Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Bob Massie to speak 1/26/11 at the Concord Democratic Town Committee

By


Massie earned a doctorate in business policy and corporate strategy from Harvard Business School in 1989.  From 1989 to 1996 he taught at Harvard Divinity School where he ran the Project on Business, Values and the Economy. In 1993, as a senior Fulbright Scholar, he served on the faculty of the University of Cape Town’s Graduate School of Business.   His definitive history of the U.S. anti-apartheid movement- Loosing the Bonds: The United States and South Africa in the Apartheid Years-was published in 1998 by Doubleday.   It received the Lionel Gelber Prize, awarded for an English language non-fiction book that seeks to deepen public debate on significant global issues.  In 1994 Massie won the statewide Democratic primary to become his party’s nominee for lieutenant governor of Massachusetts.  

From 1996 to 2003, Massie served as the executive director of Ceres, the largest coalition of institutional investors and environmental and public interest groups in the United States (www.ceres.org).   In 1997 he proposed the creation of generally accepted guidelines for corporate sustainability performance, and from 1998 to 2005 he was the co-founder and first chair of the Global Reporting Initiative.  The GRI is now an independent international standard setting body based in Amsterdam whose disclosure guidelines are used by more than 1,800 multinational corporations (www.globalreporting.org).  In 2002 Massie was named one of the 100 most influential people in the field of finance by CFO magazine.

In 2002 he conceived of the first Institutional Investor Summit on Climate Risk at United Nations headquarters, which led in 2003 to the formation to the Investor Network on Climate Risk (www.incr.com).   INCR is an active alliance of 50 U.S. pension funds worth more than $5 trillion who have moved dozens of major utilities, insurance companies, investment banks, and other key industries to assess the financial costs of climate change.  He is also founder and coordinator of the Consultation and Sustainability and Transparency in the United States (COST-US), a network of national investment leaders and experts.

His leadership has been described in many books on innovation and social entrepreneurship and he has received numerous citations and prizes, including the 2008 Boryana Damyanova Social Responsibility Award from the Institute for Global Leadership at Tufts University.   In April 2009 he received both the Bavaria Impact Award and the Bavaria Innovation Award for his transformative work on capital markets.  Named after the late investment visionary Joan Bavaria, these awards are normally given to separate individuals or organizations.

For the last few years, Massie’s professional activity was reduced because of hepatitis C related liver cirrhosis.  In July 2009, however, he received a liver transplant, which led him to a complete recovery.   He is a senior advisor to Domini Social Investments and FSG Social Impact Advisors.  He is also a visiting scholar at Harvard Law School and a senior fellow at the Initiative for Responsible Investment at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. “His leadership has been described in many books on innovation and social entrepreneurship”

    <

    p>What books?  

    • Some explanations of where he actually stands on war, on health care, on labor, on civil liberties. The mildly vague but promising rhetoric is nice, but I would love to see more.

  3. A beautiful and inspiring life story, but when it comes to substance, check out his website:

    Issues
    Coming soon…

    <

    p>I want a candidate with a track record of accomplishments as a local official.  I want someone who has balanced a city or school department budget.  I want someone who has first hand knowledge of the impact of Federal policy on state and local government before I place him (or her) in a position to make this policy.

    <

    p>I suggest that Mr. Massie should run for the Somerville City Council or Somerville School Committee before embarking on a run for the US Senate.

    • The website will obviously fill out over time. Bob’s a strong progressive, well versed on policy matters and with the conviction all but a few have — he’s no new hand in state politics, either. Why don’t you meet him in person before making such rash judgments? We haven’t seen the full slate of candidates yet, but Bob Massie is exactly the kind of person we want in a position to make these sorts of policy decisions.

      • He should already have had some idea what he stands for by the time he launched a campaign. He obviously had the time to dig up a bunch of 16-year-old news clips, so he could have taken the time to write SOMETHING about his views on the issues.

        <

        p>I don’t care what the Boston Globe said about him 16 years ago. I do care about his positions on the issues. I suspect most voters are with me on that. His choice of focus for his campaign website is at least an indication that he lacks the campaign skill needed to beat Scott Brown, and possibly an indication that he hasn’t taken any time to think about the issues that matter in a US Senate race.  

        • He should already have had some idea what he stands for by the time he launched a campaign.

