Recommendations for 2018 general election

Dear friends and neighbors around the state of Massachusetts,

Here are our recommendations for the upcoming election, this time for the General Election which will be held on Tuesday, November 6, with early voting options also available.

To see who is on your ballot, follow this link, and after you fill in your address information, click “my state election ballot” in the box under “view my ballot.”

Both of us voted early this year (you can still do that through Friday) and we both voted yes on all three ballot questions and for Democrats up and down the ticket.  We are giving you our list to keep it simple, with detailed rationale and links below if you choose to read further.  We elaborate in particular detail for some races: 1) where we think we have something to offer for your consideration, 2) that are more seriously contested, and/or 3) where the outcome seems to be in doubt and really matters.                                                                     

The candidates for statewide office that we strongly recommend are: 

Elizabeth Warren for United States Senate

Jay Gonzalez/Quentin Palfrey for Governor/Lieutenant Governor

Maura Healey for Attorney General

Deborah Goldberg for State Treasurer

We also strongly recommend a YES vote on all three ballot questions.  A quick summary of the questions is below, with our reasons later. 

If you reside in the 2^nd Congressional District, you have the opportunity to vote to re-elect our good friend, the amazing James P. (Jim) McGovern for United States House of Representatives. 

There are contested elections in some local races; for some offices we have listed candidates in a few different districts who we feel are worthy of your vote if you live in one of those districts. 

In the contested races (we omitted those that are uncontested) we recommend the following:

In the Worcester area:

Paul DePalo for Governor’s Council (listed as Councillor)

Joseph D. Early, Jr. for District Attorney

Dennis P. McManus for Clerk of Courts

Kathryn A. Toomey for Register of Deeds

You are allowed to take a list of recommendations or your own voting plans with you when you go to vote, but you are not allowed to share it with anyone else within the voting location. 

In area State Senate districts that are contested, we recommend:

Tom Merolli, Worcester and Norfolk district

Anne Gobi, Worcester, Hampden, Hampshire and Middlesex district

Susan Chalifoux Zephir, Worcester and Middlesex district

In contested State Representative races, we recommend: 

David LeBoeuf, 17^th Worcester district

Jean Strauss, 5^th Worcester district

Tanya Neslusan, 1^st Hampden district

Ballot Question 1 would set minimum legal requirements for safe nurse staffing levels by limiting the number of patients who can be assigned to each registered nurse in MA hospitals and certain other healthcare facilities.

Ballot Question 2 would create a commission to advance an amendment to the US Constitution to limit the Influence of money in elections and to establish that corporations do not have the same rights as human beings.

Ballot Question 3 maintains the existing law adopted by the legislature in 2016 that prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender identity in places of public accommodation, including hotels, restaurants, and hospitals.

If you want to read further, here is why we are making these recommendations. 

Our views and priorities in state campaigns are of necessity colored by the current national scene.  We feel that it is no exaggeration at all to say that we are in a state of emergency.  It is more urgent than ever before that we address economic injustice, racial disparities, and environmental degradation including climate change. 

The federal government and our country are racing in precisely the wrong direction.  Instead of using its power and resources to find equitable solutions to these pressing problems, the Trump Administration ignores or exacerbates these challenges.  It has functioned as a slush fund to enrich the president, his family, and other government officials.  It threatens human rights, attacks the free press, and foments hatred and scapegoating.  Simultaneously, Republicans have moved to enact policies that plunder the earnings of people with low and moderate incomes in order to benefit the wealthiest people on earth.  They have stripped workers of basic protections, endangered consumers and the environment, and suppressed the institutions of basic democracy including the right to vote. 

In this context, we feel that it is crucial to use whatever power is available in state and local government to address the problems we face and to hold a firm line on further erosion.  We need effective and compassionate leadership that will resist the party of Trump. 

