Thursday, February 26, 2009

Justice Francis X. Spina & the 1982 French film "The Return of Martin Guerre"

-

-

"At Pittsfield library, film series lays down law"
By Conor Berry, Berkshire Eagle Staff, Thursday, February 26, 2009

PITTSFIELD — Dustin Hoffman, Sally Field, Marlene Dietrich and Tyrone Power are among the Hollywood stars who will be at the Berkshire Athenaeum next month as part of the Massachusetts Trial Court's free Cinema of Law Film Series.

Well, the stars won't be there in the flesh, considering half the aforementioned actors have been dead for some time.

But their celluloid images — large and lifelike — will flicker across the movie screen at the legal-themed film festival, now in its third year and featuring guest speakers.

Pittsfield native Francis X. Spina, an associate justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, will introduce the 1982 French film, "The Return of Martin Guerre," a 16th century tale involving a case of mistaken identity starring Gerard Depardieu.

"I think the lawyers and the judges really like doing the introductions," said Barbara Schneider, head law librarian at the Berkshire Law Library, which is tucked away on the third floor of Berkshire Superior Court and open to the public.

In the past, the film series — a veritable mini-festival, replete with free popcorn and film introductions by members of the Berkshire Bar Association — has featured courtroom classics like "The Verdict," "To Kill a Mockingbird," even "My Cousin Vinny," with the late Fred Gwynne (aka Herman Munster) playing the judge.

Guest introductions

The films, all of which start at 6 p.m., and their introducers are as follows:

March 10 — "The Return of Martin Guerre," with introduction by Spina.

March 17 — "Witness for the Prosecution," with intro by Berkshire Assistant District Attorney Joseph A. Pieropan

March 24 — "Kramer vs. Kramer," with intro by retired Massachusetts Probate and Family Court Judge Rudolph Sacco.

March 31 — "Norma Rae," with intro by local labor attorney Kevin Kinne.

The annual film series is organized by the Berkshire Law Library, the Berkshire Bar Association and the Friends of the Berkshire Athenaeum.

Gary Smith, the Berkshire Law Library assistant, said he and Schneider come up with a short list, which is winnowed down after consulting with the Friends of the Berkshire Athenaeum.

"We want to get their input, too," Smith said.

Along with the free films, popcorn and commentary by local legal experts, a display of law books related to each of the legal themes addressed in the films also will be available for public perusal.

"Norma Rae" is the 1979 labor-rights classic starring Field, while "Kramer vs. Kramer," also from 1979, is a painfully realistic account of the legal — and emotional — impact of divorce starring Hoffman and Meryl Streep. "Witness to the Prosecution" is Billy Wilder's 1957 courtroom murder drama, starring Power as the killer and Dietrich as his wife.

More information about the Berkshire Law Library is available at www.lawlib.state.ma.us.

The library can be reached at (413) 442-5059 or at berkshire lawlib@hotmail.com.
-
To reach Conor Berry: cberry@berkshireeagle.com; (413) 496-6249.
-
----------

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Justice Francis X. Spina

Francis X. Spina, Associate Justice, was born in Pittsfield, Massachusetts on November 13, 1946. He received a B.A. degree from Amherst College and a J.D. degree from Boston College Law School. From 1972 to 1974 Justice Spina served with Western Massachusetts Legal Services. From 1975-1977 he served as an Assistant City Solicitor for the City of Pittsfield Law Department. From 1979-1983 he served as Second Assistant District Attorney in the Berkshire County Attorney's Office. Justice Spina was a partner with the Pittsfield law firms of Reder, Whalen, and Spina and Katz, Lapointe and Spina from 1983 to 1993. Justice Spina served on the Superior Court from 1993 to 1997; the Massachusetts Appeals Court from 1997 to 1999; and was appointed as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Judicial Court on October 14, 1999. He lives in Pittsfield with his wife Sally (O'Donnell) Spina.

----------
-

-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Cellucci
-

Governor Paul Cellucci -- "The Big Dig is on time and on budget" -- nominated Francis Spina to the highest court in the commonwealth after he based his 1998 election campaign on restoring the death penalty in Massachusetts. The conservative Judge Spina is pro-death penalty and his judicial vote on the issue was supposed to have helped Cellucci in his (unjust) cause of executing otherwise very dangerous convicted murderers. Fortunately, Cellucci was NOT successful in restoring the death penalty in Massachusetts while unfortunately being successful in winning the corner office in Beacon Hill's State House. During Cellucci's tenure, the Big Dig proved to NOT be on time and, of course, NOT be on budget either with one single cost overrun of over $2 billion taxpayers' dollars! Cellucci then resigned his seat as Governor during his term and left behind the WORST Governor in the history of the USA: Jane Swift!
-

-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Swift
-
----------

Related links:
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_X._Spina
-
http://judgepedia.org/index.php/Francis_Spina
-

-
A 2008 photo of the John Adams Courthouse, home to the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_Supreme_Judicial_Court
-
Judge Spina voted against legalizing same sex marriage in Massachusetts.
http://judgepedia.org/index.php/Goodridge_v._Department_of_Public_Health
-
----------
-

-
Photo by Ted Fitzgerald
-

-

"2 Americas - but countless injustices"
By Howie Carr, February 27, 2009, www.bostonherald.com, Columnists

There are two Americas, only they’re not the two that the lecherous John Edwards described in his doomed campaign for president.

The two Americas are the Dreaded Private Sector (DPS), where life grows gloomier by the hour, and the Public Sector, where happy days are here again, especially in Massachusetts. I know, not everyone on a public payroll is living large, but let’s face it, life right now is a lot cushier.

In the DPS, every week there are farewell parties for co-workers who have been laid off. In the Public Sector, the farewell parties are for colleagues who have filed for disability pensions at age 42.

In the Public Sector, if you can pass a physical test to prove you can do your job, you get a bonus. In the DPS, you don’t get fired - this week.

In the DPS, your pay just got cut. In the Public Sector, you just got a pay raise.

In the DPS, you pay into your pension plan for years, maybe decades, and at the end, you get nothing. In the Public Sector, if you’re a justice on the Supreme Judicial Court, you pay nothing - nothing! - and then at the end you get a big fat pension.

In the DPS, the gas tax goes up, and the money comes out of your pocket. In the Public Sector, if you’re in the Legislature, the gas tax goes up and eventually they just increase their own per-diem travel allowance, which, by the way, operates on the honor system.

In the DPS, if you don’t abuse your sick days, you don’t get fired. In the Public Sector, at least at Massport, if you don’t abuse your sick days, you retire with a six-figure payout for all your “unused” days on top of the 80 percent pension and the health plan.

In the Public Sector, you get off Bunker Hill Day, Evacuation Day, Patriots [team stats] Day, Columbus Day, etc. etc. In the DPS, you’re kidding, right?

In the DPS, people look for “work.” In the Public Sector, they’re looking for a “job.”

In the Public Sector, if you cheat on your taxes, you have the right to claim it was an “honest mistake.” If you’re in the DPS and you cheat on your taxes, you have the right to remain silent.

In the DPS, you have to pay for parking. In the Public Sector, you get free parking and a free car.

The two Americas are diverging - one’s standard of living is plummeting, the other’s is rising. In Massachusetts, the two sectors do only one thing together: They drive to tax-free New Hampshire to buy their gas, booze, soft drinks, cigarettes, electronics gear, furniture and everything else - to beat the taxes that make Taxachusetts Taxachusetts.
-
Article URL: www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1154953
-
----------

Note: I was once a juror in a civil case in Berkshire Superior Court with Judge Francis Spina presiding during the Summer 1996.

Note: I attended Judge Spina's promotion ceremony at Berkshire Superior Court with my Dad, Bob, during the next Summer 1997. "Luciforo" was there too, and he gave me a very mean & threatening stare at the post ceremony gathering outside on the Courthouse lawn.

Note: During Autumn 2001, my dad and I attended an event honoring "Moby Dick" at Tanglewood hosted by the late Peter Jennings. Judge Spina was also in attendance and said a friendly "hello" to my dad, Bob, who worked in the Pittsfield Court at the time.

----------
-

-

"Perv clerk an all-time star in Hackerama"
By Howie Carr, Sunday, March 1, 2009, www.bostonherald.com, Columnists

Who got reputed perv Chelsea court clerk James Burke his $85,000-a-year hack job?

Or, as one poster on a Herald message board asked at 1:28 Friday afternoon:

“Who’s this clown related to that he’s a court officer? You don’t get that gig without connections.”

He got his answer in 12 minutes from a poster with the handle “magnumforce,” who also added his personal assessment of Burke’s intelligence: “He’s dumb as a rock.”

We can’t say for sure yet who Burke’s political sponsor was. Everybody was ducking yesterday: Burke and his lawyer, not to mention the clerk’s alleged patron, whom we’ll call Hack X.

As for the unspeakably corrupt Massachusetts court system, it’s conducting an “internal investigation.” Riiiiiight. They’re just waiting for this latest scandal to drop off the front page.

Rest assured the courts aren’t going to turn on one of their own, especially a distinguished member of the International Brotherhood of Payroll Patriots [team stats]. No ratting allowed. Omerta - silence - may be dead in the Mafia, but not in the state court system. The only difference is, the Mob is always looking for “earners.” The courts only accept “takers.”

Meanwhile, let me fill you in on the curriculum vitae of Hack X. He has the same name as a relative who happened to be a gangster who was shot to death in Charlestown. His father, another hack, was indicted for arranging welfare benefits for the family of another Townie hoodlum. But Hack X’s dear old dad beat the rap after hiring as his attorney the brother of a serial-killing cocaine dealer from South Boston.

Mrs. Hack X eventually landed a $100,000-a-year state job, having been hired by the lawyer of Hack X’s dad. Meanwhile, Hack X himself was recently rebuffed in his attempt to reinsert his snout into the public trough, which would have boosted his pension more than somewhat.

Say what you will about Clerk Burke. He reminds us that in Massachusetts, the court system isn’t about “justice,” it’s about “just us.” It’s a multigenerational conspiracy by connected layabouts to avoid ever having to work for a living.

Burke was lugged one day after the latest miscarriage of justice in a state courtroom. Did you see what happened to the ex-police chief of Stoughton, who was convicted last month of being an accessory to attempted extortion?

The judge threw the book at him - a comic book. The chief got a suspended sentence after four years of “administrative leave,” which means, full pay. A four-year paid vacation. That’ll show the chief, by God.

The chief also lost his pension - at least until he can get his appeal into a state court, which I predict won’t take long.

This ethical cirrhosis that so infects the state courts has spread into the local federal courts. Exhibit A: Felon Finneran, the corrupt ex-House speaker, guilty of obstruction of justice - another suspended sentence for a major felony. Like I said, there’s a lot of that going around.

Now Felon Finneran will soon be trying to get his law license back. Anyone want to bet on whether he gets it?

Meanwhile, Clerk Burke must look for a new job. In the hackerama.
-
Article URL: www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1155374
-
-----
-

-
-----

"Unlike court hacks, she works hard for the money"
By Howie Carr, Saturday, February 28, 2009, www.bostonherald.com, Columnists

Try not to let this sordid episode destroy your faith in the integrity of the Massachusetts judicial system.

Never forget, it’s that 98 percent of the courthouse hacks engaging in dodgy (if not illegal) behavior that give the other 2 percent such a bad name.

Poor James M. Burke - he of the $85,000-a-year salary as an assistant clerk. In Bellingham Square, that kind of dough would have bought him several thousand - oh, never mind. Goodbye, big fat state pension. Somewhere in Middlesex County, John Buonomo feels Burke’s pain.

In the FBI affidavit, the working girl is called “CW,” as in “Cooperating Witness.” In the courtroom, she pointed out Burke to her attorney and said, matter-of-factly, “I (expletive) him in court.”

Here are two of my favorite quotes from the FBI affidavit: “The CW told Attorney Andreasi that Burke said that the judge was his friend and ‘had his back.’ . . . Burke said that he had talked to the District Attorney who told Burke that the CW’s case was going to get resolved.”

Lenny Bruce summed it up very well. In the halls of justice, the only justice is in the halls.

If these allegations are true, it was pathetically easy for Burke to find an empty courtroom for his afternoon delight. That’s the great thing about working in most of these district courthouses. Nobody is ever there, especially after noon. If Deval Patrick was serious about cutting the state budget, he could close half these hack nests.

“Burke told CW that the only way they were able to have a sexual encounter was because it was late in the day and the only judge left was not going to go downstairs.”

God forbid the judge should ever leave his chambers. Somebody might actually expect him to work. But at least the judge was there, in the courthouse, after noon. He should get an award just for that. How did Burke describe the timing - “late in the day”? At a Massachusetts courthouse, that’s any time after 11:45 a.m.

In a recorded conversation, the common nightwalker told Burke she was embarrassed to have, ahem, committed sodomy in the courtroom. Why? At least she was working, unlike most of the people who collect paychecks at the courthouse - or any Massachusetts courthouse, for that matter.

“Burke asked the CW if she thought it was ‘hot’ and the CW replied that it was ‘totally hot’ and ‘freaky.’ Burke agreed that it was freaky and said ‘it’s good because it’s like it’s so bad.’ ”

Clerk Burke turns 42 next week. Is it too late to file for a disability pension?

----------
-

-
Photo by UPI (above); Cartoon by Dan Wasserman (below)
-

-

"Paul Cellucci rushes to aid GOP"
By Jessica Heslam, Friday, March 6, 2009, www.bostonherald.com, U.S. Politics

Former Bay State Republican Gov. Paul Cellucci says conservative talk radio king Rush Limbaugh is among “many” prominent Republicans who will challenge the new White House administration - but insists there’s “a lot of good leadership” in the GOP.

Limbaugh told the Herald this week that he’s “the most prominent national figure actually tying Barack Obama to his policies” and that the Republican Party doesn’t actually have a “leader.”

“I just don’t agree with that,” Cellucci said yesterday of Limbaugh’s comments.

Cellucci said there are a lot of people “going around the country speaking for the Republican cause,” including Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele, ex-GOP presidential contenders Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee and Rudy Giuliani and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. Romney’s spokesman didn’t respond to a request for comment.

“There’s a lot of good leadership in the Republican Party,” Cellucci said. “We’ll have a nomination process to figure out who our next leader will be.”

Limbaugh has been deemed the de facto leader of the conservatives, and his status has only gained steam since President Obama took office. In an e-mail to the Herald, Limbaugh said: “The Republican Party and the conservative movement are two different things. I have nothing to do with the party.”

In January, Obama told GOP leaders that “You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done.” Earlier this week, Steele apologized to the host after calling him an “entertainer” whose show is “incendiary” and “ugly.”

Limbaugh challenged Obama to a debate this week.

“No, of course not,” Cellucci said on the chances of Obama taking the bait. “When you’re president of the United States you don’t debate a talk show host. That’s ridiculous.”
-
Article URL: www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view.bg?articleid=1156536
-
----------
-

-
Rush Limbaugh. (Photo by AP) - (File)
-

-
Howie Carr
-

"What’s Barack Obama’s Rush to make new enemies?"
By Howie Carr, Friday, March 6, 2009, www.bostonherald.com, Columnists

Barack Obama’s administration has uncovered a new Public Enemy No. 1.

Forget Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda. Obama and the pampered poodles on his staff are going after the real Mr. Big - Rush Limbaugh and his Excellence in Broadcasting network.

Does something seem a little . . . off, shall we say, about the moonbats’ newly rediscovered obsession with El Rushbo? From the War on Terror to the War on Talk Radio.

Obama’s been in office less than two months and he’s already got an enemies’ list. Whatever happened to the old saying, “Every knock a boost”? James Michael Curley used to say, “Never complain, never explain.”

What he meant was, anytime you respond to somebody, you elevate him to your level. Hell, no smart public figure ever admits he has a problem, even if he’s ambushed leaving the courthouse by camera crews demanding answers.

Remember last fall, when indicted Boston City Councilor Chuck Turner stumbled out of his house in Roxbury at dawn with his zipper down? Hardly anyone even knew about Chuck’s sartorial faux pas until he launched into a diatribe on live TV against Ch. 25 for mentioning it.

What happened? Within five minutes, everyone listening to his speech had clicked onto Ch. 25’s Web site to check out the hilarious video for themselves. Within 10 minutes, Councilor Turner had a new nickname - Superfly.

These limousine liberals have revitalized Rush. Suddenly he’s back to where he was in 1995, back when he had a TV show and best-selling books. I couldn’t be more pleased, because I have a vested interest in Rush Limbaugh’s success: He’s my lead-in. If Obama’s jihad means a lot of new listeners are “sampling” him (and it does), at least some of them may stick around at 3:06 when I come on.

Until two weeks ago, Rush was still on top, but he wasn’t as on top as he used to be, if you know what I mean. Too many afternoons he’d end up babbling about his private jet, or meander on and on about the Pittsburgh Steelers or George Brett.

No wonder Rush’s favorability rating among those under 40 had slid to 11 percent. Everything about him screamed “RICH OLD FART.” He still had his 600 stations, but he was slowly fading into a $30-million-a-year irrelevance.

Now he’s back. He’s No. 1 on the new White House Enemies List.

How long did it take Nixon to come up with his enemies’ list? At least three or four years. This Barack guy, he moves fast.
-
Article URL: www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1156528
-
----------

ELLEN GOODMAN, Op-Ed, The Boston Globe
"Sorry Rush, but you're no Oprah"
By Ellen Goodman, March 6, 2009

I WAS GOING to give this a good leaving alone. But there I was flying home from a mellow family visit when El Rushbo filled - and I do mean filled - the screen before me, delivering what he called "my first-ever address to the nation." Who knew there'd been a coup while I was gone? Hail to the Chief?

Dressed in a style David Letterman later labeled as "Eastern European Gangster," Rush Limbaugh delivered a rousing 85-minute sermon to conservative true believers that included an unapologetic hope that Obama will fail. Ah yes, a talk-radio host who'd rather be (far) right than have his country rescued. Charming.

Limbaugh was not only a counterpoint to Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, who delivered the hapless Republican response to the president. He managed to bully the Republican leadership, including its party chair, the misnomered Michael Steele. After saying Limbaugh was "incendiary" and "ugly," Steele turned to mush and groveled about being "a little bit inarticulate."

Despite watching Limbaugh's rant at 30,000 feet, I read glowing reviews saying that "it will be talked about for years and even decades." And so I am forced to return to the subject our man Rush implied just days earlier: "Why don't women like me?"

This question came after Public Policy Polling showed a gender gap of massive proportions in his approval ratings - 56 percent of men view him favorably compared with only 37 percent of women.

Pew Research folks have charted an even deeper divide in the audience - 72 percent of his listeners are men, only 28 percent are women. Nevertheless, with the deepest of faux sincerity, Limbaugh announced a Female Summit on his favorite subject: Rush Limbaugh.

As he framed it, "Cause I'm just a harmless little fuzz ball. I'm the sweetest, the nicest, most generous, compassionate, confident, cocky, I-know-what-I-want-and-I-know-what's-right-and I'm-going-to-say-what-I-think kind of guy you could run into, and I'm saying to myself, 'What could be the explanation for the gender gap?'"

Gosh. Was it something he said? Could it have the teensiest bit to do with all those "feminazi" cracks? Was it his warning that "the last place you want to be is between a liberal who gets herself pregnant and a morning-after pill"? Was it his crack that Hillary would lose because Americans didn't want to see a woman age in office? Or his description of New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand as "marginally hotter than the former senator." If that were the only problem, we could cure it with duct tape.

Now a touch of reality here. Women don't tune in to talk radio as much as men. Talk radio has been the forum of the "angry white man" since the 1990s. Women have had quite enough men yell at them, thank you, and Rush is more than vaguely reminiscent of the boss from hell.

But Rush, who brags "I own the men," asked "What must I do now to own the women?" Well, sweetie, Oprah owns the women. If Rush talks at women, Oprah talks with women.

Just imagine Limbaugh in marriage therapy letting his wife speak for an uninterrupted five minutes. You don't own women unless you can listen to them.

More to the point, remember that Oprah is all about change. Rush, however, is the prototype of the Man Who Won't Change.

What finally happened at that Female Summit? When women callers who love Rush told him how to woo women who didn't, he balked. Pompous? "I'm not changing that." Stop with the "babe" talk? "Why do I have to change who I am?" Be more vulnerable? "You're trying to emasculate me here."

None of this is world-shattering. What makes it notable is that the Man Who Won't Change has used his ample body to fill the vacuum of Republican leadership. And the biggest gap in his own approval is among exactly those who left the party in droves: independent women.

Yes, our pinup boy has a following of about 20 million listeners. But last time I looked, Obama won with nearly 70 million voters. At this rate, The Party That Won't Change is going to have to rename itself the Grand Old Ditto Heads.
-
Ellen Goodman's e-mail address is ellengoodman@globe.com.
-
-----
-
My Daily Work: Bobby Jindal
-

-
Posted by Dan Wasserman, February 26, 2009, 5:31 P.M.
-
----------

WAS GOVERNOR PAUL CELLUCCI PARTIALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR 9/11/2001?
-

-
9/11/2001 - We will never forget...Paul Cellucci & Jane Swift's poor leadership! The 2 airplanes that hit the WTC Twin Towers in NYC on 9/11/2001 left from the very Boston airport that Paul Cellucci and Jane Swift oversaw!


“MOAKLEY, CELLUCCI TRADE BARBS OVER MASSPORT APPOINTMENT
By Martin Finucane, Associated Press, 09/14/99

BOSTON- Gov. Paul Cellucci traded barbs Tuesday with U.S. Rep. Joseph Moakley over his decision to appoint chief of staff to head the Massachusetts Port Authority.

Moakley, D-Mass., had criticized Cellucci’s nomination of 34-year-old Virginia Buckingham, QUESTIONING HER ABILITY TO RUN THE AGENCY THAT OVERSEES LOGAN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT and the Port of Boston.

“I’m surprised at Congressman Moakley,” said Cellucci. “It sounds like Joe Moakley might be one of those men I was referring to a couple of weeks ago who are threatened by powerful women.”

Cellucci, at a recent news conference, had defended Buckingham by suggesting her detractors were threatened by powerful women and they should “get a life.”

MOAKLEY CRITICIZED BUCKINGHAM FOR HER LACK OF TRANSPORTATION EXPERTISE, TELLING THE BOSTON HERALD, “I FAVOR ON-THE-JOB TRAINING, BUT NOT IN THE TOP POSITION.”

He also told the Herald on Tuesday that Cellucci had taken “some girl sitting in the next office” and put her in charge.

Moakley quickly apologized, the newspaper reported, and amended his statement to say “woman.”

But the Republican governor and LT. GOV. JANE SWIFT pounced on Moakley’s initial use of the word “girl.”

“Ginny Buckingham is a professional woman. She’s not the girl in the room next door,” said Cellucci.

SWIFT said: “I just think it’s unacceptable for the dean of our congressional delegation to call an accomplished 34-year-old woman a ‘girl’.”

Moakley spokeswoman Karin Walser emphasized Tuesday that “Mr. Moakley apologized the minute the word left his lips. It was a misstatement pure and simple.” She had no further comment.

Moakley and Cellucci are currently at odds over a controversial proposal by Massport to add a runway to Logan. Moakley is leading the opposition to the plan.

The powerful South Boston politician also has clashed with Cellucci over the governor’s criticism of the all-Democratic federal delegation for failing to secure enough money for the Central Artery-third harbor tunnel project in Boston (the “Big Dig”).

Buckingham, who has been on maternity leave, is expected to be approved by the Massport board on Thursday and begin her new job next week. She has told the board she wants to make $150,000, $10,000 more than her predecessor Peter Blute was scheduled to make. Her home phone number in Marblehead is unlisted.

Moakley had also criticized the Buckingham appointment as part of Cellucci’s pattern of naming close political allies to key jobs.

“You look at a couple of (Cellucci’s) appointments, he didn’t have to walk two feet to make three of them. I know the world is getting smaller, but I don’t think it’s that small,” Moakley said.

Cellucci defended his appointments by pointing to Administration and Finance Secretary Andrew Natsios, a former state representative who left Massachusetts to work for the U.S. Agency for International Development and a private relief agency in Washington.

“It’s a remarkable life experience. … We’ve brought in people. … We’ve also promoted people who have demonstrated they can get the job done,” Cellucci said.

Natsios was a close friend of Cellucci’s when the served in the House of Representatives together in the 1970s.

----------

The Boston Globe, Op-Ed, JOAN VENNOCHI
"Could Charlie Baker rescue the state's GOP?"
By Joan Vennochi, Boston Globe Columnist, March 5, 2009

CHARLIE BAKER is thinking about running for governor.

Baker thinks about that almost as often as Julia Roberts thinks about getting married in "Runaway Bride."

But the slightest confirmation of mulling causes fluttering in the hearts of that endangered species known as Massachusetts Republicans.

Baker, who heads Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, held top administration positions for Governors Bill Weld and Paul Cellucci. From time to time, he makes it clear he would like to be governor. But, when it comes to actually running for the job, he has a commitment problem.

Like a bride-to-be poised to hit the Filene's Basement wedding gown sale, Baker looked almost ready to suit up in 2006. But, due to family obligations, not to mention a primary opponent with a family fortune, he opted out. That left the Republican gubernatorial slot to Kerry Healey, the lieutenant governor, who lost to Democrat Deval Patrick.

With some help from Baker, a Baker run is being talked up once again.

"Have not decided. Will not decide today, tomorrow, or the next day. Not the day after that either. The choice is somewhere between ridiculous and preposterous," he said, via e-mail.

Baker then went on to detail the challenges of running against an incumbent Democrat who could count on millions in political contributions, along with campaign help from his good friend, the president of the United States.

"So, yeah - I'm thinking about it - but I'm a pretty pragmatic guy," he concluded, in classic, inconclusive Baker style.

Baker also ducked when asked where he stands on the burning fiscal issue of the day - Patrick's proposal to hike the gas tax by 19 cents: "Unless I decide to run, who cares what I think?" he replied.

People should care, especially if he runs.

Baker served eight years in state government, first as secretary of human services and then as secretary of administration and finance. During the Weld/Cellucci years, Big Dig costs rose and the state borrowed money to cover them.

"When Charlie was head of A&F, the state borrowed against future federal highway aid. We're paying for that now," said Michael Widmer, who heads the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation and supports a 25-cents-per-gallon gas tax hike.

If Baker runs for governor, Widmer said, it is fair to ask, "How much of what happened on his watch is what we're having to pay for now?"

When it comes to taxes, Baker and any Republican gubernatorial candidate would like to have it both ways, just as Weld did in 1990.

Faced with a huge budget deficit, outgoing Governor Michael Dukakis, a Democrat, raised taxes with support from the Democratic leadership of the House and Senate. An angry public rebelled by voting Republican. Weld and a team that included Baker then benefitted from the new revenue.

"The tax increases saved what would have been massive budget cuts on his watch," said Widmer.

Baker was a key part of other important policy decisions that are also open to debate. For example, Baker was secretary of health and human services when the Weld administration moved to deregulate the healthcare industry in Massachusetts. As a result, healthcare providers now compete with each other; the state no longer sets rates. Baker also signed off on the merger of the state's two biggest hospitals, which occurred without a public hearing. As CEO of Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, he has been critical of the fallout, especially as it relates to cost. He recently compared it to "having the grenade that you throw on one end of the boat roll back down and blow up on you when the boat shifts."

But in a party starved for credibility and gravitas, Baker is a star. He's a Harvard graduate, a former state Cabinet officer, and widely viewed as Harvard Pilgrim's savior.

It will be much harder to save the Massachusetts GOP, which explains why Baker is still only thinking about running for governor.
-
Joan Vennochi can be reached at vennochi@globe.com.
-
----------

"To execute or not: A question of cost?"
By Deborah Hastings, Associated Press, Saturday, March 07, 2009

After decades of moral arguments reaching biblical proportions, after long, twisted journeys to the nation's highest court and back, the death penalty may be abandoned by several states for a reason having nothing to do with right or wrong:
Money.

Turns out, it is cheaper to imprison killers for life than to execute them, according to a series of recent surveys. Tens of millions of dollars cheaper, politicians are learning, during a tumbling recession when nearly every state faces job cuts and massive deficits.

So an increasing number of them are considering abolishing capital punishment in favor of life imprisonment, not on principle but out of financial necessity.

"It's 10 times more expensive to kill them than to keep them alive," though most Americans believe the opposite, said Donald McCartin, a former California jurist known as "The Hanging Judge of Orange County" for sending nine men to death row.

Deep into retirement, he lost his faith in an eye for an eye and now speaks against it. What changed a mind so set on the ultimate punishment?

California's legendarily slow appeals system, which produces an average wait of nearly 20 years from conviction to fatal injection - the longest in the nation. Of the nine convicted killers McCartin sent to death row, only one has died. Not by execution, but from a heart attack in custody.

"Every one of my cases is bogged up in the appellate system," said McCartin, who retired in 1993 after 15 years on the bench.

"It's a waste of time and money," said the 82-year-old, self-described right-wing Republican whose sonorous voice still commands attention. "The only thing it does is prolong the agony of the victims' families."

In 2007, time and money were the reasons New Jersey became the first state to ban executions since the U.S. Supreme Court reinstated the death penalty in 1972.

Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine commuted the executions of 10 men to life imprisonment without parole. Legal costs were too great and produced no result, lawmakers said. After spending an estimated $4.2 million for each death sentence, the state had executed no one since 1963. Also, eliminating capital punishment eliminated the risk of executing an innocent person.

Out of 36 remaining states with the death penalty, at least eight have considered legislation this year to end it - Maryland, Nebraska, Colorado, New Mexico, Montana, New Hampshire, Washington and Kansas - an uncommon marriage between eastern liberals and western conservatives, built on economic hardship.

"This is the first time in which cost has been the prevalent issue in discussing the death penalty," said Richard Dieter, director of the Death Penalty Information Center, a data clearinghouse that favors abolition of capital punishment.

The most recent arguments against it centered on the ever-increasing number of convicts cleared by DNA evidence.

Some of the worst cases occurred in Illinois. In 2000, then-Gov. George H. Ryan placed a moratorium on executions after 13 people had been exonerated from death row for reasons including genetic testing and recanted testimony. Ryan declared the system "so fraught with error that it has come close to the ultimate nightmare, the state's taking of innocent life."

He commuted the sentences of all 167 death row convicts, most to life imprisonment without parole. His moratorium is still in effect.

Across the country, the number of prisoners exonerated and released from death row is more than 130, with thousands of appeals clogging the courts.

Death penalty trials are more expensive for several reasons: They often require extra lawyers; there are strict experience requirements for attorneys, leading to lengthy appellate waits while capable counsel is sought for the accused; security costs are higher, as well as costs for processing evidence - DNA testing, for example, is far more expensive than simple blood analyses.

After sentencing, prices continue to rise. It costs more to house death row inmates, who are held in segregated sections, in individual cells, with guards delivering everything from daily meals to toilet paper.

In California, home to the nation's biggest death row population at 667, it costs an extra $90,000 per inmate to imprison someone sentenced to death - an additional expense that totals more than $60 million annually, according to a 2008 study by the state's Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice.

The panel, which agreed with California Chief Justice Ronald M. George that the state's death penalty system was "dysfunctional," blamed exorbitant costs on delays in finding qualified public defenders, a severe backlog in appellate reviews, and a high rate of cases being overturned on constitutional grounds.

"Failures in the administration of California's death penalty law create cynicism and disrespect for the rule of law," concluded the 117-page report.

Some prominent Californians have asked Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to get rid of executions. Especially now, as service cuts and tax increases are pegged to fill a $42 billion budget hole. But it appears that the Republican governor will not abandon capital punishment anytime soon.

Meanwhile, the nationwide number of death sentences handed down has declined over the past decade, from 284 in 1999 to 111 in 2008. Reasons differ significantly, depending on who's providing them: Pro-death penalty activists say it's because crime rates have declined and execution is a strong deterrent; abolitionists say it's because jurors and judges are reluctant to risk taking a life when future scientific tests could prove the accused not guilty.

Executions, too, are dropping. There were 98 in 1999; 37 in 2008.

Still, the costs of capital punishment weigh heavily on legislators facing Solomon-like choices in these dismal economic times.

In Kansas, Republican state Sen. Caroline McGinn is pushing a bill that would repeal the death penalty effective July 1. Kansas, which voted to suspend tax refunds, faces a budget deficit of nearly $200 million. McGinn urged fellow legislators "to think outside the box" for ways to save money. According to a state survey, capital cases were 70 percent more expensive than comparable non-death penalty cases.

In New Mexico, Gov. Bill Richardson recently said his longtime support of capital punishment was wavering - and belt-tightening was one the reasons. As the state tries to plug a $450 million budget shortfall with cuts to schools and environmental agencies, a bill to end executions has already passed the House as a cost-saving measure. The state supreme court has ruled that more money must be given for public defenders in death penalty cases, but legislators have yet to act.

In Maryland, a 2008 Urban Institute study said taxpayers forked out at least $37.2 million for each of five executions since the death penalty was re-enacted in 1978. The survey, which examined 162 capital cases, found that simply seeking the death penalty added $186 million to prosecution costs. Gov. Martin O'Malley, who disdains the death penalty on moral and financial grounds, is pushing a bill to repeal it.

There are many, of course, who refuse to change their minds, believing execution is the ultimate wage of the ultimate sin. They also say that death penalty cases don't have to be so expensive.

Kent Scheidegger, legal director of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, a pro-capital-punishment group, said, "Having an effective appeals process might very well cost less."

States "calculate the cost as if these people are going to spend their whole lives on death row. We should be revamping the appeals process so that these cases move more quickly," Scheidegger said.

But court systems and their costs vary greatly among states, as does the time it takes to exhaust appeals. It's doubtful that change could come quickly enough to generate savings during this roiling recession.

"It's all about money," said McCartin, the former California judge. "The reasons I changed my mind were between that and how the victims' families just get raped during appeals."

But if convicted killers get life imprisonment instead of death, is that letting them off easy?

Not a chance, says 52-year-old Gordon "Randy" Steidl. He lived on death row and then in the general prison population, after his sentence was commuted to life. He preferred his former accommodations.

Steidl was released in 2004 after being exonerated of the 1986 stabbing deaths of a newlywed couple in Paris, Ill. He had an alibi for the night of the murders, corroborated by others. But he was convicted on eyewitness testimony provided by the town drunk and the town drug addict. Both later recanted.

The state of Illinois spent $3.5 million trying to execute him, "only to end up giving me a life sentence," Steidl said. "And then 5½ years after that, I was exonerated."

He spent 12 years in a tiny cell on death row. Then he was thrown into "gen pop," with its snarling mass of an open cellblock, where the prospect of being stabbed, raped or worse loomed constantly, alongside deafening noise and psychotic cell mates.

"If you really want to kill someone, give them life without parole," Steidl said in an even voice. He speaks of his troubled past as if it was trapped under glass or locked behind bars - visible but no longer able to torture him.

"It's worse than dying."
-
For more on this topic:
-
Well Executed?: The Real World Implications of Capital Punishment
-
www.failuremag.com/carroll_pickett_at_the_death_house_door.html
-
Failure magazine's interview with Rev. Carroll Pickett, former Death House chaplain at The Walls in Huntsville, Texas
-
www.failuremag.com/arch_history_carroll_pickett_interview.html
-
----------

"Massachusetts: Superior court celebrates 150 years"
By Tony Dobrowolski, Berkshire Eagle Staff, Saturday, March 28, 2009

PITTSFIELD — James Buchanan was the president and the country was divided over slavery when the Massachusetts Superior Court was founded in July 1859.

One of the oldest common law trial courts of general jurisdiction in the United States, the Superior Court is celebrating its 150th anniversary this year with a series of educational events that involve courts across the commonwealth, including Berkshire County's.

The Berkshire County events include three programs that will be broadcast on local cable television stations. The first will be a discussion of the history and work of the Superior Court that includes Chief Justice Barbara J. Rouse and Berkshire Superior Court judges John A. Agostini and Daniel A. Ford. That program was filmed in Superior Court on Friday afternoon.

The two others consist of mock hearings on criminal and civil matters that will be distributed to schools on CD-ROM for classroom discussion.

Rouse, who traveled to Pittsfield on Friday to discuss the anniversary celebrations, said many across the state have no idea what the courts do.

"Civics is no longer taught in Massachusetts schools," she said. "Studies have shown that some segments of the population can't name the three branches of government."

Ford will preside over the mock criminal hearings, and Agostini the civil matters. Members of the Berkshire Bar Association will also participate. Those programs will be filmed in Superior Court in April.

Ford is the chairman of the Berkshire County committee that planned the local anniversary celebrations. He said the idea to create three television programs was arrived at by consensus.

"We're a smaller county than some of the other ones," Ford said. "We wanted to have an outreach to the schools. We thought this was a good way of doing it. It was something that we thought would be educational, informative and enjoyable."

In May 1959, the Berkshire Bar Association hosted a celebration for the Superior Court's 100th anniversary with a dinner at Pittsfield's Wendell Sherwood Hotel.

Rouse said no public funds have been used to pay for any of the 150th anniversary celebrations. Superior Court judges across the state have made contributions, and the court received a grant from the state Bar Association, she said.

The economic recession has forced Gov. Deval L. Patrick to cut funding to several state agencies. Rouse said the Superior Court implemented a hiring freeze and eliminated per diem court reporters in civil sessions. She said the Superior Court won't know what additional cost-saving measures it may have to take until it receives its fiscal 2010 funding from the state in May or June.

----------

Berkshire County: James Dohoney Scholarship Fund
"Lawyers' goal: A play for funds"
By Derek Gentile, Berkshire Eagle Staff, Monday, April 13, 2009

LENOX — Even before a visitor enters the Lenox Community Center, one can hear raised voices. This is just a rehearsal, but the two dozen or so attorneys taking part in the Berkshire Bar Players' production of "Inherit The Wind" are clearly taking this performance very seriously.

"Oh yeah, they're all into this," said co-director Lou Oggiani, a Great Barrington attorney. "And some of them are pretty good."

The play will be shown Thursday and Saturday night at 8 p.m. and Sunday afternoon at 3 p.m. at the Unicorn Theater in Stockbridge. Tickets are $30.

The Berkshire Bar Players are a group of amateur actors who all happen to be full-time lawyers. They have banded together for a good cause: They are raising money for the James Dohoney Scholarship Fund, a fund that provides scholarship money to local high school students.

To date, according to Judith Monachina, who is the publicist for the show, the event has raised $37,585, which provided scholarships for 43 local students, as well as funding to five local educational enrichment funds.

They are also bound together by their affection for Dohoney, a local judge known as much for his love of the job as for his fairness on the bench. Dohoney died in 1995, and the scholarship fund was created a few years after his demise.

But the irony of it, as Oggiani will admit, was that in 1999, when lawyers began speaking of a fund to honor the late judge, "We didn't really have any idea of how to raise the money. Then I thought about doing a play and everybody got excited about it."

That first year, Oggiani directed "12 Angry Jurors." (The play was originally called, as most people know, "12 Angry Men." But the Berkshire Bar Players included some female actors, and so the title was changed.)

The Bar Players try to choose a play with a legal theme. This year's play, "Inherit The Wind," is a fictionalized version of the 1925 Scopes "Monkey" trial, which resulted in John T. Scopes' conviction for teaching Charles Darwin's theory of evolution to a high school science class, which was then against Tennessee state law.

The company has been rehearsing since December. In March, rehearsals went from once a week to twice a week, said Oggiani.

"It's says a lot that all of these people have families and other commitments, but they've been pretty good in making time for this play," he said.

----------

Daniel Bosley is NOT hard at work! And the "BUREAUCRAT" goes out of his way to snub Governor Deval Patrick!!!!

-

-

-
A lack of activity on legislation left the House chamber empty yesterday. (Globe Staff Photo / John Tlumacki)
-

"No air of urgency at State House"
By Matt Viser, Boston Globe Staff, February 26, 2009

When a young mother from Brockton named Uloma Ikeagwuonwu roamed the hallways of the State House yesterday looking for someone, anyone, to discuss school programs, it took her 90 minutes before she finally found two legislators.

"Nothing seems to be happening," she said. "It's so quiet. The people I expect to see, I'm not seeing them."

Seven weeks into the legislative session, facing an economic crisis of historic proportions and public confidence eroded by a series of scandals and ethics controversies, the Legislature remains at a virtual standstill.

Ethics law changes? No action scheduled for at least another month, perhaps not until April. Budgets, including emergency provisions sought by Governor Deval Patrick in response to the recession? Not even a hearing, despite Patrick's calls for quick action.

Since Jan. 7, the start of the legislative session, the House has met 19 times, for a total of 18 hours, 47 minutes, an average of less than 3 hours per week, according to a Globe analysis of minutes kept by the State House News Service. Of that, nearly 7 hours were for ceremonial events where no actual work took place, honoring Abraham Lincoln, listening to the governor's State of the State address, and being sworn into office.

