First BMG PAC recipient: Rep. Lori Ehrlich!

AWESOME! (6.00 / 1)

The leg needs more like her.

---

by: Okapi @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 11:47:22 AM CST

Good choice (6.00 / 1)

She understands the GAL issue as well.  You have my support on this one.

Sadly, my core issues as to guardians ad litem, child welfare kids and their needs including to have parents whose teeth don't fall out, and indigent defense are once again orphans as far as the Executive goes.

Deborah Sirotkin Butler
AmberPaw dot @aol.com

"Failure to plan is planning to fail."
Proverb

---

by: AmberPaw @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 11:51:27 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Thanks Okapi and Amber Paw (0.00 / 0)

I do indeed.

---

by: Rep Lori Ehrlich @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 18:02:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

So Who Gets To Go To Her Fundraiser? (0.00 / 0)

All three of you? Hmmm. What about me. The PAC was my idea. I expect $50.00 from you Lori. That's 10% kick back for facilitating this backroom-cigar-smoking-move-money-around-deal.

Okay. I don't have to go to the fundraiser. But you three combined should be allowed to eat only one person's portions of scallops wrapped in bacon.


Ernie Boch, III is not related to Ernie Boch, Jr. however she does hope to be in his will.

Justice for Tookie

---

by: EB3 fka Ernie Boch III @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 12:10:27 PM CST

Or... (0.00 / 0)

just restrict yourselves to kosher scallops wrapped in bacon.

---

by: stomv @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 13:10:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Thanks, BMG PAC!! (6.00 / 2)

There. I feel like I've been holding that in for hours today while in formal session and unable to get to my computer. I'm deeply moved by the honor of your selection and the contribution that goes with it. But mostly I'm truly thankful for everyone's engagement. I read you all at least daily and have faithfully done so since just after BMG was born. (and, btw, I'm not the only one in the State House with a BMG habit...) Ah, those were the not so good ole days of hrefs and the frustration of sharing a busted Soapblox server.

Hey Ernie, if you're willing to show up in 3D at one of my fundraisers, I will gladly comp you 100% -- your appearance would no doubt turn out a crowd! (10% duly noted.)

These are tough times to raise money and I have heard that I do have at least one challenger so please know that your faith and expenditure will go to good use. If I don't end up with one, I'll look forward to bumping into all of you on campaigns of others.

I am deeply grateful. Thanks, guys. Thanks to all who contributed. Viva the Netroots!

Lori  

---

by: Rep Lori Ehrlich @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 17:51:49 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Brava Lori ! (6.00 / 1)

She is a bright light in the oftentimes dark cavern of the State House.

Nospinicus

---

by: Nospinicus @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 13:09:08 PM CST

>blushing< thanks. (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Rep Lori Ehrlich @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 18:00:01 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Hey (6.00 / 2)

Maybe soon you could give unlimited amounts to anyone you want! Hell, if the corporations do it, why not the grassroots progressive PACs.

But on a note of seriousness, I like what I've seen from Lori, and she is exactly the kind of progressive smart and "clean" pol we need at the state house.

Left in Lowell: cuz why read the Lowell Sun if you don't have to? ;)

---

by: Lynne @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 13:57:51 PM CST

Thanks, Lynne. (0.00 / 0)

I'll continue to wash. ;-)

---

by: Rep Lori Ehrlich @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 18:04:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Great choice! (6.00 / 1)

As incumbent legislators go, I've always seen Lori as one of the best of the best. She is in my opinion absolutely deserving of our support.

However-

Don't you think that the BMG PAC could have a little more wallop for the dollar if it endorsed and donated to progressive candidates in tough races? Races like, say, Rep. Jen Benson's re-election campaign against nutso Indi-turned-Republican Kurt Hayes, Rep. Danielle Gregoire's hypercompetitive battle to keep her seat against Marlboro City Councilor Steve Levy, or a great progressive Democrat running for any of the open State Senate seats in Galluchio's or Brown's former districts, or Tisei's soon-to-be-former district?

Does Lori even have any opponents this year? If not, perhaps the $500 check could have gone to an equally awesome progressive who is not running unopposed...

Just my two cents.

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere- MLK, letter from a Birmingham jail

---

by: davesoko @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 14:19:35 PM CST

We understand (6.00 / 1)

that Lori will likely be opposed.

That said, we of course also want to help out with races like the ones you describe.  What's the best way to help us do that?  That's right -- donate to BMG PAC!  :-)  The "Support BMG PAC" box in the left-hand sidebar tells you everything you need to know.

---

by: David @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 14:25:30 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Truer words were never said. (6.00 / 1)

I will try and throw you guys some scratch when I get my next paycheck.

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere- MLK, letter from a Birmingham jail

---

by: davesoko @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 16:08:20 PM CST

[ Parent ]

When you do -- ping me (0.00 / 0)

I still haven't gotten around to sending in a check, or even a cheque (do they take pounds?).  I feel quite guilty about that.

