Though in danger of seeming like a self-promoter, I thought people here might be interested in my account of the half hour I got to spend with Governor Patrick this morning while he was in Lowell to attend the Meehan inauguration as Chancellor of UML.
I found him to be as engaging as ever, and he was very optimistic about moving forward with some of the initiatives we here in the grassroots (and netroots) can eagerly support. There are lots of quotes from our talk (I won’t call it an interview, because I didn’t think of it that way) at the link above, but in general, we talked green energy, economy, jobs, and touched on health care and the proposed Billerica power plant (hint: I live within 2 miles of it and I totally oppose it).
For my part, I told him that many of us are interested in jumping back on the bandwagon and getting some of the important work done. I think that we have enough evidence that the Governor and his staff are emerging from a tough year and want to reconnect to the grassroots. I feel optimistic again after a long hiatus. I hope others do too.
And you don’t have to wait for the Governor to reconnect. You could sign up to attend our BlogLeft blogger event in Lowell on April 19th! It’s a mere $10 per person (we hope to collect the money ahead of time so we can buy the food). You can send me an email (lynne {at} leftinlowell.com) to find out where to send a check or pay via Paypal here. It’s shaping up to be a great event! If you need a ride, let us know, we are trying to make sure everyone who wants to can make it.
I am going. Feel free to e-mail me at Amberpaw2@yahoo.com to arrange to get a ride. Hey Lynn – my check is in the mail! HONEST.
Another compelling story of why we should love Deval.
<
p>Some people will never accept that they have been betrayed!
<
p>Is this BMG or the Deval Patrick fan club?
<
p>Thanks Sal for saving us.
When working for a candidate, each of us has hopes and expectations. Adults do not expect every hope and expectation to instantly translate into reality.
<
p>As with most newly elected officials, there turn out to be some disappointments be they lare or smal, and some hopes realized.
<
p>So it is with Governor Patrick.
<
p>Change is almost never quick – nor is change a total metamorphosis.
<
p>Real improvements occurs one step at a time. And I am seeing some real improvements, as well as some blind alleys and wishful thinking.
<
p>As a 6o year old, though, I have the experience to realize that “all or nothing thinking” is a waste of time.
<
p>The word “betrayed” implies treachery, or deliberately misleadiong you. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B…
<
p>With Governor Patrick, the reality is that he has extremely high goals, and an ambitious agenda which cannot possibly be achieved quickly, easily, or completely. That is not “betrayal” at all.
<
p>I do not regret my vote or my support for Deval Patrick; as compared to the other democrats in the primary or Kerry Healey, he remains my pick. Kerry Healey, after all, believes [apparently] in “guilty until proven innocent” and was quite willing to trash the entire defense bar for daring to defend!
<
p>Disclosure – I AM a member of the defense bar, and do accept court appointed work for indigent parents and children as a part of how I earn my livelihood.
Reminder to self and others: draft posts, even significant reply posts, offline and paste them in.
<
p>It should be…”be they large or small”
<
p>It should be “…some real improvement…”
<
p>”…misleading…”
<
p>I think that is all the typos – sorry folks.
Your passion gives me cause to pause and ponder. I would so much like to believe in Deval. But a mansion, Ameriquest, drapes, the Cadillac, casinos, etc. says something.
<
p>
If not manufactured, certainly pulled way out of all proportion. I never fell for any of that crap. Of course, the blame ultimately goes to Patrick for giving the entertainmedia leaches fodder, but it was still trivial and unimportant.
<
p>The casinos were the only thing that made me angry. But I said all along that as soon as he came out with initiatives I could support, I would.
<
p>Granted, the casinos was a big one, but I’m not so naive as to think that there wasn’t going to be big bumps on the road.
<
p>The investment in infrastructure and the green/biotech stuff is not going to net us instant state revenues, but will stabilize our future. Over the next 5-10 years, if we do this right, we will be back on top in terms of jobs and economy, where we should be.
