Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

New feature: the BMG issue tracker

By

SENATE:

Robert A. Antonioni, D-Leominster

Edward M. Augustus, D-Worcester

Steven A. Baddour, D-Methuen

UNDECIDED

Frederick E. Berry, D-Peabody

Stephen M. Brewer, D-Barre

Scott P. Brown, R-Wrentham

Stephen J. Buoniconti, D-West Springfield

Gale D. Candaras, D-Wilbraham

FOR

Harriette L. Chandler, D-Worcester

Robert S. Creedon Jr., D-Brockton

Cynthia Stone Creem, D-Newton

FOR

Benjamin B. Downing, D-Pittsfield

Susan C. Fargo, D-Lincoln

Anthony Galluccio, D-Cambridge

John A. Hart, D-Boston

Robert L. Hedlund, R-Weymouth

Patricia Jehlen, D-Somerville

AGAINST

Brian A. Joyce, D-Milton

Michael R. Knapik, R-Westfield

Thomas M. McGee, D-Lynn

Joan M. Menard, D-Fall River

Mark C. Montigny, D-New Bedford

Richard T. Moore, D-Uxbridge

Michael W. Morrissey, D-Quincy

Therese Murray, D-Plymouth

Robert D. O’Leary, D-Barnstable

FOR

Marc R. Pacheco, D-Taunton

Steven C. Panagiotakos, D-Lowell

Anthony W. Petruccelli, D-Boston

Pamela P. Resor, D-Acton

Stanley C. Rosenberg, D-Amherst

Karen E. Spilka, D-Ashland

Bruce E. Tarr, R-Gloucester

James E. Timilty, D-Walpole

Richard R. Tisei, R-Wakefield

Steven A. Tolman, D-Boston

Susan C. Tucker, D-Andover

Marian Walsh, D-West Roxbury

Dianne Wilkerson, D-Boston

HOUSE:

Geraldo Alicea, D-Charlton

Willie Mae Allen, D-Boston

Cory Atkins, D-Concord

Demetrius J. Atsalis, D-Hyannis

Bruce J. Ayers, D-Quincy

Ruth B. Balser, D-Newton

Fred Barrows, R-Mansfield

Carlo Basile, D-Boston

John J. Binienda, D-Worcester

Daniel E. Bosley, D-North Adams

Garrett J. Bradley, D-Hingham

William N. Brownsberger, D-Belmont

Antonio F. D. Cabral, D-New Bedford

Jennifer M. Callahan, D-Sutton

Thomas Calter, D-Kingston

Linda Dean Campbell, D-Methuen

Christine E. Canavan, D-Brockton

Stephen R. Canessa, D-New Bedford

Paul C. Casey, D-Winchester

Cheryl A. Coakley-Rivera, D-Springfield

Thomas F. Conroy, D-Wayland

Robert Correia, D-Fall River

Michael A. Costello, D-Newburyport

Geraldine Creedon, D-Brockton

Sean Curran, D-Springfield

Steven J. D’Amico, D-Seekonk

Robert A. DeLeo, D-Winthrop

Viriato Manuel deMacedo, R-Plymouth

Brian S. Dempsey, D-Haverhill

Salvatore F. DiMasi, D-Boston

Stephen DiNatale, D-Fitchburg

Paul J. Donato, D-Medford

Christopher J. Donelan, D-Orange

Joseph R. Driscoll Jr., D-Braintree

James B. Eldridge, D-Acton

Lewis G. Evangelidis, R-Holden

James H. Fagan, D-Taunton

Christopher G. Fallon, D-Malden

Mark V. Falzone, D-Saugus

Robert F. Fennell, D-Lynn

John V. Fernandes, D-Milford

Michael E. Festa, D-Melrose

Barry R. Finegold, D-Andover

Jennifer Flanagan, D-Leominster

David L. Flynn, D-Bridgewater

Linda Dorcena Forry, D-Boston

Gloria L. Fox, D-Boston

John P. Fresolo, D-Worcester

Paul K. Frost, R-Auburn

William C. Galvin, D-Canton

Colleen M. Garry, D-Dracut

Susan W. Gifford, R-Wareham

Anne M. Gobi, D-Spencer

Thomas A. Golden Jr., D-Lowell

Mary E. Grant, D-Beverly

William G. Greene Jr., D-Billerica

Denis Guyer, D-Dalton

Patricia A. Haddad, D-Somerset

Geoffrey D. Hall, D-Westford

Robert S. Hargraves, R-Groton

Lida E. Harkins, D-Needham

Bradford Hill, R-Ipswich

Kevin G. Honan, D-Boston

Donald F. Humason Jr., R-Westfield

Frank M. Hynes, D-Marshfield

Bradley H. Jones Jr., R-North Reading

Louis L. Kafka, D-Stoughton

Michael F. Kane, D-Holyoke

Rachel Kaprielian, D-Watertown

Jay R. Kaufman, D-Lexington

John D. Keenan, D-Salem

Thomas P. Kennedy, D-Brockton

Kay Khan, D-Newton

Peter V. Kocot, D-Northampton

Robert M. Koczera, D-New Bedford

Peter J. Koutoujian, D-Waltham

Paul Kujawski, D-Webster

Stephen Kulik, D-Worthington

William Lantigua, D-Lawrence

Stephen P. LeDuc, D-Marlborough

John A. Lepper, R-Attleboro

David P. Linsky, D-Natick

Barbara A. L’Italien, D-Andover

Paul Loscocco, R-Holliston

Elizabeth A. Malia, D-Boston

Ronald Mariano, D-Quincy

James J. Marzilli Jr., D-Arlington

Allen J. McCarthy, D-East Bridgewater

Paul McMurtry, D-Dedham

James R. Miceli, D-Wilmington

Michael Moran, D-Boston

Charles A. Murphy, D-Burlington

James M. Murphy, D-Weymouth

Kevin M. Murphy, D-Lowell

David M. Nangle, D-Lowell

Patrick Natale, D-Woburn

Harold P. Naughton Jr., D-Clinton

Robert J. Nyman, D-Hanover

James O’Day, D-West Boylston

Eugene L. O’Flaherty, D-Chelsea

Matthew C. Patrick, D-Falmouth

Sarah Peake, D-Provincetown

FOR

Vincent A. Pedone, D-Worcester

Alice H. Peisch, D-Wellesley

Jeffrey D. Perry, R-Sandwich

Douglas W. Petersen, D-Marblehead

George N. Peterson Jr., R-Grafton

Thomas M. Petrolati, D-Ludlow

William “Smitty” Pignatelli, D-Lenox

Elizabeth A. Poirier, R-North Attleboro

Karyn E. Polito, R-Shrewsbury

Denise Provost, D-Somerville

Angelo Puppolo, D-Wilbraham

John F. Quinn, D-Dartmouth

Kathi-Anne Reinstein, D-Revere

Robert Rice Jr., D-Gardner

Pam Richardson, D-Framingham

Michael J. Rodrigues, D-Westport

Mary S. Rogeness, R-Longmeadow

UNCLEAR – FOR?

John H. Rogers, D-Norwood

Richard J. Ross, R-Wrentham

Michael F. Rush, D-Boston

Byron Rushing, D-Boston

Jeffrey Sanchez, D-Boston

Rosemary Sandlin, D-Agawam

Tom Sannicandro, D-Ashland

Angelo M. Scaccia, D-Boston

John W. Scibak, D-South Hadley

Carl M. Sciortino Jr., D-Somerville

Stephen Smith, D-Everett

Frank I. Smizik, D-Brookline

FOR

Todd M. Smola, R-Palmer

Theodore C. Speliotis, D-Danvers

Robert P. Spellane, D-Worcester

Christopher N. Speranzo – D-Pittsfield

Joyce A. Spiliotis, D-Peabody

Marie P. St. Fleur, D-Boston

Harriett L. Stanley, D-West Newbury

Thomas M. Stanley, D-Waltham

Ellen Story, D-Amherst

William M. Straus, D-Mattapoisett

David B. Sullivan, D-Fall River

Benjamin Swan, D-Springfield

Walter F. Timilty, D-Milton

A. Stephen Tobin, D-Quincy

Timothy J. Toomey Jr., D-Cambridge

David M. Torrisi, D-North Andover

Eric Turkington, D-Falmouth

Cleon H. Turner, D-Dennis

James E. Vallee, D-Franklin

Anthony J. Verga, D-Gloucester

Joseph F. Wagner, D-Chicopee

Brian P. Wallace, D-Boston

Patricia A. Walrath, D-Stow

Martin J. Walsh, D-Boston

Steven M. Walsh, D-Lynn

Martha M. Walz, D-Boston

Daniel K. Webster, R-Hanson

James T. Welch, D-West Springfield

Alice
K. Wolf, D-Cambridge

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. I’m in.  Will make a couple calls and send a few emails too.  I look forward to hearing the Republican response!

