Crickets from Bill Galvin who has taken the duck and dodge art form to new highs.
Crickets from the blogosphere where there has been nary a hue nor a cry for a debate of some sort. There was more noise in 2006, but for some reason there appears to be little outcry this year.
And, of course, crickets from the major media outlets be they papers, radio stations or television stations.
Galvin has two capable challengers in Bill Campbell and Henderson who deserve the opportunity to debate the incumbent at least once to provide the public an opportunity to see the differences between these 3 candidates and their views on this important office. I do not believe it is asking too much of a public servant to come before the people once every 4 years and explain why they deserve their job for another 4. Bill Galvin seems to disagree with me and considers an interview with his bosses (US!) a waste of his time.
I know he won’t listen to me, but it would be a shame if the media, pundits and political parties did not challenge our current Secretary of the Commonwealth to explain, in person, why he deserves the job for 4 more years.
Crossposted at Red Mass Group
I posted a brief video on this very topic yesterday, which is shown below. My challenge to the members of the BMG community is to call out the usual suspects in the political media – NECN, WBZ, WTKK, etc. – and demand that they invite all three of us to their programs. If Mr. Galvin won’t show up, then I’ll gladly share my time with Mr. Campbell (or go it alone if necessary). But we cannot allow Mr. Galvin to effectively shut off all discussion by the simple act of refusing to participate.
<
p>I am offering substantive ideas, and a substantially different approach to the office, in my campaign. I keep telling people that access to good information allows us to make good decisions, a tenet I will put into action as Secretary. And while I trust the members of this forum will give me a fair review, we should all insist that the public at large have the same opportunity.
<
p>Jim Henderson
<
p>
Galvin seems to have managed to prevent us from having election day registration for another four years, I notice.
<
p>He does not deserve re-election.
He’s Woburn City Clerk, and former president of the statewide association of clerks and sits on their executive board. He serves on various advisory committees for things like voting procedure and records retention.
<
p>I imagine he does not agree with you on every issue – but he is not a law unto himself, either, and is willing to listen to other points of view. Even someone who disagrees with you on a specific issues, but who will still engage, is better than what we have.
Seems that would have to be provided by law enacted by the General Court and signed by the Governor.
If it were not for Galvin, the legislature would’ve passed election day registration a long time ago. Even if that weren’t the case, I’d say that it should be up to him to prod them to do it, and set up experiments, and so on. But the opposite happened: he’s consistently thrown wrenches in and stalled the legislation over the years.
That’s why we don’t have ID when voting like most states do – Galvin is against it..
At the Treasurer debate-like-object at Suffolk Law today, I got an eye roll from the Rappaport Center Executive Director Susan Prosnitz. I heard that they wanted one for the Secretary spot to follow after next week’s Auditor version.
<
p>”I hear that Secretary Galvin doesn’t debate,” she said. She hasn’t given up and said if I could do anything to help, please carry through.
<
p>The penciled-in date for Galvin, Campbell and Henderson is 10/27. The person in charge of getting it together is still unsure.
<
p>You may note that Galvin’s campaign site does not list a phone. It does have info@billgalvin.net as an email. Of course, his day job has a number, at least for the Citizens Information Service – (617) 727-7030.
<
p>Anyone who knows party officials or administration sorts who might urge this venture into the democratic process should ask.
For asking after the debate. The eye roll said it all. Bill Galvin does not debate and too many people have come to accept this affront to the democratic process.
<
p>Well if he cannot come to debate or even have a campaign phone number then I cannot come to vote for him. In fact, he has solidified my stance that I will not vote for anyone who will not engage the voters or their challengers as part of the process.
<
p>I believe that we need people in office who will serve all of us, regardless of party, especially with more the half unenrolled. This provides us all with the opportunity to vote for the best person for the job, regardless of party. Of course, we will each tend to gravitate towards candidates of one party or the other, but I like to believe that people will listen to candidates and vote “across party lines” for a better candidate every once in a while. This is not possible when the candidates will not debate their positions.
<
p>I will not be voting for Galvin. Still undecided between Henderson and Campbell. I have met Campbell and he seems genuine and earnest with some ideas for the position (not all of which I agree with). I have not met Henderson yet, but have watched his video and read his post and he appears to have good ideas for the position as well. One of them will get my vote, they are working for it, Galvin is not. If he won’t work for it, he has no chance of getting it.
ConsEph (and Peter Porcupine, too):
<
p>Let me know where you are located, and I will gladly meet with you. E-mail me directly at jim@JimForSOC.com, or call the campaign phone, 508-802-5461, and we’ll find a mutually convenient time and place.
<
p>And for that matter, if there are enough folks within the BMG community (and beyond) who’d like to hear from me directly, perhaps we can set up an online video conference or other opportunity for folks to ask questions, and get answers, about my approach for the office.
<
p>Thanks, Jim