So, my home district – 14th Essex – pretty conservative these days – much of North Andover, Bradford (part of Haverhill), Methuen, and two precincts in Lawrence.
Our State Representative is David Torrisi who is best described as an independent Democrat. He was out in front on Sal DiMasi and did not vote for him as leader in 2008 – being one of the first to break with him. Practical guy on the Small Business Committee, active in working through many important local issues. He wins in a close race in 2010 versus a business oriented (read: not Tea Party) North Andover guy, Kevin Begley in a district that had much more of Lawrence.
David is poised for a tough reelection campaign. The Merrimack Valley has its own version of Fox News, the Eagle Tribune, which rails against him on a daily basis. The Republicans are running a Tea Party Candidate whose entire political career consists of a two year stint on the North Andover School committee during which she did nothing except a) complain about state aid and b) urge a more punitive teachers’ contract. So, if I’m in the leadership of the Democratic Party or the state AFL-CIO, I’m thinking that I want Torrisi to win and that he is about as progressive as the district will bear. Scott Brown ran over 60 percent in every town he represents (except for Lawrence).
But no. Somewhere out of left field comes a primary opponent – Diana Dizoglio – for Torrisi. Is she a local Democratic activist? No. What’s her background? She served as a legislative aide to a Tea Party Republican (Paul Adams) for about 8 months, and then worked for the firefighter’s union for a few months, and NAGE for a few months. And she had to resign from her position with Representative Adams after she was found in the well of the House chambers with a State Rep from Braintree. I’ve heard her speak – she give a “I rose from the bottom to go to Wellesley College and i’ll represent the district well” load of crap. And the one issue she is targeting in her statements to the press is Voter ID. So, she’s got ambition and it is a free country, good for her.
But then today i’m greeted by the news that the state AFL-CIO is supporting her citing her past work “in support of working families.” What on earth is AFL CIO thinking? They have all the rights in the world to advocate for whomever they want, but why support a candidate who would get creamed if nominated and who doesn’t have the ability to do the job if elected. I thought Steve Tolman had some political acumen.
I hope and think that David will win the nomination and the general, but I would hope that the State AFL-CIO had bigger fights to take on in 2012 like making sure that their members don’t pull the lever for Scott Brown and further erode labor’s influence.
http://northandover.patch.com/articles/massachusetts-afl-cio-endorses-dizoglio – Link to article about endorsement.
http://www.eagletribune.com/local/x880611356/State-House-aide-implicated-in-inappropriate-behavior-has-local-ties/print – Link to article about DiZoglio’s transgressions.
I would like more information on this one and the Eagle Tribune article you linked seemed rather inconclusive. I believe she has served on the Methuen Democratic Town Committee, which may or may not count as very active. I spoke with her for a few minutes several weeks ago at an event and despite having worked for Adams, the views she expressed to me suggested she was coming at Torrisi from the left. She did not express any personal dislike for Torrisi, but she lives in a new part of his district and seems to think it’s time for someone new and that it was a good time for her to step up.
Did a double-take at the news she had “served as a legislative aide to a Tea Party Republican (Paul Ryan).”
Bad multi-tasking!
but this looks like pure power politics from the AFL-CIO. Give us 100% of your votes or we’ll endorse your opponent; we’re not satisfied with you being with us most of the time.
Who said the AFL-CIO demanded 100%?
As another commenter said, their by-laws demand 75% for consideration.
I’m sure the AFL-CIO was only too happy to make sure Torrisi was made aware of that threshold on several of the key votes he voted against, and they’ve been making statements for the past two years — nationally and locally — that Democrats were going to have to work much harder for their endorsements.
Torrisi probably thought they were bluffing. The AFL-CIO disagreed.
Adams’ picked her because she had Lawrence connections and spoke fluent Spanish. He was also the one that booted her for officially doing nothing (and I believe unofficially as well but I wasn’t there).
Her family goes back a ways in Methuen. Some relative (with the same name) was the mayor a while back.
Her events have large turnouts. She is an attractive candidate, seems to know what she’s doing, and is working hard.
I was surprised as well at the AFL-CIO thing, but Torrisi also took some lumps in re-districting too so maybe this is part of a general payback strategy.
She’s certainly not campaigning on any issues other than voter ID.
And how does having a cousin as mayor count as a qualification?
isn’t a qualification. It’s often a matter of support, however. Someone may want her to run against Torrisi and has promised support. (Merrimack Guy didn’t say that qualified her for anything).
She was a pleasant appearance.
She is well spoken.
She has a good “up from the bootstraps” story.
I haven’t seen much in the way of issues from either Dem.
The voter ID pitch is probably intended to separate the non-Hispanic and non-Puerto Rican vote from the Hispanic vote that Torrisi hopes to turn out.
She’s pitching it’s time for a change. If you’re ever met Torrisi he’s not a likeable guy really so that may resonate as well.
She might be able to get Puerto Rican votes with the voter ID.
Non-Hispanic Dems in the district will be on board with the idea as well.
I have met Torrisi and I have not found that to be true.
Also don’t hear dems out screaming about voter ID, just R’s like you.
because it’s not what I’ve seen, and I know a lot of people who have interacted with Torrisi, who know him going back to when he worked the desk at Jackson Lumber. He has a nasty streak. I’ve seen it, and many others have as well.
Talk to non-Domincan Dems in Lawrence about voter ID.
Sounds like Obama. Even Warren.
Torrisi was on the Labor Committee this session and didn’t support the bill to increase it.
