Last week I shared an overview of Governor Patrick’s agenda for the next few months. I want to post a progress report for review (and comment) by the BMG community.
The past week was a productive one for the Governor. He asked his Cabinet to institute over $150 million in spending controls and prepare for deeper cuts if revenues come in lower than expected, he delivered a well-received economic address that was supported by the Speaker and Senate President, he introduced new initiatives to stimulate the state’s economy, repair our roads and bridges, create jobs, and help regional economies, the House passed legislation to close corporate loopholes, and both the House and Senate passed the Transportation Bond bill.
This week, the Governor will continue to visit different regions of the state to discuss local growth districts, make another announcement about a company deciding to stay and grow in MA (the third such announcement in the last two weeks), and continue to work on implementing reforms in our transportation infrastructure.
I appreciated the suggestions that my last post generated, and please know that they were shared with others in the administration. I look forward to additional comments as we move forward aggressively over the next few months to implement the Governor’s agenda around economic development, education, and civic engagement.
The upcoming agenda for this month is something that will certainly win the Governor lots of support. I love these updates and I hope to see you continue them in the future. One suggestion: be specific about the bills and such on the Governor’s agenda that the progressive community supports. I may know enough to talk to my state rep and senator about the Life Sciences bill, the bond bills, and combined reporting, but the rank-and-file citizen probably doesn’t.
Thank God we have folks out there watching out for me and know what’s best for for me. hose poor folks out there who are working their butts off at two jobs. I love college elitists.
<
p>With all do respect to the governor. Gov Patrick inherited a runaway legislature that does as it damn well pleases, and spends whatever it pleases regardless of the current incumbent or any other governor for that matter. Unfortunately DP came into office just as the house of cards began to collapse.
<
p>Mr. Rubin, with all do respect to you sir, please go back in time and take a good look at what Ed King did to rescue Massachusetts from the Dukakis debacl. King pulled the bacon out of the fire. Harsh deep cuts, but within two years Massachusetts was blooming like a spring garden.
Gov Patrick may not have the luxury of proceeding slowly. He may have to wield an axe and hope that enough legislators get the message and sustain spending vetoes.
for years, monies that were earmarked for roads and bridges, social services, and education were diverted into the general fund and became subject to profligate spending. The governor had better come to grips with the fact that he must act and act now.
I received a call from a polling firm on Saturday asking what I thought of the Legislature, Sal DiMasi, Therese Murray, and my local legislators. Then there were lots of question about taxes, spending, and how much I should like Governor Deval Patrick.
<
p>I told the pollster that I would answer the questions, but I thought this was a pro-Patrick “push poll” and that a politician conducting a poll like this should be paying for this out of campaign funds and not the state coffer.
<
p>I thought for a moment, what politician needs to take a poll to reveal the obvious? I shook my head and came up with one sad answer: Deval Patrick.
<
p>If he is asking taxpayers to ante up more while state funds are going to pay for his political polls, that is just plain wrong.
<
p>Answer to poll question: People aren’t willing to pay more in taxes when your wasting it on polls.
<
p>Deval, working families need their money because times are tough. They don’t want to or need to pay higher taxes because you want to be all things to all people.
<
p>If you need to get a feel for what real people think, try taking a walk outside and listening. Move outside your echo chamber of accolades. Life outside your bubble is real and sometimes challenging.
<
p>Note to file: Deval, get real!
As you probably know, the graduation rate for Massachusetts Community Colleges is stuck at about 17% [that may be a bit low, as it doesn’t count those who do graduate but get a two year degree in six or seven years – that is my understanding and I am SURe someone in this community will correct me if I am wrong].
<
p>THE NEW IDEA: Many residents in their 40s-60s have homes with empthy bedrooms because their own children have graduated, married, moved on.
<
p>Many young people in the 18-24 year range have aged out of foster care, and otherwise, are without housing and supports, causing college to be unaffordable because the need to eat and have shelter – and difficulty in doing so – either prevent or derail college.
<
p>If a Contract for College program was created where these young folk could live with these “empty nester” families to complete school, the graduation rate would go up.
<
p>We have sheltered seven young people on our own to help them in this way. It works. It could be done in a cost effective manner on a pretty large scale [we did it “pro bono”] – Doug let me know if you are interested in hearing more about this population of young adults and this idea.
Personally I think more young people should go into the service to qualify for the Mongomery Bill/GI bill. You go into Mass national Guard and I believe your tuition at a Mass Community College/ UMASS is taken care of.
<
p>I went back to school after I got out of the service and lived a pretty humble existence for three years. You do what you gotta do.
