The Globe has two stories today on the MA house:
First, Frank Phillips reports that sharks are circling in advance of DiMasi’s possible departure, and the clearest heir apparent, John Rogers (D-Norwood) has upset DiMasi with his campaigning. The other potential candidates mentioned are Robert DeLeo (D-Winthrop), allegedly DiMasi’s favorite, and Ronald Mariano (D-Quincy). Do the progressives have a dog in this fight? (Also, isn’t it somewhat amusing that the Globe headline writer calls the Majority Leader of the MA House an “aide”?)
Secondly, Adrian Walker complains that DiMasi is forestalling any substantive discussion of the casino plan, though Walker is skeptical of the plan itself. He doesn’t mention any possibility of DiMasi moving on, but he says “Patrick and DiMasi have been locked in a fascinating, but unproductive, dance for the past year. The governor proposes; the speaker says no. Patrick floats ideas, which then proceed to die in the House.”
Anybody have more of an inside perspective on this? As an Edwards guy, I’m a little disappointed with last night’s results and could use a distraction.
Do the progressives have a dog in this fight?
<
p>The speaker always has to be a conservative bad guy, in order to allow room for the progressives to push against something. Having a progressive speaker would never work. Progressives don’t really want it, they know they need an adult parent to send them off to bed and then sign the checks and make the dirty deals while they aren’t in the room.
<
p>Also, isn’t it somewhat amusing that the Globe headline writer calls the Majority Leader of the MA House an “aide”
<
p>Yes.
<
p>The governor proposes; the speaker says no.
<
p>It’s win-win!
You have us mistaken with the religious right.
<
p>Progressives very much want to win and have been working with our even more precarious position than the religious right – the fact that we have to not only defeat Republicans, but also DINOs. Luckily, we’ve been fairly successful. Unfortunately, the governor hasn’t been nearly as progressive as he promised to be during the campaign.
It is just like that. But are you saying that DINOs are the non-progressives, and the progressives are the true Dems? That would be as false as the religious right calling all the other R’s RINOs.
<
p>Dems have always been more about practical politics, machines and party bosses, not civic engagement. They’ve always marginalized and frustrated the radicals and progressives, only tolerating and taking advantage of them.
Did he ever really promise to be progressive during the campaign? I would argue that he acted like he would be progressive, without really promising much of anything…
because progressives didn’t MAKE him promise anything.
<
p>He had very few specific policy pledges, and mostly ran with rhetoric and shrewd heartstring tugging… hope over fear, together we can, taking back the government. And now Obama is running with the same (even better) rhetoric without being held to much of anything.
<
p>If you don’t agree with me, please explain Deval’s quote in the Boston Globe when they asked him what the biggest misconception about him was and he responded “the liberal thing”. That “liberal thing” was so carefully cultivated that it should be transparent to all how manipulative he is.
<
p>And if that’s not enough, there’s his record of working on behalf of murderers, polluters and cheats (Coca Cola, Texaco, and Ameriquest, respectively).
but part of what you’re saying is dead-on.
<
p>DiMasi is not a progressive, but he takes progressive stances on a few key issues. As such, he has no need to actually advance a full progressive agenda (and can somewhat easily stand in the way of good progressive initiatives), but his support for marriage equality, against the death penalty, etc ensures that there’s no strong resistance from a progressive caucus.
<
p>I’ve been frustrated by Patrick’s lack of ability to maneuver in this political environment, but equally frustrating is the lethargic pace of the House under DiMasi. As I’ve posted before, he has no problem stepping all over Patrick’s proposals but rarely comes up with anything of his own. (And even when he does, it’s usually to stop someone else from doing it first and getting credit… coughenergy billcough.)
<
p>I’m certainly not advocating for a conservative speaker in order to give the progressives something to push off of. I don’t think we’d see Rogers slide back to his 1990’s DOMA days, but I also don’t think he would be a speaker willing to advance a strong agenda. He’d likely be DiMasi part 2; just less likable.