Senator Elizabeth Warren displays this kind of leadership.  Because of her distinguished background in bankruptcy law, she knows more than almost anyone else about why families are struggling to make ends meet.  Her research on this led her to advocacy and then to running for office, and she is driven by her passion for justice, never by personal ambition.  She never fails to stand up for what she believes in, challenging officials appointed by Democrats as well as Republicans.  We need to keep her voice in the U.S. Senate.  Senator Warren’s Republican opponent was the 2016 chair of the Trump for President campaign in Massachusetts.

We feel that the administration of Charlie Baker and Karyn Polito has been characterized mostly by timidity, mediocrity, and mean-spiritedness.  Baker has stood by while our transportation infrastructure crumbled, failed to take bold steps to stem the opioid epidemic, tried to undermine public education, taken only baby steps to slow climate change, favored corporate interests over those of workers and consumers, and shrunk rather than expanded access to health care coverage.  As environmental activists, we are especially disturbed by Baker’s undermining of the solar industry in Massachusetts and his support for public funding of pipelines carrying fracked gas.  All this is unacceptable and unnecessary.  Baker is depicted as tall, handsome, affable, and moderate (or at least not Trump).  But he has repeatedly supported allies of Trump and proposed policies pushed by ALEC, a major right-wing think tank.  This article sums up how we can do better and expect more.  If you want to know even more about how the Baker/Polito administration has failed us, read about a whole range of issues here.

Jay Gonzalez, by contrast, has a comprehensive set of proposals to take on these and many other issues.  Jay was the Director of Administration and Finance in the Patrick administration and had a lot of private sector experience before that and since then.  In running for Governor, he brings this administrative experience as well as a passion for improving our quality of life and we feel he can bring his vision to fruition.  Jay believes, as we do, that it is time for ambitious vision and goals, not timid management and handouts to big business.  Take a look at Jay’s issues proposals here.  We think you will be impressed, as we have been when hearing Jay speak about his vision and plans for action.  Jay’s running mate, the Lieutenant Governor candidate, Quentin Palfrey brings strength to the ticket with both passion and a wealth of experience in finding innovative solutions to some of the pressing problems outlined above.  You can learn more about Quentin here. 

We love Attorney General Maura Healey.  She has been doing amazing work as “the people’s lawyer” during her term in office.  She has brought millions of dollars back to Massachusetts residents by making polluters pay, challenging overcharges by utility companies, and getting exorbitant student loans discharged.  She has stood up against Trump Administration policies including offshore oil drilling, immigrant travel bans, and restrictions on family planning.  She has cracked down on sex trafficking, on firearms sellers exploiting loopholes in our commonsense gun safety laws, and on predatory trade schools.  She is fearless and tireless. 

Deb Goldberg has been a hands-on State Treasurer, delivering on promises to help families save for college (at no cost to taxpayers), help residents develop financial literacy, fight for greater diversity on corporate boards, and promoting sustainability and accountability practices in corporations that do business with the state.  She continues to fight for wage equality.

Many people don’t know much about Governor’s Council and why it is important.  This body approves or rejects the Governor’s judicial nominees.  Judges and their basic perspectives matter.  Paul DePalo, a former schoolteacher and an attorney with experience representing children in juvenile court, is running to bring a community perspective to this office.  He will fight for the selection of judges who will affirm gender equality, find help rather than incarceration for troubled youth, and enforce worker rights and civil rights.  Learn more about Paul here.  

Joe Early deserves to be reelected as Worcester County District Attorney.  His office has done an excellent job of securing criminal convictions.  His focus is also on crime prevention and on helping nonviolent drug offenders, especially youth, to find alternatives to incarceration, giving them a chance to become productive members of society. 

Dennis McManus deserves to be reelected as Worcester County Clerk of Courts.  He has done a very good job in this role for several years and his office has been highly rated.

Kathryn (Katie) Toomey (not the Worcester City Councilor) is an experienced practicing real estate attorney running for Registrar of Deeds.  The person elected to this post manages the county office that is responsible for keeping the legal documents to ensure that the property that you own is legally recorded as yours.  Her opponent has no experience in law or real estate.  You can find out more about Katie and her campaign here.

David LeBoeuf is a first-time candidate with a remarkable track record of community service and civic engagement, running against a very right-wing Republican in a swing district.  Details about David here.  If you live in the 17^th Worcester district, please be sure to vote for David!