The longest meeting was on Feb. 11, when representatives met for nearly six hours to debate rules. They still found time to adopt resolutions honoring Ronald Reagan and Red Sox legend Jim Rice. Last week, the House welcomed the mayor of Haifa, Israel.

About a dozen House lawmakers met on Monday, gaveled into session at 11:07 a.m. A prayer was said, the Pledge of Allegiance recited, and within 4 minutes they had adjourned.

Leading lawmakers say to stay tuned. House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo, who has already restored term limits for his job and mandated ethics training for House members, said yesterday that the pace will quicken in upcoming weeks.

"I can tell you that I have been busy and a lot of commissions and committees have been busy, as well," DeLeo said outside his office. "As we go along, hopefully you're going to be pleased with the progress, in terms of what we're doing."

But some lawmakers say the delays, while not unusual, need to end because of the extraordinary issues facing the state.

"I'm anxious to see things get going," said Representative David Flynn, a Bridgewater Democrat. "The pressure is on us, justifiably so with all that we're confronting. The next two weeks, we've really got to shape up. The public has a right to expect we will move."

The inactivity in the Legislature contrasts with other government activity around the country. State lawmakers in California were working long hours at the State House last week to solve a budget crisis, for example, and members of Congress met on weekends to cut a deal on a $787 billion stimulus package sought by President Obama.

Most Massachusetts lawmakers took last week off for school vacation week.

"Everything seems to be stagnant," said Senate minority leader Richard R. Tisei, a Wakefield Republican. "The building should be humming every day with legislative hearings taking place. That's not happening."

David Falcone, a spokesman for Senate President Therese Murray, said the Senate has drafted a 268-page transportation reform bill and created several commissions to oversee the state redistricting process and to monitor the state's spending of federal stimulus money. A committee also held a hearing yesterday on a proposal to reorganize several state agencies.

Yesterday House and Senate lawmakers announced a series of hearings beginning next week on transportation law changes, among them a controversial plan by the governor to increase the gas tax by 19 cents a gallon. Lawmakers have criticized Patrick for not filing the bill until this week, preventing them from moving forward on changes.

The Senate has met even less often than the House, meeting 16 times for a total of 10 hours, 48 minutes, or about an hour and a half a week. The base pay for Massachusetts lawmakers is $61,440, although many earn additional stipends for holding leadership positions.

Longtime observers of the State House say this year's session got off to an unusually slow start, but few are alarmed. The Legislature is designed to be slower and more deliberative than the executive branch, and it typically takes several weeks to get going at the start of a legislative session.

"I may be wrong, but I'm not sure we're at the point where the world is going to collapse if we take two more weeks to deal with some of these issues," said Pam Wilmot, executive director of Common Cause, a government watchdog group. "I don't want to be an apologist for the system, which has many flaws. But we also need to be realistic and let it work. You can't get blood out of stone."

Work at the State House was also stalled this year because of the shakeup in the House leadership just as the legislative session was getting started, with the resignation of former speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi Jan. 27. After DiMasi resigned, DeLeo took several weeks to make new committee assignments and decide which lawmakers to name as chairmen.

Patrick, who accused the Legislature last year of not acting swiftly enough on his proposals, declined a request for an interview and avoided criticizing top lawmakers.

"The governor recognizes the speed with which the new speaker has assembled his team and the substantive discussions the administration has already had with the new chairs in both the House and Senate," his spokesman, Kyle Sullivan, said in a statement.

"Is it slow? Yeah, but there are reasons for it," said Representative Daniel E. Bosley, a North Adams Democrat. "It's unfortunate because we ought to be talking about pension reform, transportation reform, and the budget."
-
Matt Viser can be reached at maviser@globe.com.
-
----------
-

-

-
----------

2/26/2009

Re: The Massachusetts Legislature is on a permanent taxpayer subsidized vacation!

The Boston Globe published a news article today explaining how the Massachusetts Legislature is getting NOTHING accomplished while they are asking the people to pay higher taxes, fees and tolls! To read this news article, please go to:
www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/02/26/no_air_of_urgency_at_state_house/

Highlights of this news article include:

1. "Seven weeks into the legislative session, facing an economic crisis of historic proportions and public confidence eroded by a series of scandals and ethics controversies, the Legislature remains at a virtual standstill."

2. "Since Jan. 7,(2009), the start of the legislative session, the House has met 19 times, for a total of 18 hours, 47 minutes, an average of less than 3 hours per week, according to a Globe analysis of minutes kept by the State House News Service. Of that, nearly 7 hours were for ceremonial events where no actual work took place...The longest meeting was on Feb. 11, when representatives met for nearly six hours to debate rules."

3. "The inactivity in the (Massachusetts) Legislature contrasts with other government activity around the country."

4. DAN "Bureaucrat" BOSLEY states: "Is it slow? Yeah, but there are reasons for it," said the Representative from North Adams who is Democrat. "It's unfortunate because we ought to be talking about pension reform, transportation reform, and the budget."

5. "Ethics law changes? No action scheduled for at least another month, perhaps not until April. Budgets, including emergency provisions sought by Governor Deval Patrick in response to the recession? Not even a hearing, despite Patrick's calls for quick action."

Why do the people have to pay taxes, fees and tolls when those who raise the state government's revenue are all on a permanent taxpayer subsidized vacation?

- Jonathan Melle

Source: www.topix.net/forum/source/berkshire-eagle/TDHOJURFNJ9M35RO2

----------

"Work load to get busy for legislators"
By Jack Nicas, Berkshire Eagle Boston Bureau, Tuesday, March 03, 2009

BOSTON — After seven weeks of inactivity, legislative committees get rolling this week lifting what has been a malaise hanging over the Statehouse since Sal DiMasi's resignation.

The House and Senate Ways and Means Committees will hold joint hearings on a proposed budget for fiscal year 2010 today, more than a month after its submission.

The annual hearings come nearly three weeks later than last year when the hearing process wrapped up on Feb. 28 in 2008.

The House Ways and Means Committee, newly chaired by Rep. Charles Murphy, D-Burlington, must still deal with a supplemental 2009 budget, created to plug a $1.1 billion gap in spending and revenues. The committee met for the first time last Thursday, said Rep. Denis Guyer, D-Dalton, a committee member.

Fellow member, Rep. Christopher Speranzo, D-Pittsfield, said he wasn't sure when his committee would address the 2009 bill.

The supplemental budget must pass through both Ways and Means committees and the House and Senate before fiscal year 2009 ends on June 31.

Transportation hearings also begin this week when the Joint Transportation Committee takes public testimony on transportation reform, including the governor's proposed 19-cent gas tax. Hearings begin Wednesday in Springfield, which will be the committee's first meeting of the session.

Many legislators blame the Legislature's sluggish start on the resignation of House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi and subsequent election of his replacement, Robert DeLeo, D-Winthrop.

"I put a tremendous amount of blame on the previous speaker," said House Minority Leader Bradley Jones, R-North Reading. "(DeLeo) was denied three weeks he might of otherwise had." DeLeo was sworn in on Jan. 28 and made committee assignments Feb. 12. But most committees have yet to meet or adopt committee rules.

"(Committees) now exist in name, but they're not completely operational," said Don Siriani, chief of staff for Sen. Susan Fargo, D-Lincoln.

Sen. Susan Tucker, D-Andover, said none of her seven committees have met yet. "The Housing Committee, the one I'm responsible for, meets March 10 for our organizational meeting," she said. "I hope we have our bills." Thousands of bills have yet to be numbered or assigned to committees.

School vacation and new office assignments have further delayed activity.

Lawmakers acknowledged the series of moving days had slowed progress.

"I didn't expect a lot to happen last week, school vacation week, you know, moves, this and that. Everything takes longer," Jones said.

But some lawmakers insist the Legislature is making progress.

"We've been working very hard behind the scenes," Guyer said. "Not all the work of a legislator is in the chamber; I've been very busy on other fronts." Transportation Co-Chair Sen. Steve Baddour, D-Methuen, said transportation legislation is on track.

"In terms of transportation, we've done a lot. We've already held hearings. We put together a 268-page bill. We're moving along," Baddour said. "The legislative process by its nature-and at times rightfully so-is slow." But others are not happy with the session's pace.

"There are some things we should be spending time on and it's frustrating we haven't done at least some of them already," Jones said.
-
www.topix.net/forum/source/berkshire-eagle/TJRTOMS0ABSD6PVHH
-
-----

"Lawmakers get moving on bills", By Jack Nicas, The North Adams Transcript Boston Bureau, Tuesday, March 3, 2009

BOSTON -- After seven weeks of inactivity, legislative committees get rolling this week lifting what has been a malaise hanging over the Statehouse since Sal DiMasi's resignation.

The House and Senate Ways and Means Committees will hold joint hearings on a proposed budget for fiscal year 2010 today, more than a month after its submission.

The annual hearings come nearly three weeks later than last year when the hearing process wrapped up on Feb. 28.

The House Ways and Means Committee, newly chaired by Rep. Charles Murphy, D-Burlington, must still deal with a supplemental 2009 budget, created to plug a $1.1 billion gap in spending and revenues. The committee met for the first time last Thursday, said Rep. Denis Guyer, D-Dalton, a committee member.

Fellow member, Rep. Christopher Speranzo, D-Pittsfield, said he wasn't sure when his committee would address the 2009 bill.

The supplemental budget must pass through both Ways and Means committees and the House and Senate before fiscal year 2009 ends on June 31.

Transportation hearings also begin this week when the Joint Transportation Committee takes public testimony on transportation reform, including the governor's proposed 19-cent gas tax. Hearings begin Wednesday in Springfield, which will be the committee's first meeting of the session.

Many legislators blame the Legislature's sluggish start on the resignation of House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi and subsequent election of his replacement, Robert DeLeo, D-Winthrop.

"I put a tremendous amount of blame on the previous speaker," said House Minority Leader Bradley Jones, R-North Reading. "(DeLeo) was denied three weeks he might of otherwise had." DeLeo was sworn in on Jan. 28 and made committee assignments Feb. 12. But most committees have yet to meet or adopt committee rules.

Sen. Susan Tucker, D-Andover, said none of her seven committees have met yet. "The Housing Committee, the one I'm responsible for, meets March 10 for our organizational meeting," she said. "I hope we have our bills." Thousands of bills have yet to be numbered or assigned to committees.

School vacation and new office assignments have further delayed activity.

Lawmakers acknowledged the series of moving days had slowed progress.

"I didn't expect a lot to happen last week, school vacation week, you know, moves, this and that. Everything takes longer," Jones said.

But some lawmakers insist the Legislature is making progress.

"We've been working very hard behind the scenes," Guyer said. "Not all the work of a legislator is in the chamber; I've been very busy on other fronts."

Transportation Co-Chair Sen. Steve Baddour, D-Methuen, said transportation legislation is on track.

"In terms of transportation, we've done a lot. We've already held hearings. We put together a 268-page bill. We're moving along," Baddour said. "The legislative process by its nature -- and at times rightfully so -- is slow." But others are not happy with the session's pace.

"There are some things we should be spending time on, and it's frustrating we haven't done at least some of them already," Jones said.

"To me, we could easily do a bill on (pension) next week," he said. "But now all of a sudden you're into March and then you're into the second week of March, deep into budget hearings -- it's frustrating." State agency heads will testify at all but one of the budget hearings. The final hearing, March 20 at the Statehouse, will be for public testimony.

However, all transportation hearings are specifically for the public.

"The Boston elite has spoken; they want an exorbitant increase in the gas tax," Baddour said. "The purpose of these hearings is for working men and woman from around the commonwealth to be able to voice their concerns directly to the committee."
-
www.topix.net/forum/source/north-adams-transcript/TTN8864V4QO6OJ62L
-
----------
-

-
Photo by Nancy Lane
-

"Angry citizens open fire on pols"
By Edward Mason, February 25, 2009, www.bostonherald.com, Local Coverage

From the bullet that smashed through a Lawrence City Hall window to stinking fishes flung at the Gloucester mayor’s home, city and state leaders are feeling the heat on the street from taxpayers and public sector workers fuming over impending layoffs and service cuts.

Authorities believe a bullet that slammed into the Lawrence city planner’s desk last weekend may be related the recent layoffs of 11 city employees and the firing of two others.

“If someone is giving a message that you’d better watch out, that’s disconcerting,” Lawrence Mayor Michael J. Sullivan told the Herald yesterday.

Gloucester Mayor Carolyn Kirk, who receives plainclothes police protection on occasion, found a pile of fish on her front porch last month, and her secretary intercepts an almost daily stream of angry e-mails and letters, redirecting the most menacing to police.

“In this budget climate, we’re all faced with cutting jobs, people’s livelihoods,” Kirk said. “It makes a mayor a target.”

Meanwhile, at a gas station on Old Colony Avenue yesterday, State Rep. Brian Wallace (D-South Boston) got an earful from a man incensed about Gov. Deval Patrick’s proposed 19-cent gas tax hike.

“It’s gotten worse,” said Wallace, who also gets blistering e-mails from constituents. “It’s taken a different tone, an edge. People are stretched to the limit.”

Geoff Beckwith, executive director of the Massachusetts Municipal Association, fears that the anger could morph into violence as the economic crisis deepens.

“Unfortunately, the decisions local officials have to make are personal ones, and people get upset at them,” Beckwith said. “When emotions run high and difficult decisions are made, there’s the potential for violence.”

Lynn Mayor Edward “Chip” Clancy agreed. “Any time you tell someone no, people get very, very angry,” he explained.

Beckwith and other municipal officials are aware this latest onslaught comes little more than a year after a disturbed gunman opened fire on the Kirkwood, Mo., City Council, killing five people.

“We know we’re the people who feel the heat,” said Brockton Mayor James Harrington, who’s considering laying off at least 100 cops and firefighters. “That’s the job we chose, and it’s a big part of the job.”

In Melrose, Mayor Robert Dolan blamed tough times for a spike in dime-dropping by anonymous tipsters targeting police, fire and public works employees believed to be cavorting about on city time.

Lynn’s Clancy said he’s steering clear of bars and other places where he might run into angry taxpayers.

“When they have a few in them,” Clancy said, “they get a little - how do you say - demonstrative.”
-
Article URL: www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1154481
-
----------

"Beacon Hill out of touch with local communities"
The Boston Globe, Letters, March 1, 2009

IN WATCHING the economic events over the last several months and the reaction of our state government, one cannot help but conclude that our leaders are out of touch with the realities of the communities.

Small communities have been cutting costs and services for years because annual costs have exceeded revenues. In North Reading last year, children went to school for four and a half days a week because the town could not afford a full week, and classes numbered 30 students per teacher. This happened during relatively good economic times.

Now, Beacon Hill has cut local aid, pushing problems to cities and towns. With no means to raise revenues, we are forced to make impossible decisions, such as laying off teachers and public safety employees - services that should not fluctuate with economic times.

The foundation of our governmental model is broken, and needs to be fixed. Revenues are declining, costs are increasing, and basic services have already been cut to the bone. This is the crisis that will devastate Massachusetts. It appears that our state government is more concerned with hiring a "stimulus czar" and further bloating state programs than addressing real issues.

Melissa Driscoll
North Reading, Massachusetts

----------

"Gas tax hike will boost food costs"
The Berkshire Eagle, Letters, Saturday, March 07, 2009

While I am elated that the Berkshire delegation to the Statehouse opposes the governor's new gas tax, there are more reasons this plan should be looked at carefully by those of us in the Berkshires.

Not only will we be paying more for a gallon of gasoline, but we will pay more for food and other commodities through the increased cost of transporting them to this area. While the price of a barrel of oil has decreased in recent times, have you noticed that the price of groceries and other staples has remained high? Why? Because of the cost in getting them here! We do not live in a very accessible area and heavily rely on goods being shipped in. Now, not only will we be asked to pay a higher gas tax, but also incur the higher cost of shipping them here. When the price of a barrel of oil finally did drop, did food prices? No, and I am afraid that some companies will use this new tax to raise prices once again.

With only 1.5 cents a gallon coming back to the Berkshires for roads and bridges, deputy secretary for communications and policy head the comment by Colin Durrant— the same Colin Durrant who nets $115,000 per year as a press secretary — about paying for what you're going to get is revealing. In effect, that the Berkshires can expect very little. Maybe he can defer some of his pay to help in reconstruction costs, seeing how it bothers him that much. Don't count on it, because I'm sure he drives a state issued vehicle for which the general population will pay the elevated gas tax on.

If these are the same people who are going to decide how the state's stimulus money is to be spent, the Berkshires can expect little or no change at all. Thank you Mr. Patrick.

JUDY TAYLOR
Adams, Massachusetts
-
www.topix.net/forum/source/berkshire-eagle/T3U5EF1R059HFFDG9
-
-----

"Gas-tax increase a tough sell"
By Trevor Jones, Berkshire Eagle Staff, Thursday, March 05, 2009

PITTSFIELD — Secretary of Transportation James A. Aloisi has said he believes members of the Berkshire delegation will support a proposed 19-cent increase to the state gas tax, but the legislators remain unsold, claiming it unfairly burdens residents in the western part of the state and doesn't return enough funds to the region.

"I understand that we have a statewide transportation system, but for those of us in the Berkshires who have never been through the Big Dig, have never rode on the T, to ask us to pay an inordinate amount of their expense, or their mismanagement, is wrong," said Rep. William "Smitty" Pignatelli, D-Lenox.

To offset what would be a $19 billion operational deficit for the Department of Transportation over then next 20 years, Gov. Deval L. Patrick's has called for an increase in revenue through the gas tax, and streamlining the budget by eliminating the Turnpike Authority, standardizing employee health care and eliminating the bond system that pays for employee salaries.

Patrick and Aloisi defended the proposal at a hearing in Springfield Wednesday, with Aloisi saying in a released statement afterward, "I believe that a good faith consensus can and will be reached on a bill that provides a comprehensive solution to our transportation needs."

Of the 19 cents in the gas tax increase, 1.5 cents would go to the state's five Regional Transit Authorities and 1.5 cents would go to targeted regional road projects.

"1.5 pennies coming back to the Berkshires for regional roads and bridges, that's not regional equity," said Pignatelli. "They've got to come up with a better plan to deal with regional equity so the lion's share stays with the people who pay them."

Colin Durrant, deputy secretary for communications and policy for the state, said the funds are guaranteed — as opposed to appropriated as they are now — and will be given to the regions in proportion to how much they accumulated.

"What you pay, basically, is what your going to get," said Durrant.

Rep. Daniel E. Bosley, D-North Adams, said the gas tax increase disproportionately impacts people in the western part of the state who rely heavily on automobiles and have little access to mass transit. He also said the proposal follows a two-decade trend of increasing percentages of revenue going to the eastern part of the state.

"I'm sick and tired of the money going to the east side of the state when it hurts this side of the state," said Bosley.

Rep. Christopher N. Speranzo, D-Pittsfield, said reforms should be the first priority.

"I think (Patrick) has the cart before the horse in putting revenue before reform," said Speranzo. "And once they get the revenue, what is the chance we are going to see reform follow."

"Reform absolutely has to come first," said Sen. Benjamin B. Downing, D-Pittsfield. "And discussion of revenue is ill-conceived at this point, it's based on a system that doesn't work."

But reform and revenue are inseparable, according to Durrant.

"Reform must come with revenue," said Durrant. "The reason we're facing this problem is that for too long we put off the problem. But we can't just look at the problems of today, our goal is to build a strong enough transportation system for the future that can fuel economic growth."

Several local representatives said the state should consider a smaller tax increase along with alternative forms of revenue.

Rep. Denis E. Guyer, D-Dalton, asked the administration to look into implementing tolls along I-93 coming from New Hampshire, where I-93 splits with I-95 and along the entrances from Rhode Island, but has received no response.

"An equitable solution is to tax the people that the majority of the tax is going to pay for," said Guyer. "It's not even been thought of as a solution, it's always been about the gas tax," said Guyer.

Several others said the state should consider reinstating tolls along the western portion of the Turnpike as an option.
-
The Associated Press contibuted to this report.
-
www.topix.net/forum/source/berkshire-eagle/TJP5R0EOTKMGIROP2
-
----------

"House discusses hiking income, sales taxes"
By Jim O'Sullivan, State House News Service, March 11, 2009

Sour budget predictions from leading local economists, including forecasts of a deficit as high as $4.3 billion next fiscal year, prompted House members to discuss raising the state's largest tax revenue generators, the personal income tax and the retail sales tax, dangerous political terrain as Beacon Hill desperately seeks a way out of its fiscal crisis.

During a two-hour caucus yesterday in which economists predicted the crisis could last until fiscal 2012, Representative Elizabeth A. Malia, Democrat of Jamaica Plain, suggested the income tax as a means to stave off deeper budget cuts, according to several lawmakers who attended. Lawmakers also discussed elevating the state's 5 percent sales tax.

Senate Ways and Means Chairman Steven Panagiotakos, Democrat of Lowell, rejected an income tax boost, telling the News Service, "As far as the income tax, I think the voters have preempted that issue. I personally would not be in favor of increasing it.

"If it is looked at instead of a gas tax and meals tax," he said of the sales tax, "then I think it is something that should be considered. Certainly, the question is at what level." Panagiotakos added, "People that have heard of the sales tax would much rather do a cent on the sales tax than 19 cents on the gas tax or the meals tax."

Asked about the income tax after the caucus, Speaker Robert A. DeLeo said the House is considering all options.

DeLeo said he was unsure whether the House would go along with the income tax hike, and said he would probably have a better sense "within a month or two" of House sentiment on budget decisions.

In a statement released later, he said: "In talking to members, I have found little or no support for an increase in the income tax. I myself have serious reservations about doing something that would put such a burden on the families of Massachusetts. Given the strain the state's families are under, I am committed to serious reform and profound cuts before considering any new revenue items."

A higher income tax would be a further repudiation of a 2000 voter mandate to roll the income tax rate from 5.75 percent to 5 percent.

Representative Ellen Story, Democrat of Amherst and one of DeLeo's four division chairs, said members showed broader support for bumping the 5 percent sales tax, which Governor Deval Patrick has already targeted by proposing to repeal exemptions on candy, sugared drinks, and alcohol.

Lawmakers heard from the former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, Cathy Minehan, and Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. Several emerged from the meeting saying it had darkened their view of the state's fiscal condition.

----------

Beacon Hill Roll Call: "Changes to emergency housing programs in Massachusetts ok'd"
By Staff reports, wickedlocal.com/allston, Monday, March 9, 2009, 2:23 PM EDT

BOSTON -

THE HOUSE AND SENATE. Beacon Hill Roll Call records local representatives and senators’ votes on three roll calls from the week of March 2-6.

GOVERNOR PATRICK’S REORGANIZATION PLAN (S 15)

The House, 153-0, and Senate, 38-0, approved another one of Gov. Patrick’s government reorganization plans. The detailed proposal combines the Department of Transitional Assistance’s emergency shelter programs with housing programs currently run by the Department of Housing and Community Development. It also transfers four other programs to different departments.

In his written statement along with the proposal, the governor said, “This legislation restructures certain state agencies to make them more cost effective and responsive by consolidating programs and program staff within agencies whose mission and expertise will ensure the most coordinated, efficient operation of the programs.” (A Yes” vote is for the reorganization plan).

SEVEN-MEMBER INDEPENDENT REDISTRICTING COMMISSION

The House, 23-133, voted mostly along party lines and rejected a Republican-sponsored proposal requiring that the Legislature establish a seven-member independent redistricting commission to draw Massachusetts legislative and congressional districts every 10 years. The commission would then submit the plan to the Legislature for an up-or-down vote. Only seven Democrats joined the GOP and voted in favor of the GOP proposal that would replace a Democratic-sponsored plan under which the Legislature itself would draw the districts as it has done for many years.

The GOP proposal requires the independent commission to follow specific rules, including ensuring that districts are compact and contiguous and are not drawn for the purpose of diluting the voting strength of a racial minority, political party or any individual candidate. The commission would also be required to attempt to follow other guidelines, including preventing a city or town from being divided into more than one district.

Commission members would include a college dean or professor of law, political science or government appointed by the governor; a retired judge appointed by the attorney general and an expert in civil rights law appointed by the secretary of state. The other four members would be chosen by the original three members from a list of candidates nominated by the House Speaker, House Minority Leader, Senate President and Senate Minority Leader.

Supporters of the independent commission said that it has been endorsed by Gov. Deval Patrick, former governors Michael Dukakis and Mitt Romney, the League of Women Voters and Common Cause. They argued that the Legislature is not impartial and often gerrymanders districts to protect incumbents. They said that this antiquated, partisan system allows the majority party to control the process and permits “legislators to choose their voters.”

Some opponents of the independent commission said that it would be composed of unaccountable, unelected and unknown members who are not responsible to the voters. They argued that elected, accountable members of the Legislature should be responsible for this important and tricky job of redistricting. Others argued that they support the independent commission, but that it would take a constitutional amendment to establish it because the state constitution gives the redistricting power to the Legislature. Supporters of the independent commission countered that a constitutional amendment is not necessary. They argued that the Legislature would still have the final power to approve or reject a plan proposed by the commission.

(A “Yes” vote is for the seven-member independent redistricting commission. A “No” vote is against it).

28-MEMBER LEGISLATIVE REDISTRICTING COMMISSION

The House, 132-20, approved the Democratic-sponsored bill establishing a redistricting commission composed of 28 legislators that would include 23 Democrats and five Republicans. Only four Democrats joined the GOP and voted against the commission. The 28-member commission was generally opposed by representatives who had earlier supported the seven-member independent commission. The 28-member commission was generally supported by representatives who had earlier opposed the GOP’s proposal for a seven-member independent commission. (A “Yes” vote is for the 28-member commission comprised of only legislators).

STATE WILL GUARANTEE TURNPIKE DEBT (H 100)

The Senate, 33-5, approved a bill authorizing the state to continue to guarantee the debt of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority. The current state guarantee expired in January and the bill would extend it to June 30. The proposal is designed to prevent the Turnpike from getting hit with a $363 million bill from investment company UBS if the turnpike’s struggling insurance agency’s credit rating is downgraded. The package also allows State Treasurer Timothy Cahill to be part of Gov. Patrick’s negotiations with UBS to renegotiate and avoid the $363 million payment. Supporters said that the bill is necessary because neither the Turnpike Authority nor the state have the $363 million if it comes due. Opponents said that the bill is a well-intentioned but misguided Band-Aid solution to an increasingly broader and more difficult transportation problem that is threatening the state. (A “Yes” vote is for the bill authorizing the state to continue to guarantee the debt of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority. A “No” vote is against the bill).

LIMIT MASS TURNPIKE TOLL HIKES (H 100)

The Senate, 12-26, rejected an amendment prohibiting the Mass. Turnpike Authority from raising tolls beyond the amount needed to prevent the Turnpike from defaulting on its bonds. Amendment supporters said that the amendment would in effect put a stop to the toll increases scheduled to take effect on March 29, including a 25-cent hike in tolls at the Brighton and Weston toll booths (from $1.25 to $1.50) and a $2 raise at the Sumner and Ted Williams tunnels (from $3.50 to $5.50). They argued that the amendment would give the state and Turnpike more time to explore other solutions and reform instead of toll hikes. Some amendment opponents said that the amendment is well-intentioned, but argued that supporters are misleading members because the amendment would not actually eliminate the current toll hikes. Others said that the Legislature should be looking at big reforms in the state’s entire transportation system. (A “Yes” vote is for prohibiting the Mass Turnpike Authority from raising tolls except to prevent the Turnpike from defaulting on its bonds. A “No” vote is against the prohibition).

ALSO UP ON BEACON HILL

WASTE HOTLINE AND HARDSHIP TOUR — Sen. Michael Knapik, R-Westfield, and Rep. Vinny deMacedo, R-Plymouth, announced a tool with which citizens can report any waste of the state’s estimated $6 billion share of the federal economic stimulus package funds. Citizens are encouraged to e-mail any examples of waste to mass.stimwatch@gmail.com. The GOP also announced plans for its new “Hardship Listening Tour,” a series of hearings giving citizens “the opportunity to express the issues they are facing with their own household budgets, and the potential impacts on families and individuals of the more than $411 million in taxes and fees which are being contemplated to address state budget gaps.”

MORE LEGISLATION PROPOSED — House and Senate clerks continue to process the more than 6,000 bills that have been filed for consideration in the 2009-2010 session. Here is a look at some:

PROTECT JOURNALISTS FROM DISCLOSING SOURCES — This measure would establish a “shield law” providing protection to journalists who refuse to disclose confidential sources. Protection would not be provided if disclosure of the source would prevent imminent and actual harm to public security from acts of terrorism and the potential harm “clearly outweighs the public interest in protecting the free flow of information.”

PRISONERS DEFRAY COSTS OF JAIL — This legislation would require non-indigent prisoners to pay the state $2 per day to defray the costs of incarceration.

SUPER BOWL GAMBLING — This bill would legalize “betting squares” or pools on the NFL Super Bowl and the NCAA basketball tournament. It requires all revenue from bets to be used solely for prizes, and prevents the organizers from using any of the money to compensate themselves.

ADOPTED CHILDREN AND MATERNITY LEAVE — This proposal would mandate that a female employee on maternity leave for the adoption of a child be entitled to the same benefits offered by her employer to a female for the birth of a child.

WATER AT EVENTS — This legislation would require entertainment venues to sell clean water at a fair price if the venue prohibits outside food and beverages.

TAX ON PLASTIC GROCERY BAGS — This measure would tax consumers 5 cents per bag for each plastic grocery bag they use at the check out counter at a supermarket. The tax would apply only in supermarkets that grossed more than $1 million during the previous tax year.
-
Bob Katzen welcomes feedback at bob@beaconhillrollcall.com.
-
----------

"Facing reality on taxes"
The Berkshire Eagle, Editorial, Friday, March 13, 2009

This week, the House discussed raising the state income tax and sales tax, an indication that the sobering nature of Massachusetts' economic crisis may be hitting home. Compared to an increase in the income tax, a hike in the gas tax may look politically feasible. The reality is that the state is not only enduring tougher times then have been seen in decades, but there is no light at the end of the tunnel. Difficult calls will have to be made.

Beacon Hill is faced with an additional $1 billion budget gap on top of the one that recently led to substantial budget cuts. A projected budget deficit of $4.3 billion in fiscal 2010, a product of the national economic collapse, could result in unprecedented program cuts. Lawmakers are discussing eliminating earmarks from next year's budget, but earmarks, as is the case at the federal level, where they generate a disproportionate amount of fuss, constitute chump change when compared to the deficits in Boston and Washington.

An increase in the 5 percent state income tax would be the most equitable way of generating funds, but Beacon Hill doesn't appear willing to face the controversy. A hike in the 5 percent sales tax may meet resistance in a Legislature slow to take up the governor's proposal to repeal exemptions on candy and alcohol.

Governor Patrick's 19 cent-a-gallon gas tax hike would improve roads and address a debt hanging over the entire state at a cost, according to the administration, of a barely noticeable $8 a month. Yet it is stalled on Beacon Hill. Like it or not, lawmakers have unpopular decisions to make, and the sooner the better.
-
www.topix.net/forum/source/berkshire-eagle/TUGFDO5OAG6L16N26
-
----------
-

-
State Sen. Marian Walsh. (Photo by Herald file).
-

"State Sen. Marian Walsh in line to score nearly $200k: Pension could up pol’s take"
By Hillary Chabot, Saturday, March 14, 2009, www.bostonherald.com, Local Politics

State Sen. Marian Walsh, who was handed a $175,000 post by Gov. Deval Patrick on Thursday, could boost her earnings to nearly $200,000 if she begins collecting her pension.

The 54-year-old West Roxbury Democrat is eligible for the eye-popping paycheck, which comes as state residents face crippling cuts and tax hikes, because she’s worked for the state for 20 years.

“They just don’t get it,” said Christy Mihos, a former gubernatorial candidate who is eyeing another run.

Walsh’s new job at the Massachusetts Health and Educational Authority outraged Beacon Hill observers, who argue the position is unnecessary because it has remained unfilled for the past 12 years.

Jeffrey Gerson, a political professor with the University of Massachusetts at Lowell, said the hefty paycheck comes as a shock, even if it isn’t funded with taxpayer dollars.

“They shouldn’t be handing out these kinds of figures when so many people are struggling to get by,” Gerson said.

Salaries at HEFA are funded by the nonprofits that pay the agency to funnel capital financing their way, said spokesman Liam Sullivan.

Executive Director Benson Caswell earns $220,000 and is under contract at the agency until 2011. Sullivan would not provide the payroll for the other 14 employees at the company.

Walsh did not return a call seeking comment on the pension. Her husband, retired district judge Paul Buckley, is eligible for a $92,000-a-year pension after Patrick handed him a $113,000 post on the Division of Industrial Accidents.

One veteran lawmaker said Walsh was lucky she was hired for a quasi-governmental agency instead of the administration.

“The problem with lawmakers in the administration is that it seems to me they don’t get to make many decisions,” said state Rep. Daniel E. Bosley (D-North Adams), who accepted a job with Patrick in 2007, only to spurn the post weeks later. “You can’t control your own destiny.”

Several lawmakers appointed to the Patrick administration have since departed, including former state Rep. Mike Festa, who left his secretary of elder affairs position in January.
-
Article URL: www.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1158469
-
-----

"The Walsh blunder"
By Boston Herald Editorial Staff, Saturday, March 14, 2009, www.bostonherald.com, Editorial

So how tone deaf is Gov. Deval Patrick?

The state faces a fiscal crisis unlike any other. The fourth quarter of this fiscal year may find state government another $1 billion in the hole. Taxes of every kind are on the table - sales, meals, gasoline.

The public is at once fearful and angry. The threat of tax hikes in a sour economy will do that to people. Cuts will have to be made in state agencies and that means sacrifices by the rest of us - longer lines at the Registry, a longer wait for a bus. But the governor assured us that “This is one commonwealth. We share in the sacrifices.”

Enter Sen. Marian Walsh - the new poster girl for all that is appalling about the way business is done on Beacon Hill.

Walsh is slated to get a $175,000 job at the Massachusetts Health and Educational Facilities Authority. The real problem is that the job - as assistant executive director - has been vacant for a dozen years. So in the midst of a fiscal crisis the governor has apparently decided now is the time to fill it. We rest our case on the “tone deaf” issue.

If the West Roxbury Democrat wants out of the Senate, voters in her district could easily have shown her the way - without having to pay an additional annual ransom of $100,000.

Filling the position is an insult to taxpayers. Filling it with Walsh is an abomination.
-
Article URL: www.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/editorials/view.bg?articleid=1158436
-
----------

"O'Sullivan: Jamaican some headlines"
By Jim O'Sullivan/State House News Service, GHS (GateHouse Media, Inc.), Posted: March 15, 2009, The Milford Daily News

In reality, it's the taxpayers who are out of touch. They have no idea what Beacon Hill is going through, the stresses it's under, the pressures. The taxpayers have never sat at Beacon Hill's kitchen table and had to make the tough decisions, between laying off mental health caseworkers and, say, filling a job state government has managed without since the Weld administration with a longtime political backer to the tune of $175,000 a year.

Silly taxpayers.

There were revelations of last-minute raises by former Speaker Salvatore DiMasi, first-minute raises by new Speaker Robert DeLeo, and Senate non-party-line votes against a hiring freeze on state workers and a 1-percent budget cut for the Executive Branch. There was additional discussion of the new $40,000 job as a senior assistant aide to the clerk enjoyed by former Rep. Anthony Verga. Unsurprisingly, talk radio stamped disapproval on Gov. Deval Patrick's vacation in Jamaica, chiefly because it cost the taxpayers to pay for the State Police detail. The trip also argued for round-the-clock Roundup coverage of the governor, not at its core a taxpayer issue.

There is maximum fodder for this weekend's St. Patrick's Day breakfast/roast. There was also plenty of ammo the other night at the somewhat more exclusive Mistletoe Dinner attended by several House barons, where comedian Lenny Clarke eviscerated the governor and his trip to the tropics, according to attendees.

Meantime, tax talk is alive and well on the Hill. This week it was a fresh penny on the 5-cent sales tax picking up steam, floated last week and lightly vetted during Tuesday's House caucus. An income tax boost, political hemlock, did not debut with as much popularity.

The House heard more bad news on the budget, a gap next fiscal year as high as $4.3 billion, exacerbated later in the week when Senate budget chief Steven Panagiotakos, thinking the administration was too optimistic with capital gains projections, said the new current-year deficit could hit $700 million by the end of April. If the figure reaches $1 billion by June's close, the fiscal 2009 shortfall would total $3.5 billion, meaning the original appropriations bill overspent by roughly 12 percent.

"If we still haven't hit the number in March or April, and we continue to free fall, all options are on the table," Panagiotakos said, referring to sweeping cuts and an even bigger draw on the so-called rainy day fund.

That's not the issue that most legislators have their eye on, though. It's the separate, 20-year, $20 billion transportation gap that has dominated the capitol this year and will continue to, for another two weeks anyway. There's the seemingly endless debate over whether reforms should come before revenues, and the coming-to-a-head fight over whether and how much to ask for in taxes or tolls. Senate President Therese Murray re-drew her line in the sand Thursday that reforms must come first. Transportation Secretary James Aloisi didn't back off the administration's stance that there's no time to do reforms, that the revenues are needed now, or at least by March 29, the date of a round of toll increases.

A politically charged tidal wave is making its way to the State House, and city and town halls, the confluence of years of budget shenanigans, overspending, delayed decisions, flat-out wrong decisions, and, now, the tattered global economy. It'll break on these shores in the form of up-down votes on taxes, and whether incumbent victims are caught in the undertow is unclear.

"You've got one bullet in that gun," Rep. Daniel Bosley said of a tax vote, "and if you shoot it on transportation, what do you do for the budget?"

Bosley, not the powerhouse under DeLeo he was under DiMasi: "How many times can you go to people for taxes, especially when we're in the worst economic situation we've been in for 70 years, 80 years?"

That's part of why the timing of Sen. Marian Walsh's appointment to the Mass. Housing and Education Facilities Authority was so hideous for the administration, because it lumps in with the Wilkerson-Marzilli-Vitale-toll-filching axis of misdeeds, alleged or otherwise, and as the fiscal crisis wreaks havoc among real people. Even Patrick's radio hosts, WTKK's Margery Eagan and Jim Braude, were slaughtering the governor on Thursday, Eagan charging the administration with "a political tin ear." The Walsh pick will be used as campaign rhetoric if anyone ever decides to run against Patrick, which Patrick advisers assert Treasurer Timothy Cahill now has.

Similar to the Aloisi appointment, the administration knew it was going to get drilled, but decided it was worth it, though perhaps they were not planning on the decapitative Boston Herald headline Friday: "IS THIS A JOKE, GOV?"

Big breakfast menu this weekend.

STORY OF THE WEEK: Disconnect.

QUOTE OF THE WEEK: "If the system exists, you have the right to take advantage of it. I was entitled to something and I took it." - Former Canton Town Moderator Michael Curran, explicating his $46,500 pension for 10 years in that position and 12 as town counsel, in a March 9 Boston Globe story on padded retirement payments. Mr. Curran, perhaps unintentionally, was recalling the words of the famed Tammany Hall product George Washington Plunkitt, who grew wealthy working the New York machine and rebuffed critics by pointing out, "I seen my opportunities and I took 'em."

ANECDOTE OF THE WEEK: During the 1988 presidential campaign, then-Speaker George Keverian, who lay in state in the Hall of Flags Wednesday after passing away last week, was asked by the national political press whether Michael Dukakis, then the Bay State's governor and a Democratic candidate for president, had a sense of humor. The Duke, Keverian replied, did indeed. The speaker was pressed for details. What, reporters asked, was the funniest thing Dukakis had ever done? Keverian's response: "He's doing it right now."

----------

"'Evacuation Day' holiday signals quiet Statehouse"
AP, March 17, 2009

BOSTON --On a day when most workers in Massachusetts are heading off to their jobs, the Statehouse is expected to be largely quiet.

Tuesday is Evacuation Day, a Suffolk County holiday that commemorates the evacuation of British troops from Boston during the Revolutionary War.

It's a day when little, if any, work gets done on Beacon Hill.

The House and Senate have no formal sessions planned. There are no public hearings scheduled at the Statehouse. And Gov. Deval Patrick is headed to Vermont to co-host a White House forum on health care reform.

There is one exception. Secretary of State Bill Galvin says his office is open to deal with corporate filings.

The holiday has long been fodder for critics. Occasional efforts to eliminate it have failed.

-----

"What's open, closed on Evacuation Day"
boston.com, March 17, 2009

Holiday observed: Today, in Suffolk County

Retail, liquor, or convenience stores, and taverns and bars: Open at owner's discretion.

