While Menino is overly reliant on some longtime loyalists, his top officials have usually been strong figures.
Yes, if by “strong figure” you mean “on a leave of absence until issues surrounding potentially criminal conduct are resolved.”
And while the mayor has grown accustomed to power, he isn’t closed-minded or dismissive of opportunities to improve the city. In some important ways, Menino has sought to reverse his mistakes and claim the mantle of reform, embracing charter schools and demanding long-overdue changes in the Fire Department.
Fair enough on the Fire Department. But as to charter schools, was there ever a clearer case of an election-year conversion? I mean, good grief — charter schools have been around for a long time, and have been a front-burner political issue for almost as long. Menino, after strenuously opposing charters for 15 of his 16 years in office, came around on charters only in June of this year — and only in a limited fashion. Backing “in-district charter schools” does not qualify as “embracing” charters.
Flaherty’s reluctance even to view the [firefighters] union’s lurid and misleading ads against Menino, let alone to publicly distance himself from them, bespeaks a stubborn loyalty that raises doubts about his ability to function as mayor of all the people.
That strikes me as a wild overstatement. First of all, Flaherty has publicly distanced himself from the ads in question — I heard it myself when Flaherty was on WBUR a few days ago. Maybe the Globe missed it. Second, Flaherty’s insistence on random drug and alcohol testing is (as the Globe acknowledges) reflective of significant independence from the union’s more unreasonable demands. And third, despite the drug and alcohol testing, Flaherty has a “stubborn loyalty” that “raises doubts about his ability to function as mayor of all the people”??? Please. There’s just no evidence of that. The haz-mat thing that the Globe cites as its only evidence strikes me as small-bore.
The Globe then undercuts its own point:
Those doubts may be unfair [indeed! -ed.], especially in light of some similar acts of stubbornness by Menino.
And then they go completely off the rails.
But unseating a successful mayor requires full confidence that the challenger will be an improvement. There are legitimate reasons to believe that Flaherty would be. And there are legitimate reasons to believe that he would not.
That’s one of the more absurd statements I’ve ever seen about how to decide whether one should vote for an incumbent or a challenger. In the law, there are different standards of proof for different situations, depending on how certain we think the decision has to be. Most civil cases are decided based on “a preponderance of the evidence,” which basically means if you’re 51% sure, that’s good enough. Certain issues in civil law require a higher standard of proof known as “clear and convincing evidence,” which is tough to quantify but is probably something like 75% sure. And, of course, criminal convictions must be “beyond a reasonable doubt,” which is something like 98% certainty.
The Globe seems to be setting an even higher standard for unseating an incumbent: “full confidence” that the challenger will be a better mayor than the guy in there now. What does that mean — 100% sure? 99% sure? Is the same as “beyond a reasonable doubt”? Whatever it is, it’s of course an almost impossible standard to meet when you’re talking about events in the future, which is probably why you’ve never seen anyone mention it before. And, of course, that is not how anyone can — or should — decide anything in an election. You should vote for the candidate you think, based on what’s important to you and how the various pluses and minuses of each candidate weigh against each other, will do a better job. There is no heightened standard for incumbents. Nor is should you apply some ridiculous “full confidence” standard in any situation, whether or not there’s an incumbent.
And then they just start fantasizing.
In his fifth term, freed of a need to compete for votes and approaching his 70th birthday, Menino should rekindle the humility that marked his ascent to power.
What are the odds of that?? If there’s one thing that the last several years of the Menino administration have not featured, it’s humility. Why on earth would Menino suddenly change course on that?
And his final act of humility should be to relinquish power as gracefully as he took it, nurturing potential successors and opening the door to a generation of “New Bostonians.”
Huh?? What does that mean — that he shouldn’t run for a sixth term? Menino is already openly making noises that, if he wins, he might not be done in 2013. Like I said, humility doesn’t seem to be entering into the equation at this point, and there’s no reason to think it will suddenly happen in 2013, or 2017 for that matter. If the Globe wants “a generation of ‘New Bostonians'” to start running the show, it’s difficult to fathom why it’s backing Tom Menino for a fifth term.
Vote for Menino if you think he’ll do a better job than Flaherty. But don’t vote for him for the unconvincing reasons set out in the Globe’s endorsement.
Good advice, thanks!
