Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Fun With OCPF (End-of-Year Edition)

By

Representatives

McCabe v. Donato

First off, we tackle the representatives of note, those who already have opponents. We saw quite a few challengers declare well into last year and it’s time for them to show what they’ve been up to.

Of interest to many people here is Patrick McCabe, who announced last year that he is challenging friendly marriage opponent Paul Donato. McCabe is a very appealing candidate. He’s a West Point grad and Army Airborne Ranger who also happens to be a progressive Democrat. So how did he do? He raised himself a nice $13,000 and ended the year with just over $11,000 on-hand.

But there’s a reason Paul Donato has been in office as long as he has, and part of it is his ability to rake in the dough. Donato raised over $85k, spent $48k, and ended the year with over $92k in the bank.

Now money isn’t everything, but it’s a heck of a lot. Patrick is clearly not going to outraise Donato, but will he be able to bring in enough to be competitive? That remains to be seen.

Ferrante, afKlinteberg, and Verga

Up on the North Shore, Tony Verga (also a marriage foe) has himself a couple of contenders vying to pry him away from his chairmanship of the Veterans committee.

Ann Margaret Ferrante ended the year with $17k, including a $2.5k loan to herself.

Astrid afKlinteberg (yes, that’s how it’s spelled and capitalized according to her report) brought in $5k last year.

Verga finished the year with right around $10,900 on-hand, which means that in a 3-way race either of these contenders could be competitive. This one could be the sleeper race to watch.

Lewis v. Casey

Now for the excitement. Jason Lewis announced last year that he would be challenging everyone’s favorite red-headed nut, Paul Casey. (Yet another marriage foe… anyone else see a pattern?)

Lewis is putting his (and other peoples’) money where his mouth is, as he had brought in over $40,000 in 2007 PLUS a $5,000 loan to his campaign. He ended the year with just under $35k.

Casey, on the other hand, raised a paltry $27k and ended the year with just $15k on-hand.

Also worth noting: my cursory examination of where the money came from shows that about 2/3 of Jason Lewis’s donations came from donors within the district, while only about 1/3 of Casey’s did.

This is definitely shaping up to be a competitive race. And with Paul Casey involved, I’m sure it will be fun to watch!

Other Rep. Races

Virginia Woode, who is challenging Republican Bob Hargraves, raised about $4k, which doesn’t quite stack up to his over $40k on-hand.

Carolyn Dykema (I believe it’s pronounced DIE-ke-mah) raised about $7k and loaned herself $5k in her challenge against Paul Loscocco, who is sitting on a warchest of $74,000.

Senate

Not a whole lot of action in the Senate so far, especially because it takes an @$$load of effort to challenge an incumbent senator and rarely succeeds. That’s why Scott Brown is still around.

However, there is one particular race of note, and that is the potential rematch between Dianne Wilkerson and Sonia Chang-Diaz.

First off, let me offer my kudos to Wilkerson, she hired a bookkeeper (at $1,000/month) and actually filed her report before the deadline! Bravo! The report shows that Wilkerson raised a hefty $61,000 but spend over half of it, leaving herself $27k on-hand. (She also has $47k in liabilities, so she’s technically in the red by $20k, but we can ignore that for the time being.)

Chang-Diaz still had a little money left over from her 2006 sticker duel with Wilkerson, and she added another $26k to that last year, bringing her cash on-hand to just under $30k.

Of course, the real question is: if these two go at it again, will they do it on the ballot this time? Only time will tell.

That’s pretty much the extent of the excitement I dug up. Anyone else see anything worthwhile? If not, we can go back to watching Edwards’ diminishing screen time during the debates.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. is a moot point.  The issue is over, and nothing is going to change it.  I think we need to get to a point where we put a person through more than that one particular litmus test before we decide whether or not to vote for them.  

    • Paul Casey and Paul Donato have worked to defeat both the Municipal Partnership Act and the Governor’s corporate tax loophole closings.

      <

      p>McCabe and Lewis have both stated unequivocal support for both.

      <

      p>Or, if you like,

      <

      p>Casey and Donato both vigorously opposed the buffer zone bill that passed the leg. last year. McCabe and Casey have both stated that, if they’d been in the house, they’d have voted for it.

      • GIC and Pension fund pieces of the the Gov’s bill and has not closed the door on voting for the other revenue pieces.

        • of the M.P.A., though important, will not generate anywhere near as much $$$ for struggling municipal governments as the restaurant and hotel taxes would have. To support the GIC and pension fund pieces, but leave the rest hanging in the breeze, is to gut the bill.

