While Deval is touring the state trying to build grassroots lobbying support for his agenda, I hope someone on his team is paying attention to the Special Election for Travaligni’s Senate seat…that could turn out to be a critical vote in support of or against Deval’s key measures.
The insiders are already on the case…they are busy rearranging deck chairs so one of their own can fill the gap by the looks…they have pushed Tim Toomey of Cambridge out and discouraged the Winthrop official from getting in…they do not want a wide field of candidates…the City Councilor from Revere (who has Barrios’ support in Cambridge) would not be pressured out so there will be a fight.
The State House power elite are offering up Rep. Tony Petrucelli as their annointed candidate (he was the “Toga! Toga! Toga! guy from the Animal House night on Beacon Hill.) Gives new meaning to the words “puppet government”
Sal and Trav are with him…an easy vote to control…Menino wants to keep the seat in his Boston stable, so he is on board, too…if they deliver Tony will owe them big time for this promotion.
The district includes E. Cambridge, Winthrop, Revere, Boston (East, North End, Beacon Hill)…
Boston has controlled the seat for 20 years, maybe it’s time to let the rest of the district have a turn at it…given the alternative, it couldn’t hurt.
I do not live in this district but I care about who wins the seat…this Administration will need all the votes it can muster to get Deval’s agenda through the Senate…Petrucelli will not be one of them…I hope BMGers will not only keep an eye on this race, but step up and get involved.
You state that “they have pushed Tim Toomey of Cambridge out”. This may well be the case, but what exactly do you mean to say? Did the insiders give him a proposition he couldn’t refuse? Are you suggesting that Toomey would not have dropped out for his own reasons?
<
p>
I don’t know what the real reasons were for Toomey dropping out. Some have suggested that this was purely a matter of financial sense. Toomey now collects salaries as both a state representative and as a Cambridge City Councillor. That’s a nice piece of change. If a good case was made that holding a Senate seat and a City Council seat were not compatible, then running for the State Senate would mean a rather substantial cut in pay.
Push with words: the persuasive argument goes like this:
“Tim if you run and win you think you will have more income (SEN base/comm. adds plus Council pay)…BUT don’t waste your time, you will not win, we will make sure you cannot win…Sal and Trav will not help you in any way…they will raise Tony all the money he needs (and dry up your contributions)…you can’t win…Menino will call out the troops to pull a Boston vote for him (and no one will dare cross him by supporting you in public)…you can’t win…so Tim, aren’t you happy to stay right where you are and have the summer off and not have Sal annoyed with you? Be a good ol’ boy and be satisfied with what you have…your TURN will come later.”
<
p>
This argument will be transmitted to him or anyone else considering a run against their annointed candidate by numerous surrogates until the message is heeded.
<
p>
That’s the way it goes…it’s politics…not the good part, but politics all the same.
<
p>
Toomey wouldn’t be risking his seat as state rep if he lost the special election. It may be that people told him he couldn’t win, but if he were willing to spend the time to run (and raise money, etc) and he lost, he’d be no worse off than he is now.
First of all, Anthony (not Tony) will be a pickup in terms of pro-gay marriage votes in the Senate
<
p>
Second of all, Trav is no longer in the Senate.
<
p>
Third of all, one doesn’t need to live in a particular community to be a strong advocate. Sen. Barrios represents Boston well, as does Congressman Capuano, so one assumes the reverse is true as well. (Senator Tolman has lived in both Watertown and Brighton, so he’s someone with a good balance! And Mike Ross recently moved from one end of his Council district to another.
<
p>
In terms of Deval support, Anthony has already been a supporter, and, I believe, sponsor of the Gov’s Municipal Relief package, when it was in its original form as the City’s municipal relief package. He helped several Deval people get on the East Boston slate last year, even though he supported Gabrieli, and supported Tim Murray early on.
<
p>
And, as I noted in another thread, he’s been praised by Harbor advocates for his work on the Beaches Commission.
<
p>
I don’t know his opponent, but had a chat with Sheriff Cabral on Friday, who said good things about him. Could we let ourselves believe that the voters may actually have two good choices?
1) Gay marriage get a pick up in Senate no matter which candidate wins…they are both in favor.
<
p>
2) Trav OF COURSE will not be in the Senate, he will be on the phone to the Senate asking for votes for his new clients…lobbyists do that…and how nice for him to have a new Senator who owes him just as much as the others do…
<
p>
3) No one will fight harder for the Patrick/Murray Municipal Partnership than a local municipal official…who understands the issue first-hand. Legislators, especially those who have not demonstrated serious interest or energy in this or any issue and are used to voting as they are told, may not be the best profile in courage for Deval to depend on.
<
p>
Just a correction…you stated that Tony Petrucelli was early supporter of Tim Murray…if by “early” you mean before the convention, that is incorrect (he was not listed with Murray Endorsers on Murray website until August)…if by “early” you mean by late August, 2 weeks before the primary, you are correct…the latter is not my idea of early…
<
p>
Murray’s strongest, truly early supporters came from municipal officials in the cities and towns who were fed up with being ignored by Romney and the Legislature…
<
p>
Electing more candidates with municipal experience is the only way to bring new understanding of and commitment to these issues…same old same old deck chair shuffle won’t work.