---

by: stomv @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 16:21:52 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Excellent choice. n/t (6.00 / 1)

WE NEED A PUBLIC OPTION

---

by: liveandletlive @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 14:39:14 PM CST

thanks, liveandletlive. n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Rep Lori Ehrlich @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 18:06:20 PM CST

[ Parent ]

bravo! (6.00 / 1)

Great choice.  

---

by: kaj314 @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 15:12:41 PM CST

and thanks, kaj314. (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Rep Lori Ehrlich @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 18:07:09 PM CST

[ Parent ]

BMG PAC definitely doesn't get any of my money (4.00 / 2)

I like most of what she's done, but the bullet point about her opposition to appointing an interim Senator made me do a double take. Legislation shouldn't be based on what's politically expedient. Great, how much political courage did she have to muster to come up with that soundbite?

People have bad motives for supporting legislation all the time; that's how legislatibe bodies work. Do I care that Ben Nelson is only supporting HCR because he got a nice handout for his state? As long as HCR still makes the world a better place on balance, no, I don't. Do I care that Joe Cao only voted for it because he's a Republican in a really liberal district and it's the only way to save his hide? No, I don't. What matters is whether it's good policy.

The interim Senator was good policy. Perhaps some people disagree on that. Voting against it because it was bad policy is a principled position; voting against it because it also happened to be politically expedient is an insane position, and perhaps a grandstanding, unprincipled one as well.  

---

by: PatrickLong @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 16:48:32 PM CST

Please read my explanation (6.00 / 2)

which is far more than a soundbite. After quite a bit of outreach, research and discussions with constituents I agonized over this decision. As I mentioned in my piece linked above, there were important principles in both a "yay" or "nay" vote, a point on which we agree. While it wasn't an easy vote, I stand by it and feel that above all else, it was good policy.

---

by: Rep Lori Ehrlich @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 18:17:37 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Read it (3.00 / 1)

Consent of the governed favors the interim appointment. If the proposal was to go back to a Gubernatorial appointment filling out the rest of the term, a nay vote would be supported by concerns about consent of the governed. But when I voted for Ted Kennedy, I consented to him being my Senator. I didn't consent to Pauk Kirk being Senator, but I DEFINITELY did not consent to being denied equal representation in the Senate. Paul Kirk is closer to what I voted for than an empty seat is.

The most democratic way to deal with a vacancy would be a special election, with an interim appointment required to be of the same party as the deceased/former Senator. The 2004 change was a big step in that direction; the 2009 change was another step toward it. So I still don't see anything but a lot of big talk about political expediency, and a vote that can't be explained by anything but political expediency.  

---

by: PatrickLong @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 21:39:54 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Patrick, you are never going to find a candidate or an elected (0.00 / 0)

official who does things your way 100% of the time.
I think she gave it a lot of thought, considered the
feedback from her constituents, and made her best decision.

Not donating to BMG because of this one decision that you disagree with is a little narrow-minded.  I am still going to donate again even though they endorsed Alan Khasei when my guy was Mike Capuano.  I could see you getting a little disappointmented if you can't agree after maybe five or ten BMG endorsements/contributions, but really, the first one and your going to cave?  


WE NEED A PUBLIC OPTION

---

by: liveandletlive @ Fri Jan 29, 2010 at 22:53:27 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Ok (5.00 / 1)

I'm reluctant to give to PACs in the first place because of precisely this issue. Unless the PAC's decisionmakers share the same values and have significantly better information than me, it makes more sense to find candidates on my own. So part of my objection here is to giving to PACs in general, not BMG specifically.

In a tough re-election against a Republican or conservaDem, would I give Rep Ehrlich my money? Perhaps. If I lived in her district in that scenario, I'd definitely vote for her. But unlike voting, I can give money in any district I want. But I can't afford to give in every one and wouldn't be allowed to even if I could. So I'm going to seek the highest probability I can that my values will be promoted, in terms of ideological difference between the candidates in a particular race and chance that my donation will make a difference in the final outcome. And pretending that the voters consented to not having full representation in the US Senate is a big difference, perhaps a fundamental one.

I tend to weight votes on procedural changes more heavily than votes on substantive law because procedure has far-reaching implications on who has power and thus on what becomes substantive law, while a substantive law is just one law (see: filibuster). Those who voted against the interim gave the finger to their constituents and the democratic process, and I find it particularly insulting when they do, present no principled reason for their position, and then talk about how the other side is focused on "political expediency".  

---

by: PatrickLong @ Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 00:07:53 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes, I see your point (0.00 / 0)

during campaigns I give to the candidate of my choice too.
(trust me, I'm not a huge contributor. I'm very much in the middle of the working/middle class trap that a lot of people are in.)

The reason why I understand Rep Ehrlich's vote on the interem Senate seat is because that was when some people were starting to boil over about it being called Teddy's seat.  The whole incident of that vote, as well as appointing a long time Kennedy friend could very well have begun the process of riling up independents who don't feel a particular allegiance to the Kennedys - or the the Democrats.  Perhaps she was getting mail that was expressing that and had genuine concerns of the impact. Who knows.  In any case, that vote didn't really bring us any closer to health insurance reform anyway, in a concrete sense.