        • At the last check, he was not supporting them. McCabe (and Lewis, I might add) passionately spoke on it. Lewis, in particular, gave a long, detailed, enthusiastic speech on making state revenues more progressive when I called him, stating very strong support for both MPA and loophole closings.

  2. FYI: Matthew Israel, director of the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center that has recently been embroiled in a scandal regarding its electro-shock treatments, the accidental overshocking of a student (or students) that proceeded from a “prank” phone call, and the subsequent destruction of evidence of the incident by staff members, donated $500 to Deval Patrick, $300 to Robert DeLeo, chairman of Ways and Means, and somewhat lesser amounts to a couple other state legislators who didn’t ring a bell with me. This is all legal, and pretty much ethical, so long as the recipients do not involve themselves in pending legislation surrounding the banning or limitation of these electric shock “aversion therapies”.  

  3. 06/14/2006 ISRAEL, MATTHEW 240 TURNPIKE ST CANTON, MA 02021 $100.00   Chandler, Harriette L.
    07/03/2007 ISRAEL, MATTHEW 240 TURNPIKE ST CANTON, ma 02021 $125.00   Chandler, Harriette L.
    06/14/2007 ISRAEL, MATTHEW 55 THOREAU RD CANTON, MA 02021 $500.00 EDUCATOR JUDGE ROTENBERG EDUCATIONAL CENTER Patrick, Deval L.
    06/04/2007 Israel, Matthew 240 Turnpike Street Canton, MA 02021 $125.00  Judge Rotenberg Education Center Tolman, Steven A.
    06/04/2007 Israel, Matthew 240 Turnpike Street Canton, MA 02021 $250.00  Judge Rotenberg Education Center Tolman, Steven A.
    04/20/2004 Israel, Matthew L. 240 Turnpike Street Canton, MA 02021 $100.00 Educator Judge Rotenberg Center Menard, Joan M.
    12/13/2007 Israel, Matthew L. 240 Turnpike Street Canton, MA 02021 $200.00 Educator Judge Rotenberg Educ. Ctr Vallee, James E.
    06/07/2006 Israel, Matthew L. 240 Turnpike Street Canton, MA 02021 $300.00 Educator Judge Rotenberg Center DeLeo, Robert A.

    <

    p>As you might be able to surmise, I’m not a big fan of the idea of aversion therapy.

    • …and for MANY years as a Rep. was Chair of Haalth Care; still serves on Public Health.

      <

      p>She ROCKS!  She is one of the most intelligent women in the Legislature.  Seems more like the Doctor making a strategic donation than an ally.

      <

      p>Jim Valle is also Asst. House Ways & Means – the old Nancy Flavin slot.  No health care ties.

  4. First of all, the correct spelling is “af Klinteberg” (the ‘af’ is used like ‘von’) but the software probably ran the name together.

    <

    p>I don’t think this is a competitive race as it stands. With two challengers in the race (and both women lawyers at that), the potential anti-incumbent vote would be split. More importantly, Tony Verga is a great fit for the district (Gloucester, Rockport, and Essex). He’s a fisherman by trade, which always helps in Gloucester, and his voting record (very progressive on the economic issues, traditional Catholic on social issues) is very much in line with the voters of the district.

    <

    p>The other two candidates may well be positioning themselves for when Tony leaves. He is, after all, 72. A year ago, when Verga’s name was suggested by many in the veterans community as a possible head of the veterans office (Gov. Patrick ended up keeping the incumbent), Tony’s son Greg Verga, a Gloucester School Committee member, created a committee to run for the office. (I assume that Greg’s committee had no activity in 2007, which is why no report was filed, or it was filed by paper and is not yet online.)

    <

    p>Greg Verga would start with a significant head start (he’s the only one of the three to run city-wide in Gloucester), so it’s logical that the other two would be looking to get a head start on the first post-Tony race.

    <

    p>Disclosure: I’m not part of anyone’s campaign, but I’m an active member of the Gloucester Democratic City Committee and obviously we have a large stake in ensuring this seat stays Democratic no matter what.

  5. While the candidate I’m working for(Lori Ehrlich-D) has consistently filed her reports on time, the candidate we’re running against (Cesar Archilla) has failed to file his most recent report (kind of weird, considering he’s an attorney). It’s now only four days away from the next report deadline (in other words, he’ll have completely failed to file the report, before the next report was due).