<
p>The neglect of such things by past leaders – and make no mistake, this is about leadership – got us here over the years. It takes years to change it. It’s like a tanker ship – you don’t turn one of those things on a dime. However, once you get sailing in the right direction again, it’s a solid movement.
<
p>The same thing happened in Lowell. For years, we had a city manager who treaded water, and we lost ground economically. Now, we have an active CM who understands municipal management. You have no idea how much things have been able to turn around already, and how much better our future is.
“how much better our future looks” – I don’t pretend to know the future. đŸ™‚
This gushing puff piece is a display of wide eyed fawning reverence. Deval Patrick has reached out and touched the third rail time, after time, after time. Gimme a break will ya. The governor is great at the soft spoken reassurance as if we are all patients on his psychiatric couch and he has the script pad out writing for xanax and prozac.
<
p>The governor has absolutely no idea where he is or where he is going and unfortunately folks, no one in the crew has a clue as well. I wonder just how far , Murray and DiMasi will allow us to venture into the minefield before they relieve the skipper and lock him up in captain’s quarters for his own safety as well as ours?
I’ve never really been clear on what it says, exactly. That he has bad policy? Well, only on the casinos, maybe. That he has a hard time with PR on the small stuff? I suppose. But what exactly does the Caddy, drapes, or the book deal thing really say about his policies? Not really all that much.
<
p>We can focus our energy and our time on the latest PR gaffe. We can look at the stuff that sounds bigger than it is, but ultimately means very little. We can talk about our governor’s wealth or that he’s tried to make the executive office nicer.
<
p>Or, we can talk about how to deal with the economic downturn. We can talk about how to re-engage our citizens to participate in politics. We can figure out how to best foster new industries like bio-tech and clean energy. We can work to update old laws and build a culture of equality for all.
<
p>The question, really, is whether we’re going to sweat the small stuff in our politics or try find the revenue we need to bring positive change in the lives of Massachusetts residents.
I can understand that…just that “betrayed” indicates an intent to mislead, or lying, or a fiduciary relationship that led to malfeasance, stuff much worse than not living up to expectations…so disappointment is understandable. “Betrayal” doesn’t seem accurate or warranted at least to me.
He’s going to write in his time off? What time off. He is the captain of a ship in distress and he thinks he rates shore leave? He is on duty 24/7 and if he isn’t it’s nonfeasance, misfeasance and malfeasance all rolled into one. Under the UCMJ it’s called : Dereliction of duty.
<
p>Patrick’s fanny should be at his desk 18 hours a day along with his minions. When you run for the highest office, it calls for personal sacrifice, devotion to duty, blood, sweat, and tears. I have seen zero so far from this guy. ZERO. Upon being sworn in, he goes on some form of self imposed house arrest.
<
p>This is insane. Did we elect a governor or a new principal of Ding Dong School?
<
p>Lastly: The police detail scam was the final straw. DP gets a few calls and he collapses like Kleenex in a hurricane.
AmberPaw, please share with us, how did you come by this information with such certitude? If it is anecdotal then your wording might be a bit off. My data on this is anecdotal but it leads to a very different conclusion.
<
p>Overwhelmingly, the people I talk with who come from all walks of life are hugely disappointed in Patrick and feeling like they — and the entire state community — have been intentionally mislead by then candidate/now Governor Deval Patrick.
<
p>So even if it’s not explicitly “betrayal” they’re expressing I’m not sure there’s much difference.
I think we make a mistake to take the Governor’s major disappointments of the past few months personally. The casino thing really blew my mind and made me very angry with the Governor, but the fact of the matter is that there’s a tremendous agenda for the month of April that includes wide-sweeping legislation that’ll bring not only jobs to Massachusetts, but long term economic and health viability. Investments are set to be made in two of the most critical fields of the new economy: life sciences and renewable energy. So, I can’t really afford to feel ‘betrayed’ or hurt over any of his windmill tilting and misguided plans, because there are genuinely good plans on the table and we need to make sure that they not only pass, but that they pass as they should (and not warped upon alteration).
