There have been discussions here on BMG on whether we should abolish the Governor’s Council. Like it or not, ignoring this important position that local media has dubbed a “Dysfunctional Circus” does not help it improve.
This debate between the incumbent Marilyn Petito Devaney and Charlie Shapiro delves into important questions on a woman’s right to choose, campaign finance, transparency, honesty and many more.
There are many important campaigns vying for our attention and activism. After watching this debate, do you believe it is in the best interest of the Commonwealth to add your voice and commitment to this race?
Please share widely!
It’s not my district, but this would make for an easy choice.
Also helping to make it an easy choice is that Devaney appears to not even have a website so that one can get more info.
Charlie clearly displayed the temperament for the job. The incumbent did not.
I also question her truthfulness. I would be curious if the other people on the Council support her as she kept saying they did. I know I have heard her say that people endorsed her who later said they had not.
I’ve long thought that calls to abolish were throwing the baby out with the bathwater. If you don’t like the current crew vote them out, and here those in the district have the opportunity while keeping the seat Democratic. MPD no doubt takes her role very seriously, but the challenger raises some key issues as well. To say nobody pays attention may be true, but also excuses both public and media laziness, though the GC itself could do a better job with communication as well. In fact I believe it was MPD who I heard say she has never seen a representative of the press actually observe GC proceedings. My own Councilor, Eileen Duff does a great job, and is quite an improvement on her predecessor, Mary Ellen Manning.
Yes, approving judges is important, but protecting the life of vulnerable foster kids is important, addressing the opiate endemic is important, educating the next generation is important…you get my point. There are plenty of important things that need to be done and the colonial era Governors Council is a relic whose time has passed.
Indeed, we’ll always need a process of approving judicial appointments. But it does not have to be the GC. Plenty of alternatives. We won’t be throwing out the baby when we dump the stale bath water called the Governors Council.
There is no compelling reason to get rid of it, and bad acts and lack of knowledge are not IMO compelling reasons to eliminate a branch of the government. Sure there are other ways, but why bother when we already have a way?
…I actually do prefer our way to the federal way, which I assume is the most likely alternative. I definitely don’t want to elect judges.
First, thank you to all who are interested in the Governor’s Council. For those who feel it should be eliminated, I can understand why you might think that. Whenever a governmental body has been troubling, it is a natural reaction to say “let’s just get rid of it”. Alternatives would be the Senate, or electing judges. Both of those come with their own set of issues.
However, there is another option: Improve it. Since the GC is part of the MA Constitution, it’s not likely going to go away. So, let’s focus on improving.
If you watched the debate, I think you may notice a clear difference in tone, approach, and substance between the candidates.
I’ve always felt that government behaves better when the public is watching. In this day and age, it is stunning to me that the incumbent would prefer to continue demand nominees have private meetings with her. The entire point of the Council is to allow public input. The meetings are held in the middle of the workday making it tough for most to participate. The SJC sessions are webcast in an arrangement with Suffolk U., and there’s nothing preventing the GC meetings being opened up to the public as well.
On policy, I am a progressive and proudly pro-choice. The incumbent was endorsed by Mass pro-life. I am in favor of full equal marriage, adoption, and LGBTQ rights. The incumbent says she doesn’t vote on issues…just on people. I think how a person or nominee feels about core issues is important. It totally disingenuous to say otherwise.
For those of you who are attorneys, (I’m a former teach/reporter), you may be aware of how the Berman nomination was mishandled. It was so poorly handled That Governor Patrick called it “Unprecedented” and “Unfair”.
Two years ago after 14 years in office, the incumbent was re-elected with only about 40%. Two challengers (me and Mr Margolis from Brookline) split 60%. This time it’s a 1-1 race and I am very proud to have Mr. Margolis’ endorsement.
We can win this. We can end the drama on the Council. We can re-establish pride in the position. We can think independently while ensure that Democratic values are front and center in the proceedings.
I need your help to make this happen. I hope you’ll vote Shapiro for COUNCILLOR on Sept 9th.and If you’re in a position to contribute, that would be very welcome, as well. http://www.voteshapiro.org has all the info. Thanks.
Great debate performance, Charlie!
Your opponent is a political hack. Her vote against Joe Berman was absolutely disgraceful.
I am voting for you, Charlie Shapiro.