    <

    p>If not for that, I’d add in another state rep race matchup (8th Essex). But it’s hard to do that when one of the two candidates hasn’t filed his report.

    • True story.  When Sen. Henri Rauschenbach decided to leave, he did so in such a way that a caucus was needed to choose a replacement candidate on the ballot.  I was chosen as a caucus voter by my town committee.

      <

      p>5 candidates spoke, and the caucus chose Ed Teague, former House Minority Leader, who had left the House to run against Bill Delahunt for the open Studds seat.  Ed then proceeds to inform us that he’s facing a fine of several THOUSAND dollars due to his failure to file OCPF reports for many years but leaving his account open.  Not a great kickoff….

  6. that’s all over the Wilkerson report?

    <

    p>Looks like both of them raised a ton of money outside the district, but Mike Ross has more money than both of them combined …

    • I didn’t see Mike Ross on OCPF. Any link or background about him?

      <

      p>Going on name-based assumptions here, I have a hard time picturing this district electing a white guy. Nothing against white men, of course, but this is a heavily minority district.

      <

      p>Also, while there’s nothing wrong with self-financing, it’s hardly an indicator of potential for success (see: Chris Gabrielli). Successful fundraising shows people you’re a serious candidate. Popping up with tons of cash and an air of entitlement turns people off.

  7. Your post about the Casey/Lewis race made me think about some of the stories I did about the Casey/Prindiville race in 2004 when I was the editor of The Winchester Star. Here is one on campaign donations for that race readers might find interesting. Sadly, state Sen. Charlie Shannon has passed on:

    <

    p>

    Special interest, out-of-district cash funds Winchester candidates
    By Anthony Schinella
    STAFF WRITER
    Special interest groups such as unions, political action committees, lobbyists and business interests funneled thousands of dollars to Winchester’s incumbent state officials, state Rep. Paul Casey and state Sen. Charlie Shannon, both Democrats, according to campaign finance reports filed with the state. At the same time, all three of Winchester’s state candidates received a good chunk of their campaign money from out of the district.
    The Office of Campaign & Political Finance, the state agency that regulates political campaigns, requires legislative candidates to file financial paperwork multiple times during the year: Before a primary, the general election, and at the end of the year. The last filing period was at the end of August. The next filing period is next week – eight days before the Nov. 2 general election.
    According to the filings, Shannon raised the most of the candidates running – more than $61,000 – during the nine-month period between January and the end of August 2004. Shannon has no opposition this year. Casey raised more than $31,000 while his Republican challenger, John Prindiville, raised less than $14,000 during the same filing period.
    More than 23 percent of the money Casey received was from special interest groups like union and business PACs, other committees, lobbyists, and legislative agents. Special interests funded almost 16 percent of Shannon’s donations while only about 4 percent of Prindiville’s money came from similar interests.
    Many of the interests donating money to Casey and Shannon also do business with the state. Many of them indirectly benefit from tax loopholes that the Legislatures refuses to readdress despite the pleas of local communities and liberal groups requesting more money. It is no surprise that state incumbents receive the largest amount of special interest cash since the Legislature has refused to get tough with corporate tax loopholes.
    For example, Casey received donations from the Raytheon MA PAC, the MA Bankers PAC, and Life Underwriters PAC of MA. Raytheon, Fidelity, banks, insurance companies and others receive controversial and protected tax loopholes despite the state being in what Casey calls “a fiscal crisis.”
    Casey also received donations from a myriad of lobbyists including William Coyne Jr., Edward Dever, Mark Delaney, F. Jeffrey Fleming, James Harrington, Stephen Karol, and Vincent Shanley.
    Coyne has had a long relationship with both Casey and Shannon. In the past, he has lobbied for Raytheon, Miller Brewing Company, Phillip Morris, and Verizon. Dever has lobbied for Mass. Mutual Life. Delaney lobbies for utility companies, Phillip Morris, greyhound racing, and the Mass. Assoc. of Realtors. Fleming represents many interests on Beacon Hill, including insurance companies, banking interests, retail businesses, pharmaceutical companies, and Fidelity. Harrington, who works with Stephen Karol at the Karol Group, has worked for insurance companies, HMOs, airlines, and banking interests. Shanley has also worked with a number businesses involved with of insurance, banking, retail, pharmaceuticals, as well as Fidelity.
    Casey also received money from former House Speaker Charlie Flaherty, a convicted felon, who is now a legislative agent and Edwin Shanahan of the Greater Boston Real Estate Board. While Casey received a number of donations from union PACS, like the Boston Carmen’s Union, the Boston Carpenter’s Union, and Professional Firefighter’s Union of MA, he also took money from Associated Industries of Massachusetts [AIM], a pro-business organization that some liberal and labor groups have been critical of in the past. The incumbent received a 62.5 percent rating from the organization on its legislative scorecard with the Legislature itself receiving a 68.89 percent average rating, according to Brian Gilmore, executive vice president of public affairs for AIM.
    “I wouldn’t call it a failing grade,” said Gilmore said about Casey’s rating in an interview Friday.
    Gilmore said Casey backed such AIM-supported legislation as making a 3 percent investment tax credit permanent in a recent economic stimulus package, establishing state funding to secure federal research and development grants, and requiring any new regulations on businesses approved by the state to have a cost benefit analysis by employers before passage. Casey also supported an amendment to the universal health care bill that would indicate how much the bill would cost and who would pay for it as well as voting to override Romney’s against the streamlining of the permitting process for commercial and industrial development, all business-friendly legislation according to Gilmore.
    “Those aren’t anti-business votes,” he said.
    Shannon received donations from numerous unions – from the asbestos workers to the Carmen, to bricklayers, ironworkers and pipefitters. He has also received donations from the Insurance Agents and Brokers PAC, the Mass. Federation of Teachers PAC, the state’s Lumber retailers, and various firefighter organizations.
    Shannon also received a slew of donations from lobbyists John Brennan Jr., Scott, Mark and William Delaney, Dever, Luke Dillion, Martin Fisher Jr., Fleming, Jeffery Haggerty, Harrington, Brian Hickey, Karol, Francis O’Brien, former state Sen. Henri Rauschenbach, Peter Robertson, Shanahan, and Shanley. These lobbyists work with some of the state’s biggest special interests including Fidelity, Raytheon, insurance companies, banks, retailers, and pharmaceutical companies.
    During a recent interview, Prindiville acknowledged that he took two PAC contributions of $500 from Citizens for Limited Taxation [CLT], one in 2003 and the other in 2004. However, he said he had refused all other special interest donations. Prindiville did receive committee donations from the Stoneham and Winchester Republican town committees, the state Republican committee, and a donation from the Women’s Republican Club of Winchester. Neither Casey nor Shannon received any funds during the filing period from state or local Democratic committees.
    In the case of the CLT donation, Prindiville said in a previous interview that the donation would be of no influence because he received the donation for supporting the rollback, a policy that would benefit taxpayers of the district.
    Chip Faulkner, executive director of CLT’s 2 1/2 PAC, agreed.
    “We gave him the donation because he is running against Paul Casey, who has a terrible record with us,” he said. “[Prindiville] seems to be in synch with us and took the taxpayer protection pledge.”
    Faulkner said the taxpayer protection pledge was one sentence which requested that representatives not raise any new taxes.
    “It doesn’t limit them or cut them, it is just, please, don’t increase them,” Faulkner said, adding that Prindiville filled out and returned the group’s questionnaire, something Casey has never done.
    How does the money influence?
