His independent candidacy is necessary, he said, because both the GOP and Democrats are “bought and paid for by special interests” and “there is not a dime’s worth of difference between the parties”. (He claimed as an Independent to speak for the largest bloc of voters and referred to the GOP as the “third party”. He referred to Maine independent governor Angus King as a role model.) The Senate, he said, offered nearly 1000 amendments to the state budget that were mostly special favors, including $36M for infrastructure improvements around Fenway for the benefit of the quite wealthy Red Sox. These raids on the treasury distract from what should be the government’s priorities, to benefit its “customers” and deal with the loss of jobs and population. (He blamed this last on housing costs and lack of spending on public higher education, among other things.)
He took several questions — anything not in quotes is my paraphrase:
Q: Why should the governor serve on the UMass board — isn’t that micromanaging? A: It would establish that UMass gets the high priority it deserves. Romney has appointed “celebrity trustees” who go to few or no meetings — the governor would set an example for the other trustees to work hard and raise money.
Q: Would you commit to improving affordability by freezing tuition, as you did as trustee? A: No commitment to a freeze, as he is no longer up on details of the budget, but affordability would be a priority. Fee increases at UMass are emblematic of Romney’s increases of fees, fines, and tolls while priding himself on lowering taxes.
Q: Where will you get the money for your laudable plans for UMass? A: Money is “coming in over the transom” for the foreseeable future because of the revenue surpluses. There is also $1.7B in the rainy-day fund — pessimistic estimates for future budgets are biased because the special interests want to maintain the revenue stream. We can “get the money to the people” in the form of higher ed funding and local aid.
Q: I’m worried that you constantly speak of government as a business and citizens as customers, when a profit-driven approach is destroying education at all levels. A: Perhaps “end user” is a better word than “customer” but I am committed to running the state as I ran my business, respecting and empowering my employees so that they can do the best job for the “customer”.
Q: What would you do about Springfield, where a state control board has taken over the city government? A: The fact that the control board is at open war with all the city unions is emblematic of the failure of the Romney administration. I hope the control board will be gone, and the government run by the elected city officials, by the time I take office.
I am about to announce a plan for a $300M bond issue to develop businesses in Springfield to exploit UMass-developed technology in biotech and nanotech. (He also mentioned his plan to abolish Mass Pike tolls west of suburban Boston.)
Q: Would you commit to negotiate UMass employee contracts promptly and to abide by them once signed? A: I “will not turn a blind eye to UMass” and will keep the state’s word on signed commitments. (He didn’t specifically address the timing of negotiations, except that he would give UMass more attention than does the current administration.
Like any successful politician, Mihos was charming, and he certainly had command of the issues and a sincere concern for the university. I would of course prefer him to Healey on hot-button social issues alone (he is pro-choice, pro-gay-marriage, and pro-gay-adoption according to Wikipedia), but I don’t think he gave me any reason to vote for him over a Democrat. The narrative of corruption and inefficiency in both parties is a powerful one — it remains to be seen how effectively he will be able to make his case to the general public and how seriously he will be taken. Since we on the UMass faculty quite naturally consider the interests of the university to be identical with those of the state as a whole, we liked a lot of what he said, but wondered (a) how much of this was specific pandering to us as a single constituency, and (b) how well we will do under someone who shares the anti-tax rhetoric and was a Republican until recently — how reliable is his claim that we have no revenue problem?
