Funny how Obama would be supported by Patrick, Like Obama, Patrick came into the Massachusetts political scene basically unknown.
After all he was a change from the status quo or so we thought.
With his charisma and ability to appeal to those who felt they had no voice, the real question is after one year do the people in Massachusetts have a voice?
Resoundingly the answer is NO. Special interest still controls the legislation. Millions and millions of tax dollars are wasted in organizational greed.
The department of Education is the biggest waste of tax payers’ dollars spending out of control with no end in sight. Still after months Patrick has failed to appoint a commissioner.
Last year Massachusetts stole 8000 children from their families to which the State actually profits by holding (federal funds placed into the children’s trust fund) now we have an executive order to form the office of the child advocate which is not funded nor designed to actually hold the department of social service accountable.
The once highly respected Massachusetts State police have become the laughing stock of law enforcement. The debacle in the crime lab, failed auto accidents investigations, never mind those troopers who solicited sex from children and sell drugs to name a few.
The board bar of overseers is a disaster and much like the State police fail to actually investigate lawyers which I think most Massachusetts residence will admit are out of control.
The social workers board within the division of professional licensures can’t make a quorum to hear cases of violations due to the fact Patrick has not appointed two members since August.
Jobs have not been created in the State but we do hear Patrick’s cry for casinos casinos casinos
Tax reduction for home owners which was a resounding theme in the Patrick campaign has not occurred.
Now when our people are going hungry and cold our Governor is out campaigning for Obama and why do you think that is? Perhaps In search of the next job after being Governor?
I was no fan of Mitts and he did nothing but increase FEES and help big business but at least he put his cards on the table.
I wonder when is it that those who contribute to this site and feel they are educated about politics going to stop posting story after story and actually start concentrating on putting pressure on OUR Governor the House and Senate members to actually complete campaign promises, improve the life of all citizens of Massachusetts and stop the political greed which still runs ramped!
Yes, Deval Patrick can make a great speech, he can bring hope into your heart, he can campaign on the promise of change however like Romney before him he has not come close to helping the people who stood in the streets, who came to his speeches and believed in his promises.
After one year what I have seen is we still have a rich polished well versed individual with new curtains and a Cadillac sitting in the State House and the average person in Massachusetts is worse off today than when Patrick was elected!
Deval Patrick has been in office for just a little over a year. I think people should give him a chance and not jump to conclusions too quickly. Just as often as not, changes take time to really set in and come into fruition. Also, one must also bear in mind that there are undoubtedly certain constraints placed on Deval Patrick from above. Let’s see what happens.
They are the most important.
<
p>Deval squandered a mandate!
n/m
If you get something significant done in that time, congratulations, but it is the exception and not the rule. The political stars have to be aligned just right. Otherwise this phony comparison to FDR is worthless.
God wants Deval to fail?
Toooo funny, eury13!!
“Barack Obama: He’ll do for America what Deval Patrick is doing for Massachusetts”.
<
p>That oughtta be a big seller.
I’m honestly curious.
Do something– really at this point almost anything — about K-12 education in this state. And when he does something, I wouldn’t mind a few separate ideas rather than an omnibus reform that won’t go anywhere.-Stop shilling for casinos.
-Stop shilling for corporate tax cuts
-Find funding and advocate for home heating cost relief
-Put more resources behind expansion of commuter rail
-Withdraw the life sciences bill. I don’t think government has a great track record of picking winning companies.
-On that matter, craft a bill that would remove tax breaks for companies that have not brought the jobs that they promised to bring.
-Work with the Legislature. Deval’s vetoes are overriden very frequently. This is partially because his ideas differ greatly from that of the Legislature, and also largely because he hasn’t been working with them. It’s not coincidence that on those days that Deval is spending time in Iowa and New Hampshire, the Lege is happily steamrolling through his vetoes at home.
…the Governor favored CLOSING corporate tax loopholes, especially for the telecoms, rather than shilling for more corporate tax cuts as you suggest.
