Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

The Big Hustle

By

It is pretty evident that the process is political and the white guy with the biggest influence amongst his state legislative peers wins.  But, just for a moment let’s consider what might be a scenario that may not initially look so good for western Mass (where the requisite population for 2 Congressional seats does not exist) but would potentially be healthy for the economic and social long-term well-being of the region and the Commonwealth.

Holyoke and Springfield are in dismal shape by all standards and measurements.  Hampden County ranks low in health, wealth and education measurements.  The current leadership has had plenty of time and resources to implement stop gaps for the slide into the abyss.  Hasn’t happened, won’t happen….because the will and the skills are not present.

One western Mass district with a competitive electoral process for Congress is in this observer’s opinion the best solution.

Imagine a progressive, energetic, hard-working Congressperson that the people of western Mass could actually approach and get measured results – for them, not the politician? Imagine this new district working side-by-side with Congressman McGovern in Worcester and central Mass?

Imagine in four years the Governor of the Commonwealth is a Worcester boy with deep ties and connections to western and central Mass?

Damn, it is an exciting concept.

Real clout and real awareness is what the region needs.  I have yet to truly see, in tangible form, how the prestigious rank on a committee has translated into sufficient funding for infrastructure, education, health and prosperity for the region.  And, I am referencing pre-recession lack of tangible delivery.    

There is an imbalance between the eastern, central and western Mass economies.  That however, is a reflection of the populations, opportunities and wealth generated by the regions.  If western Mass is about 11% of the state’s population and has lower median incomes (logically, the region likely sends less revenues per capita through income tax to Beacon Hill and DC), why would should the region expect 20% of the Congressional representation? And, conversely why should central mass or any other region be sliced north and south to placate the current congressmen and the status-quo?

Don’t get me wrong the Congressman in the first district has his head, heart and policies in the right place, but he’s just not an easy guy to converse with….a basic and necessary skill for an elected representative.  I would like to see him graciously retire and make room for a dynamo.

That’s what we need….a redistricting plan that brings forth a Dynamo not another Big Hustle.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

    •    As you might think. Guy attended UMASS-Amherst. “A We against the Boston establishment” theme just might work.

      • And Western Mass is more liberal than much of the state. He’s not going to beat John Olver or Richie Neal.

    • …but I don’t think McGovern is threatened by this process and I would take McGovern over Glodis in a heartbeat in the primary.

      •    You don’t live in the hinterland outside of 128 that is known as “western” Massachusetts. Auburn is that little fingernail immediately south of the city of Worcester. It is not beyond the imagination that Auburn moves to the second CD. With the exception of Worxester to the north, Auburn is surrounded by towns in the second CD.

        • …though I consider Worcester central rather than west.  Personally I think there should be a Worcester-centric district which includes as much of Worcester County as appropriate for the numbers.  Currently the 3rd reaches Fall River, which makes more sense to be in a district with New Bedford, IMO.

          • And a distinct Congressional District that is truly western MA.  It is the gerrymandering to keep districts for certain pols to which I object.  I want to see government functions and policies based on objective analysis and best case scenarios for the greatest good….not the best hustlers.

  2. I’m not sure you’re making much sense.

    <

    p>Who is the big hustle you’re talking about?  You’re allowed to name names on a blog.  Now obviously at the end you mean Olver but there’s too much vagueness in this post.  

    <

    p>Why do you assume that a Worcester-born representative who magically becomes governor will somehow care about Springfield, Holyoke,  North Adams and Pittsfield more than other candidates because they are all represented by one congressman?  Just because people from Boston and the north shore think Worcester is Western MA does not make it so.  

    <

    p>How exactly, aside from the fact that you obviously don’t like one of the congressmen from either districts 1 or  2, will these changes help western mass?  If its Olver you don’t like, would an election be a far less drastic way to get change than redrawing the districts?

    <

    p>Now I understand that new census data dictates that MA will likely lose a congressional seat.  And hey,  I get it that there’s not a lot of people out in my neck of the woods.  But I’m not sure how any if this is “an exciting concept.”  

    • will not

      magically become governor

      …he will win on merit and hard work.

      <

      p>LG Murray’s track record along with Governor Patrick’s are unmatched in their attention to Springfield, Holyoke, North Adams, Pittsfield….western MA.

      • How pray tell, is my comment above a (3)?  Go ahead and disagree on my controversial hypothesis that western MA (as defined by the four counties of Berkshire, Franklin, Hampden and Hampshire) should have one dynamo Congressperson and not two gerrymandered seats….but please let’s not confuse the fact that LG Murray and Governor Patrick have been unmatched in the attention and time they have spent in western MA.

        •    I would like to know what they have done for us, and not to us.
            Worcester is still pretty PO’d at Timmy on dumping us the very night he was re-elected to another term as mayor in 2007. Some folks may have not voted for carpetbagger Tim.

