Second in an occasional series of posts on candidates challenging Democratic incumbents in the legislature.
Deirdre Healy, a lawyer, long-time environmentalist, and long-time Worcester resident, is challenging incumbent Senator Harriette Chandler in the Sept. 19 primary for the First Worcester District. Healy is one of only two primary challengers to incumbent Senators whose names will be appearing on the ballot (Dianne Wilkerson, of course, also faces challengers in an all-sticker primary). She has focused her campaign heavily on energy and environmental issues – as good a focus as any, IMHO. Here are her answers to the questions we emailed her:
What are the issues that are most important to you?
The CENTRAL issue facing Massachusetts is our energy supply!
- A clean renewable energy source for Massachusetts residents is a must.
Using wind/solar farms (preferably brightfields), microgeneration with solar panels, and small turbines on people’s homes should be the norm.
I believe that tackling our energy issues will be the starting point for most other important issues – from our health, our quality of life, economic development, jobs and cost savings. When ISO-NE is warning of potential power outages starting next year, it’s crucial to conserve and encourage fuel efficiency.
- In the meantime, build a new, non-polluting, non-imported energy supply. A steady supply of power is important for our health, and the result will keep commerce running profitably.
- I really believe that if we’re aggressive with energy issues, the result will be a healthier and more prosperous Massachusetts.
Why are you trying to unseat Harriette Chandler? Do you feel that her views don’t reflect those of the voters in your district? If so, in what respect?
Im running for office because I am deeply concerned about the state of our environment, the culture of complacency at the statehouse and our legislators failure to discuss the energy crisis Massachusetts is facing. I had two options run against Bob Spellane or Harriette Chandler. Over the years, Bob has replied to my many calls, emails and letters. I sent the same amount of communiqués to my opponent and I only receive ONE reply. So I figured her lack of responsiveness was one good reason to start holding her accountable. In addition, as a long-time environmentalist, I have witnessed her failure to do the right thing for the environment. She failed to oppose House Bill 4500 to protect the Boston Harbor Islands from an LNG terminal. She was a staunch proponent of adding toxic industrial waste (hydrofluosilicic acid) into our drinking water. She recently weakened the mercury reduction bill by pulling the original bulb recycling language, which will most likely result in taxpayers having to bear the cost of the recycling.
As an entrenched incumbent, she seems to have the same complacency that is occurring at the Statehouse. She was on duty and failed to call for oversight regarding the Big Dig.
We really need a proactive legislator who can counter Romneys destructive energy plan.
Do you feel that you are on track to accomplish your goals? Has your campaign fundraising been sufficient to mount a serious challenge to Sen. Chandler (who at the end of 2005 – the most recent online report – had over $93,000 in her campaign account)?
Yes, I am on track. Ive been running a grassroots campaign. Based on the responses Ive been getting from people, theyre supportive of alternative energy and want a change. Do I have $93K? No. But I should be able to get the word out. I have enough money to purchase the requisite ads.
Interested? Here’s her website. Looking for more info? They’d be happy to hear from you. Already sold? You know what to do!
Previous anti-Incumbent posts:
Leah O’Leary takes on John Rogers
is known as the “fluoride lady.” She’s a single issue candidate and is, by her own admission, concerned with a very narrow agenda. When questioned on the myriad issues that state senators deal with around here, e.g., roads & infrastructure in the district, health care, public safety, and education funding, she doesn’t appear to have any ideas, thoughts, or, candidly, a clue. All of the folks I know who aren’t exactly thrilled with Harlee Chandler’s centrist positions on some stuff were kind of interested that she had a Dem challenger, but after talking with Healy, I don’t know of a single individual who is either impressed or willing to vote for her. She’s a curiosity and not much more. < shrug >
We’re not taking a position on most of these races (though we probably will in a few of them). We’re just publicizing the fact that they exist, which I think is all to the good.
And in addition I would dispute Healy’s claim that what we need is an environmentally focused state senator. What we need is what we have…A senator who has time and time again done what worked for Worcester after considering all of the points.