Supermarkets: Open.

Stock market: Open.

Banks: Open.

Municipal, state offices: Closed.

Libraries: Closed.

Schools: Closed.

Mail: Post offices open.

MBTA: All services will run on the regular weekday schedule. Bikes are not allowed. For more information call (617) 222-3200.

Boston traffic rules: Meters not in effect. All other parking rules apply.

Trash/recycling collection: No delays in Boston.

----------

A BOSTON GLOBE EDITORIAL
"Incumbents' paradise"
April 4, 2009

WINNING PUBLIC office for the first time may be a slog in Massachusetts, but once elected, most officials who don't break the law can stay as long as they like. Thomas Menino hasn't announced for a fifth term as Boston's mayor but is the favorite anyway. As for the Legislature, CommonWealth magazine recently found that Massachusetts had the lowest proportion of contested races of any state - just 17 percent.

The lack of competition is unhealthy, especially in comparison with Minnesota. In that chilly, deep-blue state, the magazine noted, all legislative races are contested. That's every one. There are important cultural differences: "Minnesota nice" - the state's storied combination of optimism, politeness, and reluctance to give offense - has no clear analog in local politics here.

Yet the lack of competition has some more nuts-and-bolts causes. And at a forum hosted by CommonWealth last month, speakers zeroed in on some of them.

Campaign finance. The fund-raising advantage that incumbents enjoy is well-known. But it can be limited. Minnesota legislative candidates can't carry more than $15,000 from one election to the next. Boston mayoral challenger Sam Yoon, who spoke at the forum, has proposed a lower donation limit for companies with business before City Hall, and a ban on contributions by municipal employees.

Ideas like these at least deserve an airing. The campaign finance system is designed mainly to keep donors from exercising undue influence over candidates. It should also be built to keep an imbalance of money from preempting competition.

A dearth of opposition. Nothing guarantees contested elections like a two-party system. Republicans are barely hanging on in Massachusetts, not least because the national party's brand of conservatism does not sell well in New England.

But that's not the whole story. At the forum, Charles D. Baker, the CEO of Harvard Pilgrim Health Care and frequently mentioned as a GOP candidate for governor, said his fellow Republicans often don't try again if their first bid for office fails. Baker offered that critique in partisan wrapping; more Democrats, he said, see politics as a career. But clearly candidates who are determined are more likely to get elected.

Some states have resorted to term limits to inject more competition. But that creates its own problems: lame-duck terms, the loss of qualified officials. Besides, Massachusetts governors aren't term-limited, but there's been plenty of churn in that office in the last decade or so.

A more important step is simply getting people to run. In Minnesota, candidates jump into races even against formidable odds, because, well, that's just what one does. Ironically, the best way to generate more political races in Massachusetts might be to stir in some "Minnesota nice."

----------

"Massachusetts legislators looking askance at tax hike plans"
By Matt Viser, Boston Globe Staff, April 9, 2009

House and Senate leaders on Beacon Hill, in the throes of a budget crisis of historic proportions, are resisting Governor Deval Patrick's demand for new taxes and instead plan to impose deeper spending cuts, lawmakers said.

The state has yet to finish dealing with a total budget gap that could reach $3.5 billion this year. It faces the prospect of worse revenue shortfalls next year.

But when the House unveils its budget next week, it is unlikely to contain the bevy of new taxes Governor Deval Patrick is seeking, including sales taxes on alcohol and candy, and higher fees at the Registry of Motor Vehicles.

Instead, House budget writers will rely on cuts of massive proportions, according to State House officials who have been briefed on the deliberations. The cuts will go well beyond those included in the $28 billion budget Patrick proposed in January, sources said.

The Senate also is planning to craft a budget that does not account for any tax increases, according to Senator Steven Panagiotakos, chairman of the Senate Committee on Ways and Means.

"Not many relish taking a tax vote," he said. "Over here, we've been very serious about reform before revenue. I think we need to continue along that road."

House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo declined to comment yesterday, although he told the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce last week that "the cuts that are required to balance this budget. . . will cut to the very core of government's purpose and mission." He told reporters afterward that "as of right now, I haven't sensed the support" for most of the governor's tax increase proposals.

Representative Charles A. Murphy, a Burlington Democrat and chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means, declined to comment on his committee's budget proposal, which goes to be printed later this week and will be officially unveiled next week. Advocates for human services and other government programs are bracing for a major blow.

"There's a growing sense of impending doom, anticipating a budget filled with pain and loss," said Representative Jay Kaufman, a Lexington Democrat and House chairman of the Committee on Revenue.

He said there had been little discussion of any of the governor's tax-raising proposals, although lawmakers could change their minds as the economic situation deteriorates in the coming months and the fiscal year looms July 1.

"I certainly see no evidence of any consensus over any revenue package, or even that there should be one," Kaufman said.

In addition to the nearly $600 million in tax and fee increases and other revenue generators the governor included in his budget proposal, lawmakers are also skeptical of a plan to raise the state's gas tax. Patrick has proposed increasing the gas tax by 19 cents, a measure which would probably be considered separately, outside the budget, but top lawmakers have proposed delaying that debate.

The clearest signal from the Legislature: No one wants to discuss taxes right now.

"It's a talk for another day," Panagiotakos said.

Once the House approves its version of the budget, it will go to the Senate for debate. The two branches would have to reconcile their differences before sending it to the governor. The whole process will unfold over several months.

Leslie Kirwan, Patrick's secretary of administration and finance, declined to comment yesterday on the prospect that House and Senate lawmakers aren't following the tax increase plans. Kirwan has until next week to revise revenue estimates for the remainder of this fiscal year.

"This is gruesome," said Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. "At this point, it's very much in the air what combination of tax increases, if any, there would be. They've had trouble getting consensus on the gas tax alone . . . all of that is very fluid."

While a House budget next week with heavy cuts would provoke an uproar from social-service advocates and others, the budget calendar gives lawmakers time to change their minds. And waiting could provide them with more accurate revenue estimates before they commit.

One problem with the governor's proposal, lawmakers said, is that it incrementally increases taxes in a wide variety of places.

"You're not going to get people to vote on four or five different taxes," said Representative Daniel Bosley, a Democrat from North Adams. "People can't feel like we're raising taxes on them every week. You need . . . to do this one time."

Whatever budget goes into effect on July 1 will be one of the starkest in recent memory and will continue a slide that began last fall when Massachusetts fell victim to the global recession.

The state is currently facing a gap of at least $245 million just to close the books on this year's budget, according to administration officials. And most analysts expect that number to grow - some have estimated it could reach $1 billion - if monthly revenue continues to fall short, as it did for February and March.
-
Matt Viser can be reached at maviser@globe.com.
-
----------

"Numbers show deteriorating Mass. budget situation"
Boston.com - April 14, 2009

BOSTON --A recap of the state's deteriorating financial situation and the steps taken to remedy it during the past year:

FY2009 BUDGET

July 1, 2008: $28.1 billion

FY2009 REVENUE ESTIMATE

July 1, 2008: $21.4 billion

REVISED REVENUE ESTIMATES

Oct. 15, 2008: $20.3 billion

Jan. 28, 2009: $19.45 billion

April 14, 2009: $19.3 billion

June 2009 (projected): $18.9 billion

BUDGET CUTS

Oct. 15, 2008: $1.4 billion

Jan. 28, 2009: $1.1 billion

April 14, 2009: $156 million

June 2009 (projected): $400 million

RAINY DAY FUND BALANCE

June 30, 2008: $2.1 billion

July 1, 2008: $1.7 billion ($400 million withdrawn to balance FY2009 budget)

Oct. 15, 2008: $1.5 billion ($200 million withdrawn to balance FY2009 budget)

Jan. 28, 2009: $1.2 billion ($327 million withdrawn to balance FY2009 budget)

April 1, 2009: $1.3 billion (including interest, FY2008 accounting)
-
SOURCE: Executive Office of Administration and Finance
-
----------

"Patrick works to close $156 million budget deficit"
By Glen Johnson, AP Political Writer, April 14, 2009

BOSTON --Gov. Deval Patrick says the state is facing another $156 million budget deficit that may grow by an additional $400 million before the end of the fiscal year in June.

During a Statehouse news conference Tuesday, the governor said he would close the current gap by using a combination of federal recovery funds, budget cuts and spending controls. He said he would order mandatory staff furloughs and cut more than 750 additional state jobs through layoffs, attrition and new hiring limits.

Sagging tax collections have now prompted three rounds of budget cuts.

In October, Patrick revised estimated collections downward and closed a $1.4 billion deficit. In January, he closed another $1.1 billion deficit.

----------

A BOSTON GLOBE EDITORIAL
"Plum jobs, veiled in obscurity"
April 14, 2009

IT'S HARD ENOUGH to keep track of the generous benefits paid to those who work directly for state government. Soon, a gubernatorial commission will examine the even more bewildering realm of compensation at the state's quasi-public authorities. These agencies, including Massport and the Turnpike Authority, perform the work of government with less accountability.

The historical justification for fat salaries at the quasi-public agencies is rooted in the nature of work deemed too complex - such as airport management - to entrust to patronage-minded politicians. But decades of experience has taught residents that quasi-public agencies are just as prone to abuse.

Patrick formed the commission, in part, to assuage the public's anger over his own thoughtless appointment of state Senator Marian Walsh to a $175,000 post at the quasi-public Health and Educational Facilities Authority, which provides tax-exempt financing to nonprofits. The do-nothing post had been vacant for 12 years.

It's unknown how many other sinecures are marbled throughout the quasi-public authorities, or how many executives collect heavy salaries for light duty. As many as 57 agencies could come under the commission's review, or as few as 27, depending on how the panel defines its scope. But HEFA is not an outlier in the realm of plum jobs. Patrick is wisely calling on the quasi-public boards to suspend pay raises until the commission completes its work. Refusal to do so should be treated as a sign of contempt for the public, which subsidizes many of the agencies through taxes or user fees.

Some Senate Republicans have taken issue with the choice of Stephen Crosby to head the commission, arguing that he lacks the necessary independence because of his $172,000-a-year state post as dean of the McCormack Graduate School of Policy Studies at UMass. But Crosby, who served as administration and finance secretary for former governor Jane Swift, has worked mainly in the private and nonprofit sectors. And he expresses the same concern as many taxpayers about the "fundamentally out-of-whack" salaries and pensions of public employees. "I will go where the facts tell me," says Crosby.

Patricia McGovern, who serves on the commission, was a strong critic of the lack of transparency at quasi-public authorities during her days as Senate Ways and Means Committee chairman. But two vacant seats still need to be filled by people with a deep understanding of executive pay and a deep appreciation of the public's frustration.

If the commission succeeds at untangling the salary structures, Patrick should consider expanding its mandate. Beyond the question of overpaid executives is a larger one: Are these agencies themselves worth the investment?

----------

"Massachusetts House budget cuts broadly, uses no savings"
By Steve LeBlanc, AP, The Boston Globe Online's Boston.com - April 15, 2009

BOSTON --Massachusetts House leaders unveiled a budget Wednesday that would cut a broad swath through state government operations, slicing some aid to cities and towns by a third and leaving few other areas unscathed.

The budget plan relies on no new taxes or revenues and ignores Massachusetts' rapidly dwindling "rainy day" savings fund, which the state has relied on heavily during the current fiscal year.

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Murphy said he doesn't expect anyone will be happy with the level of cuts. But the Burlington Democrat said the economic meltdown was forcing the state's hand.

"Are we happy about it? No. Is anyone happy about it? No," Murphy told reporters after the committee voted to release the bill so it could be debated April 27.

"This budget reflects reality," he said. "It was a long process and a difficult process, but one that had to be taken in such a way that we balanced the budget."

The House-devised budget totals $27.44 billion, about half a billion less that the governor's version.

The budget retains state education aid to cities and towns, but cuts lottery aid and other assistance funds by about a third. The deep cuts will likely make it harder for communities to balance their municipal budgets.

Murphy said the House decided against cutting all state budget accounts by the same percentage, but instead tried to do the "least harm as we could" by looking at each item individually.

"Nothing was safe," he said.

Although the budget plan rejects new revenues, Murphy said he couldn't rule out efforts by other members of the House to add new taxes. Friday is the deadline for submitting proposed amendments to the House proposal.

"I expect to have a long and vigorous budget debate," Murphy said. "And if the will of the membership is such that they want to move forward with revenues, so be it."

Murphy was not alone in warning of an exceptionally tight budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1.

Senate President Therese Murray, speaking to a Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce audience Wednesday, described the House proposal as "lean," and said it may get leaner when the Senate offers its own plan later this spring.

Murray said tax collections continue to fall, resulting in a budget based on about $19 billion in revenues, below the current estimate of $19.53 billion.

That would likely mean major program cuts once the Legislature completes its work in June or July.

Murray said she has not ruled out increasing the state's 5 percent sales tax.

----------

"House Budget Proposal 'Devastating'"
By Tammy Daniels - iBerkshires Staff - iBerkshires Newsroom - April 15, 2009

NORTH ADAMS, Mass. — The House released a spending plan today that paints a "devastating" picture of the state's financial situation — and will likely whet the public's appetite to digest hated tax hikes.

The House's preliminary fiscal 2010 budget is more than a half-million below that of Gov. Deval Patrick's proposed spending plan and $700 million less than last year's budget and includes $1.8 billion in cuts. While Chapter 70 education funding is being held level, it cuts local aid to cities and towns by 25 percent and eliminates a rash of grants and programs.

"This is the most devastating budget I've seen in 23 years," said Rep. Daniel E. Bosley, D-North Adams. "There are 55 line items that were cut out completely."

The veteran lawmaker said he's been on the receiving end of calls from municipal leaders in his district who say "they absolutely cannot live with the budget we're proposing."

House leaders say the budget is a dose of reality that reflects a precipitous drop-off in revenue that is expected to continue into the next fiscal year.

"We were forced to take reductions in virtually all areas of state government," said Rep. Charles Murphy, D-Burlington, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, at a press conference Wednesday afternoon. "This will undoubtedly result in major disruptions for citizens in all areas of the commonwealth."

But, he said, the state is taking in far less revenue while state services are climbing: "This is an unsustainable equation."

"It's very draconian and very painful," said Rep. Denis E. Guyer, D-Dalton, a member of the Ways and Means Committee. As a former Dalton selectman, he said he understood the plight of local officials. But with a deficit that could balloon to $5 billion, "you're going to have to do something to get you out of the hole . ... This is the reality. I don't think this is a game that's being played."

Among the line items slashed are community policing grants, at-risk youth programs, the Agricultural Innovation Center, funding for the Quinn bill that provides education aid to police officers, small-business grants, the governor's Commonwealth Corps and other municipal and educational programs.

The $27.4 billion House budget doesn't dip into the state's stabilization fund and doesn't have any new broad-based taxes, although it does include hikes in motor-vehicle and nursing home fees.

Lottery aid and additional assistance funding, targeted for urban centers, will be combined in a general government fund. State workers will have to pony up more for their insurance premium split, up from 15 to 20 percent to 30 percent.

The governor's call for taxes on alcohol, candy, soft drinks, motel/hotels, etc., wouldn't cover enough of the deficit, said Bosley, and would disproportionately affect the state's poorest citizens. Raising the income tax rate to 5.9 percent could raise up to $1.5 billion, but another $2.1 billion would still have to be found just to level-fund it.

Some lawmakers still see gambling as a way out — Senate President Therese Murray gave a slot-machine "ka-ching" earlier Wednesday afternoon when it was announced gambling was back on the table. New House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo backs expanded gambling.

Bosley, a stalwart gambling opponent, put it down to "irrational exuberance." Casinos across the country have been hit hard with some facing bankruptcy, he said, and estimated revenues would be eaten up additional costs. Too, gambling opponents could put off the issue for years.

Instead, Bosley wants to see more investment in economic development to create jobs. "The [federal] stimulus money gives us an opportunity to plan long term, it's not going to happen overnight but as economy gets better we need to be ready."

Guyer said all options will be on the table when debate on the budget begins next week.

"My constituents say raise the sales tax," he said. "They understand that there's a revenue problem."

----------

"Local aid slashed"
By Matt Murphy, Berkshire Eagle Boston Bureau, Thursday, April 16, 2009

BOSTON — Hamstrung by plummeting tax revenue, House leaders unveiled a bare-bones budget on Wednesday that slashes local aid to cities and towns by 25 percent next year and eliminates funding for community policing and gang-violence prevention crucial to cities like Pittsfield and North Adams.

The stark budget proposal marks the biggest decline in year-to-year spending in recent memory, and could serve as a prelude to debate two weeks from now over whether to raise taxes like the gas tax or sales tax to fill the gap.

"It's not pretty," said House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Murphy, D-Burlington, about his first crack at the budget. He called the cuts to local aid and public safety "a string of regrettable choices" that reflect the reality of the state's financial health. A total of 55 lines in the budget were wiped out, including Gov. Deval L. Patrick's community service program, Commonwealth Corp.

The popular Shannon Grant program, which provides money to cities like Pittsfield to fight gang violence, has been eliminated along with other sacred cows like the state's share of the Quinn Bill, which pays police to further their education. Another $21 million in community policing grants have also be chopped.

North Adams Mayor John Barrett III blasted House leaders for using no reserve funds and having no plan to raise revenues.

"I think what they did was take the easy way out. This isn't leadership," said Barrett. "Why don't we have more management tools, a plan for health insurance so we can compete? Why don't we have the ability to raise hotel and motel taxes, and why isn't the state using their stabilization funds? Any fool can cut."

He added, "Cities and towns across the commonwealth have been forced to institute fees, increase fees and make cuts for better than eight years now. Not to touch reserves and not to even have a revenue package ready — this should have been dealt with. It's political courage, doing that type of thing, but there's a lack of it in the House right now."

Barrett said House leaders are making a big deal out of not having touched Chapter 70 education aid to communities but are forcing those very communities to make cuts in school programs and staffing.

"That's the only place left we have to go," he said. "I think mayors and municipal leaders across the state are angry because of the lack of leadership and because all they are doing is cutting. Anybody can cut. They've got to find solutions to these problems."

The mayor said he will attend a meeting of municipal leaders in Boston today to discuss the situation and to learn more about the potential impact on North Adams.

"I don't know the exact figures yet, but this budget would be just absolutely devastating for us," Barrett said. "Right now we're looking at another half million dollars, minimum, and it could be worse."

The House budget proposal includes no new revenue streams, and leaves the state's "rainy day" fund untouched in the hopes of squirreling that money away for 2012 when federal stimulus money disappears. The cuts do not take into account hundred of millions in stimulus funding that Patrick has pledged to communities, including $168 million for K-12 schools that will shrink the size of the local aid cuts.

House lawmakers are also expected to consider a municipal relief package in May that could include local option meal and hotel taxes, according to House leaders.

Overall, $1.8 billion in cuts were made to close a projected $3.6 billion budget gap in the House proposal. Federal stimulus dollars and other federal reimbursements make up the difference.

"I expect to have a long and vigorous budget debate," Murphy said when asked if new taxes would be on the table when debate begins a week from Monday. "If the will of the membership is such that they want to move forward with revenues, so be it."

Senate President Therese Murray also said Wednesday a bill to expand gambling and potentially license casinos or slot machines in Massachusetts will come up for debate in both branches this fall.

The Senate will propose its own budget next month.

Direct education aid for local school districts is level-funded at $3.95 billion, while lottery and additional assistance, also used by communities to fund schools, has been slashed by 25 percent in the House proposal. The total cuts to local aid average out to 6.6 percent less than cities and towns are now receiving from the state after the governor was forced to reduce local aid mid-year.

"This will have a real negative impact," said Barrett, pegging the lost aid in his city at close to $500,000. "There will be significant further cuts in the schools."

Higher education, including the University of Massachusetts system, has been level-funded from fiscal 2009 in this budget.

The budget also calls for all state employees to pay 30 percent of their health insurance, more than double what many pay now.

The $27.4 billion House budget is $532 million less than the budget proposed by Patrick three months ago and $700 million less than the budget approved by lawmakers last year.

"The decision to save whatever money we can is where we are. This is what you get with no new taxes. We've spent the amount of money we have," said state Rep. Daniel Bosley, D-North Adams. "Some of these cuts are horrendous, but I think there are things we can do."

Bosley said he is aware that families are hurting and worried about losing their jobs, but said he would be open to increasing the state's 5 percent sales tax by a penny or upping the state income tax.

"If you're going to do a tax, you have to do one of the bigger ones because it doesn't give you enough money and it isn't worth the effort," said Bosley, who is less interested in raising the gas tax, or sales tax on just candy, soda and alcohol.

He also said the state should not be shy about using federal stimulus dollars to help lay the groundwork for creating new jobs in Massachusetts long-term so that the state is better positioned to swing quickly out of this recession.

"You have to increase jobs. That's the only real answer," Bosley said.

Geoffrey Beckwith, executive director of the Massachusetts Municipal Association, said he hopes the House will consider new revenue streams like taxes to avoid steep cuts to local aid which are used to fund city services as well as school.

"It's impossible to cut your way to success," Beckwith said.

Not all lawmakers, however, agree that new revenue should be on the table.

State Rep. Jim Arciero, D-Westford, said he was pleased that the "rainy day" fund was untouched, and said he would not support new taxes.

"I don't think we can tax our way out of this mess. We need to change the way we do business. It's going to be difficult. It's going to be sobering, but this is the reality were in," Arciero said.
-
www.topix.net/forum/source/berkshire-eagle/TSPTAF97TS11RJCUS
-
----------
-

-
Yvette Barr and her daughter Nina Savignano live in an apartment in Marblehead with a subsidy from the state. (Suzanne Kreiter/Boston Globe Staff)
-

"Revenues off, vulnerable hit hardest by cuts"
By Eric Moskowitz, Boston Globe Staff, April 18, 2009

MARBLEHEAD - Two years ago, lymphoma survivor Nina Savignano was working at a credit union when the numbers on her computer screen started to blur. Thinking she needed a quick trip for new glasses, the 24-year-old discovered instead that she was about to begin a nightmarish medical journey.

The cancer had returned, spreading to Savignano's brain and nervous system and requiring aggressive treatments that left her temporarily unable to walk or speak. The six-month fight wiped out her family's finances, leaving Savignano confined to a MassHealth-supported nursing home and forcing her infant daughter and her mother toward homelessness.

But as they were on the brink, Savignano and her family were awarded a subsidy from the state to pay for a safe and airy Marblehead apartment, in a first-floor setting conducive to rehabilitation. "They saved my family," her mother, Yvette Barr, said of the state program.

Now that $33 million program could be slashed, potentially knocking Barr, Savignano, and thousands of others - many of them elderly, disabled, or families with young children - back toward homelessness.

With state revenues plummeting, House leaders proposed a budget Wednesday that would substantially cut the Massachusetts Rental Voucher Program, meaning that nearly half of the 5,171 households that receive these subsidies could lose them.

"We cut a lot of good programs," said Representative Charles A. Murphy, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. "Tough decisions had to be made."

The $27.4 billion House budget proposal calls for the steepest spending reductions in memory, including several to programs serving the state's most vulnerable residents. Top lawmakers said they had little choice, facing an estimated deficit of $3.6 billion. Much of the budget could not be cut, contractual obligations such as employee healthcare and retiree pensions, so that left decisions about which of the remaining lines to eliminate.

Among others, the House budget would delete a $3.5 million jobs program for at-risk teenagers and wipe out $13 million in grants to counter gang violence. It would reduce subsidies to the state's food banks from $12 million to $8 million, at a time when pantries and shelters have seen need grow 10 percent or more over the previous year.

The governor's budget, in contrast, contained more funding for these programs, as well as new revenues, proposing sales taxes on alcohol and candy and tax increases for meals and hotel rooms. Murphy and Speaker Robert A. DeLeo have avoided talk of tax hikes amid a recession.

"Every time there's a problem, you just can't tack on a tax," said Murphy, a Burlington Democrat.

As lawmakers debate the budget, advocates for lower-income residents hope they restore funding to a variety of programs before approving the final 2010 budget, which takes effect July 1.

"The impact is substantial," said Catherine D'Amato, president and chief executive of the Greater Boston Food Bank, which handles the current $12 million state contract to buy the nutrient-rich staples that supplement private donations at roughly 800 pantries, soup kitchens, and shelters across the state.

"We fully embrace that our state is in a financial crisis; this is true across America," D'Amato added. "We also hope that this state and the decision makers will embrace the fact that there's a safety line here."

For Barr, Savignano, and 4-year-old Aliviah Savignano, that safety line is the rental voucher that pays 90 percent of the $1,664 monthly rent on a three-bedroom, one-bath apartment they could not otherwise afford.

When Savignano's cancer came back in life-threatening fashion, Barr quit her job as a dispatcher for a security firm to care for her daughter. Barr had already lost her car and was on the brink of losing her two-bedroom Lynn apartment, while her daughter underwent slow rehabilitation at a nursing home, paid for by MassHealth, when the family landed a subsidy through the Massachusetts Rental Voucher Program in late 2007.

Governor Deval Patrick's fiscal 2010 budget proposed increasing the state program slightly, from its current $33 million to nearly $36 million. The House proposal instead slashed it to less than $18 million.

"People who have been depending on the subsidies to keep a roof over their head are now going to have that pulled out from under them," said Leslie Lawrence, associate director of the Massachusetts Coalition for the Homeless.

Affordable-housing advocates say the cut would cost taxpayers more in the long run, as evicted residents turn to the shelters of the state Department of Transitional Assistance. The rental subsidies provide an average of $560 a month to recipients; the state's emergency shelters cost about $3,000 per family per month to operate.

"Even if only half the families end up in a shelter . . . that's $41 million in [new] shelter costs," said Chris Norris, executive director of the Metropolitan Boston Housing Partnership.

It would also destabilize families and fly "in the face of the commitment to end homelessness," added Norris, whose nonprofit agency administers the vouchers in the Boston area and placed Barr's family in Marblehead.

In an interview at the apartment yesterday, an emotional Barr, now 47, said she wakes up every morning thanking God and thanking the housing partnership. "I call it a miracle," she said.

The voucher has provided otherwise unimaginable stability amid chaos, Barr said, holding her daughter's hand and sitting near photos of her granddaughter, who was off at preschool. One showed Aliviah dressed as Disney's Ariel, marking her third birthday in 2007 with a small party at her mother's nursing home, when the family's situation was more precarious.

"With this voucher, my daughter [now] lives in Marblehead, in a beautiful three-bedroom apartment, where she can walk, exercise, go to the ocean, peacefully rehabilitate," Barr said, letting out a small sigh. "My granddaughter goes to school a two-minute walk from the house. And I'm able to breathe again."

----------
Massachusetts pension abuse
Over the past year, the Boston Globe has uncovered a series of cases in which lawmakers have skewed and twisted the state and city pensions laws for hundreds of thousands of dollars in personal gain and patronage. The backlash prompted Governor Deval Patrick and state Legislators to push pension reform this year. Watch the story unfold below.
-
www.boston.com/news/specials/pension_abuse/
-
----------

"A gutless House"
The North Adams Transcript, Editorial, 4/20/2009

The Massachusetts House reminds us of the kid who takes his ball home when the others won’t let him play. The leadership this week displayed absolutely no leadership in simply taking the money away -- coming up with a budget that cuts everything in sight without offering any solutions to the state’s massive fiscal problems.

It seems our illustrious and highly paid legislators are poised to do what they always do in times of crisis: Close their eyes tightly to ever-burgeoning state spending -- including a pension system that is simply out of control -- and pass all costs on to local communities.

Local leaders were blunt in their assessments of the House budget this week, with North Adams Mayor John Barrett III calling the proposed cuts "devastating" and Clarksburg officials wondering what essential services would have to go next.

While the exact local impact isn’t known yet, we do know that if this budget is adopted, hundreds of teachers, firefighters, police officers and other municipal employees across the state would lose their jobs. We also know that 4,000 senior citizens would be tossed from home-care programs and the Mass. Rental Voucher Program would be cut by half, leaving thousands of low-income families without access to affordable housing.

We have to agree with Williamstown Town Manager Peter Fohlin, who as always, was blunt and to the point in his take on the situation:

"While perhaps no one could foresee the enormity of this recession, it has been obvious to us for years that the Legislature’s appetite for spending has been unsustainable while their approach to tax increases has been delusional and that eventually local communities would be the victim," Mr. Fohlin said. "In tough times, the state always turns to the cities and towns for a bailout."

State leaders seem to be waiting for the federal government to bail us out -- although we still haven’t seen the plan on how to spend roughly $7 billion in stimulus money, and that won’t help our operating budget.

The House won’t touch the state’s $1 billion rainy day fund, although if ever it was raining, it’s pouring now. It also seems reluctant to pass a 1 percent increase in the sales tax, which would yield an estimated $750 million in additional revenue while having a negligible effect on the buying public, despite screams of outrage from the usual quarters.

We don’t like higher taxes any more than the next person, but in this time of crisis there aren’t many options. Increased sales taxes, along with new taxes on gasoline, candy, alcohol and "junk food" seem logical and inevitable. During tough times, those who can’t afford to buy these things learn to do without.

But to move forward and weather this storm, our legislative leaders have to get some moxie and bring their ball back onto the playing field. Let’s hope that happens starting on April 27, 2009.

----------

"What's closed, open on Patriots Day"
boston.com - April 20, 2009

Holiday observed: Today.

Retail stores: Open at owner's discretion.

Liquor stores: Open.

Supermarkets: Open.

Convenience stores: Open.

Taverns, bars: Open at owner's discretion; most open.

Banks: Open at bank's discretion; most open.

Stock market: Open.

Municipal and state offices: Closed.

Federal offices: Open.

Libraries: Closed.

Schools: Closed.

Mail: Post offices open; regular delivery schedule.

MBTA: All subways, commuter rail, inner harbor ferries, and commuter boats will operate on a weekday schedule. Copley Station will be closed all day. All buses and trackless trolleys will operate on a Saturday schedule. The RIDE will operate on a modified weekday schedule. Some bus routes affected by the Boston Marathon will be rerouted. For more information, call 617-222-3200.

Boston traffic rules: Meters not in effect. All other parking rules apply.

Trash/recycling collection: One-day delay in Allston/Brighton, Dorchester, East Boston, Hyde Park, Mattapan, Roslindale, West Roxbury, and Jamaica Plain. Normal collection schedule for Back Bay, Beacon Hill, Charlestown, Chinatown, Fort Hill, the Financial District, the North End, Roxbury, South Boston, and the South End.

----

"Historian: NH should celebrate Patriots Day, too"
The Associated Press, April 20, 2009

NEWMARKET, N.H. --Just like Massachusetts, New Hampshire should celebrate Patriots Day, too, according to one historian.

Currently, New Hampshire doesn't celebrate Patriots Day even though it sent thousands of soldiers to fight in the Battle of Bunker Hill in 1775 and the Battle of Saratoga, two key American victories over the British in the Revolutionary War, notes Jack Resch, a history professor at the University of new Hampshire in Manchester. He delivered a lecture Sunday at Newmarket Town Hall.

Foster's Daily Democrat reports Resch said New Hampshire soldiers volunteered from several towns at the start of the war when volunteerism and enthusiasm was high, as well as during the low point of the war in 1780 and 1781.

----------
-

-
Governor Deval Patrick
-

"Gov. Patrick leery of raising sales tax"
By Matt Viser, Boston Globe Staff, April 22, 2009

Governor Deval Patrick said this afternoon that he is “very, very reluctant” to raise the state’s sales tax to help the state cope with deep budget cuts, a proposal that is being widely discussed among House lawmakers.

“That’s not where I am,” Patrick said at a State House press conference to launch a Green Communities program. “Our proposals are where I am. I am very, very reluctant in times like these to ask as much as we are asking, and certainly more than we are asking.”

Patrick, who has proposed a variety of other tax increases, refused to say whether or not he would veto a sales tax increase if it were approved by House and Senate lawmakers.

“I want to engage with them directly, rather than, with due respect, through the media,” Patrick said. “We have not talked about this in any depth. We’ve made some very particular proposals about particular ways of funding particular needs. They’re very targeted. We’ve asked a lot of the public with those proposals, and that’s where I want us to be.”

Patrick’s posture is almost identical to the one he took last fall on raising the gasoline tax, when he repeatedly said the focus should be on toll increases instead. He later began advocating for a 19-cent-per-gallon increase in the gas tax.

Senate President Therese Murray, echoing comments made Tuesday by House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo, said today that the sales tax was “one of the things on the table” and the only tax increase that had been ruled out was an increase in the income tax.

DeLeo said Tuesday that he is "open-minded" about raising the Massachusetts sales tax to help the state cope with a historic economic downturn, a sign that representatives will seriously entertain at least a one percent hike in the sales tax in an upcoming budget debate.

"I'm open-minded towards it, as I am with the others," DeLeo told reporters Tuesday, after being asked how he felt about increasing the sales tax.

DeLeo said the only tax increase he has ruled out is a boost in the state income tax, an idea he called "dead on arrival." On all other taxes, he said, "I'm willing to talk."

In January, Patrick released a budget that included a host of tax increases, on everything from candy and soft drinks to alcohol and hotel rooms. Lawmakers have resisted his approach, saying that increasing a variety of taxes by small increments could cause a greater political backlash than if one broad-based tax were raised.

“You don’t want people to think you’re raising a tax a week,” Representative Daniel Bosley, a North Adams Democrat, said today in an interview. “If there is any coalescing around here, it’s for a sales tax.”
-
Matt Viser can be reached at maviser@globe.com.
-
www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2009/04/gov_patrick_lee.html
-

Daniel E "Bureaucrat" Bosley is for raising the state's sales tax! Daniel "Bureaucrat" Bosley is quoted in the following news article, above.
DAN "BUREAUCRAT" BOSLEY STATES:
“You don’t want people to think you’re raising a tax a week,” Representative Daniel Bosley, a North Adams Democrat, said today in an interview.“If there is any coalescing around here, it’s for a sales tax.”
NOT surprisingly, Daniel "Bureaucrat" Bosley's support of the sales tax is in line with the new House Speaker's support of the measure.
Governor Deval Patrick does not support the measure similar to his policy differences on casino gambling where he supported casinos, but the House killed it because they would not get as much is campaign contributions as they do from the lottery, which is a form of regressive taxation that redistributes tax dollars from the poor and working class to the rich and professional class. Dan "Bureaucrat" Bosley is only for what fills his campaign coffers with special interest dollars!

- Jonathan Melle

----------

"Sales tax hike to 7 percent 'on the table': Consensus builds for revenue booster"
By Matt Viser, Boston Globe Staff, April 24, 2009

House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo has begun to seriously consider a plan to increase the sales tax from 5 percent to 7 percent, which would give Massachusetts one of the highest sales taxes in the country, said a State House official who has been briefed on the speaker's deliberations.

"It's something that's on the table," the official said.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the record, said DeLeo has not come to a final conclusion. But sentiment has built in the House for taking just one conclusive vote on a tax increase instead of subjecting representatives to multiple tax votes, so House leaders are narrowing in on one, broad-based tax hike that could produce enough revenue to avoid the need for more votes later.

Increasing the sales tax from 5 percent to 6 percent would raise about $750 million a year, according to some estimates. Raising it another percentage point, to 7 percent could bring in a total of $1.5 billion in new revenue per year, according to the estimates.

Several other states have a 7 per cent sales tax, including Rhode Island, New Jersey, and Mississippi. California, in response to its own budget crisis, has raised its sales tax a percentage point, to 8.25 percent.

Associated Industries of Massachusetts, which represents businesses across the state, released a statement yesterday urging lawmakers not to raise taxes. It called tax increases "exactly the wrong solution to budget challenges facing the Commonwealth."

It said higher taxes would discourage investment and job growth and exacerbate budget shortfalls for state government.

DeLeo is expected to present tax increase options to his leadership team and committee chiefs during separate meetings today. The meetings will help House members prepare over the weekend for a budget debate Monday.

"We're hoping that they come up with a package in this leadership meeting that they can support," said Representative Matt Patrick, a Falmouth Democrat who has advocated for several different tax increases. "It's good to know that they're open to new sources of revenue."

Rank-and-file lawmakers have filed a range of proposed amendments to the $27.4 billion House budget that would increase taxes. The proposals include raising the meals tax from 5 percent to 8 percent, raising the gas tax by 25 cents per gallon, and increasing the state's income tax from 5.3 percent to 6.3 percent.

Some business groups have said they are opposed to sales tax increases, saying families and small businesses cannot afford it. But until yesterday's statement from Associated Industries of Massachusetts, organized opposition by business leaders has been notably absent.

The House also is considering expanding the sales tax to cover gasoline, instead of adopting Governor Deval Patrick's call for increasing the the gas tax, which is currently 23.5 cents per gallon. Such a move would give lawmakers the political benefit of avoiding votes to raise two different taxes.

Eliminating the current sales-tax exemption on gasoline would raise up to $400 million under current gasoline prices, according to Representative Jay Kaufman, a Lexington Democrat and the House chairman of the Committee on Revenue. That money would have to be earmarked for transportation needs, Kaufman said. If the sales tax is extended to gasoline, then House leaders would be unlikely to seek the full 2-cent increase, the official briefed on DeLeo's deliberations said.

Lawmakers have been cool to Governor Deval Patrick's proposal to raise the gas tax by 19 cents, which would raise about $500 million.

While he continues to send signals that he is willing to raise taxes, DeLeo has not come out clearly in support.

DeLeo said earlier this week that he was "open-minded" about raising the sales tax, as he was with other ideas.

He and Senate President Therese Murray have said that the only tax increase that is off limits would be a hike in the state income tax.

"I don't really have a sense yet of where there might be a proposition that is going to get a majority vote," Kaufman said yesterday in an interview. "There are a lot of ideas out there.

"But that doesn't make for a package that will get a majority," he said.
-
Matt Viser can be reached at maviser@globe.com.
-
----------

"House OK's hike in Mass. sales tax: Tally enough to override Patrick's threatened veto"
By Matt Viser, Boston Globe Staff, April 28, 2009

House lawmakers approved a sales tax hike last night by a veto-proof margin, capping a dramatic showdown with Governor Deval Patrick after he threatened to veto the broad-based tax increase.

House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo won his first political victory with the 108-to-51 vote, persuading lawmakers to sign onto his plan to increase the sales tax from 5 percent to 6.25 percent. The vote also heightens the tension among top Beacon Hill Democrats, who have had sharp disagreements over how to solve the state's budget crisis.

"We've got 160 members . . . making their own adult decisions," Representative Charles A. Murphy, the House chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, told reporters after the vote. The governor, he added, "can do whatever he does. That's great."

Patrick opposes the plan and sent an ultimatum to all 200 members of the Legislature yesterday afternoon, promising to veto the increase unless lawmakers first enact transportation, ethics, and pension law changes he has sought.

The governor sent his threat in a letter as the House was preparing to debate DeLeo's plan, which could raise $900 million in new revenue to help avoid steep budget cuts.

Patrick said he did not believe that the public will support the House plan without bigger changes on Beacon Hill, including curbing pension abuses and tightening ethics codes.

"I don't believe that we can go to the pub lic and ask for any broad-based tax increase unless we get meaningful outcomes on the reform measures that are pending," Patrick told reporters yesterday afternoon.

It was a rare moment of open discord between party allies. It forced DeLeo and his leadership team to retreat behind closed doors through much of the day to muster 107 votes, the two-thirds required for an override.

Senate leaders, who also would need to sign onto the House's tax increase, were conspicuously silent on the subject. Senate President Therese Murray declined to comment. Her spokesman repeated Murray's previous comments that she has not ruled out any tax increase, except for a hike in the income tax.

Several lawmakers accused Patrick of posturing in advance of a 2010 reelection bid. "I think this is him kicking off his campaign," Representative David Flynn, a Bridgewater Democrat, said in an interview. "It's usually the thing to do, run against the Legislature."

Patrick's veto warning was part of an eventful day full of political intrigue, behind-the-scenes negotiations, and Democratic infighting. The chants of protax advocates thundered through the State House corridors, even as lobbyists, hoping to preserve funding for various causes, stood in the hallways hoping to catch a few minutes with lawmakers.

At one point Patrick tried to avoid reporters and slip into his office by an alternate, fourth-floor office, only to be tracked down.

The debate was the first major political test for DeLeo, who took over from Salvatore F. DiMasi in January. DeLeo's promise to hold a free and open debate on the House floor was jettisoned as, in private meetings, he sought to persuade Democratic lawmakers to buck the governor. Late in the afternoon, DeLeo still had not found enough votes, and the House recessed for several hours, according to Democratic House members who did not wish to be identified.

Debate on the issue began around 8 p.m. and lasted for about three hours.

DeLeo also did not emerge to make any public statements, even after the vote last night, temporarily ceding the public debate and the strategic advantage to Patrick.

