It may not have been his fault.
Or it may have been – I really don’t know. But with last night’s vote in the legislature to transfer control of the investigation of Monday’s disaster away from the Turnpike Authority, together with public statements by Sal & Trav and by Republican legislators that Matt Amorello should fade away, it couldn’t be any clearer that the entire legislature, as well as the press, the Governor, and apparently everyone else in the state other than Amorello and his family, have lost confidence in Amorello’s ability to run the Turnpike.
Here’s Amorello on why he doesn’t want to quit (yet):
Amorello said he had decided, after soul-searching conversations with his wife and family, that he had a duty to press on. “I have taken an oath of office to serve as chairman of the Turnpike Authority until July 2007,” Amorello told reporters at the late-afternoon news conference. “I will tell you that I have done everything humanly possible in my capacity as chairman of this authority to maintain the authority, the stability of the board, to hold the budget price, to open these tunnels, to build the parks on top.”
… There were private and public entreaties from political leaders for him to go…. Throughout the day, there was rampant speculation among lawmakers and aides about what would come next. Amorello, though he rejected the calls to leave his job, left open the possibility that he would rethink his role if the “dynamic changes” and he was forced to make a different decision. “We’ll take those as they come,” he said, taking no further questions.
Does this situation remind you of anything? Over thirty years ago another embattled leader said the following in reluctantly announcing his decision to resign his office:
Throughout the long and difficult period of Watergate, I have felt it was my duty to persevere, to make every possible effort to complete the term of office to which you elected me.
In the past few days, however, it has become evident to me that I no longer have a strong enough political base in the Congress to justify continuing that effort….
I would have preferred to carry through to the finish whatever the personal agony it would have involved, and my family unanimously urged me to do so. But the interest of the Nation must always come before any personal considerations.
From the discussions I have had with Congressional and other leaders, I have concluded that because of the Watergate matter I might not have the support of the Congress that I would consider necessary to back the very difficult decisions and carry out the duties of this office in the way the interests of the Nation would require.
I have never been a quitter. To leave office before my term is completed is abhorrent to every instinct in my body. But as President, I must put the interest of America first. America needs a full-time President and a full-time Congress, particularly at this time with problems we face at home and abroad.
To continue to fight through the months ahead for my personal vindication would almost totally absorb the time and attention of both the President and the Congress in a period when our entire focus should be on the great issues of peace abroad and prosperity without inflation at home.
Therefore, I shall resign the Presidency effective at noon tomorrow. Vice President Ford will be sworn in as President at that hour in this office.
Now, by quoting President Nixon I certainly don’t mean to imply that Matt Amorello has engaged in criminal activity like Nixon did – there is absolutely no evidence of that. But the situations are nonetheless similar. Nixon quit, not because he wanted to or out of contrition, but because it became clear that he simply could not do the job – he had lost the support of his allies in Congress, the press, and the public. He correctly recognized that as long as he remained in office, he, not the needs of the country, would be the story. That is more or less the situation in which Amorello finds himself.
There’s another parallel too. A big part of Nixon’s calculus in resigning was to head off impeachment proceedings – he said that he would have preferred to “see the constitutional process through to its conclusion,” but that in light of the loss of his political base in Congress, “I now believe that the constitutional purpose has been served, and there is no longer a need for the process to be prolonged.” Governor Romney has begun the legal machinery to forcibly strip Amorello of his chairmanship. The outcome of that proceeding is a foregone conclusion, and the only real question is whether the SJC will sustain Romney’s decision months later. No one, least of all Matt Amorello, needs to see that process go forward, particularly since no one in the state will be backing Amorello. It would be a waste of time, money, and resources that would be much better used in trying to restore some semblance of confidence in the Big Dig.
McGrory got it right this morning:
This ceiling collapse wasn’t his fault. He doesn’t deserve all the blame. He was hired to finish the project and watchdog the budget. Now we need someone to do something different, which is restore faith. Amorello is not that guy.
