Our esteemed FrankSkeffington says it’s time to understand that we are in a different kind of campaign than the primary. We knew that it was going to get nasty, and expensive. We may not have known just how nasty — but I think we’ve got a good idea.
As Deval’s campaign manager John Walsh told us almost two weeks ago at Jimmy Tingle’s: “Please, please, please, ignore the polls.” The post-primary glow is officially gone. We didn’t choose to do it this way, but this is the fight that’s been thrust upon us. So be it. It’s a close race now, folks. You didn’t think the hard work would be done before November, did you?
In spite of the feeding frenzy of the last few days, there are two signficant opportunities for going on the offensive:
- The crime record of the Romney/Healey administration
- Kerry Healey’s inability to communicate a vision — beyond fear of a Patrick administration.
As David Bernstein (author of the masterly article about the Boston PD, “The Worst Homicide Squad in the Country”) has helpfully pointed out, the Romney/Healey record on crime is abysmal — and it’s not just shootings in Boston. This is the real record of the people who are actually in office, right now. This is, as Healey likes to say, “the proof of the pudding.” Are you safer now than you were four years ago? The evidence says no.
Furthermore, Romney/Healey budget cuts have left us with an underfunded DNA lab. As David wrote more than a year ago:
… The AP is now reporting that the crime lab really is grossly underfunded. According to the article, the lab can handle 300 samples per year – one sixth of the demand, hence the nine-month backlog (the national standard is 30 days). Each of the state’s DAs can only submit four samples per month, and the head of the Mass. DAs association describes DAs as “ludicrously handicapped” in the number of samples they can submit. The article reports that the legislature and Governor Romney have pledged to double the lab’s resources in the wake of the Worthington fiasco.
… And so I ask again, Governor: how can you responsibly push for yet another tax cut, while simultaneously pushing to double the State Police Crime Lab’s resources?
So, we can see that the governing philosophy of this adminstration actually costs real lives, lets crimes go unsolved and murderers go free. That’s what you’re actually getting from Romney/Healey. How’s that working out for you? Four more years?
Remember, Healey is running as a legacy candidate for an increasingly unpopular administration, with very little profile of her own. She knows that well: “Now, none of us here on this stage tonight have been governor before,” she said in Tuesday’s debate. That’s a way of saying, Don’t blame me for how things are now. I didn’t do it. But unless she actively and intentionally distances herself from the current administration, it can be reasonably assumed that Romney’s record is her record; and that his slapdash, careless approach to issues is indeed her approach as well. She has done nothing to disabuse us of that perception.
Healey is trying to exploit fear of the future to distract attention from the present. But interestingly, this laser-like focus on tearing down Patrick sucks all the oxygen out of the room, and prevents her from articulating a clear vision. It’s a strategy of cowardice and weakness, and simply needs to be addressed as such. Contrast what is now vs. what ought to be, and we win. That’s honest, that’s accountable, it’s democracy.
And should our candidate be fortunate enough to win, he’ll be accountable in four years, too — along with all of us who helped get him there to begin with.
That’s terrible about the crime lab. Is it the one listed here?
You cited a stat about crime lab performance and funding, so I wanted to see how much funding had been cut. I found this information that seemed to indicate the budget had been increased by 50%, so I was just asking if this was the crime lab you were talking about.
<
p>
I’ve found it difficult to find past budgets online — actually it was easier to find the 98/99 budgets than anything since — but I wanted to try to find the data on the funding history.
<
p>
It doesn’t matter if you’re a department head in the public or the private sector — there are always politics involved when trying to garner more money for your efforts. I’ve done it when working as a teacher, I’ve seen it at the companies I’ve worked for, and I’ve seen it in my time in local government. Part of the process is fact checking. I guess if there was a point, that was it.
<
p>
If you can point me to some past budget docs, that would be great. Thanks.
If the state crime lab is rationing DNA testing, and has a much higher response time than other states, then something is significantly wrong.
<
p>
You can make the claim that they’re not using their money efficiently, but they are also operating within a Romney/Healey administration, so either way, their poor performance is a direct reflection of this administration.
<
p>
This is a pattern with the Romney/Healey administration. How about the refusal of Romney/Healey to pay higher stipends to public defenders, resulting in Romney/Healey essentially forcing lawyers to take cases so the courts didn’t shut down? Remember, he threatened to ban people from being bar advocates if they refused overloads of cases? That also resulted in the release of criminals awaiting trial in Hampden county. As the Globe said in a August 17, 2004 editorial, “Kerry Healey, the Romney administration’s alleged expert on criminal justice matters, must be on vacation”.
<
p>
How about today’s report about the grossly underfunded public housing system — 1,000 units offline while 80,000 people are on waiting lists. People living in substandard and even dangerous quarters.
<
p>
How about the criticisms of state Appeals Court Justice Andre Gelinas, claiming that court consolidations have forced some people to drive long distances for court access?
<
p>
It’s the same theme, over and over again. The Romney/Healey approach to things is to “starve the beast”. And they’re trying to cover up the fact that when you starve the beast, critical things don’t get done and a lot of people, particularly those without rich husbands, suffer.
The AP reported that there was a problem over a year ago. The funding went up 50%.
<
p>
So, why should we surmise that the problem remains at the 2005 level?
If I believed in gambling, I’d put a hundred bucks on Healey’s ads amounting to lots of sound and fury, signifying nothing. People aren’t stupid; they’ll sense the desperation.
<
p>
Meanwhile, even if Deval’s numbers go down a little bit, Healey’s negative ads will drop her already abysmal favorability numbers. She can’t afford to lose any of that. If Deval and his supporters keep up the pressure, Healey’s doing the dirty work for us by exposing to the public just how craptastic she really is.
I see it much the same way. The race will narrow and the gloves must now come off. It doesn’t require Deval stop what has worked well, but he needs to point out policy differences in a more pointed and sharp way than he has in the past and doing it on crime, law and order is the perfect place to start, their administration has a lot to answer for – you want to make this election about crime? Fine, bring it on!
Although there was a solid money trail from the White House to the Swift Boat Veterans, that was ignored, and they got away with it. Isn’t there some way for someone or some organization to do the dirty work with some reasonable separation from the campaign and the candidate? Bush just played the “Aw shucks, I’m just a compassionate conservative” crap while the SBV ads (not associated with the campaign, wink, wink, nudge, nudge) scorched John Kerry. Just trying to look beyond the hand-wringing about that, to how the damage was done, in case there’s a lesson that could be used.