"I've always been about reform before revenue," Patrick told reporters yesterday. "But it's more than that. It's change before revenue, and I want that change. And so, by the way, do the people of the Commonwealth."

DeLeo wants to dedicate about $275 million of the new revenues that would be raised by the sales tax increase to transportation. Under the speaker's plan, that would avoid the need for a gas tax increase of 19 cents per gallon proposed by Patrick. DeLeo's plan would result in just half the revenue, however, dismaying transportation advocates, who say it is not enough to solve chronic transportation funding problems.

In recent days, Patrick has grown increasingly impatient with the Legislature, chiding lawmakers for not adopting his transportation changes, separate pension and ethics changes, and for ignoring his proposal to tax candy and alcohol.

With his new tactics, Patrick predicted yesterday that "we will get to a good result."

The governor surprised many lawmakers by e-mailing them his letter at 12:31 p.m., just before they went to the House floor to debate the $27.4 billion budget.

The letter was later sent to his political supporters through his campaign committee.

"I ask that you forward this e-mail to all of your friends, family, and colleagues, so that they too can be informed of this very important issue facing our state," Patrick wrote in the e-mail.

Two of Patrick's possible gubernatorial rivals oppose the sales tax increase.

"While I recognize the need for revenue, raising taxes of any kind during a recession is a bad idea," Treasurer Timothy P. Cahill, who has not ruled out challenging Patrick, said in a statement.

Christy Mihos, who has declared he will run as a Republican, also opposes increasing the sales tax.
-
Matt Viser can be reached at maviser@globe.com.
-
----------
-

-
Representative Garrett Bradley voted last week for the 25 percent hike in the sales tax. (Photo)
-
"Before bingeing on sales tax, pols should purge hack kin"
-

-
By Howie Carr
-
Wednesday, May 6, 2009, www.bostonherald.com - Columnists

The hacks at the State House are desperate to raise taxes. They want it so bad they can taste it, and it tastes like beer - free beer, their favorite kind.

So I have a suggestion. For once the solons should lead by example. Before they raise taxes on people who actually work for a living, each legislator should offer up sacrifices, human sacrifices. Each rep should agree to remove not one, but two of their hack relatives from the state payroll.

Let’s start with Rep. Garrett Bradley of Hingham. You see, he voted last week for the outrageous 25 percent hike in the sales tax.

Bradley became a hero in the hackerama when he snatched Carol Aloisi off the payroll-patriot waiver wire. The do-nothing Carol, sister of the greed-crazed transportation secretary Jim Aloisi, now works in Bradley’s State House office.

First, Garrett Bradley could order his wife, Heather, off the public payroll. She works at the Plymouth County district attorney’s office for $47,502 a year. The DA is Tim Cruz, whose brother used to be a rep. Heather’s husband the rep made $65,737 last year, and now he’s in leadership, the first “division chair.” Plus last year he made more than 100 large in his private practice. So surely the Bradleys won’t miss Heather’s salary.

Next, Bradley can prevail upon his brother Michael to give up his $80,000 hack sinecure at the Division of Industrial Accidents. The DIA has become a popular hack holding pen, and its payroll includes the son of state Rep. Paul Kujawski, the husband of Sen. Marian Walsh, not to mention the ex-state Sen. Cheryl Jacques (rhymes with Fakes) whose brother Steve works at the Turnpike . . . But I digress.

Michael Bradley used to work at the Plymouth County House of Correction, until shortly after Democratic incumbent Joe McDonough was ousted in 2004. Among those he worked with was one Jack LaLond, who now has an $83,562 a year hack job at the Department of Conservation and Recreation. The DCR payroll is also the home of one Patty Vantine, who makes $105,000. Patty is the sister of Gov. Deval Patrick’s campaign manager, John Walsh, who, by an amazing coincidence, happens to have run the unsuccessful re-election campaign of one Joe McDonough back in 2004, when Sheriff McDonough employed Bradley and LaLond.

Rep. Bradley sent me an e-mail, saying he has two other brothers - a car salesman and “the other works for a private ambulance company.” So I guess we don’t have to get rid of them.

One rep down, 199 to go.

----------

"Default region for closings"
The Berkshire Eagle, Editorial, Tuesday, May 12, 2009

When Beacon Hill needs to cut budgets, it is tempting to look to the sparsely populated western hills for programs to cancel, services to shift and offices to close. The Berkshire County office of the state Department of Public Safety is just such a example and may be a leading indicator of things to come.

Former Governor Mitt Romney wasn't alone in his inability to tell Pittsfield from Springfield. For too many eastern-oriented officials, both are western outposts ending in "field." If a Pittsfield office is closed, residents can pop over to Springfield. In the case of Gordon Bailey, the only state building inspector in the Berkshires, the Department of Public Safety says he has a cell phone and a computer and his Pittsfield office is irrelevant.

Local building inspectors, who are on the front lines, feel differently. They use the office to access information on state building codes and practices and fear that closing the office will make it more difficult for them to get a quick response to requests. State Representative William "Smitty" Pignatelli points out that the office is in a state building in Pittsfield that will still be open, negating savings. The money to be saved by the move, about $13,000, is roughly one-third the salary of a turnpike toll-taker.

We expect the entire Berkshire delegation will fight this move. The Berkshires should not be the default region when it comes to shutting state offices.
-
www.topix.net/forum/source/berkshire-eagle/TIBRS6HGCONCRMERF
-
----------

The Boston Globe, Op-Ed
SCOT LEHIGH
"Reforms that lead to big savings"
By Scot Lehigh, May 15, 2009

OPEN YOUR Beacon Hill misfortune cookie, and here's the prophecy you'll find inside: Higher taxes are in your future.

Now, no one wants to dig deeper, particularly in tough times. But nor do I want to have elders lose their home care or developmentally disabled kids deprived of vital programs or teachers laid off.

So I would be willing to pay more, under the right circumstances.

However, citizens have every right to expect that state leaders have done everything they reasonably can to save public dollars first. And let's be clear: That condition has not yet been met.

What further should be done? Here are several obvious reforms that could lead to big savings.

First up, that lamentable Democratic gift to the public-employee unions known as the Pacheco law, which effectively ended the state's ability to contract with private firms for services they can deliver more efficiently than state workers. Although Senator Pacheco, the measure's proud papa, denies it, I have it on good authority that his signature "accomplishment" was thought up and written by lobbyists, then given to him to file. The Legislature passed it over a gubernatorial veto back in 1993, bringing the portcullis crashing down on Bill Weld's efforts to reap public savings by tapping the private sector.

Ever since, repealing Pacheco has been a reform that dare not speak its name. Not among Democrats, anyway.

But this year, Senate Republicans, who estimate the state could save $150 million to $300 million a year by aggressively contracting out, plan to try.

"If people are really serious about saving taxpayer dollars and making government more efficient, then we have to look at sacred cows like the Pacheco law," says Senate minority leader Richard Tisei.

Amen.

Here's a second sound idea Tisei is pushing: a fiscal year 2010 state hiring and salary freeze (including "step" increases), which he estimates would save about $140 million. Wage cuts have become commonplace in the private sector; that being so, surely the state can temporarily hold level public-sector wages.

"Most people would be shocked to know we haven't done that already," Tisei notes.

Next, it's time to do away with all so-called termination pensions, which let public employees of 20 years duration start collecting at least one-third of their salary upon losing their jobs, regardless of age. That counterproductive program should be low-hanging fruit.

The state also needs to grant cities and towns either the unrestricted authority to join the state's Group Insurance Commission or GIC-like ability to design their own health-insurance offerings. Currently, every change in local health-insurance plans has to be bargained with the local unions.

"There are a lot of communities that can't get the unions to agree even to increase a $5 co-payment for a doctor's visit," reports Geoff Beckwith, executive director of the Massachusetts Municipal Association.

The GIC, by contrast, sets co-pays and deductibles and other insurance plan features without having to bargain the changes. If the ability of municipalities to join the GIC weren't subject to a union veto or if they had similar plan-design power, the savings would be large.

Springfield saved $14 million to $18 million in just two years by joining the GIC, according to a new study by UMass-Boston's Collins Center for Public Management and Harvard's Rappaport Institute. A 2007 report by the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation and the Boston Municipal Research Bureau estimated that if all municipalities joined the GIC, after 10 years the total annual savings could be as much as $2.5 billion. This simple safeguard would protect employees: local health-insurance plans would have to be at least as generous as those the GIC offers.

Asked about the municipal health insurance issue on Wednesday, Senate Ways and Means Chairman Steven Panagiotakos said the Senate would consider it later. Queried about repealing the Pacheco law, he replied: "We haven't got there yet."

Make no mistake: If Beacon Hill policy makers don't get there on Pacheco and these important reforms during this fiscal crisis, they will never take place. And if not, lawmakers will be playing Pinocchio should they later claim they did everything possible to enact savings before finally turning to taxes.
-
Scot Lehigh can be reached at lehigh@globe.com.
-
----------

"District could face more cuts from state"
By Ryan Hutton, The North Adams Transcript, 5/16/2009

ADAMS -- Selectmen Chairman Donald Sommer was very concerned at Wednesday night’s meeting after he got the latest budget numbers from the state that predicted an additional $210,000 cut to the Adams-Cheshire Regional School District.

Superintendent Alfred Skrocki said the situation was not that dire -- yet.

"He’s probably looking at the current senate budget," Skrocki said. "What they did was cut the regional transportation reimbursement from 70 percent to 40 percent. The house reduced it to between 40 and 44 percent and then amended it to put it up to 65 percent. That reduction from 70 to 40 would have equated to a $200,000 reduction."

Skrocki said that once the state senate got a hold of the budget, they again slashed the regional transportation reimbursement to 40 percent but he added that there’s still a long way to go in the state’s budget process.

"Right now the senate has it at 40 percent, and if it stays at that level we stand to lose close to $200,000." he said.

The senate budget still needs to be finalized and then go before the governor and to a joint committee.

Skrocki said that if the district winds up needing to cut an additional $200,000, he’s not sure where it’s coming from.

"I have no idea. No idea," he said. "We’ve already cut $1.3 million from the budget, and I don’t know what else can go. At this point we need to see what happens in the senate."

District officials have spent the last few months trimming $1.3 million from the budget which has necessitated some drastic steps. Adams Memorial Middle School is slated to close after this school year, with its operations going to Hoosac Valley High School. This move is expected to save the district $241,000. The current school budget also proposes cutting 28 faculty and staff positions in the district at a savings of $893,588 to the schools. Adding to the district’s budget woes is the fact that district revenue is down $560,000 and the state’s charter school reimbursement is down to $19,000 from last year’s $250,000. On top of it all, the district relies on state Chapter 70 money for 61 percent of its funding and that has been level funded this year.

"Right now we’re focusing on getting the grant done for our last quarter payment of the chapter 70." Skrocki said.

Skrocki said that, right now, he was trying to focus on finishing the process of hiring a project manager for the proposed building project’s feasibility study that would mostly fund the transition of the middle school up to the high school. He said the state School Building Authority is expected to review the final candidate at it’s next meeting and return a decision. In the meantime, Skrocki said he’s not taking the state budget number lightly and has enlisted outside help for the district.

"When it was in the house version I contacted our local representation about it," he said. "I talked to Sen. [Benjamin] Downing’s office last week when the numbers came out. They’re going to try to do something. It happened in the house, primarily through Rep. [Dennis] Guyer and hopefully the same thing will happen in the senate."

----------

"Grand opening set for Mount Greylock"
By Ryan Hutton, New England Newspapers: The Berkshire Eagle & The North Adams Transcript, Thursday, May 21, 2009

ADAMS — The reopening of Mount Greylock will be celebrated this Friday as the state's highest peak will once again be opened to vehicle traffic after two years of being closed.

"We have quite a show planned," said state Department of Conservation and Recreation spokesperson Wendy Fox.

Starting at 2 p.m. at the Mount Greylock State Reservation Visitor's Center, Gov. Deval L. Patrick will cut the ribbon on the newly repaired roads with DCR Commissioner Rick Sullivan, state Sen. Benjamin B. Downing, and Reps. Daniel E. Bosley and [Dennis] Guyer.

The mountain closed early 2007 for the overhaul of the 13.5 miles of Rockwell, Notch and Summit Roads. The contractor, J.H. Maxymillian Inc. of Pittsfield won the bid to do the work in late 2006 and requested all three roads be closed at once, so the work could be done faster. The $14 million worth of repairs included rebuilding of scenic overlooks, stone walls, installation of septic lines, and repair of the drainage system.

Friday's festivities will also include a caravan of antique cars heading to the top of the mountain courtesy of the local motor club, The Piston Poppers and a 21 gun salute from the American Legion Post #160 from Adams. The C.T. Plunkett Elementary School will sing the Star Spangled Banner and America the Beautiful along with the Berkshire Highlanders to provide bagpipe music.

Greylock's reopening coincides with DCR's decision to give the historic curatorship of Bascom Lodge to John Dudek, Peter Dudek and Brad Parsons. The lease on the 5,800-square-foot, 72-year-old lodge is expected to run 25 to 30 years.

The group's plans call for recreating the original 1930s look and feel of the lodge through period furniture and decorations and a revamp of the food service on site. The group will offer two dining options; a casual cafe to meet the needs of hikers, tourists and day visitors and an evening, weekend-only restaurant in the enclosed porch for fancier fair.

Renovations on the lodge will take place mostly in the off season so that it does not hinder visitors from using the lodge. They hope to open it for business some time in June, after the state has finished putting in a new heating system.

----------

JOAN VENNOCHI
"The power struggle on Beacon Hill"
By Joan Vennochi, Boston Globe Columnist, May 24, 2009

CAN'T THEY all get along? No, they can't.

The executive and legislative branches of state government are at war. Massachusetts lawmakers ignored Governor Deval Patrick's call to increase the gas tax, opting instead to increase the sales tax. Senate President Therese Murray recently referred to Patrick as "irrelevant" and suggested the governor needs to be more "conciliatory."

House Speaker Robert DeLeo is less confrontational, but he is also unhappy over Patrick's method of dealing with the Legislature.

Things started falling apart shortly after Patrick asked Murray and DeLeo to meet with him one Sunday afternoon.

On April 26, the three leaders gathered in Patrick's State House office. They discussed pending reform proposals relating to ethics, pensions, and transportation. DeLeo told Patrick he planned to go forward with a bill to hike the state sales tax. The governor let DeLeo know he wasn't happy about his plan, but there were no fireworks. The meeting was mostly collegial.

What Patrick did the next day was seen as a betrayal of that surface cordiality.

The next morning, the governor ran into the speaker under the State House arches and reiterated his unhappiness over the sales tax hike. Later, Patrick cranked up his outrage. While DeLeo was caucusing with members, the governor's office hand-delivered a letter to the speaker's office, and to the Senate president's office. In the missive - distributed to all House and Senate members - the governor wrote, "Without final and satisfactory action on the several reform proposals before you, I cannot support a sales tax increase and will veto it if it comes to my desk."

With the House set to vote on the sales tax hike, DeLeo saw this as a surprise attack at the moment of his first major proposal as speaker. Murray also viewed it as an unwelcome challenge to her authority, and didn't like Patrick's appropriation of her earlier call for "reform before revenue."

In response, the House passed the sales tax hike by a veto-proof margin. Last week, the Senate followed suit. Patrick said he will veto it without meaningful reform bills on ethics, pensions, and transportation. He insists the fight is about principle and the best way to raise new revenue and bring about needed reform.

"The governor has decided he doesn't like us," said Murray, when asked about the breakdown.

Lawmakers say Patrick is in campaign mode, running against Beacon Hill as a way to improve his own standing with voters.

Their pique with Patrick is a small window into a Beacon Hill mentality that hardened during 16 years of Republican governors.

With a Legislature dominated by Democrats, House and Senate leaders turned themselves into virtual co-governors. For the most part, they dictated the agenda. Lawmakers went along with some of what Republican Governor Bill Weld wanted, because of the serious economic crisis that grew out of recession and the liberal fiscal policies of the 1980s. But the Democrats essentially had their way with three Republican governors who followed.

House and Senate leaders are not about to cede power to Patrick, a fellow Democrat who ran as an outsider who would change Beacon Hill. Patrick's first year in office was marked by conflict with the Legislature and he weakened his position with now well-documented symbolic missteps involving curtains and a Cadillac. His second year was easier, because then-House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi cooperated with the governor in an effort to deflect attention from assorted ethics problems. Last January, DiMasi resigned and DeLeo took over as speaker.

The current recession is hitting Massachusetts hard, causing a large dip in state revenue and a severe budget gap. The public is disgusted by general waste, cronyism, and pension abuse.

In the midst of all that, lawmakers seem driven by contempt for Patrick, rather than commitment to reforming a system that rewards each other and their friends. Patrick has political problems of his own, from controversial patronage appointments to the MBTA's systemwide power outage.

No one looks good. It's all about power, not the people, and it's a turnoff.
-
Joan Vennochi can be reached at vennochi@globe.com.
-
----------

COLUMN: "Patrick still hasn’t figured out how to deal with the Legislature"
By Rick Holmes, wickedlocal.com/easton - Columnists, Friday, May 29, 2009

Easton - Deval Patrick’s 2006 campaign for governor was the template for the presidential race run by his friend Barack Obama two years later. Both were young, black, Harvard-educated lawyers. Both campaigns were managed by David Axelrod, with the same key ingredients: an inspirational call for vaguely-defined change and a Web-based grassroots organization.

But running is different from governing, and Obama had better hope his presidency doesn’t follow the lead of Patrick’s governorship.

There have been false starts and political fumbles since the day Patrick was sworn in, along with some modest successes, like preserving same-sex marriage and aggressively courting life sciences businesses.

A big question on that sunny January day two years ago was how a Democrat-dominated Legislature that had spent the previous 16 years ignoring Republican governors would respond to having a Democrat in the corner office. Would they follow their new leader, who had never worked a day in the State House and had campaigned against the “Big Dig culture” of Beacon Hill? Would Patrick, the House speaker and Senate president become the “gang of three” Republicans had long warned against?

The answer is in the sharp barbs being thrown Patrick’s way as Democrats push through a budget that bears little of his imprint and goes out of the way to snub him. Last Wednesday, the Senate unanimously inserted into the budget a dig at the salaries Patrick pays his staff. Thursday, Senate President Therese Murray called her fellow Democrat “irrelevant.”

More than halfway through Patrick’s term, a new slogan comes to mind: Together we can’t.

Patrick came to office with a mandate for change, a limited agenda, and a grassroots organization ready to storm Beacon Hill. But the change never got defined beyond a vague commitment to civic engagement. His most concrete campaign promises — putting more police on the beat, controlling property tax hikes — were mostly ignored by the Legislature. And Patrick never seemed to mobilize his grassroots organization to do anything, including winning the state Democratic primary for Obama.

Patrick tried working with the leadership, but House Speaker Sal DiMasi wouldn’t even let some of the governor’s priority bills come up for a vote — notably his package of revenue-raisers for local government, which cities and towns could sure use now that state aid is shrinking by the day.

When he finally decided to challenge the leadership, Patrick picked the wrong issue. He put his money on resort casinos, an issue with little support among liberals in the Legislature or in his grassroots network. Patrick didn’t bring much passion to his proposal either, and he compounded the damage to his image by flying to New York to sign a book deal the day his casino bill went down in flames in Boston.

The governor never developed a “Patrick caucus” in either the House or the Senate. Plenty of lawmakers like him personally and share his politics, but they take their orders from the House speaker and Senate president. Privately, they complain about not being consulted on matters affecting their districts, about not being invited to share the credit when some state or federal grant lands in their hometowns. Patrick’s top aides, they say, don’t know how to play the game.

A year ago, when the House was obsessed with who would be the next speaker, Bob DeLeo or John Rogers, I asked several members which candidate Patrick would prefer. They acted like no one had ever thought of the question. Patrick says it would have been wrong to interfere, but if he was serious about being the state’s most powerful politician, wouldn’t he at least want people wondering about his preference?

At this point, Patrick is almost as much of a bystander as his Republican predecessors. His budget is long forgotten. The revenue package he supports — a gas tax increase, new taxes on alcohol and candy — was barely mentioned in the House and Senate budget debates.

And when he dared raise an objection last month, threatening to veto a sales tax increase if legislators didn’t finish their work on three reform bills still in conference, lawmakers went ballistic. Politicians who are compared unfavorably to vermin on talk radio and newspaper opinion pages daily, heard Patrick’s polite criticism of their slow pace and spewed righteous indignation.

Senate President Murray chose retaliation, pushing through an ethics bill prohibiting one of Patrick’s favored campaign fund-raising gimmicks and a budget that zeroed out the Commonwealth Corps, the most visible product of Patrick’s civic engagement initiative.

Patrick acknowledges the rift. “I’ve always said that the dynamic that matters is not Republican and Democrat, it’s insider and outsider,” he told me last week before hosting a community forum in Franklin. “And I’m still the outsider.”

Patrick never wanted to be like Mitt Romney, always jumping in front of a camera to denounce the status quo, knowing the Democrats who run the Legislature wouldn’t listen anyway. But the insider thing isn’t working either, and the polls show his popularity slipping with the economy. A Fox 25/Rasmussen poll put his approval rating at 34 percent and reported that more voters like Romney’s performance than Patrick’s.

A better model for Patrick is California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who demands structural reforms and, when the Legislature rejects them, takes the question directly to the voters. Sometimes it has worked — last year, he bucked both Republicans and Democrats in Sacramento to take the politics out of legislative redistricting — and sometimes it hasn’t. Voters rejected Schwarzenegger’s budget reforms last week, leaving California in a budget hole that makes Massachusetts’ shortfall look like a walk in the park.

Patrick has lately wrapped himself in the reform banner on ethics, transportation and state pensions, but he shows more deference than outrage when discussing the Legislative leadership. When redistricting reform came up for a hearing earlier this year, Patrick didn’t even testify.

Patrick has launched a new series of community forums across the state, and those who see him face-to-face almost invariably come away impressed. He’s an excellent campaigner, and it’s hard to see any of the current crop of possible challengers — Democrat Tim Cahill or Republican Charlie Baker included — beating him in 2012.

Patrick insists he’ll run for another term, denying any interest in an appointment to Obama’s cabinet, or even the Supreme Court. But he doesn’t seem comfortable on Beacon Hill, in a job that a long string of governors — Dukakis, Weld, Cellucci, Romney — have left for greener pastures.

To succeed as governor, as opposed to just getting re-elected, Patrick will have to become either a more effective insider or a more aggressive outsider. The verdict on his governorship hangs on whether he defines himself as an alternative to the status quo or finds a productive role within it.
-
Rick Holmes, opinion editor of the MetroWest Daily News, blogs at Holmes & Co. (http://blogs.townonline.com/holmesandco). He can be reached at rholmes@cnc.com.
-
----------
-

-
JIG IS UP: Even amid scandals and allegations of corruption, such as the Tuesday indictment of ex- Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi, Beacon Hill politicians still won’t let go of their grip on the ‘hack holidays.’ (Photo by Herald file).
-
"Pols in daze over hack holidays"
-
By Howie Carr
-

-
Friday, June 5, 2009, www.bostonherald.com - Columnists
-

The Suffolk County-only hack holidays must go.

Yes, folks, I plead guilty. I am the one, at least as far as I can recall, who coined the term “hack holidays” to describe Evacuation Day - aka St. Patrick’s Day - and Bunker Hill Day. Sometimes I call them the “high hack holidays,” to distinguish them from more mundane hack holidays, such as Patriots [team stats] Day, which everyone in the hackerama, and not just Suffolk County, gets off, with pay.

I know the hacks are reeling this week. Their coach, Sal DiMasi, has been indicted. Club 418, their favorite strip joint in Springfield, has been padlocked on the eve of the Democratic convention. And now, Bunker Hill Day is on the chopping block. The Suffolk solons went straight crazy.

Rep. Gene O’Flaherty of Chelsea, who is best known for hiring the niece of Felon Finneran, claimed, “Bunker Hill Day is not a day off.” Then why do his hack constituents care?

Rep. Angelo Scaccia of Readville, who has spent much of his career battling the State Ethics Commission, brought up George Washington and linked him to the two hack holidays.

“That man,” Scaccia said, “has to be turning over in his grave.”

George Washington was a hack? Who knew?

Rep. Brian Wallace of Southie came in off his sickbed. He had to - the hack holidays are a big deal in Southie because Southie is lousy with hacks.

“I keep hearing ‘hack holiday,’ ” Wallace told a Republican. “Can you enlighten me where that term came from?”

The Republican wasn’t biting, so Wallace answered his own question. “It came from the Boston Herald. It came from a certain reporter who some people in this chamber are carrying water for. I’m for the people of South Boston and I’m tired of people bowing to the pressures of the Globe and the Herald. This is my life.”

Protecting a couple of phony-baloney paid fake holidays for ungrateful, unemployable louts is your life, Brian? Yikes. And you can quote me on that. I’m a “certain reporter.”

“This is a big deal to my community. So I do take it personal. You’re taking away something that shouldn’t be taken away.”

Brian, your hacks in Southie need to go out and get real jobs. As Dapper O’Neil said back in 1967: “We work. Why don’t they?”

Then it was the turn of Rep. Jim Fagan of Taunton. His constituents don’t get the days off. But to paraphrase Merle Haggard, when you’re running down the hackerama, Hoss, you’re walking on the fightin’ side of Fagan.”

“I’m going to vote against this because I’m proud to be an American.”

Give Fagan Bunker Hill Day off or give him death! “We’re willing to let that (holiday) go because the Boston Herald thinks it’s a good idea? I’m sick and tired of genuflecting to those people.”

For the record, Jim Fagan has never genuflected to me.

In the end, the hacks prevailed on a tie vote, 78-78. Angelo Scaccia and Gene O’Flaherty hugged each other on the House floor.

Long live the hackerama!

To quote Dapper one more time, It’s enough to make ya wanna throw up on TV.

----------

"In Boston, Threatening of 2 Holidays Hits Nerves"
By ABBY GOODNOUGH, The NY Times, June 7, 2009

BOSTON — Quick, why is June 17 a government holiday here and only here?

If you answer, “Because the Battle of Bunker Hill took place on that day in 1775,” you must be the scholarly sort. If you answer, “Because Boston deserves an extra holiday,” you must be a public employee here or exceptionally proud of the city’s history.

And if you say, “Because lawmakers from Boston refuse to give up a pointless day off,” you agree with many in the state legislature, who are building a case for axing the holiday amid the financial crisis.

State Senator Richard R. Tisei, a Republican from Wakefield, in Middlesex County north of Boston, filed legislation on Friday to eliminate Bunker Hill Day and Evacuation Day, another Revolutionary War milestone that is celebrated on March 17, as holidays.

They have been paid days off for state and local government employees and schoolchildren in Boston and the rest of Suffolk County since 1935 and 1941. (Schools in Somerville also close on both holidays, as do schools in Cambridge on Evacuation Day.)

Both houses of the legislature recently rejected proposals to end the two holidays, with a 22-to-17 vote in the Senate and a 78-to-78 vote in the House.

Those proposals came as amendments to budget bills, and Mr. Tisei, the Senate minority leader, is hoping that a stand-alone bill will draw more support. Gov. Deval Patrick has said he would sign a bill if it passed.

“At a time when we are making some real difficult cuts to vital human services,” said Kyle Sullivan, Mr. Patrick’s spokesman, “it is tough to make the argument to continue pay for these holidays.”

The savings would be small, about $6 million a year, according to the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a nonpartisan watchdog group, which estimates that 35,000 public employees get the days off. But Mr. Tisei said the gesture would soothe taxpayers, who have seen ethics scandals on Beacon Hill over the last year and may soon see a 25 percent increase in the sales tax.

“It may sound symbolic to some people,” Mr. Tisei said, “but the symbolism is important given the times we are in right now. When people are being laid off by the thousands and taking pay cuts in order to keep their jobs, they look at this as just an extravagance.”

Many Suffolk County lawmakers, who represent Chelsea, Revere, Winthrop and Boston, disagree. Senator Jack Hart, a Democrat from South Boston, warned last month of setting a precedent.

“If we eliminate these holidays today in Suffolk County, then what’s next?” Mr. Hart asked. “Do we eliminate maybe Presidents’ Day? Do we eliminate July 4th? Why don’t we get rid of Thanksgiving?”

Mr. Hart, who did not respond to an interview request, also hinted that the proposal was sour grapes on the part of lawmakers from outside Suffolk County.

“I would not go out to Hampden or Hampshire necessarily and tell your constituents to disregard what your history is,” he said, referring to counties in western Massachusetts.

Peter Drummey, librarian of the Massachusetts Historical Society, said the Battle of Bunker Hill and Evacuation Day were indeed seminal events in the nation’s history. The British won the Battle of Bunker Hill, he said, but they suffered significant casualties and realized that they had underestimated their opponent.

Evacuation Day — which, conveniently for this heavily Irish city, coincides with St. Patrick’s Day — commemorates the withdrawal of British forces from Boston, another turning point.

“I’d just hate for there to be confusion about the importance of these events — to have that lost in an argument about whether the holidays are good public policy,” Mr. Drummey said.

Mr. Tisei said that Massachusetts was too aware of its history to let that happen and that parades for Bunker Hill Day usually take place on Sundays anyway.

All of Massachusetts celebrates a third Revolutionary War-inspired holiday, Patriots’ Day, on the third Monday in April. Its elimination has not been proposed.

“It’s different,” Mr. Tisei said.

----------

"Scandals cast shadow on state Democrats: As gloom deepens, new vows on ethics"
By Matt Viser, Boston Globe Staff, June 7, 2009

There was a moment last week when Representative Denis E. Guyer was stuck in bumper-to-bumper traffic on Interstate 93. He was in his red Toyota Matrix, sporting old campaign bumper stickers and a special House of Representatives license plate meant to be an honor bestowed on elected officials.

But after the indictment of former House speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi - the third Democrat to face criminal charges in 11 months - residents are in no mood to give much respect to those who work on Beacon Hill.

One motorist pointed his middle finger squarely at Guyer. Shortly after, another motorist did the same.

"A lot of us are in shock," said Guyer, a Democrat from Dalton. "I'm in shock."
-

-
Denis E. Guyer (above)
-
Democrats have never had more power in Massachusetts, and it has been on their watch that the political and ethical culture on Beacon Hill has reached its lowest point in decades. The House, Senate, and Patrick administration have all been battered in recent months, and are trying to regroup as they face reelection next year.
-

-
"Everything is spinning around chaotically," said Senator Steven C. Panagiotakos, a Lowell Democrat and chairman of the Senate Committee on Ways and Means. "It's just negative. It's hard to find that glimmer of hope, that glimmer of optimism, and we're all trying to find it. But it's been pretty elusive thus far."

The House last week saw its former leader indicted for allegedly accepting $57,000 in payments from Canadian software company Cognos ULC while he pushed contracts for the company. One of the contracts was approved in 2007 by Governor Deval Patrick's administration, which missed numerous red flags that it was being rammed through at DiMasi's behest without sufficient scrutiny.

The Senate had two members resign last year, one of whom, Senator Dianne Wilkerson of Roxbury, was photographed by federal agents stuffing money into her bra - an alleged payoff for her help in passing legislation. The other, Senator J. James Marzilli Jr. of Arlington, was indicted on charges of accosting four women in downtown Lowell.

Lawmakers have reacted much like family members after a death or disgrace strikes close to home, unable to bring themselves to discuss specifics or, in some cases, even mentioning the names of their former colleagues.

House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo, when talking about his predecessor's indictment, resorts to generalities, referring to "the news of a couple of days ago." Panagiotakos calls all of the recent scandals "these other issues around," even as Republicans have seized on the opportunity, plastering DiMasi's name in bold letters atop press releases.

"I'm sure every elected Democrat in the state is trying to figure out what hit the party," State Treasurer Timothy P. Cahill said in an interview. "Because it's not just Sal."

At the state Democratic Convention in Springfield yesterday, Cahill's assessment seemed about right.

One local official attending, Mattapoisett School Committee member Charles Motta, said he was disturbed that it took a federal probe to bring the alleged wrongdoing to light. "I'm sure the people in [the State House] knew what was going on," said Motta, 65.

But others stressed that these are cases alleged corrupt acts by individuals, not by the party.

'The party has nothing to do with it," said Farooq Karim-Mirza, 60, a Framingham resident.

The ethical controversies and corruption scandals come on top of the discord among top Democrats at the State House, who are divided over whether to increase the state sales tax from 5 percent to 6.25 percent.

"These times are not matched by any time I've seen," said Representative David Flynn, a Bridgewater Democrat and dean of the House. "They're weighing more heavily on legislators than any time I've been involved. The pressure is quite severe from constituents. And it's only natural to try and blame someone."

By all accounts, DiMasi's indictment rocked the marble corridors of the State House. Almost every House Democrat voted in January to give him another term as speaker, a decision some privately expressed shame over last week.

But some lawmakers took a not-my-problem posture, determined to press on, despite the political equivalent of a 50-car pileup on the Turnpike.

"We're doing the important work that the people send us to Beacon Hill to do," said Representative David Linsky, a Democrat from Natick. "And we're not going to let the action of a few of our colleagues keep us from doing that type of work."

Despite months of pledges to embark on ethics, pension, and transportation reform, a final bill has yet to be produced. A six-member conference committee met for the first time Thursday afternoon to discuss ethics reform - and the first action taken was to close their meetings to the public. On Friday, the same decision was made by a committee reviewing the budget, new taxes, and which programs to cut.

The Senate last month unanimously approved an ethics bill that gutted the ethics commission, although this week senators plan to meet with Ethics Commission chairman Charles Swartwood, a former federal magistrate judge.

"There is a real mood of reform in this building. I really sense that," DeLeo said in an interview. "At the end of the day we can't let one incident wash away all the good that we have done."

Senate President Therese Murray said lawmakers were close to moving on several pieces of legislation but added that little could be done to prevent the type of corruption DiMasi and Wilkerson are accused of. "It has always been against the law to use your office to line your pockets," she said. "It's just like dealing drugs. Everyone knows it's against the law but they still deal drugs. Everyone knows it's against the law to take money, but we've got two members - one from the House and one from the Senate - accused of doing that."

Still, lawmakers are getting angry phone calls and e-mails as they attempt to defend voting for things like retaining special holidays for state employees in Suffolk County. And, in a sign that power and relationships are often more significant than appearances, lobbyist Richard McDonough, who was indicted Tuesday for conspiring with DiMasi, attended a State House rally just two days later against a proposal for new taxes on alcohol purchases. One of his clients is Anheuser-Busch.

"There does seem to be sort of a Groundhog Day approach to this," Cahill said. "You look up and the same thing seems to be repeating itself again. You just say to yourself, 'When are people going to learn?' . . . I think back to Dianne Wilkerson and how dirty things felt for about a week, and then it kind of passed."

Cahill, who is weighing a 2010 run for governor, has not been immune to controversy. There has been scrutiny over some of the state treasury contracts that have involved Cahill's friends and political supporters.

Democrats have dominated state politics in recent years, achieving a historic majority in the Legislature and recapturing the corner office in 2006 for the first time in 16 years.

But some of the recent controversies have given new hope to minority parties, which have been harping on a theme that one-party rule is bad for state government.

The state's Green-Rainbow Party last week called DiMasi's indictment "the tip of the iceberg."

"Urgently needed legislation gets sidetracked while legislative leadership puts their greatest efforts into doing favors for their friends," said party co-chair Eli Beckerman. "Catching one of them in an illegal act once in a while doesn't address the massive flow of money that goes from special interests into campaign accounts."

The Massachusetts Republican Party has called on Patrick to investigate what roles his aides played in the awarding of the Cognos contract.

"The public's trust will not be restored until there is a full explanation of the role played by all public officials and employees in this House-for-sale scandal, and all we are hearing is a lot of 'no comments,' " GOP executive director Nick Connors said in a statement. "Governor Patrick should immediately launch an investigation into the role his top advisers played in this sordid affair and release the findings."
-
Matt Viser can be reached at maviser@globe.com.
-
----------

"‘Hurtful’ voters bewilder reps: So why not do something?"
By Michael Graham

-
Tuesday, June 9, 2009, www.bostonherald.com - Op-Ed

Boo hoo hoo.

The Beacon Hill Boys are - to quote Rep. Denis Guyer of Dalton in the Boston Globe-Democrat - “shocked” to discover that the public thinks they’re a bunch of incompetent crooks. According to Guyer, passing motorists are flipping him the bird.

Other legislators are puzzled by a flood of angry e-mails and phone calls after their vote to save the “hack holidays” of Evacuation Day and Bunker Hill Day. They’re assailed in appearances with complaints about expected toll and tax hikes.

Voters are outraged, and our legislators don’t know why. They’re hurt, confused. As longtime Rep. David Flynn put it: “The pressure is quite severe from constituents. And it’s only natural to try and blame someone.”

Note that phrase “try and blame someone.” Not “hold us responsible,” but “try and blame.” This is the same Rep. Flynn who joined with fellow Democrats to overwhelmingly return Sal DiMoney to the speaker’s chair in January. The same Democrats who gave the sales tax hike a veto-proof majority. And now they complain that they’re being turned into scapegoats as we voters randomly assign blame?

Massachusetts Democrats remind me of the drunk who smoked two packs a day and spent his spare time in a brothel. One day he goes to the doctor and, after his exam, the doctor says “You’ve got lung cancer, cirrhosis, and the clap.”

The drunk looks toward heaven and cries, “Why did this happen to me?”

Why? We just watched the third House speaker in a row indicted by the feds; a shameless vote to save the $5 million worth of “hack holidays”; and a legislative committee reviewing the ethics bill promptly threw out the press and met in secret.

All in the same week. And you can’t fathom why we might be a tad annoyed?

This wouldn’t be so bad if our full-time, salaried legislators could sneak in some real work between ripoffs. But they don’t.

It’s no secret the state has a problem with elderly drivers. In fact, last week also saw a plague of seniors crashing their Town Cars into buildings, bike riders and even a somber gathering of war veterans.

But even as the bodies fly and store fronts shatter, our lawmakers refuse to discuss, much less pass, reasonable new testing requirements for seniors.

When it comes to protecting government workers and union perks, Beacon Hill will bear any burden and pay any price (with our money, of course).

If these low-rent government grifters had the decency to at least be embarrassed by their actions, it wouldn’t be so annoying. But they aren’t. They honestly think they’re doing a good job.

“We’re doing the important work that the people send us to Beacon Hill to do,” said Rep. David Linsky (D-Natick) in response to the Sal DiMoney indictment.

Work? What “work”? It’s still possible in Massachusetts to legally give a cash “gift” to a state senator. A 95-year-old can renew her driver’s license without a test. The country’s worst-run toll road is still threatening a toll hike. And the Legislature is trying to charge us a sales tax on the tax we’ve already paid when we buy beer and wine. Literally a “tax” tax.

And you guys on Beacon Hill are bothered when voters flip you the bird? You’re lucky they aren’t flipping over your cars.

----------

"Considering term limits"
The Berkshire Eagle, Editorial, Wednesday, June 10, 2009

The best argument against term limits for elected officials is that voters already have the power to end terms at the polls on Election Day. That argument, however, is negated if voters don't have a choice at the ballot box, which is the case in a majority of races for the Massachusetts Legislature every two years. This reality, combined with the periodic corruption charges brought against leadership and the opposition to meaningful ethics reform by the rank-and-file, are sufficient to put discussion of term limits on the table.

The House speaker and Senate president are limited to eight years in office, and we agree with Democratic Representative William "Smitty" Pignatelli of Lenox that members of the leadership team should also be subject to limits (Eagle, June 9, 2009). This would give back-benchers a chance to shine and prevent any member from accruing too much power.

Representative Karyn Polito, a Shrewsbury Republican, has proposed a constitutional amendment limiting legislators to 12 years in office. If this comes about, Massachusetts would join 15 other states with term limits on legislators. Institutional stagnation contributes to the creation of all-powerful leaders holding sway over members afraid to risk losing perks and influence by standing up to those leaders. With fewer perks and pension money at stake, term limits may free legislators to act more independently. Public financing of campaigns was supposed to address this situation but the Legislature's reluctance to provide financing and the ability of wealthy candidates to decline financing has sabotaged this remedy.

Term limits at the federal level remain a bad idea as there is competition for seats in Washington and the loss of an accomplished veteran like Senator Edward Kennedy would hurt the state and nation. Last year, however, the entire Berkshire delegation went unopposed for election(: State Senator Ben Downing, State Representative Daniel E Bosley, State Representative William PIGnatelli, State Representative Denis E Guyer, State Representative Chris Speranzo), and the same may be the case next year. With voters deprived of an opportunity to execute term limits it may be necessary to implement them at the state level.
-
www.topix.net/forum/source/berkshire-eagle/T8K30HC16K0BK9EKT
-
----------

"Gov’s gloves come off in re-election bid"
By Hillary Chabot, Wednesday, June 24, 2009, www.bostonherald.com - Local Politics

Self-styled new politics reformer Gov. Deval Patrick is launching his re-election bid as a Beacon Hill brawler, targeting potential rivals with opposition research and openly sparring with fellow Democrats in the Legislature.

