Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

There’s dumb governing, and then there’s dumb reporting

By

The four appointees in question?

Pat Cloney, a former director under Patrick’s administration at the Massachusetts office of business development, as the $190,000-a-year interim executive director at a newly created agency called the Clean Energy Center.

Michael Morris, Patrick’s legislative liaison, as the $119,000a-year public relations director at the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority.

Edwin Carr, former chief of staff at the economic development department, as the $110,000-a-year executive director at the Massachusetts Office of International Trade and Investment.

Chuck Anderson, who served as Patrick’s policy director, as a $95,000-a-year senior adviser with the Massachusetts Technology Collaboration.

Of course, when you actually read the article all the way to the end, it seems that there are worthwhile explanations for all of these appointments.

– Cloney was selected by a board to head an agency recently created by the legislature. His background is in management of portfolio companies and focusing on new energy ventures.

– Morris is making less money than his predecessor.

– Carr is making just as much as he was in his previous job.

– Anderson has “unique combination of state policy experience and expertise in international law.”

Ernie, in his earlier post, argues that problems arise when inexperienced people try to run government. So maybe, just maybe, it makes sense to promote qualified government employees to positions of greater responsibility.

A promotion in and of itself does not a hack make.  

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. A promotion in and of itself does not a hack make.  

    <

    p>This is VERY true. However so is “When you’ve spent the last two months defending questionable hirings, be prepared to have every future hire scrutinized.”

    <

    p>We could spend pages going over all the “hack-y” appointments made by Romney, Swift, et al. (Swift placing her aide/babysitter on the Umass Board of Trustees for example.)

    <

    p>But it wouldn’t do any good, because this is about Deval Patrick, who promised to raise the bar, in so many words. These hirings may do just that. But Gov. Patrick has lost the right to expect the benefit of the doubt.  

  3. I wholeheartedly agree with your assertion that the Herald is a jaw-droppingly dumb “newspaper”.

    <

    p>The sun also rose in the east this morning, and will set in the west this evening. This is, after all, the Herald we’re talking about.

    • Don’t tell me that you are one of those who considers himself intellectually superior because you read the “Globe.”  Are you old enough to remember the old Boston Post?   Now there was an excellent newspaper.

      • I said, correctly I think, that the Herald is a jaw-droppingly dumb “newspaper.”

        <

        p>I said nothing about my own superiority or inferiority. I said nothing about the Globe — which is, sadly, but a faint shadow of the excellent newspaper it was when I arrived here.

        <

        p>The Boston Post was before my time (I arrived in Boston in 1974). I grew up, in Washington DC, reading the “Evening Star” (now the “Washington Times”, I believe) and, after the Star was taking over by the Moonies, the “Washington Post”.

        <

        p>The fact remains that the Herald is rubbish, regardless of who does or does not read it.

      • *[new] Compared to what? (0.00 / 0)

        Don’t tell me that you are one of those who considers himself intellectually superior because you read the “Globe.”

        <

        p>I consider myself intellectually superior because I can recognize stupidity when I see it.  No comparison is necessary.  Why would you pose such a false dilemna? Sometimes stupidity just stands out all on its own.   One does not need to see “The Godfather” to make a judgement about “Plan 9 From Outer Space”.  You don’t need to eat at O Ya to know that McDonalds is crap. Nor, it needs little saying (but I’ll say it anyways) you don’t need any appreciation of Obama to point out that his predecessor was a total idiot.

  4. It isn’t about the money, as you plead.  These appointments are, obviously, patronage jobs (synonymous with government jobs, get it?) doled out as political rewards to faithful political insiders.

    <

    p>It doesn’t matter that Cloney, Morris, Carr, and Anderson may all be Rhodes Scholars or Mensa members.  Their appointments have the stench of a political fix.  Were any outsiders considered?  I think not.  Four-for-four, they’re insiders getting big bucks.  And I sense the tax-paying public will fail to see these appointments as “promotions.”

    <

    p>How outraged are the taxpayers?  It’s their money going to pay these salaries.  And you wonder why Howie Carr has the largest audience. I can hear him now … “a nationwide search was conducted.”  This stuff writes itself.

    <

    p>Perhaps at this point Cadillac Deval should simply quit filling any open positions.

    • southshorepragmatist makes the correct point, which is that any questionable appointments throw a shadow over every other hiring.

      <

      p>Frankly, if I were the MWRA, I would think that it would be a benefit to hire someone who had spent a few years working for the Governor in government affairs. It just might make that person qualified to help advance MWRA’s agenda.

      <

      p>Apparently for those interested only in criticizing the Governor for anything and everything, any level of experience automatically equals patronage and makes one a hack.

      <

      p>There are undoubtedly cases when unqualified people get hired because of who they are or who they know. Crying “hack” at every turn only serves to make it that much harder see when the public should actually be offended.  

      • I don’t disagree with southshore.  

        <

        p>As I said, maybe these folks are all super-qualified, and the positions they fill will save widows, babies, and kittens, but it’s the imagery and symbolism which is so damaging to the Governor, notwithstanding how much you argue for the righteousness of each appointment.

        <

        p>And, by the way, I’d like to know just how many resumes they looked at before settling upon Cloney, Morris, Carr, and Anderson.  My guess: zero.  If true, that defines “hack” and “patronage.”  Your logic and protestations do nothing to refute this.

        <

        p>Deval put himself in this position.  It’s his fault he now is criticized for ANY position filled no matter the circumstances. He has only himself to blame. The criticism is heightened because so many folks are out of work and it’s infuriating to read that it’s only political insiders getting these six-figure jobs.  Like Marian Walsh, Deval doesn’t see the tsunami of anger rolling in.