<
p>
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not ecstatic about her support of Reilly or some other centrist moves. I also have my own issues with Healy, who tore apart my company for work that I personally did making the mercury bill better for everyone. Give me ’till tomorrow when I can get to work and grab the Telegram article, and I will quote here again. But the bottom line is that the mercury law we ended up with is very difficult on manufacturers and distributors of mercury added products, and I salute it. Healy’s assertions on the topic are just silly and misguided. She wasn’t there for the crafting of the law we came out with. I was, and so was Senator Chandler, Senator Resor, and others from the environmental and business folds. We showed the legislature a better idea for the environment, consumers, and business; and after a lot of hard work we got a great bill for everybody.
the Telegram article, rollbiz, if you get a chance. Healy, in all candor, comes across as a bit nutty on these issues. There’s a hint of it in her responses posted above. Even in an election year, is this a sentence that anyone can take seriously?
<
p>
<
p>
Even in the most strident political environments, this sort of rhetorical mischaracterization tells us much more about Ms. Healy than it could ever tell us about Sen. Chandler.
Link
a lot of votes, hence the fact that Worcester doesn’t have fluoridated water. Even so, Sen. Chandler won’t have much to worry about from Ms. Healy. She doesn’t represent a credible threat.
…and I really liked her – she was up on all of the issues. She new about impending infrastructure problems, chapter 70 funding, educational issues, budget issues, how renewable energy can bring in a lot of jobs and save money. She had the facts and figures down pat! And I really grilled her. I think lightiris and rollbiz have to be buddies of what did you call her – Harlee? She never even once mentioned fluoride, so I don’t know where you two are coming from. Plus you both mentioned Harlee’s support of Reilly – sounds fishy to me. Frankly, Chandler has been no help to me and she never once replied to any of my emails or phone calls. And I’m not too happy with her about all that affordable housing she foisted on us here. I’m voting for Healy because she was up on the issues and was actually quite pleasant and intelligent.
I think I made it pretty clear that I am a Chandler supporter. I think I also made it pretty clear why. Take from that what you will, but it’s no secret.
<
p>
As for me mentioning Reilly, anyone who has been a registered user here for longer than a day knows I’m a vocal Patrick supporter, so I’m not sure where you’re going with that one.
to the Telegram article.
<
p>
In particular, it was this section that really irked me in my obviously biased position (I work for bulbs.com):
<
p>
<
p>
This assertion is just patently false. There has never been a successful manufacturer takeback of mercury containing bulbs in the US. Ever. What happens is that the cost to recycle exceeds the margin and sometimes even the retail cost of the bulb. Obviously, any manufacturer that wants to make money (which is most!) cannot eat a cost that exceeds their profit. Therefore, they raise the price of bulbs going into the state in question.
<
p>
Problem is, we don’t have border checkpoints. We can’t stop the product from being purchased in any of the surrounding states and shipped into MA.
<
p>
One example I presented to the legislature was this: You’re buying a new car. The car costs 25k. Massachussetts just passed a law which causes the manufacturer to double the price. Now the car is 50k here, but still 25k in all of the bordering states. Hell, in NH it’s 25k and tax free! Where is your value oriented consumer going to buy the car?
<
p>
The ultimate result would be that these products would be purchased out of state, the manufacturers would lose money on trying to take them back here, and they would leave the state. You would also see a lot more people being discouraged from using energy efficient lighting which contains mercury, which would actually increase mercury pollution (see below). CA realized this when they were making their law, and so they changed it. So did NY. With a lot of work on the part of my company and a few legislators including Senator Chandler, we were able to craft a law that will ensure that these items are getting recycled. I could explain it more, but I won’t bother unless someone is actually interested.
<
p>
One more thing that Healy forgets to mention about this issue. Fluorescent lighting is an environmentally friendly product! Here’s a simplified breakdown. The top cause of mercury pollution in the region is actually coal fired power plants. A typical compact fluorescent (spiral energy saver) contains about 4mg of mercury. To put this in perspective, it’s less than 1/100th of what’s in an old thermostat. Over the course of the bulb’s life, it will prevent about 8mg of mercury from being produced at a power plant by reducing energy demand. So even if you take this thing and smash it in a river when it dies, you’ve still done the environment a favor to the tune of at least 4mg mercury per bulb! Don’t believe me? Check with the EPA.(PDF) Obviously that’s not what I advocate doing, but you get the point.