Miss DiZoglio only became a registered Democrat this past winter, and only joined the Methuen Democratic City Committee this past spring – after she announced her candidacy for State Rep.
In addition, just six months before challenging David Torrisi as a Democrat, Miss DiZoglio joined Rep. Jim Lyons (R-Andover) at his home to kick off his campaign for re election as State Represenative.
Jim Lyons? Why he is the defacto leader of the conservative movement in Massachusetts! At least according to Rob Eno.
Given this information, I am sure it is no surprise to learn that the North Andover Democratic Town Committee has unanimously endorsed David Torrisi for re election.
Phil DeCologero
Vice Chair, NADTC
Actually, the MA AFL-CIO doesn’t demand a “100%” voting record or else. To be eligible for an endorsement and the resources that come with that endorsement incumbents must meet a 75% voting record threshold. I believe that Rep. Torrisi is at 70% and therefore ineligible for the AFL’s endorsement.
As for endorsing against him, it’s an interesting message to a House that has not been overly worker friendly in the last session. As the former Chair of the Labor Committee Rep. Torrisi was not a leader on worker issues. I don’t see him having the record to make a case for an AFL endorsement and clearly his opponent was politically sharpe enough to use that to her advantage.
The AFL endorsement process is regionally driven by area Labor Councils not top down, so questioning President Tolman’s political sense doesn’t really fly.
Personally it’s good to see the MA AFL-CIO getting involved in primary fights -be it incumbents or open seats. Labor’s strength is the ground war so sitting on the sidelines or endorsing incumbents with poor worker records makes far less sense than trageting a race as a statement.
Do a little research and look into the background of the people you are endorsing and their chance to connect with Dem voters.
And think about the area that Torrisi represents. Tax Free and right to work New Hampshire is a five minute drive away. Many of his constituents regularly shop in NH. Marginal changes to the minimum wage or tax rate have an exaggerated effect on Merrimack Valley businesses and it is important to keep the area vibrant.
And does the AFL-CIO really want a Republican in that seat instead of a Democrat who is at 70% support?
the AFL-CIO’s actions are not without merit.
You have to realize that this state just voted to gut collective bargaining for state workers. “Liberal Massachusetts” pulled a mini Wisconsin. Deval helped negotiate a deal that mitigated some of the worst effects of that anti-labor bill, but it still gutted collective bargaining, for little — if any — cost savings.
Every facet of state government supported that bill, propelled by a Democratic leadership that isn’t nearly as friendly toward labor as it should be.
What do you expect unions to do under those circumstances, other than making their displeasure known? Should they continue to feed people, when those people bite the hand that feeds it?
They’ve obviously weighing the pros and cons of electing a bad Democrat, who’d have power in the caucus, or a Republican, who’d be powerless in any leadership capacity, and wouldn’t be able to expand the anti-labor votes within the Democratic caucus.
Personally, I’d choose to stay out of the race altogether, but sending the message to Democrats across the state that the unions are willing to go nuclear — up to and including allowing a Tea Bagger to muck up a Democratic Primary — is a pretty effective way to send a message.
Mark my words, some Democratic Rep or Senator is going to look at this next time there’s a big vote on labor issues, and they’re going to ask themselves, “Do I want to be next?”
Again, it’s not what I’d do, but it’s not wholly without merit. It may not elect more Democrats in Massachusetts, but it may elect better ones.
The MMA has estimated savings statewide at $178 million.
If you want just one local example check this from Sudbury which will save for FY2013 $1.8M for the town and $147K saved for the employees
http://sudbury.patch.com/articles/sudbury-selectmen-review-health-care-savings
I’m not wrong. Cutting collective bargaining was only a part of the cost-saving aspects of the bill, and the union’s alternative proposal to cutting collective bargaining — creating benchmarks for cities and towns to meet and then enabling an arbitration process if it failed — would have saved $20 million more on the first year alone than the alternative.
Forcing everyone onto the GIC was really about getting everyone into the state’s system, where the legislature could control it, not about empowering cities and towns to maximize health care savings. There were plenty of cities and towns that didn’t want to be a part of the GIC, for legitimate reasons, and could have saved more money staying outside of it. Lest you think that’s a partisan position, the Republican Lynn Mayor was one of those who resisted the state’s law.
Cutting collective bargaining doesn’t save money — and even hard-core Tea-Bagging Republicans know it.
If we want to cut costs, then we should use the collective bargaining process to do it.
So $178M is not good enough for you and you think that creating an new untried system would then result in $20M more savings than that.
I think I’ll take the $178M (annually) for now.
Really conspiracy theories about the legislature? If you want to think conspiracy, then check into the Lawrence Schools takeover, where the Patrick administration has shut out all local input, and won’t release any info on what they’re doing.
I need to figure out a topic where all the Mr “Can Never Be Wrongs” can be on different sides.
To close the loop on an interesting post and thread from mid-August, Rep. David Torrisi lost to challenger Diana Dizoglio in today’s Democratic primary.
Diana certainly knocked on a lot of doors and that seems to have been the difference. 165 votes.
and she combined that with savvy and hard work.
Her Republican opponent is a good candidate as well.
Should be interesting for her because I assume she planned on battling Torrisi.
She’d never held a job for more than 8 months, according to her resume.
This was bloodsport for Paul Georges and revenge for some Michael Savage fans who took D ballots in the primary.
The Valley can have another Tea Party representative and the AFL CIO son’t even get its calls returned.
Have a great day Chris.