I would like to be be sacrilegious for a moment.
Who would be interested in seeing another Democrat — progressive or otherwise — run against Deval Patrick next fall?
It could be for political or policy reasons.
Maybe you want to see the Corner Office remain Democrat, but don’t think it’s going to happen with the current guy carrying the banner.
Maybe you’re a progressive who doesn’t like his support of casinos, charter schools, Ameriquest, real estate developers, tax credits for movies, public employee unions, etc.
I know it may be unpopular to raise this question on what has been the most Deval friendly board anywhere (and I don’t think that’s neccesarily a bad thing). But I am truly curious: leaving Tim Cahill aside for the time being, is there an appetite for an alternative Democatic candidate? And if so, who would it be?
Martha Coakley, who won’t do it, could give Deval a serious challenge. But Deval is a long way from being Jane Swift, so challenging him is risky.
<
p>In terms of my new rule — challenge everybody — I’m satisfied with the task Deval has before him. He has to shore up his base to prevent Cahill defections, and then he has to beat Baker. I’d compare it to routine surgery, which still has its risks.
<
p>
Can we run a straw man that will stand in for the MA Lege?
Deval has defined himself as an outsider. That made a lot of sense, in 2006. But at some point, he has to position himself as leader of the party.
The problem is that he’s welcome to position himself as leader of the party, but the body of the party in the Lege keeps doing stuff the Leader doesn’t want. I think he’s better off looking like he doesn’t want to be leader, rather than looking like he doesn’t know how to be leader.
Dogs are pretty good at it.
<
p>Or maybe carrots and sticks is a better metaphor.
<
p>I got nothin’, really. I just think, if I were the Honorable JimC representing the 99rd Middlesex District, that I would want to look to the new, popular governor for leadership, not the Speaker surrounded by snakes. This window may already ne closed, though.
I tend to think primaries keep people honest. I’m not sure the comparison to Healey in the promotion comment is exact, however. Unlike her Patrick is the incumbent so he has some news-generating ability by default. Of course, if he tries to tie newsmaking to governing he’ll have Sabutai to answer to:)
Candidates and parties are strengthened by primaries, and it wouldn’t hurt to remind Deval Patrick of the large swaths of the Democratic Party (and population of the Commonwealth) that his policies abandon. Taking the shine off his disconnect from the Lege and its supporters could make him more effective in governing this state, as well.
<
p>From a strategic point of view, however, I do think that there’s a disconnect. From education to taxation to unions to economic development, Deval Patrick is governing like a centrist (to be generous), but he has managed to present himself to liberals as “one of them” for various reasons I won’t go into here. What would be necessary for a serious primary challenge to Deval would be somebody who:
<
p>A- Commands respect and reputation (no county commissioners)
B- Holds genuine progressive principles (no Cahills)
C- Is not already part of the Deval camp (no Eldridges)
<
p>There’s only one person I can think of who even vaguely fits these requirements and could pull off a successful campaign.
<
p>And he’s too busy defending his mayoralty.
Coakley deserves a higher office at some point for the excellent work she has done though her base is the same as Deval’s I suspect.
<
p>One name I was thinking of drafting is Chris Gabrielli.
<
p>We all know that if Gabrielli had come in early he would have been the anti-Reilly long before Deval and could have done a lot better. He still came in second and had the support of over a third of the Democratic party. If ex-Reilly voters and his old primary supporters were to back him now he could beat Deval, along with people like me and my family that supported Deval but now want someone else. And with self-financing he could hit the ground running.
<
p>The question is could any candidate get 15% at John Walsh’s convention?
<
p>Is Gabrielli too connected to insiders?
<
p>Is he progressive enough to challenge Deval from the left?
I think it’s pretty openly expected that Coakley will challenge for a higher office at some point, but the odds aren’t that good in a primary against Deval.
<
p>Gabrieli would be interesting. He’s smarter about education than Deval could ever hope to be, but he’s already well into Deval’s circle. I don’t see him moving outside to challenge, and like Coakley is a bit of a cipher on these issues.
<
p>If a serious challenger is suppressed under the 15% line, it causes many more problems for the party then it solves.
He seems like a smart guy, but I think it’s a stretch to mention him in the same class as Coakley, who has had electoral success.
From the July 9 issue of Mass High Tech:
<
p>Q: So just to confirm: You’re not planning to run for governor again?
A: Want to break the story? I’m not planning to run. I am not going to run for governor in 2010. I’m not ruling out ever participating in elected politics again. But I feel very fortunate that this governor and this Legislature and this administration, on the communication side and so on, have been eager to partner with me, and I’ve had terrific opportunities to express my public policy side.
