Thursday, May 25, 2006

Kelley Out

BlueMassGroup has the scoop here, courtesy of Political Intelligence.

Not sure how this changes things, but it's interesting nonetheless.

Wednesday, May 24, 2006

LG Mid-May Money

A commenter on this site noted that the mid-May OCPF filings have been made. While these reports are not always reliable in terms of showing where things stand, I thought that given the upcoming Convention, and given that many undecideds might be looking for ways to distinguish these four candidates, posting these mid-month numbers would be relevant in this month more so than probably any other month.

One huge caveat: Deb Goldberg does not file mid-month reports; rather, she files a single report at the end of each month. However, given the influx of cash she gave herself last month, I think it doesn't really matter.

The larger question is: who will have the funds to compete with her.

So, here are the mid-May numbers, based on Cash on Hand. Commentary follows.

1. Deb Goldberg ** THIS IS THE MAY 1ST NUMBER

$1,144,765.83

2. Andrea Silbert

Starting Balance: $451,691.13
Receipts: $33,070.00
Expenditures: $24,051.37
Ending Balance: $460,709.76

3. Tim Murray

Starting Balance: $330,017.99
Receipts: $17,275.00
Expenditures: $35,775.73
Ending Balance: $311,678.26

4. Sam Kelley:

Starting Balance: $13, 617.94
Receipts: $1,725.00
Expenditures: $3,381.42
Ending Balance: $11,961.52


My thoughts: Murray dumped a bunch of costs into this month, as did Silbert. I'm surprised Murray didn't have a better opening, but again, he may be holding checks, he may have a ton of stuff going on this week, who knows. But I think the more likely scenario is that his people are so busy with delegate-related stuff that fundraising is taking a back seat. Not a bad strategy if he can pull off a first-ballot win as is possible. If he doesn't though, then it may not have been worth it. I'm sure his people have plans for a big June. Time's getting short and Silbert's $150K gap ain't getting any narrower. She's continuing to move along at a solid clip.

Interesting.

Sunday, May 21, 2006

More Thoughts on Silbert

I posted more thoughts on why I chose Silbert over at BMG.

Here's the text of that entry:

As many of you know, I have been a frequent commenter on this blog about this wonderful LG field. And as many of you also know, I had not decided who to vote for, but it was down to Murray and Silbert.

Today, that all changed. Andrea Silbert won me over today and I am proud to say that I will be supporting her at the Convention, on this blog, and over at my blog, MassChange, where I live-blogged the debate (forgive typos, etc...) and where I posted some additional thoughts on today's forum.

With a clear message, relevant experience and the ability to get her message out through paid media, I believe Andrea will be our best hope for going up against Kerry Healey and Reed Hillman and the best complement to any of the three gubernatorial candidates.

She's not perfect, and none of the candidates are, but she is the one talking about the issues in a way that is different and more innovative than any of the the other three candidates. Her argument that we need to grow the pie, as opposed to re-dividing it, appeals to me. (Yes, I did post that yesterday here.) And I think it will appeal to voters who want a sense of hope and entrepreurial thinking from their elected leaders. After all, for those people in this state that are hurting, just getting by, living paycheck to paycheck: they're the real innovators in this state because they have to think of new and creative ways to keep their families fed, their children clothed, and their lives secure. They are the real Massachusetts entrepreneurs, and they deserve to have someone in the Corner Office who not only thinks like them, but actually lives like them - middle class, public schools, expensive health care, and on and on. Andrea Silbert is the only one in this field who can truly claim to be their champion because she is one of them.

Also, no one else in this race can provide the same blend of skills, experience and a plan. Andrea's is a simple, yet powerful message, and as we all know, in a crowded field and in a downballot race, there is no wiggle room within which one can educate voters on multiple fronts. The Gubernatorial candidates can and will be doing that, but the LG candidates need to "pop" and stand out. One, maybe two things about them will be remembered by voters, and her message of "jobs jobs jobs" trumps "cites and towns" and "health care" not only in its simplicity, but in its breadth. So much of what we as Democrats want to do can be started if we had more consistent revenues to utilize. Jobs get us there.

I wholeheartedly encourage my undecided BMG friends to support Andrea Silbert.

As I said, Andrea Silbert is not the perfect candidate. She is not an elected official, she has no natural constituency, she is not independently wealthy, she is not a lawyer, doctor or merchant chief, and she is not an expert in all things that state government does.

But she is an innovator and am entrepreneur, a product of the extraordinary non-profit sector that exists as a sort of "shadow government" in our state, filling in so many of the holes our government should, but cannot fill because 16 years of Republican rule and neglect.

Just imagine. Massachusetts is home to some of the most innovative ideas in the world. Don't we want someone in the Corner Office who understands these people, and wants to bring the positive forces of government to serve and promote these ideas, as well as advocate for the core ideas that make our state so proudly Democratic? With all due respect to the other candidates experience and passion for Democratic ideals, I think it's time for a 21st Century Democratic leader who brings the best of all that Massachusetts has to offer to the table. For my money (well, at least my delegate vote), Andrea Silbert should be our choice.

