Another HUGE part of what does or does not happen on the Hill, which my previous point touches on, is that it makes more sense to fall into lockstep with leadership in the Legislature than to actually stick up for things, like the Municipal Partnership Act for example, on a consistent basis. A lot of people either do not know, or conveniently forget, that the Speaker and Senate President run that building in a very literal sense. Staffing levels, office assignments, budgets, committee assignments, and a host of other everyday work items all go through those offices. If you do not have opposition for your seat that provides a GOOD alternative to voters in your district then why tilt at windmills on a regular basis in support of initiatives that mean more to a niche constituency, a majority outside of your district, or a handful of out-of-favor elected officials, when your seat is safe and you can get a few more perks for you, your staff, and maybe your district by playing ball?
This is not to excuse the behavior of some members of the Legislature, simply to provide one possible rationale for why we see so little movement on issues that we see as no-brainers for good governance. With there being so little competition for these seats, such lopsided dominance by one party, and a culture that has become solidified and downright arrogant in the supposed preeminence of the prerogatives of the Legislative Branch, to the detriment of the other branches and average citizens, it is no wonder things are in their current state of torpor.
In my ideal world the Democrats, as a group comprised of members of the various wings and ideologies existent within the party, would still be in control, but with healthy, robust, and effective pressure from challengers with good legislative potential on the outside AND genuine, organic pressure for discussion and movement on issues from the inside. But, for this to happen, we need identify these potential future officeholders, support them in their efforts, and let them and the establishment know that good people with an interest in public service as elected officials should not feel so intimidated that they would rather wait and wait for someone to be so kind as to step away from a seat, for fear that challenging an incumbent would turn the tide of the entire party against them in perpetuity, rather than run and at the very least hold those in office accountable for their action or inaction in the most public way possible.
This is not a “change for the sake of change” commercial. Good legislators should be able to hold onto their seats, but that is just it. Without more competition the one true metric that we have as voters, the power of the ballot box, really loses most of its effectiveness. Unless we as the voting public, and especially those of us who assume the mantle of activism, are willing to encourage more competition and accountability for the privilege (not right) to represent us in the Great and General Court, then the Offices of the Speaker and the Senate President, as institutions, will be able to continue to stifle discussion and progress with impunity for a long time to come. Sorry for the diatribe, just a few thoughts late at night (or early depending on how you look at it.)
Lori, the Democratic candidate in the 8th Essex, has always stood up for what she believes in. SHe has made her positions on important issues (such as the MPA) quite clear, agreeing with the House leadership on some issues, with the Governor on some issues, and maybe with neither on some issues.
<
p>She hopefully will be a refreshing new voice in the legislature.
Are both standing up for important fiscal issues, have excellent backgrounds, and are running to replace conservative dems:
http://www.mccabeforrep.org/
http://www.electjasonlewis.com/
He has a great background. Working class family. West Point grad. Served in Bosnia. He works with a union now. He speaks well. His values are very progressive.
<
p>He needs money and volunteers.
Doesn’t matter how right and good any one rep or senator is. If they go in alone they have one choice to make: toe the line or be ineffective.
<
p>If they go in together it gets interesting. If they go in together and actively recruit progressives to challenge incumbent conservatives, real interesting.
<
p>Alone, not so much.
But one reason some of these ideas may not be going anywhere in the Lege is because they’re bad ideas (the regressive casino tax, spending millions of dollars trying to guess winning companies in an industry, etc…). We now return you to your regular programming…
and keep repeating it. Maybe someone will finally listen. Not every idea coming from a “progressive” is necessarily a good idea. Marshmallow Fluff, any one?