Quite right. Amorello needs to step down.
will says
This is my third time mentioning this point, and David you seem to pay lip service to it but I don’t understand your conclusion–
<
p>
The ceiling tile failure is not Amarello’s responsibility.
<
p>
It is the responsibility of the contractor who proposed, implemented, and built the design.
<
p>
Responsibility only falls to anyone on the government side in a secondary fashion at best.
<
p>
David, you seem to acknowledge this when you say that the “collapse wasn’t his fault,” but we need to “restore faith”. I’m not sure what you’re looking for to restore your own faith, but for me, removing the contractors responsible for the flawed design would give me a lot more faith than removing a political figurehead.
david says
Amorello’s stepping down does not solve the problem. But it seems to me to be necessary so that everyone can move on with the investigation – including looking into what Bechtel knew and when it knew it.
<
p>
Part of being a responsible leader is knowing when circumstances have conspired such that you simply can no longer be effective in your job, even if that’s due in part to events beyond your control. He should be a grown-up and do the right thing. If he’s spending all his time holding press conferences explaining why he still isn’t quitting despite everyone in the state asking him to, how does that help figure out Bechtel’s role? Let him stay on the board and make whatever contributions he can make, but let someone else be chair.
dca-bos says
I think this quote from Reilly says it best:
<
p>
<
p>
If he steps down, at least some of the political infighting and silliness goes with him, and that’s important at a time when we need professional management of a situation that only seems to be getting worse.
<
p>
On another note, I can’t help but think that every time Amorello opens his mouth, it becomes more and more apparent to the public that he really doesn’t have the proper qualifications and expertise to be leading the MTA during this time.
chriswagner says
Will has a very good point about going after the contractors who were responsible for the fatal design. Through all of the calls for Matt Amarello’s head, I have heard very little, if any talk of Bechtel’s role in this. In a list of heads that should role as a result of this tragedy, Bechtel should be at the very top. That being said, I completely agree with David’s post. Rightly or wrongly, Matt Amarello has become the face of this tunnel disaster, and that is not something that he can overcome. He has zero support from any facet of government, the media has been crucifying him, and the public at large has lost complete faith in him. When you lose the faith of the public, you either need to figure out a way to win it back, or if you can’t, you need to step aside because you will never be able to lead again. If Matt Amarello truly had the best interests of the people in mind, he would resign his post because as long as he continues to fight, Matt Amarello is the story, not figuring out how this happened, and who is ultimately responsible. Please Mr. Amarello, it is time to step aside.
will says
This is my request to the BMG community (and other participants in public dialogue):
<
p>
Please stop focusing on Matt Amarello. He is simply not important to the safety of the tunnels, as both David’s and Chris’s posts cannot help but acknowledge. The fact that everyone has “lost faith” in him simply means that we put our faith in the wrong channels from the start. The entire debate around Matt Amarello is emotional, not logical. It is also useless, in fact counterproductive.
<
p>
For the safety of Massachusetts commuters…let’s forget Matt Amarello, and start talking about the contractors.
david says
I don’t necessarily disagree with that. But the fact is, there is only one person who can put a stop to it, and that’s Matt Amorello. For the good of the state, and (as you say) for the safety of the commuters, he needs to get out of the way.
will says
by posting about “Why we should look at Parsons-Brinkerhoff” instead of “Why Matt Amorello should step down”
<
p>
Howie Carr could put a stop to it by not talking about Amorello 24/7.
<
p>
Mitt Romney could put a stop to it by showing some actual leadership and inclination to stand up to big contractors, instead of blaming his personal nemesis.
<
p>
I’m not arguing that Amorello should stay. I’m arguing that people interested in constructive dialog should be talking about the contractors and the investigation process, instead of making the whole thing into a clash of personalities that accomplishes nothing.
david says
but the problem is that Howie, Mitt, Sal, Trav, the Globe, the Herald, and everyone else – excluding, of course, the ultra-reasonable BMG, who would stop if they thought it might help đ – are not going to stop. Sometimes one has to accept the polical reality of the situation, and ask “given that reality, what is the best course of action?”