          <

          p>Having a fully-fleshed website has nothing to do with having “some idea what he stands for.” Of course he has “some idea what he stands for,” don’t be ridiculous. While I don’t know Bob well, I know him well enough to know he’s always been guided by “what he stands for.” Why don’t you go back and look at some of his old BMG diaries if you don’t believe me? He’s an exceptionally thoughtful person who’s filled with conviction to do the right thing, and who’s been fighting for the rank and file person pretty much all his life.

          <

          p>

          I do care about his positions on the issues.

          <

          p>Then why don’t you give him, oh, I don’t know, a couple weeks to get them posted? Or go to see him speak in person, and ask him any question you’d like?

          <

          p>

          His choice of focus for his campaign website is at least an indication that he lacks the campaign skill needed to beat Scott Brown, and possibly an indication that he hasn’t taken any time to think about the issues that matter in a US Senate race.  

          <

          p>The election’s in two years. The race has just started. Did Deval Patrick even have a website at this point in his race for Governor back in ’04, when he first started making rounds across town committees across the state? Did anyone but the most devoted supporters think Deval Patrick had a chance to win even six months before the primary, never mind two years? Meanwhile, unlike Patrick in ’04, looking at ’06, Bob’s already won a statewide primary and was a part of a statewide general election for Governor, so he at least has some idea of what he’s getting himself into — which is a big asset.

          <

          p>I sometimes think people just don’t understand the time, effort and money it takes to run a campaign. Not everything can be perfect, particularly a week or so after announcing a candidacy, yet we live in a McDonald’s-type world where people expect instant gratification for everything they want. Campaigns aren’t fast food, they’re a horse race, and candidates — at this point in a race — have to be focused on doing what gives them the best shot at winning: getting out there and speaking with activist voters who can open up bigger networks of voters to communicate with. That’s clearly what Bob is doing here at Concord. Websites, at this point, are more of a distraction than anything else.  

          • Martha Coakley has won a primary for Senate, which is a higher office than LG, and been involved in a general election. And she only lost by 5%, instead of 40+. She’d be the perfect candidate!

            <

            p>I’m quite aware of what goes into a statewide campaign, which is why I’m so skeptical of him.

            <

            p>If websites are a distraction, why is he spending the time and money to dig up 16-year-old Globe articles for his website? Clearly he disagrees with you. He’s just not prioritizing correctly.  

            • more power to her. I probably wouldn’t vote for her, but I wouldn’t bash her candidacy because I found something on her newly formed website that I thought could use a little sprucing up.

              <

              p>

              I’m quite aware of what goes into a statewide campaign, which is why I’m so skeptical of him.

              <

              p>If you were really aware, then you’d know a campaign is a horse race and that often the candidates who look strong at the beginning of a campaign aren’t the strong finishers, and that those who look weak up front can often be the best candidates in the end. Tom Reilly was the only Democrat who had the power and chops to take on a Republican after 16 years of Democratic defeat — remember? /snark off.

              <

              p>I also think that if Martha Coakley had to face a real primary — one that was serious for the better part of a year — her flaws would have been found out much sooner and she wouldn’t have won. Unfortunately, we didn’t have that kind of time in that race, but we do today.

              <

              p>The only way to separate the wheat from the chaff is time. In another year or so, we’ll have a much better understanding of who the real candidates are in this race — why not let the dang thing develop organically instead of poisoning the first sign of roots in this race with weed killer up front? I haven’t endorsed Bob yet, because I want to see how his campaign grows over the coming months and year, but I’m glad he’s in the race — and I’ll certainly be giving him the time to impress me on the campaign trail.

              • Sometimes they don’t. Deval Patrick was untested, and he did a good job recruiting volunteers and raising money. Bob Massie’s been tested before. He didn’t do very well.

                <

                p>Think about picking a primary candidate as hiring someone for a job, where the job is general election candidate.  Tom Reilly was the guy who performed competently in the interview. He would have been a decent choice if no one better came along. Deval Patrick started out as the guy who hadn’t been interviewed yet. And he aced the interview.
                Bob Massie is the guy who came to an interview last July, half-empty whiskey bottle in hand, wearing pajamas and reindeer antlers and unable to answer any of the questions. If that guy can show me he’s cleaned up his act, I might hire him. But after bombing so badly, I’m going to be skeptical. And so far, Massie has not done anything to reduce my skepticism.

                <

                p>There’s a difference between a new face whose strength we don’t know and an old one who we know is weak.

                <

                p>I’m supposed to wait a year to criticize weak candidates because you say so? Doesn’t sound very organic to me. Or democratic.