<
p>Life sciences has the potential to be an economic boon in the state and I hope he does continue on that path.
That he now wants to do both — close these loopholes and lower business tax rates. He’s said the two steps are revenue-neutral, meaning that the state gets little real benefit. Government has a bad track record of deciding which private-sector efforts to support, which is why we have so many companies in this state laying off workers while enjoying tax breaks.
<
p>Life sciences does have potential to be an economic boon, of course. As do half a dozen other fields. But this isn’t just about fields, it’s about determining what sub-fields qualify for tax breaks. Deval wants to make a massive bet on his and his aides’ economic prescience, which isn’t good odds in my book.
<
p>I agree that Deval Patrick should and must stop shilling for casinos, and not even think about bringing them here into the Bay State any more. Casinos won’t help our economy, nor will they bring jobs or revenue. They’re a cheap, cheap way to get thrills. Why should Boston and the Bay State at large become yet another Atlantic City, NJ, or Mohegan Sun, in CT, or a Las Vegas East? That’s just what we don’t need or want. Deval Patrick should be
putting in time to make sure that public transportation here in Boston is expanded, and getting the Green Line Extension put in place. It’s a badly-needed and wanted thing, and it’s high time it were started. This seems like a bad time for Deval Patrick to be out of state campaigning for the Presidential candidates, when there are things here right smack on the homefront that’re clearly at stake.
I’m glad to see opposition to the Life Science bill. There are other problems with it besides the way the state would dole out the bond revenues to a lot of shady companies. That is actually a rational way to do this, because it spreads the risk around, so that investors don’t have to do the picking. This field is so wild-west and new that there is no way that an investor can guess which company is going to make the big score, so they’ll invest in Apple or something they know. But if they could buy a bond and join a big pool, and get guaranteed (tax-free?) returns, they might choose to invest in Life Science instead.
The main problem is that it’ll burden us with having to buy back $1 Billion dollars of bonds whether anything good comes out of it or not, and the companies will still own the patents and profit off us if something good does come.
Also, a state stem cell bank doesn’t make sense. If there is a human health value to a government owned stem cell bank, it should be a federally owned stem cell bank, since presumably the larger the bank, the better. We shouldn’t be competing against other states with our “own” stem cell banks that we jealously guard, all states should pool together on this with a federal bank.
<
p>I agree with all those other points too, and would add infrastructure inspections and repairs.
I don’t really know what a “stem cell bank” is. I think it is probably a building full of freezers or incubators with test tubes of stem cells, each one a line from a different person, cataloged with its DNA sequence stored in a computer. And when a researcher wants some stem cells with a breast cancer gene and blue eyes, he or she will order some cells from certain lines delivered to his or her lab, and the bank will fedex them.
<
p>But there probably wouldn’t be one giant building somewhere. As long as the database is shared by all researchers, the storage facilities could be many buildings spread out across the country, not some big “federal bank”.
It’s a known fact that stem-cell research could yield important information leading to a cure for afflictions such as diabetes, heart disease, Parkinson’s disease, not to mention a whole host of other ailments. It’s long, long overdue, imo. This is something else that our government should be investing money in, rather than constantly throwing good money after bad at our wrongheaded, ill-concieved war on Iraq.
Yeah, OK. I support people doing stem cell and genetic research too, because it is indeed a known fact that it could cure people’s diseases, but you shouldn’t be suckered into thinking that means you have to support a $1 Billion debt to Massachusetts tax payers. There are actually more important things, like schools and expanding health care and bridges, etc.
nationwide. The fact that even Ronald Reagan’s family, including Nancy Reagan, tried to encourage G. W. Bush to relax his refusal to support stem-cell research speaks volumes right there, imo.
I don’t think it should be illegal to create cloned embryos for stem cell therapies, especially if they are able to create eggs so that they don’t have to exploit college girls and risk their lives and fertility. But it doesn’t need to be funded by the government, especially by a state government, and not with $1 billion dollars.