Patrick, who once expressed a disdain for political mudslinging, already has hired the state’s top opposition researcher, David Stone, to keep any gubernatorial hopefuls against the ropes.

“This is going to get nasty,” said Christy Mihos, a Republican candidate for the Corner Office. “He’s going after the Democrat Legislature each and every day, and these are folks that got him elected. He’s going to do whatever he has to do to keep his seat.”

Treasurer Timothy Cahill, who is strongly considering a run for governor, has suggested Patrick’s office is behind several negative stories questioning his ethical dealings with the state lottery and pension board.

The governor also appears to be taking a page from former Republican Gov. Mitt Romney’s campaign playbook, running against lawmakers - even though they are fellow Democrats.

Just last week, Patrick blasted lawmakers for passing the $24.7 billion budget before an ethics reform bill. “It’s probably a good strategy, but every time he invokes that it’s him against the Legislature, he continues to encourage cynicism about the building,” said Rep. Daniel E. Bosley (D-North Adams).

The hardball tactics come as Patrick ramps up his re-election campaign, hosting an invite-only meeting with supporters in Somerville last night. Patrick’s campaign said the $7,800 recently spent on Stone’s company, 3 Street Inc., is a necessary part of campaigning.

“The governor has made it clear that he fully intends to run for re-election and that includes gearing up by hiring communications, fund-raising and research experts that are all aspects of a modern political campaign,” said campaign spokesman Steve Crawford.

Aides insist Patrick hasn’t spent any money on opposition research against Cahill, but Patrick’s chief of staff Doug Rubin did work as Cahill’s first deputy and would have extensive knowledge of the treasurer’s operation.

As an opposition researcher, Stone reportedly has dug up political dirt for U.S. Sen. John F. Kerry during his presidential campaign.

Patrick hired Stone for his first campaign, but campaign officials said in 2005 Stone worked only on policy. His current contract is to do research, Crawford said.

Administration officials insisted Patrick, who surprised House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo (D-Winthrop) and Senate President Therese Murray (D-Plymouth) with his veto threat last month, is not interested in scoring campaign points at their expense.

----------
-

-
The car belonging to state Rep. Benjamin Swan, of Springfield, is seen on State Street Monday afternoon bearing House motor vehicle plates on the front of his car. (Photo by Dave Roback / The Republican)
-

"Statehouse - Massachusetts lawmakers having 2nd thoughts about specialty license plates"
By Dan Ring, The Springfield Republican, masslive.com/news - September 21, 2009

BOSTON – In a time of cell phone cameras and angry taxpayers, many elected leaders on Beacon Hill are shunning the type of specialty license plate that gave away a state legislator who bought alcohol in tax-free New Hampshire.

Under an old state law, members of the state Legislature can pay extra to purchase specialty license plates with the state’s seal and a number that corresponds with their seat in their chamber on Beacon Hill. Government specialty plates are also available to members of the Governor’s Council and constitutional officers.

A specialty plate revealed the identity of Rep. Michael J. Rodrigues, D-Westport, whose “House 29” plate was on his car parked outside a New Hampshire state liquor store on Interstate 95 south. A resident of Massachusetts spotted the plate and snapped a photo that was provided to the media earlier this month. The incident sparked stories about Rodrigues voting to increase the sales tax in Massachusetts and then buying alcohol in a state with no sales tax.

Barbara C. Anderson, executive director of Citizens for Limited Taxation, said activists with the organization will be carrying cell-phone cameras and will be watching for legislators who might be buying products in New Hampshire.

Anderson said legislators love their specialty plates.

“It shows how special they are, or in rare cases, how stupid they are,” she said. “Why not advertise it?”

Governor’s Councilor Thomas T. Merrigan of Greenfield said the incident with Rodrigues is a good reason for officials to think again if they use one of the specialty plates.

“It’s probably a disadvantage as this guy with tell you,” Merrigan said.

Merrigan said he had a specialty license plate for a week, but then decided he didn’t like it and stopped using it.

“It was a little more demonstrative than I wanted,” he said.

Rodrigues said he is keeping his “House 29” plate despite the photo of his car outside the New Hampshire liquor store.

“I don’t want them to beat me,” Rodrigues said. “I did nothing wrong. I’m proud of being a state representative. I want to display that.”

Rodrigues said he will pay the state sales tax on three bottles of hard liquor when he files his tax returns next year. His wife also bought two bottles of wine.

Rep. Donald F. Humason, R-Westfield, said he is also retaining his “House 152” specialty plate.

Humason said a key is to obey traffic and other laws.

“When you have nothing to hide, you don’t worry,” Humason said.

Rep. Brian M. Ashe, who has House 38, agreed.

“I don’t plan on doing anything I would have to worry about,” Ashe said.

Sen. Stephen M. Brewer, D-Barre, said his wife uses a car that he owns with the special “Senate 6” license plate. Brewer uses a vanity plate – Barre 1 – on the car he drives.

“I don’t know,” Brewer said when asked why he decided to use the government plate. “It’s a great honor to be a senator.”

Many legislators don’t have special government license plates, according to the state Registry of Motor Vehicles.

House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo, D-Winthrop, does use a government specialty plate, for example, but Rep. Thomas M. Petrolati, D-Ludlow, the speaker pro tempore, uses a regular plate.

Legislators pay an additional fee of $40 for two years for the government specialty plate, said Ann C. Dufresne, a spokeswoman for the Registry.

Sen. Stephen J. Buoniconti, D-West Springfield, said the specialty plate was offered to him when he was first elected to the Legislature, but he declined.

“I have a lot of friends who do have the plate,” he said. “That’s their choice.”

“I’m just a regular working-class guy,” added Rep. Peter V. Kocot, D-Northampton, who also decided against buying one of the specialty plates. “I wouldn’t even know how to do it.”

Legislators in Western Massachusetts with the specialty plates include Springfield Democratic Reps. Angelo J. Puppolo, who has House 18; Benjamin Swan, with House 24; and Cheryl A. Coakley-Rivera, who has House 103.

Swan said he will keep his specialty plate. He’s had the plate since 1994 and said it is just like any other specialty plate.

Several legislators said the plate gives them no special considerations with police or other people.

Puppolo said he didn’t think his House 18 plate comes with any benefits.

“I haven’t received any special treatment, nor do I expect any,” Puppolo said.

Other local legislators with the plates include Reps. Michael F. Kane, D-Holyoke with House 67; Daniel E. Bosley, D-North Adams, House 66; and John W. Scibak, D-South Hadley, House 32.

Reps. Stephen Kulik, D-Worthington, who has House 53, and Christopher J. Donelan, D-Orange, who has House 96, said the plate does carry at least one positive benefit: constituents see the plate and know their representative is in the district and working.

“People notice I’m around,” said Kulik, who has had his specialty plate since 1993.

Donelan said the Rodrigues incident does raise “a good question” about the government specialty plates.

“It doesn’t seem quite worth it,” he said.

----------

"Procrastinating pols"
By Boston Herald editorial staff, 9/30/2009, www.bostonherald.com - Editorials

Ever wonder if the 200 members of our full-time Legislature are capable of walking and chewing gum at the same time?

With word this week that they’re putting off action on a casino bill until next year, well, any doubt can now be put to rest.

They aren’t.

Yes, it seems Gov. Deval Patrick, Senate President Therese Murray and House Speaker Robert DeLeo have far too much of the people’s business to attend to get wrapped up in a gaming bill, which of course is the people’s business, but whatever.

On Monday the trio, all professed supporters of expanded gambling at various levels, acknowledged that they’re unlikely to get to a bill until calendar year 2010.

They don’t want to rush the process, they said.

Given that Murray’s famous “Ka-ching!” pronouncement came in mid-April, and the (self-imposed) deadline for formal sessions doesn’t come until Nov. 18, we have to wonder what this crowd considers a rush-job.

Actually, we needn’t wonder at all. It took barely four weeks for Beacon Hill to enact a bill allowing for an interim senator to serve Massachusetts in the U.S. Senate until a special election is held to fill Ted Kennedy’s seat.

Yes, when this crowd wants something to happen, they make it happen.

And the decision to put off a gambling bill is all the more curious given that state tax revenues are running way behind projections and another round of mid-year budget cuts is in the offing.

Not that revenue from casinos would or should solve the immediate crisis. But why would alleged supporters of expanded gaming pass up a prime opportunity to expand and diversify the commonwealth’s revenue sources in times like these?

The outcome of a casino bill is in doubt, so it’s possible the delay is simply needed to build support. And working out the nitty-gritty details of a casino bill won’t be easy. But it would have been nice if someone had thought to start this process sooner.

“Nobody wants to permit gaming to suck all the air out of the work that has to be done here in the Legislature on behalf of the people of the commonwealth,” Patrick said.

Right, because that never happens on Beacon Hill.

----------
-

-
(Illustration by Harry Campbell)
-

"Crooked and Crookeder: Yes, Massachusetts politics today is littered with bums and cheats. But the state was once more corrupt than it is now."
By Charles P. Pierce, Boston.com - September 27, 2009

It was the first session of the 186th General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts -- God save it! -- but last January 7 was not the ordinary opening of an ordinary legislative year. A few moments earlier, the Democratic caucus in the House -- which is to say, virtually the entire House -- had voted to install once again Salvatore DiMasi as speaker. This despite the fact that DiMasi had been beset for six months by accusations that he had been at the center of ethically dubious, and possibly criminal, lobbying efforts by his friends and close political associates on behalf of everything from a computer company to ticket brokers.

On the dais, chuckling with the House chaplain, DiMasi was joined by former speakers of the House, including his immediate predecessor, Thomas Finneran, who’d been convicted of obstructing justice, and Finneran’s predecessor, Charles Flaherty, who’d been convicted of tax fraud. Within the month, DiMasi had resigned from the House. Within six months, on June 2, he had been indicted on federal charges of using his influence to steer two state contracts, worth $17.5 million, to Cognos, a Burlington-based software company. His friend and former campaign treasurer, Richard Vitale, had already been indicted on state charges regarding Vitale’s work as a lobbyist for the state’s ticket brokers. As strange as that tableau at the House podium had looked back in January, it looked even more surreal as the year went on.

DiMasi’s indictment punctuated a two-year stretch in which Massachusetts public officials of varying rank and station made the news in explosions of bizarre and unethical behavior. Both state Senator Dianne Wilkerson and Boston City Councilor Chuck Turner were arrested on charges of bribe-taking after being caught on videotape in FBI sting operations; most memorably, Wilkerson was shown stuffing cash into her brassiere. State Senator James Marzilli, on the other hand, was arrested and charged with accosting and propositioning women on the streets of Lowell. Elsewhere, there was well-publicized jiggery-pokery involving public pensions, Governor Deval Patrick’s attempt to install state Senator Marian Walsh in a $175,000 patronage job, and the revelation that state Treasurer Timothy Cahill awarded a $21 million contract to a company that also was paying one of his top fund-raisers. A cloud of public outrage surrounded everything that went on, and Patrick responded this year by proposing a massive overhaul of the state’s ethics and lobbying laws, including new and wide-ranging powers for investigators to tap phones and subpoena records. The Legislature passed some -- but not all -- of the proposals the governor had presented to it.

On the subject of corruption, Massachusetts always has been just a little off plumb. For one thing, we’ve taken a kind of mad pride in political chicanery. Much of that stems from the days in which the WASP establishment worked to circumscribe the rising political power of the various immigrant communities. “It’s always been a tricky argument,” explains Scott Harshbarger, a former state attorney general. “The Brahmins were losing power, so they were defining grass-roots politics and the ways guys were getting votes as being corrupt.” From this came the local myth of James Michael Curley, political Robin Hood. The face of the rising power of immigrant Boston, whether as a mayor or a congressman, Curley was forever inveighing so loudly against the old Yankee plutocrats who were keeping the Irish down that his constituents didn’t notice -- or chose not to notice -- that he and his cronies were making out very well. This kicked off a kind of generational alibi that did not begin to dissipate for decades and that lives on today because of the virtual one-party rule. “Politicians grow up here, and they say, ‘We’re Massachusetts Democrats, immune from challenge,’ ” says writer Jack Beatty. “ ‘When I grow up, I want to get my finger in the till.’ It’s almost a habit that’s passed on,” explains the author of The Rascal King, the definitive Curley biography.

Truth be told, however, this might be the same kind of vaulting provincial pride that we see in our passion for the Red Sox. Once, you needed to pay politicians directly to do business here, but even that period in Massachusetts history doesn’t compare to, say, the voluptuous historic corruption of Louisiana. In 1945, Curley was elected mayor of Boston while under a federal indictment that eventually landed him in the hoosegow, yet how does that compare with Maryland’s Spiro Agnew, who literally took envelopes of cash from local developers in his office while serving as vice president of the United States? All our current scandals together don’t add up to what broke loose in New Jersey in July, when, after a two-year investigation into official corruption, the FBI rounded up dozens of people -- including two mayors, two state assemblymen, and five rabbis -- on allegations that included money laundering and the sale of black-market body parts.

Remarkably, Massachusetts politics are much cleaner now than they’ve ever been. “Looking at [former US senator] Ed Brooke’s biography, in the 1960s and 1970s, when he came in as a reformer, all the stuff they had to clean up, it doesn’t happen anymore,” says Massachusetts Attorney General (and US Senate hopeful) Martha Coakley. And Harshbarger, upon reading about Wilkerson’s alleged secreting of ill-gotten booty in her lingerie, thought: “The thing was so retro. Cash in a brown paper bag, that’s not how it’s done anymore.”

Instead, what we have is a tightly knit fabric of power and influence, some of it legal and some of it not, some of it ethical and some of it not. “It is a lot more subtle,” says John Foley, a supervisory special agent with the Boston office of the FBI whose brief includes public corruption cases. “These are people who are very savvy as to the means and methods that we use, and who are involved in what we call ‘the soft extortion,’ where the contribution is handed over with a smile.” At least part of the reason for the spate of high-profile cases is that Foley and the FBI have treated corruption cases more like investigations into traditional organized crime families, including the use of stings like those in which Wilkerson and Turner were ensnared. This renewed vigor also has consequences outside the courtroom.

Corruption has become as hard to define as it has been to eradicate. Certainly, the crimes of which Wilkerson, Turner, and DiMasi are accused are obvious cases. But much of the rest of what is referred to as “corruption” can fairly be defined as “anything that makes me angry.” It is a stew of that which is manifestly illegal, that which is legal but ethically dubious, and that which is legal but guaranteed to raise public hackles, particularly in a time of economic downturn. The perception of “corruption” also feeds on the general political philosophy, ascendant since the rise of Ronald Reagan, that “government” is, at best, incompetent and, at worst, a haven for thieves. Which is partly why the current incidents of public corruption raise a level of public anger that condemns the whole of “politics,” while huge scandals in the private sector, which have every bit the same impact on the public, flare briefly and then die away.

For example, there seems to be an equal amount of anger aimed at the government employees who game the public pension system and at those who simply end up with a pension that the public reckons to be excessive at a time when the private sector has all but abandoned the concept of pensions. “A person can abuse the [public pension] system,” Harshbarger says. “We should have solved that problem by now. But corporate America can take right out of your pocket millions, if not billions, and we don’t see anything like the same degree of anger or focus.”

This all plays out in a culture of outrage, in which the pathetic story of James Marzilli ends up vaguely mixed into the larger scandals involving money and the public interest. It’s all “corruption,” which, the less clearly defined it is, the more virulent it seems to make people. However, it’s not a chain with interconnected links, but, rather, an ill-defined cloud. “The frontier has clearly moved,” Coakley says. “I’ve been a state prosecutor, a federal prosecutor, and I’ve done defense work. You know, people don’t change. The kind of things people do don’t change. Our job has always been to understand when temptations arise, and how do you minimize that?

“You can always do more rules and enforcement, but you’re not going to stop people from finding loopholes and ways around it, if they’re wont to do that,” Coakley says. “We’ve always had corruption around the edges, but I don’t think the basic thing is corrupt. A lot of what government used to be was basically corrupt relationships.”

It is not as it was. There are garish outbursts of personal venality. There are individuals who succumb to what Coakley describes, in her best Catholic catechism formulation, as “the occasions of sin.” There is money changing hands and cash in brassieres, all of it vivid on clandestine videotape. There is gropery and mopery on the park benches of Lowell. There is a fathomless reservoir of public outrage, so easily brought to a boil today that the fine distinctions between what is truly corrupt and what is simply personally aggravating to a sufficient number of taxpayers get lost in the froth. But, while they’re arguably inevitable in politics awash in money and shot through with a stubborn culture of discreet influence trading, these offenses are endemic but not systemic. Not the way they once were.

It is not as it was here, a little over three decades ago, when the state was utterly for sale, when pay-for-play was conducted in Massachusetts in so nakedly obvious a way that, in retrospect, it makes the modern depredations of former Illinois governor Rod (“This is [expletive] golden”) Blagojevich -- to say nothing of the alleged nickel-and-dime grifting of Dianne Wilkerson -- look like the work of kids selling substandard lemonade on the sidewalk. The era, which spanned decades and several governors and which was both bipartisan and multigenerational, was best defined by the testimony of one William Masiello, a prominent bagman of the 1970s. His clients got the contracts. The politicians got fat. And the Commonwealth got a whole lot of public buildings that fell apart as soon as they were put up. Asked by an investigative commission of the time how the system worked, Billy Masiello replied with what had become the de facto state motto of Massachusetts, at least in terms of how its politics operated.

“If a hand is open,” he told the commission, “someone will find a way to fill that hand for something in return.”

There once were three adjoining hotel rooms in downtown Boston. If you were a rising architect who wanted to do business here, you were ushered into the first of them, where you got to meet an aide to the governor, who talked vaguely of how tough it was for someone to run for office in Massachusetts and how much money it cost and wouldn’t you like to help, and how much would you like to help, specifically? You may have noticed the other people in the room, all of whom were busily making phone calls and talking to people on the other end about how much money it cost to run for office. If you were politically astute, you might even have noticed that one of the people on the phone, pitching hard for contributions, was the assistant state treasurer.

If your answers to the questions, especially your answer to the last one, were satisfactory, you were ushered into the second room, where you got to meet the governor himself. The aide would talk about your great desire to do work for the Commonwealth. The governor would smile, agree that you were a stout fellow who should do work for the Commonwealth, and then hand you off to the aide again, who would bring you into the third room, in which you were told quite plainly what was the price in campaign cash for doing business in the Commonwealth. If you said that you didn’t have the money at the moment, you were told that the gentleman over in the corner was the president of a bank. He was willing, right there on the spot, to loan you the money you needed to meet the price you just had been quoted. The banker would sign off the loan, discount it immediately, and the money would go zipping right into the campaign account. A little while later, you would get a contract to build, say, a jail in Worcester County, which would function splendidly except for the fact that the mechanism for automatically locking the cells failed to lock any cells. And maybe you noticed, one day in the papers, that the aide who had brokered the deal had become a judge. This was how it worked for decades in Massachusetts.

What finally broke the system was a deal struck with a New York-based construction management firm named McKee-Berger-Mansueto. In 1969, the firm -- known as MBM -- received a contract to manage the construction of the new UMass-Boston campus in Dorchester. Subsequent investigations over the next 11 years revealed that MBM had landed the deal in the customary way -- bribing its way into it through carefully laundered campaign contributions to nearly the entire Massachusetts political establishment. (One check went from the ubiquitous Masiello through then state senator James A. Kelly Jr. and eventually into then Boston mayor Kevin White’s gubernatorial campaign.) Eventually, two state senators -- Joseph DiCarlo and Ronald McKenzie, both of whom had received campaign contributions from MBM -- went to prison for their efforts to stifle a legislative inquiry into the UMass contract.

By 1978, there was a rising reform impulse in Massachusetts. Two legislators -- Phil Johnston, a Democrat, and Republican Andrew Card, who eventually would become chief of staff to President George W. Bush -- agitated for an independent commission to investigate the whole tangled mess of how public buildings in Massachusetts got built. Governor Michael Dukakis had to bludgeon the Legislature into agreement, and the chairmanship of the commission was handed to John William Ward, the president of Amherst College. Ward was an odd choice. Born in Dorchester, he was a career academic in history and American studies.

He and his commission worked for nearly three years. The testimony -- by Billy Masiello and scores of others -- was specific and damning. The media ate it up. There were moments that were undeniably comic; Masiello seemed to have stepped out of an Edwin O’Connor novel. But the general impression was utterly dismal. As far as the state’s public buildings were concerned, the best design firms around the country had written Massachusetts off as a total loss, leaving the bidding to hacks who were willing to pay the asking price. Besides the Worcester jail with the cells that didn’t lock, there was the auditorium at Boston State College in which the stage was invisible from a third of the seats and the library at Salem State College in which the walls were not sturdy enough to bear the weight of the books. At the UMass-Boston campus, ground zero of the scandal, school officials were forced to erect barricades to keep passersby from being brained by the bricks that kept falling off the side of the library. Unsurprisingly, a completely corrupt system had produced completely shoddy buildings that the taxpayers, already fleeced once, would have to pay to repair.

“It was not a matter of a few crooks, some bad apples which spoiled the lot,” Ward wrote in his introduction to the commission’s final report, which was released on December 31, 1980. “The pattern is too broad and pervasive for that easy excuse. . . . At those crucial points where money and power come together, the system has been rotten.”

The commission issued four major recommendations, three of which became law. In 1980, Massachusetts expanded its statutes on extortion, bribery, and the filing of false statements with public agencies. It radically revamped the process for design selection on public buildings, and it created the state Office of the Inspector General. The only recommendation that failed was the fourth; significantly, that was the commission’s recommendation for the public financing of state political campaigns. In other words, the framework of campaign donations, through which the previous system had metastasized, was left reasonably intact. Ward was extremely disappointed at what he felt was a dilution of the commission’s work. He spent the next five years drifting from job to job. His marriage broke up. On August 3, 1985, John William Ward took a room at the Harvard Club in New York, got into the bathtub, and opened the veins in his arms.

His work outlived him, however. The commission’s reforms broke up the systemic corruption in Massachusetts politics in a manner from which it never has recovered. “It’s a lot better,” says state Inspector General Gregory Sullivan, who holds the office created on the recommendation of the Ward Commission. “I’m not sure the public confidence in the system is better. The very debilitating effect of the actions of individuals still undermine that confidence.”

“It’s subtler now,” says the FBI’s Foley. “It’s difficult to break into, because for the people involved, they don’t have to speak a word. Some things are just understood.”

Tom Kiley is an old-time Boston law-yer who has seen the system both as a prosecutor and as a defense attorney. Over the next year, he’s going to work as hard as he can to keep Sal DiMasi out of the federal sneezer. He sounds almost rueful when he talks about what he sees as the historical pattern of corruption and the attempts to stamp it out. “What I know is that the reaction to every supposed scandal is a cry for reform, and I know reformers seldom pay attention to work done in that area before, and you get ever more Draconian provisions of the law applied in ever more situations, so that nobody can comply. . . . We are social beings. We don’t want to outlaw friendship.”

This, of course, is an alibi that goes back to Curley and beyond. After all, Kiley’s client is being charged with an influence-peddling scheme of a kind that John William Ward would have recognized instantly. There are not many of us who (allegedly) could steer a $17.5 million payday toward any of our friends. But Kiley’s larger point is well taken. For all the attempts -- ideological, or for the purpose of ginning up your Arbitron share -- to paint a culture of civic corruption in Massachusetts in the past two years, the corruption that has been revealed has been a kind of individual entrepreneurial venality -- which is to say, a demonstration of a distressing weakness for what Martha Coakley called the occasions of sin. If he is indeed guilty, Jim Marzilli didn’t grope women because he was a state senator. He did it for reasons buried far deeper in his psyche. If charges are proved true, Dianne Wilkerson and Chuck Turner acted out of individual greed. The way you know that is because they came so cheaply. Turner is accused of pocketing $1,000, boutonniere money for Billy Masiello, if he’d ever worn one.

What’s left are the myriad loopholes and exceptions and favors, most of them perfectly legal, that politicians will tell you function as the grease that keeps the wheels turning and that much of the public sees as part of what it generally calls “corruption,” often at the top of its lungs. The various institutional remedies for these things seem as distant as they ever were -- a permanently viable two-party system for one, a breaking up of the endless bickering among minor legislative satraps, and sensible campaign finance regulation. “The ethical problem,” Harshbarger explains, “is a range of choices within the bounds of legality . . . [in] that ambiguous area.”

“If men were angels,” James Madison wrote in Federalist 51, “no government would be necessary.” Politicians wouldn’t be necessary, either, but they are. We are stuck with them, in all their maddening human frailty. Some of the players are crooked, but the game is not rigged. Not the way it once was. Not the way it is elsewhere. That may be the best anyone can expect. At least the library walls are sturdy enough to handle the books. At least we can lock the cell doors now.

----------

"Lawmakers leave Patrick, bills waiting: Overhaul proposals stall as 2009 session ends"
By Matt Viser and Eric Moskowitz, Boston Globe Staff, November 19, 2009

Sweeping changes to the state’s education and criminal justice systems stalled in the Legislature early this morning, as House leaders traded barbs with Governor Deval Patrick and refused to give him power to make emergency budget cuts.

Lawmakers, who ended their formal session for the year just after midnight, also planned to rebuff some of the governor’s most controversial budget proposals, including cuts to the Probation Department, the near elimination of extra compensation for police officers who earn college degrees, and a deep cut in the Legislature’s own multimillion-dollar account, which critics call a slush fund.

Because of its rules, the Legislature will not reconvene until January.

“I have to respect their rules,’’ Patrick told reporters yesterday. “But I also know they can suspend their rules if there’s work to be done. And I think there is work to be done.’’

The House did approve a budget-balancing bill late last night by a vote of 132-21, but the measure moved to the Senate too late for action before the close of the session.

House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo said that the House would be doing a disservice to the people of the state if it rushed through legislation without appropriate deliberation, and he emphatically rejected the request to extend the session.

“Every year, on the very last day of session, there’s been someone else who said they had a cause for us to break that rule,’’ DeLeo said. “I think that that is a very dangerous precedent.’’

The debate yesterday capped a chaotic session on Beacon Hill, one that saw House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi resign and face federal indictment, the approval of an unpopular sales tax hike, and overhauls of the state’s ethics, pension, and transportation laws.

But while work for the 200 lawmakers is now complete until after New Year’s, the Legislature left Patrick with a series of budget decisions that remain uncertain and could include further cuts to disabled, homeless, and health and human service programs.

For a proposal he outlined last month, Patrick needed the Legislature to approve $215 million in budget changes as part of his plan to close a $600 million midyear budget gap.

Administration officials said yesterday that the Legislature’s rejection of many of Patrick’s proposed cuts will leave the governor with a $125 million budget gap. In addition, lawmakers did not approve changes in the state’s health care plan, MassHealth, potentially forcing the governor to make up another $100 million elsewhere. All told, it means Patrick may have to make $225 million in additional cuts in the areas that he can reduce without legislative approval, with the bulk probably coming from health and human services.

Lawmakers also did not go along with several other proposals Patrick put forward as part of his emergency budget bill, including allowing cities and towns to install cameras at stop lights to better catch and fine traffic violators, and the elimination of two controversial paid holidays for certain state workers.

“I have tremendous respect for the speaker and fondness for him, so I don’t want this to be heard as personal,’’ Patrick told reporters yesterday outside his State House office. “But I just think now is the time to stick to it and get this work done.’’

The governor was particularly concerned about the House’s inaction on his proposal to raise the number of charter schools allowed in the worst performing districts and pave the way for possible state takeovers if schools do not improve.

The state must adopt an aggressive agenda in these areas if it is to compete for up to $250 million in education grants in federal stimulus money, under the Obama administration’s so-called Race to the Top competition. Applications for the money are due in mid-January. The Legislature will convene in early January, which would give it time to approve the needed changes before the deadline.

Patrick, who first submitted his education proposal in July, started the day by calling on the Legislature to act quickly during a visit to a charter school in East Boston.

“I thought it was fascinating that the governor, with the number of charter schools that are throughout the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, that he happened to pick one that was about a half-mile from my community,’’ DeLeo told reporters.

DeLeo also sent a letter to House lawmakers, saying the legislative year would end without action on an education overhaul because there was not enough time for it to be considered.

“I believe it would be a disservice to the members of the House and, most importantly, to the students and families of the Commonwealth to attempt to consider this bill at today’s session,’’ he wrote in the letter.

Patrick also expressed concern about lack of action on the criminal justice bill, which would make it easier for former prisoners to get jobs by limiting employer access to their criminal history. Patrick has twice submitted bills that would overhaul the criminal record information system, but he has not aggressively lobbied for it.

The House was in a difficult position yesterday, because the Senate did not send several key measures to it until recently. The Senate approved the education bill Tuesday, and the criminal records bill was sent yesterday at around 6 p.m.

The education bill has long been targeted by teacher lobbyists, and yesterday they and lobbyists for a variety of other interests were roaming the hallways, trying to make sure their concerns were taken care of.

Meanwhile, Patrick’s attention will now have to turn to solving a budget gap without assistance from the Legislature, after state lawmakers did not go along with several of his proposals.

The Legislature, for example, refused to allow the governor to dip into a reserve fund that the Legislature maintains. Patrick had wanted to use $18 million from the fund to help close the budget gap.

DeLeo and Senate President Therese Murray released a statement last night saying they would voluntarily cut their total budget by $5.5 million.

Representative Charles Murphy, the House budget chief, called ridiculous any suggestion that the Legislature was putting off its decisions until later.

Patrick is “a smart guy, and he has a lot of smart people working for him,’’ Murphy said. “Guess what? We have a lot of smart people in this building, as well, and we have our own ideas. And we gave him a majority of what he’s looking for.’’
-
John R. Ellement, Andrea Estes, and Kay Lazar of the Globe staff contributed to this report. Material from the State House News Service was also used.
-
www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/11/19/lawmakers_leave_patrick_bills_waiting/?comments=all
-
----------

A BOSTON GLOBE EDITORIAL
"Fix schools and budget - Legislature’s recess can wait"
November 20, 2009

WHEN THE state House of Representatives formally adjourned for the year Wednesday night, it left important public business in limbo. The chamber failed to pass a landmark education reform initiative - one that is vital to competing for $250 million in federal education money. And while the House took steps toward balancing the state budget among plunging revenue projections, the cuts weren’t aggressive enough to close an expected $600 million shortfall.

Against the needs of students, and of the state in a time of economic crisis, the Legislature’s desire to adjourn for a six-week vacation hardly seems pressing. Speaker Robert DeLeo should call his chamber back into formal session, and his Senate counterpart, President Therese Murray, should follow suit.

To its credit, the Senate passed the education bill, which would raise a cap on the number of charter schools in Massachusetts and give superintendents more power to reorganize failing schools. But DeLeo rebuffed calls to push the measure through the House. The loss of momentum is discouraging. Opponents - specifically unions representing teachers and other public employees - have launched an all-out assault, complete with blatantly misleading ads stating that the reform bill will create larger class sizes. DeLeo and his leadership team should be steeling members for a tough vote on an important piece of legislation, not giving opponents more than a month to scare legislators into voting against it.

Still more pressing is the need for further action on the state budget. The House rejected or hacked away at many of Governor Patrick’s proposed cuts, protected a legislative slush fund, and rejected the governor’s request for authority to make emergency cuts to agencies outside the executive branch. Yes, legislators are entitled to defend their own prerogatives against what they see as encroachment by the governor. But this fight has grim consequences. Granting Patrick’s request would allow him to spread cuts across a broad variety of agencies and across the seven months left in the fiscal year. Denying the request only concentrates the pain - especially for human services agencies.

In an interview, House Ways and Means Committee chairman Charles Murphy said the governor’s estimate of the revenue shortfall is on the high end of a range of forecasts, and that lawmakers have time to revisit the issue in January. But no one is expecting dramatic improvement in the state’s finances. Indeed, Murphy predicted that fiscal 2011, which begins next summer, “is going to make this year look like a walk.’’ That’s all the more reason not to punt on tough decisions now.

Vacation can wait.
-
www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2009/11/20/fix_schools_and_budget___legislatures_recess_can_wait/?comments=all
-
----------

"Return to session"
The Berkshire Eagle, Editorials, Saturday, November 21, 2009

Everyone wants to be home for Thanksgiving, but the state Legislature should not have left early this week for the Thanksgiving holiday with so much on its plate, most notably in terms of the budget shortfall. We urge lawmakers to heed the request of Governor Patrick and return to address issues that can't be left hanging.

On Friday, the day after Governor Patrick made his request, Administration and Finance Secretary Jay Gonzalez warned in a speech in Boston that Wall Street credit agencies would take a dim view of the Legislature's decision to adjourn until January without closing a projected budget deficit of at least $125 million, which could affect the state's bond rating. House Speaker Robert DeLeo on Thursday snidely replied to the governor's concerns by claiming he was operating under a "political calendar" in an apparent reference to next year's gubernatorial elections. However, the calendars of more immediate concern on Beacon Hill are the ones hanging on the walls on Wall Street and in the homes and offices of those affected by the budget cuts needed to address a deficit that won't just go away.

Governor Patrick had asked for expanded power to make cuts to the budgets of the Legislature and courts to assure that sacrifices were shared equally across the board. If the House and Senate don't want to give him this power they should explain why to constituents. If the governor is not granted it, he will have no choice but to make those cuts in areas where he is already allowed to constitutionally, which Mr. Gonzalez pointed out would be in programs and services. It's up to the Legislature to assure that cuts don't slam those agencies disproportionately.

The House also left hanging an education reform initiative that contains controversial elements, such as raising the cap on the number of charter schools in the state, that must be resolved. Failure to pass the initiative in some form could jeopardize desperately needed federal education grants. The Senate passed the education bill and a reform of the Criminal Offender Record Information system that will make it easier for those who have served sentences to find employment, but the House acted on neither. There is too much left undone for a holiday.
-
www.topix.net/forum/source/berkshire-eagle/T03QOPC2LC758GJGK
-
----------

November 21, 2009

Re: My synopsis of Beacon Hill politics

Corrupt House Speakers, bureaucratic House members, special interest lobbyists, a State Senate President who called the Governor "irrelevant", & a Governor who wants the people addicted to all forms of gambling! What does the B-Eagle expect?

- Jonathan Melle

----------

A BOSTON GLOBE EDITORIAL
"Beacon Hill spat: Snubbing the guv"
November 23, 2009

Massachusetts citizens have to be shaking their heads about the latest spat on Beacon Hill. On Thursday, House Speaker Robert DeLeo wouldn’t return a telephone call from Governor Patrick, who was pushing the Legislature to stay in formal session until more had been accomplished. The governor later visited State House reporters to express his hope that lawmakers would return to work.

That was not to be, however. Indeed, there soon came a verbal poke from Seth Gitell, DeLeo’s spokesman, who accused Patrick of political motivations - and made it clear the speaker felt no obligation to respond to the chief executive’s timetable.

In fact, Patrick’s request is an entirely reasonable one. The legislative departure date is hardly sacrosanct, particularly given the important education and budgetary matters left hanging.

What’s more, the umbrage legislators take at Patrick’s occasional prods toward greater productivity is petty and misplaced. This time it was DeLeo who was miffed. Earlier this year, Senate President Therese Murray was angry because Patrick pushed for much-needed ethics reform at a time when scandals had cast a cloud over the Senate.

The governor has every right to push the Legislature to act on important priorities. When he does, Patrick’s comments are never personal and always well within acceptable bounds for politicians. Yet legislative leaders react as though he has somehow insulted their personal honor whenever he says anything even mildly critical about the way the Legislature operates.

To call that reaction childish is to insult children. Legislators need to grow up - and to get back to work.

----------
-

-
Photo by Staff graphic
-

"Foes cry fowl on House over holiday break"
By Hillary Chabot, November 25, 2009, bostonherald.com - Local Politics

Slacker state lawmakers - already under fire for quitting work before they fully patched the budget deficit or passed education reform - have given themselves a four-day Thanksgiving weekend for the first time in nearly a decade.

Legislators won’t be required to come in Friday even though House leadership has historically kept a skeleton crew on hand.

“They’ve given themselves another day off? Isn’t Bunker Hill Day enough?” said Republican consultant Charlie Manning.

According to holiday schedules circulated this week, House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo and Senate President Therese Murray have allowed staffers to clock out today at 1 p.m. and give Friday a pass.

The new day off comes as Gov. Deval Patrick again blasted lawmakers yesterday for wrapping up their formal sessions without passing legislation to fix a $600 million budget deficit.

“We need your attention to these remaining issues now,” Patrick said yesterday in a surly letter to Beacon Hill pols. Patrick said he would have to make another $210 million in emergency cuts to make up for the lack of legislative action.

A Murray spokeswoman did not return calls for comment. DeLeo spokesman Seth Gitell, who didn’t address the new day off, listed several legislative accomplishments including transportation, pension, and ethics reforms in a statement.

“As for calling the House back into session, formal sessions for 2009 did conclude last week by joint rule. (House Ways and Means) Chairman (Charlie) Murphy has indicated that we don’t have to fill at this moment a $600 million hole,” Gitell said.

Under state law, legislators have formal sessions until the third Wednesday in November.

Senate Ways and Means Chairman Steven C. Panagiotakos (D-Lowell) said plenty of work is accomplished during the informal sessions that will continue until the end of the year.

“I was just meeting with the administration and Chairman Murphy on the budget gap and how we fill this,” Panagiotakos said. He plans to work on Friday, he added.

The holiday break reinforces negative public opinion about the state’s lazy Legislature, which ramped up this fall when few substantive laws were passed, said Minority Leader Bradley H. Jones (R-North Reading).

“We should have had a more productive fall and passed more legislation,” Jones said. Out of 72 bills signed into law since September, 66 focused on municipal issues such as liquor licenses and sick leave banks. Lawmakers spent the majority of September voting to allow Gov. Deval Patrick to appoint a temporary U.S. Senator.

“I wish we had done more the second half of the year,” said Rep. Daniel E. Bosley (D-North Adams). “But most of us are in the State House working every day or in our district offices working every day.”

----------

"Patrick urges Legislature to return; DeLeo says no: Budget could cost disabled and poor"
By Andrea Estes, Boston Globe Staff, November 25, 2009

Governor Deval Patrick repeated his request yesterday that lawmakers return from their holiday recess to find a solution to the state’s budget crisis, saying that without emergency budget-cutting authority he will be forced to slash programs for the disabled, the elderly, and the poor.

But House Speaker Robert DeLeo did not budge, issuing a terse statement through his spokesman: “Formal sessions will resume in the first week of January, as scheduled.’’

Patrick, who addressed a conference of human service providers yesterday at the University of Massachusetts at Boston, said he has already made deep cuts in the budgets of agencies under his control and he needs legislative approval to cut $75 million from other departments such as the judiciary, constitutional offices, sheriff’s departments, and the Legislature. He also wants authority to transfer funds among state accounts.

“It’s enormously important the Legislature come in and finish their work,’’ Patrick said. “I continue to urge the legislators to come back in and do the job, finish their work, so we can manage the budget crisis together.’’

Patrick said he has instructed Administration and Finance Secretary Jay Gonzalez to come up with a list of $120 million in cuts, which will probably include reductions in programs for “the most vulnerable citizens.’’ Possible victims include programs for the sight-impaired and home health aides and day rehabilitation programs for people with disabilities, he said.

Last week, the Legislature made a last-ditch effort to close the state’s budget gap before leaving for a six-week holiday break.

The deficit reduction bill passed by lawmakers made few substantial cuts, and lowered costs by only $95 million. That bill, which Patrick signed yesterday, reduced the budget primarily by transferring funds from one account to another, authorizing a tax amnesty program, and dipping into surplus funds from last year.

The Legislature’s action, combined with reductions already made by the governor, will eliminate about $480 million of the state’s projected $600 million budget deficit for this year, lawmakers said.

Patrick called DeLeo last week to urge him to bring the Legislature back into session, but the speaker did not return his call.

On Monday night, the two State House leaders were inadvertently seated next to each other at a private dinner.

According to a legislative source who requested anonymity, DeLeo gave the governor a hug and said, “Isn’t it wonderful, you and I coming together in the spirit of Thanksgiving.’’

Patrick asked DeLeo whether lawmakers were going to come back, said the source, and DeLeo replied: “C’mon.’’