<
p>
My point, basically, is this, and I apologize if I haven’t made it clear before. I’m perfectly willing to believe Amorello when he says that what he wants most is to get the tunnels inspected, repaired, and reopened as quickly and safely as possible. But in light of the political situation, he himself is preventing that from happening – even if it’s not his fault. You say we should look at Bechtel/Parsons. I agree, and so do lots of other people (except Lynne!). But we can’t do it until the political crap is out of the way, and it’s not gonna happen with Amorello at the head of the Authority.
<
p>
If the guy were some kind of indispensable super-genius who had a technical understanding of the project that surpassed that of anyone else around, that might be a different situation. But come on – everyone knows that’s not the case. Giving him the maximum benefit of the doubt, he’s a modestly competent manager. There are lots of those around that don’t carry the baggage that he now carries. He can be replaced, and he therefore should be replaced.
andy says
I like that line and think it fits with the situation regarding the incompetancy of the legislature and your desire to only pursue the governor as having responsiblity. Specifically I am talking about this comment:
In your example of Washington I think the political reality suggest throwing both out because of incompetence yet you don’t draw that conclusion and I am absolutely boggled as to how you can do that. Oversight is the function of the legislature and execution is the function of the executive. Neither is doing their job yet you seem only to care about the executive. That’s being selective and frankly I think it is this partisan mindset that keeps us out of the corner office. The position you take seems a bit arrogant, Dems do no wrong, Repubs do no right.
andy says
to your comment.
david says
you’re just not listening, so I’m going to stop repeating myself after this. But the fact is that no one around here has been louder than I have about complaining about the hackocracy that our legislature has become. The thing is, though, there is not a goddamn thing we can do about that in the short term (i.e., this calendar year). Why? Because the only Democrats with serious primary opponents are the one who didn’t collect enough signatures to make the ballot, and the one who apparently beats not only his wife but his children. That’s a fine state of affairs.
<
p>
Drastic measures may be called for. I’m planning to roll out some proposals in the relatively near future, and I assume from what you’ve said so far that you’ll be with me 100%. But they are longer-term solutions, and they have to be because of the nature of the beast. In the short term, just because we can’t throw out the “bums” that have screwed things up in the legislature, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try as hard as we can to throw out the party that has – without question – screwed things up in the executive branch.
will says
..why you keep repeating that nothing can happen until Amorello steps down. I’m guessing you think until that happens, no one will talk about anything else, and so no one will do anything else either; if so, I find that neither entirely accurate, nor entirely compelling. Investigations are happening left and right (Reilly, NTSB, and so on) and at the end of the day, Amorello’s position going forward is an unrelated story.
<
p>
Furthermore, it seems like you’re saying, “The voice of the people/media/public officials here may not be right, but it’s clearly against Amorello, so he needs to go (in a loose correlation with the reasons above)” As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, while this may or may not be how it plays out, I see BMG’s role as not joining that mob voice, but calmly calling for action on the important issue, which is the investigation. If the media/public frenzy gets Amorello out, so be it, but BMG doesn’t need to become mixed up in it.
stomv says
It is the responsibility of the contractor who proposed, implemented, and built the design.
<
p>
Surely it wasn’t a single contractor, was it? Was there a single contractor who served as architect of that part of the project, as well as built it?
<
p>
Even so, even if it was… is there no government oversight? Not even for safety of design and implementation? I mean, a building inspector has to give the thumbs up for a house, surely the same thing exists for a government project, no?