Thanks.

LG Forum Thoughts: Silbert wins.

Here are my initial thoughts:

We didn't learn anything new today, we didn't get anything that can be used as ammo either at the Convention or otherwise. We are basically in the same place. But, I definitely got the sense that the candidates are beginning to hone their messages - as would be expected as things have developed.

Murray stayed on the local aid tip, and in doing so, beat out Goldberg, but not by as much as I would have thought. Goldberg was impressive with her statements about knowing how to bring people together, etc...

Kelley was all over the place. I thought he had landed on something with the prescription drug thing, but then kept saying weird things.

In the end, though, I think it's Silbert who comes out with the "W" here. Although her message about jobs may be getting tiresome to those of us paying attention, I think voters need to see that we can all cry for more local aid or more money for healthcare, but if the money ain't there, then you're going to have to take from somewhere else to pay for it. She beat that home today, and did an effective job doing it. My call today is that Silbert won.

As many of you readers know, I've been deciding between Murray and Silbert for a while now, unsure of who was going to get my vote at the Convention. Today, Silbert sealed the deal for me. She's got the best combination of new ideas, a clear message and an ability to provide the resources needed to win (i.e. fundraise.)

Andrea, today you earned my support.

LiveBlogging LG Forum

I'm watching the stream because I couldn't make it to Lowell, so this will have to do!

Refresh for updates.

2:30: looks like I have a stream!

2:34: head over to the LTC website where there will also be a chat that you can participate in.

2:36: and we're off!

3:00 minute openings:

1. Silbert up first. Opens with comment about enrolling her kids in school. Then gets to jobs. wants to bring her skills as a proven jobs expert to the job. A bit shaky start, but got to her point.

2. Kelly: Education, health care and guarantee of a job. I'm an indivdual that tries to get people to a healthier place in live.

Plan to help local aid: buy drugs from Canada. I'll lead that charge immediately.

I can connect dots on our historic healthcare plan and navigate waters to make sure you have affordable, quality health insurance.

Need to restore confidence and credibility in corner office.

A decent start, hints of a clearer message (Czar to implement the new HC bill)

3. Goldberg: what's happened in Lowell w/ floods is why I'm running for LG and why we need dems in Corner office. We didn't see it in Greenfield (stolen line from Deval!).

Talking about background, how S&S kept profits low (1% margin). She talking about her background, her budget experience, but doesn't say where she's from or what she's done!

4. Murray: thoughts go out to flood families. (His lapel sticker is reflecting light).

Frontline of govt = local govt.

Talks about experience in Worcester w/ what he's done.

Focus should be on keeping people in MA.

says he's running to be voice for regions not otherwise heard.

Probably tied w/ Silbert for best opening statement.

Questions:

1. To SIlbert from Marie Sweeney: what is role of FedGov in Flood. Did Romney act qucikly enough, how would you handle?

Answer: Govt. is about anticipating problems. We had 5.7 million in peabody, but Romney vetoed. When $4 mill. program for womens biz was slashed, she rallied nationwide. to save and grow program. We need to get more back from DC for us. And then you have to be there immediately.

Kelley Response: agrees we need to be prepared. "I've been involved in disasters all my life" - not sure he wanted to say that!

Goldberg response: role of LG is to be interface bet. local communities and state govt. as local official, I've had to be in that position before.

Murray: slams Healey for lack of performance here.

Summary: GOldberg wins this round. Silbert's story about bringing $ back was solid too.

Kravetz to Kelley: how do we control costs of new healthcare plan?

Kelley: task force to negotiate prescription drug deals for towns. Do away w/ prior authorizations.

I missed a part of this answer due to barking dog.

Goldberg: 38% of healthcare costs are admin. Create statewide database to
Murray: munic. budgets: health ins. huge, and increasing faster at local level. Towns should be able to opt into GIC, but keep local bargaining rights.

Silbert: daughter of 2 VA docs, now I buy my own health ins. 3 things: invest in preventative care, crete jobs from investing new tech, and force people to buy more generics.

Quite concise on all fronts, with SIlbert and Murray doing well.

Question: Role of LG

Goldberg: I'm here for the long run, want kids to stay here.

My model is Duke/O'Neill: a lot to do. Right hand to gov. as local liaison. And also right hand to regional growth of economy. Work w/ Fed. Gov. to expanding rail (hello, could you be stealing any more from Silbert and Murray here?)

Invest in Comm. Colls. We don't have oil wells. We can't be 47th in national funding.

Murray: i want to be a real liaison for cities and towns. Don't want to use local officials as props. Also focus on comm. rail and cleanup

Silbert: fresh ideas, new vision, true partner. 3 things: lead econ development, bring back more fed. $, help disadvantage: end hunger and homelessness.

Kelley: glad Romney is leaving. work on healthcare to bring bulk prescription drug purchasing and make new law afford. and accessible.

Summary: Murray beats Goldberg on local issues, but SIlbert has clearest message.