“I guess you answered the question,’’ the source quoted Patrick as saying.
-
Andrea Estes can be reached at estes@globe.com.
-
----------

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Michelle Gillett

Michelle Gillett, Op-Ed, The Berkshire Eagle
"Arts matter in hard times"
By Michelle Gillett, Tuesday, February 24, 2009
STOCKBRIDGE, Massachusetts

I wish I had a better grasp of where and how the economic stimulus money is being spent but once the numbers go beyond several hundred billion and car manufacturers request more and more of it, my grip begins to loosen. But I can comprehend that $50 million of the final version of the economic stimulus bill President Obama signed last week will be going to the arts, and that some of that money will be allotted to museums, arts centers, and theaters despite the insistence of some conservative Senators that the arts are luxuries only enjoyed by lefty high-brows. The money will be disbursed by the National Endowment for the Arts.

Forty percent of the money will go to state arts agencies. Sixty percent will be set aside for individual arts projects competing for endowment grants. Knowing the legislature voted for support for the arts is helping me sleep a little better at night. We may be living through an economic nightmare but without art, what's the point in even waking up?

"Life beats down and crushes the soul and art reminds you that you have one," Stella Adler said. And life does seem to be beating down more and more people each day — unemployment is up to 8 percent. In Massachusetts, foreclosures were up 22 percent last month.

As someone who works in and with the arts, I have been witnessing the impact of the downturn. Small publishers are receiving less of the grant money that keeps them in business; large publishers are laying people off and cutting back on publications; museums are cutting staff and hours, freezing salaries and hires. Benefactors have less to give or are holding onto what they have.

Financial advisers are telling clients to give less away which also hurts the arts. I would hate to choose between the social service and the cultural organizations I make donations to — but many people are making that choice, and the arts usually lose the draw. The stimulus in no way means we should think that cultural organizations don't need our ongoing support or can manage for long on less. Fifty million dollars is a drop in the bucket from the $787 billion stimulus package, and certainly doesn't amount to much when you consider 40 percent of it is being shared by 100,000 nonprofit arts organizations.

I liked reading Andrew Leonard's insights on the economy and how to get it going in his column on Salon.com.

"At least in part, a successfully growing economy is an illusion predicated on a shared hallucination," he writes. "If we all believe the economy is healthy, we feel confident enough to take risks and spend and invest and create. But if we believe the economy is unhealthy, we pull back, we avoid risk, we save our pennies. The great paradox is that when we, as individuals, prudently pull back, we can end up making things much worse for all of us collectively."

When we pull back, there are fewer cultural opportunities for families, for students and educators. It is far more prudent for us to spend and invest and create in the arts right now than to suffer irretrievable losses.

Americans for the Arts has some viable proposals for ways to create and invest beyond the stimulus money. Among them are creating an Artist Corps, a national training initiative that would train young artists to work in low income schools and their communities and provide "jobs to artists seeking to share their skills, provide mentoring, and professional development to students and individuals seeking work in the creative economy," and making Human Capital Investments in Arts Job Training. The National Governor's Association (NGA) has proposed a $1.5 billion increase to the U.S. Department of Labor's Adult, Dislocated Worker and Youth Programs and Wagner-Peyser Act administered by the states to "help up-skill workers and provide employment services and supports that will increase worker employability and earning power." Americans for the Arts recommends expanding these services available to workers in the creative sector and through arts.

There are those who still think that the arts do not represent real jobs. But as the parent of two daughters who studied art and now support themselves as artists, I know first-hand that they make an essential contribution. They are among the nearly 6 million Americans who have arts-related jobs and contribute to the $166 billion impact the arts have on the economy. Leaders in Washington — Democrats and Republicans — need to continue to recognize that money for the arts feeds more than our souls.
-
Michelle Gillett is a regular Eagle contributor.
-
----------

"Unseen horrors of war"
By Michelle Gillett, Op-Ed, The Berkshire Eagle, Tuesday, March 10, 2009
STOCKBRIDGE, Massachusetts

I never thought I would experience relief over seeing caskets containing dead bodies. But now that Defense Secretary Robert Gates has lifted the ban on media coverage of returning casualties from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, I feel like I am in touch with an important reality. Because of the ban, first imposed in January 1991 during the Gulf War and continued by President Bush with the start of the Afghanistan war in October 2001, we have witnessed little of the suffering our service people have been enduring in the last eight years.

The ban was intended to "ensure privacy and respect is given to the families who have lost their loved ones," but I am cynical enough to think it was also intended to withhold images that might stir us to anger and anti-war feelings. Barring a few exceptions to the ban, we have had no chance to see the hundreds of coffins returning from Iraq and Afghanistan in Air Force C-17 jets or to witness honor guard ceremonies for fallen troops at military facilities.

.

In reaching his decision, Gates said he sought out the views of each service's senior leadership and had aides in his personnel and readiness division canvass family groups outside the Pentagon. Gates stated in a news conference, "I have decided that the decision regarding media coverage of the dignified transfer process at Dover (Air Force Base) should be made by those most directly affected: on an individual basis by the families of the fallen . . . We ought not presume to make that decision in their place."

The families of the service members will be making the call on whether the return of their loved ones can be reported upon or filmed. He was also heavily influenced by the Army's stance.

"I got a very compelling memorandum from the Army in favor of this change of policy," Gates said. "And since that involves the largest number of our fallen, that, obviously, had an impact on me." It is thanks to President Obama's pledge to have an unprecedented level of transparency and openness in government that we are finally allowed to see the casualties of these wars.

But no matter how much transparency we are given, there are other war casualties that still remain invisible. The psychological damage wrecked on so many service people in the past eight years continues to increase.

As Bob Herbert noted in his New York Times op-ed column a week ago, 300, 000 service members are suffering from post-traumatic stress syndrome or depression, 320,000 have probably suffered a traumatic brain injury. The number of suicides among active-duty soldiers and Guard and Reserve troops called to active duty is over 100, the highest it has been in all the years of fighting in the Middle East. The rate of soldier suicides surpasses that of the civilian population. The Pentagon said suicides by U.S. soldiers rose sharply in January 2009. Before the Iraq war began, less than one U.S. soldier tried to kill himself each day.

Now there are six suicide attempts every day, adding up to over 2,100 suicide attempts a year. The causes are numerous: repeated deployments without adequate rest, lack of treatment and recovery time, problems with intimate relationships, with work, with finances, with the law, the lack of access to psychiatrists and psychologists, I.S Army Chaplain,, Lt. Col. Ran Dolinger observed, "The real central issue is relationships. Relationships, relationships, relationships. People look at PTSD, they look at length of deployments . . . but it's that broken relationship that really makes a difference."

Since repeated deployments often cause the broken relationships, part of the solution to suicide prevention seems obvious.

There are other ways of reducing suicides — teaching soldiers to notice warning signs that can lead to suicide, giving the Veterans Affairs mental health system more money and staff, putting a system in place where soldiers can request a second opinion from a nonpartisan civilian psychologist. Often a soldier who sees a military psychologist is sent back to the front.

.

Soldiers need better advocacy at home as well as in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Obama administration is working on policies that will expand and strengthen Veterans Centers, fully fund veteran health care, create a Military Families Advisory Board, and ease deployment uncertainty, But until the wars in the Middle East end — which doesn't seem likely any time soon — much of the suffering of soldiers will continue.

While images of flag-draped caskets bring the horror of the war home to us, we need to keep sight of unseen horrors — those soldiers so traumatized and stressed, they are taking antidepressants or contemplating killing themselves.
-
Michelle Gillett is a regular Eagle contributor.
-
----------

"Our ailing ally"
By Michelle Gillett, The Berkshire Eagle, Op-Ed, Tuesday, April 21, 2009
STOCKBRIDGE, Massachusetts

One afternoon last week, I was raking the layer of needles under the white pine and looked up at the two bat boxes positioned high above me on the trunk. After I hung them four years ago, I would sit on the back step at dusk and watch the bats fly out — one after the other, dark signal flags marking the coming of night. I considered them my environmentally correct approach to mosquito control and felt a certain pride of ownership when they emerged, weaving through and under the trees.

But there have been no bats riding the evening air over my garden for the past couple of years. At first, I thought the bat houses were too high on the tree; then I worried they were not getting enough warmth. I decided to move them to a more hospitable location, but then, I decided I there is no point in moving them because my bats are probably never coming back.

A massive die-off of bats is occurring in the Northeast and, because bats are migratory, the die-off will likely start happening in the South soon. In the Northeast, 90 percent of cave-dwelling bats have died. Some caves in New York have death rates of 100 percent. This rapid decimation of the bat population could lead to their extinction. There is no historic precedent or prior evidence of a die-off like this, and scientists are uncertain of the cause.

Most of the research so far points to a fungus called "white nose syndrome." White nose syndrome is a winter syndrome where a white powder appears on the bats' noses and wings; it is a symptom of something else, and that something else is still a mystery to scientists. The illness has caused bats to burn up their fat stores early in their hibernation and as a result, they leave their caves too early and freeze to death.

Pesticides which kill off bats' food source have been considered a possible cause or at least a contributing factor in the bats' deaths as well. A study of the fungus is being conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey's National Wildlife Health Center in Madison, Wisconsin, and another study, led by Indiana State University's Center for North American Bat Research and Conservation, is looking at the bats' diets and how they metabolize food during hibernation.

One bat eats as many as 3,000 mosquitoes and moths every night. Without them, we will be vulnerable to insect-borne diseases, and our crops will be endangered. According to a recent article in The Hartford Courant, "Every June, over the vast corn and cotton fields of Texas, for example, millions of corn earworm moths migrate north from Mexico, descending at dusk to lay their eggs on crop fields. If left unchecked, these eggs would hatch within a few weeks, and then new moths would lay additional eggs, multiplying their scourge and smothering the crops."

We have the same corn here in New England, and the same earworm moths. Until recently, millions of pounds of those moths have been consumed by bats. Undoubtedly, without hungry bats to rid their fields of equally hungry insects, farmers will rely on pesticides to protect their crops, and will people like me who like to be outside when the weather is nice — without being attacked by mosquitoes.

Bats have been around for millions of years. While my deepest concerns are for the upset in the balance of nature their extinction will cause, I can't help wondering what will happen to Dracula without vampire bats to accompany him on his nocturnal forays for victims with blood to suck. And what about Harry Potter? Will the boy wizard's saga make sense without the Bat-Bogey hex? With no frame of reference, will comic book readers care if Batman protects Gotham City? And what will we have in our belfries when over-use of pesticides to kill those rapidly multiplying insects drive us mad and perhaps to extinction ourselves?
-
Michelle Gillett is a regular Eagle contributor.
-
----------

"A good if pricey, bond"
By Michelle Gillett, Op-Ed, The Berkshire Eagle, Tuesday, June 2, 2009
STOCKBRIDGE, Massachusetts

I got inspired to write about American Girl dolls when "Kit Kittredge," the first feature film about an American Girl Doll character, was released a year ago just when the stock market began to plunge — an ironic coincidence since Kit lives in Cincinnati during the Great Depression. Her father loses his car dealership and must leave town to look for work. To help make ends meet, Mrs. Kittredge raises chickens, grows vegetables and takes in boarders, while 10-year-old Kit, who has pluck and determination, decides to become a journalist and succeeds in solving a crime through her investigative research. I also found it ironic that a girl like Kit in today's economy would not be able to afford an American Girl Doll with its price tag of $100.

The reason for the film's success had little to do with its relevance to present-day social and economic concerns. Known as the "anti-Barbie," Kit, and her sister doll-characters, are among a very few positive role models in toyland for girls, and despite their price tag, they enjoy an almost cult-like following, Pleasant T. Rowland started marketing the dolls through a mail-order company in 1986 as an alternative to dolls that sell sexiness and precocity. Since then, over 14 million dolls have been sold, as have more than 125 million copies of the books that tell each girl-doll's story.

The characters are the 21st century equivalent of Nancy Drew — girls who are clever and resourceful and brave and determined. President Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court, Sonia Sotamayor, devoured Nancy Drew books when she was growing up and says the girl detective influenced her choice of a law career.

Some day, there might be a woman nominee for the Supreme Court who will acknowledge the influence of Kit Kittredge on her career choice — that is, if she can afford the doll. An American Girl Doll and her accessories can only be purchased through the company's catalogue or in one of its flagship American Girl doll stores. Kit and her caboodle, which includes her tree house, her reporter dress and accessories, holiday dress, holiday baking set and dog Gracie, cost close to $400. You can buy Malibu Barbie at Target for $39.99. You can buy a copy of The Nancy Drew Sleuth Book in a bookstore for $6.94.

American Girl dolls have been lauded for their history lessons, their real girl bodies, their commitment to social change — qualities you can't attribute to Bratz dolls with their thongs and diamonds. There is Addy, an African-American who grows up during the Civil War; Josephina, who lives in New Mexico in the 1820s; Kaya, a Nez Perce girl growing up in 1764. Then there is Julia, who lives in San Francisco in the 1970s and her best friend Ivy, who is Asian-American. The latest in the historical/diversity line-up is a Jewish-American girl, nine-year-old Rebecca Rubin, who lives on the Lower East Side in 1914 with her Russian-Jewish immigrant parents, siblings and "Bubbie," her grandmother.

According to the Mattell-owned American Girl Doll Company, its mission is to "create girls of strong character." For the last seven years, it has offered a Girl of the Year contemporary character. Chrissa, the doll of 2009, has had to move with her family to live with her grandmother. When Chrissa starts her new school, she is given the cold shoulder by the "Mean Bees," and in response becomes the school's anti-bullying spokesperson. Chrissa has her own feature film, "An American Girl: Chrissa Stands Strong," and the company supports the Stop the Bullying campaign.

I applaud Chrissa's work to stamp out bullying but I will have to spend $178 to buy her "Starter Collection." I am hoping my granddaughter will be satisfied with the two American Girl dolls she already owns. I have watched her circle items in the catalogue the way I dog-ear pages in the Neiman Marcus catalogue. In a New York Times article last year, A.O. Scott wondered, "Is the brand reflecting tastes or enforcing norms of behavior? Is it teaching girls to be independent spirits or devoted shoppers?" He guesses, "Probably all those things and more."

There are those who condemn American Girl dolls for being elitist and expensive. No one would deny we live in an age where marketing and materialism make us consumers early in life. But some realities hold true throughout the ages — girls and dolls have a special bond. If I were a little girl today, I would certainly identify with and want to own Kit, who hoped to be a writer and make a difference in the world.
-
Michelle Gillett is a regular Eagle contributor.
-
----------

Stockbridge, Massachusetts
"Michelle Gillett to teach two writing workshops"
Berkshire Eagle Staff, Sunday, September 6, 2009

Author Michelle Gillett will be teaching a 10-week writing workshop beginning on Tuesday from 9 a.m. noon at her home in Stockbridge.

The workshop includes discussion of craft, writing time and time to share work and receive feedback.

She will be also be teaching an eight-week poetry workshop on Wednesday mornings beginning Sept 16 from 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. This workshop focuses on reading, writing and discussing poetry and giving and getting feedback.

For more information, all (413) 298-4814 or e-mail mcgillett@verizon.net

----------

"Pull curtain away from ‘new chosen'"
By Michelle Gillett, The Berkshire Eagle (Online), Op-Ed, Tuesday, November 17, 2009
STOCKBRIDGE, Massachusetts

I cautioned myself not to have a knee-jerk reaction to the news that along with the passage of the health care reform bill by Congress two weeks ago, came an amendment to restrict coverage of abortion. I decided, this time, I would find out all I could about it and then respond.

The Stupak-Pitts amendment was created by Bart Stupak, a Democrat from Michigan, and Joseph Pitts, a Republican representative from Pennsylvania. The amendment offers restrictions that would prevent women from buying insurance that covers abortions -- even if they pay for it with their own money. Under present law, the Hyde Amendment bans the use of federal dollars to pay for almost all abortions in a number of government programs.

The Stupak amendment broadens those restrictions and states that no funds appropriated in the bill could be used "to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion." Those two words -- "any part" -- will separate those who can afford to buy their own insurance without government help and those who need to use government subsidized plans.

President Obama has already said that he thinks the language of the amendment needs to be changed. Forty-one Democratic representatives have signed a letter telling House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that they will not vote for the final bill if "contains language that restricts women's right to choose any further than the current law." The bill will be debated in the Senate after Thanksgiving.

As I worked at learning all I could, I discovered that Stupak and Pitts are both are members of an organization called "The Family," a fellowship of sex-segregated prayer cells or "invisible believing groups" of business, political and military leaders dedicated to fighting a "spiritual war on behalf of Christ." Doug Coe, the leader of The Family, told evangelical leaders at a breakfast not long ago, that "the more invisible you make your organization, the more influence it will have." Even though I felt a twitching, I again decided to learn more before I had my usual knee-jerk reaction.

No one really knows the scope of The Family's activities or the extent of their under-the-radar power, but the fact that the abortion amendment was passed makes me think it is vast. Jeff Sharlet is a writer who spent time as a "junior" member of The Family and wrote a story that appeared in Harper's Magazine six years ago about his experience.

Sharlet lived in one of the group's houses in Washington D.C. called "Ivanwald." The group's senior members live in an estate over-looking the Potomac called, "The Cedars." There was an "Ivanwald for girls" across the road from The Cedars, and the women who live there help serve at the weekly leaders' breakfast. "They wore red lipstick and long skirts (makeup and "feminine" attire were required)," Sharlet recalled. "After several months of cleaning and serving in The Cedars (they) become quite unimpressed by the high-powered clientele. "Girls don't sit in on the breakfasts," one of them told me, though she said that none of them minded because it was "just politics." Sharlet also wrote that The Family members consider themselves, "the new chosen."

I decided that I had reached the pinnacle of my learning curve. No "new chosen" is going to make my medical choices for me. But it seems that Coe is right, the more invisible you are, the more influence you wield.

In response to the Stupnak-Pitts amendment, President Obama said, "I laid out a very simple principle, which is this is a health care bill, not an abortion bill," "And we're not looking to change what is the principle that has been in place for a very long time, which is federal dollars are not used to subsidize abortions." He pointed out that because of "the strong feelings on both sides. . . there needs to be some more work before we get to the point where we're not changing the status quo."

The Senate Finance Committee has a approved a bill that incorporates the compromise the House rejected in favor of the Stupak Amendment. The compromise "would have prohibited the use of tax subsidies to pay for almost all abortions, but would have allowed the segregation and use of premium contributions and co-payment to pay for such coverage," according to a New York Times editorial last week.

I am sure the "new chosen" are busy at their secret work pressuring senators not to approve the compromise where insurers would not give up all coverage for abortions. Politicians who believe that women should wear make-up and feminine attire obviously do not care that the procedure is most often used for medical reasons and to save the life or the health of the mother. They are shifty enough to shift the focus of health care reform to abortion.

There is a chance that the Stupak-Pitts amendment will be removed from the final bill, but we need to keep trying to remove the cloak that allows conservative religious groups like The Family to be invisible. Remember when Toto pulled away the curtain that concealed the Wizard of Oz? What was revealed was an ordinary little man running people's lives by playing with power.
-
Michelle Gillett is a regular Eagle contributor.
-
----------

Sunday, February 15, 2009

STOP Handgun Violence!

----------

A Boston Globe Editorial: Short fuse, February 15, 2009

"Guns: Virginia's senseless exception"

Earlier this month, the Virginia Senate rejected Governor Tim Kaine's legislation to require background checks for firearms sales at gun shows. Kaine has pushed to tighten Virginia's gun laws since the massacre at Virginia Tech in April 2007, when Seung-Hui Cho, a student with a history of mental illness, killed 32 people. Although Cho didn't buy his firearms at a gun show, there are no restrictions on a mentally disturbed person buying weapons there. We'd like to say common sense is in uniquely short supply in the Commonwealth of Virginia. But according to John Rosenthal, founder of Stop Handgun Violence, 31 other states do not require background checks for private gun sales. And that's a chilling thought.

----------

"Guns: Assault rifles on the streets"
SHORT FUSE - A BOSTON GLOBE EDITORIAL - August 2, 2009

Assault rifles are showing up with increasing frequency on Boston’s streets. As Police Commissioner Edward F. Davis said last week, they present a special danger because their bullets can go through cars or utility poles. Davis spoke after gunfire in Dorchester in which at least one weapon was an AK-47. A 12-year-old girl watching TV at home received a leg wound during the shooting. A ban on such rifles, which are ill-suited for legal uses such as hunting or home protection, expired in 2004. Congress should restore the ban. But sadly, the gun lobby has a stranglehold on even a Congress with Democratic majorities.

----------

Saturday, February 14, 2009

US President Harry Truman & his wife Bess Truman's newly released papers

----------
-

-
More than 24,000 pages detail the lives of Bess Wallace Truman and President Truman.
-

"Bess Truman's papers released to public"
boston.com/news/nation, February 14, 2009

INDEPENDENCE, Mo. - Family papers detailing the private life of former first lady Bess Wallace Truman were released yesterday, with no apparent bombshells about the wife of President Truman in the more than 24,000 pages.

The Truman Presidential Library and Museum opened the family papers to mark the 124th anniversary of Bess Wallace Truman's birth. The library obtained the papers after the death of the Trumans' daughter, Margaret Truman Daniel, in January 2008.

About 1,600 of the papers once belonged to Bess Wallace Truman's mother, Madge Gates Wallace. They apparently do not mention the 1903 suicide of Bess Wallace Truman's father, David Wallace.

The papers include ledgers detailing Harry Truman's personal finances while he was in office from 1945 to 1953. The ledgers include notations involving occasional personal payments made by the president to his younger sister, Mary Jane Truman - payments that became a financial embarrassment for the 33d president.

The notations, probably made by presidential secretary Rose Conway, are of interest because the president was criticized for putting his wife and sister on the Senate payroll. The personal payments to Mary Jane Truman hint at an interesting Truman family dynamic, said Amy Williams, the Truman library's deputy director.

"It was Mary Jane Truman who helped run the family farm in Grandview after Harry Truman went off to war," Williams said. "He was helping her out."

Experts on Harry Truman have said that one reason he did not want to become President Franklin Roosevelt's vice president in 1944 was because he feared a media scandal over the payments to his wife. When the payments became public, Harry Truman defended his wife's salary as payment for her time and expertise around his Senate office.

Bess Wallace Truman also was reluctant for her husband to become vice president because she feared the press would delve into her father's suicide. But the suicide did not become public.

"I would be surprised if there was anything in there about the suicide," Williams said. "One just didn't discuss that kind of thing back then."

----------

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Mayor Frank Guinta criticizes Governor John Lynch! Do Guinta's partisan remarks hurt the City of Manchester? Answer: YES! Does Guinta care? A: NO!

-

-

"Reaction To Lynch's Budget Address" ~In Part~
wmur.com/politics, POSTED: 2:36 pm EST on February 12, 2009
Reaction to Gov. John Lynch's budget recommendations for the two years beginning July 1, as compiled by The Associated Press:

"He's saying the federal government's going to save us, so wait for that money. That's a terrible way to set policy."
- Republican Mayor Frank Guinta of Manchester

Source: www.wmur.com/politics/18701434/detail.html

----------

"Guinta has 'grave concerns'"
By SCOTT BROOKS, New Hampshire Union Leader Staff, Friday, Feb. 13, 2009

MANCHESTER – Mayor Frank Guinta yesterday said he has "grave concerns" about Gov. John Lynch's budget proposal, which he said would deprive Manchester of millions of dollars in state aid.

The governor's proposal takes away $9.5 million in aid expected to come Manchester's way in fiscal 2010, according to the mayor. Most of the losses are due to cuts in revenue-sharing and rooms-and-meals tax rebates.

Guinta said the proposal also deprives the city of $2.4 million in aid this fiscal year, which ends June 30. The city already has an operating deficit that has been estimated at $1.9 million, a revelation that prompted aldermen last month to approve a spending freeze.

"Gov. Lynch's budget address left me deeply concerned on how this decision to down-shift the budget crisis onto the backs of local taxpayers will play out," Guinta said in a statement.

Lynch spokesman Colin Manning was unable to confirm the mayor's estimates but said the state will be directing federal stimulus dollars to Manchester and other communities.

"It's a tradeoff," Manning said.

Manning said the governor's proposal would not cut money for education aid.
Manchester school district officials are expecting to take in an extra $7.4 million this year.

--Scott Brooks, New Hampshire Union Leader

Readers' COMMENTS:

I agree with Jay. Lynch has proposed increases and Guinta has proposed the opposite. So now Lynch is playing Guinta's deck of cards and now Guinta is screaming mad that he has to now reduce his budget even more!

Too bad he hasn't done anything about the state of the streets and roads in Manchester since he was elected. Brown avenue is overcrowded and very dangerous and no one cares. Thanks to Devries, we now have a neighborhood watch in extreme southern Manchester. We see more Litchfield and Londonderry police driving through than we do Manchester. Thanks Guinta for leaving us to our self defense. Soon our area of the city will have it's own mafia to protect us from speeders and stop sign runners and child killers (thanks to stop sign runners).
- Michael, Manchester

Just about every city and town in NH is making cuts including Manchester. Guinta is getting squeezed by the Alderman and now the state.Things are getting ugly out there.
- Chris, Merrimack

Good for Frank Guinta in standing up to Lynch's horrible budget. I had the same concerns about the rooms and meals tax being withheld when I saw his budget proposed yesterday. The governor just doesn't know what to do now that he has to make an actual decision. Oh wait, yes he does, he just forces other people to deal with it rather than dealing with it himself (expect this time it is US that will have to bear the burden of Lynch's inability to actually govern.
- Chris King, Manchester

Its so nice to actually have a mayor that stands up for its citizens. Thank to Mr. Mayor for supporting the tax payer and not letting the governor constantly get away with just forcing his own budget issues on smaller governments.
- Fred Jenkins, Manchester, NH

Jack, of course Guinta is going to deal with his own cuts for the city budget, but why should it be the cities and towns that have to make even more cuts because of Lynch not sending us our share of the Rooms and Meals tax. This is wrong and Lynch knows it!
- Ben Thomas, Manchester

Jay and Steve, you two Lynch lovers are too ignorant to realize that the reason why Guinta and other mayors/town leaders are VERY upset with Lynch is because Lynch is just passing the buck like he always does. Rather than figuring out how to deal with his budget problems, Lynch is just going to pass them off to the towns and cities and let them deal with them. Cities like Manchester have their own budget problems, they don't need to deal with those of the actual state as well.

Typical Lynch politics- Pass the buck and let someone else deal with the problem. Lynch is ruining this state, but Guinta at lease has the guts to stand up for Manchester.
- Ryan Feltner, Manchester, New Hampshire

well, your Dem hacks, be carefull what you wish for. if lynch takes the rooms and meals tax away sacred cow city teachers will definatley be laid off.

guinta has doen nothing but fight increases. lynch's chickens have come home to roost and it sickens you.
- mike conway, manchester

Manchester paid out $1.3 Million in severances in 2007. Why should government employees have pensions while the rest of the business world has realized what a burden it is on their business and have a 401(k) plan instead.
- E, Manch

What happened? Mayor Guinta has been the big man talking a good conservative Republican game up until this point. Suddenly, when Manchester gets some aid cut, he agrees with Democrats that money needs to be invested into people?

It's funny how so many people are all for slashing cuts and services until it effects their own life directly. Mayor Guinta is a fiscal tough guy until it makes his job harder; then suddenly, he believes spending money on people is a GOOD idea, but only when it comes to Manchester. Grand hypocrisy...
- Jay, Atkinson

Have you people been reading the paper at all or are you just Democrat hacks trolling for the party? Mayor Guinta has made cuts and is calling for possible layoffs. The differance here is he is doing it to fix the mess the Alderman made buy not going along with his budget. On Lynch, it is not sound fiscal policy to use one time stimulus money to try to make up for the money he is taking away from local communities. If the money was such a sure thing why dosen't the Governor keep it and not take the rooms and meals money that was supposed to go to the municipalities to balance his busget?
- Steve Vachon, Manchester

I'll have to side with Lynch on this one. Guinta needs to make cuts to his own budget.
- Jack, Concord

Governor Lynch is making cuts and Mayor Guinta is crying poormouth. Who's the conservative here?

Note to Frank Guinta: shut up and use the reduction in state aid as a reason to make cuts in Manchester. You want to talk the talk, start walking the walk.

Either that or throw in the towel and admit that you are just another tax and spender.
- Glen, Manchester

Mayor Guinta has a right to be upset about Govenor Lynch's Budget and we should thank him for doing his job representing the people of Manchester what he was elected to do. Maybe the tax cap that was proposed isn't such a bad idea now for the Alderman because aren't we all now living within a budget? what happened to the tax cap anyway?
- Danielle Davies, Manchester, NH

Do people realize that Brandy Stanley, the Parking Manager make more than the Mayor does? The woman who comes up with all these brilliant parking plans.....gets paid more than the mayor does.

I bet you would have a line of qualified applicants for that position for half her salary.

And we wonder why we have budget issues.
- Rick, Manchester

If Governor Lynch didnt blow the budget up 17.5% last year he wouldn't now be leaving the local taxpayer holding the bag. How come he found the cuts in this budget and he couldn't find them in the last? I thought all the increases had to happen in the last budget? Not to mention the so called stimulus money that was supposed to go to helping the economy....oh yes now we are now using that to make up for the Governor's sins of the past. I am sure that will create jobs.
- Bill Mortenson, Manchester

Far as I can see all towns are speaking out about it Morgan. Not just Manchester. But we can all look at Dover with a teary Eye too if you would like. This is more than just New Hampsire also, the whole country is whats feeling the pinch. Clearly the rest of the world isnt doing to great either.
- Chris, Goffstown

I think Mayor Frank Guinta needs to get in line with the other cities in New Hampshire which will be impacted by Gov. Lynch's proposed budget. His city won't be the only one which will be feeling the pinch. This is about New Hampshire citizens, not just Manchester residents.
- Morgan Vendetti, Dover

Mayor Frank .. time to tell the head meter maid that her $100,000 per year job is now a $50,000 per year job .. which is what the pay should have been when she was hired.. the pay scale for the Manchester Hacks is completely out of control.. cut the pay and benefits.. If they don't like it, they can go stand in line with their fellow citizens of Manchester at the unemployment office..
- Thom, Manchester, NH

----------
-

-
Gov. John Lynch outlines his budget in an address yesterday (2/12/2009). (CHERYL SENTER)
-
----------

"Governor gets budget ball rolling"
www.seacoastonline.com, OPINION, February 15, 2009

When speaking with business groups, New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch often repeats his strategy for turning a business failure into a success. You have to make more money than you spend. It’s that simple.

Lynch came to the governor’s job from the private sector, fresh from turning Knoll, Inc., a national furniture manufacturer, from a $50-million-a-year loser into a $200-million-a-year profit maker.

While Lynch has gotten great mileage from his private sector success, that challenge pales in comparison with the $275 million deficit the state faces for the rest of fiscal year 2009 ending June 30, or the potential $550 million deficit the state would face if it didn’t drastically change its revenue and spending plans for the 2010 and 2011 biennial budget, which begins July 1 of this year.

On Thursday, Lynch unveiled a budget that bears the hallmark of someone who has spent time in the real world of the private sector rather than the public sector which, increasingly, seems to answer all its budget challenges by increasing the tax burden on the people it is supposed to serve.

Lynch’s proposals are far reaching. Some suggestions, such as an increase in the cigarette tax, were predictable. Others were surprising, such as the discovery of a $110 million surplus in the state’s little-known medical malpractice fund (we’re told by some that this windfall is too good to be true). Some proposals, leasing land at welcome centers and streamlining the state’s highly profitable liquor business, seem so obvious you wonder why it took a crisis to get them on the table. And some ideas for reorganizing the administration of state services seem downright innovative.

The governor’s budget proposal begins the debate. Now, the Legislature will weigh in and we will certainly hear some revenue proposals not in the governor’s plan, such as expanded gambling, the return of an estate tax, a gas tax and, yes, bills on sales and income taxes will be debated despite the governor’s promised veto.

In the coming days, we’ll gain greater clarity on exactly how much money will come to the state from the federal government via its economic stimulus package. And we’ll see whether revenue trends are better, worse, or holding steady as the governor’s budget assumes.

Already narrow interests are lining up to protect their slice of turf in what is certain to be a hard-fought battle. But each group has to recognize that every dollar it moves to its pile has to be taken from someone else’s. Resources are finite.

As the debate proceeds, state officials must guard against balancing their budget by simply pushing more expenses onto cities and towns. In Portsmouth, for example, the governor’s budget would push $1.8 million in new expenses onto local taxpayers by reducing the amount the state sends the city in rooms and meals taxes, shared revenue from block grants, and a 5 percent reduction in payments toward the retirement system. These cuts might help the state balance its budget, but they do nothing to help taxpayers who will either have to foot the bill through increased property taxes or cut local jobs and services. That’s no bargain. Legislators must also beware of diminishing returns. Hiking the rooms and meals tax may raise money in the short run, but if it causes people to curtail overnight stays and meals in restaurants, then nothing is gained.

But the governor deserves praise for his budget proposal. He took a hard look at state spending and came up with far-reaching proposals. He recognizes that you can’t nickel and dime your way out of this type of budget shortfall. State government will need to be reshaped and that, in turn, will put pressure on local governments to drastically reduce spending as well.

“If you disagree with something in this proposal, I respect that,” the governor said Thursday. “But it is not enough to simply say no or to criticize. We all have a responsibility to come to the table with solutions.”

Well said, governor, and well done.

----------

"Guinta: State is too slow on stimulus"
By JOHN DISTASO, Senior Political Reporter, NH Union Leader (Sunday News), March 1, 2009

MANCHESTER – Mayor Frank Guinta says it's high time for the state to get federal stimulus money, or at least detailed information about it, to the cities and towns.

The two-term chief executive charged in an interview that state officials are either dragging their feet or having trouble interpreting and reacting to the requirements of the complex law.

He also complained that state officials are shortchanging municipalities with precious little stimulus aid for local highway and bridge projects.

A spokesman for Gov. John Lynch responded that the governor's office has been working as fast as it can to get information and funding to local officials. He also defended the state transportation agency's project priority list.

Guinta said he never expected Manchester's $100 million "wish list," which includes $45 million for the school district and $55 million for city facilities and equipment, to be totally fulfilled. He said, in fact, the city's list is not a wish list at all, but rather projects that already were under consideration or in the pipeline before the stimulus was passed.

While not directly critical of Democrat Lynch, Republican Guinta said the governor told him on Feb. 19 that state officials "were reviewing the legislation and would have an update in a few weeks."

Since then, Guinta said, "There has been growing frustration among towns and cities because the stimulus has now been passed and information regarding access to dollars has been very slow, to the point where we continue to wait for informational data," such as how to go about applying for funding.

"The notion here of a stimulus to stimulate the economy as quickly as possible in New Hampshire has become a situation where either the information is flowing into the state and the state is slow to disseminate it, or they're still sifting through the actual legislation to try to determine how this money will be distributed," Guinta said.

"People are asking me for news and information, and I can only say that I'm being told by the state, 'You have to wait. We don't have answers yet."

The municipalities' cut

Guinta also noted that only $11 million of $130 million in first-round transportation stimulus funds is slated for state aid to municipalities for highway and bridge projects.

He said Manchester alone has transportation projects that exceed $11 million. The top city priority, a new public works facility, carries a price tag of $25 million.

Lynch spokesman Colin Manning said there has been movement on the stimulus. He noted that two transportation projects have been advertised and said applications for environmental projects have been submitted. He said the transportation projects on the state priority list already have been approved by the Legislature and are shovel-ready.

"There will be other pools of money municipalities will be eligible for," said Manning, noting Lynch "has proposed sending $80 million back to the community through the fiscal stabilization fund."

Manning said the governor's office, "in some cases, is still trying to get more information from the federal government, and as soon as we get it, we're trying to pass it along to local officials."

Less aid than anticipated

Soon, other local officials may be joining Guinta in voicing frustration.

A top state environment official told the New Hampshire Sunday News that the amount of stimulus money for municipal wastewater and drinking water projects will be on the low end of the possible range he had been told would be available.

Harry Stewart, state director of environmental services, said that depending on which version of the stimulus bill passed, New Hampshire could have received between $40 million and $100 million for wastewater projects. The final amount, he said, will be $39.1 million.

He said the state could have received a maximum of $40 million for drinking water projects, but will instead receive $19.5 million.

Stewart said the total amount of money sought for projects in municipal applications will "substantially exceed" the available funds.

A deadline for municipal officials to submit pre-applications passed on Friday at 4 p.m. Stewart said the number of projects submitted and the total dollar amount on the wish list will be known by the middle of this week and a prioritization process will begin immediately.

He said his department must draw up an "intended use plan" for all projects, explaining in detail how all the funds will be used.

"That's going to take several weeks," said Stewart. "We'll be filing for the (Environmental Protection Agency) grants within the next week or week-and-a-half."

The intended-use plan, he said, must be completed before the funds are forthcoming. The process, he said, includes a public hearing, to be held later this month.

Stewart said that although the money the state is receiving is "on the low end of the spectrum of possibilities, there is reason for optimism.

"In the long term," he said, "this discussion around the stimulus has opened up the possibility for long-term funding and more flexibility than we've had for these projects, particularly on the wastewater side."

More on the way

On other stimulus fronts:

-- Transportation officials advertised for bids for a $9.5 million project to resurface Route 101 from Epping to Exeter on Feb. 19 and for the $31.1 million widening of Interstate 93 from Salem to Manchester last Tuesday, Feb. 24.

They are scheduled to solicit bids for two more projects on Tuesday -- a $9 million umbrella for various small "district resurfacing projects" throughout the state, and a $4.7 million project to resurface Interstate 89 in New London from Exit 11 to Exit 12A.

The department plans to advertise for bids on March 17 for a $12.7 million widening of the F.E. Everett Turnpike, as part of the Manchester-Bedford airport access road project.

-- The Department of Health and Human Services at mid-week received the first $25 million of $50 million in Medicaid stimulus money it hopes to receive before June 30, the end of the state's fiscal year.

-- Sen. Jeanne Shaheen announced on Friday that the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development has promised to deliver $24.8 million to New Hampshire. Her announcement said the money will be distributed "at both the state and community levels in formula funding" for public-housing capital funds, community-development block grants, low-nncome housing tax-credit funding, and homelessness-prevention funds.

State and local officials must yet go through a bureaucratic process, unclear in length, before they actually receive the money, her spokesman said.

----------

"Lynch, Guinta Say Spending Needs Cut At All Levels: Mayor Calls For One-Week Pay Furlough For City Employees"
wmur.com - March 18, 2009

MANCHESTER, N.H. -- Business leaders in Manchester heard a grim assessment of the state of the economy from the governor and the city's mayor Wednesday.

Gov. John Lynch and Mayor Frank Guinta said the city and state are both trying to reduce spending, and layoffs will be necessary. Lynch was able to provide a brief moment of levity during his address to the Greater Manchester Chamber of Commerce.

"If any of you have a mere $500 million you're willing to give the state," Lynch said.

Lynch said some fundamental changes in they way the state does business are needed, beginning with the Department of Health and Human Services.

"They contract out with 4,000 different organizations," Lynch said.

The governor said politics will make implementing change tough. But he said the current system doesn't make sense or spend dollars wisely.

"Each of these organizations has administrative costs, which also we help to finance," Lynch said. "Each of these organizations has an executive director and they all have on their boards politically powerful people like all of you."

Guinta repeated his pledge to hold the line on taxes to the group of business leaders.

"Equally important to me is that in the current economic conditions, I don't feel raising taxes is a proper policy to support," Guinta said.

Guinta said layoffs of city and school workers are inevitable, but in an effort to reduce layoffs, he will call upon city workers to give up a week's wages -- something he will do himself.

"I will not ask any employee to give up something that I'm not willing to also give up," he said.

Guinta said he remains concerned that as the state deals with its budget problems, it will look to shift costs to cities and towns. He also plans to sit down with the city's unions on Monday to see if they will buy into his furlough plan.
-
SOURCE: www.wmur.com/money/18958507/detail.html
-
----------

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Matt Kinnaman

-

-
http://www.mattkinnaman.com/assets/images/photos/pics/
-
----------

"The spirit of stimulus"
By Matt Kinnaman, Op-Ed, The North Adams Transcript
Thursday, February 5, 2009

Politicians in favor of passing a huge stimulus bill don't understand the marvelous powers of private capital. From Beacon Hill to Capitol Hill, they salivate over expansions of government revenue and spending schemes that are ultimately corrosive of human well-being.

Higher gas taxes, bigger "bailouts," salvation by casinos and other government money-grabs, aimed at transferring private wealth to public collectors all suffer from the same fatal flaw: They undermine the free movement and formation of capital, on which all economic growth depends.

The political appetites on display in Washington and Boston are not truly about economic growth but about government growth. A "stimulus" plan stuffed with pork and propelled by new spending will mostly stimulate the growth of government agencies, bureaucracies and dependencies, while it diminishes the opportunities of the ultimate source of economic growth -- human capital.