<
p>Nothing I’ve heard indicates that Bosley is interested. O’Flaherty, should he decide to make a go for it, would be significantly worse for progressives than Rogers. Mariano is a total hack. I know very little about DeLeo, but the fact that he’s kept a low profile compared to some of the others is kind of heartening.
<
p>Or maybe DiMasi is actually telling the truth and is going to stick around for a while. Then the question is not who should replace him but how to get him to act on an agenda that we want.
He would make a great speaker – knows the budgetary and legislative systems, knows a lot about technical and arcane issues (telecommunications, for instance), has done a lot to learn about legislatures through the national organization, great sense of humor, plays well with others, etc. I think he would make an effort to build consensus behind closed doors so no one – including the Governor, if he makes an effort – will be dissed in public.
<
p>At one point, he was also the House’s leading expert on beanie babies.
<
p>I hope he is under consideration.
But he has a fairly good position in the house, so who knows.
<
p>I will say that as much as I love his position on casinos, I disagree with him profusely on the telecom issue. He’d like to reward Verizon for doing nothing about Broadband in Western Mass by allowing them to keep their completely unfair corporate tax loopholes… I recognize we need new revenue somewhere and that’s a fair place to get it, given that Verizon would still have low taxes and it’s not enough money to impact jobs or prices, compared to their overall profits and rate/tax comparisons in other states.
<
p>My dream would be a Speaker Eldridge. But that’s only going to happen in fantasy land, at least until we’ve replaced at half the DINOs in the House.
But that’s only going to happen in fantasy land, at least until we’ve replaced at half the DINOs in the House.
<
p>Woo boy! Then all the magical creatures from Fantasy Land can finally come down from the chocolate covered mountains and bring the candy rainbows to us all!
But I had no idea that he opposes closing the telecom loophole. Arguing against casinos after helping to stop the Municipal Partnership would leave him in a pretty weak spot. (I’m agnostic at this point on casinos, but the reason they even came up is DiMasi’s shooting down of every other revenue idea)
<
p>Speaker Eldridge would be great, maybe he could move up to Majority Leader: he was the secret hero in getting the votes to defeat the anti-marriage amendment.
I heard the rumor of DiMasi going last night from a person in the know. I so thought I’d have an awesome scoop this morning. Alas, the Globe beat me to it!
<
p>On casinos, I wrote a very good blog on my site, listing why this is sleazy politics and why I’m generally disappointed by the governor.
… if I do say so myself! đŸ˜‰
None of them includes being humble. I’m completely full of myself, but at least I’m honest =p
I mean, on it being a very good blog post. (Except you spelled receiving wrong, heh).
<
p>But as to the Governor including the casino revenue in his budget, what the fuck difference does that make? Why wouldn’t he? His budget is his budget, a fantasy budget that he does for fun. It is a big waste of time for him to even propose a budget and for everyone else to care about it. It is not supposed to be part of the Executive’s job, and it won’t have anything to do with the actual budget that is entirely the legislature’s responsibility.
He never included cash from his other proposals before, either, when they were yet to pass. See corporate tax loophole cuts and the Municipal Partnership Act. With his last budget, he created a serious effort meant to stabilize the fiscal situation. He wanted the leg to consider it, not take it as a game of politics. He’s going from that serious effort, which earned him wide praise when he released it from the general public, to a mockery of that effort, meant to play politics and keep this issue in the news.
If DiMasi does exit will it actually change anything? Will the legislature actually start taking up items that actually matter to citizens of the Commonwealth rather than texting while driving?
It could move backwards.
Issues like what?
<
p>Health Care?
Emergency Contraception?
Stem Cell Research?
Gay Marriage?
Predatory Lending?
ID Theft?
Junior Operator Licenses? (see todays Globe)
Child Abuse and DSS reform?
<
p>my rep sent a nice mailing and addressed these issues in the mailing.
<
p>Of course there are others but this seems like a pretty good record.
for a little divide and conquer. I wonder to what degree the Governor can play the majority leader off DiMasi to push through some bills.
Interesting idea but seems pretty risky to me. DiMasi still holds the power of the podium and gavel. Unless the Guv is absolutely certain he can win this gamble (not to be confused with the casino bill) will he can run into serious trouble.
