Mike Lake vs Suzanne Bump on other progressive issues:
They are both pro-choice and both pro-equal marriage.
Mike Lake opposes any income tax cut (from an email response from the Lake campaign)
Mike could not support a tax cut at a time when so many families in Massachusetts are relying on the services provided by the funds generated by state taxes. He believes it would not be prudent to cut state services programs further than we have already been forced to cut. In addition, with Mike’s vision for a more proactive Auditor’s Office, he will identify and eliminate inefficiencies in state government to redirect those resources to the programs and services in great demand. We must support the working families of Massachusetts and we must do so with the most efficient and effective state government possible.<blockquote>
There is no position (that I could find) on Bump’s website regarding tax cuts.
The State Auditor has final approval on privatization plans for state services. Neither Lake nor Bump address the Pacheco-Menard Taxpayer Protection Law on their websites but Lake’s campaign did respond to an email question:
Mike is a supporter of the Pacheco Law as it protects rights of hard working state employees and provides a safeguard to ensure that state revenues are spent wisely and effectively. As you probably know, the Pacheco Law grants the State Auditor significant responsibilities in the decision making process of awarding contracts to private vendors for services provided by the state.
Another interesting note comes from Votesmart.org which lists organizations that Bump is associated with – and includes the South Shore Chamber of Commerce – the most conserative Chamber in the state.
Former Advisory Member, Government Relations Committee, Boston Symphony Orchestra
Former Treasurer, EMH Recovery
Saint Francis House, Boston
South Shore Chamber of Commerce.
Here are a couple of examples of the South Shore Chamber’s positions on issues:
An item left out of the proposal called for indexing, which would have increased the minimum wage based on inflation for a period of years. The $1.25 increase called for in the bill would also have been added on. South Shore Chamber of Commerce President Peter Forman called this “the scariest” of all the proposals made.
The South Shore Chamber of Commerce has adamantly opposed the tax (local meals and hotel) in Quincy and in the other South Shore communities where it has been proposed. Abington and Braintree rejected the new tax. In Plymouth, the tax was defeated in a referendum by an 80% to 20% margin.
Opposing the minimum wage indexing and opposing a local option tax (Quincy is facing 200 teacher layoffs this year) doesn’t sound progressive to me.
So the question is, who is the real progressive in the State Auditor’s race – the insurance bobbyist or the United Way Development Director?
Full disclosure: my union has endorsed Guy Glodis and I will be voting for him at the Democratic Convention. I don’t think it matters who asks the question, just what the real answer is.