MCRD – not everyone has the physical stamina or the mental stability to do that. Myself, I had braces on both legs well into my school years having been born with double club feet. None of the folk we sheltered could have survived basic, I assure you. And they all pulled their own weight around here, worked, and simply needed a bit more parenting to stand on their own two feet.
<
p>Having done what I call “road time” I consider helping the occassional friend of my own young adult kids – both of whom have had major asthma and etc. to contend with – what all good citizens and mentally stable adults should do. I did not pay any of those young people’s bills or tuition – just room and board and a listening ear until they could make their way.
I had a close friend in H.S. who’s foster parents took in thirteen children. I have no idea how they did it financially, and the outpouring of love worked wonders. Everyone of those kids did well. My HS friend although not famous by current standards left an indelible mark on US society and part of our history. God Bless
…we see ourselves as a port in a storm. The ships sail off if we do it right.
<
p>Anyway, so no stipends, nada – but we do prayerfully determine if a birdling is “one of ours” and both of our kids also have to agree – it is unanimous every time. So I have only 25% of the credit.
No thanks. Not with dishonest leaders lying us into fraudulent unending wars. Dying or losing an arm for Bush’s lie is not worth UMass “tuition”. Your plan is just another way to coercel impoverished kids into becoming Iraqi IED fodder.
<
p>And tuition at UMass is only like $1,700 bucks a year, but the mandatory fees are around $7,000 bucks. They tell you that the GI Bill will take care of tuition, which at private institutions is pretty much the whole shebang, and any normal person equates “tuition” with the charge associated with attending college. But at UMass tuition is only 25%. So go into the Military, they say they’ll pay for college, but really only pay for 25%. What a deal!
<
p>But what you suggest sounds a lot like Barack Obama’s plan:
<
p>
<
p>
Be an office pogey, a cook, a weatherman, drive the laundry vehicle. Be the officer in charge of basketball equipment or a OB/GYN. You could even—-Gasp–go into the Peace Corps, go to Darfur, Zimbabwe, Somalia and show the folks how to stop ruining their land. See, in seconds–some great ideas for you.
<
p>Are you just going to sit there and take, take, take your entire life? What’s with this sense of entitlement?
<
p>From age 20 to age 60 I devoted my entire life to national, state and local community service. Didn’t make a lotta money, but I always enjoyed myself and I have nothing to apologize for when they start throwing dirt on my face.
<
p>It’s real easy to complain, lot more difficult to do something about it.
So many issues with this post.
<
p>1. It’s not a push poll. A poll that tests messages (either good or bad) is not a push poll. It’s message testing. If you’re actually interested in learning what a term means before you use it, there’s a wealth of information on the matter here and elsewhere on the internet.
<
p>2. I honestly don’t know if the poll was done for the Governor, and neither do you (although you can assume as much as you want). If the polling company is worth their salt, they wouldn’t have told you who the client was for fear of influencing the results.
<
p>3. And IF the client was Deval, then how on earth do you know how he was paying for it? More assumptions with absolutely nothing to back them up.
<
p>I don’t care if you like the guy or not, but stop wasting our time with accusations based on nothing more than your biases.
Your comment speaks volumes about you!
Might you think to answer eury13’s points 1, 2, and 3? Or do you simply prefer the food fight aspect of commenting?
Eury raises three perfectly legitimate questions. You refuse to answer any of them, claiming that eury had no “legitimate points,” and instead claiming “bias.”
<
p>Classic. You wouldn’t be a Republican, would you? đŸ˜‰
I am a fiscally responsible, progressive Democrat.
<
p>;-}
<
p>It’s not that I refuse to answer questions. I feel my comments speak for themselves. whether Deval wasted state funds or campaign money is sort of irrelevant. A politician who know what people think doesn’t need to squander money like thin
<
p>Of course, it would be worse if it were state monies. But he did use state taxpayer monies to his consultant to “study” casinos that he already decided were a great idea of his.
<
p>Deval would be much more likable if he wore true to the vision he espoused during his campaign for governor.
<
p>I am a little surprised at how passionate you are about this. I refrained from referring to Deal as Governor Deluxe. But I will save that reference for special occasions that apply. And I’m confident there will be plenty of occasions where the reference can be used in the future.
<
p>
speak for themselves.
How do you know that 1, it was the Governor who hired the poll, and 2, that he used state funds to pay for the poll? Which by the way would be illegal.
That would be illegal and I am certain it has not happened with the poll you cite.
trust me, the state isn’t paying for it. Furthermore, as others have indicated, that’s not what a push poll is… and it’s certainly not inherently ebil to do a regular ‘ol poll to test issues and favorability, etc.