<
p>Appreciated the point by point commentary too, but now I have to get some household work done so I can spend the afternoon campaigning.
Tom Menino has done and will continue to do a better job than Mike Flaherty.
I will put it out there at the beginning, I was a Sam Yoon supporter during the primary and now (like Sam) am supporting Flaherty for mayor. I agree with this post that the Globe endorsement was full of odd statements and backtracking. What I think it really shows, since the decision is made by a group rather than a single person, is that there were some WIDE disagreements in a conference room on Morrissey about who would best serve Boston’s future – hence the schizophrenic writing style.
<
p>While I could also go point by point on this, there is no need to re-invent the wheel. The one point that is worth readdressing to me is the notion that menino might use another term to usher in new leadership for the city, I think nothing could be further from the truth.
<
p>The reason I say that is because I have heard him say as much. I was at a meeting last summer and had the opportunity to ask him a question, so I asked who – of all of the elected officials, civic activists, and others in the city (MANY of whom have worked for his administration over the last 16 years) – he thought would make a worthy successor. Pretty simple question and one that I thought would provide some insight into his thoughts on the long-term future of the city.
<
p>What was his response? First – that “no one” was out there doing it like he does, period. Then, after a LOOOONG pause, he gave one name. I am not going to say who he said but I will say that it is a current Boston elected official; one that, not surprsing, a mayor this obsessed with himself would see as a good person to continue his legacy. If you know anything about who represents Boston at the municipal, state, and federal levels it should not be too hard to figure out.
<
p>The fact that, of all of the people he has utilized to further his political agenda, he could only envision one person succeeding him – and then only after saying that no one likely has the potential to be as good as he is – showed me such an arrogance and lack of vision that it was frightening. It was then that I realized that it was time for someone else to be mayor, someone who could see beyond their own self-importance.
<
p>Vote for whoever you want, you know who my ballot is being cast for, but I hope people read this and think about what it says. I also hope that those people who think menino truly supports their favorite local elected official really take a moment to think about what this says about how much he really thinks about them.
<
p>If you don’t believe me just check out Joe Keohane’s article to see a lifelong theme of menino using people then throwing them under the bus: http://www.bostonmagazine.com/…
i had the same reaction.
<
p>almost seemed like “well he’s gonna win anyway, so if we want to have any influence as an editorial page, we should probably say something nice right now.”
<
p>
Menino is famous for denying access to journalists who criticize him. Endorsing the other candidate would draw his wrath, big time.
Menino isn’t an ideal mayor, but he’s nevertheless a better choice than Flaherty. Note how the analysis focused on the first part with a fine-toothed comb, but hurriedly dismissed the second part of the column.
It took quite a while for Flaherty to distance himself from those firefighter ads, and he only did so after many weeks of stonewalling any question regarding bad behavior of the firefighters. In the last debate, he continued to duck the question about whether he would pay the firefighters to accept random drug testing, so he still hasn’t entirely come clean. It seems to me that Flaherty has correctly perceived that his relationship with the union could keep him from winning but is still unwilling to truly distance himself because he knows he is going to need to deliver on promises he has made to them. You don’t promise a contract in 100 days if you haven’t negotiated it in advance.
<
p>It is definitely true that Menino appears to have changed a number of positions in order to be reelected, but that is even more true of Flaherty. It is only this year that he decided to go against the BRA, he voted against the budget for the first time this year after many years voting for it, and he is trying to portray our schools as utterly failing while not making a big issue about it in past years.
<
p>I saw Sam Yoon as a genuine agent of change (although I didn’t necessarily like all the changes he was proposing), while Flaherty is pushing change because that is the only way he can get elected. If you had asked average Boston voters last year whether Boston needed major changes, I don’t think most would have agreed. The main change Flaherty wants is to replace Menino, the rest of the changes are a means to that end.
<
p>So while Menino has problems, I don’t see Flaherty as a great alternative. I am going to vote for Menino and hope that there are better options next time around.
Almost all your comments on this race have been about Flaherty’s relationship with the firefighters, even after he addressed concerns right here on BMG. Your one-track mind on this is leading me to wonder whether you have a personal stake in this issue that you’re not disclosing.
