Diane Patrick is our First Lady here in Massachusetts. Watch out! She is back on the “job”, in good form, and not likely to take any gruff from trouble makers, i.e., rude reporters that don’t know where to draw the line. Speaking of reporters, it wasn’t too long ago that they thought the world was going to end because the Patrick administration hired someone to help Diane with the organization of her public appearances and duties.
Let’s put this “domestic” side of the governing business in proper context. Here in an easy tabular form full of hot links, is a quick survey of the First Spouses of each state. I have highlighted the various support staff at each spouse’s command (that I was able to find on the web.) Just because I have not listed a staff assistant for a spouse does not mean that the position/person does not exist, only that the information wasn’t clearly published on the web. I had fun putting together the little mansion icons. Click on one them for a visit to that state’s government supplied housing for their Chief Executive and family. Oh, and you know what comes with each mansion? Staff.
Some eye-opening tidbits include:
As you have probably surmised, the volunteer position of First Cheerleader to the First Lady is unabashedly mine. Come on Massachusetts, this is the 21st century, let’s get out there and give Diane all the support we can.
You’ve nouned a perfectly good adjective.
Apologies for my gruff being nessless. Serious business this nessless nouning. In my search to invent a new word, I thought you might have pointed me in the perfect direction: The “nesslessness” of my behavior should have netted me a new word. Damn you Colbert, seven hits from Google.
I think it’s “guff” that one no longer takes.
Or a [http://en.wikipedia…. MacGuffin} for that matter.
…the obviously-intended word was “guff.”
I don’t know where the right balance lies in regards to paid staff, mansions and the like, but what this topic brings to mind for me might be a surprise:
<
p>
Do we really need a full-time legislature? How many states have one? What does our legislature produce in comparison to the ones with part-time leges?
<
p>
Our legislature is largely a joke, IMHO. Yet it’s not a joke at all as it spends so much of our money (MA 2008 State Budget is what, about $30Bil, with the largest item by far being healthcare spending).
<
p>
Maybe we could do better with a part-time legislature and more power in the Governor’s office with an active First Lady (hoping it will stay a Dem, or Green, for many years to come of course!)
The media ran her into the nut house in her husbands first 100 days in office….and it was EASY.
you’re efforts have helped make a difference here in Massachusetts.
<
p>
can you go to Ohio, Indiana, Missouri and Texas and help elect more Democrats there, too?
Furthermore, how does what they do in their other job bleed over to what they legislate for the state?
<
p>
Relative to the budget of Massachusetts, the salary costs of full time vs part time legislators is really small. For that small increase in cost, we keep conflicts of interest minimized, open the job up to people who might not otherwise be able to swing a lege job, etc.
On full balance I still wonder if the leges had to get more done in less time might it serve to reduce opportunities for behind-the-scenes power plays and slimy pressure tactics that are antithetical to a more open and healthy democratic process.
<
p>
I guess it’s public financing of elections that is most needed to open up the chance to run and to serve without being as beholden to special interests. Do you think this is one of our best chances to help restore voters’ faith in the political process? I’m so discouraged these days.
<
p>
Do you think that public financing for candidates that agree to spending limits would also have the positive effect of lessening incumbants’ regular dismisal of their constituents’ interests? I think it’s a widespread phenomena now b/c so many leges feel almost secure-for-life in their positions, knowing the chances of having a challenger are slim. Isn’t it only 20 or 40% of lege seats that even have any challenger at all?
<
p>
Sorry, I know I’ve wandered way off topic from First lady…but that brings to mind the whole gov’t accountability issue…
Actually, since the base salary of a legislator is about $55k, almost all of them have “another job”. For example, Senator Panagiotakos has a law office in Lowell, Rep. Haddad has [or at least had either an insurance or real estate agency – I forget which], Rep. O’Flaherty works for the O’Donovan Law Office – and so on. Becoming a committee chairman [which is an “at will” job that a speaker or senate president can take away”] is worth $15,000 — a vice chairman – $7500. So, really, a representative currently earns somewhat less than the folk who give out tickets and take toll money on the pike – who get the same health insurance and defined benefit pension. This is because the base pay of a representative/senator is tied to the average weekly wage.
Isn’t Marjorie Rendell a federal district judge in Philly? I’m curious how she handles conflict of interest/appearance of conflicts issues.
Turns out Judge Rendell is actually a Circuit Judge for the 3d Circuit, which oversees PA.
Can I please apply for the position of First Assistant Cheerleader?
It was the salary.
<
p>
But your chart did make for interesting reading!
<
p>
I’m actually pleased that MA hasn’t been hoodwinked into the nonsense of an official residence and its accompanying staff. It’s wasteful.
<
p>
When the day comes that we elect a governor from western MA, I’ll be happy to see us just rent the family a nice place near Boston.
we didn’t exactly elect her Governor, but the issue did arise more than once when Jane Swift was Acting Gov.
…In the total scheme of things, it strikes me that the budget for the Office of the First Lady is so low that–as engineers would put it–it’s in the noise. Aren’t there other issues there in MA, or do the news people have to manufacture them to sell fish wrapping and bird-cage liner?
<
p>
Note to AnnEM @ Thu Apr 26, 2007 at 16:23:04 PM EDT, no, we do not need a full-time legislature. Nor do we need a full-time Congress. But a part-time legislature gives more power to the executive. And a part-time Congress gives rise to–listen up!–increased opportunities for recess appointments! by, for example, a lame duck pResident.
<
p>
It is not entirely clear that states that have legislatures that sit for a limited length of time every year or so are governed any better off than states that have unlimited session time. Whether or not the legislators are in official session, they can phone each other up and make deals that will be passed into law the next time they officially meet–and notify the executive of their consensus. Limited official sessions is a charade.