<
p>The state could, it seems to me, create a larger risk pool for investors and appoint a few people to decide which hopeful startups should get funds, but the investors shouldn’t be guaranteed a profit by the state’s taxpayers, they should only get paid back if at least some of the companies are successful, at which point they’d all get portions of those companies’ stock to either sell or hold on to.
Creating cloned embryos for stem-cell research won’t yield the proper information, because cloning isn’t natural. Also, the embryos that’re available for research aren’t embryos from “ordinary” college girls. They’re sometmes from women/girls who’ve had abortions, but most of those aborted fetuses get thrown away. Also, stating that college risk their lives and fertility is totally irrelevant, because that’s not why people get abortions. Anyway, a pregnancy is a much more serious risk for a young girl who’s under 20, anyhow. Unwanted pregnancies produce more than that–ill-begotten marriages, more domestic violence, more criminality, increased welfare rolls, more sickness and death, more mental illness, more homelessness, the list goes on and on. To force a women or girl to carry through with an unwanted pregnancy is absolutely unconscionable.
<
p>Anyway, back to the subject at hand: Embryotic stem-cell research on natural, normal fetuses, not fetuses that’ve been cloned.
They don’t do stem cell research on fetuses. They do use extra IVF embryos, which is how all of the lines have been created so far. The controversy is about whether or not to create embryos in order to turn them into stem cell lines, either by cloning (which would create matched stem cell lines and be useful to therapuetic medicine for that person) or normal fertilization (which are useful for research). They haven’t yet succesfully created a cloned human embryo that got far enough into the blastocyte stage to derive stem cells from.
<
p>At any rate, the point is: don’t support the $1B Life Science bill just because you approve in general of research.
what could/would they use, then, if they wanted to do research that would hopefully lead to finding cures for such things as Alzheimers Disease, diabetes, heart disease, Parkinsons, and many other ailments? Just curious.
They probably do research using fetal tissue from ended pregnancies, as well as using unused IVF embryos. But they don’t make stem cells from fetal tissue, those come from embryos that have never been implanted. They also don’t or maybe can’t currently make cloned embryos of humans, but having a genetic match to a patient so there is no tissue rejection is one of the intended purposes, so they want to be able to start doing that now. That is currently banned by Bush, and I think they arent even allowed to turn any more of the IVF embryos into new stem cell lines for research, they have to use cells from one of the “existing lines” that had already been created from IVF embryos. But many states and universities contest that rule I think and allow both cloning and using IVF embryos.
<
p>Another thing I’m not sure about: Harvard might even be creating embryos solely for stem cell research from scratch, using donated eggs and sperm, where none of the embryos created are intended for becoming children. Or maybe they only asked permission to do that.
<
p>But the fetal tissue research issue is treated as a separate issue in both the media and in laws, because they aren’t still potential lives, and also because they can’t get stem cells out of them, which have unique potential.
This:
<
p>
<
p>is kind of what I thought all along. Thanks for clarifying it, they.
<
p>
<
p>I know that embronic stem-cell research is banned by G. W. Bush, which is totally irresponsible, imo, and shameful. The fact that the (late) Ronald Reagan’s family, including Nancy Reagan, implored Bush to relax his veto on embryonic stem-cell research says something right there, too.
Substance: Pick one initiative that is concrete, not a juge polyglot – and stick to that one initiative.
<
p>Style: Stop appointing only big wigs, and the President of this and the CEO of that, and bring in indepedent talent – actual new faces.
<
p>Civic engagement: Actually make use of what the civic engagement groups suggested [as far as I know and can see and have heard, all of that went into the frozen outer wastes of darkness].