I worked for Deval and against Gabrieli because I didn’t like Gabrieli’s position on charter schools and privatization. So, what happens? Deval adopts Gabrieli’s positions.
<
p>I wish I could say this. “I feel very fortunate that this governor and this Legislature and this administration, on the communication side and so on, have been eager to partner with me, and I’ve had terrific opportunities to express my public policy side.”
If he can’t, it would NOT be because of John Walsh. John takes his job as head of the Dem PARTY (not the Patrick party) very seriously.
<
p>No, I suspect he’d be pulling for people to make their 15% rather than the opposite, if that person was capable of pulling it off that is.
<
p>I’m a progressive, and no candidate I’ve ever voted for has ever pleased me 100 percent. I’ve long since give up the notions I held in childhood about the messiah candidates. Once I gave up that notion, the idea that somebody not perfect, is unsuitable, quickly followed to the dumpheap. You probably didn’t post with that in mind, but that’s the subtext of your post.
<
p>I do think Deval Patrick expressed a suitably chastened heart with respect to Ameriquest and has not repeated the mistake. I don’t stand with him on casinos but he hasn’t expressed much of a willingness to push for the adoption of the legislation beyond what is reasonable (i.e. he hasn’t held other legislation hostage or arbitrarily veto’d something else to push casinos… whereas he did exactly that with ethics and transporation reform).
<
p>The term “charter schools” merely designates a ‘curricula to be named later’ and doesn’t, it seems, mandate any particular orthodoxy: by definition it is an open ended question. So I don’t see where, exactly, the lines of support or opposition lie cleanly…. I understand teachers union recalcitrance, and the worry about quasi-privatization, but neither of those things actually speaks to charter schools so much as the underlying fear that politicians are going to screw things up…
<
p>I’m not certain on your references to either ‘real estate developers’ or ‘public employee unions’…
<
p>So, Deval Patrick isn’t perfect. This doesn’t make him, de facto, unsuitable.
<
p>
<
p>Insofar as you are trying to gin up support for ‘something better’… I don’t think there is support, nor can I think who it would be… Not because I think so highly of Deval (tho’ I do) but because I don’t see much in the way of alternatives. Cahill is the self-described alternative candidate, but I wouldn’t describe him that way (he’s a second-rate Bill Weld: shameless opportunism behind a vast surplus of charm. He’s has not the ghost of a chance as the Republicans already have their second-rate coming of Bill Weld in Charlie Baker… ). That is, unless Caroline Kennedy decides to run… (that was a joke!!!)
<
p>Insofar as you are trying to keep Deval honest, or express frustration with deviation from progressive bona fides, that’s not something to which I’ll stand in opposition… However, having said that, I’ll also note that I do think there are better ways to get that message across than to wait an election cycle and throw wrenches.
<
p>What do you suggest?
<
p>Attend the governors town halls and make your voice heard.
‘Friend’ Deval on facebook and (politely) tell him what you think.
Blog.
write letters to the editor
write to the governor
write to your state rep
<
p>I think we’re living on the cusp of an age where politicians can get too much information, rather than too little… But I think if your ideas have merit and they are presented politely and respectfully, you’ll be heard. That doesn’t mean that they’ll be acted upon, but you’re only entitled to a hearing not action… If you want action you should, indeed, wait for an election cycle and be the wrench you want to see in the works… Then, and only then, you’ll have a candidate who’ll agree with you 100%… you.
<
p>
So I make all mannuer of polite suggestions, and then they fail, so I have to run against him?
<
p>High bar.
… I was merely noting that success isn’t guaranteed either… The high bar of which you speak is merely your expectation of success/failure. But I’m only expecting a fair hearing. So…
<
p>IF
you make all manner of polite suggestions
<
p> AND IF
<
p> The governor dismisses them out of hand
<
p> AND IF
<
p> you care and/or know enough about the issues you raised to think your implementation is the only thing that will save the state
<
p> THEN
<
p> run for some office (not neccessarily against him… but maybe)
<
p>Personally, if I have an issue and I raise it to the governor (or any politician) and he shows me that he considers it seriously, then I’m satisfied apart from whether or not he adopts or rejects my suggestions… I’m not sure you have a right to expect anything more than that.
<
p>
I’m not trying to advocate for 100% obedience to any particular platform. But I think there is a strong argument to make that the governor has been a disappointment to many progressives.
<
p>For some progressives, the notion of endorsing casino gambling, with the regressive reliance on money from lower income brackets, is enough to change their feelings. For others, his refusal to play hardball when it comes to a progressive icnome tax, or CORI reform, may send then over the edge. Also, I know of a few who got turned off with the Aloisi hiring, the Marian Walsh saga, the book deal, etc.