<
p>Furthermore, there’s an important lesson for us all; We now know that the Governor certainly isn’t perfect and certainly won’t do as we want him to without us nudging him in the right direction.. We should have known that before – but many of us thought he could be trusted in ways that he shouldn’t have been (which happens when candidates are so vague that people can paint whatever they believe in their candidate’s speeches). In the campaign, there was a certain level of the Governor being turned into something he clearly wasn’t – and perhaps that’s an inherent danger I never considered before as a proponent of grassroots movements. The grassroots should never end after a politician is elected – that’s when the true effort should begin. If we don’t hold a candidate’s feet to the fire, that’s when they stop needing and listening to us.
Equally important is that “the grassroots” should not exist only to be involved in organized politics.
<
p>I appreciate your reply, and ironically, I was laboring over a reply to another of your comments at the same time.
<
p>I will tell you that during Governor Patrick’s campaign I had the opportunity to speak with him twice about health care reform. Both times he assured me that he would act on his strong beliefs that health care should be treated as a public good rather than as a corporate commodity. He stated that health care for all should be made a part of our social contract, and that yes, the citizens health care constitutional amendment (http://healthcareformass.org) was an important and viable piece of accomplishing that reform goal.
<
p>The truth can be hard to say but still it must be spoken. Governor Deval Patrick’s words and actions–or lack thereof–on health reform since he was elected to the highest public office in this state have led me and many others to sadly conclude that he is not to be trusted; that he is not willing to stand up for ordinary people’s needs if it means putting people before corporate profit and corporate control in our health care system. Perhaps his future words and actions will begin to regain some of that lost trust.
<
p>The public backlash against the mandate fines, a misguided and harmful provision of the insurance law, is here and it’s growing.
<
p>After all, Deval Patrick was elected by the people to be our Governor. This position comes with Executive Powers and the responsibility to use them when needed; Many of his constituents feel strongly that Governor Patrick has a civic and a moral responsibility to use his powers to pass emergency regulations to halt the “enforcement of the mandate” and stop the financial penalties against state residents simply for being uninsured.
I doubt that the Governor has the legal authority to “pass emergency regulations to halt the ‘enforcement of the mandate’ and stop the financial penalties against state residents simply for being uninsured.” I’m no Chapter 58 expert, but aren’t those enforcement mechanisms in the statute, rather than the regulations? I’m happy to be corrected, but it’s standard separation-of-powers learning that the executive branch cannot override or refuse to enforce legislation simply because it doesn’t like it. (W’s signing statements notwithstanding!)
David, you’re the lawyer and your input on this would be appreciated by many. Here’s what the DOR put up on their website.
<
p>
Of note is that neither DOR nor the Connector did any other public announcements about the Mandate Penalty Regs being “proposed” and having a public hearing on them. Only about 12 people were at the Proposed Regs Hearing. I and 2 others testified against enacting the mandate penalty regs.
<
p>Of note is that at the hearing Health Care For All’s reps asked for some minor tweaks but did not utter a peep against enacting the mandate penalty regs and fining people for not buying insurance. So much for McDonough’s statement to me on his blog that he and HCFA don’t want the mandate and the penalty fines.
<
p>Thanks in advance for your opinion on Governor Patrick exercising Executive Office Emergency Powers to stop the mandate fines.
Changes to mandate penalty details in the statute have already been made without a lege vote. In late 2007 the penalty fine structure was changed. There is now a specific dollar amount cap on the maximum penalty fine. It is now $912.00 annually for an individual who does not comply with the mandate. Whereas in the statute it reads
<
p>Doesn’t the Governor know we’re in a recession and what that means to the hundreds of thousands of his constituents who are of moderate income?
<
p>Is Governor Deval Patrick that out of touch with the middle class?
<
p>Civil disobedience in many forms is likely to occur if the health insurance mandate fines are not halted.