<
p>
This is just one example of an issue with many facets. Senator Chandler voted for the original mercury bill. So did everyone else in the House and Senate. However, after we sat down with her and others, they realized the other side of the story that Clean Water Action and the like were not telling them. We sell an environmentally friendly product that happens to require a tiny bit of mercury to operate. We absolutely advocate the responsible handling and recycling of this product. It just simply doesn’t make sense to make the manufacturer take the product back. It’s a nice theory, but the forces of economics would defeat it in practice. It would ruin businesses like ours and more importantly it wouldn’t even accomplish the goal of recycling.
I’ll quickly add that bulbs.com is a 40 person company. We’re doing very well, but we’re not exactly the type of place that gets our bidding done for us in the Legislature.
for the information; very helpful.
<
p>
Things are lookin’ good….
FYI, the form of fluoride that Worcester wanted to add to the water, that Sen. Chandler was supporting, IS hydrofluosilicic acid, which IS a contaminated waste product from the air pollution scrubbing systems of the phosphate fertilizer industry. It contains small amounts of bioaccumulative hazardous substances including arsenic, lead, mercury, radionuclides, and more. It IS a toxic industrial waste. This is descriptive, and not myth or hyperbole. People who think mentioning this is nutty havent done a whit of research to determine if it is true. If they did, they would know that whats nutty is to want to put this stuff into the drinking water.
<
p>
Ive been paying attention to Ms. Healy and I dont see her at all as a single-issue candidate. I also know that a lot of people ARE taking her seriously. If you pay attention to what she is saying, it makes a lot of sense and she covers a lot of ground and many issues. I’m sick of legislators not proactively advocating for environmental and environmental health issues. Shes got my vote.
<
p>
drphil
We have to get my kids prescription flouride tablets because this woman’s ability to provoke paranoia about flouride in the water. It was simply absurd, and as kooky as the previous paranoid theory that flouride is a communist plot. Worse, Worcester has plenty of families that do not, or more likely cannot afford to, seek dental care for their kids. This woman’s single issue was to take a position directly harmful to these kids’ long term health.
<
p>
For disclosure purposes, I am a strong supporter of Sen. Chandler, though I don’t work for her campaign.
It may be kooky, but there’s widespread support AGAINST flouride in Worcester. Go figure. Several years ago, I was approached by a group of upstanding, intelligent, and well-connected residents both in and out of government. They sought financial analysis that showed that the reason for the push to flouride was because certain chemical companies stood to profit. I was unable to make the connection and they moved on.
<
p>
I didn’t agree with their position, they certainly weren’t kooks.
last week was brutal on Healy. Healy said outright that Chandler is too old to hold office and that she should be home with her grandchildren.
<
p>
<
p>
Chandler is 68.
<
p>
Healy has revealed herself to be an utter loon.
I’d like to back up everything lightiris says, except for one thing. More on that later. But I’d like to add a few things.
<
p>
Dierdre Healy never approached local environmental leaders to vet whether we felt that Senator Chandler’s record merited an opponent. In fact, we were meeting with Senator Chandler on key issues and found her very responsive and willing to be educated where she didn’t know the issues thoroughly. During the year since then, Senator Chandler has come through for us whenever we asked her to take a step to advance the legislation proposed by Alliance for a Healthy Tomorrow, the very group Dierdre Healy claims as her environmental credential.
<
p>
In addition: Dierdre Healy is inaccurate on the one thing that is the central reason for opposing Chandler: fluoride. Chandler is not a backer of hydrofluorosilic acid, is not now and has never been. I asked Senator Chandler about the bill that was being proposed that would have mandated fluoride addition in all municipal water supplies when the rumor was abroad that she was backing this bill. Chandler’s clear and unequivocal response was that the voters had spoken four times on this issue and she was not going to back legislation that would override that. I think it was Healy herself who was the source of this rumor.
<
p>
Here’s the one thing lightiris is wrong about: Dierdre Healy does have some supporters around here. They are the lunatic fringe, the people you don’t want to have on your side when you are in a serious struggle.
