While my affinity for this candidate and his campaign has been well known on BMG for awhile, I decided to take the time to write up why I feel Michael is the best candidate for DA and give him a full post.
The name Sullivan has been well known in Cambridge for over 70 years, almost as much as the name Daley in Chicago. Theirs has been a legacy of consistent grassroots campaigning, neighborhood to neighborhood, matched with unparalleled constituent service. This legacy helped three generations of the Sullivan family win a seat on the Cambridge City Council, to the point that it got nicknamed ‘the Sullivan Seat’. It also led Michael to his current position as Clerk of Courts, where he has done a great job of updating this office for the 21st century, increasing openness and transparency, and becoming a real presence beyond Cambridge and throughout the county.
In this campaign, Michael is taking nothing for granted. He has been outraised by an appointed incumbent. But he has taken to the streets, holding Sullivan Shoutouts on every corner he can in the county, appearing at every parade, and making key connections to the grassroots and law enforcement communities. He is committed to alternative and restorative justice. As a Cambridge Mayor, he proudly presided over the first gay marriages legally performed in the US, opening City Hall at midnight to make sure everyone had the opportunity to enjoy the full equality they were ensured under the law. He also voted for resolutions opting out of CCTV monitoring funds and against the Patriot Act. He was instrumental keeping Cambridge a sanctuary city and will continue to bring his values of social and economic justice to the DA’s office.
He has had extensive experience as a former prosecutor for the county in dealing with crime head on, and a compassion for it’s victims and those who have been incarcerated. He also has extensive experience managing a county-wide bureaucracy from his tenure as Clerk of Courts.
Now for the personal side. He is not just a public figure I admire, but a man I’ve come to know. As a student School Committee member, I was struck by how often then Mayor Sullivan would side with us to make sure our motions were heard and our right to speak wasn’t taken away. He co-sponsored one of the motions I wrote, in spite of the Superintendent vocally opposing my efforts to get it passed. I also remember the look on his face one night at dinner after the School Committee meeting when he got a call that a shooting had taken place at Cambridgeside Galleria. He immediately called the police commissioner and got all the information he could, before leaving to go to the scene and attend to the victims families as best he could. While Cambridge has a weak mayor system, he was anything but a weak mayor in that moment, and I grew to appreciate his leadership, even in that limited capacity, of going above and beyond. He did that another time for me as well, on a more positive note, by writing a highly personalized college recommendation. I asked for just one, but when I told him I was applying to BC (his alma mater) he made sure to give me another one that spoke to that school specifically without my asking. Big touches like his bold and early leadership on gay rights or his response to that shooting, to the little touches like the college recommendation, symbolize the Sullivan legacy of service and the kind of experience Michael will bring to that office. A decidedly old school commitment to an ‘all politics is local’ style of campaigning, organizing, and service combined with a progressive approach to important questions of social justice, civil liberties, and transforming public service for the 21st century. This is why he has my full endorsement and support.
Check out his website or friend him on facebook, and any email or call always gets answered.
In this case there’s no compelling reason to fire the incumbent and when he tries to make the case he comes off with a bit more attitude than I would like.
If this were the case, then we would probably have a US Senator Lynch right now (OMG the Horror!) or a President Hillary Clinton (meh!?). The incumbent is not “fired” if he does not win the seat again.
The incumbent is corrupt.
The incumbent is incompetent (Sullivan is largely going with this one.)
The incumbent votes the wrong way (not relevant for DA)
Not sure why the Lynch reference; as the dean of the delegation it was probably Markey’s turn if that were the standard.
Sullivan makes a good case for himself, but he rubs me the wrong way, so yes an open seat would make me more favorably disposed.
She messed up the Remy case badly, hasn’t been all that visible here or on the stump, apparently there is a revolt among ADA’s, and she clearly seems to be in over her head. She also wasn’t elected, so the idea that voters shouldn’t have a say is a false one.
I made a positive case for Michael and didn’t want to resort to attacking Ryan, but your comments here left me with no choice. She is invisible and incompetent, he is incredibly competent, compassionate, and has been visible in every community in the county.
I attended a debate between the two of them a couple weeks ago in Lowell and I’m not sure I can identify exactly, but I just felt he attacked her in a way that made me cringe several times. She’s been very visible and the bar seems to love her. Not sure how you would know about visibility if you are still in Chicago.
I keep track of the campaign on Facebook and probably know
more about it than the average joe you meet at a dunkins.
I guess I should just stop posting on BMG since I don’t live in MA anymore?
I’ll be here this weekend FWIW.
I was taking visibility very literally as being out in the community, both in her capacity as DA and as a candidate, which I absolutely stand by, rather than the virtual visibility of FB, which I agree Sullivan has a very active presence. I also suspect that being from Cambridge you have a lot more exposure to Sullivan that we do on my side of the county. I posted on BMG right through two stints of living in NOVA, but I don’t think I would claim to know who’s been visible on the campaign trail.
I also keep in touch with old Cambridge friends, including one official who endorsed Ryan early before Sullivan announced, and he has said she hasn’t called him or spoken to him since about going out to campaign. Michael has called him three or four times, knowing he endorsed Ryan and can’t back out of that, but to let him know he doesn’t take it personally and will work hard to earn his endorsement as the nominee after the primary.