    • My state senator (Badour) lives in a cave and only comes out for election day. We will have to wait until then to find out what he thinks. I have no idea who my rep is other than I know she ignores emails …

      • 1.  One typed or handwritten letter is worth 10 phone calls to the state house office.

        <

        p>
        2.  One call to the state house office or the “district office” is worth 10 e-mails.

        <

        p>
        3.  One e-mail is better than nothing, but the majority of our elected legislators – be shocked – do NOT read their own e-mails. 

        <

        p>
        What is the best way to be noticed?  Make an appointment to meet with your legislator in their district office during whatever office hours are posted.

        <

        p>
        What is the next best?  Make an appointment as a constituent to see your legislator at the State House.  You will get an appointment – BECAUSE you are a constituent.

        <

        p>
        Also, the average issue generates fewer then 5 phone calls.  I have been told this realiably by SEVERAL staffers.

        <

        p>
        So, David, if your “tracker” mobilizes significant numbers of constituents to actually [shock shock] talk to and meet with their elected legislators rather than just complaint about them – YOU may have changed the political culture.

        • are a little distant from Boston (thankfully, at times), so it is important to communicate with the area offices.  I’ve already sent an email to the local office of my state senator.  I actually do expect a response, but not all legislators are as easy to access.  I can say that I’ve had conversations with all my elected representatives at one time or another — even with the Republican from this district, though I wish I hadn’t.  I think the size of the district has a lot to do with accessiblity.  Don’t you think?

          • I have always heard back directly from my representative, Jim Marzilli.  Senator Havern usually had replies go from and to his chief of staff – but anyway, his seat is now vacant, ergo the 4th Middlesex Election.

        • …I do have to mention that, over the last couple of years, we have been in contact with our state Senator Creem, and our state Rep. Piesch by email, and they have been very responsive.  I don’t expect them to be in front of their email program 24/7, but we have always gotten responses within a day or two.

          <

          p>
          I’ve mentioned that, in 1989, Barney Frank, our rep in the House, called us back to discuss an issue that my spouse had called him about earlier in the day.  And that was on a Friday night.  They agreed to disagree, but the fact that Barney was willing to call us personally, to discuss the issue really did make more than a bit of a difference in our assessment of him.

      • if you call Baddour’s office, someone will answer the phone, and the person who answers will have to tell you something about where he stands on this issue (or any other).  (Don’t email — call.  AmberPaw is right about that.)  Give it a shot — I’d love to know where Baddour is on the life sciences thing.

        • Now you are going to make me dig into exactly what the life science “initiative” is, or else I will call the guy and wind up sounding like some complete fool …
          My take at this point is that it is some vague feel good platitudes devoid of specifics or direction. Is there any kiid of actual legislation like idealy a bill number?

        • His staffer said he does not have a position at this time but “when the issue comes up” they would call and let me know his position.
          Linda Cambell’s staffer said he would check into it, but led me to beleive she might also be uncommitted.

    • MY orphan issue – the neglect and abuse of the child welfare population and system – would never be tracked.  It is an orphan.  Just like too many of these kids have been made into legal orphans by a cynical adoption/foster care industry.

      • Everyone feels sorry for kids in rough situations (except Republicans in Washington).  I’d vote for it.

        <

        p>
        What I don’t feel like voting for is a de facto information service to provide Deval Patrick’s political team with reports on the status of their agenda in the eeeeevil Legislature.

        • what’s wrong with that?  I mean, if you don’t like the agenda, or at least the particular agenda item we’re talking about, sure, I get that (note that we’re not starting this project by trying to track the casino bill).  But if you do, what’s wrong with shining a little sunlight on what’s going on inside the building?