I would like to put the poll question to rest – we were not doing a poll recently, and we have not done one since the end of last year.
<
p>Of course, when we do conduct polls, they are paid for by the campaign committee.
In one of my previous posts, I was going to say that the governor could just tell us if he had anything to do with the poll.
<
p>You had the foresight to anticipate the statement and the courage to respond. I compliment you on both counts.
<
p>Today, I have a little more confidence in the governor and his staff.
<
p>Thank you.
<
p>
<
p>Even though your 2 posts are a bit on the press release-ish side, hopefully you’ll become more comfortable over time.
<
p>Note that many BMG readers realize you face risks in posting: if you get into give-and-take in the comments section, and have real dialogue with BMGers, some of the press will feel bypassed, and you may pay a price in coverage. Still, we hope you jump in nonetheless! That’s where the BMG action is.
<
p>2. MA centrists liked the Gov’s positioning last week. On 1 hand, you propose some cuts. On the other hand, you propose some reasonable tax increases (loopholes, whatever) and borrowing.
<
p>We centrists also like hearing that some of the local folks in perma “give-us-more-more-more-state-aid” are frustrated that the Gov (appropriately) is telling them: No.
<
p>Good. Keep it up!
<
p>3. My $.02
<
p>Instead of the Gov projecting an image of “I’m sorry the casino $ didn’t come through”….
<
p>…It would be great to have him embrace a decisive message and make the media rounds saying: “That’s the past, I’m about moving forward. For the rest of my term, we’re simply not going to be able to do Bigger Gov’t. The only way forward is Better Gov’t — better execution, roll up our sleeves, cut the fat and replace with innovation, etc.”
If we stub our toe, the bond rating will drop and we will start paying all of our money for debt service. We have to stop monkeying around with the numbers and start paying off this debt.
Here’s the data.
<
p>We’re #2, and a hair “ahead” of NY.
<
p>
if income distributions are exact across states. And, of course, they’re not.
<
p>Consider Colorado and Connecticut:
CT: $8870 per person
CO: $8386 per person
<
p>Clearly, Colorado’s in better shape, right? Well, except that the per capita income in Connecticut is $28,786 and Colorado it’s $24,049. So, (state debt/capita / income/capita) tells a different story:
CT: .301 debt/income
CO: .349 debt/income
<
p>In other words, it would take Connecticut .301 years to pay back the debt, but Colorado would require an additional .048 years because even though it owes less, it also makes less. Taken to an extreme, Donald Trump is carrying more debt (mortgages, etc) than stomv is — but I assure you that Mr. Trump has far more financial security than stomv.
<
p>This only looks at mean wages, not variance or distribution — so even now we’ve only got part of the story.
<
p>In short, state rankings in the Tax Foundation’s table are instructive, but not the whole story, not even close. Why would we expect anything less from them anyway?
I hear you about the press-release-ish nature of the posts – I promise to work on them in the future.
<
p>As for your second point, I agree that better, smarter initiatives and innovative policies are the goal. For example, the transportation plan introduced by the Governor last week is based upon a smarter way to finance future construction projects that will save the state money while aggressively reducing the number of structurally-deficient bridges over the next 8 years.
The Bridge has been torn up for three years now. They stopped working on it approx a year ago allegedly because of a design flaw—which I find very difficult to believe. It is like every other bridge in this state-all essentially designed the same way.
<
p>This bridge as it currently sits is a clear and present danger. The Patriot Ledger stated that it will not be finished for two more years. Are you kidding me?
<
p>In the meantime, the next bridge going nortbound in Rockland has been destroyed, rebuilt and about to be finished in less time.
<
p>Huh!
I’m not suggesting you are wrong — I have no idea if the bridge which appears to be designed the same way as many other bridges really is, nor do I know if it is a clear and present danger. I hypothesize that you don’t either.
<
p>Again, I haven’t seen it, and I’m not a civil engineer. I just can’t stand it when people pretend they’re engineers and make bold claims without training or facts.
<
p>Ugh!
1 There are no guardrails on the sounthbound side.
<
p>#2 There is no means for a pedestrian to cross the bridge
without walking onto the travelled part of the way.
<
p>#3 Four lanes of traffic are funneled down into two lanes.
<
p>#4 I spent much of my working career working in
an occupation where I was charged with keeping
the idiots in the general public from killing
themselves.