<
p>What I voted for was change and new blood into government here, what I got, I feel, is empty rhetoric and exclusionary micromanagement without a clear focus.
as far as I know and can see and have heard, all of that went into the frozen outer wastes of darkness
<
p>It’s almost as though Patrick thought that merely forming the task force and letting them make some suggestions, he had fulfilled his promise to all the BMG types that got him elected, and had no intention of even reading them. They’re just “arguments on emotion” anyhow. But what do you bet a few of those things are unthawed just in time to get the grassroots back on board for 2010? If he wants it, that is.
I would like the Administration to identify and pursue three or four tangible goals that were identified in the campaign.
<
p>Civic Engagement is a two-way street – Stay true to the people who elected you. Spend time and direct all Secretaries/Commissioners/departments to pursue communication and feedback with solution oriented discussions. Politics 101 – be true to the people who brought you to the dance….it wasn’t Sheldon Adelson.
<
p>Local Aid – municipal leaders flocked to the Patrick/Murray campaign liked children to the pied piper because they know our communities are starved! Commit to a five-year plan to improve local aid funding.
<
p>Efficiency – Charge state government with internal review for re-structuring and creating efficiences. Being a state employee or program is not an entitlement. Prove that you are serious about making government efficient.
<
p>Education – Design and implement common-sense education reform. Eliminate redundant, costly reporting school districts must perform. Solidify K-12 programs and funding before expansion. The deficits in urban/rural poor need to be addressed before any expansions are funded.
<
p>Demonstrate common sense, discipline and leadership. Then inspire us to do more.
and a manageable size for an agenda.
<
p>I’ve held forth at some length about the lameness/absence of Gov. Patrick’s grassroots relationship. Where’s he been?
<
p>Local aid: Well, he tried to get more tax $ out of the telcos, and local options taxes for the towns, and the GIC for their employees’ health care. I think it’s fair to say he’s doing what he can with a lot of resistance from a complacent legislature that feels totally safe, for the most part.
<
p>Efficiency: Totally agree. I hate to say it, but politically, he’d do really well to slim down some agencies with firings, etc. One wonders if he’ll get to do that if and when he gets his MassTrans control.
<
p>Education: I’m told something will be out in April, but I doubt it will address the issues you mention first and foremost.
<
p>i.e. raise phone rates for users
<
p>
<
p>i.e. raise taxes on residents
<
p>
<
p>i.e. he catered to the unions which effectively killed the GIC proposal.
<
p>The public sector unions are perhaps the greatest destructive (aka money eating) force in the State today, and if you seek change, for my dime, eliminate the public sector unions, or at least have the courage to curtail their power.
<
p>Seriously, why do the teachers, firemen, police, etc… need a union if the state, totally against extracting profits from the working man?
You write:
<
p>
<
p>A. The Governor is not allowed to appoint a Commissioner of Education. That power lies with the Board of Education.
<
p>B. The Commissioner retired in August. Then they did a national search. A new Commissioner will be hired this month. Two of the three finalists are from out of state. Seems reasonable.
<
p>As for the appointment we also knew that Driscoll was leaving for a period of time before August.
<
p>In the end it is true Patrick will place the YES on the confirmation.
<
p>As for the DOE please examine the amount of staff and employees and the actual productivity it has on education.
<
p>If we take the millions spent on this department and actually gave the money to the cities to use for education our children would be much better off. Far as I know reading writing and arithmetic hasn’t changed in fifty years.
No, as far as you know, “reading writing and arithmetic” haven’t changed, but students and society’s needs have. What a maroon.
<
p>
if you haven’t noticed the dramatic changes in the world in the last 50 years. Reading, writing and arithmetic have indeed changed in the last 50 years. 50 years ago there was no internet, no text messages, no personal computers and no electronic calculators. 50 years ago no one was expected to have computer skills and everyone was expected to be able to write legible script. Where have you been, anyway?
An office in Boston with a Commissioner and lots of staff is required to teach kids to read this new language that replaced SAE, and to use calculators.