        • I thought I gave a fine primer about the fact that, unlike the putative birth of the Goddess Venus springing from the waves, legislation takes work.

          <

          p>
          I don’t think the tracking idea is a ploy to get info for Deval as to the legislature, but rather to allow folk like ME with issues that have no lobbyist and no organization to support them a way to monitor.

          <

          p>
          Y’know?  A tool can be used in many ways.  If it is a good tool…

        • except that there are virtually infinite issues that could potentially be tracked.  How do we pick the five or so that go into a poll?

            • pick five.

              <

              p>
              Or, start a thread asking for proposals.

              <

              p>
              Or, ask for short diaries to justify proposals.

              <

              p>
              If we’re talking like one a week here, we’ll crank through ’em fast enough that “orphan issues” will come up.

              • I picked one – the life sciences initiative.  Let’s work on that one, see how quickly we can generate a useful list, and we’ll go from there.

                • 1.  DSS-changing legislation “has legs”.  Salvatore DiMasi is the chief sponsor of H 4191.  I do not think this issue is even on Devakl Patrick’s radar, though.  Even after Haleigh Poutre, Dontel Jeffers, and Rebecca Riley – and the oountless families taken apart because they were too poor to keep a roof over their children’s heads.

                  <

                  p>
                  2.  There is a new commissioner.

                  <

                  p>
                  3.  These kids don’t vote.  Aside from the social workers unions and the for-profits that want a piece of the action, there is no organizational over sight of this issue.

                  <

                  p>
                  4.  If BMG does not track the efforts being made to over haul DSS and [maybe] support families, I don’t think any organization will.

                  <

                  p>
                  5.  Oh yeah – I get lonely fighting this particular battle, often it feels like I am out there, testifying, investigating, filing briefs almost – or actually – all by myself.

                  <

                  p>
                  6.  To sum it up – “This is a request for help.”.

                • You are awesome.

                  <

                  p>
                  You are a leader, passionate, articulate and skilled.  You are not alone.  Those of us working and fighting for the same and similar issues as you often feel the loneliness infused by an oppressive society that continues (and with greater relish in the past decade) to throw children, mentally ill, immigrants, battered women, people of color (etc)…under the bus.  With the help of Bush & Co. much of the middle class (like public defenders) went down with the usual disenfranchised groups. 

                  <

                  p>
                  Breathe and keep up the good work.  Your posts are the heart and conscience of BMG.

  4. of emailing as opposed to calling by phone.  Nowadays I think they do pay attention to email although they cant usually answer them.  I get good response from my two reps Harriet Stanely and Bruce Tarr.  Stanely will actually get on the phone (at a pre-arranged time) and discuss issues. 

    <

    p>
    My current pet peeve to call them about will be the deterioration of commuter rail service. 

  5. …I’m not exactly sure how this is supposed to work.  There are two invertible issues, as follows.  You have listed the state Senators and Reps, and I presume that you are going to do the issue tracking on a Sen & Rep basis for each issue.

    <

    p>
    Are you also going to do the inverse: given an issue, who has expressed a pro- or con- position, or who has not expressed a position?  This is also importent, since the fence-sitters might be persuaded one way or another.

  6. A hearing on the Life Science bill is scheduled for Tuesday, October 30, before the Committee on Economic Development.

      • If a hearing is scheduled in  hearing rooms such as “Room 222” or “Room A1 or B1”  the ventilation is bad, very few people can attend, and mostly the public is turned away.

        <

        p>
        The “Gardner Auditorium” is the closest to a stadium in seating that the State House has, and this means that the “powers that be” expect a circus and have not manipulated the location to keep the public out.

        <

        p>
        Expect many legislators to attend, press, and “Kleig lights” and that the legislators will be taken first to testify, and will be doing so for the cameras.

        <

        p>
        Also, in the Gardner they will keep going as long as anyone wants to talk and thousands can be seated.

        <

        p>
        Just “FYI” given that I think I have now attended hearings in EVERY hearing room in the State House and do not consider room assignments random [as in which room is assigned for which hearing].

  7. I just wanted to say that I think this is an excellent idea.  I will contact my Rep. and Senator within the next couple of days and report back. 