We have a Governor until 2010 who’s been pretty good on the issues. Yes, he’s annoyed me at times with one issue and I fought against it. Does that mean I roll up my sleeves, dig in, and work against him for his entire term? What would that even accomplish?
<
p>Ultimately, we’ll accomplish far more if we work with the Governor than against him. Occasionally, we’re going to line up on opposite sides. When that happens, we’ll act as adults do: choose to respectfully disagree and advocate for the issues we happen to believe in.
<
p>The Governor is neither hero nor villain: he’s a human politician who can make good decisions and bad. It’s our job, as an electorate and constituency, to make sure he’s working on more good ideas. It’s our responsibility – as citizens – to make sure the good ideas pass; that will go a lot quicker if we choose to work with the Governor than act like toddlers who were just told they couldn’t have candy.
<
p>It’s hard to not take anything political personally, but one thing I’ve learned over the past few months is that you have to avoid making it personal at all costs – because that’s just the kind of cynical attitude that sets up government for failure. The best way to make sure nothing significant is accomplished over the next 2 years and change is by giving up on an entire branch of government before that entire branch of government gives up on you.
RE Ryan’s remark:
<
p>”It’s hard to not take anything political personally, but one thing I’ve learned over the past few months is that you have to avoid making it personal at all costs – because that’s just the kind of cynical attitude that sets up government for failure.”
<
p>Maybe there’s a misunderstanding about what you’re saying, but if not, I could not disagree more strongly on this and have to wonder if someone’s taken over Ryan’s BMG account? (btw my 3yo is named Ryan :).
<
p>Are you saying that the citizen activists who very much “made it personal” over the past decades and centuries and who took action alongside Martin Luther King, Ghandi, Margaret Sanger, and other social justice/social change leaders should NOT have “taken it personally” or “made it personal”?
<
p>Where is the personal outrage over the fact that tens of millions of our fellow citizens are living in extreme poverty in the US while unprecendented corporate and personal fortune is being made, much of it on the backs of the poor? Where is the outrage over our state’s and our country’s over-the-top rip-off and inhumane health insurance system??? It’s not good enough to say “well, MA is better than other states”. The MA Chapter 58 law only attempted major tinkering with a horribly flawed and broken health care system. Yes, it did do some helpful things for some people but did them in a way that is wasteful, expensive, unsustainable and often ineffective.
<
p>The Corporate Health Care Emperor still has no clothes but the state’s “opinion-leaders” appear loathe to address this fact. What’s that quote about evil being not only the direct action that harms, but also the passive act of standing by while people are being harmed? I think it was Einstein.
<
p>The MSM and BMG intentionally and repeatedly downplay the very real trauma, suffering, financial ruin and early death that occur due to lack of health insurance and the obscene fact that this exists directly alongside enormous corporate profiteering in health care. That should be taken very personally by ALL of us. After all, it’s our state and our country, so it’s being done in our name. Or have I got that wrong?
<
p>Our own special version of this state-sanctioned immorality is the new individual mandate law to buy private health insurance. Its “enforcement mechanism” of tax fines is meant to force state residents to purchase this expensive product or be fined up to $1,000 annually.
<
p>It’s as if state politicians are saying “too bad for you but we really don’t care (and we need your penalty money to close the budget deficit gap)” to the 200,000 to 300,000 uninsured state residents who are trying to keep up with paying for the mortgage/ rent, heat, medicine, and food, so cannot afford to buy expensive insurance. Can you imagine the stress and anger that is causing?
<
p>So Ryan, I’m not sure who you’re calling a toddler fussing b/c s/he didn’t get candy, but the way that remark came across to me is like you are trivializing, scolding, and even dismissing the very real anger that exists in this state over very real and profound problems in our midst. As I’m sure you know, many of these problems share root causes that involve unbridled corporate power and greed that have not been forcefully addressed in this country since Martin Luther King began his March to Abolish Poverty to expose and to remedy the causes of our widespread social injustice.