Kravetz to Murray: can we afford more local aid and increasing rail service?

Murray: CT did it by dedicating portion of oil tax and raising other fees. Cabral's bill last week did it. Might involve tax increases. we need to talk about how to pay for it. Romney hasn't ID'd how to pay for it. Don't support rollback.

Don't let Healey say she hasn't raised taxes.

Silbert: regional rail important - from Maine to CT. Second, we need to increase jobs and wages which fund income tax receipts. I'm only one who's created jobs.

Kelley: must rein in costs of housing and improve access to healthcare.

Goldberg: all these are great ideas, this is a 5-10 year plan (local aid and rail expansion). You need to have local experience and employer experience. I have those skills.

Summary: Murray did well, SIlbert's message is clear.

Next: Kravetz to Silbert: talk about your plan for statewide wifi.

Silbert: we should be leading the charge. Too bad Philly won. We need to lead nationally on this topic. I was able to work from home. it doesn't cost a lot. A woman who started ZipCar now wants to have wifi networks in cars.

Kelley: there may be Fed. issues for state doing it.

Goldberg: great idea, but how do you get it done? We need local experience, I brought in competition in Brookline.

Murray: ditto. Romney dropped the ball.

Summary: No one answered how to pay for it. I'm curious about that car thing!

Sweeney to Kelley: do you support new payroll tax to fund Trav's paid familiy leave proposal?

Kelley: grow revenues.

Goldberg: I'm an employer right now: all 7 of my staffers get dental and health.

Murray: As Dems, people opposed us on Soc. Sec, etc... we need to support Trav's concept and a payroll tax to do it.

Silbert: as a mom of 3, nothing is more important than maternity leave. I don't know if payroll tax is the right way, and 12 weeks at home is key.

Roundup: Kelley didn't answer. Others did. a clear difference between Murray and SIlbert emerges, perhaps.

Next question: Cape Wind.

Goldberg: MA residents need to be beneficiaries on this. And there wasn't bidding on this. (Sounds like Reilly, a bit). Initial reaction was favorable, but now wants to create a system. EIS must finalize.

Murray: work with colleges and green buildings. This is a public nat. resource, need to

Silbert: oppose giving veto to Gov. Finish process. If no red flags in the enviro review, let's go for it.

Kelley: cell phone towers should be windmills.

Summary: Silbert was clear, but no one took a position.

Next: Are we fooling ourselves about public schools?

Murray: Romney/Healey are by underfuding ed reform. Compact there was broken. I know what local budgets are dealing with.

Silbert: I went to public schools, my kids will, we must make them work. Education has a cashflow problem now, so if we don't create to jobs to get more $$ in the budget.

Kelley: me too. Early childhood ed. is the key.

Goldberg: R/H has used smoke and mirrors to fund education. Need to put direct $ into reducing class size and increasing teacher #s. We added teachers in brookline.

Summary: Murray knows his stuff, Goldberg does too. Sam good on Early ed., Silbert brings it back to her message.

Lightening Round:

1. Silbert wants to look more at Slots
2. Kelley on charter school cap: didn't answer.
3. Goldberg says increased Ch. 70 and local aid can help avert prop taxes.
4. Murray: Romney correct not to suspend gas tax. Election year false promises, bad leadership. God help us.
5. What has this admin. done right? Silbert: Helathcare: legis. did some work.
6. Seatbelt law: Kelley suports its enforcement.
7. What one bill would you get through? Goldberg: Increased education funding.
8. Auto insurance reform, favor?: Murray: expand State Police fraud unit.
9. Silbert: judicial appt.s should be diverse, not put forward as partisan choices. Opposed to Repubs packing courts.
10. Regional Greeenhouse gas initiative: Kelley: supports. Notes he is an environmentalist.
11. Goldberg on State Parks: open space at a premium, we need to improve so that people can ring cows to Boston common.
12. Murray on what Gov can do to bring back afford. housing: Comm. Rail is key. Helps outlier cities, "limited strategic investment."
13. MCAS: support it? Silbert: shouldn't be necessary in every case. Have to test to know what kids need. More important issue: why are kids dropping out?
14. Kelley on capping public college fees: everything more expensive now. In favor of reducing costs.
15: Goldberg on debating Hillman: I was police and fire commissioner. Reed doesn't own public safety issue. We're also competing against each other.
16: Murray on first suggestion to New Gov: make sure LG plays a key role.
17: Howe: I'm chair of citywide parent council. New Bedford School. Comm. on this. Each, one minute on this:

Silbert: we need to know how our kids are doing, but we have to make sure the test is testing the right thing - critical thinking skills, not just rote knowledge. But I want to get to the source of the problem: is MCAS causing higher dropout rates? If so, it's a huge problem.

Kelley: I take care of kids for a living. Teens are worried about mcas, leads to depression, and yes, they do drop out and take a GED. It doesn't measure hope, aspiration.

