The $88,000 Middlesex Clerk of Courts position is open for the first time since the Eisenhower administration. At 85, Edward Sullivan has decided not to seek re-election. “Many people think it’s a crime to do a favor,’ he said. ‘In my opinion, if no one’s getting hurt, what’s wrong with doing someone a favor if you can help them out? That’s been our success, he said of the family’s political credo,” according to the Globe. With one eye, perhaps, on the family legacy his nephew, Cambridge City Council member and former Mayor Michael Sullivan has announced his candidacy for the job. The Somerville News reported today, however, that Somerville alderman Bruce Desmond has jumped into the race. There may be more to come since potential candidates have been waiting since the 1950s.
In news from the campaign front, blogger Teddy Korkoros was not impressed by what he heard from Sullivan last night. “Coincidently the person who is leaving that job is Sullivanâs uncle. Sullivan tried to play this off saying he has to work harder to prove that he is not just getting the job because of his family name recognition. This argument falls flat because any one who looks at national or local politics can see being in a politically connected family helps someone enormously. My biggest problem with Sullivan presentation tonight was that aside from vague generalities he did not fully detail what his job does,” he wrote.
Commenters at the Somerville Journal appeared split on Desmond: “I think one Sullivan for 48 YEARS is enough, that hackarama needs a good cleaning out!” wrote one. “Hey Desmond, You will never win that race. You are a loser and will always be a loser. In case you can’t tell, We canât stand you. You are an arrogant, pretentious jackass who will not have any political future in this city or anywhere else in the commonwealth for that matter. Hang it up chump! PS, You Suck,” wrote another.
Ah, Massachusetts politics. More information about Sullivan here and information on Desmond here. We’ll ask each of the candidates for an interview.
Forgive a poorly educated citizen, but I can’t figure out exactly why we elect a Clerk of Courts, anyway. Their function may be important to the smooth operation of the judiciary, but probably not more than that of cheifs of police or judges, and we don’t elect them.
<
p>
I believe in a simple representative democracy, where citizens are asked to choose leaders by means of fair elections for roles that are meaningful, relevant, and comprehensible: a legislature to make the laws, an executive to carry them out.
<
p>
Offices like Clerk of Courts and Register of Deeds are too low-profile to be worthy of citizens’ time, and should properly be in the hands of the governor to appoint. Without that, these posts, especially at the lower levels, are breeding grounds for hacks, patronage, and hangers on.
Are you suggesting that having the governor appoint positions like this would reduce patronage? If so, color me confused.
<
p>
I honestly don’t know why Clerk of Courts is elected. I can think of some reasons for, and some against. But that certainly isn’t one of the “against” reasons!
Elections are the disinfectant that destroys the germs of patronage.
Elections can only disinfect if the voters have a clue of who is holding the job now, what they do, whether they are doing a good job, and who their opponents are, and what they propose. In a far, far down ballot race like this, most people do not have the time or inclination to find out.
<
p>
As voter interest in an elected position decreases, the ability of incumbents to slink along on the basis of a strong bank account and the votes of lots of their employees and the people they have done favors for increases exponentially.
<
p>
The point here is that government should follow some logical means of determining which things we elect and which we don’t. If we are going to elect a Clerk of Courts, why not elect the head of the housing authority? How about the head of the human rights commission, the traffic and parking coordinator, and the head of the sanitation department? It would be fine if we citizens had infinite time and energy to put into governing ourselves, but we don’t.
<
p>
Don’t get me wrong here. Governors and local executives like mayors can sponsor plenty of patronage (and they often do). But they are held to more frequent and much more intensive public scrutiny than Registers of Deeds and Clerks of Courts. If they do a bad job, we are more likely to find out about it and give them the boot.
Im a big Mike Sullivan fan though I am disappointed to see him running for this particular open seat, I wish he had run for an office that actually matters, I also hope he can keep his Council seat as well. He is a very progressive very active city councilor and his family has done a lot for Cambridge in a selfless way, not in a political boss type of way a la the Daley family. That said I dont know anything about his opponent and the position seems pretty pointless and irrelevent and I wish Mike had run for an office more deserving of his talents like DA or State Senate though both of those races are contested (he and Gallucio are pals, Tolman will never be unseated, the DA primary is already too crowded and he and Barrios share the same base) so this seems logical. I do hope he runs for something better someday though.
<
p>
And in MA we have a lot of useless county positions like Sheriff and Commissioner that are also elected. I believe one of Sully’s brothers ran for Middlesex County Treasurer but lost to Shannon O Brien.
Was actually elected Middlesex County Commissioner in 1996, but the position was abolished a year later. Guess it wasn’t too important.
<
p>
Rumor is that he’s going to run for Michael’s Cambridge City Council seat if he is elected clerk of courts.