You then confidently state I am not an issues person and do not like talking about issues with constituents. Where do you get that? Completely inaccurate.
I am hapy to talk with you about the National Popular Vote legisaltion that I filed this session that was recently released with a favorable report from the Election Law Committee. I am hopeful that the full House will vote on the measure in the coming months. We could also discuss the so-called Reporter Shield Law that I filed (along with Rep Peisch of Wellesley) that protects reporters (to include bloggers incidentally) from providing information on their sources. We can talk about my support of same sex marriage, stem cell research, my support of a woman’s right to choose and finish up with my opposition to the death penalty.
With regards to Danny’s observations I certainly respect his opinions, however, I do not agree with his analysis. Additionally, it is important to point out that I did not “prefer” a telephone conversation rather Danny and I attempted to get together on three ocassions and were unable to pull off a face to face meeting. The telephone was the only way to meet.
Best regards
Charley Murphy
State Representative
21st Middlesex District
State Senate Candidate
4th Middlesex District
My read is that your political position as a State Rep has more to do with your family’s and your history in Burlington, than with your leadership or spokesmanship for important issues affecting the district. I’d stand by that analysis.
Murphy’s response was subdued in light of the fact that you crafted your piece with an unhealthy amount of poetic license.
Thanks.
Now I klnow not to trust anything you write,
The history of the Murphy family in Burlington? I believe that is documented, and in fact confirmed by Rep. Murphy himself in his response.
<
p>
Or leadership on issues? The standard for leadership is higher than just voting for a bill. How does Rep. Murphy stack up on this score? Do you have any information I’ve overlooked to offer on this point?
<
p>
Or, are you a constituent of Rep. Murphy? Have you had any conversations with him on issues that you can report, as Danny did?
<
p>
“Because the representative preferred a telephone conversation, I cannot provide a full transcript as I did with Marzilli.”
That told me from the beginning this was an hit job. You inferred that Murphy was trying to run from you when infact you could not work your schedule with his. Howhard did you try Beans?
<
p>
BTW Beans, you can record phone conversations and make a transcript. That’s what journalists do. I doubt very much Murphy’s answers were as short as you make them out to be. Most likely they were just as long and nuanced as Marzilli’s, which you chose to puiblish in full.
<
p>
Beans, if you want to be respected than earn it. Give Murphy the same treatment you gave Mazilli. Let the reader see the full answers.
<
p>
This make believe problem you created by having the interview done over the phone shows you are far from ajournalist and lack credibility.
<
p>
As for leadership. Jim Mazilli is to leadership what Greg Gagne is to baseball hero.
<
p>
Leaders have followers, Show me one sucessful piece of legislation Jim mazilli has championed in the House. Just one Beans.
<
p>
If you can’t then tell me what your definition of legislative leadership is.
<
p>
Please.
He angered the hacks by being the force behind abolishing Middlesex County government.
<
p>
He wrote the senior circuit-breaker tax law.
<
p>
He got two minimum-wage increases through the legislature.
<
p>
Marzilli was too busy working for his district and the people of Massachusetts to kiss the posterior of Tommy Finneran. Turns out he got more done than any of the legislative sheep.
<
p>
Plus, he is recognized interntionally as a leader on environmental issues.
If he deep sixed county government, he can’t be all bad and is looking out for the effective use of hard earned tax dollars.
I was working in the State House during the abolition of county government. Jim was front and center on that one.
Never mind.
I made the “not an issues guy” comment after reading the interviews, which were consistent with my impressions as someone who lives in the district. I have yet to see anything here that would invalidate those impressions but I’m open to hearing it. So please cool your jets with the ‘underhanded’ etc. You are the one who is missing the strike zone like Gagne here.
I am sorry about that. Basically, this being my first go-round, I am using a simple analog recorder, with no other technology. In fact, in a previous post, I proposed creating a list of technology whose owners would be willing to lend out equipment. Anyway, I conducted three interviews. The first was with Bob Peters, and took place in a crowded Starbucks. Bad move. The tape was about 50% audible. Marzilli I did in a public library, and came out late. As I am sure Murphy can confirm if you need him to, I offered to meet in person at the State House or somewhere in the district. Murphy opted for a telephone conversation, which I was unable to record. Any tips on how to do this in the future would be welcome.
<
p>
As for a “hit job”…well, first, it’s certainly not at hit job for Marzilli, as I was in fact leaning Peters at the time of the interview. I fail to see how somehow performing a Murphy “hit job” by not providing a transcript could have helped the Peters cause, especially as a full transcript was not available for Peters. I would certainly welcome any corrections from Murphy if I got any information wrong, and if he has anything to add, he is welcome to at any time.