I kept carping on the firefighter’s issue because Flaherty kept ducking the issue for months and months and months. For me, this smacked of dishonesty. It is crystal clear that when most firefighters become disabled while “coincidentally” filling in for someone in a higher ranking desk job, that most of them are lying about it. Flaherty flat out refused to admit that and in fact tried to blame Menino for that fraud. Flaherty’s promise to sign a contract within his first 100 days is simply not even remotely credible unless the firefighters get something out of the deal. As I said, despite “setting the record straight”, Flaherty still refuses to comment on whether he would pay the firefighters for the random drug testing that he is promising. Furthermore, he has adopted wholesale the firefighter’s demand for a unnecessary dedicated hazmat unit and is clearly taking their side in the ongoing turf battle between the firefighters and the emts.
<
p>I still don’t trust that he will do the best thing for the City with respect to that one group and that leads me to question all of his other campaign positions, many of which he only adopted for this election. Sam Yoon I would have voted for, even though I didn’t like all of his ideas (like an elected school board), but I don’t believe that having him as a “deputy mayor” will
<
p>I have no stake in either candidate winning or losing, and truth be told, I doubt that either would do anything to noticeably change my life as a citizen and homeowner in Boston. Furthermore, I don’t think enough Boston voters even read this blog for anything anyone says here to make any difference in this election, in any case. Half the people commenting on these Boston election threads don’t even live in the City.
<
p>
Michael Flaherty is on record answering your very direct questions. Twice in fact.
<
p>HERE
<
p>And
<
p>HERE
<
p>You keep asking question, he keeps answering them and it is never enough for you. I think Christopher may be right and it doesn’t matter because you have been a Menino supporter all along. Totally fine if you like a Mayor who thinks moving Boston forward is allowing top officials to care more about politics, than public service. A mayor who obfuscates school statistics and claims he has no control over the BRA because they are independent(lol), yet runs it with an iron first to help his developer friends who fatten his campaign war chest. Oops, did I mention he promised not to take money from developers with business before the city? I guess that one went with the promise to serve only two terms. Must have been another century thing again. Damn!
<
p>Please Kevin, enough of the shit you sling on here in regards to the mayors race. You can vote for him and feel good about it, but I will not be and I hope I am joined by thousands of other residents of Boston who want a mayor who raises my hopes and expectations, not lower them, then tell us it is just good enough.
In the last radio debate, after both of those comments, he refused to answer the question as to whether he would pay the firefighters more for the random drug testing (which, by the way, the firefighter’s claim they actually want). Why?
<
p>Scott Lehigh in his op-ed piece says that Flaherty still won’t distance himself from the firefighters on Oct 28.
<
p>Furthermore, most of the time I was supposedly slinging “shit” on this issue, was when he was still actively and very publicly ducking the issue.
<
p>Now please tell me the truth. Do you really think that Flaherty will get a contract with the firefighter’s union in his first 100 days without making a major concession?
<
p>I don’t know what to think about the BRA thing. I am willing to believe Menino’s opponents that it is too powerful and not responsive enough to the people who live in the city, and that Menino has some influence in the BRA. I don’t necessarily believe that he “controls” the BRA, nor do I believe that entirely dismantling the BRA is the right fix, at least not without trying less extreme solutions first. Michael Flaherty himself only jumped on the anti-BRA bandwagon this year. I believe that the BRA is one of those issues that only resonates with people with direct experience of the BRA or who have already decided they don’t like Menino for other reasons.
<
p>I don’t especially care that Menino went against his self-imposed term limit promise, because I know that 95% of politicians will violate such pledges if given the chance, and I expect Michael Flaherty to be the same. I don’t believe in term limits in any case. For the same reason, I don’t put much stock in Flaherty’s pledge not to run for reelection if the schools have not improved during his first term.
<
p>I have indeed defended Menino, but I am a lukewarm supporter at best. He has been an adequate mayor. As I have stated many times, I voted for Yoon, and would do so now if he were still in the race.
<
p>You do make a good point that it is kind of a bummer to vote for a mayor who is “just good enough”. I would love to vote for a candidate who inspired me, but Michael Flaherty hasn’t done that. Sorry.
Mayor Menino has been doing ANYTHING to stop the flagrant abuse of disability benefits by Boston firefighters? Please enumerate what, if any, steps Mr. Menino has taken in this regard. You complain of Mr. Flaherty ducking the issue, while ignoring Mr. Menino’s abysmal record in this regard.