<
p>And I think there are many centrist Democrats who think he’s too far to the left with his in-state tuition for illegal immigrants, his new proposed gun laws, etc.
<
p>And then there are the plain old survivalists who want to keep the governor’s office Democratic, but think Deval is better known for the drapes, the Caddy, and the $100,000 appointments for friends than anything he’s acheived policy wise. (I include this last bit fully realizing that his list of legislative accomplishments is actually pretty damn impressive)
… any candidate, will disappoint. Democracy, with it’s requisite compromises is an invitation to disappointment.
<
p>Personally, I’m pleased with Deval Patrick because, while I didn’t expect miracles from him, he has handled himself well, IMHO. Looking back to 2006, with the stench of Romney still in the air and an entirely entitled state legislature smugly sniffing their nose at him… to be where we are now, is actually an accomplishment I didn’t expect (though I did hope for…).
<
p>
<
p>As we’ve seen in the past six months, the most regressive element in the state has been the (Democratic) state legislature. They are feckless and moody and entirely resistant to change. I think Deval has been far more progressive then they, and has opened up some cracks in their facade, to boot. And, as I’ve noted elsewhere on the blog, the lege has been more or less awash with corruption for a long long time, abetted by long a string of republican governors who put the lazy in laissez-faire…
<
p>To the extent that Deval Patrick has thoroughly upended that dynamic, he has been more progressive than any single politician in the entire state. Any politician coming in now, has Deval Patrick to thank for the state of the political state. To the extent that the dynamic needed to be upended before we can get anything really done, policy-wise, now is where the particulars matter. As I’ve noted, while supporting casinos, Gov Patrick hasn’t gone out of his way to enact them… this is in marked contrast to tranportation and ethics reform, two instances where he has stood firm. This is a window into his priorities and ought to, methinks, count for something.
But he’s been great in other areas of concern to progressives- green policies and leadership, protecting marriage equality, economic development.
What an upside down world. You have schools like Roxbury Prep where kids make DRAMATIC gains.
<
p>Every major African-American politician in the nation now supports charter schools.
<
p>It’s not just Deval Patrick and President Obama.
<
p>NY Governor David Paterson and NY Senate President Malcolm Smith.
<
p>House Majority Whip James Clyburn.
<
p>Jesse Jackson Jr.
<
p>Charlie Rangel.
<
p>DC Mayor Adrian Fenty.
<
p>Newark Mayor Corey Booker.
<
p>Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson.
<
p>Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon.
<
p>You impeaching the progressive credentials of these people? My goodness.
Maxine Waters
<
p>Barbara Lee
<
p>Douglas Wilder
<
p>First three names I looked up, GGW. If we want to play popularity contest, we can waste everyone’s time. If it’s about getting the best schools for the community, the metaresearch shows that charters do as much with more. In other words, public schools do more with the same.
<
p>Obviously, there are progressives on both sides of the issue.
We got you to acknowledge that there are progressives on both sides of the issue.
Sorry you’ve not been able to notice.
…others don’t.
<
p>Paul Reville is going around the state, stating that smaller school districts are costly and inefficent. They can’t provide the curriculum or academic support that a larger district (enrollment over 4,000 or 5,000) can provide.
<
p>So why would the same folks want to expand the very smallest districts, the stand-alone Commonwealth Charters? We could expand Horace Mann charters very easily – we could tell school committees in districts with more than six schools that they can convert one school or ten percent of their schools (whichever is greater) to Horace Mann charters (under the funding and control of the school committee) by submitting a proposal that is research-based and educationally sound. We could greatly expand charters with that approach, and eliminate the problem of financial equity.
<
p>We could adopt the Menino proposal to allow the Boston School Committee to authorize charters. We could consolidate the Commonwealth Charters into BPS as Horace Mann charters, which would give them the identical student assignment policy and funding as all other Boston schools.
<
p>I favor charters in principle, but I think the current funding system for Commonwealth Charters is wrong. Let’s fix the funding, then we can come together to find a way to ensure charters can be a positive force in the system of publicly funded schools.
One big picture and one technical.
<
p>1. Technical – What do you mean by “identical student assignment policy”?
<
p>I’m not trying to be a smart ass. Just curious.
<
p>To my knowledge, there are only two Horace Mann charters in Boston.
<
p>While all 14 traditional Commonwealth charters have open lottery (no test, no recommendations, no essays), each of the two Horace Manns (district run charters) require both recommendations and essays for kids to get in.
<
p>Health Careers Academy explains things here and Boston Day and Evening Academy (which also requires two interviews) is shown here.
<
p>Are you saying that you think the 14 open-admissions “Commonwealth” charters should change to the “mildly selective” admissions of the district-run Horace Manns?