<
p>#5 When an aircraft passenger observes a control
surface on the aircraft on which he/she is about to
fly on damaged and brings the observation to
the attention of the flight crew, by your rationale
the proper response of the
captain should be: ” Are you an aeronautical
engineer?” “No captain I am not an aeronautical
engineer, I am just an educated person that has
the common sense to realize the friggin obvious”.
<
p>
<
p>2. Problematic to be sure, but there’s no way for me to cross most streets without, well, walking onto the traveled part of the way. Clear and present danger seems strong.
<
p>Still, if you weren’t questioning the integrity of the bridge itself but were instead concerned about (1) and (2), fair enough. I misunderstood; I thought you were imagining another Minnesota collapse. Those two situations seem like the bridge isn’t “all it can be” — as to whether it’s worth pumping in money to fix those two particular problems, that’s a discussion between bean counters and civil engineers, and I’m neither.
<
p>3. So what? Totally irrelevant.
<
p>4. So what? Totally irrelevant.
<
p>5. If the aircraft passenger observes a control surface damaged and reports it to the flight crew as a “clear and present danger” than yes, the flight crew should say (1) we will/we have reported it, and (2) it may or may not be a clear and present danger.
<
p>Just because something looks dangerous to the untrained eye doesn’t make it dangerous; it simply makes it look dangerous. Maybe it is a danger, maybe it isn’t — but the airline passenger isn’t qualified to make that call w.r.t. the damaged airplane. He is qualified to say that it looks dangerous. There’s a big difference between a hypothesis and a conclusion my friend. In fact, it shows up in the education system, usually right around 8th grade science class.
Thank you, and the Governor, for stepping up and getting out. I appreciated the Governor taking the time to have coffee & conversation in Mansfield with us local grassroots Dems. I have never had that chance with any elected official. Ever. We appreciate the recent postings here.
<
p>People still believe in the message from the campaign. Many are disappointed by the book deal/drapes/Cadillac stuff, and I hope that is all behind us.
<
p>I am glad to see good things happening and a positive message and strategy going forward. It’s a different environment and economy now than 2006, you’ll need to govern differently. Democrats succeed when we show that government can be effective and efficient, and still attain loftier goals.
<
p>My disappointment, which I’ve expressed elsewhere on BMG, is that the grassroots organization has atrophied since the campaign. Give us something to do, something positive, something that connects and engages us with our government and our governors (both Legislative and Executive). Together we still can.
<
p>Keep posting here. Keep sending the Governor out to just talk and listen. Keep the grassroots going. Get smarter about some pretty basic PR things. Let’s get some things done. Energy. Health. Technology. Housing. There is plenty to do.
<
p>Thanks.
<
p>
What are the first two companies that announced they are expanding here?
they announced last Monday doubling the jobs and a 50% increase in the size of their Devans plant
http://boston.bizjournals.com/…
didn’t they go public recently?
I thought the tobacco tax was a bit of a regressive measure, and a bit cowardly politically, when calls by the Massachusetts Transportation Finanace Commission to raise the gasoline tax seem to have been ignored. Driving cars hurts the environment and contributes to global warming, and it costs money to fix roads that are damaged by motor vehicles. Users should have to pay their fair share to repair the roads. (Commerical vehicles could be given some variety of exemption so as not to inflate commodities prices inordinately). Also, howzabout raising the booze tax as well?
Just like the gas tax goes to roads, the cig tax increase went to health care costs.
as well as (even better) fully legalize pot and sell it. You could have two brands: Deval Kools and DiMasi Blunts, and all the profits would go toward, uh, some public purpose to be determined. (I was going to say education but then I felt my Puritan forefathers rolling over in their subterranean prisons) But you gotta admit, that would be truly progressive.
I am in for the legal blunts
Where did it go? Last I heard, it was earmarked for healthcare. I never saw it—and I work in healthcare.
I am not saying your are wrong, but unless you work in management or accounting how exactly would you expect to see the money? Do you expect to see someone go by carrying a big box of cash with the words “Tobacco Settlement” on it?
Removing these loopholes should be done in such a way that we minimize the tax increase on those corporations that provide a high degree of employment of Massachusetts citizens, and weight the tax on those who make a lot of sales, but don’t have a substantial payroll.
I want to hear the governor go after the mismanagement of our national economy, specifically the Federal Reserve which raised rates, raised unemployment, and caused the subprime crisis.
<
p>We’re getting killed out here with a collapsing dollar which has led to inflated prices for food and gas… the clueless Democratic candidates tell us to drive wind cars or something.
<
p>Are you just going to sit there and get buried by the national economy? You’re going to be out of a job Doug Rubin when the Republicans get in.