<
p>Near the end of his life he focused increasingly on stopping the war, ending poverty, and establishing social equality in its many forms.
<
p>”Of all forms of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking and inhumane” — Martin Luther King, Jr.
Yes, you have to take it personal – you fight tooth and nail for the issues you care about and making sure your elected officials follow them to the letter. That’s part of being an active, engaged citizen. However, I think it’s important that we – as a people – be able to carry over those personal feelings from one issue to the next. I may not be explaining that very well, so allow me to use an example: I’ve been royally pissed with the Governor for several months now over his misguided and downright stupid support of casinos in Massachusetts. I’ve been mad at all the time we’ve wasted, and I’ve been mad that he’d be so willing to go after this issue when he had no real, wide-sweeping grassroots support for it from his base – instead, it was the type of issue that completely divided his coalition and ended up being nothing more than tilting at windmills, because it was doomed for failure from the start.
<
p>As angry as that battle made me, and as personal as I took it (I worked damn hard for Deval to be elected), I’m not going to let my personal feelings cloud my judgement on his entire candidacy. I’m not suddenly going to stop working with him on issues where we have common ground. Yes, the dynamics of the relationship may have changed a little, but I recognize there are so many issues that there is common ground and if I cynically tuned off, they’d be less likely to pass.
<
p>
<
p>I probably shouldn’t have went after an analogy like that without better explaining it. The spoiled toddler would have been the person who completely gave up on working on anything with a person, because there was one issue they didn’t agree with. I’d be that person if I suddenly said, “No, Deval, I’m not going to work with you to create green jobs,” because he supported casinos and I was vehemently opposed to it.
<
p>But, on the issues… of course you have to take them personally – they actually affect our personal lives. The fact that if I were married and couldn’t get a passport if I changed my name through a marriage license, all because the federal government doesn’t recognize Massachusetts marriage equality, would negatively effect my life – you bet I take that personally. Yet, we have a Governor who we can work with on a whole host of issues, so all I’m trying to say is that we can’t get so angry and so outraged with a politician that we refuse to work on them with anything, because that’s just not helping our cause… at least when the Governor can be convinced through us holding his or her feet to the fire (and that’s a GOOD way to take something personal and make sure that it makes things more likely to pass – we need to focus our anger and make sure we just don’t turn off, that’s what I’m really trying to get at here – I just don’t think I’m explaining it well).
I fear that paragraph is barely comprehensible… forgive me. I’m exhausted, barely got any sleep last night, and just got back from the delegate caucus which took a long time and wiped me out.
Thanks for the effort – it made sense but still over-simplifies the dynamics, to me, at least.
We have to talk. Um, the glowing review thing was a little much. LOL. It’s not good for me. đŸ˜›
<
p>Anyway, it helps to have unlimited (pixel) space to write, I suppose…I mean, instead of one or two little quotes in an article, I could actually listen to my recording of the discussion and quote long paragraphs. Honestly, all you have to do to get this material is sit there and mostly listen. The interviewee, especially someone like Patrick, will do the rest.
<
p>There is something about writing the quotes down that is different from an audio podcast. As much as I like audio/video on the web, it seems to me like the written word is more accessible. I mean, I’ll admit to having a short attention span when it comes to internet video and audio myself…writing out the quotes more time consuming than just up and posting the mp3 file, but I think it’s worth it.
<
p>Besides, I couldn’t put up the full audio, I talked so damn fast in it, I could barely understand what I was saying!!! Ug. I gotta work on that. A year and a half on local college radio hasn’t really helped that much. đŸ˜›
It’s a gas-fired peak power plant being proposed in Billerica. Heh. It’s been written about so much on my blog I didn’t bother to mention the specifics.
<
p>However, a peak power plant, due to the demand going up and down on the equipment, is the least efficient you can build. So “clean” (so to speak, I disagree) natural gas becomes a lot more polluting. (Not to mention the diesel backup stored onsite and the aqueous ammonia…)
What is Gov Patrick’s position on the power plant?