                • Bob Massie’s been tested before. He didn’t do very well.

                  <

                  p>Um, he won the race in which he was the deciding factor (statewide primary). A Lt. Governor doesn’t factor in heavily during general elections — it seems very silly to come to the conlusion that “he’es been tested before” and “he didn’t do very well” because a lousy candidate for governor was nominated at the top of his ticket.

                  <

                  p>Furthermore, if we determined the fate of candidates based on their one, previous election, I guess that means no one who’s lost before should ever run again. I suppose President Obama should never have run for Senate (never mind President) after he lost his election for Congress, right? After all, he had been tested before and hadn’t done very well, right?

                  <

                  p>You should stop while you’re ahead not too far behind. I return to my previous opinion: the race is too early to know what we can make of anyone’s campaign yet. I’m not going to try to crucify anyone’s race because I don’t think they have a shot two years out, before the election. In fact, I’ve actually been surprised at the buzz Massie’s campaign has already created amongst the activist base — I’ve been hearing people in democratic circles talk about his campaign in a positive light from people who never heard of him before. That’s anecdotal, but if momentum is to build, that’s the sort of thing that has to happen.

                  <

                  p>

                  There’s a difference between a new face whose strength we don’t know and an old one who we know is weak.

                  <

                  p>Yup, the guy who’s lived his entire life with hemophelia, has beaten HIV and HPV and survived a liver transplant to come to the healthiest point he’s ever been in during his entire life is “weak.” At this point, I have to think you have some kind of grudge.

                  <

                  p>

                  I’m supposed to wait a year to criticize weak candidates because you say so? Doesn’t sound very organic to me. Or democratic.

                  <

                  p>Criticize all you want, but it’s shortsighted. I remember a lot of people telling me Deval Patrick had no shot back in the spring of 2005 and were later very embarrassed by that. Just because someone is known by few doesn’t make them a weak candidate, not when there’s two entire years to go from one end of the state to the other and make your case. That’s how Deval Patrick won, and that’s a recipe Bob can certainly follow. Only time can tell if he can create a campaign that will be organized enough, sophisticated enough and deliver the right kind of message to win. It’ll be an uphill battle, but it’s the type of uphill battle that has been won many times in the past.  

                • Having a strong immune system is not the same skill set as running a strong campaign. At all. Yes, it’s kind of impressive that he’s not dead. That does not make him a competent candidate.

                  <

                  p>A 40 point loss isn’t something you can blame just one candidate for. They both have to screw up royally to get that result. Serious candidates don’t lose by those margins.  

                • Weld was very popular and probably would have beaten just about any ticket, plus it was a bad year for us and Weld had a lot of positions acceptable to Democrats.  I really don’t understand why you’ve decided to dump on Massie so much.  What’s he done to you?

                • He’s a weak candidate, that’s what he’s done to me. I don’t want to lose again.

                  <

                  p>In 2010, a more Republican year than 1994, Tennessee, a more Republican state than MA, elected a Republican Governor against a nobody by only a 30 point margin. Roosevelt and Massie lost by 40 points. A ticket that included one competent candidate couldn’t have lost so badly. No Democrat in MA, in any year, should be doing worse than a Democrat in TN in 2010.  

                • …and as Ryan pointed out he wasn’t the top of the ticket.  I’m starting to wonder how old you are, because you clearly don’t remember just how popular Weld was, and how lacking in name recognition the whole Democratic field was.  The closest Mark Roosevelt came to name recognition was that he shared his last name with two presidential ancestors.  As a point of comparison, Ted Kennedy ran for re-election that year and the GOP contenders were no-names as well.  His ultimate opponent in the general election was an obscure businessman with his own political ancestry named Mitt Romney, who also lost convincingly but has since come back.  I also dispute that 2010 was more Republican than 1994 as that time we lost both chambers and MA elected a couple of GOP House members.

                • Don’t know why you’re so hung-up on the spread.  As I recall the Jets got walloped 45-3 by the Patriots earlier this season and came back to knock the them out of the playoffs.  Let’s recap:

                  <

                  p>18-years
                  Popular incumbent
                  Not steering the ticket
                  Different office being sought

                  <

                  p>No such this as second chances, I guess:(

    • And will be interviewing a 14 year old to evaluate if her medication is effective at 2:00 PM.  As I am self employed, though, no worries – I am not ‘stealing time’ when I pop online.

Archives