Recently Steve Grossman, well behind in the polls, dug up a years-old interview by one of his opponents in an attempt to score some political points. With Grossman’s past, should he really be looking back instead of ahead?
In his biggest one-time haul of political cash since he took office, state Treasurer Steve Grossman accepted $45,000 at a fund-raiser earlier this month from package store proprietors, bar owners, and liquor distributors, industries his office heavily controls and regulates.
Grossman took donations from executives across the state, all of whom have a financial interest in the decisions and policies set by the Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission, the agency he oversees as treasurer.
—
The event, held Sept. 15 at Legal Seafood in Park Square, was attended by some of the industry’s heavy hitters. It was organized by Ralph Kaplan, owner of Kappy’s Liquors, and Stephen V. Miller, a Boston lawyer who specializes in representing bars, liquor stores, and distributors before local licensing boards and the ABCC.
Miller, a partner in the Boston firm McDermott, Quilty & Miller, is also a registered State House lobbyist for the Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of Massachusetts. Neither he nor Kaplan, whom the treasurer describes as a good friend, returned calls made to their offices seeking comment.
This report is from 2011.
How many tens of thousands has Grossman pocketed from the industry he supposedly regulates since 2011?
Not long ago, Coakley’s foes claimed that her hiring of a relative was a gross conflict of interest. Are those foes aware of the Grossman Marketing Group?
but the snarky opening held me back.
There are more than two people in the race…
Seems he thinks it’s between him and her.
They will probably be the two who make the second ballot at convention.
It seems that Coakley’s supporters are also treating this as zero-sum game. It doesn’t serve either side well.
Grossman and Coakley supporters here are doing a pretty good job of convincing me not vote for either one.
I’m not sure who all they are here for Grossman. I haven’t attacked anyone and jconway, who may vote for him I don’t think has either.
I’ve been critical of Coakley when she’s been evasive on the issues, but I also have said several times, that there are aspects of Coakley’s record as AG (civil rights, foreclosure cases in particular) that I think are excellent. And wrote the post urging people to stop revisiting 2010.
I join jconway in concluding that Mr. Berwick is preferable to either Mr. Grossman or Ms. Coakley.
quite a bit. I have serious questions about whether he can win in November and, perhaps more importantly, whether he can handle the legislature should he become governor. I’ll keep my eye on him though.
I have those same questions. I have no doubt he could beat Baker in a general election, and it is starting to seem based on caucus reports that he might edge out Grossman at the convention though we will have to wait and see. I think he will be a strong contender for the nomination and has some heavyweights in the Leg endorsing him.
I’m confident that even though Rosenberg endorsed Grossman that he will be a team player if Berwick wins. No matter who is Governor, DeLeo will be problematic, so we might as well elect someone who will be negotiating with him from a position of strength with strong progressive stances on all the issues who will move DeLeo to the left rather than be pulled to the right. I think Berwick based on the casino stance is the better choice on the issues.
That said, I have and will continue to defend Grossman from baseless attacks like this one or that other post on his handling of the lottery, or from the random AIPAC accusations that get thrown in as well. He is a solid Democrat and friend of labor, I just trust Berwick on the issues more.
… since you feel the need to whack him.
But, you do have a point. I’m on record on this re: Barney Frank. In an ideal world, people who regulate industries would either be banned from taking money from that industry, or get so shamed for it (by their elected official peers) that they just stop.
They would have the integrity to completely steer clear of conflicts and not embed themselves in these corrupt practices because they are principled public servants committed to the Constitution of the United States and the sustenance of democracy.
Let’s play a game!
What group of people are the real Wall Street Inside-Traders?
1. Republicans
2. Hedge Fund execs
3. Congresspersons and their associates
Not sure if dipping into the past regarding campaign contributions is the best way forward for your candidate either, Methuenprogressive.
You raise a good point though. Dr. Berwick’s campaign is run by small grassroots donors and he is the only candidate without dirty money on his hands, the only candidate committed to clean elections in Massachusetts. And fortunately, this time when Coakley is denied a promotion she will lose her day job, which will go to Warren Tolman a consistent backer of clean elections who has walked the walk (and paid the political price).
That would be a nice modest reform JimC-but even that would be hard in the post-CU world. We just can’t trust them to regulate themselves, we will have to enact these changes via the ballot box and the Constitution.