Goldberg: I stood with lang on this. A rifle kills people, schools save lives. Mel Levine says that you can't judge every kid on one stndard. (What is she talking about here - rifle? I don't get it.)

Murray: Worcester and Lawrence have added value added tests, but people aren't willing to put money where mouth is.

Open Round: talk for 2 minutes:

Silbert: Zip Car is great example of what I did at CWE. I helped her raise $$ to get started. IRobot - Roomba: helped them get started. (She DID? Wow! i LOVE my Roomba.). Christine Dolan: precious cargo is her biz, transporting kids to and from day care. (This is a GREAT story.)

Kelley: states his liberal credentials.

Goldberg: practical experience w/ Dem. values - what we need. I come from S&S, where we had values, and I put them to work in the public sector. Bridge to legis. and Gov.

Housing: focus on multiuse development. Capture expiring use properties.

Murray: Government can't do it all, but can do things that biz can't do. Public higher ed is one area. these grads fuel the state. We need to produce graduates to serve the jobs we want to create.

All were great!

Closing Statements:

Silbert: We're all progressives in this field, so what's the difference among us? I've walked the walk: saw a problem (Feminization of poverty) and made a big difference. I've had an impact on 100,000 of lives. Now, how do I impact millions? By running for office. New ideas, fresh voices. I can point results - people whose lives have been impacted by my work. Finally, I NEED to make this state better because I have kids.

Kelley: I've worked all of my life taking care of people. We take care of 1000 people per day at MSPCC. I'll hit ground running to bring back local aid. I take care of people. And #3, I'm the only person who can connect the dots to make sure the health care reform plan work for everyone.

The karl Rove playbook will be thrown at us. I have studied him and push out our values.

Goldberg: we need tested people in Govt. I know how to make govt. work. I took my private experience and used it effectively in the public sector. You need to get diverse people to the table and work together. I rose to that challenge. We need that more than ever on healthcare now as we figure out how to pay for it. I know how to get insurers to the table to make sure that 100% of people are covered.

Murray: 3 great candidates for gov. But we need someone with local experience, that understands that cities towns, teachers feel. I've created great partnerships in Worcester. We need people who know how to make people work togther. We need people who know the names of the legislators and what districts they represent. Our governor and lt. gov. don't know basic lessons of shcoolhouse rock -- coeqal branches of govt.

Friday, May 19, 2006

Patrick Wins Debate

Or at least that's MY opinion.

I listened to the debate on WBUR last night and felt that Deval Patrick won the debate.

Chris Gabrieli came in second.

Christy Mihos came in third.

Tom Reilly came in last.

Expanding on the above assessments: what was Tom Reilly doing? He wasn't answering questions, he sounded exactly like the obfuscating, non-answering politicians that have caused us to lose not only locally but nationally as well. He was trying to stay on message, but he had no message to stay on! I suppose he may also have been going for a n0-gaffe performance, and he accomplished that (as did the others). But I just don't get why, when faced with two charismatic and substantive primary opponents, and one (at this stage in the campaign) goofball candidate, he didn't try to stand out more as the statesman. It baffles me.

As for why Patrick won, it was because of the combination of substance and passion. He knows his stuff and believes it. I thought the questioning from Alison King was a bit much though. She accused (not asked) him of being two-faced on taxes. C'mon Alison, don't try to make news where it ain't. Deval made himself very clear last night: no plan to raise income, gas or sin taxes, but he did consider raising sin (i.e. ciggs) taxes to pay for the new healthcare plan, but that issue was taken off the table. One cannot rationally call that two-faced. Rather, it's a clear statement, to me at least, that taxes are not going to go up if we continue on the economic road we're on and if we improve that road with his policies. Shameful questioning, in my book. Overall, though, the questioning and format was excellent, I thought.

Why Gabrieli second? Because he knows his stuff too, it's just his aural presence (remember, I was listening on radio) that didn't hit me as well as Patrick. Perhaps it's his slight speech impediment, perhaps it's his wonkishness that shone through, I don't know. Without Patrick there, this guy would have been off the charts ahead of Reilly and Mihos as the clear winner. I like Chris, but wasn't moved by him.

And Mr. Miho- oops, I mean "Christy"? As many said this morning, he is not ready for prime time. But you know what, he doesn't have to be. Plus, he IS going to be there at all the debates in the fall and he has time to button up his message. Hearing him speak explained to me why he does NOT speak in the ads he's running on the radio. If he can translate his "throw the bums out" message into something short, concise and coherent, I predict he will be a major force in the fall. He's got the gimmicky ad guru on his side, so who knows.

Thursday, May 18, 2006

MA Cultural Politics: The Old Boy Network

There is a great post over at Flash and Yearn by Sachem Head that dives into an issue I've been curious about for a long, long time: the way politically active people categorize the various constituencies in Massachusetts.

Basically, he was attacked by a poster as being racist for referring to a portion of Reilly supporters as "Irish Power Brokers." While perhaps this description of Reilly's support may have been accurate wer Reilly running a generation ago, I think a more apt term is "Downtown Power Brokers." Or, more simply, "The Old Boy Network."