<
p>
In contrast to Beans, I have not stated full support for Marzilli, as I am still hoping to talk to Donelly, about whom I know nothing but union endorsements. However, Marzilli did in general seem to be quite strong on specific progressive policies.
<
p>
To reiterate, I believe I represented Murphy as well as I could. Again, if Murphy any corrections, or any additions to the statements contained in my writeup, I would be happy to add them to the original diary.
Should be “came out great.”
Anyway, that is why only Marzilli has a full transcript available. I would be absolutely willing to fully record in person any other views Murphy may have.
BITB
You stand by what analysis? Your “analysis” continues to be baseless, flawed and lacking merit. I humbly suggest to you that I am and have been a leader on many fronts my entire life. I would further suggest to you that my 4 years in the United States Marine Corps taught me a fair amount of how to be a leader. You do not know me at all to be in a position to know what I have done or have not done in the House. “The standard for leadership is higher that just voting for a bill”-what does that mean? You have no idea what I did to assist with the same sex marriage issue as it made its way through the system. Rest assured I did more than merely vote for the bill. You have no idea what I did back in the day with regards to keeping the death penalty out of MA-rest assured I did more that merely vote for the bill. I was one of the most vocal opponents of Tom Finneran when his lock on the House was at its zenith-that was an example of leadershp reast assured. The National Popular Vote issue I mentioned earlier today-I am the lead sponsor of that bill that recently cleared the committee (does that automatically make me a leader in your book?). I can list plently of other pieces of legislation from the past-but I am not going to because I am starting to bore myself. Laslty, let me say in response to Pablo’s observations-while I did not play quarterback in high school I was the captain of the football team-does that help with my leadership creds?
Charley Murphy
By the way I do not know EB3 but appreciate his astute observations.
The loudest voices are often NOT the most effective voices within the State House on moving legislation.
<
p>
Rep. Murphy’s votes on equal marriage, choice, anti-death penalty, in-state tuition should be important to every progressive. For me, his pro-worker voting record is another plus for him as a candidate.
<
p>
Progressives have several friends in this race. We have the luxury of being able to make choices.
<
p>
Several people have posted on Rep. Marzili’s progressive record and, in particular, his actions on enviromental legislation. Those postings seem to me to be good points of discussion. I have posted on Ken Donnelly’s 30+ years of public service and his pro-worker record.
<
p>
I have my doubts about what postings challenging so-called individual “leadership” add to the debate. But hey, free speech can be messy.
Hey, I’m not from the district, I don’t know much about the players in this special election for senate, but from everything I’ve read, progressives have an array of good choices, from the union guy Donnelly, to the two very accomplished state reps Marzilli and Murphy.
<
p>
All of these guys are good on our issues. Rep. Murphy just outlined how he’s voted our way on almost every huge issue that’s come up in the past few years, so he’s wondering why he’s being attacked here. I’m wondering the same thing.
<
p>
If I lived in the 4th Middlesex, I’d probably be a Marzilli leaner, just because I know the guy through my work with MassEquality and like him. But I’d certainly be open to others so long as I agreed with their politics.
<
p>
So let’s be clear: This guy, as far as I can tell, is on our team. So instead of tearing him down, let’s save it for Ogo and his ilk, eh?
<
p>
PS, Murphy is (or was) a Marine officer. So, questioning his commitment to his community sounds a little silly.
Not anti-Murphy. At this point, for reasons I have explained, it is Marzilli’s strong advocacy of specific progressive policies that at this point puts him above Murphy for me.
Would be interested, and not bored, in hearing about the legislation you have taken the lead on during your terms in the legislature. It would be valuable to engage here in some discussion of the issues most important to you and how you are helping to advance them.
<
p>
I would love to hear about issues you have championed in the past, in addition to death penalty, anti-Finneran, and NPV. In addition, though, what I would like to see is specific priorities for legislation in the Senate. Finneran is gone, death penalty seems to be pretty solidly gone (I do give you and Marzilli credit, of course, for supporting keeping it off the books while Natale, as of the 05-06 session, does not), and so NPV seems to be the only thing listed here to push for in the Senate. We’re all listening for specific priorities.
As I have little experience with the Representative other than the interview.
However, it did seem that Marzilli gave a good deal more in specific, progressive policies, particularly in areas of revenue. I would also note that of the Rep’s answers, they were mostly good, progressive answers. I would love to see some clarification, though, on your positions on meals and hotel taxes, and also toll increases and gas tax increases (especially with recent toll proposals, which I believe came out after October 1), to all of which you expressed opposition at this point in time.