The fed made too easy. When the economy started heating up, they put the brakes on too hard and too fast. Thank you Mr. Bernhanke. The remainder of the problem lays with the greed factor on Wall St.
that
didn’t include rail, but then I looked up the Transportation Bond Bill and saw that $700 million is going to public transit, the bulk of it for the Green Line extension. But, I haven’t been able to find the full breakdown of the $700M, nor do I know what happens to the money if we do get federal funding for the Green Line and don’t need all that loot for that project.
<
p>When will we pay to connect the Silver Lines? When will we extend Blue Line’s Bowdoin end to connect to the Red Line at Charles/MGH? How about major projects, like a Green A line to split from Comm Ave and head through Harvard’s new acquisitions, connecting to the Harvard Square T stop on the Red Line? How about “adding two lanes” to the Green Line from Kenmore (or even Copley) to Gov’t Center, allowing for express runs to help ease massive congestion in the tunnels? How about setting up the Silver and Green Lines with proper green light controls so that a train with 200 people in it isn’t waiting for 4 cars carrying 6 people to make a left turn across the tracks? How about a North-South rail link? How about commuter rail extension to Springfield? How about improving the Amtrak rails in MA to speed up the Acela Express? And wouldn’t it be nice to take a reasonably fast train to the Cape on the weekends?
<
p>I’m not arguing which projects should have a high priority — I know the MBTA has great studies on lots of this. I do know that they won’t get built without money, and that improving public transit in the state helps poor people, middle class, and rich people; it helps city dwellers and those in the seemingly endless suburbs; it helps all those groups who don’t/can’t drive including young people, senior citizens, and the disabled. It results in more quality local jobs, it reduces the auto traffic and the expenditures on roads, it reduces air pollution and global warming. It encourages smart growth.
<
p>So, $700M isn’t a small chunk of change, but what is it buying? What’s next on the docket — do we have a Gov and a Lege with a vision for public transit in MA, or do we have a team which throws a few crumbs in that direction because it’s the Democratic thing to do, without much thought, care, concern, or willpower?
Civil engineering feasability studies, soil analysis, hydraulic analysis, population projections, and cost anaysis vis a vis current funding analyis/feasability/projections.
<
p>Ugh!
I did no such thing. I listed a bunch of projects which clearly would improve transit.
<
p>Would they improve them enough to justify the cost? I have no idea. I never claim they would, and furthermore, I even wrote
<
p>
<
p>What I do know is that improvements to every single one of those projects I listed would make public transit more accessible, resulting in fewer car trips and more transit trips. How many more? 1? 1,000,000? I don’t know. For most of these projects though, the MBTA does know with a reasonable degree of certainty; they’ve got the studies, and you are welcome to find them online.
<
p>I asserted that they would have benefits. That’s certainly correct. I did not assert the degree of benefit, nor any cost-benefit analysis. To do anything more would be amateurish.
<
p>P.S. While I wouldn’t call myself an expert, I do have quite a bit of training in systems engineering; heck I’m getting a Ph D in systems engineering. It’s not on subway install, but it is on a part of graph theory with direct ties to transit networks, not to mention courses on stochastic analysis, queueing theory, probability & stat, and optimization, all of which are quite relevant to the topic at hand.
In this fiscal and political climate it is vital to pursue both an aggressive progressive agenda and cost saving reforms.
<
p>Try to recreat the Fort Devens model elsehwere, and go green even faster and on a boader scale. Promote affordable housing to make it more possible for young adults to stay in the state.
<
p>At the same time voters need to see a clear signal that the government is also using their funds as wisely as possible. Curb the use of police details. Conduct a bottom up review of administrative departments to find examples of duplication. Try, whenever possible, to cut administrative expenses.
was a solid single (it is baseball season). keep it up with more, more, more.
Instead of permitting more fossil fuel electric generation plants in the Commonwealth, it is about time Cape Wind gets on a fast track, and other similar projects follow.
<
p>And where are the components to be manufactured and assembled for this green power? We need some progress in both energy production and economic development in 2009.
Doug,
<
p>Last week, the Governor indicated he would consider “0.5% for the Kids” during the conference call. Can you assist us in arranging a meeting with the appropriate staff? If the State is unable to provide more funding for local schools, we need to empower our local towns and communities to tap into the income tax system to directly meet their needs.
<
p>Check out the following posts and replies:
<
p>April 2 Response to Doug
<
p>0.5% for the Kids Proposal
<
p>Q&A with Secretary Kirwan
<
p>Thanks
<
p>Bruce Leicher