As far as giving to BMG PAC, it's also a show of support to the Editors who give us a forum to express our views.
We are not inhibited to give our opinions in any way.
I've commented on other sites where your remarks are
"moderated" and only make it through if they follow the same values of the moderators. Dissension is not allowed.
That's not the case here.  This is a truly valuable forum to come to say what you think, hear what others think,
and learn about just how different we all are, even those of us in the same party.  It's a gift really, and free too!

But if it's something that really irks you enough to say you won't contribute then, it is what is.  I know I've been that irked too, probably not here, but on other websites and for other reasons.

WE NEED A PUBLIC OPTION

---

by: liveandletlive @ Sat Jan 30, 2010 at 22:57:30 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Maybe you should read (6.00 / 2)

the entire column, linked above, that contained that "soundbite". The column ran in both local papers in her district and goes through her rationale. I was published immediately after the vote took place.

---

by: Okapi @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 17:02:19 PM CST

And maybe you should read (3.00 / 1)

my response, instead of just giving a 3 to everything you disagree with. The column does not present a principled reason for voting against the interim, unless she was confused and thought it was a vote to eliminate the special election.  

---

by: PatrickLong @ Fri Jan 29, 2010 at 11:33:00 AM CST

[ Parent ]

You raise $1,000... (0.00 / 0)

...and you gave $500 of it to an Incumbent in a safe seat?

Wow.

Bold move!  Really changing things up on Beacon Hill!

"I have found it advisable not to give too much heed to what people say when I am trying to accomplish something of consequence. Invariably they proclaim it can't be done. I deem that the very best time to make the effort."

-Calvin Coolidge

---

by: Cool Cal @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 19:49:25 PM CST

Jealous, heh. (6.00 / 1)

Thanks for the sweet comment.

God I love our Republican commenters, especially one who looks to Calvin Coolidge for inspiration.

BMG: Reality-based commentary.

---

by: Bob Neer @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 20:23:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Excellent! (0.00 / 0)

Most BMGers who have weighed in say "great move!"  The RMGer says "bad move!"  That's all the confirmation I need.  :-)

---

by: David @ Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 22:28:19 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Oh, I'm DELIGHTED... (0.00 / 0)

...that you're giving your precious, limited PAC funds to someone with almost $22,000 cash-on-hand as of 3 weeks ago in a seat where the last Republican  state rep. candidate got what?  33%?

I'm delighted that you need to blow your money not on trying to change the legislature, but propping up a candidate who has nearly zero chance of losing!

You could never have used that money to support some "Progressive" primary challenger against a Conservative Democrat, nor could you have used it to fight for the half-dozen or so GOP open seats we'll have this year!

Yup.  Giving it to some lefty in a safe seat totally was the better call.  You guys are so on the ball!

Please, keep it up.  Don't make me beg!


"I have found it advisable not to give too much heed to what people say when I am trying to accomplish something of consequence. Invariably they proclaim it can't be done. I deem that the very best time to make the effort."

-Calvin Coolidge

---

by: Cool Cal @ Fri Jan 29, 2010 at 00:15:47 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Like I said. (0.00 / 0)

---

by: David @ Fri Jan 29, 2010 at 08:48:04 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Actually, Cool Cal has a valid point (0.00 / 0)

If MA allowed candidates to give substantial funds to other candidates it would make sense on the grounds that a safe incumbent who shares one's views is the best judge of how to best promote them through redistribution of campaign funds. That's kind of the idea behind leadership PACS at the federal level (from a principle-motivated donor's viewpoint anyway). As it stands, the only incumbent state politicians I can think of who need donations are the Gov and LG.  

---

by: PatrickLong @ Fri Jan 29, 2010 at 11:29:38 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Lori represents the best the Democratic Party has to offer (6.00 / 1)

She'd diligent, smart and responsive.

Massacusetts (and the Democratic Party) needs more Lori Ehrlichs.

John Walsh, Chair
Massachusetts Democratic Party

---

by: John E Walsh @ Fri Jan 29, 2010 at 07:51:58 AM CST

I second Jen Benson (0.00 / 0)

and I hope you'll put Jamie Eldridge on your list as well. He's always been very visible in his district, and an energetic campaigner, both for himself and others. With his recent physical problems, I imagine campaigning will be tougher for him. And as a first term senator, he's going to need all of the help he can get.  

---

by: ChrisO @ Fri Jan 29, 2010 at 08:43:32 AM CST

Like the pick... (6.00 / 1)

Lori is great**

Going forward, I would say that I'd like to see BMG PAC also support progressive challengers to some of the more hack-tastic D reps.  Incumbents have easy access to fundraising, which is why defeating the entrenched reps is so difficult.  Maybe the special election in Brown's senate seat is the place to start?

** Though I wish she had voted against the sales tax and forced consideration of the governor's much better revenue proposals... but hey, no "progressive" in the House came through on that order...

---

by: Ed Poon @ Fri Jan 29, 2010 at 09:46:51 AM CST

We have every intention (0.00 / 0)

of doing exactly that!

Of course, we need your help ... the BMG PAC donation box is conveniently located in the left-hand sidebar!  :-)

---

by: David @ Fri Jan 29, 2010 at 14:07:20 PM CST

[ Parent ]