<
p>I realize this MAY be what you mean but that would surprise me.
<
p>2. Big picture – What’s your view of the Menino proposed district-run charters (which are to be free of union contract) versus the former Menino darling pilot schools (which have some autonomy from district but union contract remains)?
<
p>Do you prefer one over other?
<
p>And what is your view on the 3 Readiness Schools?
<
p>Probably a different thread….
<
p>2. Big picture. I favor Menino’s district run charters. They are funded by the district and under the governance of the local school committee. That fulfills my desire for local governance and accountability.
<
p>I have no problem with:
– the local school committee wants a charter and authorizes it and supports it with its budget.
– the state wants a charter, places it in a community, and pays for it.
<
p>My problem is when the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education has the ability to plunk down a charter in my community, ignoring all community input, and forcing the community to pay for it through a garnishment of the city or town’s Chapter 70. I have seen too much damage to the K-12 system when aid garnishments are combined with Barbara Anderson’s municipal finance structure.
…a group of people with no experience wants a charter and finds a private company to run it?
<
p>That’s a “Readiness School” per Deval’s report.
If you want him to win, then no, no primary.
<
p>This election will be about money… not spending money in September will allow him to spend more in October/Novemeber. Getting HIS message out will be vital, if he has two others trying to tell the voters who he is.
Fighting a primary and being able to get in the news with his message (as opposed to the big news being the Republican fight) about what he has accomplished could be key towards building up support for the general. I think that’s the point some are trying to raise.
I spell token with an L. Brain reaching for Tolkien. Sad.
I was a school committee member when Deval ran in the primary. I supported Deval because I thought he had the better education policy. I continued to support Deval through the general election, and during the first few years of his administration.
<
p>School committee members wanted a significant change from past practices. I encouraged folks to be patient, as Deval needed to take control of the state Board of (Elementary and Secondary) Education and get his people in a position of power. The Romney appointees were in the majority when they named the current commissioner, and I counseled patience as Deval got the opportunity to name his people to the board.
<
p>My support was based on Deval’s promises. Deval’s drastic shift in policy severely undercuts my credibility and my ability to support Deval publicly.
<
p>At this point, I think a Democrat who can offer an education strategy that is significantly different than what is offered by Charlie Baker and Deval Patrick would be a healthy addition to the debate.
with straight out opposition to charters, is that it’ll lose us federal funding if we don’t up the caps. That’s the stark reality.
<
p>Secondarily, I don’t think new charters == bad schools. I think done well it could work well, and done poor it could be detrimental and a drain on our resources for underperforming public schools. I’m not a big fan of the touting of charters as the answer to our education woes, that’s for SURE sure, and the studies show that mixed bag of results you mentioned up thread, but if we could assure that this won’t reduce resources for local public schools, and will be held more accountable than they’ve been so far, well, there are some good things happening at some of these schools and we’d be fools not to try to replicate the good and weed out the bad, but throwing the baby out with the bathwater is not only stupid, but also a matter of adhering to federal mandates.
Charter schools get $11,936,387 for educating Lowell students.
<
p>When you consider the cuts that were made in Lowell this year, do you think the Lowell Community Charter was worth the cost to the city? Consider that the Lowell Community Charter has test scores that are usually among the lower scores in the city, but their funding is an entitlement.
<
p>As the parents at the Rogers School – was it worth closing THEIR school to have a prosperous charter school in town? And who should make the decision, anyway?
If he ran and won 4 years ago, do you think everyone would be fretting about the looming candidacy of Charlie Baker? There’s no way he makes all the rookie mistakes Deval did…
He would be a very strong primary candidate. He would be able to appeal to elected municipal officials, a potent group in terms of organizing support.
Never mind rookie mistakes. Capuano would be supportive of core democratic platforms like public education, affordable housing, necessary human services, support for labor unions, etc.
<
p>I wish Capuano would run but I don’t see him coming out against Deval.
Let’s start running primaries for legislators. I want legislators who aren’t fat and happy. Honestly, I’d rather a hard working, hustling, tough centrist than a lazy, same-old, ethically-questionable left-of-center politico.
<
p>Of course, what I really want are Democrats who will challenge legislators from the left. Go after them on:
* improving public transit
* progressive elections reform
* progressive tax reform
* anti-casino
<
p>Either the hungry progressive wins (yay!) or the legislator (and perhaps leadership) gets the message that they’ve got to move left on these issues to protect their Democrat incumbents (yay!)
<
p>But, one or two primary challenges won’t do it. Frankly, I don’t know which “cameral” is less liberal, but it seems to me you’ve got to credibly primary-challenge 5-10% of the legislators to get noticed; that’s a tough thing to orchestrate.