People like to be asked as Tip would say, and Michael, who knew Tip personally, comes from that same school. He won’t take a single community for granted, and some friend’s parents bumped into him outside of Tags in Porter Square just this weekend, and my sister saw him in Marlborough, and he remembered her from her Cambridge years. This guy is a Grade A campaigner.
We had a discussion in Sudbury and Wayland about this some weeks ago. I wrote this to explain why I was supporting Sullivan. I was writing partly in response to some posts supporting Ryan, and there’s no doubt that I have far less experience with either candidate than jconway does. But this was my take on what I had heard and seen from them:
———————————————————————————-
I think I should explain why I prefer Michael Sullivan to Marian Ryan for Middlesex District Attorney.
First, let me say that for better or worse, I’m not a lawyer, and I have no experience with either of these people, either personally or professionally. So I come to this decision strictly as a citizen looking at two candidates.
I have seen Marian Ryan several times. Each time she has given the same stump speech. She always starts out by saying (this is a paraphrase, but I believe I’ve got it substantially correct) that her first act once she was appointed to fill the office, was to bring charges against Dzhokhar Tsarnaev for murdering the MIT police officer in the aftermath of the Marathon Bombing. She makes this point with great intensity — if someone murders a police officer, that person should stand trial for this act.
The first time I heard her say this, I was puzzled. After all, this is is pretty much an open-and-shut case. It’s the kind of thing any DA would do without thinking, and presumably would be an easy case to win. (OK; I’m not a lawyer here, but that’s the way it appeared to me.) Further, Dzhokhar was at that moment being held on Federal charges, and actually the Federal government refused to bring him to be arraigned on these charges that Ryan brought. And it does seem unlikely that these new charges will ever amount to much in any substantive sense, at least as far as the defendant is concerned. So I couldn’t understand why Ryan was making such a big deal of this.
In fact, the last time I heard something like this was when I heard Gerry Leone puff himself up with the boast that he had prosecuted the shoe bomber. It eluded me at the time how this kind of thing constituted political courage or thoughtfulness or something even worth talking about, and it still eludes me.
Since then, I’ve heard Marian Ryan speak a couple of more times, and every time, this is the starting point and the main point of what she says, and she plays it like an applause line. This, really, is who she is, or at any rate, who she wants to present herself as. I’m not impressed.
I have also heard Michael Sullivan speak several times. And in his stump speech he makes the interesting point that while of course it is the job of a prosecutor to prosecute, and to recommend jail time when necessary, and he will do that, he also feels that far too many people are going to jail for crimes that really should and could be handled differently — crimes basically stemming from addiction. He hasn’t just said this once: I’ve heard him make a point of it again and again. He wants to use the office to make prevention and treatment of such pathology a priority.
Now actually I don’t think this is all that startling a thing to say. It’s been said before, and it’s been tried before, generally with good results. But I have to say that in today’s political climate, it’s a breath of fresh air.
And the office of District Attorney is, after all, a political one. The DA is elected, and that’s for a reason. We’re not electing a police chief. We’re electing a person who has real decisions to make about the administration of justice and the approach we take as a society to dysfunctionality. I’m glad to see someone like Sullivan avoiding self-puffery in favor of speaking for a serious and thoughtful approach to the matters that properly come before the DA’s office.
And that’s why I’m supporting Michael Sullivan for Middlesex District Attorney.
Re: Tsarnaev – that was an obvious move. It might be a decent selling point, however, because a good chunk of voters (maybe most) might not make the Fed/State criminal law distinction and think that she’s handling it all.
It won’t matter for this race, but I’d be interested in seeing whether the DA tries for spectacle and seeks additional state charges after the federal case wraps (which I have a strong feeling will result in the death penalty or life at a supermax facility – I think both would be wrong). That would be a true waste of resources and show the priorities of the new DA.
On the issue of avoiding prosecution for certain crimes, I think that is the most important thing a DA can do. I’m glad to hear that Sullivan seems to be in that camp, but I don’t notice much to that effect on his website. If that was the hallmark of his campaign, I would support him in a heartbeat.
He has said repeatedly that he worked with Ryan in the past, considers her a friend, and loves the job he has, which frankly, his uncle left in a one way Cadillac as my daddy would say, so he is not looking for a cushy position or job security-he strongly feels the current DA is in over her head and he is ready for the challenge. He also has different values than she does, and to me, they are more progressive.
having been appointed DA to fill z term I don’t view Ryan as an “incumbent”. This is, IMO, an open seat and therefore the race is wide open.
Ryan dropped the ball on the first major case she was presented with (Remy) which leaves me feeling she may be a decent ADA but she’s not up to the job of DA.
My understanding is the Governor also appointed her over Sullivan even though the latter also applied.
JConway’s endorsement is right on every point. I could not have said it better. I have known Michael for many years and he clearly has the intelligence, the experience, the competence, professionalism and perhaps most important, the heart to make a tremendous DA! I encourage all of my BMG friends from Middlesex County to give him your support and your vote.
Having had an opportunity to speak with both Michael and Marian Ryan, I was impressed by Michael’s commitment to an area of criminal justice which needs attention and modification and that is the issues involving mental illness and criminal justice. I found him interested in my thoughts and concerns enough to engage in a 15″ conversation during a campaign event. He indicated an open door policy to discuss such policy issues with interested citizens. Michael is warm and personable. I think he has struggled with how to campaign against someone he considers a friend. On September 9th, I will be casting my vote for Michael Sullivan for Middlesex DA.
He said as much at the Lowell DA debate I attended.