We strongly support Ballot Question #1 because we believe in regulations that promote safety.  The organization that represents 70% of bedside nurses in the state wrote this law in response to the large and growing number of incidents that put both patients and nurses in jeopardy.  The opponents of this ballot question (hospitals and their very highly paid executives and administrators) have spent tens of millions of dollars to confuse voters and to sow doubt.  They have couched their arguments against government mandated safe staffing levels by claiming that the requirement for minimum staffing will endanger patient safety.  They have claimed that other staff will be cut, but in fact the proposed law explicitly forbids this.  It is clear to us that a key part of their strategy is to pit lower paid and lower level staff against one another.  The state already mandates minimum nurse staff levels in Intensive Care Units.  There have been measurable reductions in hospital-acquired infections since that was implemented.  Please see this article for an analysis of the issue and the misleading claims of the campaign waged against it by the most powerful lobbying group in Massachusetts. 

We think Ballot Question #2 is a no-brainer; it is the first – and very measured – step toward developing a state position in favor of a constitutional amendment to overturn the disastrous Supreme Court decision that allowed unlimited money without disclosure of its source to flow into politics.  See this for a succinct explanation of the question. 

We have been very active in support of Ballot Question #3 because we feel it is crucial to defend the civil rights of this very vulnerable population.  You can read all about this issue here.

Thank you for allowing us to share our opinions about elections with you.  We are honored that many of our friends actually ask us for them.  We also appreciate that some people who like us and who we like don’t share our views.  Whether you agree with us or not, please be sure to vote!

Sincerely,

Margot Barnet and David Coyne

Margot's and David's recommendations for Sept 4 2018 primary

Dear friends,

We are once again reaching out to friends and neighbors with our recommendations for the upcoming election, this time for statewide candidates in the Democratic primary Tuesday, September 4, the day after tomorrow (which is Labor Day).  We recommend Jay Gonzalez for Governor, Quentin Palfrey for Lieutenant Governor, and Josh Zakim for Secretary of State.  We will elaborate on our reasons below.  Please forgive us for the lateness of this message.  We have also been working very hard on one local race, and our intense focus there has prevented our getting to this communication until now.  More on that below also. 

Our views and priorities in state campaigns are of necessity colored by the current national scene.  We feel that we are in a state of emergency.  Just as it is becoming more urgent to address economic injustice, enormous racial disparities, environmental degradation, and climate change, the federal government is racing in the wrong direction.  Instead of using its power and resources to find equitable solutions to these pressing problems, the current administration acts as a slush fund for officials in key power positions, enacts policy that plunders the earnings of people with low and moderate incomes to benefit the wealthiest among us, destroys protections for workers, consumers, and the environment, threatens a variety of human rights, and foments hatred and division to divert attention from these ravages. 

In this context, we feel that it is crucial to use whatever power is available in state government to address the problems we face and hold a firm line on further erosion of human rights.   We need leadership. 

We feel that the administration of Charlie Baker and Karyn Polito has been characterized mostly by mediocrity and mean-spiritedness.  Baker has stood by while our transportation infrastructure crumbles, failed to take bold steps to stem the opioid epidemic, tried to undermine public education, taken only baby steps to slow climate change, and shrunk rather than expanded access to health care coverage.  This is unacceptable and unnecessary.  Jay Gonzalez has a comprehensive set of proposals on these and many other issues, the administrative experience to bring his vision to fruition, and the boldness to fight for it.  Jay was the Director of Administration and Finance in the Patrick administration and had a lot of private sector experience before that; his background gives him standing to refute Baker’s claims of management expertise.  Take a look at Jay’s issues proposals here.  We think you will be impressed, as we have been when hearing Jay speak about his vision and plans for action. 