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas addressed the Manhattan Institute last year and said this: "The self-indulgent 'me' generation has had a profound effect on much around us. Rarely do we hear a message of sacrifice -- unless it's a justification for more taxation and transfers of wealth to others.

"Nor do we hear from leaders or politicians the message that there is something larger and more important than the government providing for all of our needs and wants ... as I have traveled across the country, I have been astounded just how many of our fellow citizens feel strongly about their constitutional rights but have no idea what they are."

Chief among those rights is the right to property. Stimulus-hungry Democrats can quickly twist the growth and stewardship of an individual's private property into a manifestation of greed, but the opposite is true. The cultivation of private property and its protection from government confiscation is the heart of human liberty and is the well-spring of resources that meet human need.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, pushing the Democrat's version of economic stimulus, embraced the bill's inclusion of federally-funded contraception because it would "reduce costs to the states and to the federal government" that would be engendered by new human lives.

The ultimate irony is apparently lost on Pelosi. In the early days, the American people were ravaged by a multiplicity of misfortunes no longer known, but despite rampaging shortages, dangers, diseases and uncertainties, the ideal of the day was to have lots of children. Today's newborn baby -- by historical standards arriving into unprecedented wealth and care -- is now identified by Pelosi as a liability instead of a new source of growth and possibility.

If only today's Congress were led by the late economist Julian Simon, who taught that people are not resource drainers but are instead the "ultimate resource." They invent new technologies, new economic breakthroughs and new sources of revenue, energy and productivity. Rich Karlgaard, publisher of Forbes magazine, makes Simon's point again when he says, "the most valuable natural resource in the 21st century is brains."

This is the critical insight separating those who want to tax and redistribute capital (and call it "stimulus") from those who want to produce it.

Forget for a moment about asking a politician whether he is a liberal of a conservative. Instead, ask him if, in an either-or scenario, he favors the current stimulus bill or an immediate reduction in the capital gains tax. Choosing the latter demonstrates a favorable orientation toward the economic importance of private property and private capital as the drivers of all other measurements of economic health, including the maintenance of appropriately-funded government treasuries and the expansion of charitable endeavors driven by private donations.

In 1819, Chief Justice John Marshall wrote in McCulloch v. Maryland that "the power to tax involves the power to destroy." Destroy what? Productivity. Incentive. Profit. Even life.

Economic stimulus is provided by human capital -- human life -- which freely engenders and directs other capital -- private property -- in the pursuit of productive and profitable aims. Fueled by the inexhaustible human capacity for innovation and creativity, this is the engine of all economic growth and health.

When this engine runs unimpeded, economic miracles occur. The first commercial computer, UNIVAC, built in 1951, weighed 29,000 pounds. It had tape drives that were 6 feet high and 3 feet wide. Today, a computer I can wear on my belt clip is more powerful than a city filled with UNIVACs. Researchers are on the verge of producing computers with 32 nanometer transistors, only six times the width of a DNA strand -- infinitesimally small but able to do very big things, like reshape the economic world as we know it.

Reshaping the economic world as we know it through the creative and innovative power of human capital: That's the spirit of stimulus.
-
Matt Kinnaman of Lee writes his column every week for the Transcript.
-
----------

"Governor Patrick channels the Bee Gees"
By Matt Kinnaman, Op-Ed, The North Adams Transcript, Thursday, February 19, 2009

Forty years ago, the Bee Gees prophetically harmonized about how "the lights all went down in Massachusetts." As if to forestall the frame of mind engendered by mental images of fast-fading luminescence, people began to sing "All Hail to Massachusetts" as the commonwealth's state song, and it was officially codified as such by the Legislature in 1981.

Appropriately, it's full of strong, bright Reaganesque lyrics speaking of "the flag we love to wave" in "a land of opportunity" where "people come to stay."

If only. Unfortunately, the Bee Gees' bottom line more accurately summarizes Massachusetts' story: the negative demographic phenomenon the U.S. Bureau of Census calls "net domestic migration."

Picture 550,000 people turning out the lights and walking into the sunset, and you've got a handle on the recent Massachusetts experience -- a vast disappearance in the past 20 years of families, companies, entrepreneurs, young people, inventions, jobs and revenue, lured by the competitive attractions of other states.

Among the 50 states, Massachusetts has earned the 49th worst ranking, being surpassed only by New York. New York, by the way, is where politicians in the world's greatest city celebrate the idea of taxing plastic garbage bags as a bold new civic accomplishment. All hail taxes on plastic bags! And see ya later!

Some politicians hear about craziness like that and resolve not to repeat it. (They tend to be concentrated in states with growing populations.) Other politicians are tempted to one-up their tax-happy colleagues next door. This provides an explanation for Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick's recently-announced brainstorm to raise the gasoline tax by 27 cents per gallon, making Massachusetts the most expensive state in the country for a fill-up, with 50.5 cents added to the cost of every gallon, outpacing even tax-crazed New York at 41.3 cents per gallon.

Just to make sure everyone gets the point that Gov. Patrick is serious about making Massachusetts No. 1 in this category, the new tax would also be indexed to the Consumer Price Index beginning in 2011 (one year after the next gubernatorial election!), insuring that the gas tax would automatically escalate even further in coming years.

That's just the beginning. When the 2011 automatic-gas-tax-hike increaser kicks in, Massachusetts will only be three years away from chip-implanted vehicle inspection stickers -- giving the state the ability to track and compute the travels of every Massachusetts driver.

The Registry of Motor Vehicles will administer this new VMT program ("vehicle miles traveled"), and automobile inspection charges will increase by $10 to cover "RMV modernization," a euphemism meaning "we know where you drove today, we're keeping track, and we're going to charge you."

Apparently, you shouldn't mind. The projected impact on your wallet is "less than the cost of two small Dunkin' Donuts coffees per week," said Massachusetts Transportation Secretary James Aloisi. He also referred to the price of his recently-purchased turkey sandwich as a benchmark for what taxpayers shouldn't mind coughing up.

In other words, eat, drink and merrily pay double in taxes for the privilege of living here. The governor is even considering new tolls at the state border to charge drivers who want to enter "the grand old Bay State." All hail to Massachusetts!

"I am not going to ask people to pay more money for the status quo," Gov. Patrick said while defending his proposals that would increase the cost and decrease the freedom of living in the commonwealth. According to him, this is "all about how much reform we're prepared to pay for."

The corrosive economic effect of this approach is incalculable. Seeking capital expansion through endless manipulations of tolls, tax hikes, driver tracking and border-entry penalties completely ignores the importance of attracting human capital. Human capital -- the most powerful, indispensable generator of real revenue growth -- is the resource Massachusetts continues to chase away.

Proving they can't catch a clue, Massachusetts Democrats, addicted to spending, are also angling for ever-bigger revenue caches, casting for their share of federal "stimulus" funds while simultaneously preparing to land the gambling industry. "How much reform we're prepared to pay for" sounds more and more like a refrain of the socialistic mega-phenomenon under way in Washington -- a systematic drowning of free enterprise and its essential energies in the tax-and-spend tsunami of "stimulus."

Economist Arthur Laffer, analyzing the net effect of our national bailout and high-tax binge, warned that "the age of prosperity is over." All hail sanity! If Massachusetts has any left, it will quickly start driving in the opposite direction of its governor's proposals.
-
Matt Kinnaman of Lee writes his column every week for the Transcript.
-
----------

"The road to serfdom, revisited"
By Matt Kinnaman, The North Adams Transcript, Op-Ed, Thursday, February 26, 2009

Friedrich August von Hayek, leader of the "Austrian School" of economics, was a pioneer in explaining how free human action and choice create economic growth.

Hayek taught that: "If we wish to preserve a free society, it is essential that we recognize that the desirability of a particular object is not sufficient justification for the use of coercion." When considering the various coercion techniques available to government, taxation is the first and primary method, and the most comprehensively employed as a means to additional coercive government objectives.

In one of the ever-multiplying ironies of history, Hayek was a professor at the University of Chicago and profoundly influenced the "Chicago School" of economics, famous for its libertarian, free market focus, an influence which, by all evidence, has had no discernible effect on Barack Obama, despite his politically formative years spent in that city.

As if to refute everything taught by the pioneers of free market thinking, on the 21st day of his presidency, in his first presidential news conference, Barack Obama said: "The federal government is the only entity left with the resources to jolt our economy back into life." With this pronouncement, the new president was instantly at odds with the very nature of free enterprise and all of its associated miracles.

The only resource the federal government actually has is the resources provided to it by free people engaged in free enterprise. Centralized "stimulus" planning is the opposite of this dynamism.

The classic liberal economist Henry Hazlitt wrote that "the art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act of policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups. Nine tenths of the economic fallacies that are working such dreadful harm in the world today are the result of ignoring this lesson."

Obama is ignoring it

Popular economist Steven Landsburg, who earned his Ph.D.. from the University of Chicago and teaches economics at the University of Rochester, authored "The Armchair Economist," a treatise designed to make it all make sense in everyday life. Here's Landsburg's bottom line: "Most of economics can be summarized in four words: 'People respond to incentives.' The rest is commentary."

The immediate commentary on Obama's economic program is that it diminishes incentives and promotes coercion. In that first news conference on Feb. 9, he referred to a "profound economic emergency," a condition which, by unprecedented spending and plans to increase taxes on capital, he is intent on worsening.

Grover Norquist, founder of Americans for Tax Reform and a promoter of incentives, published his own commentary this week outlining the extent of Obama's anti-incentive economic initiatives, which continue the headlong rush over the spending cliff that began under President Bush last fall.

Norquist writes: "Since 2007, the federal government has managed to increase spending by 50 percent." This puts total spending at 30 percent of Gross Domestic Product, a level 33 percent higher than the average since 1945.

Chief among Obama's economic fallacies is that, by printing money and raising taxes, the federal government can manufacture prosperity. Nothing is further from the truth. The only road to prosperity is through incentivizing profit. People power profits, and people are powered by incentives. The same is true of corporations, because ultimately, corporations are people.

People and corporations are likewise commonly and negatively affected by punitive economic policies based on coercion and penalties. Commenting on this, Hazlitt pointed out that, "when a corporation loses a hundred cents of every dollar it loses, and is permitted to keep only 52 cents of every dollar it gains," it avoids the risks required for robust profit. The economy suffers, and human life suffers.

"The result in the long run," said Hazlitt, "is that consumers are prevented from getting better and cheaper products to the extent that they otherwise would."

Add it all up, and Obama's economic program equals a planned violation of the energies of economic growth. Taxes up, incentives down, productivity discouraged, and profits damped.

Norquist's voice in the wilderness cries out: Progressing steadily down the Obama policy pipeline, scheduled to kick in only 22 months from now, are multiple coercions, penalties and disincentives that destroy economic performance. Profits on small-business taxes will rise by 12 percent. Capital gains taxes will rise by 33 percent. Taxes on dividends will rise 164 percent. And Americans who die after building an estate for their families of $1 million or more will see the federal government demand 55 percent of it back.

This may be change. It is also the antithesis of economic wisdom.
-
Matt Kinnaman of Lee writes his column every week for the Transcript.
-
----------

"Coach Calhoun upends Obamanomics"
By Matt Kinnaman, Op-Ed, The North Adams Transcript, March 5, 2009

On Feb. 21, three days before President Obama's address to a joint session of Congress, a much briefer and more effective presentation on economics was conducted by Jim Calhoun, head coach of the University of Connecticut men's basketball team.

Connecticut, a perennial national basketball powerhouse, had just finished off Southern Florida, 64-50, to improve its record to 25-2. Calhoun was confronted at the post-game press conference by a questioner who inferred that, since the coach is a Connecticut state employee, he should return some of his $1.6 million salary to reduce Connecticut's budget troubles: "Considering that you're the highest paid state employee, and there's a two billion dollar budget deficit, do you think --?"

"Not a dime back," Calhoun retorted.

The questioner persisted: "You don't think 1.6 million is enough?" after which Coach Calhoun cranked up the volume and closed the case with a spirited recitation of some simple math -- Connecticut's men's basketball program generates $12 million annually for the university, many times more revenue than it spends on its coach. It's a profitable arrangement. Calhoun makes no apologies.

But the coach actually left some calculations out. He didn't mention the immeasurable value to the university -- and to the state -- created by the year-in and year-out national prominence and exposure generated by a nationally-ranked major collegiate home team.

He didn't mention that, in this era of 24-hour HD sports coverage on multiple television networks, the upside of achieving the nation's top ranking in the nation's most popular college sport is not measurable by basketball-generated dollars alone. What about its positive effects on competitive student recruitment? What about its influence on alumni donations? What about the charitable endeavors it engenders?

Jim Calhoun has coached Connecticut to nine times as many NCAA post-season victories as all 16 previous UConn men's basketball coaches combined. His teams have won two national championships. This season, Calhoun's Huskies are poised for their 16th NCAA Tournament bid in 20 years. Under Calhoun, Connecticut has won 16 Big East Conference titles in 22 seasons. Calhoun's team is currently ranked No. 1 in the nation. It played on national television six times in February alone.

The premise feebly floated by Calhoun's press conference antagonist -- that the failure of Connecticut's state Legislature and governor to deliver the state's tax-paying citizens a balanced budget requires of the state's most successful employee the coerced surrender of his lawfully-earned property -- would be laughable if it didn't also seriously represent what passes for acceptable reasoning in the current political climate.

Connecticut Gov. M. Jodi Rell inexplicably weighed in: "I think if Coach Calhoun had the opportunity right now, he would welcome a do-over and not have that embarrassing display from last week."

Two Connecticut state legislators, Sen. Mary Ann Handley and Rep. Roberta Willis, went further, urging the university to take "appropriate disciplinary action" against Calhoun, whose energetic defense of his salary they found objectionable.

Unlike electoral politics, big-time, big-money athletics holds its top coaches brutally accountable for success. You are only as good as your most recent measurable performance, and top-tier coaches who don't deliver winning seasons are summarily fired.

What is truly remarkable about this entire episode is -- nearly two weeks and a thousand news stories later -- that anyone considered the accusatory news conference question worthy of serious attention in the first place. If it was, why aren't Gov. Rell, Sen. Handley, and Rep. Willis offering a portion of their salaries back to the state? After all, the blame for Connecticut's budget shortfall belongs with them and their colleagues, not Jim Calhoun.

Connecticut's lawmakers ought to issue a proclamation in honor of Jim Calhoun, affirming hard work, competitive success and merit pay, instead of pursuing penalties and recriminations against individuals who are guilty of nothing more than quantifiable high performance and its commensurate financial rewards.

Significantly, Calhoun's treatment in Connecticut eerily resembles something bigger -- the Obama economic philosophy of limiting and punishing success. Obama's early assaults on economic incentives include salary caps on individuals, punitive income taxes on those who in the government's estimation make too much money, disincentives for charitable giving and higher costs on the energy production that fuels growth -- alongside a seemingly endless series of unprecedented wealth transfers from private earners to federal budget-busting spending programs.

Here's the important lesson: Coach Calhoun's financial rewards pale in comparison to the value he creates for others. That's the way it's supposed to be. Calhoun was right to stand up in defense of basic economic freedom and common sense.

Jim Calhoun doesn't need to be disciplined. He needs to be appointed Barack Obama's chief economic advisor.
-
Matt Kinnaman of Lee writes his column every week for the Transcript.
-
----------

"Fairness is a poor substitute for freedom"
By Matt Kinnaman, The North Adams Transcript, Op-Ed, 3/19/2009

Awakened by economic alarm bells, the currently popular political response -- to supersede and suspend market forces by government dictate -- is precisely opposed to the natural dynamics that make freedom and enterprise successful.

Should this not set off additional alarms?

It is accepted contemporary wisdom to say that politics and religion don't mix. The problem is, if we don't -- at a very essential level -- inform politics with a metaphysical (essentially religious) belief in unalienable rights endowed to each person by the Creator of those rights, the institutions of the state eventually become sacramental keepers of political doctrines bearing little or no resemblance to the original American idea of those very rights themselves.

Recent political actions and intentions emanating from the White House and, when its assistance is needed, a compliant Congress (and these actions are legion: TARP I, TARP II, Omnibus I, assorted specialized industry bailouts, erosion of the benefits of charitable activity, pay caps, seized bonuses) represent, as parts and in total, a shift away from the very essence of individual liberty.

In every case, these actions comprise a consistent and relentless attack on the most critical element of prosperity: individual economic incentive. And in attacking incentive, these state-directed interventions undermine the natural and necessary antecedent of both incentive and prosperity: private property.

As John Locke, a weighty and wise influence on the American founding, observed, governments lack legitimate authority in the realm of individual conscience. In arguing persuasively for this, Locke also identified the most basic exercise of the unalienable right to private property. What, after all, is more completely and purely private, and possessed by only one person to the exclusion of everyone else, than that person's conscience? Conscience -- comprised in life itself -- is the essential private property. It is inviolate.

The implications of this revolutionary civil-liberties insight resound in Locke's observation that each individual "hath by nature a power" that guarantees each person the right "to preserve his property, that is, his life, liberty and estate, against the injuries and attempts of other men."

Locke's identification of "life, liberty, and estate" as the essence of freedom blazed the path to the bright horizons opened in 1776 by our own Declaration of Independence, which proclaimed "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness" among the unalienable rights endowed by our Creator.

A Constitution based on these rights, and guaranteeing their protection, soon followed, expanding individual liberty far beyond any previous advancement.

But the continued full enjoyment and preservation of those rights depends on a clear understanding of their constitutional bedrock. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas remarked last year that:

"The self-indulgent ‘me' generation has had a profound effect on much around us. Rarely do we hear a message of sacrifice -- unless it's a justification for more taxation and transfers of wealth to others. Nor do we hear from leaders or politicians the message that there is something larger and more important than the government providing for all of our needs and wants. ... As I have traveled across the country, I have been astounded at just how many of our fellow citizens feel strongly about their constitutional rights but have no idea what they are "

By indicting the "justification for more taxation and transfers of wealth to others" Thomas rightly raises a red flag at the primary activity of the Obama administration -- massive transfers of private property to government allocators via new spending and taxation directives. It's a program ultimately incompatible with the full protection of the rights of life, liberty and property.

In the Wall Street Journal last week, Daniel Henninger identified retribution as Obama's motivation for "fairness," saying Obama's presidential priority is made clear in "A New Era of Responsibility: Renewing America's Promise. The President's Budget and Fiscal Preview." The document states, "There's nothing wrong with making money, but there is something wrong when we allow the playing field to be tilted so far in the favor of so few. ... It's a legacy of irresponsibility, and it is our duty to change it."

This proclamation, that it is the government's "duty" to "change" the amount of money some people make so that centrally-planned bureaucratic fiats can be fulfilled, is antithetical to the free exercise of Lockean and Jeffersonian and American property rights and is an affront to freedom itself.

Libertarian economics analyst Llewellyn Rockwell speaks of "the political violence that characterizes all central planning, whether in Germany, the Soviet Union or the United States."

In other words, when it becomes government's "duty" to "change" the allocation of property among its citizens, this is a form of coercion at war with the premises for which freedom was first won and has always been defended.

But most nefariously, it puts us at war with ourselves.
-
Matt Kinnaman of Lee writes his column every week for the Transcript.
-
----------

Getting it right
"Other people's money: It's fun while it lasts"
By Matt Kinnaman, The North Adams Transcript, Op-Ed, 4/2/2009

Alex Rodriguez, the highest paid employee in professional baseball, will not play in the first game at the new Yankee Stadium when it opens on April 16. He will be recovering from hip surgery. As he sits on the sidelines, he will collect a salary of nearly $90,000 a day.

Under his current contract, which pays him $32 million a year, this compensation continues every day, seven days a week, 365 days a year, whether he plays or not. And he makes this much money from the New York Yankees alone, excluding independent endorsement deals.

Construction of the new Yankee Stadium cost approximately $1.5 billion. To complete the project, the Yankees received nearly $1 billion in funding from tax-exempt bonds, often referred to as "public funds."

The idea behind this financing vehicle is that in the long run, it pays off for everyone involved. As New York's Mayor Bloomberg said, "The deal leverages a federal program and will result in New York City getting back more tax revenue than it will cost and the South Bronx getting thousands of new jobs and more than $1 billion in private investment."

Whether it pays off or not, it does raise the question of whether Congress, to be consistent with its decision to apply a 90-percent retroactive tax on the bonuses of executives from firms receiving bailout money, must also go after other individuals whose compensation -- in the judgment of Congress -- is too high. If the government can seize bonuses, limit pay and force the firing of executives at companies receiving one form of federal aid, why not apply the principle everywhere, to every form of federal assistance or involvement?

If it's legitimate for the federal government, at the whims of the legislative or executive branches, to monitor, mandate and manipulate the pay of people working for businesses that benefit from federal funding measures, will Congress or the Obama administration next take aim at A-Rod? Or at the entire Yankee roster? Or you?

During the recent off-season, the New York Yankees executed salary contracts with total commitments of more than $420 million for just three players (C.C. Sabathia, A.J. Burnett and Mark Teixeira). Prior to these moves, the Yankees total payroll -- the highest in baseball -- was already at least 50 percent higher than those of its next closest competitors, the Tigers, Mets and Red Sox. The average annual salary on the Yankees roster in 2008 was nearly $7 million. In today's climate, does Congress consider this reasonable -- or fair or not excessive?

Commentator Byron York's DC Examiner inquiry into the current pay-pouncing initiatives of Congress uncovers the pitfalls of their policy overreach, specifically in the Grayson-Himes Pay for Performance Act of 2009, a piece of legislation written "to prohibit unreasonable and excessive compensation and compensation not based on performance standards" at companies receiving bailout money. Already approved by the House Financial Services Committee, passage of the bill in the House is expected as early as this week.

As York explains, "the legislation gives Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner extraordinary power to determine the pay of thousands of employees of American companies," including "the authority to decide what pay is ‘unreasonable' or ‘excessive.' And it directs the Treasury Department to come up with a method to evaluate ‘the performance of the individual executive or employee to whom the payment relates.'"

In 1802, Thomas Jefferson wrote, "If we can but prevent the government from wasting the labours of the people, under the pretence of taking care of them, they must become happy." Jefferson, who established "the pursuit of happiness" in the Declaration of Independence as inalterably tied to the unalienable right to private property, knew what he was talking about.

The same quality is not evident among those members of Congress convinced it is their constitutional duty to determine how much money Americans are allowed to make, while it empowers the Treasury -- an agency of the executive branch -- to issue job evaluations of privately employed citizens.

Meanwhile, Congress closed out 2008 by paying out bonuses to its own staffers that were "among the highest in years," according to a Wall Street Journal analysis released on April 1. According to the report, Barney Frank, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, which oversaw the approval of the Grayson-Himes bill, paid out bonuses to "dozens of aides."

Consider the irony: Those congressional bonuses were 100 percent paid by taxpayers, to reward government employees whose success was measured by how well they could machinate the confiscation of those same taxpayers' property.

But as Margaret Thatcher understood, "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
-
Matt Kinnaman of Lee writes his column every week for the Transcript. Feedback is welcome.
-
----------

"Is marriage a civil right?"
The North Adams Transcript, Op-Ed, By Matt Kinnaman, 4/9/2009

On April 7, when its legislature overrode Gov. Jim Douglas's veto, Vermont became the first state in America to legislatively legalize same-sex marriage. It also became the fourth state (so far) to amend the definition of marriage, joining Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Iowa -- states where the change was mandated by the courts.

In Massachusetts, the first state to legalize same-sex marriage, the argument in favor was focused on civil rights, with the state's Supreme Judicial Court famously declaring that the traditional definition of marriage creates second-class citizens out of those who don't fit its parameters.

"First-class v. second-class" reasoning continues to define the debate. But it also raises critical questions about the nature of law itself, which are not being answered. This much is clear: Under the law and as a matter of legal principle, we routinely define the parameters of institutions in manners that deny membership to others, with the understanding that we are not infringing their civil rights.

For instance, the Vermont Legislature is an institution, and membership in it is not a civil right. Membership in the Legislature is only available to those who satisfy particular criteria. It's not open to everyone who has opinions on legislative matters and would like a chance to vote on pending bills. By definition, the Vermont Legislature is a closed, exclusionary institution. Is the exclusion of those who would love to be senators or representatives from membership in the Vermont House or Senate a violation of their civil rights?

If the answer is yes, then it makes sense to remove all barriers to exclusion, including elections, allowing anyone who wants to be a member of the Legislature to join. But, if the answer is no, then our definition of "civil rights" must be independent of our right to membership in institutions.

But what about the comparison of achieving "marriage equality" with the American fight to end slavery or other forms of oppression? Are the Vermont legislators and the Massachusetts, Connecticut and Iowa judges today's historical compatriots of those who stood against slavery and totalitarianism?

If so, we are considering not only a redefinition of marriage but also a redefinition of civil rights. These rights, as defined in the American founding, are unalienable. They can neither be given by government nor rightfully taken away.

Free speech, the free exercise of religion, a free press, the right to peaceably assemble, the right to vote, to be free from unlawful intrusions of government on their persons or property and the right to fair and equal treatment under the law in all other matters mentioned in the Constitution and its amendments -- these are the rights which define the constitutional framework of civil liberties.

Whether intentionally or not, the redefinition of marriage to accommodate arrangements other than one man and one woman confuses civil rights with something very different -- the redesigning of history's preeminent and most enduring cultural and legal institution in a manner that creates an unending confusion over the ability of assign meaningful legal parameters to institutions and interpersonal contracts at all.

In a philosophical foreshadowing of this progression, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the words commonly referred to as the "mystery passage" in the 1992 majority opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey: "At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life."

Those who agree with Justice Kennedy that liberty is largely, and finally, self-measured, and those who embrace the expansion of marriage's definition as a civil right must contend with additional questions. Is graduation from school a civil right? Is a government job? How about being a son, or a daughter, an uncle, or an aunt? What about the right to a graduate degree? Or employment, housing and a specific salary? Is obtaining a driver's license a civil right? Membership in the National Organization of Women? The NBA? The priesthood?

Just as it is with these institutions and definitions, so it is with marriage -- each one is defined with exclusions in place, and once it becomes anything we want it to be, it actually becomes nothing at all. Marriage is not a measurement of first- or second-class citizenship. First-class citizenship is an inviolate constitutional guarantee. The full protection of property and persons under the law for all is required and right. But this does not logically require nor recommend a redefinition of marriage.

In the end, marriage either has an enduring, unchanging definition, or ultimately, it has no definition at all.
-
Matt Kinnaman of Lee writes his column every week for the Transcript.
-
www.topix.net/forum/source/north-adams-transcript/T7SVDBONOAM34SJON
-
----------

"The first 100 days: Sullenberger says it all"
By Matt Kinnaman, The North Adams Transcript, Op-Ed, 4/23/2009

Reflecting on a week in which the president of the United States has pursued penance in the presence of dictators, while hinting he may endorse prosecution of those whose legal actions helped protect Americans from a repetition of 9/11, it's timely to reflect on actions far more heartening and inspiring -- actions approaching a 100-day milestone of their own.

On Jan. 15, 2009, U.S. Airways Flight 1549 took off from LaGuardia Airport, piloted by Capt. Chesley Sullenberger III. Moments later, airborne over New York City with a plane full of passengers and both engines knocked dead by a mid-air bird strike, Sullenberger saved 155 lives by doing what was considered a near-impossibility in commercial aviation: successfully crash-landing in the water.

The radio communications between New York Tracon air traffic control and Capt. Sullenberger are sparse, yet speak volumes, including their continual mix-up of the flight number.

Sullenberger: This is Cactus 1539. Hit birds. We lost thrust in both engines. We're turning back towards LaGuardia.

(29 seconds later)

Tracon: Cactus 1529, if we can get it to you, do you want to try to land runway one three?

Sullenberger: We're unable. We may end up in the Hudson.

(18 more seconds pass.)

Tracon: Alright Cactus 1549, it's going to be left traffic to runway three one.

Sullenberger: Unable.

Tracon: Okay, what do you need to land?

... Air traffic control suggests runway four.

The ethereally calm Sullenberger, as if reading a bedtime story to his child, says, "I'm not sure we can make any runway. What's over to our right? Anything in New Jersey, maybe Teterboro?"

In less than half-a-minute, Tracon has Flight 1549 cleared to land on runway one at Teterboro.

Tracon: Cactus 1529, turn right two eight zero, you can land runway one at Teterboro.

Sullenberger: We can't do it.

Tracon: OK, which runway would you like at Teterboro?

Sullenberger: We're gonna be in the Hudson.

There were no more transmissions from the cockpit of Flight 1549. Unknown for several more minutes to air traffic control, Sullenberger had landed his passenger-chocked plane on the 36-degree Fahrenheit surface of the Hudson River, upright, intact and escapable. He then walked the airplane aisle twice, searching for anyone left behind, before escaping with his own life.

Amazingly, in the vise-grip of an almost unthinkable crisis, Capt. Sullenberger never once asked air traffic control what to do. His only question in the entire episode was whether the Teterboro Airport was on his right. Supplied with the required information, he took independent action. Deciding he couldn't make Teterboro, he ditched in the Hudson. It was American individualism at its best.

Spring epitomizes hope, a characteristic highlighted by the beginning of the baseball season, when, according to an exceptionally American thread of thought, all things seem possible. Amplifying this sentiment, Capt. Sullenberger was back in the spotlight to throw out the first pitch of the season for the San Francisco Giants home opener on April 7.

Standing on the field of the Giants' AT&T Park, inundated by cheers, he himself appeared as the giant. The number on his jersey was 155. Three thousand miles from the scene of his hero's landing, Sullenberger's heroism symbolically spanned the nation, from coast to coast.

As formidable as the man Sullenberger is, the fans at AT&T Park were cheering more than a man. They were also cheering the spirit that makes great actions possible. As Americans, we know it when we see it. Sullenberger epitomizes it. When it shows up, it shines remarkably, untainted by politics. It is simply and straightforwardly recognized for what it is: greatness.

The spirit of Sullenberger is kindred with the spirit that conceived our Constitution, enabled the preservation of the Union, built the most powerful and generous economy in history, sparked the innovations that have extended and enriched every measurement of human well-being beyond the wildest imaginations of our ancestors and carried us to victories against fascism, Nazism, communism -- and now, we must determine, terrorism.

It's a spirit that makes San Francisco, New York and everyone in between cheer wildly for the same person and the same actions. It's the spirit that Hugo Chavez, Daniel Ortega and the Castro brothers seek to bind and repress, and thus all the more, it's the spirit that every American president ought to stand up and proclaim at every opportunity.

Doing the opposite on the international stage -- accepting the disparagement of America as President Obama did in the company of these tyrants -- silences this spirit, and with it, the essential greatness of America.

Next time, let's send Sullenberger.
-
Matt Kinnaman of Lee writes his column every week for the Transcript. Feedback is welcome.
-
-----

"Reducing Sully to G.I. Joe"
By Benno Friedman, The Berkshire Eagle, Op-Ed, Friday, May 8, 2009
STOCKBRIDGE, Massachusetts

In a recent CBS/The New York Times poll, Americans (68 percent) approved of the president's first 100 days in office. Yet conservative talk radio hosts and the defiantly unapologetic remains of the Republican Party have been unwilling to give Obama the break he has earned and that the office of president deserves. Matt Kinnaman's recent op-ed ("Flight 1549: 100 days later") is a case in point.

Distilling the piece to its essentials, Kinnaman regards our current president as a softy, an appeaser and an apologist when it comes to both confronting dictators and to dealing with terrorism. If only he were made in the mold of Captain Chesley Sullenberger.

No one has basis for questioning either Sullenberger's heroism or his skill. He is truly a brave and accomplished pilot.

However in the American tradition of reducing complex individuals, events and concepts into easily understood, one dimensional folk icons and images (Davy Crockett, Daniel Boone, waving fields of wheat etc.), Mr. Kinnaman has transformed an extraordinary story of skill, luck and bravery into an advertisement for a few, good men.

Kinnaman's fable has no room for the less visible factors that were intrinsic to the outcome of this potential calamity, not the least of which is the immeasurable contribution of good fortune, rigorous training and the adherence to ever-evolving regulatory requirements around safety. Additionally, the lack of strong winds and the corresponding waves on the river, the location of the flame-out, over water and in proximity to rescue craft (and media coverage), the design of the airplane allowing it to float for some time, the required regular proficiency training all pilots must take in emergency procedures etc., all played important parts in providing a dramatic and successful conclusion to this highly visible drama.

In spite of Captain Sullenberger's modest protestations that he was simply doing his job, Mr. Kinnaman has reduced him to a convenient sketch, a Superman who "...never once asked air traffic control what to do...he took independent action...It was American individualism at its best."

Kinnaman has replaced a human being with an action toy, a take charge, G.I. Joe, an "I'm the decider..." kind of guy; unnuanced and unencumbered by systems, procedures or complexities. I suspect Matt's ideal hero is solely guided by his (could it be her?) convictions and instincts; when he strides into town, the actual or presumed bad guys take cover along with the rest of the population who fear the associated risks of bullets gone astray. As for the checks and balances of juries, debate, Congress, or The Constitution, they are too measured and indecisive for the made-for-action hero.

Characterizing Obama's recent measured approach at the Summit of the Americas as silencing the spirit and "... the essential greatness of America." Kinnaman suggests that, "Next time, let's send Sullenberger."

I have no idea how Sullenberger might have acted had we sent him as our emissary. I do know that the traditional values associated with heroism: bravery, integrity, honesty, responsibility under demanding if not hazardous conditions are in evidence with each passing day of the current presidency.

The relentless vitriol being directed towards President Obama is shameful and destructive. Kinnaman speaks rapturously of the American spirit, shining "...remarkably, untainted by politics."

Yet what comes from his pen is nothing but politics, divisive and odious, especially in a time of crisis. I imagine Matt on flight 1549, scared and unprepared to die, loudly giving voice to doubt, fear and blame as Captain Sullenberger struggles to bring his craft and passengers down safely.
-
Benno Friedman is an occasional Eagle contributor.
-
-----

May 9, 2009

Re: Against the predictable persecution of Matt Kinnaman

I do NOT believe Matt Kinnaman is the political problem for Berkshire County, Massachusetts. He has stood up against the "Good Old Boy" Network that has a narrow and unfair INSIDERS' ONLY sign -- mostly Catholic political hacks and a few token "others" -- on the unwritten walls of City Hall & Beacon Hill. Berkshire County only elects MEN to high political office: see Mayors Ruberto & Barrett, Senators "Luciforo" (who strong-armed two WOMEN candidates out of a 2006 state government election to anoint himself to the $85k per year sinecure) & Downing, see Dan "Bureaucrat" Bosley, Denis "Golddigger" Guyer, William PIGnatelli, & Chris Speranzo...ALL MEN POLITICIANS! Matt Kinnaman has democratically run (& lost) for US Congress and then State Senator with a platform open for the people's review and vote. He is a man with convictions who has the integrity to stand up against the groupthink that has made the Berkshires the #1 place for job loss, high welfare caseloads, teen pregnancy #'s that double the statewide average, political corruption and unfair exclusivity. Most importantly, I have reached out my hand of friendship to Matt Kinnaman and he accepted me with true his Christian spirit of kindness. While I am a Democrat, Matt Kinnaman of Lee, Massachusetts -- like Joe Levasseur of Manchester, New Hampshire -- both Republicans with different views than myself on politics -- I am proud of who Matt Kinnaman is and what he stands for: Democracy, Liberty, Freedom, Justice, Jobs, Families & Children, and Good Governance that serves the people instead of just the special interests.
- Jonathan Melle
-
www.topix.net/forum/source/berkshire-eagle/TH7VVM9L8TVFVPVG4
-
----------

Getting it Right
"Merrily we roll along"
By Matt Kinnaman
The North Adams Transcript, Op-Ed, 6/27/2009

So, what if Obama is really, really wrong about the big stuff like energy, education, the economy, the environment, taxes, spending and health care? We are currently blazing a political path into parts unknown, and millions are lined up wearing smiley faces for the long march.

What am I talking about? OK, one at a time now.

Energy: Obama wants Americans to use less of it, and he wants to tax it to the tune of more than a thousand dollars per family per year. This is a recipe for human disaster on a massive scale. The dividing line between the depths of the dark ages and the bright heights of human progress is drawn by access to affordable and abundant supplies of energy.

It still costs more to generate energy from wind and solar than it's worth. Ronald Reagan reputedly summed up Washington, D.C.'s, guiding economic principle: "If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it." This also sums up Obama's energy policy.

Wind and solar enthusiasts urge us to embrace these "alternative" energy sources. Alternative to what? Profits? Well, yes, but also alternative to meeting the economic needs of the world's poorest people. The only energy supplies that are currently both affordable and abundant are the carbon-based big three -- oil, coal and natural gas. Nuclear provides the real alternative answer. Obama is against all four.

Education: Why does President Obama refuse to support the Washington, D.C., school choice program that minorities are lined up to get into, while his own children attend the expensive Sidwell Friends School? The $28,442 lower school tuition at Sidwell Friends is more than the annual income of some families crying for the continuation of D.C.'s school choice program, which Congressional Democrats are intent on killing, while Obama is silent. Can this be right?

The economy: After capping executive pay, bullying General Motors to accept government terms coddling the union demands that bankrupted the company in the first place, bailing out ne'er-do-wells across the land, castigating the entrepreneurs and capitalists who power economic growth as greed-mongers and calling communist Hugo Chavez "mi amigo," it is clear that in his heart Obama is anti-market. Historically, politically and culturally, anti-market forces are prone to tyranny, repression and all forms of human suffering.

That Obama is a family man and appears to be a nice guy is small comfort. Markets make the world go ‘round. Stop them, hinder them, impede them, punish them, and you also stop, hinder, impede and punish human progress, hope, wealth-generation and peace.

The environment: Just imagine if the human-caused-global-warming theory isn't true. Then what? Not only will an entire generation of American school children graduate with brains crammed with entirely useless propaganda and no real science, but we will have subjected our nation to a U.N. energy-rationing scheme which points us toward poverty and away from progress.

The real issue is not the environment. If it were, an honest Obama would celebrate the increasing population of polar bears and the expanding U.S. forests instead of scaring up disaster stories as covers of Al Gore's greatest hits. The real issue is a nexus of the first three -- limiting energy supplies, limiting choice and limiting economic incentives, all in the name of protecting the environment. Of course, it doesn't come out very well if protecting the environment means lessening the opportunities of people seeking better economic and educational lives. This is not a small concern.

Taxes and spending: On this one, it's hard to know where to start. Michael Jackson died a half-billion dollars in debt. This was after three-quarters of a billion albums sold, so when all was said and done, Michael Jackson was in the hole almost 67 cents per album. Out-of-hand spending overcame the King of Pop, but it apparently has no negative effect on the mind of Obama, whose unprecedented spending spree has already tripled the total deficits of the Bush years.

Printing money to keep up with the dearth of real revenues to cover his binges, the president seems to have faith that this will be the first time in history that overheated printed presses won't drive up inflation and interest rates. If you voted for hope and change, you really need it now. Obama's tax-and-spend program necessitates a hope that the basic laws of economics will change, just for him. I wouldn't bet on it.

Finally, health care: We're kidding about a "government solution" to the "health care crisis," right? The approach that got us something like $50 trillion in unfunded entitlements via Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid is now going to suddenly save money and expand choice and efficiency across nearly a fifth of the economy?

The initial price tag for Obama's brand of "health care reform" comes in somewhere in the neighborhood of $2 trillion. As it spirals up, there will be no way to pay for it. There's no way to pay for it now. With bureaucratic health care cost controls in place, the government next needs to become concerned with how many pepperonis are on your Friday night pizza. And your Tuesday night pizza, if the health czar let's you have that one.

Doesn't this sound fun? Here's your smiley face. Keep on marching.
-
Matt Kinnaman of Lee writes his column every week for the Transcript. Feedback is welcome.
-
----------

"A basic philosophy of American freedom"
By Matt Kinnaman, Op-Ed, The Berkshire Eagle, July 4, 2009
LEE, Massachusetts

The Republican Party's prospects for achieving resurgent leadership of American political life depends not on a big tent or a kinder gentler tone, but on a proclamation that freedom is found not in bailouts and mandates, but in life, liberty, and property, and the opportunity to freely protect, increase, improve, and share it, according to the natural incentives that people everywhere respond to with great enthusiasm and ingenuity.

The natural dynamism of a capitalist economy driven by the prospects of individual risk and reward affords the greatest number of people with the greatest possible prosperity. The degree to which government rules, regulations, and financial impositions restrict this dynamism dictates the degree to which the natural benefits of human freedom are eroded.

When the president and the Congress propose increased tax rates on individuals who in the estimation of the government make too much money, they impose penalties on every essential economic performance and on the free movement of capital, and everyone who participates in the economy-both the poor and the well off-ultimately suffers.