  8. Sen. O’Leary – Pro, but seems resigned. (Staff reply)

    <

    p>
    Rep. Peake – wildly, MADLY Pro. (staff reply).

    <

    p>
    Benefit to Cape Cod – negligible, unless they come up with something for Alzheimer’s real quick…(i.e., no jobs, etc.)

      • do different people ever get different answers from different staff on different days, or at least a different sense of how wildly, madly committed they are?  And don’t they sometimes change their position in response to pressure or persuasion?  So just one “FOR” or “AGAINST” might not be stay accurate, you might consider putting something like “Staff says wildly madly for – Peter Porcupine 10/29/07” and then add another line if anyone else contacts them.

        <

        p>
        It does seem like a lot of work, and only BMG readers will gain access to all that effort.  Why don’t they have their own “issue tracker”?  Their staff should post a blurb stating their position for every bill on the mass.gov site.  Instead of just letting one caller at a time know their position, why not post it on their site, so that everyone gets the same info?

        <

        p>
        Remember those famous John Kerry form letters sent to people on each side of some issue, that made it appear he agreed with who ever was writing?  They should have the same answer for everyone – the way they better actually vote.

        • Imagine living in such a society, where our “representatives” had to actualy make some small  effort to let people know what they were up to.
          The only time we hear anything from them now is when they want their contracts extended. After that its bah-bye for another couple of years.
          I participated in this “survey” just because I was curious about how impossible it would be to get any feedback from my state “representatives” and sure enough, after only a few hours of calling, I was essentialy told that I would know how they felt about an issue once they had voted and not before. Whoo-hoo.
          A system like that is designed to DISCOURAGE any citizen participation in the process.
          This process either needs to be changed to reflect some transparancy, the constitutional perspective that these so called representatives actualy are responsible to us (ludicrous) or else they should just knock of with this “representative government” speel which I find insulting to my intilect.
          Lets just refer to government as the oligarchy it is and get on with our peasanting. 🙂

          • in our jobs as “constituents”.  I, personally, would not consider insulting your “intilect”, but it’s certainly worth noting that you’re not going to get very much with an attitude like that.

    • Peter – I would love a post about the graying of Cape Cod, lack of year round jobs, loss of the youth, etc.

      • The Cape Chamber of Commerce held an economic summit last Friday, and this is the story.  Very well written and accurate.

        <

        p>
        And ask yourself – when’s the last time an off-Cape Chamber was spoken to by an expert in demographics?  Scary stuff.

  9. Senator Gale Candaras (- Wilbraham) enthusiastically supports the legislation and would like to see the initiative broadened and expanded to include other sectors (such as the chemical industry) and a geographical expansion to include the Greater Springfield area.  It did take a phone call in addition to my email to get a call back.

    <

    p>
    Representative Mary Rogeness (R – Longmeadow) is supposed to return the call with more information on her stance.  The staffer I talked to believes she will be against the intiative.  If I get more details (or a call back), I will post more details.

    • when I received a call back from Rep. Rogeness (D-Longmeadow).  She left a voice message that said “there was an awful lot in the Life Sciences Initiative that would be good for the Baystate and UMass for science.”  Again, she mentioned that it should be expanded out west to this area.  So, I don’t know if that was a FOR or not. I will call back today for clarification.

  10. Senator Creem’s office pointed me to an aid who said that the Senator is generally supportive of such a bill, that she supports the life sciences and has for a long time. Creem will need to look into the costs and the actual mechanics of the bill before she can sign onto it. The aid said she will be interested to see what the committee will report. But yes, there is general support.

    <

    p>
    Talked with aid for Rep. Balser, who said she’d bring it up with her today and will get back to me. She took my phone number & address, which Creem’s office didn’t do, fwiw. Will report when I hear back.

    • It’s full of tax breaks for companies that start up something “new”, hire “new” employees or move to a “new” building, and they all have to be in Massachusetts, and pages more restrictions and rules.  A company would rather just concentrate on their business, making decisions that made sense, making the best products, than conform its goals and practices to meet these artificial constraints on its operations.  A state that just guaranteed that SCNT would remain legal and didn’t offer special incentives would be much more preferable.