    While elected officials deny the money has influence over how they legislate, a look at how the state collects revenue and from what sources, calls that denial into question. With state officials staring at multi-million dollar surpluses, the issue of special interest money influencing political campaigns is never more apparent.
    Republicans and populists, backed by Republican Gov. Mitt Romney, want the income tax rolled back to 5 percent, as promised by the Legislature in 1989. Others are requesting tax fairness and equity so that large corporations who reap huge profits pay the same percentages in income taxes – if not more – as individuals.
    At the same time, D
    emocratic incumbents have touted about 60 tax line items they have tinkered with while at the same time saying there is no money to roll back the income tax, despite huge revenue streams. Many of the taxes that have been manipulated don’t benefit the average citizen despite claims by incumbents.
    While Romney and others want to roll back the income tax, the Mass. Tax Foundation [MTF], a business friendly think tank, has lobbied against the rollback. But they also have advocated preserving the many corporate loopholes – while not acknowledging that it is funded by the same organizations which receive the tax loopholes. MTF is often touted in the media as a credible source on tax policy. Yet, some speculate that the group’s actions benefit its corporate backers and are harmful to average citizens who would like a tax break in the wake of ever increasing property taxes.
    During previous fiscal scrapes, Democrats in the Legislature have stated that “everything is on the table” but somehow the corporate tax loopholes never get touched.
    One of these loopholes is the single-sales tax law, a tax credit created to benefit defense contractors like Raytheon.
    According to the Mass. Coalition for Healthy Communities, a non-partisan, non-profit advocating fairer taxes, the single-sales tax break has allowed Raytheon to pay only $456 in state taxes annually while the average taxpayer pays thousands more. The tax cut was passed in 1995 after Raytheon promised to maintain 90 percent of its payroll and not move jobs from the state.
    Since that time, Raytheon has laid-off thousands of workers despite strong sales in its arms business. Many other jobs have been moved to other states where the standard of living is lower. Two years ago, Raytheon posted almost $17 billion in sales. Last year, they were granted a multi-billion dollar contract to replace weapons systems used in the invasion of Iraq.
    Yet according to the coalition, the tax loophole has helped Raytheon and Fidelity alone escape paying more than $221 million in taxes to the state, money that could be used for local aid or school reconstruction. Local aid and school reconstruction are just two programs that have been cut by the Legislature which has put towns like Winchester and Stoneham in a financial pickle.
    The Mass. Dept. of Revenue confirms that corporate tax loopholes have allowed other companies like FleetBoston [now Bank of America], Staples, Teradyne, Yankee Candle, and a host of others, to pay as little as $456 a year in taxes – despite hundreds of millions of dollars in posted sales and profits. This, while the average taxpayers in Winchester and Stoneham pay much higher income taxes on average salaries of $156,125 and $73,757, respectively, according to state data.
    In previous interviews, Casey admitted that special interest donations were “hard to avoid,” noting that many in the business community were his friends. He said lobbyists and other interests had no influence on his decision-making. Shannon has also denied that any of these lobbyists have any influence over how he legislates and also noted long friendships with lobbyists.
    On the corporate tax breaks, both Shannon and Prindiville have previously stated that the Legislature should get more aggressive with the issue. In an interview last year, Casey said he believed more revenue should come from payroll taxes instead of corporate profit taxes, suggesting that companies like Fidelity and Raytheon already paid property taxes to local communities. At the time, Casey said the single-sales tax break would be discussed but later, no action was taken on the measure. The loophole remains.
    More recently, Casey has come out against the rollback of the income tax despite the unfairness of the current tax structure, stating that the tinkering of other taxes was more important than keeping the Legislature’s promise to roll back income taxes on individuals.
    Other revenue proposals
    On its Web site, the Coalition offers a number of alternatives to create a fairer tax structure in the state which would increase local aid and end the need for multiple Proposition 2 1/2 property tax overrides.
    For example, by repealing a sales tax exemption on certain services, like lobbying, legal services, accounting, engineering, business consulting, public relations and financial management, the state could reap an additional $531 million in revenue based on 2003 data. This would allow the state to not only increase its local aid receipts beyond what it cut a few years ago to stay in line with current budget figures but also beef up its rainy day fund. Closing the “combined reporting” corporate loophole, which allows companies active in more than one state to hide income and escape paying state corporate income tax, would generate another $97 million. Just repealing these loopholes, along with the Raytheon and Fidelity loopholes, would reap almost $1 billion more in revenue for the state.
    Other tax proposals forwarded by the coalition – like real estate transfer taxes and taxes on pollution – are more controversial and probably not plausible. Winchester’s 2 percent transfer tax proposal is currently stalled in the Legislature, dying a slow death.
    But strangely, lawmakers who stated that everything would be on the table clearly overlooked – or ignored – the ability to close these corporate loopholes and missed a chance to relieve communities of multi-million dollar overrides year after year.
    Money from out of the district
    An audit of the campaign reports of the three candidates found that the bulk of the donations came from out of the district.
    On Casey’s reports, more than 68 percent of his donations were from outside of Winchester and Stoneham. The majority of the out of district donations came from the metropolitan Boston area, with one from former Springfield Mayor Michael Albano, and a couple from New Hampshire.
    Shannon received more than 51 percent of his donations from out of the district with about 15 percent unknown since the contributions were not itemized [Donations of $49 or less do not have to be itemized]. The majority of Shannon’s out of the district donations came from metropolitan Boston with a few from the South Shore and Rhode Island.
    About 34 percent of Prindiville’s donations were from outside of the district, with another 28 percent unknown because the donations weren’t itemized. In a previous interview, the candidate said most of his out of the district donations were from family members donating to his effort with most of the others coming from neighboring towns. He did receive donations from as far away as Oregon, Ohio, and also Maine.

Archives