<
p>Gamble and lose net result? Publicly denounce the Guv’s proposals? Already done. Refuse to alllow his bills to move through? Already done. Continue to centralize power and disregard the mandate the Guv got when elected? Already done. Give more and more gifts to business at the expense of the environment (a la wind proposals that everybody else opposes)? Already done.
<
p>Gamble and win net result? I’m not certain there is any guarantee Rogers would improve the relationship and have every reason to believe that DiMasi supporters would redouble their efforts to stop the Guv from doing anything. (Granted they would now be minority by virtue of someone taking DiMasi’s place.)
<
p>All told, not certain it is worth the risk.
Suppose he gambled the other way. Throw his hat in with DiMasi against Rogers, should it come to that, and build up a relationship. Suppose the Governor goes the other way: Help get a bunch of the progressive legislators who supported the Governor early on who may have a less favorable view of DiMasi to support DiMasi, and if it was going to be close, DiMasi might actually owe the Governor a thing or two.
<
p>This is just getting embarrassing. Where a year ago it was nice (for a little while) to call yourself a Democrat, now we’re just regressing. I blame guys like DiMasi AND Patrick. You can see where this is going already. In two years another race for Governor will begin and Republicans will say, “SEE! We TOLD you the Democrats couldn’t get anything done! They can’t lead a camel to water!”
<
p>And the worst part is that it will be true. I have spite for Sal DiMasis. I have no sympathy for the Governor. I am even frustrated with my own reps who seem content to work on their own side projects and legislation, while offering zero leadership.
<
p>Kind of makes a guy want to run for office himself…
Senator Galluccio would love to help you with your campaign.
i still want accountability on that one!
<
p>kind of makes a guy want to build a grassroots third party alternative to the corporate duopoly.
<
p>
an anti-semitic group in the State House, great. A group that refers to a Jewish public service agency's event as “a zionist event” and calls that group's 50th celebration of the state of Israel “a racist celebration of Israel” I really want to elect someone who espouses these views from a Green-Rainbow party press release during the DNCC in Boston
Oh yeah, I almost forgot that they also think the genocide in Darfur is a lie. Conveniently taken down from the party's website are their position papers on Sudan/Darfur, Israel and Palestine, and some other fun position papers that have gotten them into hot water.
Yeah, that's a party I want to join.
This had been going on for a while now.
<
p>Rogers has been sitting back for a couple years after DiMasi kicked him out of the HW&M chair, waiting for this opportunity. My understanding is that he has quite a bit of support.
<
p>If Rogers does take Speaker, it will be a massive step backwards for progressives since he will put people in leadership who are conservative.
<
p>And Sal says he still ain’t leaving, although Trav did the same thing until the day he left.
it would indeed be a huge leap backward for Massachusetts. At least DiMasi’s always been a staunch and courageous supporter of gay rights.
Oddly enough, two of my ten predictions for 2008 are on the subjce tof the Gov. budget and the House struggle – so here is my take on these matters, posted 12/31/07 –
<
p>Gov. Deval Patrick will file his second budget as Governor with a heavy reliance on gambling revenues to justify expansions in local aid, making it clear that without a casino bill, local aid will be cut. Speaker Sal DiMasi will retaliate with a House budget that guts all of the Governor’s pricey new initiatives like biotech and the housing funding, and will make it clear that the Legislature will not spend money that it does not and may never have. It will fall to Senate President Therese Murray to make peace, telling the Governor that you can’t write a budget with pie-in-the-sky revenue forecasts, and telling DiMasi that money can be found in a reasonable way. Her brokering of the situation catapults her into power, setting her up to become the Billy Bulger of the 21st century.
<
p>The House will lose its leader as Speaker Sal DiMasi will not finish out the Session in his current position. The battle ro replace him will be between John Rogers and Gene O’Flaherty at first, but it is Ron Mariano who will emerge as the next Speaker.
At least it was somewhat a challenge when Romney was governor. He’s bored.