It's an interesting dynamic. On the one hand, the Old Boys can weild tremendous power. On the other, given the $500 giving limit, that power is reined in more here than in other states with higher giving limits, like New York.

What do you all make of Reilly being the Old Boy candidate? Do you agree? What about in the other races? In 1998, that same group got scared of Lois Pines and helped her win. But in 2002, it didn't help Steve Murphy or Jim Segel beat an unknown county treasurer.

Monday, May 15, 2006

Cape Wind as Environmental Barometer

I am bit distressed that this year, a candidate's position on Cape Wind seems to be the sole barometer of whether or not someone is enough of a friend of the environment. For example, Tom Reilly is getting hammered on it in some circles but his environmental creditials are quite solid. He's prosecuted polluters and his office has been amongst the leaders in joining with other states to oppose Federal weakening of environmental protection regulations by the Bush administration.

We certainly have a lot of energy problems in this state, but Cape Wind isn't the only solution. (Like Andrea Silbert - at least according to this chart over at BMG - I am in favor of allowing the permitting process to continue, but want to see what the environmental impact reviews reveal. But I am also in favor of imposing stricter requirements on power plant smokestack scrubbers and reducing mercury output - two of many things that need to be addresses ASAP before our water and fish stocks become any more contaminated. I know Cape Wind will help those things, but shouldn't we just do those other things anyway?

I dunno, just a random thought this afternoon.

Sunday, May 14, 2006

LG April Money

Here's an update on where the candidates stand as of April 30, 2006, based on Cash on Hand.

Analysis follows

1. Deb Goldberg:

Starting Balance: $155,479.94
Receipts: $1,034,250.83
Expenditures: $44,964.94
Ending Balance: $1,144,765.83
Net: +989,285.89

2. Andrea Silbert:

Starting Balance: $408,226.86
Receipts: $62,825
Expenditures: $19,360.73
Ending Balance: $451,691.13
Net: +43,464.27

3. Tim Murray

Starting Balance: $323,234.76
Receipts: $49,871.09
Expenditures: $42,926.33
Ending Balance: $330,017.99
Net: +6,944.23

4. Sam Kelley:

Starting Balance: $26,039.26
Receipts: $9,625.00
Expenditures: $22,046.32
Ending Balance: 13, 617.94
Net: -$12,421.32

Obviously, Deb Goldberg's insertion of $1 Million of her own money is the most significant development to happen in the LG's money race thus far. However, Murray's hot and cold fundraising is baffling to me. I guess that's the strategy - focus for a month, catch breath for a month, and so forth. If the pattern holds, May will be a big month for Murray.

But his failure to continue his catch up to Silbert is ominous nonetheless. From what has been posted in comments on this site and others, he's throwing a huge party at the Convention. That's going to cost him a lot, and I'm sure he's going to be spending on other stuff to try and woo delegates so that he can do what he has to to to remain viable - win the convention. As I've said before, Murray can't let one of the others win or even come close - otherwise it's lights out. I think the darkhorse that I'm hearing about is Silbert. She's picking up steam, is doing better than any first-time and non-uber-rich candidate has ever done, and actually has something to say. If she can pull off a second place finish, I think all bets are off because then she becomes the one people want to contribute to, she raises some more dough over the summer and competes on the airwaves with Goldberg. But if Tim does his job and wins handily as the conventional wisdom expects, then we're in to the trenches of a long, hot summer.

Here's an interesting tidbit I picked up from reviewing these:

- Sam Kelley paid $16,000 to Spoonworks for signatures. Looks like he only paid for about 4000, according to today's Globe. Other candidates' and parties' payments in that article too. Deb Goldberg paid $12,000 for her signatures to J&F Associates. Probably not for all of them, unless this was some upfront fee, with more being paid later.

- Here are the salary payments for each candidate this month:
Goldberg: $15,145.26 (after taxes)
Silbert: $8,845.59 (after taxes)
Kelley: $6,000 (consulting fee)
Murray: $10,840 (He appears to not be giving his employees healthcare and instead is treating them all as consultants - but I'm not a benefits expert, so correct me if I'm wrong.)

Sunday, May 07, 2006

LG Forum Wrap Up & Straw Poll Results

It appears that the LG candidates held a forum/debate out in Westfield last week. You can read a wrap-up of it here courtesy of the T&G. The article doesn't say anything particularly new, but it does include an interesting nugget at the end:

An exit poll by the debate's student organizers had Mr. Murray winning with 34 votes, Ms. Silbert in second with 32, and Ms. Goldberg and Dr. Kelley tied with 6. Nine respondents said they were still undecided.
A sampling of that size - 87 respondents - can be trusted to a certain degree. However, they are not typical voters because they voted after learning more about the candidates than the average voter will ever come close to learning. With all the information, they still could not pick a clear winner. However, they sent a clear message: Silbert's and Murray's messages resonate the best. The others', simply, don't.