When the president and the Congress propose carbon cap-and-trade programs that create a government-controlled market setting artificial charges on carbon dioxide, and limiting the amount of energy produced by commercial enterprises, they impose penalties on the very currency of human progress, and everyone who uses energy-both the poor and the well off-ultimately suffers the higher costs of a hidden, capricious, regressive, and arbitrary tax.

When the president and the Congress propose the universal, government-controlled delivery of health care benefits, they impose penalties and costs on the private choices of citizens, who must now comply with the requirements of bureaucracies and agencies about how much of certain substances your diet must or must not include, and everyone forced to participate in this new system of health care delivery-both the poor and the well off-ultimately suffers the diminishment of their natural rights.

When the president and the Congress propose the continuance of a tax-financed compulsory education system that precludes the right of parents to choose in which schools their taxes can be expended on behalf of their own children, they impose penalties on families who are predominantly poor members of minority groups seeking avenues out of failing schools, and everyone who lacks the financial wherewithal to choose a private or home education suffers the incalculable costs of lost educational opportunities.

The truth that is being obscured by the president and the Congress is that all state impositions on the free multiplication and movement of capital, the market-driven production and distribution of energy, the free exchange of ideas and solutions in education, and the free exercise of economic choice in health care decisions are a direct imposition on the unalienable rights undergirding the American constitutional framework, and the guarantees of the Bill of Rights.

The Constitution does not guarantee any citizen the right to health care, housing, education, or employment, nor does it need to. Free people will seek these things without government guidance or dictate, and they will organize themselves organically into free arrangements defined by contractual agreements of mutual benefit, and in so doing, will create wealth, innovations, efficiencies, and generosities that subsume and supersede the entirety of all the supposed good intentions of every government program ever conceived and implemented.

Last month, George Will reminded America that Alexander de Tocqueville, the great chronicler of the wonders of American liberty, famously foretold the perils of government provision. On Independence Day, it bears repeating: Of leviathan government and its insidious insistence on controlling productive human behaviors, de Tocqueville wrote that "it provides for their security, foresees and supplies their necessities, facilitates their pleasures, manages their principal concerns, directs their industry, regulates the descent of property, and subdivides their inheritances: what remains, but to spare them all the care of thinking and all the trouble of living?"

As government's grasp grows, de Tocqueville warned, "it covers the surface of society with a network of small complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd." Finally, "it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to be nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd."

When policy initiatives seek guarantees of government-proscribed material distributions, the amelioration of risk, the limitation of reward, and forced participation in programs designed to satisfy the state's conception of the greater good, de Tocqueville's prophecy is fulfilled.

And each American is one step closer to being a cared-for, corralled "timid, industrious animal," a member of the herd.
-
Matt Kinnaman is an occasional Eagle contributor.
-
www.topix.net/forum/source/berkshire-eagle/TQD54IC57MONVFDVJ
-
----------

Getting it Right
"Bill Russell and Lou Gehrig: freedom fighters"
By Matt Kinnaman, The North Adams Transcript, Op-Ed, July 6, 2009

Liberty springs from a certain simple greatness of spirit, captured in truths that are too easy to forget. Ten years ago, Sports Illustrated writer Frank Deford told the story of Celtic great Bill Russell, who, in Deford's words was "the greatest team player of all time ... the hub of a Celtics dynasty that ruled its sport as no other team ever has."

Many others agree, but words are not easily arranged to convey the immensity of Russell's championship caliber and the way it made champions of those around him. Deford himself defers to one of Bill Russell's compatriots and teammates.

"Tommy Heinsohn," says Deford, "who played with Russell for nine years and won 10 NBA titles himself, as player and coach, sums it up best: ‘Look, all I know is, the guy won two NCAA championships, 50-some college games in a row, the [1956] Olympics, then he came to Boston and won 11 championships in 13 yearsS '"

Those numbers remain nearly unfathomable. When new, young Celtic Kevin Garnett sat down to talk with Bill Russell in early 2008 for an ESPN segment, Garnett was in the pressurized quest to reestablish the Celtics as world champs. Garnett sought insights into the fire and motivation and meaning in Bill Russell's heart.

The man who won it all over and over again, who remains today the central figure in Celtics' history, who continues to command standing ovations from the Garden home crowd just by walking to his seat to watch the Celtics play, summed it all up for Garnett: "Well, I want to tell you something. I don't think that you will encounter anyone happier than I am S the first thing that I knew, as a human being, was that my mother and father loved me."

When Lou Gehrig stepped to the microphones in Yankee Stadium 70 years ago, he foreshadowed Bill Russell's sentiment. Gehrig had changed baseball forever. Playing in 2,130 consecutive games between 1925 and 1939, he redefined athleticism, toughness and professionalism while winning six World Series titles with the Yankees and hitting .340 for his career.

Attacked suddenly in 1938 by the killing paralysis of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Gehrig's consecutive game streak and baseball career were swiftly cut short by the cruel disease that in subsequent generations would bear his name.

Faltering on the diamond, he took himself out of the Yankees lineup on May 2, 1939. The Mayo Clinic confirmed his ALS diagnosis on May 19, the day Gehrig turned 36. On July 4, only two months after he benched himself, Lou Gehrig Day was held at Yankee Stadium. Reserved and overcome, Gehrig spoke 276 words to the crowd of 60,000. Like Bill Russell's, those words bear repeating:

"Fans, for the past two weeks you have been reading about a bad break. Today I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of the earth. I have been in ballparks for 17 years and have never received anything but kindness and encouragement from you fans.

"Look at these grand men. Which of you wouldn't consider it the highlight of his career just to associate with them for even one day? Sure, I'm lucky. Who wouldn't consider it an honor to have known Jacob Ruppert? Also, the builder of baseball's greatest empire, Ed Barrow? To have spent six years with that wonderful little fellow, Miller Huggins? Then to have spent the next nine years with that outstanding leader, that smart student of psychology, the best manager in baseball today, Joe McCarthy? Sure, I'm lucky.

"When the New York Giants, a team you would give your right arm to beat, and vice versa, sends you a gift -- that's something. When everybody down to the groundskeepers and those boys in white coats remember you with trophies -- that's something. When you have a wonderful mother-in-law who takes sides with you in squabbles with her own daughter -- that's something. When you have a father and a mother who work all their lives so you can have an education and build your body -- it's a blessing. When you have a wife who has been a tower of strength and shown more courage than you dreamed existed -- that's the finest I know. So I close in saying that I might have been given a bad break, but I've got an awful lot to live for. Thank you."

Ultimately, Bill Russell powered his way to championship through the love of his parents. In the end, Lou Gehrig never allowed himself to become a victim.

These champions convey an eternal message at the heart of independence and its continuance. Determination. The love of family. The anchor of home. Faithful use of God-given talent. Appreciation of the greater goodness brought by others. Thankfulness. Undying optimism, even in the face of seemingly unjust and undeserved conditions. These are the themes and currents of American freedom.

And today, despite multiple attacks from within and without, we remain the luckiest people on the face of the earth.
-
Matt Kinnaman of Lee writes his column every week for the Transcript.
-
----------

"Getting it Right: Hug a nuke, drill a well, save a tree"
By Matt Kinnaman, Op-Ed, The North Adams Transcript, 7/12/2009

Why are we abandoning the energy sources that can save humankind? Oilman T. Boone Pickens celebrated his own one-year anniversary of abandoning the oil industry that made him rich by abandoning the wind farm he said would deliver us from oil.

After spending $60 million on advertising to get the American public on board with "The Pickens Plan" last summer, he apparently discovered it didn't work.

That was after he ordered 667 GE windmills at a cost of $2 billion, for a 400,000 acre wind farm in Texas.

Pickens anticipated that costs would increase to somewhere between $10-12 billion, after which the project, presumably, would have a capacity of 4,000 megawatts, enough to light more than a million homes.

That is, if the wind is blowing and there's a grid in place to distribute the electricity, and Congress keeps on redistributing the earnings of American workers to subsidize wind power, which can't compete economically on its own.

Dr. Arthur B. Robinson, president and research professor at the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, is also publisher of "Access to Energy," a scientific newsletter focused on energy production, the environment, climate change and the economic effects of technology policy.

T. Boone Pickens would have saved a lot of money if he had simply paid $35 for a subscription to "Access to Energy" and then actually read it. He would have been reminded of what he must already know: "Alternative" energy sources don't work well enough to power human activities, either economically or technologically.

Instead of inundating the airwaves with last year's Pickens Plan commercials, T. Boone could have done every citizen a huge favor by purchasing gift subscriptions to "Access to Energy" for everyone. For $10 billion, he could get the newsletter delivered to more than 285 million Americans.

Putting "Access to Energy" in the hands of that many citizens -- 93 percent of the total population -- would have an overwhelming effect on the American electoral landscape in 2010, after which we would be well on our way to energy abundance, economic recovery and political rejuvenation.

How and why? Because readers would be awakened to the political charade underway on Capitol Hill, at the White House and at the G8 Summit, and they would demand that our leaders stop the solar-wind-climate change nonsense and embrace sensible energy and economic policies.

Consider this scientific analysis published by Dr. Robinson regarding the solar energy array at Nevada's Nellis Air Force Base. Installing the solar array required "$100 million worth of energy of various forms to build." As Robinson says, "A large portion of this was in the form of actual electrical energy," which is produced predominantly with carbon-based sources.

You can't even build or deploy "green" energy without depending on fossil fuels. And even then, the costs aren't feasibly recoverable. As Robinson explains, with the current maximum output of the Nellis solar array, it will take 50 years to produce enough energy to recoup the original $100 million worth of capital investment.

"In contrast," writes Robinson, "the Palo Verde (Arizona) nuclear power station S pays back its entire capital investment in six years." Robinson then points out that the predicted lifetime of Palo Verde is 50 years, while the Nellis array is only 30 years. While Palo Verde produces approximately $100 billion in net energy over its 50-year life, the Nellis solar array will never produce any net energy at all, because it is unable to recover its capital costs during its projected 30-year lifespan.

For Americans concerned about open space and environmental stewardship -- and that's nearly all of us -- Robinson delivers the knockout punch: "The solar array at Nellis occupies 140 acres. A similar solar array large enough to duplicate the power output of Palo Verde would cover 125,000 acres, or 200 square miles."

The Pickens Plan would have consumed three times that much land. Palo Verde sits on only six square miles and uses only two.

If I could, I'd pipe Robinson's voice directly into Pickens' ear: "Wind power suffers from the same disadvantage as solar -- very large capital costs for very small amounts of energy. These boutique methods sound fine during televised speeches, but the only methods that actually produce net energy at reasonable cost are hydrocarbon and nuclear."

T. Boone Pickens ignored this message and wasted piles of money, underlining how critical it is for the rest of us to listen up and elect leaders who will promote nuclear and hydrocarbon energy production.

If that happens, it will spark an American economic and political renaissance.
-
Matt Kinnaman of Lee writes his column every week for the Transcript.
-
----------

Getting it Right
"Stop enabling Massachusetts Democrats"
By Brian P. Burke and Matt Kinnaman, The North Adams Transcript, Op-Ed, 7/18/2009

Driving through the Berkshires, or Worcester, or anyplace in between, it's no surprise to come across a bumper sticker with the reminder that "Friends don't let friends vote Republican." Or, even more to the point, one seen in Pittsfield: "The road to hell is paved with Republicans."

In each case, the anti-Republican driver of the plastered car may feel the sentiments are droll or hip, or maybe both, but one thing he evidently doesn't feel is that he's become a political co-dependent and an enabler in a spiral of addiction to unaccountable, self-indulgent, over-spending state government.

With an election year looming just five short months from now, the people of this commonwealth who love their state and are fed up with the expensive excesses of its government have a golden opportunity to do something better than sloganeering against the wrong enemy. In 2010, it's time for some tough love for Massachusetts politicians.

In Worcester, Democratic state Rep. Robert P. Spellane recently ran into trouble via a public verbal altercation with his ex-wife, in front of his son's baseball team, apparently over a mere $20 shoe purchase. This embarrassing run-in provides a dramatization of the public outrages Massachusetts voters have had to endure. If only Spellane and his colleagues on Beacon Hill were as stingy with our tax money.

Just a few days before this incident, Rep. Spellane had sent his constituents a letter apologizing for previous "mistakes in his personal life."

For those familiar with the familial dynamics of addictive persons, this pattern is all too familiar. It's a pattern that's not confined to Spellane's personal life - it extends in an unfortunate arc to the everyday practices on display in the political life of our Massachusetts Democratic legislators.

Holding public office is simply unhealthy for most Massachusetts politicians because unchecked political power acts like a drug. Massachusetts voters, having elected a nearly 9-to-1 Democratic majority on Beacon Hill, must stop delivering the drug directly to the addicts.

The reason that embarrassing scandals, blatant corruption, patronage, indecent assaults, pension abuse, corrupt coziness with lobbyists, stonewalling of the public's will and an insistence on outspending drunken sailors characterize our state government finally must be addressed by the voters themselves.

Look in the mirror, Massachusetts voters. Do you see the telltale signs of an electoral enabler?

Do you ignore scurrilous and unlawful behavior in your public officials because they claim to be sorry and their political party offers token corrective reforms?

Do you excuse your representatives' unacceptable behavior because "everyone on Beacon Hill is doing it?"

Alternatively, do you defend your state representative while proclaiming that it is just all the other politicians on Beacon Hill who need replacing?

Do you rail against the political bosses on Beacon Hill and their far too influential lobbyist friends, but when Election Day rolls around you can't seem to find the time to make it to the polls to vote for the alternative?

Do you hold your nose and re-elect over and over again the same high-tax, big-government, power-protecting state senators and representatives because they promise to bring home the bacon for your community, your business, your union, or your social cause, but refuse to straightforwardly address the overall corruption of our state Legislature?

And finally and most tellingly: Do you elect Democrats out of blind loyalty to their brand, without holding them accountable for their actions?

If you answered yes to any of these questions, you may be an enabler of bad government in this commonwealth and the politicians who practice it. Let's wake up. Tough love is required. Without it, the Legislature has proven that it will not change its ways.

Let us be very clear. We are not parodying Al-Anon or the troubled people it serves. Far from it. We applaud the wonderful work this fine organization is doing for addicts and their families. At this low point in our commonwealth's political history, the Al-Anon model for breaking out of the codependency trap is our state's only hope for ending the unaccountable actions of our state government.

But as long as Massachusetts voters keep enabling its politicians, There is only one way to bring recovery. A 9-to-1 super majority is not a recipe for good government. It's a recipe for more of the same, and worse. This time around, spread the word on behalf of those you care for, and on behalf of the state you care about:

Friends, don't let yourselves, or your friends, vote Democrat.
-
Brian P. Burke is a Worcester attorney and a Republican State Committee member from the Middlesex-Worcester District. Matt Kinnaman's Getting it Right column is published every week in the Transcript. He is a Republican State Committee member for the Berkshire, Hampshire and Franklin District.
-
www.topix.net/forum/source/north-adams-transcript/TN4UM7A4H58M5FKON
-
----------

Getting it Right
"The road to health care totalitarianism"
By Matt Kinnaman, Op-Ed, The North Adams Transcript, August 1, 2009

On July 28, 2009, USA Today highlighted an event called "Weight of the Nation," a presentation sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, revealing the findings from a study by government scientists and the non-profit research group RTI International.

The research has heavy implications. "Americans who are 30 or more pounds over a healthy weight cost the country an estimated $147 billion in weight-related medical bills in 2008 -- double the amount a decade ago," says the report. "Obesity now accounts for 9.1 percent of all medical spending, up from 6.5 percent in 1998."

Also this week, The Wall Street Journal released a poll that spells trouble for Obama's health care reform plan. It looks like Americans -- even those who eat too many Twinkies -- don't want it. They'll want it even less when they discover that, under government-run health care, the national health czar and his troops would have a convenient rationale to monitor the food choices of American citizens, under the guise of "cost control." But they may not get the chance.

That's because Obama today finds himself in the same trouble Bill Clinton got into when he tried to engineer a government-run takeover of the entire health insurance system. It's called overreach.

According to the Wall Street Journal poll, only 15 percent of Americans with private health insurance plans -- that's most Americans -- think Obama's plan would improve their coverage. Among all respondents, only two out of 10 believe their health care would improve if Obama's plan is passed.

Congressmen can read these poll results, too, and that's bad news for Obama. But it's good news for liberty. Health care "reform" is not just about cost. It's about freedom. And not just the freedom to choose a plan, a doctor, a treatment or an elective procedure. It's about the most basic definition of the freedom of choice.

Obama's overreaching and overspending has hurt not just his health care plan. It's also hurting the Democratic Party. The confidence of individual Americans in the Democrat's ability to reduce the federal deficit has fallen sharply since 2007, while confidence in the Republican Party's ability to reduce the deficit has remarkably increased. Republicans now lead on this issue. Citizens now trust the Republicans more than Democrats on tax policy -- and by a wide margin -- to control government spending.

In three of these critical categories -- reducing the deficit, dealing with taxes and controlling spending -- Americans favored Democrats in 2007. Now, less than seven months into Obama's presidency, Republicans are in front. The number of Americans who believe Obama will bring "real change" to the country has dropped from 61 percent to 51 percent since the first weeks of his presidency, and an increasing number of voters appear to oppose the "change" he's looking for.

The Obama camp knows it has a problem. The president's uber-adviser David Axelrod spoke 21 words this week that even Republicans can agree with: "People are properly skeptical about any proposals out of Washington that speak to cost because they've been singed by past experience."

No kidding.

Consider a September 2008 National Public Radio report. During the height of the presidential contest, the Obama campaign, when asked what his health care plan would cost, offered an estimate of $60 billion a year. Today, based on the projected $1 trillion over 10 years cost of the plan, the campaign season estimate has already jumped 67 percent. The Obama health care plan itself has become morbidly obese.

For Obama, the problem is fundamental. Americans don't want Washington, D.C., telling them what to do with their health -- and more Americans are recognizing that this is exactly what Obama seeks to do.

Before long, benignly-packaged government intentions lead to furtive skulks down a path of endless laws, prohibitions, rules, complications and costs.

American freedom was conceived in an age when nutrition was worse, work was harder, life was shorter and survival itself was a gift to be cherished. You can bet that the phrase "weight of the nation" never passed their lips, and neither did "government-sponsored health care." The Sons of Liberty were not like that.

When the government pays, the government has the say. Maybe people are better off -- in some ways -- when they're not overweight, but why should a congressman care if his constituent likes Fritos and he likes soy milk? What happens to liberal tolerance for an endless array of lifestyle choices when it comes to junk food? In an era of government-run health care, that tolerance vanishes.

William Dietz directs the CDC's Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity and Obesity. "Obesity is not a problem that is going to respond to a silver bullet or a single solution," he said. "Comprehensive policy and environmental changes are needed." That kind of talk sounds more like totalitarianism than tolerance.

And Americans don't like to live that way.
-
Matt Kinnaman of Lee writes his Getting it Right column every week for the Transcript.
-
----------

Getting it Right
"Nixon still speaks"
By Matt Kinnaman, Op-Ed, The North Adams Transcript, 8/8/2009

Tomorrow it will be 35 years since the most remarkable presidential speech in history.

It is remarkable not for its political impact or policy content but because of its piercing illumination of common, dark human conditions, its transcending treatment of universal human hopes and - despite its momentous meaning - its lack of historic status, having been largely lost from our national awareness, hidden beneath the ever-higher mountain of onrushing events.

On August 8, 1974, as his increasingly intense and losing battle against the mounting assault of the Watergate scandal peaked, Richard Nixon appeared before the nation to resign from the presidency.

The crisis had begun two years earlier with what Nixon's press secretary Ron Zeigler quickly dismissed as "a third-rate burglary," a break-in carried out by faceless, nameless political rogues and hack operatives who ransacked an office of the Democratic National Committee at its Washington, D.C., office complex located in the Watergate Hotel.

The scandal would not pass quickly. From 1972 to 1974, Nixon's political water torture proceeded relentlessly. Pit-bull reporting by The Washington Post's Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein made Watergate a national news story that intensified daily. High-drama nationally-televised hearings in the Senate caucus room stripped away Nixon's professions of innocence. Carefully-orchestrated counter-attempts by Nixon to free his neck from his tightening political and legal noose failed.

The conclusion was inescapable. When the White House - with Nixon's knowledge - decided early on to cover up the break-in instead of cooperating with its prosecution, a string of crimes multiplied, eventually implicating the president of the United States.

By early August 1974, with impeachment hearings in the House nearing a vote, and with the crumbling of Nixon's last bastions of Republican congressional support, he realized he was finished, that there were no means left by which to contain or deflect his doom.

The work of Nixon's life - and the confidence of the nation that had re-elected him by an historic landslide only 19 months earlier - was destroyed.

Nixon, America's 37th president, addressed the nation from the Oval Office for the 37th time - this time to announce his resignation, effective at noon the following day, August 9th.

On the Friday morning of the 9th, Nixon's staff packed the East Room of the White House, where the president would meet them. Nixon - beaten as no American politician ever had been before, zigzagging now back and forth across the edge of tears as he stood one last time at the presidential podium - spoke from a place of almost incomprehensible defeat.

The sweat on his face and the exhaustion in his soul were clearly visible, even transmitted via his generation's low-def television cameras and screens.

The tension in the East Room that morning was magnified by the sheer singularity of the moment. What does a president say at a time like this? Would he break apart and melt down? Rant and rave? Indulge a third-world-style harangue against his opponents and enemies? Embarrass himself and his family and further embarrass the nation?

He did none of that. Nixon, speaking extemporaneously, chose to cut through the anguish, anger and blame concentrated in the East Room. Although he was already mummified in an historic political death, Nixon reached out to encourage his family, his staff and the nation with a profoundly simple and living hope: that no matter what happens, there is still another day, with other possibilities.

Speaking of Theodore Roosevelt's loss of his wife while still in his 20s, Nixon reflected on Roosevelt's lament that, in the face of his grief, "the light went from my life forever."

Nixon pursued the thought, saying, "We think sometimes when things happen that don't go the right way we think that when someone dear to us dies, we think that when we lose an election, we think that when we suffer a defeat, that all is ended. We think, as T.R. said, that the light had left his life forever. Not true. "It is only a beginning, always. The young must know it, the old must know it, it must always sustain us. Because the greatness comes not when things go always good for you, but the greatness comes when you are really tested, when you take some knocks, some disappointments, when sadness comes."

Nixon closed his remarks and his presidency 35 years ago with a sentence that is timeless for American politics - and for American life: "Always give your best, never get discouraged, never be petty. Always remember, others may hate you, but those who hate you don't win unless you hate them back, and then you destroy yourself." Bob Woodward called it "one of the great spontaneous moments in history." And so it remains.
-
Matt Kinnaman of Lee writes his column every week for the Transcript.
-
----------

August 8, 2009

Re: Open letter to Matt Kinnaman - On Richard Nixon

Dear Matt,

I read your column: www.thetranscript.com/opinion/ci_13018644
and I wanted to share with you my thoughts on President Richard Nixon.

The irony of Nixon's failings is that a great majority of the criticisms against him were borne by the Democratic Administrations of President John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson. The biggest example is the failed confict in and around Vietnam. Nixon is in the shoes of our current President, Barack Obama, only with the political parties reversed. As Obama inherited Bush's 2 foreign wars and economic recession.

On Watergate, Nixon clearly had the wrong attitude and belief that the President was above the law. However, the persecution of Nixon's breaking the law looks myopic in today's study of the Presidency. Bill Clinton perjured himself about a love affair with his White House intern Monica Lewinsky. George W. Bush started a pre-emptive and illegal war in Iraq that has resulted in over 1 million Iraqi civilian deaths, wire-tapped and illegally spied on millions of Americans, violated the Bill of Rights in judicial proceedings, and his administration outed a CIA Agent for political retaliation to suppress dissenters in the U.S. Government against the War in Iraq. Nixon only said what he believed, while Clinton & Bush hid behind questionable "signing statements", an army of lawyers, and pardons.

I post some of your essays on my Blog page:
www.jonathanmelleonpolitics.blogspot.com/2009/02/matt-kinnaman.html

Please keep participating in politics, friend.

Best regards,
Jonathan
-
www.topix.net/forum/source/north-adams-transcript/TS46FTP1E114RVEKN
-
www.jonathanmelleonpolitics.blogspot.com
www.luciforo.blogspot.com
www.frankguinta.blogspot.com
www.aldermanpetersullivan.blogspot.com
-
----------

"International Day of False Peace"
By Matt Kinnaman, The North Adams Transcript (Online), 9/21/2009

Attention: If you are a full-out pacifist greenie with a carbon-neutral footprint and a favorite Che Guevara T-shirt, today is your day. It's the International Day of Peace, thus enshrined by United Nations Resolution 55/282.

According to the official language of the resolution, today provides "an invitation to all nations and people to honour a cessation of hostilities for the duration of the Day." Furthermore, the General Assembly "invites all Member States, organizations of the United Nations system, regional and non-governmental organizations and individuals to commemorate, in an appropriate manner, the International Day of Peace, including through education and public awareness, and to cooperate with the United Nations in the establishment of the global ceasefire."

I think you have to admit that, even if you are a full-out pacifist greenie with a carbon-neutral footprint, a favorite Che Guevara T-shirt and a United Nations Fan Club membership card, the language of the peace resolution is at best dryly polite, bureaucratically boring and not very effective. At worst, it's just plain dangerous in its intent to influence people to believe these resolutions make the world any safer.

The inescapable verdict is already abundantly clear. The United Nations has an inconvenient and blatantly unapologetic track record of doing things which are un-peaceful in the extreme, including the election by secret ballot in 2003 to elevate Libya to leadership of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights (yes, that Libya, the country whose government, under Muammar Gaddafi, ordered the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 and then, still unrepentant, welcomed terrorist Abdel Basset al-Megrahi -- a lead perpetrator of the bombing -- to a hero's homecoming last month).

Beyond rewarding terrorist states by expanding their influence, the United Nations has throughout its history made anti-Israeli bias its most prominent organizing policy principle. This treatment includes the long-term disbarment of Israel from the U.N.'s regional group that Jewish interests ought to be represented in and an unfortunately predictable steady stream of anti-Israel resolutions that have poured out of the General Assembly for decades.

Now, in a violently ironic foreshadowing of the farcical nature of the International Day of Peace, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad launched a diatribe on Sept. 18, proclaiming that the Holocaust -- the historical catalyst for the 1948 establishment of the modern state of Israel -- is a myth. In his unhinged rant, Ahmadinejad dismissed the murder of six million Jewish people as a fable and consigned the Jewish state to annihilation.

"The pretext for the creation of the Zionist regime is false," said Ahmadinejad. "It is a lie based on an unprovable and mythical claim." Speaking to an anti-Israel rally in Tehran, Ahmadinejad called for Israel's obliteration. "Confronting the Zionist regime is a national and religious duty this regime will not last long. Do not tie your fate to it ... This regime has no future. Its life has come to an end."

On the day Ahmadinejad spoke, the Jewish High Holy Days began at sundown. Spanning 10 days from Rosh Hashanah to Yom Kippur, the Jewish High Holy Days coincide with the U.N.'s International Day of Peace and the opening on Wednesday of the 64th session of the United Nations General Assembly.

And guess who headlines the United Nations' speaker line-up? Ahmadinejad. Riding a wave of monomaniacal global defiance as he threatens world war and pursues intercontinental ballistic nuclear weaponry, Ahmadinejad will address the world's population from the General Assembly's platform 48 hours after the United Nations asks the world's population to observe and honor the International Day of Peace.

Ahmadinejad's favorite activities include the full support and promotion of Hezbollah, the anti-Israel terrorist movement led by Lebanon's Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah. Responding to Ahmadinejad's "death to Israel" outrage this week, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah was murderously succinct: "Our belief and creed ... remain that Israel is an illegal entity, a cancerous tumor that must cease to exist." International Day of Peace anyone?

Ahmadinejad isn't the only prominent speaker at this week's U.N. grand opening. Libya's Muammar Gaddafi also speaks on Day One. And so does Barack Obama.

The president of the United States faces a defining moment. Will he fight the deadly despotism and terrorist hate surrounding him, or will he fold? Will he courageously defend America's moral force in blazing a true path to peace? Will he fearlessly defend Israel's existence and the opportunities of its people? Or will he seek to please his audience with global-speak pablum coupled with inoffensive applaud-line platitudes? Obama's brief international record does not inspire confidence.

As Ronald Reagan famously and enduringly said when he made his own political debut, today is "a time for choosing."
-
Matt Kinnaman, of Lee, writes his column every week for the Transcript.
-
----------

Sunday, February 8, 2009

Alderman Peter Sullivan is hypocrite on mental health!

-
Ward 3 Alderman Peter Sullivan
-

-
----------

2/8/2009

Re: Alderman Peter Sullivan is hypocrite on mental health!

My former Ward 3 Manchester Alderman is a hypocrite on mental health. He recently wrote a letter to the Editor of the Manchester Express claiming that he was being unfairly criticized for his mental health condition focusing on depression.

This was interesting to me because about 2 weeks prior he posted a blog article about me whereby he described me as "the accused felon". Furthermore, Mr. Sullivan knew of my mental health disabilities, as he went to the NH Superior Court in Manchester and photocopied the indictments of my 7 false criminal charges in addition to my then NH Public Defender's competency motion and then proceeded to distribute these copies to Mayor Frank Guinta and his 13 Aldermanic colleagues and the local news media reporters, too, after I spoke out against his slanderous and harassing behaviors against me to the Board of Mayor and Aldermen in mid-December, 2008.

Yesterday (2/7/2009), Alderman Peter Sullivan (aka "WCB") publicly wrote the following about me on a Internet Blog:

"Did they add "Chronic Douchebaggery" to the DSM-IV?"

I take offense to Alderman Peter Sullivan's disparaging remarks about me. Firstly, I am a Disabled Veteran whose mental health disabilities were all permanently worsened as a result of my honorable military service in the US Army. Secondly, Mr. Sullivan played the victim of unfair criticism for his own mental health conditions, while he openly provokes and mocks me for mine. Alderman Peter Sullivan is a hypocrite on mental health!

Sincerely,
Jonathan Melle
Disabled Veteran
-
http://www.topix.com/forum/source/berkshire-eagle/TOURJM40F1GSVTMFA/p11
-
www.aldermanpetersullivan.blogspot.com
-
http://blogsearch.google.com/blogsearch?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=%22Peter+Sullivan%22+blogurl%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fjonathanmelleonpolitics.blogspot.com%2F&btnG=Search+Blogs
-
----------

About Me

Jonathan Melle
Amherst, NH, United States
I am a citizen defending the people against corrupt Pols who only serve their Corporate Elite masters, not the people! / My 3 political enemies are Andrea F. Nuciforo, Jr., nicknamed "Luciforo", Denis E. Guyer, nicknamed "Golddigger", and Berkshire County Sheriff Carmen C. Massimiano, Jr. "Golddigger" Guyer has been spreading vicious, hate-filled, violent, untrue and hurtful rumors about me to the people of the Pittsfield area. / I have also pasted many of my political essays on "The Berkshire Blog": berkshireeagle.blogspot.com / I AM THE ANTI-FRANK GUINTA! / Please contact me at Jonathan A. Melle, 7 Corduroy Road, Unit # 3, Amherst, NH 03031, 603-554-1113, Cell 603-289-0739. Please Email me at jonathan_a_melle@yahoo.com
View my complete profile

50th Anniversary - 2009

50th Anniversary - 2009
The Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame on Columbus Avenue in Springfield, Massachusetts.

Pittsfield Politics: Capitanio, Mazzeo agree on budget cuts, public safety

Pittsfield Politics: Capitanio, Mazzeo agree on budget cuts, public safety
Paul Capitanio, left, speaks during Monday night's Ward 3 City Council debate with fellow candidate Melissa Mazzeo at Pittsfield Community Television's studio. The special election (3/31/2009) will be held a week from today (3/24/2009). The local issues ranged from economic development and cleaning up blighted areas in Ward 3 to public education and the continued remediation of PCB's.

Red Sox v Yankees

Red Sox v Yankees
Go Red Sox!

Outrage swells in Congress!

Outrage swells in Congress!
Senate Banking Committee Chairman Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., left, and the committee's ranking Republican Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., listen during a hearing on modernizing insurance regulations, Tuesday, March 17, 2009, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh). - http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090318/pl_politico/30833

Beacon Hill's $pecial Interest Tax Raisers & $PENDERS!

Beacon Hill's $pecial Interest Tax Raisers & $PENDERS!
Photo Gallery: www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/03/15/St_Patricks_Day_Boston/

The path away from Wall Street ...

The path away from Wall Street ...
...Employers in the finance sector - traditionally a prime landing spot for college seniors, particularly in the Northeast - expect to have 71 percent fewer jobs to offer this year's (2009) graduates.

Economic collapse puts graduates on unforeseen paths: Enrollment in public service jobs rising...

Economic collapse puts graduates on unforeseen paths: Enrollment in public service jobs rising...
www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/03/14/economic_collapse_puts_graduates_on_unforeseen_paths/

Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis

Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis
Should he be fired? As Bank of America's Stock Plummets, CEO Resists Some Calls That He Step Down.

Hookers for Jesus

Hookers for Jesus
Annie Lobert is the founder of "Hookers for Jesus" - www.hookersforjesus.net/home.cfm - Saving Sin City: Las Vegas, Nevada?

Forever personalized stamped envelope

Forever personalized stamped envelope
The Forever stamp will continue to cover the price of a first-class letter. The USPS will also introduce Forever personalized, stamped envelopes. The envelopes will be preprinted with a Forever stamp, the sender's name and return address, and an optional personal message.

Purple Heart

Purple Heart
First issued in 2003, the Purple heart stamp will continue to honor the men and women wounded while serving in the US military. The Purple Heart stamp covers the cost of 44 cents for first-class, one-ounce mail.

Dolphin

Dolphin
The bottlenose is just one of the new animals set to appear on the price-change stamps. It will serve as a 64-cent stamp for odd shaped envelopes.

2009 price-change stamps

2009 price-change stamps
www.boston.com/business/gallery/2009pircechangestamps/ -&- www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/02/27/new_stamps_set_for_rate_increase_in_may/

Red Sox v Yankees

Red Sox v Yankees
Go Red Sox!

President Barack Obama

President Barack Obama
AP photo v Shepard Fairey

Rush Limbaugh lackeys

Rush Limbaugh lackeys
Posted by Dan Wasserman of the Boston Globe on March 3, 2009.

Honest Abe

Honest Abe
A 2007 US Penny

Dog race

Dog race
Sledding for dogs

The Capital of the Constitution State

The Capital of the Constitution State
Hartford, once the wealthiest city in the United States but now the poorest in Connecticut, is facing an uphill battle.

Brady, Bundchen married

Brady, Bundchen married
Patriots quarterback Tom Brady and model Gisele Bundchen wed Feb. 26, 2009 in a Catholic ceremony in Los Angeles. www.boston.com/ae/celebrity/gallery/tom_gisele/

Mayor Jimmy Ruberto

Mayor Jimmy Ruberto
Tanked Pittsfield's local economy while helping his fellow insider political hacks and business campaign contributors!

Journalist Andrew Manuse

Journalist Andrew Manuse
www.manuse.com & Editor of www.manchexpress.com

New Hampshire Supreme Court Building

New Hampshire Supreme Court Building
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Hampshire_Supreme_Court

Economic State of the Union

Economic State of the Union
A look at some of the economic conditions the Obama administration faces and what resources have already been pledged to help. 2/24/2009

President Barack Obama

President Barack Obama
The president addresses the nation's governors during a dinner in the State Dinning Room, Sunday, Feb. 22, 2009, at the White House in Washington. (AP Photo/Haraz N. Ghanbari).

The Oscars - 2/22/2009.

The Oscars - 2/22/2009.
Hugh Jackman and Beyoncé Knowles teamed up for a musical medley during the show.

The 81st Academy Awards - Oscars - 2009

The 81st Academy Awards - Oscars - 2009
Hugh Jackman pulled actress Anne Hathaway on stage to accompany him during his opening musical number.

Rachel Maddow

Rachel Maddow
A Progressive News Commentator

$500,000 per year

$500,000 per year
That is chump change for the corporate elite!

THE CORPORATE ELITE...

THE CORPORATE ELITE...
Jeffrey R. Immelt, chairman and chief executive of General Electric

The Presidents' Club

The Presidents\
Bush, Obama, Bush Jr, Clinton & Carter.

5 Presidents: Bush, Obama, Bush Jr, Clinton, & Carter!

5 Presidents: Bush, Obama, Bush Jr, Clinton, & Carter!
White House Event: January 7, 2009.

Bank Bailout!

Bank Bailout!
v taxpayer

Actress Elizabeth Banks

Actress Elizabeth Banks
She will present an award to her hometown (Pittsfield) at the Massachusetts State House next month (1/2009). She recently starred in "W" and "Zack and Miri Make a Porno," and just signed a $1 million annual contract to be a spokesmodel for Paris.

Joanna Lipper

Joanna Lipper
Her award-winning 1999 documentary, "Growing Up Fast," about teenaged mothers in Pittsfield, Massachusetts.

Happy Holidays...

Happy Holidays...
...from "Star Wars"

Massachusetts "poor" economy

Massachusetts "poor" economy
Massachusetts is one of the wealthiest states, but it is also very inequitable. For example, it boasts the nation's most lucrative lottery, which is just a system of regressive taxation so that the corporate elite get to pay less in taxes!

Reese Witherspoon

Reese Witherspoon
Hollywood Actress

Peter G. Arlos.

Peter G. Arlos.
Arlos is shown in his Pittsfield office in early 2000.

Turnpike OK's hefty toll hikes

Turnpike OK\
Big Dig - East-west commuters take hit; Fees at tunnels would double. 11/15/2008.

The Pink Panther 2

The Pink Panther 2
Starring Steve Martin

Police ABUSE

Police ABUSE
I am a victim of Manchester Police Officer John Cunningham's ILLEGAL USES of FORCE!

Barack Obama

Barack Obama
The 44th US President!

Vote

Vote
Elections

The Bailout & the economic stimulus check

The Bailout & the economic stimulus check
A political cartoon by Dan Wasserman

A rainbow over Boston

A rainbow over Boston
"Rainbows galore" 10/2/2008

Our nation's leaders!

Our nation\
President Bush with both John McCain & Barack Obama - 9/25/2008.

Massachusetts & Big Dig: Big hike in tolls for Pike looming (9/26/2008).

Massachusetts & Big Dig: Big hike in tolls for Pike looming (9/26/2008).
$5 rise at tunnels is one possibility $1 jump posed for elsewhere.

Mary E Carey

Mary E Carey
My FAVORITE Journalist EVER!

9/11/2008 - A Show of Unity!

9/11/2008 - A Show of Unity!
John McCain and Barack Obama appeared together at ground zero in New York City - September 11, 2008.

John McCain...

John McCain...
...has all but abandoned the positions on taxes, torture and immigration. (A cartoon by Dan Wasserman. September 2008).

Dan Wasserman

Dan Wasserman
The deregulated chickens come home to roost... in all our pocketbooks. September 2008.

Sarah Palin's phobia

Sarah Palin\
A scripted candidate! (A cartoon by Dan Wasserman).

Dan Wasserman

Dan Wasserman
Family FInances - September, 2008.

Mark E. Roy

Mark E. Roy
Ward 1 Alderman for Manchester, NH (2008).

Theodore “Ted” L. Gatsas

Theodore “Ted” L. Gatsas
Ward 2 Alderman (& NH State Senator) for Manchester, NH (2008).

Peter M. Sullivan

Peter M. Sullivan
Ward 3 (downtown) Alderman for Manchester, NH (2008).

Jim Roy

Jim Roy
Ward 4 Alderman for Manchester, NH (2008).

Ed Osborne

Ed Osborne
Ward 5 Alderman for Manchester, NH (2008).

Real R. Pinard

Real R. Pinard
Ward 6 Alderman for Manchester, NH (2008).

William P. Shea

William P. Shea
Ward 7 Alderman for Manchester, NH (2008).

Betsi DeVries

Betsi DeVries
Ward 8 Alder-woman (& NH State Senator) for Manchester, NH (2008).

Michael Garrity

Michael Garrity
Ward 9 Alderman for Manchester, NH (2008).

George Smith

George Smith
Ward 10 Alderman for Manchester, NH (2008).

Russ Ouellette

Russ Ouellette
Ward 11 Alderman for Manchester, NH (2008).

Kelleigh Domaingue

Kelleigh Domaingue
Ward 12 Alder-woman for Manchester, NH (2008).

“Mike” Lopez

“Mike” Lopez
At-Large Alderman for Manchester, NH. (2008).