Quentin Palfrey brings both passion and a wealth of experience in finding innovative solutions to some of the pressing problems outlined above.  As Senior Advisor for jobs and Competitiveness in the Obama administration, he led a variety of initiatives to create an economy that works for everyone.  In Massachusetts he served as chief of the Healthcare Division in the office of the Attorney General, overseeing implementation of health care reform. He is dedicated to addressing the underlying causes of poverty and inequality.  We have been impressed with his comprehensive grasp of the key issues we face as well as his heartfelt approach to public service.  You can learn more about Quentin here. 

Josh Zakim, a young attorney and Boston City Councilor, is challenging the long-time incumbent Secretary of State in order to make voting more accessible to citizens of Massachusetts.  Sometimes the office holders and candidates who are vying for offices that are not at the top of the ticket don’t get much attention, but who holds these offices can have a profound effect on how our democracy plays out.  The Secretary of State administers our election system, overseeing (with considerable discretion) how the election laws are implemented.  He or she is in the position to propose and champion changes to existing law.  The election laws we have now in Massachusetts resemble the ones in states like North Carolina where Republican-controlled legislatures have enacted draconian legislation with the express intention of suppressing voter turnout.

Josh points out that our voter turnout has plummeted over the last 30 years.   Low turnouts here favor entrenched incumbents, especially top leaders in the state House of Representatives who year after year prevent vital environmental, worker protection, and funding legislation from moving forward.  If we were serious about expanding access to voting we would expand early voting to include primaries and municipal and special elections, institute no-excuse absentee voting, and remove the 20-day deadline before an election to register to vote.  Josh Zakim favors all of these reforms, and is already fighting for them. 

In his current role as a Boston city councilor, Josh has consistently stood up for equity, fairness, housing security and protections for immigrants.  We would be proud to have him as our Secretary of State.  You can learn more about his platform here.  

In our local race for State Representative in the 17th Worcester District, just next door to the one we live in, we have been helping our longtime friend and political ally David LeBoeuf to win the Democratic nomination.  If you live in that district we have already reached out to you to let you know about David, and we urge you to vote for him!  He brings an impressive track record of civic engagement, successful advocacy, and community service to his quest for public office.  Professionally, David has led initiatives to support small business and develop strong local economies.  He has held key roles in a number of political campaigns including serving as campaign manager for Harriette Chandler’s re-election in 2014.  You can learn more about David here.  

Looking toward the November election, we urge you to support and get involved in ballot questions #1: Safe Patient Limits, and #3: protecting civil rights for transgender individuals.  We will elaborate on our reasons for supporting these questions in a later post.  Meanwhile, you can learn more here and here. 

Thank you for taking the time to read through this!  Most importantly, please vote!

As we say in the campaign business, Many Happy Returns!

Sincerely,

Margot and David

P.S. A little of how the process works:  you can vote in a party primary if you are registered in that party or if you are registered to vote but not enrolled in any party.  Polls are open from 7 AM to 8 PM.  If you are unenrolled, you need to ask for a Democratic ballot to vote for the candidates we are recommending.  If you are not sure where you vote, you can find out here.    

(It is a bit ironic that we're sending you to a page with a picture of our candidate's opponent on it.  It demonstrates his penchant for self-promotion.) 

Vote Doug Arbetter for District 5 City Council Tuesday, September 12

We’re sorry to be posting this at the last minute.  It has been a hectic time for many of us.  We hope that you and all of your loved ones are safe and doing well.

Tomorrow, Tuesday, September 12, there will be preliminary elections for Worcester’s non-partisan municipal contests in Districts 1 and 5.  We live in District 5 which consists of Wards 7 and 9, currently represented by Gary Rosen.  There are three serious and active candidates in this race.  After tomorrow’s vote the top two vote getters will continue on to face one another in the general election in November.

Over the past few years we have been flattered to have had many friends, neighbors, and colleagues ask us to share our recommendations regarding candidates for public office.  We are proud to be unusually active in many political campaigns and we spend a great deal of time learning about the candidates and their views.  We understand that you probably haven’t asked for our opinion at this time.  You are, of course, free to ignore this, to follow our advice, or to go in the exact opposite direction.  We are willing to discuss our opinions and we certainly will continue to love and respect those whose judgment comes down differently.  We do think that it is important to vote as the turnout tomorrow is expected to be low and the stakes are high.