        • His track record is one of corruption and patronage that’s bad for the state. I’ve already posted on that a few times. If he runs for Governor, I guarantee you’ll learn more.  

          • PatrickLong, you are Long on hyperbole, short on truth. Corruption? Corruption!!! Nonsense. Absolute nonsense. Tim Murray has been a great Lt. Governor and if truth be told is the originator of many of the ideas and initiatives the Patrick Administration can rightly take credit for. And as far as Central Mass is concerned, he has done more for Worcester and the communities of Central Mass. in one term as Lt. Gov. than the last 4 governors combined! If you didn’t notice, you weren’t really paying attention. The best thing tat’s happened to Worcestr is having McGovern in Congress, Murray at the State House and Joe O’Brien at City Hall…if Ed Augustus had stayed in the State Senate it would be a perfect quartet. I hope Murray becomes Governor. He would be a great one.

            •    Got citation? Wanting to close state hospitals, but wanting to build a $302 million addition for a facility the executive branch wishes to close, is not a good thing.
                A new prison perhaps? Good luck with pushing that one through.

  3. This is the “one representative for the region vs. two representatives representing part of the region” problem, isn’t it? Is it better for Boston to have parts of 3 representatives or 1 representative all to itself? It seems that if you answer the question “it’s better to have 3”, then you can’t make the argument that it is best for Western MA to have just one instead of sharing two.

    <

    p>I don’t know the answer — I suppose it depends on the allegiance of the rep. I know that in Springfield, we have parts of seven state representatives. Best case is all seven are from Springfield — but the way things are carved up, that is unlikely. Worst case is that we have two from Springfield. We currently have four state reps from Springfield. I think that the dual loyalties of the 2 Springfield resident reps whose territory spills into other communities have to tread lightly on some issues, lest they provide fuel to a suburban challenger.  

  4. We agree on most issues, but I don’t think you have your facts straight here.

    <

    p>On clout: John Olver was Chair of Appopriations before the GOP took Congress in 2010. He is one of the most senior people in Congress. That’s not clout? Neal’s been in Congress even longer. Seniority=clout.

    <

    p>John has been a reliable elected liberal since 1967 when he ran and was elected to the state senate. I’ve actually known him all my life. My parents worked on that first campaign and many others since then. John is not show horse, he’s a work horse, and he works on behalf of the entire Massachusetts delegation. He’s taken good care of Holyoke and cares about people of color. But we should ask him to step aside because you say easy to talk to?

    <

    p>There’s some sort of half-assed accusation in your statement: “the white guy with the biggest influence amongst his state legislative peers wins.” I don’t know of a politician of color in Western Mass, progressive or not, with the juice, reputation, and/or organization to get elected to Congress. To my knowledge, there has never been a person of color elected as mayor of Springfield. Holyoke still hasn’t had one. If there is one district in Western Mass, and John Olver retires, Richie Neal will continue as Congressman.

    <

    p>Why would should the region expect 20% of the Congressional representation? This is the crux of the redistricting issue: should population or geography determine the shape and size of districts? The answer is not a simple one. John Olver’s district geographically covers 40% of the state, according to the article you cite. I don’t know what Richie Neal’s district adds to that geographically (it would stretch from the New York/Vermont border to Norfolk), the Congressman would be representing 147 municipalities–over 40% of the state’s communities.

    <

    p>Is it easier for a Congressman to serve a small, densely populated district or a large (relatively) sparsely populated district? Which makes more sense? I don’t know the answer, but that’s the question to ask.

    • The current gerrymandering is what has created the unwieldy geographic size and shape.  It has not created cohesiveness.  The population does NOT qualify for the region to have two congresspersons (period).

      <

      p>Your criticisms are well taken, however I disagree that time in congress is real clout in terms of what the people, health and wealth of a district receives.  Your perspective is understandable given that Hampshire County is measurably better off than Hampden, Franklin or Berkshire Counties.

      <

      p>It is great that you have a positive relationship with your congressman.

      <

      p>

      I don’t know of a politician of color in Western Mass, progressive or not, with the juice, reputation, and/or organization to get elected to Congress. To my knowledge, there has never been a person of color elected as mayor of Springfield. Holyoke still hasn’t had one.

      <

      p>Isn’t this a problem in a region that has majority-minority populations?  And, there’s always the pesky 51% issue….

      • clout from Commonwealth magazine:

        Asked what role US Rep. John Olver plays in the 10-member Massachusetts congressional delegation, Rep. Michael Capuano of Somerville puts it very simply: “Money.”

        Ask Olver about his role and the answer is a little less succinct. OK, make that a lot less succinct. In fact, prepare for a long lecture about how the congressional appropriations process works, how it integrates with congressional authorizing committees, and how it’s not maybe quite as powerful as some say it is to have a seat on the House Appropriations Committee.

        But Olver seems to relish his role as the Bay State’s money man – that is, our representative on “Approps,” as the committee that oversees $1 trillion in discretionary federal spending is called in Washington. He’s even a cardinal, to use the nickname given to chairs of the 12 subcommittees of Appropriations, and his subcommittee is a biggie, covering both transportation and housing.