Deval Patrick also inherited a whole bag of problems that was left over from the Romney Administration. Frankly, Mitt Romney and Kerrry-Healey put some of the programs and vetoes in order before leaving office, precisely because they lost, leaving Deval Patrick to deal with them or not to deal with them. This, in a way, is kind of like what G. H. W. Bush Sr. did when Bill Clinton got elected president…He compromised Clinton’s ability to pass progressive legislatures, and put the New World (dis)Order into place for Clinton. All the revengeful things that the Republicans, including Mitt Romney are doing and have done are out of revenge for the supposed “downfall” of Richard Nixon.
That has to be the most hilarious comment I’ve read here in awhile. I truly mean that.
<
p>35 years spoiling for revenge over Nixon. Wow.
;^D
You’d be surprised at how long people can and do hold grudges and want to get even.
to effect meaningful change after 16 years of Republicans in the corner office and a deeply entrenched legislative culture. I’m not sure how you could expect otherwise. Of course I expected him to have a learning curve, and for it to take time for him to find his footing to start implementing some of the things he wants to do.
<
p>Meanwhile, I’ve found it refreshing to have someone heading the Commonwealth’s executive branch who actually cares about Massachusetts, its government and its people, and who, from what I hear, is appointing professionals to run and oversee the nuts & bolts of government.
<
p>And, by the way, I’m thrilled he used his rhetorical talents and powers of persuasion in the fight to keep an anti-marriage-equality amendment off the ballot here. All the expense, divisiveness and ugliness that we avoided! Allowing that time time and energy not to be wasted on trying to take away the rights of others was, to me, a huge achievement. It wasn’t only his achievement, of course, but he was part of that fight.
Your dissatisfaction comes through loud and clear — you blame Patrick for everything from organizational waste to state troopers who solicited sex from children — but do you have any constructive suggestions? If yes, please share them.
<
p>Closer to home, you write:
<
p>
<
p>First, I think you offer an oxymoron: I don’t know anyone here who would claim they are, “educated about politics.” Certainly not me. So much for that. Second, however, and more practically, you are welcome to post on anything you please. Just click, “Create a new post,” and add some pressure.
<
p>It’s easy to tear down, hard to build up, as the Republican administrations we have suffered through at both the state and national level have, I think, richly demonstrated.
somebody else brought this up. I have been here too long so people know I hate everybody.
Deval,Obama, same meme, same theme. It became a “marketing” model.
When you run on a campaign promise or so to speak give your word trust me and I will….. than you don’t that’s the point.
Massachusetts has been entrenched in political patronage for a long time that is true; Patrick did inherit Mitt’s issues but Patrick has yet to bring forth issue which he campaigned on.
I can assure you my property taxes went up again this year. Our schools are mismanaged with sales of material to our children based on marketing pressure and not educational benefits.
Our state police need to be reigned in from their abuse of power and excesses payroll perks.
Our children are still being stolen for profit.
I believed Patrick was going to unite our state and bring forth the promise of a better Massachusetts for all, sorry but I have not seen that.
No he is not personally responsible for child abuse or poor schools, or failed governmental agencies but what he is responsible for is not bringing forth REAL CHANGE for the people in Massachusetts.
Casinos may be a way to help our state but that in the very least is futuristic. I really doubt even if passed today the first casinos could be built and opened in this term in office.
We will lose a seat in congress due to population loss; people are leaving our state faster than any other state in the country.
Polish and poise don’t get the job done it takes hard work dedications and commitment to the cause. It is not about race or gender, financial status or age it is about getting it done.
As for positive ideas I have already put forth some abolish the huge payroll of the department of education and give the money to the cities and towns to use for the education of their children.
Remove the millions in perks to the “Staties”. They don’t need to each have their own cruiser; or get paid four hours for giving blood and one hour a day to exercise. Never mind the details in which we all pay for in the long run. (yes I know that has been proposed)
And as for the comment that people who posts on this site are politically savvy……that one is true and a good thing I believe.
I just think if we stop concentrating on campaigning on every election and worked on the issues that are true to all our citizens we would be all be better off.