Our views are quite obviously shaped in large part by our values and ideology.  We care about the city of Worcester, about the nature of debate on important issues, and about the full and equitable inclusion of voices of all our neighbors.  At this moment in time, as President Trump continues to speak, tweet, and act in ways that are very concerning to us, a candidate’s posture regarding Trump and his supporters is overwhelmingly important to us.  We need leadership at every level, inside and outside of government, that will stand with those who are targeted, that will rise in the prophetic tradition to speak truth to power.

We have heard good things, that they are sincere, good neighbors, hardworking, and nice people, about Matt Wally, Paul Franco, and Doug Arbetter.  We have donated to, assisted, and will be voting for Doug Arbetter.  We strongly urge you to join us in voting for him tomorrow.  Here’s why.

Doug Arbetter stands for much of what we believe in.  Like us, Doug’s role model and hero on the local political scene is Jim McGovern, for whom he once worked.  He is young and bright, part of an emerging generation of leaders that as a whole fill us with optimism even in these troubling times.  He is an unabashed progressive Democrat who has already demonstrated his willingness to stand up for communities at risk.  He has earned the endorsement of Mass Alliance, a coalition of political and advocacy groups including labor, environmental, women’s, pro-choice, and LGBTQ organizations.  If elected, he will be an excellent city councilor and a reliable vote for Mayor Joe Petty’s block on most issues. 

Paul Franco has previously run unsuccessfully as the Republican nominee against both State Senator Harriette Chandler and State Representative John Mahoney.  He is a leader in the local Republican City Committee.  The GOP City Committee is led by City Councilor Michael Gaffney.  Many of us believe that Gaffney is a very harsh, intolerant, and divisive voice, a leader who plays to the cheap seats, who demagogues issues and supports President Trump.  Franco may be a nice guy but in politics you are accountable for the company you keep.  Franco is an enthusiastic supporter of people who coarsen our civic deliberation and who promote policies that harm some of the most vulnerable members of our community.  If elected, he will be a reliable vote for the Gaffney block on council.  We would be horrified to have him representing us.

Matt Wally ran unsuccessfully for City Council as an at large candidate two years ago.  He impressed us then even though, then as now, he was not a top choice candidate for us.  He is a Democrat and stands for many things that are important to us.  He has worked in the non-profit housing sector and now works to assist a bank in meeting its community responsibilities.  We believe that he would make a good city councilor if elected.

If you think you live in this district but are not sure, you can check your district and your polling place by going online to wheredoivotema.com.  Polls are open from 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM.  You should feel free to forward this message or otherwise share it as you see fit.

Thank you for your time and consideration. 

Sincerely,

Margot Barnet and David Coyne

Recommendations for Worcester's municipal election from Margot Barnet and David Coyne

Friends,

For several years now we have written and shared with friends and allies our opinions about candidates running for office.  We do this with sincere humility and a tremendous sense of responsibility, with our best thoughtfulness and attention.  We came to do this originally and now return to it in response to requests from some friends who, much to our amazement, respect and appreciate our attention to things political and electoral and actually have asked for our advice.

We offer this today, to some of you for the first time, to others once again.  Of course, you should feel free to ignore our views, to disagree partially or even completely, to vote your own conscience, or, if you so choose, to share our views with your friends and allies as well.  We welcome your sharing your own views with us.  

This year’s Worcester municipal elections are fraught with high stakes volatility.  At a level that we have not seen before in our more than two and a half decades living here, this election presents a series of choices that reflect dramatically different assumptions about both the purpose of government and its legitimacy, and about the current state of our city and its prospects for the future.  Our personal choices, in the light of such a debate, obviously reflect our own values and perceptions.  And we owe you at least a brief articulation of where we are so that you can determine for yourself if your own views and sensibilities would lead you to similar conclusions.

In a healthy democracy, people feel that their votes and voices matter.  When many people do not feel this, and feel squeezed, both economically and by unsustainable demands on their time, unscrupulous media and candidates can exploit their unease with demagoguery.  They fan people’s fears, and they blame and demonize the members of our community who have the least resource and the most visible breakdown of social fabric. 