        The former University of Massachusetts chemistry professor is a major power broker in Washington, albeit one with a very low profile. He rarely sponsors legislation or mounts a soapbox to address big national issues.

        “There’s a substantial amount of responsibility,” he says of his position. “What one does in the Appropriations Committee is try to serve the whole caucus,” referring to all Democrats in the House.

        The argument is seniority leads to powerful committee assignments which lead to clout. I’m open to another argument.

        <

        p>I don’t know if you realize that Hampshire County and Hampden County are not equally split between congressmen. Olver doesn’t have Northampton, which is closely related to his hometown of Amherst and is the county seat of Hampshire County (if we actually had a county). Olver also serves Holyoke which is in Hampden County. On the other hand, Neal serves Springfield, and Chicopee, which in spite of a large, impoverished minority population is quite well off as well as the relatively affluent Longmeadow, East Longmeadow, and Wilbraham.

        <

        p>Also, I don’t think it’s accurate to say that Western Massachusetts has a larger minority population (people of color?) than it does a majority population. Hampden County is 87% white, just above the state average. Hampshire County is 92% white. Even Springfield is 56% white. If there is an underprivileged group in Western Mass, it is poor, rural whites.

        <

        p>To get a congress(wo)man of color, either county would need either a rising star (an Obama) or a good political farm team. Neither is in existence.

        • I have no doubt he’s intelligent, hardworking, and effective, but I once heard him say a few words at an event for a state house candidate in his district.  Based on that my reaction was, “How did this guy ever get elected to anything?”

          • …as I heard him joke (or he may have been serious…) “As a former college professor, I’m used to making my point in 45 minutes, so it takes me ten minutes just to warm up”.  What do you expect from someone with a PhD in Chemistry from MIT?

        • I mistakenly wrote “region” for the majority-minority statement and should have written “communities” or more specifically Springfield and Holyoke.

          <

          p>

          In eight cities, minority groups are now more than half the population, Draisen said. Boston, Lawrence, Chelsea, and Springfield crossed the threshold in 2000, and Brockton, Holyoke, Lynn, and Randolph did in the current count.

    • Olver is quite a bit more progressive than McGovern and a boatload more so than Neal.

      <

      p>Saying the population doesn’t justify having two districts is absurd. After redistricting, each Congressional district will be the same size, regardless of the exact details of how the districts are carved up.  

      • quantify Olver as quite a bit more progressive than McGovern?  Similar votes on many issues but McGovern is the one leading and laying it on the line.  Example: Opposition to Patriot Act, Human Rights, Health Care…even standing up for NPR.

      • quantify Olver as quite a bit more progressive than McGovern?  Similar votes on many issues but McGovern is the one leading and laying it on the line.  Example: Opposition to Patriot Act, Human Rights, Health Care…even standing up for NPR.

  5. With due respect to these gentlemen, all else being equal they should have to fight it out for the west.  The western district should be the four western counties, or some approximation thereof to accomodate the right number of people.  It beats having Pepperell in a district that borders NY.

    • That presumes that geography is the primary way that someone is represented. Pepperall probably has more in common with 90% of the communities in Olver’s district than it does with Lowell, Worcester, or Methuen.  

      • I do tend to prioritize geographic compactness, or a common geographic connection like a river.  Certainly if I were Olver I’d find my district rather unwieldy.

        • I don’t automatically assume that it’s making one gigantic district. Look at the map. I’m in Western Mass, and I’m not going to complain if we get lumped into a huge district. The question for me is what is democratically (small “d”) best. The eventual decision will more likely be first what is best Democratically (big “D”), then for existing people in power, and then little “d” democratically.

          <

          p>The 10th Congressional district actually looks pretty small. Peter Porcupine can perhaps opine on that.

          <

          p>Political interests aside, a district isn’t gerrymandered because it’s funny looking. I know because I’m funny-looking and I’m not gerrymandered.  

          • …pretty much any division that has equitable numbers works from a small-d democratic standpoint.  SCOTUS is actually pretty strict on that.  The six is for the self-deprecating humor in the last sentence, though I don’t know you so I can’t vouch for its accuracy:)

      • …two towns from Olver and Neal’s district respectively.  

        <

        p>I really only wanted to write that headline…but I guess I need to make a point…and that is Pittsfield has far more in common than Springfield and Palmer (Olver, Neal and Neal communities) than Pepperell.  And despite the size difference, Pepperell certainly has similar transportation and development issues as nearby Lowell…and efforts of a congresscritter repping Lowell will have more impact on Olver communities like Townsend and Pepperell.  

        <

        p>The key reason to keep Olver / Neal’s districts can be summarized in one word: Clout…

  6. at 16, if I remember correctly. You don’t need to be a good speaker to be an effective congressman.  

Archives