<
p>
I find it hard to believe that there wasn’t government oversight and approval of the design and actual construction of those concrete panels. That doesn’t mean I don’t also fault the poor design/implementation from the contractor, just that I suspect one or more non-elected non-figureheads in government signed off on the work, and therefore also must bear some of the primary responsibility.
chriswagner says
I don’t think that anyone is debating whether or not Matt Amarello deserves some of the blame for this disaster. Likewise, for all their grandstanding, Governor Romeny and AG Reilly also deserve some of the blame for this horrible event. This was a complete failure of oversight on the part of the state government, I don’t think anyone is debating that. However, Matt Amarello has become the face of this disaster, as I said earlier, and because of that there has been no focus on the role of the contractor, Bechtel in this case. It is important to note that Bechtel controled every aspect of this project, from management, to design, to construction. Did Bechtel, in an effort to hide potentially serious flaws in the design of the connector tunnel engage in a cover-up to hide thses flaws from state agencies responsible for oversight (such as the Turnpike Authority)? Did state agencies and offices, such as the Turnpike Authority, the AG’s office, the Legislature, and the Governor’s office, do an adequate job of oversight on this project? Did they conduct vigorous inspections of the tunnel system to guarantee its saftey? These are all very important questions, with the most important, IMHO, being whether or not Bechtel engaged in some type of cover-up to hide deficiencies in the tunnel.
stomv says
My point isn’t Amarello. My point is that there should be a small number of government employees who signed off on design and construction of that particular part of the project.
<
p>
In a very direct sense, they are accountable, just as in a very direct sense, the designer and/or builder are. The inital poster suggested that only the contractors have primary responsibility, and that the government responsibility is secondary. My claim is that the inital poster isn’t quite right — that there are indeed government employees who had a primary responsibility. Matt Amarello isn’t one of them, but there are some.
lynne says
Come on…how many times do I have to make this comment…it could very well be the fault of the government. If the concerns came up and B/PB made a proposal (more expensive) for a change order on that aspect of design or materials, and the client refused, then it is not the fault of the company.
<
p>
The government was the client, what did the client demand? If the client was concerned and the contracting company didn’t address it, that’s one matter. However, my experience is that the government, when it’s a client, is a pain the ass to deal with, and very gunshy (especially on this project) whenever the costs went up. It’s very likely it was the contractor which recommended the changes and the government decided against it.
<
p>
Let. The. Investigation. Finish. Please.
<
p>
Arg!
lynne says
to the company Katherine Harris hired as SecState of FL to purge the voting records of felons. They said to the state, “hey, this criteria will purge non-felons too, it’s too broad” and Harris said, “do it anyway.”
<
p>
This happens more than you think it does.
will says
That is calm advice (other than the interesting punctuation). And if people were doing that, I’d be happy. “Why Matt Amorello should step down” is not doing that.
<
p>
I understand the back-flip argument of, “Well, he needs to go now anyway, because no one trusts him, because it looks like he messed up, so he needs to go, and then the investigation can proceed.” I understand it, but it’s not productive. I’d rather let Romney do the grandstanding, and here at BMG, we can be productive.
david says
it is productive, because it is the most expeditious way to move forward the investigation that everyone wants to see happen. It costs no one including Amorello much of anything – heck, the guy gets to stay on the authority, he just wouldn’t be chairman anymore – and it saves everyone else involved a lot of energy and trouble that they could better spend elsewhere.
stomv says
as I outlined here.
danielshays says
Lynne,
<
p>
Just in case you don’t come across this on the other thread, please address it here.
centralmassdad says
We are plagued by a Turnpike authority that is (i) absurdly corrpupt, (ii) focused on sleazy maneuvers to protect the jobs of its board members, (iii) focused on the politcal vendettas of its board members, and is (iv) completely insulated from accountability.
<
p>
Why is the existence of this authority tolerated?
porcupine says
centralmassdad says
Kerasiotes, Natsios, and Amorello!
<
p>
Oh, wait…
porcupine says
If it were just them, the building would be on fire and the Legislatue would be roasting marshmallows!
<
p>
As it is, SOMEBODY (Diane Wilkerson?) put an amendment in place to keep Matt in power and the longest runing show in politics (now that the MDC is gone) on the road.
<
p>
Hackarama is bipartisan, bilingual, biracial, bisexual….