By contrast there are many people in our community who struggle in many different ways to promote a livable community for everyone.  We have witnessed and been inspired by how people from really tough circumstances blossom, move toward self-sufficiency, develop leadership, and come together to solve problems when they are approached with respect and dignity.  Local government, while it often cannot on its own provide sufficient resources, can play a big role in shaping a culture that embodies the respect and dignity that allows people from different backgrounds to partner and find solutions together. 

We support candidates who believe that government has a constructive role to play, who respect the dignity and are willing to listen to the stories of everyone in our community, and who work to build consensus to solve the problems we face.  We need leaders who have the vision and courage to challenge demagoguery whenever it occurs. 

With all of this in mind we are supporting the following candidates:

Joseph “Joe” Petty for Mayor and City Councilor at Large

Morris “Moe” Bergman, Khrystian King, Linda Parham, Matt Wally, and Christina “Tina” Zlody for City Councilor at Large.

Some people contend that the best way to support their candidates of choice is by bullet voting, by voting for fewer and sometime many fewer candidates than there are spots.  In this case we believe block voting will be more effective, as bullet voting leaves too much room for candidates who should be defeated. 

We are declining to comment on district council races except for District 4, where our good friend Sarai Rivera is facing a challenge from a candidate with a very different agenda.  Sarai understands and embodies the vision we outlined above more than anyone else in our city leadership.  It is crucial that she return for another term. 

We have quite honestly paid far less attention to the race for School Committee this year.  Three incumbent members of the School Committee have, we believe, provided high quality consistent leadership and representation.  We will be voting for Jack Foley, Tracy O’Connell Novick, and Hilda Ramirez.  We also urge you to reject the candidacy of Donna Colorio, a Tea Party extremist.

For more background about our choices, see our September blog post here.  Our thoughts and vision about public policy for a healthy future require a much longer series of conversations, and we invite you to engage in them with us.  Please let us know if you would like to talk with us about anything we have touched on after Tuesday’s election. 

Thank you for your attention and for exercising your sacred right to vote,

Margot and David

Recommendations for Worcester’s Preliminary Election from Margot Barnet and David Coyne

Some of our friends have asked us for our recommendations for this year’s municipal election.  We are always honored that people we know and respect value our opinions! 

The Preliminary Election on Tuesday, September 8^th will narrow the field for at-large city council, eliminating four candidates from November’s ballot.  You get to vote for up to six.  In November the top 12 will be on the ballot for the six at-large seats, as well as candidates for district councilor and school committee.  The election for Mayor will also take place in November.  Under Worcester’s charter, all candidates for at-large City Council are automatically candidates for Mayor unless they opt out a week after the preliminary.  (Most usually opt out.  This year only Mayor Joe Petty and Councilor Mike Gaffney have so far declared their candidacy for Mayor.)

We are so late in getting out our list of recommendations this year because it has been hard to figure out our choices.  We have seen a lack of political courage and skill among most incumbent councilors and are more certain of who we do NOT want to vote for than those we do want to support.  Despite this disappointment, we believe there are substantial differences among the candidates and that the election of some of them portend serious harm to our city. 

We ask you to join us in supporting and voting for Joe Petty for Councilor at Large and, in November, Mayor, as well as Moe Bergman, Khrystian King, Linda Parham, and Tina Zlody, for Councilors at Large. 

We have left open one slot for an additional candidate of your choice.  However, we ask you to NOT vote for Konnie Lukes or Mike Gaffney. 

Here are some of the issues that are important to us and the reasons for our choices.  We will weigh in on school committee and district council races after the preliminary.  We will discuss the Mayor’s race now because it is relevant to how votes for the at-large councilors are distributed. 