  11. via email to me, from a reader who prefers not to post under his/her screen name.  That’s totally fine — if you want to do the same, please email your results to me at this address.

  12. So far, the only AGAINST is Patricia Jehlen, D-Somerville.  We had assumed she was 100% progressive, but maybe she sees something about this plan that stinks.

    <

    p>
    Who contacted her?  Did she have an explanation for her maverick position?

      • I knew she couldn’t be opposed to stem cell research, so it is great news that she’s showing other legislators that they aren’t going to be labeled fundies or luddites if they oppose “Life Sciences.”  They can oppose this $1B fleecing of the public for private investors in this particular industry and not lose progressive credentials, right?

        • ..BUT many people who post here would disagree….I have come to realize that if you are disagree with the sponsor of the life science bill then you are told to keep your mouth shut!!!

          <

          p>
          Imagine…Senator Jehlen an enemy pf the progressive movement!! Shocking…

          • It would make sense that legislators are being arm-twisted into supporting this, since it will divert so much tax revenue from other projects.  They can’t all agree that biotech is the be all and end all industry.

            <

            p>
            This Globe article is worth reading, to see the quotes from opponents and proponents and try to understand the various positions.

            <

            p>
            This doesn’t seem quite right though:

            But biotechnology supporters say the money and other investments are critical, or the state’s life sciences edge could fizzle in the same way Massachusetts’ early leadership in the computer industry fizzled.

            <

            p>
            I don’t recall anyone saying that the reason Digital and Wang went under was because Massachusetts wasn’t supporting them enough.  We DID have MIT Lincoln Labs and the Air Force Cambridge Research Labs pumping money into basic research here.  It’s probably true that funding lessened in the 80’s when things became more entrepreneurial, but it shows what happens to companies when they’re started with boatloads of government funding all around them.  That lush government funding, uncoupled from marketplace reality and innovation, is what caused the early computer companies around here to be unresponsive to the new paradigm of microcomputers.  But California had the Woz and Steve Jobs, and Seattle had Bill Gates and the guy he bought DOS from, Texas had Micheal Dell.  An Wang and Ken Olsen were great great visionaries, but they didn’t know what to do when the market rejected their proprietary systems that couldn’t run Lotus 123.

            <

            p>
            And Lotus is still here, aren’t they?  IBM owns them, but they are still in Cambridge.  And there are a few other companies here, aren’t there?  Facebook moved to California, but was that because of disparate state incentives, or just because all the leaves were brown, or to see about a girl?

            <

            p>
            If we want to relive the 80’s and proudly be the home of the next Digital, we should recreate the AFCRL/Lincoln days of unlimited early government support.  If we want the next Dell, IBM, Apple or Microsoft, we should get out of the way and let innovation happen wherever it happens, if it happens.  If it doesn’t, there’s always next year.

            • I think you are right that the biotech line that without State support life sciences may wither as did computer industry is fairly misleading – although every business lobby in the State makes the same case in asking for some pork to be thrown their way.

              <

              p>
              My sense is that the end of the Cold War and decrease in defense spending from late 80s on hurt the old computer dinosaurs, not to mention they just didn’t keep up with where tech was headed so they lost a place in the market.

  13. Here’s a story on what this bill means to Lexington.

    <

    p>

    “[Kaufman] is making sure both parties do everything is possible to make sure that Shire and Lexington come together with an agreement for the full TIF funding,” said Kaufman’s chief of staff, Sean Fitzgerald. “He is meeting tomorrow with Chairman Bosley and the Shire executives to try to stay on track and have an open dialog with the chairman about the need for this life sciences initiative to move quickly through the legislature.”

    Town Meeting approved the TIF agreement with Shire Wednesday, Oct. 17, which if approved by the state could bring $68.7 million in tax revenue to Lexington in the next 20 years. Under the current agreement, Lexington would forgo a net of $5 million in taxes.

    …

    However if the state’s incentive package is not up to snuff, the company may decide not to build on the 200 and 400 sites, significantly reducing Lexington’s financial gains. According to projections by the town’s appropriation committee, Lexington could expect $26.9 million in taxes if Shire only moves into the 300 Hayden Avenue building.

Archives