I’m leaning Berwick. One thing that interests me about Berwick is what a Berwick nomination does to the healthcare issue for Baker. If Baker runs against Coakley, Grossman, or Kayyem, I think most voters will give Baker the upper hand on managing health care issues in the state. But, Berwick has forgotten more about health care than Baker will ever know. On the flip side, Berwick is for single payer. Which way does that cut?
That’s the one!
Frankly I was leaning Grossman since this* Coakley campaign has been about as transparently cynical and uninspired as John Kerry’s was in 2004. The best Bush critique-that he was a poll driven candidate who followed rather than led was functionally true. I would apply it to her’s as well. I want to stop her nomination at all costs. But the lottery stuff, stuff like this, and a narrower set of issues (paid leave, minimum wage raise, labor rights) has pushed me away for now.
And it’s not just a negative choice. Berwick is clearly the smartest candidate, the cleanest candidate, with the strongest set of progressive values down the line on every issue. There is no issue where he doesn’t have the best and most thought out plan. He is also getting a ton of momentum. My concerns about his governance have been allayed by pragmatic progressives like Chang-Diaz and Eldridge endorsing him. Those two don’t just vote progressive-they actually pass progressive laws. With them in his corner we can actually build the coalition and movement we were supposed to build in 2006. And I don’t see Berwick getting squeezed and squished like Patrick and Obama-he will at least go down fighting like de Blasio-and hopefully can actually get it done.
And his commitment to running a clean campaign is one of the reasons I believe he can get it done. He won’t make a thousand compromi$e$ on the way to the Corner Office.
And opposition to casinos. Nothing will set the cause of progressive revenue back more than agreeing to that massive tax on the poor and all the associates social costs it brings. Only candidate with the integrity to call bullshit on that bad deal. Perhaps because he isn’t in their pockets.
Grossman, Crosby, Patrick are all in bed with casinos and internet gambling. Just watch Happy Hours come back with the alcohol lobby generously plying the Treasurer’s/ABCC regulator’s campaign coffers – along with all night – or at least really late night alcohol sales (regression to 70’s blood on the highways) as a bone to small businesses/restaurants/pubs that will be screwed with the corporate-monopoly-special-interest slots/casinos. Marty is steering Boston towards becoming a 24/7 city that never sleeps…..and that’s fine but let’s be sure we know that regressive taxation is the revenue drug of choice for many of our Democrat candidates.
But, I know you already know this. Sigh.
He’s as exciting as a good night’s sleep, and his helpers seem a bit amateurish, but the cause he champions is at the root of social injustice. Quality healthcare for all is perhaps the most progressive of all issues.
Look in the mirror before you make those charges or those regarding campaign finance.
Elizabeth Warren is not an electrifying crowd-pleaser. She’s the best Senator I’ve seen in a long time.
I will get a great many more good nights of sleep with Mr. Berwick as Governor than any other candidate, Republican or Democrat.
That’s good enough for me.
It is her biggest liability (and foreign policy) when it comes to presidential politics. But I am 99% certain she will stay in the Senate and continue to command the attention of the press around important domestic issues while pressuring the party to move leftward on essential bread and butter issues. She will be our ambassador to the middle class and will get even more done than Ted Kennedy.
Similarly, Berwick is an academic and not a career politician, but he also has founded and run a successful business and has the chops to hire great staff and the innovation to think outside the box. I see him operating the levers of power quite effectively, particularly with the seasoned pols that have endorsed him.
I can live with Grossman, but I am excited about Berwick. Anybody else will lose to Baker IMHO.
…I think she can hold her own in the charisma department. She can certainly explain things in a way people can understand and not be put to sleep.
And that should’ve been a hearty uprate.
I agree.
I hope to move our culture away from the media-driven requirement that each candidate be some vibrant, energizing and of course handsome/beautiful Barbie-or-Ken in order to be viewed as “electable”.
I think methuenprogressive was actually attempting to say something positive about Mr. Berwick (namely, the Mr. Berwick is on the right track regarding health care), so I’m not really attempting to disagree with anybody.
I would just like to see less emphasis on “excitement” and more on overall right-person-for-the-job-and-time-ness.
It’s an issue that defines him as a candidate.
Grossman Grabs Mass Cash
There are several law firms that do a LOT of public sector work and have fat contracts “with Grossman’s state office.”
No, this does not define Steve Grossman as a candidate. Among other things, Steve Grossman has done a lot for the Democratic party in his life. For another, his integrity has never been questioned.
Make it illegal to take campaign contributions from employees of industries you either regulate in your current office or be responsible for regulating in the office you are seeking.
…will primary voters turn to Berwick or Kayyem?