<
p>The fact is that the unions representing the firefighters, police, and MBTA appear to own the politicians of both Beacon Hill and City Hall. At least Mr. Flaherty has come forward on the question. It appears to me as though the empty and toothless “reform” legislation is the only thing that anybody has accomplished.
<
p>Tom Menino has been Mayor of Boston since 1993 — SIXTEEN YEARS and counting. I invite you to offer anything he’s done while in office to curtail the rampant disability and pension abuse of city firefighters and police.
I don’t know one way or the other what Menino has done to fight pension abuse. Perhaps he has been too friendly with the unions, but he has refused to give the firefighter’s union what they want where it appears that Flaherty will give them what they want.
<
p>If your argument is that Menino is not any better than Flaherty, then perhaps you are correct, but that doesn’t convince me that Flaherty is a better alternative than Menino.
Except on the major sticking point between them and Menino, i.e., drug/alcohol testing.
They have stated they are actually in favor of testing but want compensation in return. Flaherty in the last debate refused to say whether he would pay them to accept drug testing, which makes me doubt he is really going to be tough with them. He has also stated that he would like to see such testing legislated – by others – presumably so that he won’t be put in the position of having to disappoint his allies.
I should mention again that I really do live (and vote) in Brookline, so my interest in the mayoral race is purely academic (or voyeuristic). I am appalled that random drug and alcohol testing of city firefighters and police isn’t already in place and enforced. I am disgusted by the culture of corruption that supports and enables the disability and pension abuse mills — not just the unions, but the network of lawyers, doctors, and cronies that sustains and protects the entire sorry racket. Like you, I don’t really see that either candidate is going to make much difference.
<
p>I’m disappointed that the AG’s office has been so disinterested for so long. If Martha Coakley is the junior senator from Massachusetts when all this mess blows up, the national GOP will have a field day.
of the Mayor’s ambivalence in regard to concessions and contracts, as you seem engaged and informed. But the legacy of BFD is long, and numerous commissions have been formed to assess problems within the department–ultimately to have findings shelved, by the Mayor. Wish I had links at my fingertips to point you in the right direction, but you can probably get there on your own. I may be wrong on this point, but I believe the ‘king-for-a-day’ benefit was negotiated under a Menino contract. The drug-testing point is relevant in that firefighters seem to latch on to concessions Menino made to police unions in order to agree to similar protocols, and I guess they wonder why they should agree for less.
<
p>Nothing has ever challenged my pro-labor origins more than the workings of Boston unions. That being said, what I have heard from both Flaherty and Yoon is that they seek a different conversation with the unions, and will end some of the tit-for-tat fundamentals; perhaps prohibiting a service-based municipal structure from falling on the sword of inertia. Like you, I am not sure any politician can be held to his/her word, but at this point I gravitate toward any candidate that suggests a different approach.
I don’t work for the city or the unions and have no relationship with any of the campaigns. I just know what I pick up here and in the papers.
<
p>I was aware that the “king-for-a-day” rule was negotiated under Menino, but I also know that it was 100% the union’s idea.
<
p>My impression was also that the firefighter’s union was offered a deal similar to that of the policemen but wanted more, but who knows. I don’t know the fine details of either contract.
<
p>
at roughly the same rate as his skills. But I imagine that he will win again. I think the next four years will be a lot of fun for the Globe as they continue to gradually bring to light various abuses and improprieties (such as Kineavy’s emails, Menino Jr.’s superhuman moonlighting, etc). It will also be fun for people who like scandals. But I doubt this next term will be particularly productive.
“Nurture a successor”, huh? I just hope the city council took care of that succession thing- passing the mantle to “an annointed one” without the benefit of an election would be an obnoxious prank on the people of Boston.
<
p>Full disclosure: I live in Boston.
Globe’s new publisher is an in-house guy who has raised his family in the city. It’s just a guess, but maybe this plus the Menino endorsement suggest the NYT Co. has come to believe the paper’s best bet for survival is to entrench as a local institution, w/perhaps gifts from city and state down the road when the next crisis hits.
<
p>Doesn’t bode well for accountability journalism, but perhaps other kinds of local coverage, not to mention local jobs, will benefit.