Both of us value, and have worked for many years to promote, a healthy, vibrant community.  This has many dimensions.  We proudly recognize Worcester’s leadership on issues of primarily environmental concern like recycling and becoming a Green Community.  Being a healthy community also includes fostering a locally based economy so that good jobs are close to where we live, local dollars build local prosperity, and economic relationships are based on trust.  It includes a culture of respect for people of all backgrounds and stations in life, including making sure that voices of historically disenfranchised populations are heard.  It includes recognizing that public safety depends on relationships of trust.  Policing, a dangerous and important job, is made more difficult when large swaths of law-abiding residents believe they cannot trust the police to treat them fairly. 

Issues of race relations have been in the forefront in Worcester in the past year as they have been around the country.  We have been present as members of People of Color communities, many of them our longtime allies in social justice work, spoke out about racial disparities in the community, especially regarding law enforcement .  We regret that none of the at-large city councilors seeking re-election exhibited courageous and effective leadership in addressing these issues.  However, some city officials have tried to play constructive roles while others have initiated actions that were decidedly not constructive.  This distinction informs our choices for future leadership. 

Mayor Joseph Petty has brought a constructive mindset to the challenging issues of racial disparities.  He has brought groups together both in public and behind the scenes for useful discussions and has made sure that voices are heard.  He has also been a visible and outspoken supporter of initiatives promoting worker justice and a strong local workforce. 

While our point of view on several issues differs from that of Councilor Moe Bergman, we see him as a person of integrity who is dedicated to improving the community for all of its residents.  He has actively engaged with some leaders in the People of Color communities and is open to learning from people whose backgrounds differ from his. 

Khrystian King has demonstrated a grasp of the relationship between youth empowerment and good public health and safety outcomes that goes beyond what most public officials express. He is articulate and practical in his policy statements.  We think he would be a great asset to the City Council. 

Rev. Linda Parham brings a grassroots community organizing perspective to the City Council race.  She played a key role in the Initiative for Engaged Citizenship, a local organization dedicated to bringing new voters into the electorate and sponsoring meaningful voter education forums.  Her leadership has promoted a dramatic increase in participation of members of minority communities in electoral politics.   We believe Linda would be an asset to the City Council. 

Christina “Tina” Zlody has contributed enormously to the quality of life in Worcester and to the economic viability of local artisans through the stArt on the Street program which she co-founded and co-directs.  She brings a can-do attitude, a wealth of organizing experience, and a generally progressive outlook to the City Council race.  She also would be an asset to the Council. 

Here are some thoughts on our recommendations for NO votes.  Both Councilors Lukes and Gaffney have introduced resolutions to the City Council that have taken issues of race relations in the wrong direction.  When informed of the divisiveness of their proposals and asked to withdraw their motions, they instead doubled down.  As a mayoral candidate, Gaffney is really dangerous.  He is positioning himself as an anti-establishment populist, so he has some appeal to people who feel the system isn’t serving them.  But he plays to the lowest impulses in civic life.  He engages in fantasyland rhetoric around public resources (lower taxes and spending while bringing in more police and more support for schools).  Both Gaffney and Lukes have taken the lead from a hate-spewing local blog, attacking local programs that improve lives and conditions in impoverished and disenfranchised communities. The quality of our civic discourse would be enhanced if they were not re-elected to the Council.  Gaffney’s and Petty’s respective showings in the preliminary election could well impact their chances in the Mayor’s race in November. 

There is a lot of background to the points we have made, but we have tried to keep this brief.  Please contact us if you have any questions or comments. 

Vote NYYY on 2014 Ballot Questions

Some of our friends have asked us for information on this year’s ballot questions and where we stand.  We have researched and are recommending votes on all four of them, with our reasoning and background information below.

Massachusetts Secretary of State’s office provides a summary of the ballot questions with arguments for and against.  You probably received it in the mail, but you can also read it here.   The independent web site Ballotpedia also provides a summary and background on all of the questions, as well as a list of the questions that did not make it to the ballot this year. 