        <

        p>Maybe, just for the imagery and symbolism, the governor’s office should publicize the next job opening nationally, and hire a candidate NOT involved with Massachusetts politics.

        <

        p>What are the chances of that happening?

        • Your assumption (makes an ass out of u and mption) is that none of these hirings were competitive, publicly searched for, or proper. Just more blind patronage.

          <

          p>My assumption is that more often than not things are done the way they should be, even by government. That people are hired because they’re right for the job, and that their experience and qualifications, whether public or private, make them the right candidate for the position.

          <

          p>You ask for proof that the hirings were done properly, but you’re the one throwing the accusation (well, you and the Herald) that they weren’t. I’d love to see your evidence of that.  

          • While I don’t necessarily agree with bostonshepard’s view that these were likely the only folks who were really considered, there’s good reason to assume that’s the case unless shown otherwise.  Massachusetts has a a long history of patronage jobs being handed out by government to reward support.  If the Patrick administration hadn’t just gone through a scandal with Walsh and his administration had been totally clean (which it hasn’t, although on par, better than most) you’re earnestness might be well founded.  

            <

            p>Being cynical in politics usually is the way to avoid looking like an ass, not the other way around.  
             

    • That’s what makes this article so poor.  There is nothing that links these as patronage appointments.  There is nothing that notes that anyone is unqualified for their position.  There is nothing here at all.  It’s just a lazy nothing story.  

      <

      p>People get hired for positions, they get paid.  

      <

      p>OMG!  Can you believe it!

      <

      p>There is a tipping point when a storyline gets stupid, the Herald has played this for what it was worth.  But I guess you are right, what’s left are the Howie readers.

  5. “At MassTech, spokeswoman Emily Dahl said the agency received “zero pressure from the governor’s office to hire Mr. Anderson. “

    <

    p>Tell me when we’ve heard that before. Whoever said it was right – Deval is already Duke II. And Emily better hope no one thinks to demand her email records.

    <

    p>And no, it doesn’t matter what Romney did, or Bush did, or Herbert Hoover did. None of them is the governor of Massachusetts today.  

  6. These are liasons between the industry and the machinery of government boondogglery. They are insulated from the heat because they represent ostensibly good causes, like tech or green energy.

    <

    p>These positions show that Massachusetts is not going to become some center of innovation, but more likely a center of taxpayer support of connected and “cool” industries that can’t sell their products on the free market. That’s why you need an agency to collect lobbying attention and a department head to keep track of the favors paid and who owes what to whom.

  7. dumb ass politics.  And this is it.  

    <

    p>You know, I reread Deval’s speech from October 2006 and I am thunderstruck at how he could say those words then…and be at the place he is now.  

    <

    p>But this did catch my eye:

    <

    p>

    They misjudged the hunger for change and fresh ideas.

    <

    p>That is the God’s honest truth.  People were so drawn in and inspired by this man…which is why he’s not getting a pass now.  

    <

    p>The thing that differentiated Deval from everybody else is his ability to inspire people to a higher standard of public discourse and public service.  His words were a virtual symphony, stroking every note of hope in the most cynical of hearts.   And it’s those things that people are going to have a hard time shaking off lightly, because people have a hard time tolerating hypocrisy.  

    <

    p>Someone better get this guy in hand.  

    <

    p>Given all that’s transpired, it looks like Deval played a virtual symphony of “hot air” instruments, instead of the real deal we were promised.  

    <

    p>People who run on change don’t get to play the “my hack is better than your hack” game.  

    <

    p>People who run on transparency don’t get to place staffers in lucrative positions in  “beneath the radar” quasi-public agencies and not get criticized.  It kind of begs the question; if everything was on the up and up, were these jobs posted or advertised?  

    <

    p>People who run on truth shouldn’t have emails contradicting official version on “how things came to be.”

    <

    p>People who promise something better should have had an organization in place to deliver on it.  

    <

    p>

    • I never had illusions about Deval being above politics, like Duke I, but this stuff really crosses the line. Jobs should get posted. Candidates should get interviewed.  Important decisions should be listed on board agendas. Public officials should tell the truth when decisions get questioned. It’s possible to do all those things and still advance a meaningful political agenda, and that’s what we elected this guy to do.

      <

      p>Having supported Deval long before the primary and convinced many skeptical friends and family to support him, I’m now questioning my own judgment and really feeling at a loss.

      <

      p>  

      • I don’t have a problem with people who may have demonstrated they were good at politics getting political jobs. Is a nationwide search for the PR director of the MWRA going to produce a significantly better candidate?

        <

        p>What bothers me more than who got the jobs, is how much they get paid.  Massachusetts funds many human services programs at a level to pay direct care staff $12/hour and masters level staff $35K/year.  The median wage in Mass was $18.10/hr in 2007 (first figures I could find).

        <

        p>Why does every political job have to pay 6 figures?

        • There are countless people working in state government making $30,000-$50,000/year. Not a pittance, but not exactly a king’s ransom either. In many cases, a decent wage with good benefits.

          <

          p>If you go to the Herald’s database, you’ll see that within the House of Representatives (for example) there are far more people making $30-$40,000 than the big number salaries. Same goes for most other government agencies.

          <

          p>Of course, those are never the ones we hear about. It’s a much less sexy story to learn that someone was hired/appointed for a position that makes $35k.  

          • I was referring to politically appointed positions, like the ones in the original post in this thread, not hired state government employees.  

            <

            p>You’re right, most government employees are regular working folks: clerks, janitors, drivers, mental health workers, case managers, social workers, nurses, highway workers, etc.

            <

            p>

Archives