Still not going away. Today’s Herald has a story proclaiming that Tom Reilly accepted campaign contributions from employees of a Beacon Hill lobbying firm, one of whose clients is Ameriquest.
Color me not shocked. It seems highly unlikely to me that Ameriquest is the only client of this lobbying firm, and the article makes clear that this particular firm is generous and non-partisan with its campaign contributions, spreading them among Democrats (including Trav and DiMasi) and Republicans (including Kerry Healey) alike. Not much to see here.
But there is one nugget in the article that suggests to me that Deval Patrick still doesn’t appreciate that the Ameriquest story could become an albatross around his neck if he doesn’t aggressively seek to turn it to his advantage:
Patrick has not revealed whether he is compensated for serving on the board of the parent company, ACC Holdings, and a campaign spokesman did not return a call.
Oof. Bad strategy. Shouldn’t withhold information like that – it will all come out eventually anyway, and probably at the worst possible time. And what is it, exactly, that campaign spokespeople are doing all day if they’re not returning calls from the second-largest newspaper in Massachusetts?
Come on, Deval. Right now, the story is “Patrick serves on board of company that cheated poor people and that is run by bazillionaire Bush backer; won’t reveal how much he’s paid for his service or exactly what he’s doing there.” Not a very good story, especially when you add the sub-headline that reads “Reilly brings company to its knees, recovers millions for cheated Mass. homeowners.” But you can take ownership of this story, and use it to demonstrate how you showed a bad company the error of its ways, and how people who want to buy a home but can’t get a traditional mortgage are actually going to be better off as a result. That’s a good story.
You get the feeling that some one over there is telling the candidate that this was a two day story, max, and the best thing he can do is stay silent and talk about the issues.
<
p>
Except it’s not and he shouldn’t. This is an opportunity to tell voters what he’s about without having to get into stump speeches.
<
p>
I’m really surprised that a campaign with, really, nothing to lose hasn’t figured this out yet.
that’s exactly the feeling I get. Conventional political advice for someone who’s supposed to be an unconventional candidate. Deval strikes me as someone who wouldn’t be shy about overruling his advisors when he thinks they’re wrong. Let’s hope this is one of those times.
Why wonât Reilly disassociate himself from these people? It sure doesnât look like heâs having ânothing to do withâ this company. Does anyone know if Reilly has taken money from any other lobbyists with ties to companies that heâs investigating?
What this says to me is that Patrick still hasn’t figured out how to talk to the public about his corporate past. And that’s something he’s going to need to do as the campaign progresses. Also, I’d say there’s a parallel between Patrick refusing to divulge his compensation from ACC Holdings (assuming he was compensated, which seems likely) and Tom Reilly’s refusal to make his coversation with Bob Davis a few weeks back.
is that Patrick has actually been fairly direct when asked about his work for Coke and Texaco, even though a lot of people think Coke is evil incarnate. Why this one is so different for him baffles me.
Are the rumors true, that this John Brennan guy has held fundraisers for Reilly and raised tens of thousands of dollars for Reilly? Does anyone know if the rumor is true or not?
The Herald had another story about Reilly, Patrick and Ameriquest. This time by Columnist Wayne Woodlief. This story isnât going away, but I have to admit Woodlief brings up some good points. I only wish he pushed Deval a little further.
<
p>
Why isnât Deval telling us what exactly he does for Ameriquest? I mean they clearly are a bad company and as was said before all we know about Devalâs involvement is that he works for this bad company. And now we find out he is making more than a hundred grand from them, but why wouldnât he say exactly how much? That pretty much tells us that it is well over a hundred grand
On day 2 David, you linked to a story where I thought Deval did just as you have suggested.
<
p>
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/04/20/patrick_tied_to_company_under/
<
p>
…
“These are serious charges that I believe the company is taking seriously,” Patrick said. “In fact, the company is using the situation as an opportunity to raise the bar for the entire industry.”
<
p>
“The measure of a good company is not whether it always gets it right, but how it responds when things go wrong,” Patrick said. “I see my role in every company I have been associated with as trying to make it better. Sometimes problem solvers, if they’re serious, get their hands dirty. That is exactly the kind of leadership we need in Massachusetts today.”
<
p>
<
p>
It seems to me that Patrick has a history of trying to work within a corrupt system to make it better. You go into Coke, Texaco and Ameriquest in order to change policy for the better, just as Progressives go into the Democratic Party (which many see as corrupt) to change it for the better.