<
p>
’nuff said. Vote for Hariette Chandler and let us spend our time on more important things, like getting Deval Patrick elected for Governor. By the way — don’t judge Chandler on her support for Reilly — she committed to him at the beginning and feels she has to keep her word. That’s honorable if unfortunate, IMHO.
Margot, lightiris and rollbiz are a perfect example of why democrats in Mass. can’t seem to get out of their own way to accomplish anything. All you do is pick about silly little things while you don’t even have the courage to admit that Harriette Chandler is a liar and a fraud.
<
p>
I was at the forum the other night and she cleverly implied that all the building going on in Worcester was because of her. Well I’ve been around long enough to know that she’s not responsible for a single big building project around here. Those were all started many years ago by other politicians.
<
p>
And if you actually believe anything that Dianne Williamson says, you oughta have your heads examined. I heard Healy on WTAG and knowing Williamson’s history, I tend to believe that Williamson really did sandbag her. How soon you forget all the other vile things Williamson has done and how many other people she has stabbed in the back.
<
p>
Even though Healy might be new at this game, at least she seems honest – which is a far cry from your Chandler chick.
Are you kidding me? You claim to have been around long enough to know what’s going on in Worcester politics and yet you call her that?!?
<
p>
All you do is pick about silly little things while you don’t even have the courage to admit that Harriette Chandler is a liar and a fraud.
<
p>
I was at the forum the other night and she cleverly implied that all the building going on in Worcester was because of her. Well I’ve been around long enough to know that she’s not responsible for a single big building project around here.
<
p>
Way to walk right into doing what you just criticized us for doing.
I take exception to the comment that Deirdre Healys only supporters are the lunatic fringe. I am neither fringe nor a lunatic. I know quite a few people none fringe or lunatic – who are fed up with Harriette Chandler and eager to vote for Ms. Healy. I was very disappointed that she fell into the trap set for her by Dianne Williamson. She was very stupid to say the things she did to a reporter. However, her political naiveté doesnt negate her progressive ideas.
<
p>
Chandler may be responsive to environmental groups, but doesnt seem to be PROactive regarding environmental health ideas. If she had to be educated, its nice that she listened and complied, but Healy sounds like she already gets it and wouldnt have to be spoon-fed what to know or do or how to feel.
<
p>
Its sad that theres not a single MA legislator so far, that I know of, who has made cleaning up the environment a primary mission. Im willing to forgive Healy her stupidity in talking to that reporter and give her the benefit of the doubt that her passion will spark something on the Hill. The environment NEEDS a full-time advocate in the legislature. She seems smart and aware enough to deal with all the other issues that would come her way. Chandler has turned off a lot of people with her nasty disposition, her arrogance, and her lies.
Does anyone have any specific examples of what Chandler has been so terrible at? What she’s lied about?
<
p>
Can anyone tell me what Healy will be able to do better as a Senator? Do you realize that this isn’t a spot in the DEP?
<
p>
Senators don’t just deal with the environment. Just throwing that out there.
She is bought and paid for by big business money – shes more than happy to give developers and other corporations whatever they want why did she receive a large sum of money from lobbyists on the floor of the state house after making a vote just recently? She wasnt holding a fundraiser at the time! Even after all of that, she STILL has the audacity to say shes in favor of clean elections. Puh-leaaaz!
<
p>
When she first started out she was all about term limits but shes been in office forever!
<
p>
She has always avoided getting involved with controversial funding issues related to all the projects currently underway like the courthouse, voke school, etc. the politicians who started all the projects (OSullivan, McManus, Amorello, etc.) and actually GOT the funding are gone now but theres Chandler taking credit for them.
<
p>
During the race against Early, she was overheard by several people as saying that she was sick and tired of the Irish in her district, and shortly after that, she redistricted half of the voting population of Clinton because she wanted to dilute the Irish vote.
<
p>
She picks and chooses what should go in via initiative petition. Everything by initiative petition should go in if she were honest with the voters.
<
p>
Oh yeah and she was taking credit for the tax holiday that was John Biniendas baby.
<
p>
The most appalling excuse I hear from her when it comes to not getting things done is when she tries to blame the governor. How stupid does she think we are! She is clearly incompetent if she cant get the Senate President to override a veto when theres a democratic majority!