<
p>Several other communities are facing similar power plants sited close to schools and residences.
<
p>Is he solidly against it and ready to put the power of the office and regulatory agencies into action to stop it?
But seems deeply skeptical.
<
p>Recently he met with Brockton grassroots opponents to the plant being proposed there. Read the article – it’s obvious he’s not fooled by company’s claims that they would produce “clean” power.
<
p>It’s obvious he wants to make these sorts of plants unnecessary with good energy policy (especially peaking power plants). But he also has limited power (read: none) over the Siting Board. Unfortunately. He did express that he’s interested in that fight (to gain more executive control over the Siting Board). He says that with the way things are now, if a municipality wants to put up some wind turbines, and the town votes against it, there’s no recourse. Like cell towers, the greater good might just be to put up renewable energy generators on public property, and override the NIMBY tendencies, like the federal government did with cell towers.
I agree with the comment “long term view”.
<
p>Deval has proven to be less than adept at State House baseball and made a big mistake by supporting casinos.
<
p>But if you look at the overall change in Massachusetts state government over the past year — its been breathtaking.
<
p>Im a public health professional and the change in approach at the state health department has been dramatic. DPH has reclaimed its reputation as a progressive agency working to create heatlhier communities across the state.
<
p>We have to be certain we don’t lose that change. I read an op ed piece yesterday in The Globe that suggested Charile Baker is licking his lips….we can’t let them get back in power…it makes a huge difference to have a Democratic Governor.
<
p>MC
It Matters Who You Elect.
Most of Deval’s apologists seem to fall into the “but he’s way better than previous governors” trope. This is true, but that’s setting the bar pretty low. Furthermore, Reilly, Gabrieli and probably Mihos would have been better than the last few governors. I have yet to see Deval do anything the others couldn’t or wouldn’t have.
Kinda hard to prove one way or another, isn’t it?
That’s why I’m surprised so many Deval apologists present the inverse of this claim so seriously.
Maybe you can point me to a case in which a Deval groupie here said Boo-yah to Chris Gabrieli or Tom Reilly, except as below. I think given Reilly’s late and lukewarm support of marriage equality, he might not have fought quite as hard as Patrick, but then again, who knows?
<
p>In any event, you gotta get elected first. Boo-yah.
I’d love to hear anyone say that Deval brought them over to marriage equality. The fact is opposing equality has been an electoral loser in Massachusetts, and with a powerful and pro-equality Speaker, it had become a loser in the House chamber as well. Murray and DiMasi get the lion’s share of credit in my book for that vote, if for no other reason than they know how to get votes for the things they want, unlike Deval.
<
p>As for using the “hey, at least he’s not Romney” apologia, that line is over a year old…no good then, no good now.
<
p>Finally, yes boo-yah Deval did win the primary and general. From today, it seems that he peaked at primary night.
That’s a matter of record.
…to pass off the Governor’s mistakes as non-issues. The big book deal is offensive on many levels not the least of which is the Governor cashing in on the hard work of thousands of activists who helped him get elected, then he uses that idealism to justify the seven figure book deal. (Assuming today’s Globe report was based on the actual book proposal and not some Repulicrat dream.)
<
p>I don’t think the average working family in the state will think this is so much of a non-issue as Lynne and Charley. I think this is why people check out. I think this is how we get 16 years more of Republican Governors.
Next month, a major bill on renewable energy will pass that’s absolutely, positively fantastic. The Life Sciences Initiative will pass, which is another great bill. We also had, among the successes of the past 12 months, protecting marriage equality and creating a Secretary of Education, which various experts have told me is a fantastic thing (and I’ll take their words for it). We also have major bond bills coming to improve our state’s public college infrastructure… at every state school, as well as major improvements to our roads and bridges.
<
p>In the grand scheme of things, that’s a hefty agenda for 12 months time. It’s also an agenda that would never have moved through with a Republican Governor. As Lynne has said, “it matters who we elect.”