Toomey would have been good, because he gets it…but he’s not running.
But as an early supporter of Tim’s (as well as Deval), I can remember Anthony taking Tim through some of the East Boston Main Streets districts. I’ll check with Joe O’Brien or Dan Passacantilli from Tim’s campaign, but Anthony and John Tobin and Rob Consalvo were among the earliest Boston officials to endorse, as I recollect (anyone else want to add to this?). Unfortunately, the East Boston papers don’t seem to be archived.
<
p>
Anthony served in local government as a Neighborhood Liaison for the Office of Neighborhood Services. He has carried a lot of legislation for the City and for the Metro Mayors Caucus, which includes Boston, Cambridge and Revere among its ten cities.
According to the Murray Pre-Convention Legislative Endorsement list. Anthony/Tony was among the missing…but his name does appear in the August press release 2 weeks before the Primary.
Hey, late is better than never and I am sure he was helpful to the campaign on the streets of East Boston with Dan P.
<
p>
I do not think the issue is about endorsements in the last election. it is about whether or not it is better to bring new people into the legislature rather than just rearranging the deck chairs of state government. Deval Patrick and Tim Murray ran on the need to bring NEW perspectives to Beacon Hill…Murray in particular was talking about the need to help the cities and towns that were being ignored on Beacon Hill by the governor and legislature.
<
p>
Even if Petrucelli and Rizzo were identical on the issues (I do not know that they are, but, even if…)the one thing Rizzo can offer (particularly to voters in Revere, Winthrop and Cambridge) that Petrucelli cannot is independence from the Beacon Hill/Boston kingmakers (Sal-Menino-Trav)…he will owe them nothing.
<
p>
It’s the voters of the district who will make the choice. It was good to see both candidates agreeing on the need for a clean campaign in Alan Lupo’s column today.
Clean campaigns mean judging candidates on their records…sticking to the facts.
<
p>
Let the facts fall where they may. Couldn’t agree more.
There are many proponents of “process liberalism” on this blog. It’s driven probably 80% of the LGBT people that used to post here off to other places.
<
p>
I don’t see why this particular diary was never promoted, seeing as how the corrupt leadership has totally dropped the ball. At this point, I don’t see how even a combination of a new Senate President who claims she will “respect the SJC’s decision” (when it’s far too late) and a new person in Travaglini’s old seat can ever redeem the extremely corrupt Massachusetts legislature. I say that really, really appreciating many, many (dozens) of individual legislators who I’ve spoken with, received personal notes of gratitude from.
<
p>
But moving the marriage amendment forward while killing the health care amendment, and thereby violating the SJC’s legally binding ruling on these amendments while claiming they still somehow intend to this sessiobn, and no attempt to whitewash will ever excuse them for that sin.
<
p>
The double standard seems to be everywhere. The legislature, this blog, etc. Even if the health care amendment, it won’t be forgotten by some of us.
<
p>
Anyway, keep speaking out for truth, HL Peary. This one incident is only symptomatic of a larger problem, and you’re speaking out about it is nothing if not appreciated, even if only by a tiny minority among us.
like everyone else in the political game…
<
p>
howardLjp is reflective of that tendency since last November’s “outsider” victory to now become an apologist/proponent for the “insiders/status quo” we railed against last summer…
<
p>
I agree changing one seat in the senate, bringing one new voice to the debate, does not make a huge difference…but it can’t hurt, either…the whole building is so “fait a compli”…everything is decided before the voters even know who’s running…no wonder they checked out…
<
p>
There is a rumor going around the North End that Dan Pascantilli may be getting in this race, too…Hope he does…(No one would ever dare shave Dan P.’s leg during a State House after hours Animal House party…he’s not the toga, toga, toga type…thank goodness!)
Do you have any evidence that Petrucelli will be hostile to the governor’s agenda? Is there any sign of a promising alternative? Is support from Trav and Menino a bad thing? Shouldn’t the gov and his supporters be careful which battles they pick with the leg (ie, those where something clear is at stake that are winnable)?
Before I say anything, let me start off by saying that I am a Petruccelli campaign volunteer. I am also a relatively new resident of East Boston (2 1/2 years), someone who comes from the wild, progressive suburbs (Metrowest), and a very early Deval supporter in this neighborhood. That last piece is the reason that I am with Rep. Petruccelli.
<
p>
After the primary, where his guy Gabrieli lost, he came onboard to the local Patrick/Murray effort full throttle. He did visibilities, opened his entire organization, and brought a lot of support with him. His help was crucial to the fact that we took 12 out of 14 precincts within East Boston. The time spent working with him, and his team members, showed me a different side of him, both as a candidate and a person.
<
p>
I have no issue with Councilor Rizzo and, while I wish he was with us, like Senator Barrios by and large. I do think that it is interesting that Councilor Rizzo lives in Senator Barrios’ district, and not in the district he is trying to represent. Not that this is without precendent I am sure.
<
p>
All in all though, Rep. Petruccelli has been nothing but open and inviting to me. As a person of color living in a district known for being more than a little homogeneous, this has had a huge impact on my willingness to stay and be involved in this community. It is this type of openness and willingness to engage in dialogue, even if we do not always agree, coupled with his knowledge of the district and the State House, that make me think he is the best candidate for the seat.