Also, I would like to hear some about this shield law. How does it compare with the federal legislation currently going forward?
First for full disclosure. My union has endorsed Ken Donnelly and I do not live in the 4th Middlesex nor in Representative’s Murphy’s District.
<
p>
Ok, point one. Representative’s Murphy’s family has a proud history of public service and that is in no way a negative for his current position nor his seeking the State Senate seat. I seem to remember that the Kennedy family was a bit “entrenched” prior to Ted Kennedy’s election. The Honan family has a history of service in Allston-Brighton. The Sullivan family has been elected in Cambridge for generations. The Tolman family has an entrenched history in Watertown and the surrounding State Senate District. To critize an elected official for his family’s service and the fact that actual voters support them and elect them to office if way off base.
<
p>
Now issues. I have posted before that as part of the Boston Labor Council Political Screen Committee, I interviewed Rep. Murphy (along with Reps. Natale, Marzilli and Ken Donnelly). Rep. Murphy answered several questions on a range of issues posed to him by the 7 member Committee. The issues ranged from funding education to gaming and gambling, to stronger enforcement of employers abuse of independent contractor laws to responsible development in the District.
<
p>
(BTW with regard to Murphy’s not being a leader on issues, in my opinion you can judge elected officials effectiveness in at least three ways – How do they vote on issues you care about, are they sponsors of legislation that you care about and/or do they make constitutient services and local issues a priority)
<
p>
In discussing the range of issues and his willingness to go against the talk show types -Rep. Murphy talked indepth about his vote to grant in-state tuition to the children of immigrants. He raised that issue fully expecting that a number of the unions in the room would have opposed the bill. (this wasn’t the case and I thanked him for that vote).
<
p>
It was clear to me that Rep. Murphy’s focus and interest are much more directed toward the nuts and bolts of government – not broad policy statements. He spoke at length about the solid relationship he had with the local elected officials in his district. A relationship built on concerns for increasing local aid and maintaining local services. (if I have misrepresented his focus, I am sure his campaign will correct me).
<
p>
Rep. Murphy is – in my humble opinion and after spending as much or more interview time with him as anyone interview blogging here – progressive on social issues (choice, equal marriage, in-state tuition), open to gaming (depending on the revenue and how it benefits the 4th Middlesex District). His take on gambling was sumerized by him as adults make decisions and as long as they “don’t break the law and pay their taxes” choice should be left to citizens.
<
p>
I had never met nor interacted with Charlie Murphy prior to the Boston Labor Council interview. I spent over an hour with him then and another 30-40 minutes when the candidates all attended a full Labor Council meeting. A meeting where Murphy once again directly answered issues questions from the floor.
<
p>
I will be working as hard as possible for Ken Donnelly but it won’t be because I dislike Rep. Murphy. He was honest, straight, forward and very personable.
<
p>
Since Rep. Murphy has demonstrated that he is active on BMG, I suggest questions on issues be directed to him. He can pass or fail them on his own.
“Nuts and bolts.” Specific ideas and policies that can make a difference. “Increasing local aid and maintaining local services” is nice, but that is a “broad policy statement.” What services, exactly? (Although in this case, “let the towns decide” can be an acceptable answer, although state legislators can play a key role in moving local government forward.) And how do you pay for it?
I can’t speak for Murphy on specifics of legislation or plans but it is my hope that he will respect BMG and respond to questions (well non-SchoolZombie type questions)
I went to the debate in Lexington, when Bob Peters was still in the race, and found there was much to say for each of the candidates.
<
p>
Murphy and Marzilli, who are experienced legislators, were much more at home in the debate. Murphy and Marzilli appeared to be on good terms, somewhere between colleagues and friends.
<
p>
Would I say Murphy was light on the issues? No, but Marzilli had more depth. Marzilli demonstrated a deeper knowledge of education policy (beyond the usual response of fighting for more state aid). Where it really was obvious was when the question got to environmental policy, where Marzilli is an internationally-recognized expert.
<
p>
There aren’t any broad differences between Marzilli and Murphy, but the real difference is the depth and passion. Murphy is the adult equivalent to the quarterback of the high school football team. Marzilli’s the policy wonk.
that he received the endorsement of Mass Alliance. The progressive organization heavyweights all seem to be a part of Mass Alliance, including the Progressive Democrats of Massachusetts, the Mass Teachers Association, the American Federation of Teachers and the Boston Teachers Union, Planned Parenthood and NARAL, Neighbor to Neighbor, the Sierra Club, SEIU Local 509, Mass Equality and the MGLPC, among other organizations.