance. Surveillance today rarely target only the suspected offender. Cell tower dumps, for example, compromise the privacy of everyone who has connected to the tower. Stingrays, WiFi and packet sniffing are also pretty indiscriminate.

Markey’s amendment, and Republican Bradley Jones’ companion amendment #515, are efforts to sneak bad legislation into the budget — legislation that police and district attorneys have long wanted. The ACLU notes that “prosecutors in Massachusetts can [ALREADY] obtain all of this information and more without any judicial oversight. And a recent ACLU investigation shows they’re using this power extensively, and largely in the dark.” Markey’s legislation does nothing to improve judicial oversight. But it makes surveillance much easier for prosecutors to abuse.

In filing his amendment, Markey reveals that his old law enforcement buddies are his true constituents — not the average citizen who is getting damn tired of having everyone from spy agencies to socal networks violating his privacy every minute of the day.

What’s the Downside of Demanding Wage Transparency?

April 20, 2018 By johntmay 6 Comments

When I think of wage transparency and the number of social issues it will help improve, I wonder why wage transparency is not discussed in Democratic circles and more importantly, part of the party platform. From equal pay for women, narrowing the wealth gap, lifting minority wages, and even a healthier more productive work environment, wage transparency works. Sweden shows that wage transparency works. The salaries of all our elected officials are public as are the salaries negotiated by professional sports players and entertainers. I work for a company that employs about sixty thousand people and the wage scale for just about everyone is there for all to see. I know there is this taboo about such things, but I think it’s time to fight for wage transparency.

How to implement it is another issue, but we could start with a tax code that is favorable to companies that provide wage transparency.

Quick hits

April 18, 2018 By Charley on the MTA 6 Comments

Too long to tweet, but real writing hurts my brain …

Do check out the website of Tram Nguyen, the young Legal Aid attorney who is taking on Republican Jim Lyons in the 18th Essex House district. I know that this district (mostly Andover) is a click or two more conservative than most, but Lyons is a gun-loving, immigrant-bashing Tea Partier. He defeated Barbara L’Italien in 2010, so it’s not out of the question that it could be represented by a progressive again.
[Apropos of nothing, did you know that a couple of years ago, Lyons won a judgment against his neighbors, who were harassing his family in some pretty bizarre ways? I did not know this. People are weird, man.]
Our friends at 350Mass are still looking for folks to pester their reps (State Reps, mostly) about S.2302, the transformative energy bill by Sens. Pacheco and Eldridge. Thomas Golden (Co-Chair of the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy) is now leading your typical House slow-roll and break-apart. It shouldn’t be like this. I know I’m a broken record on this — if you haven’t already, 350Mass is asking you to call both your own rep (find out whom here, switchboard is 617-722-2000) and the Speaker at 617-722-2500. Signup and call scripts are here.
I think, upon reflection, that it would be a mistake to regard the criminal justice reform bill something other than a success for progressive, decent, compassionate governance. That being said, mandatory minimums are still dumb, and our legal system should deal with people in ways sensitive to both mental age and mental health.
If we were to have a questionnaire for State Rep/Senator primary candidates, what would it include? For me it would include statements on MBTA (and other transit) funding; clean energy (3% RPS, transport emissions); climate readiness; school foundation funding; health care costs. What else? What would you want to know about?

White spaces persist in Boston

April 17, 2018 By Charley on the MTA 80 Comments

The recent arrests at a Starbucks in Philadelphia as examples of a troubling notion that is near-invisible to most white folks, even as we participate: That many (if not most) public spaces are self-evidently white – and socially “policed” as such.

“When the anonymous black person enters the white space, others there immediately try to make sense of him or her—to figure out “who that is,” or to gain a sense of the nature of the person’s business and whether they need to be concerned.” – Elijah Anderson, “The White Space” https://t.co/i3F7gg6cNC

— b-boy bouiebaisse (@jbouie) April 13, 2018

You don’t have to be ideologically or casually racist to participate in this; doubtless people who are appalled by blatant hatred participate in this kind of social policing all the time. I doubt the Philly Starbucks manager thought of himself as racist. It’s not necessarily ideological; prejudices burrow deep to the amygdala, and remain invisible to those who continue to harbor them. This stuff is hard, and stubborn: Just “being right” doesn’t necessarily count for much.

Renée Graham notes with fatigue (emphasis mine):

For black people, this video has been viral forever. This is what we live with every damn day.

This isn’t a Starbucks problem. It could have been a fast food restaurant, a mall — or a street in Cambridge. Last Friday police responded to a report of a naked man on Massachusetts Avenue. A video shows Selorm Ohene, a black 21-year-old Harvard student, being struck several times after he was already pinned to the ground by three Cambridge police officers and an MBTA transit cop. Cambridge Mayor Marc C. McGovern called the incident “disturbing.”

Everything black people do is weighted by irrational white fear. It’s mentally exhausting to always be on guard, even during mundane moments like waiting in a coffee shop – or asking for directions.

Boston has made itself a “white space”, not just by blatant racism in policing, home lending, schooling, and the like; but in this more subtle but suffocating way of policing “white spaces”. And these supposed subconscious “micro-aggressions” can turn, under stress, into mega-aggressions, even leading to wrongful use of police power.

This is nothing new:

“Personally, I’ve never seen much difference between the South and the North,” comedian Dick Gregory wrote in a 1971 issue of Ebony. “Down South white folks don’t care how close I get as long as I don’t get too big. Up North white folks don’t care how big I get as long as I don’t get too close.”

Well, what if we didn’t care about how close?

My fellow white folk in MA: Let’s invert our internal conversation here. Can we tell ourselves a new, more positive story? Can we envision something more aligned with our stated values? Can we accommodate making an easier time for our black friends, neighbors, and colleagues? Doesn’t seem like too much to ask, does it?

Black people belong.

Black people belong in the coffee shop. In your restaurant. In your store.
Black people belong in “your” neighborhood; on the sidewalk; in their cars; in a cab; on the T.
Black people belong in your schools, in your classroom, at your gym, at the library.
Black people belong, dressed nicely, or shabbily, or meh. They belong in short hair, long hair, dreadlocks, or whatever. And they don’t require your approval.
Black people belong at Fenway Park, at the Strand, at the MFA, at Symphony Hall, at the Middle East.
Black people belong, in Milton or Mattapan; Brockton or Boxborough; Roxbury or … West Roxbury. In “nice” neighborhoods. They belong on your street. In your apartment complex. As your roommate.
Black people belong at Harvard, and Bunker Hill. They belong at Tufts, Wellesley, and UMass. As your high school valedictorian. As not-valedictorian. They don’t have to be exceptional to deserve your respect.
Black people belong in your family; in your church; in your circle of friends.
Black people belong in your office; as your employee; co-worker; as your boss; in the corner office.
Black people belong, as your doctor or lawyer; as your loan officer; as your contractor; as your handyman.
Black people belong in your political party (and the other one); in City Hall; on the school board; in the Oval Office.

It’s not a special thing to ask; it’s the privilege of being not special, not particular. Of being anonymous in public. Of being normal.

Can we do this?

Front Page Posts