If I were Deb Goldberg, I'd think about shaking up her campaign team in a hurry. This kind of result is not something that dollars can cure. She can't throw money at a landslide like that and expect to win. It can't be good times in the Goldberg camp, despite the fact that they're probably all giddy
about the money they have to spend. As an undecided delegate who wasn't going to support Goldberg anyway, this confirms my concerns about her. She's unelectable and will be a drag on the democratic ticket if she wins the primary. Her money will diffuse any ability we have to criticize Kerry Healey for being out of touch. I think having only 6 people vote for you out of 87 after they've heard you and the other candidates for an hour is a bad, bad sign.

As for the winner here, it appears to be Silbert. She's positioning herself to be the outsider underdog battling the insiders, and if she keeps running like this, then she could surprise a lot of people come September. I'd be ecstatic if I were over at the Silbert HQ after this result.

Murray's take? Mezzo-Mezzo. He is (and ought to be) the early favorite. His political pedigree makes him initially appealing to people and he says all the right things that we Dems like to hear. I think his getting the most votes is great for him, but I think he probably would have thought he would win more handily. The Murray folks gotta be looking over their shoulder.

Kelley? Not a surprise. He's single issue and that's the kind of result single issue guys get.

All in all, another interesting event in the LG race.

Can't wait to hear what happens at the upcoming LG forums.

(Incidentally, it appears that this guy Sutner at the T&G is the only reporter in the state on the LG beat. Good luck and thanks to him!)

Wednesday, May 03, 2006

MA Dem Convention: Friday Night - Worth It?

Sorry for the non-substantive post, but I figured this was as good a place as any to ask:

Should I go out to the Convention Friday night? I know there are the non-contested races and Kennedy speaking, but I have another thing I could go to closer to home with some friends. However, if there's a decent party or two planned that anyone knows about Friday night that should convince me otherwise, let me know and I'll probably come out Friday night. That's always been a very fun, and long, night, but I'm 4 years older now than last time around...

Any thoughts/info on the Friday parties? Anyone throwin' a bendah?

P.s. - I was inspired to post this after reading about Murray's "tent" over at BMG. Is he really having a tent somewhere? Fun!

Does Mihos Need a Running Mate?

Anyone know what happens if Mihos doesn't pick a running mate and then ends up winning the general? Do we not have an LG? Can he even be on the ballot without one?

Anyone read the MA constitution lately? I know I sure haven't...

Also, are Mihos's signatures due now or later in the summer? Could this be why he hasn't chosen anyone yet?

Murray Gets to 10K Sigs First...

Or does he?

yes, he does.

Link to release here

Enough discussion over at BMG here and here.

MURRAY CAMPAIGN FIRST TO REACH 10,000 SIGNATURESWORCESTER, MA – As of 4:30pm yesterday (May 1), Timothy P. Murray, Mayor of Worcester, was the first candidate in the Lt. Governor’s race to reach the required minimum 10,000 signatures to qualify for the primary ballot.

“I am ecstatic that our team is the first to reach 10,000 signatures and I am grateful for the support of hundreds of volunteers around the state that made this possible,” said Tim Murray. Of Murray’s 10,000 signatures, only 3,219 came from the city of Worcester, showing the campaign has a broad base of support across the state.

As of 4:30pm yesterday, Andrea Silbert’s campaign had 7989 signatures, Deborah Goldberg’s campaign had 8880 signatures, Sam Kelly’s campaign had 1028 signatures, and Reed Hilman’s campaign had 4086 signatures.

The deadline for submitting signatures to the various town clerks’ offices for certification is May 9.







Tuesday, May 02, 2006

Silbert Announces Jobs & Economic Growth Plan

From her website, it appears that LG candidate Andrea Silbert has announced her jobs plan. Full text below, but it appears to be a four-point plan:

1. Jumpstart and Invest in Entrepreneurs and Businesses from the Ground Up
2. Reinvigorate the Innovation Economy – Invest in Sciences and Technology
3. Invest in our Physical Infrastructure
4. Invest in People – Our Human Capital

The plan appears to include a lot of specifics, including, but certainly not limited to, beefing up the Office of Business Development, streamlining zoning and land use permitting, establishing a Venture Guarantee program to encourage venture capital investment, and universal pre-school and all-day kindergarten.

Also, it appears that she has seen Tim Murray's commuter rail wifi proposal and raised him: she proposes investing in statewide wifi. Touche, Mr. Murray, touche! (Seriously, both great ideas and both ought to be implemented in this most technologically advanced of states, particularly in dense, poor urban communities where it should be offered free or at a reduced rate.)

All in all, this is by far the most comprehensive proposal put out by any of the LG candidates so far this year. Murray has put out his two proposals as well, and those, combined with this economic revitalization plan, are great starts. They also show how far apart Silbert and Murray are from the others in the field. Goldberg's recent injection of her own inheritance into her campaign can't be a good sign. She didn't even earn the friggin money, for chrissakes. At least Gabrieli, Deval and even Healey can claim that they, or their spouses, worked to earn their money. She got it from Mommy and Daddy. Not good and not the image we Dems want to be sending out there.