No, Patrick is not responsible for the past but he certainly will be responsible for our future
I agree that there has not been much change in Massachusetts in the past year. And I am not a big fan of the casino plan.
<
p>But it is not fair to lump all of that on Patrick. The legislature, with its veto-proof override, is where a huge amount of political power lies in our state. They deserve a lot of the blame for the lack of progress on the issues you cite. You do also have to ask yourself if we would have been better off with Tom Reilly, Chris Gabrieli, or, drumroll, Kerry Healey. I think definitely not.
I was not a Patrick supporter in the primary – I was concerned that the “outsider” candidate would have trouble governing when elected.
<
p>A year later, I am a supporter because I have seen the Governor demonstrate real desire to get things done. After years of Governors who view inaction and dis-interest as the prime directive for governing – Deval Patrick’s hands on approach gives me hope. (and of course he should spend time in NH or Iowa or anywhere else to support a presidential candidate of his choice – or don’t you think Massachusetts will benefit under an Obama Administration?)
<
p>I support his casino plan because it does create jobs and it will generate revenue. I don’t see opponents of the casino proposal offering real alternatives. And if/when passed the first casino will open its doors with 2 years.
<
p>The Governor has moved to take over the boards and controling bodies of authorities; placed compenent people into cabinet positions and begun to shape the state government to respond to his visions. All that takes time.
<
p>Thankfully, the Governor respects state workers and respects collective bargaining. He recognizes they are the backbone of all service delivery – not the enemy. He apprecaites that state workers are homeowners, taxpayers, parents and community leaders.
<
p>I respectfully recommend that you give Governor Patrick a full term before you judge his success or failure as a Governor.
<
p>
Where has the dialog gone?
<
p>I think the idea of “give Deval Patrick a full term” is fair, but at the same time, the promised dialog seems to have all stopped – and the work of the transition teams on civic engagement…went where?
He was the co-chair of the civic engagement task force after all, wasn’t he?
<
p>Or, maybe BMG is the civic engagement 😉 You see, AmberPaw, you’re part of the solution and you didn’t even know it!
<
p>Striker57: I agree with everything you’ve said, with the exception of the above-mentioned quote from your post about Gov. Patrick’s casino plan. I, for one, do
not support the casino plan. Boston and the Bay State at large don’t stand to benefit at all by becoming another Atlantic City, NJ, a Las Vegas East,
or, for that matter, another Mohegan Sun. I honestly don’t see how casinos will bring in any real revenue, especially because when people to go gamble at casinos, they end up losing money more often than winning it. It’s irreseponsible, imo, to entice people who really don’t have very deep pockets to go and spend what little they have on such cheap thrills or whatever.
<
p>Imo, the real way to create jobs and bring real revenue to Boston and the Bay State at large is for cities and towns throughout the Commonwealth to bring small businesses back to the neighborhoods. That, in turn, would also bring residences, and affordable housing in the cities should be constructed, too. Rebuilding/repairing our roads, bridges, and public transportation system, and our aging infrastructure generally will also generate jobs and revenues in the Bay State, also. We also shouldn’t have any more fiascos like the Big Dig, either. Enough is enough.
The first time I heard candidate Patrick speak he said that the problems facing MA would not be solved by the end of his first term and some would not be solved by the end of his second term. He said he was willing to do what is necessary to turn our state around and put it on solid footing for the long term.
<
p>I was sold. At last I found a candidate who did not insult my intelligence by telling me he would fix all our problems in the first 100 days, etc. etc.
<
p>Our problems are major and structural. We have a governor who is actually working on them. I am very pleased with that.
Five day balls, Caddy, three staffers to thirteen, and increasing refusal to listen to constituents and outsourcing biotech jobs to China.
Plus the Satanic idea of turning Mass into east Las Vegas.
Why do you hold him responsible for problems such as those at the crime lab which clearly greatly predate his administration. Your inclusion of these issues greatly dilutes your argument.