<
p>
She is the most opportunistic, disingenuous fraud I ever met in politics. Oh and even though shes gotten offers from radio personalities to host a debate, and shes been asked countless times for a debate, she refuses to debate her opponent. And shes a good representative of us and democracy? I dont think so.
The fact that you had to EDUCATE a legislator doesnt make her good. Im not an environmentalist, but I cant BELIEVE that you actually expect a candidate to vet or get permission from YOU or your environmental group before they plan on running. I didnt realize the wheels of democracy run according to your approval.
It shows how oblivious you are to the process when you talk about the fact that having to educate a legislator is a bad thing. Guess what? Legislators see hundreds of bills dealing with things they aren’t familiar with. Making the best decision on these bills means learning the ins/outs of AT LEAST two positions of the people concerned with the bill. A good legislator does not know everything about every bill, in fact no one does. A good legislator consults with all sides and determines what the most reasonable approach is after having done this homework.
<
p>
Dierdre Healy doesn’t understand this process, plain and simple. Even worse than this, she is willfully ignorant of this process. This is made clearly apparent by her words and the words of her supporters here.
<
p>
I’d wish that you got what you asked for, but I have to live in this district too. This is the reason I’m glad that Sen. Chandler is going to beat the pants off of One Issue Healy.
It is too bad that when a newcomer to politics runs for office we have to post nothing but negative comments. Healy may be naive, but give her an A for effort. Too many times people complain about the lack of choices for candidates for elective office. Incumbents rule!!! Give Deirdre credit for running against an entrenched incumbent! No one should run unoppposed. Republican or Democrat!
I never criticized Healy for running, I think challenges are healthy. I tried to provide facts about a situation I worked closely with the legislature on, a situation where Healy’s criticisms were factually incorrect. If you’d like to refute these claims, please feel free. Otherwise, the fact that she made the effort to run is not enough to change my vote.
I know you can’t actually be denying the fact the Chandler DID indeed pull the recycling language, so let’s get to the big thing that you seem to be trying to deny – that consumers or taxpayers are going to be paying for the recycling. It’s mighty interesting that bulbs.com got itself a nice little side business for having Chandler remove the recycling language, isnt it? bulbs.com wants to CHARGE for the certified disposal of mercury containing bulbs, Healy was right in saying that the public will end up paying since bulbs.com is setting itself up to do biz with city/town DPWs. And who funds the DPWs? The taxpayers.
<
p>
Thank you so much for proving your complete lack of knowledge on the subject, it makes my mission so much easier.
<
p>
bulbs.com already offers the certified disposal of mercury containing bulbs. We have for over 5 years, before any laws existed to mandate us doing so in any of the states we do business in. Are we charging? Absolutely. It costs us money, after all. However, we’re not setting ourselves up to do business within cities and towns and most certainly not for a profit, and you have no reason to make an assertion that we are.
<
p>
In fact, if you were to actually do your homework and have a working knowledge of what is really going on, you would know that residential recycling of such items is already free in Worcester. The DPW is mandated by state law to pay a certain rate per ton of trash into a fund which pays for the collection and reclamation of mercury in household products.
<
p>
This is all secondary to the fact that you are wrong about how the language was arrived upon. The recycling language was decided upon in a conference committee of 3 House members and three Senate members. They were Resor, Tucker, Tarr, Gifford, Smizik, and Deleo. You’ll notice Chandler’s name is missing from the bunch.
<
p>
Consumers will pay for recycling, or at least in Worcester businesses will. Is this a problem? Does McDonald’s pay to recycle a food bag? Does Jiffy-Lube or any mechanic not surcharge you for waste oil disposal?
<
p>
Welcome to the real world. Unfortunately, most of the things we need day to day are not organic. Some, like energy efficient fluorescent lighting, cost money to remove the bad ingredients from.
<
p>
If you’d like to battle me on this issue further, feel free. However, this issue was the focus of my job for over three months. I spent a lot of my free time on it as well, because if you look at what else I say on this site I’m a progressive and it is important to me that all people in business and residence act responsibly with toxics. Therefore, I’d leave it be if I were you. Spend some time participating in the rest of BMG.