So, it looks like the "issues" game is on and it's a two-horse race.

Look forward to your comments and thoughts.


Andrea Silbert Releases Economic and Jobs Growth Plan for Massachusetts

I am running for Lieutenant Governor to re-energize Massachusetts through job creation and innovation. My first priority will be to lead the state’s economic development efforts, working with the Governor and Legislature to present a bold vision and a clear plan to replace the 170,000 jobs that our state has lost since 2001. Massachusetts is a national hub of innovation and entrepreneurship. In recent years, however, we have faced significant challenges and we have not lived up to our potential. While corporations continue to invest in research and development and entrepreneurs continue to innovate in the Commonwealth, job growth remains stagnant. Massachusetts is one of the few states in the country losing population as young, educated residents seek opportunities elsewhere. My goal is to reverse this trend and return our state to its position of leadership.

I am confident that we can do better. I have devoted my life’s work to economic development and job creation. As the former CEO and co-founder of the Center for Women & Enterprise, my team and I helped individuals create over 14,000 jobs that now generate $400 million in new wages each year across Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Small and medium-sized businesses are the lifeblood of innovation and opportunity and they are the big businesses of tomorrow. When an entrepreneur starts a company he or she hoists a sail. I know first hand how state government can get wind into that sail in the form of capital, training and technical assistance. With strong leadership and a vision, state government can create and execute programs that will tap the potential that exists here in Massachusetts and get our economy moving again.

Job creation is at the top of my list of priorities. I agree with Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s decades old argument that the best social program is a good job. I also know that the number one source of revenue in the Massachusetts state budget is income taxes. Income taxes come from wages, and to improve the quality of life in our cities and towns we must create new jobs. Jobs generate the money we need to invest in education, expand workforce housing, protect our environment, fund universal health care and make sure the social services are there for people who need them.

My four point plan to grow our economy is as follows:

1. Jumpstart and Invest in Entrepreneurs and Businesses from the Ground Up

Over the last 10 years, our state government’s economic development agencies and programs have been severely cut. These agencies and programs play key roles to help homegrown companies stay and grow in Massachusetts, to sell Massachusetts to new employers, to reduce red tape, to speed up permitting and to enforce consumer protection and competitive policies. Under my plan, we will:

• Re-invigorate the Massachusetts Office of Business Development and staff the office with proactive, highly-trained professionals with small business expertise. This office and I will work closely with the federal Small Business Administration to maximize federal dollars flowing to Massachusetts small businesses.

• Remove and/or streamline burdensome regulations. The permitting process at the state level often adds unnecessary time, cost and hassle for new and expanding businesses in Massachusetts. While retaining environmental protections we can streamline this process and other regulatory hurdles.

• Continue to fund Public-Private Partnerships that Work Directly with Businesses. Accessing programs like the Massachusetts Manufacturing Extension Partnership, the Smaller Business Association of New England, the Commonwealth Corporation, the Workforce Training Fund and the Center for Women & Enterprise are all inexpensive ways to leverage public dollars.

2. Reinvigorate the Innovation Economy – Invest in Sciences and Technology

Innovation has been the engine for job creation in the Commonwealth for more than thirty years. We must continue to capitalize on the entrepreneurial and innovative spirit of our populace. Under my plan, we will:

• Encourage investment in our most innovative companies and industries. Create a Venture Guarantee program to stimulate equity funding to companies in major growth sectors of the twenty-first century including life sciences, renewable energy, security technology, high technology and robotics.

• Make Massachusetts the center of innovation in the life sciences. Promote expansion of key industries such as biotechnology, medical devices, pharmaceuticals, and healthcare services by bringing together universities, hospitals, venture capitalists, groups like the Massachusetts Biotech Council and state agencies.

• Introduce and support legislation, especially for stem cell research, that will enable life sciences organizations to operate and innovate within a clear and predictable legal and regulatory framework.

• Make Massachusetts the center of innovation in one of the most important pursuits of our day: the search for renewable energy alternatives. We will create a strategic plan to work with our public and private higher education institutions and businesses to encourage innovation and growth.

3. Invest in our Physical Infrastructure

We must urgently create more housing for workers and public transportation for commuters. I believe we should invest in economic development from the inside out, revitalizing our main streets and urban centers. Never is the term “if you build it, they will come” more apt than in economic development. Once upon a time, Route 495 was just a new roadway. Now, the 495 beltway is one of our country’s software and high tech Meccas. Rail routes will be our next gateway to development. Under my plan, we will:

• Win federal funds for a regional rail system. Along with colleagues in other states, I will lobby Congress for money for regional rail from Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont down through Massachusetts and on to Connecticut and Rhode Island. The best way to raise the money we need to expand rail in our state is to work jointly with the rest of the New England states to win federal dollars.

• Expand commuter and freight rail service throughout our state, beginning with Southeast, Central and Western Massachusetts. Increased rail service will enable residents to live in more affordable and underutilized sections of the state and commute to their jobs. Rail is a first step in revitalizing communities; rail enables us to bring jobs to communities where people live rather than the other way around. Increased freight rail capacity will cause companies to look to these regions as places to grow their businesses.

• Create workforce housing. Housing and job creation are two sides of the same coin. We are losing population in large part because the cost of housing in Massachusetts is so high. By increasing transportation to the more affordable areas of the state, we can provide reasonable commute times and keep our people here. We must also continue to invest in programs that help working families afford homes, such as the soft-second mortgage program or rental programs for younger workers.

• Revitalize urban downtowns and the main streets of our small towns. I will advocate for revitalization through the Main Streets Initiative, a public-private partnership program created by the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

• Encourage cities and towns to create economic development plans. I will create a competitive grant program that cities and towns can compete for by submitting their economic renewal plans. State investment will focus on helping revitalize downtowns that are underutilized, in such areas as Worcester, Pittsfield, Lawrence, Fitchburg, Springfield and Fall River.

• Renew our “brownfields.” I will advocate for more funding to restore brownfields and create programs that provide incentives for companies who choose to re-use and revitalize former brownfields for their new construction.

• Roll out wireless Internet access throughout the Commonwealth. A simple way to help Massachusetts’ small businesses and increase the productivity of all Massachusetts workers is to build incentives for providers to roll out wireless Internet access throughout the state.

4. Invest in People – Our Human Capital

The organization I started and ran, the Center for Women & Enterprise, is an education and training organization. I know first hand how important preparing people to be good business owners or employees can be – in today’s global economy this is now more important than ever. Massachusetts is not just competing with North Carolina or California; we are also competing with Bangalore and Beijing. Our employees need to be trained to the highest levels and that training must be aligned with the needs of our current and potential employers. In some cases, our work force needs to be redirected and retrained to compete in our twenty-first century knowledge-based economy. Under my plan, we will:

• Get children off to a head start. Universal pre-school and all day kindergarten are critical to preparing children to excel in school. They are also essential because most adults – both women and men – are engaged full-time in the workforce and need high quality and dependable childcare and pre-school.

• Invest in a strong foundation for our children – particularly in math and science. K-12 education should make sure that all students have core language and math skills ensuring that all graduates are prepared for further training. Additionally, I want Massachusetts students to receive a strong foundation in math, science, financial literacy and engineering regardless of what careers they choose.

• Invest in our workforce by increasing funding to our public institutions of higher education. 85% of the graduates of our public universities stay and work in our state. These graduates are our workforce, and they must receive a world class education that is as good as the education our private universities offer. I will look for creative ways to encourage our graduates to stay, innovate and work in Massachusetts.

• Invest in workforce training programs. We must immediately invest more to equip our adult workforce with the skills and education they need to compete in the 21st century economy. Employers have stressed the need for more English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) classes, Adult Basic Education, job readiness and job training programs. Forming public-private partnerships with industry groups – particularly in health care, high tech and higher education – as well as with non-profit groups will help align government policy with employers’ workforce training needs.

• Coordinate all workforce training programs. We will encourage collaboration between community colleges and universities, large employers and non-profits/social service providers to provide workforce training to all workers who need it, including our immigrant population.

Join Us

If you believe as I do that we can do better at making the Massachusetts economy robust and vibrant for the twenty-first century, join me in helping create good jobs and a renewed sense of hope in Massachusetts. I invite you to share your thoughts on the points outlined in this paper via a written note to Info@AndreaSilbert.com. Together, we can make a real difference for Massachusetts.

Monday, May 01, 2006

LG May 06 Money Preview

According to this post over at BMG, Deb Goldberg has given $1 Million to her campaign.

I'll analyze this more later after the others' results are in, but my initial reaction is this:

This will help her for sure, but will also help Silbert and Murray raise a lot more money this summer because they will be able to argue that Goldberg's wealth hurts the ticket. If I were working for those two campaigns, I'd immediately begin calling Goldberg's supporters and asking them for money since they can't give her any more and since, as da clerk points out over in the BMG post, she didn't really need their money in the first place.

I also would caution Silbert and Murray against running a "woe is I" campaign. That makes you look poor. In the 2002 LG race, I recall Pines and Slattery saying at bit of the "the voters can't be bought" to try to get traction against Gabrieli's millions. The difference there was that they didn't have NEARLY the funds that Silbert and Murray have now. According to OCPF, Silbert and Murray will go into the Convention each having hundreds of thousands more than any downballot candidate in history. (Click here to see 2002 Cahill, Segel #s as opf 5/31/02.) That's an amazing feat, particularly for Silbert (who could be pushing 500K COH) as a first-time candidate with no personal wealth.

I also think that this is probably only the first of a couple more Deb's willing to put in. (If you have 1 million, surely you have a couple more you can afford, right?). If she puts up a $2 million ad campaign against an 800K effort from Silbert and Murray, I don't know who wins, especially given that there's going to be a ton of Gov. ads on the air.

All very interesting.