Our recommendations are:

#1: NO

#2: YES

#3: YES

#4: YES

Question 1 proposes to repeal the 2013 law that indexes the gas tax to inflation. The revenue from the gas tax, which is dedicated to maintaining transportation infrastructure, will only keep pace with costs if it rises as costs go up.  In Massachusetts our roads and bridges have been neglected for years.  The American Society of Civil Engineers identifies about 53% of our bridges as structurally deficient or obsolete.  Investment in transportation both creates jobs and makes it possible for workers to get to them.  The ballot question was proposed and is supported by hard line anti-tax crusaders who still think there is such a place as “Taxachusetts” and do not recognize the consequences of decreased revenue.  Such mainstream groups as the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, the American Automobile Association, and the Chamber of Commerce are urging a no vote.  Here is the explanation from the Mass. Taxpayers Foundation.  Vote NO on Question 1.

Question 2 proposes to expand the Bottle Bill, to include containers of beverage products that accounted for a much smaller percentage of beverage containers when the original bill was enacted.  Plastic bottles from water, juice, teas, sports drinks, and other on-the-go beverages litter parks, roadways, and streams, creating hazards to wildlife and cleanup costs to towns and cities.  Only 23% of these containers are recycled, while 80% of the containers which do have deposits are returned and recycled.  The measure would also reinstate a dedicated funding stream to aid recycling programs from any unclaimed deposits.  Opponents of the ballot measure – mostly large beverage and retail corporations – have poured millions of dollars into the advertising campaign to defeat it.  Many of their claims are misleading or blatantly false, but they hope to drown out the real story by flooding the airwaves.  Here is a basic fact sheet about what Question 2 would do, and here is an editorial supporting it.  Vote YES on Question 2. 

Question 3 proposes to “Repeal the Deal” that allows casino and slot parlor gambling in Massachusetts.  The original proposal was a hot issue in 2010 when I (Margot) was running for office, as it was working its way through the Legislature at that time.  I felt a responsibility to take a thoughtful and credible position, and researched the issue at that time.  I learned how the gambling industry operates on a business plan that is inherently predatory on its customers.  I came to the conclusion that most of the promises of the casino industry are illusory and that any boom from establishing casino gambling in a community is inevitably followed by a big bust.  Jobs are lost, promised revenues to the states decline, and there is pressure from the industry to relax the conditions that made the siting of the casino acceptable to communities.  We were influenced by this article, penned by one of the legislators who we most respect.  You can watch a former legislative staffer reporting on what he learned at that time about how casinos affect communities.  And here is a recent letter to the editor discussing this year’s ballot question. 

We realize that many of our friends in organized labor are opposing this ballot question and see the casino industry as a provider of much needed jobs.  While we recognize the urgency of job creation and economic recovery, we believe that there are other, more reliable ways to revitalize our economy and that reliance on an industry with such a bad track record for keeping its promises is unwise.  We need to get serious about investing in clean technology and energy efficiency as well as increasing investments in renewable energy.  We urge our friends to vote YES on Question 3. 

Question 4 proposes to allow employees to earn sick leave.  We have joined with a broad coalition of faith-based, labor, and community organizations to pass this measure.  It sets a basic standard that all employers must meet, prohibiting employer retaliation against workers who take time off due to illness. It provides a basic level of dignity for all workers, instead of forcing them to choose between a sick loved one and their job.  At companies with 11 or more employees, workers would earn up to 40 hours of paid sick time.  The proposal is sensitive to the needs of small business:  workers at companies with 10 or fewer employees would earn up to 40 hours of unpaid sick time to recover from illness, visit a doctor, or take care of a sick family member.  Both full-time and part-time workers can earn sick leave based on numbers of hours they work.  Enacting this proposal has benefits to public health as well as to the economy.  When workers go to work sick, or children go to school sick because their parents can’t take time off, they endanger other people around them.  The Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center has documented how earned sick leave supports healthy and thriving communities.  Please vote YES on Question 4. 

Remember to vote on Tuesday, November 4th! If you are not sure about your polling place, look it up here. Reminders about your rights as a voter: you do NOT have to show ID unless it is your first time voting in Massachusetts; if your name is on an inactive list, you might have to show proof of residence.  You MAY bring literature into the polling place with you for your reference.  You MAY NOT hand those materials to any other voter within the polling location, because that is considered electioneering in the zone where it is prohibited.  You MAY bring the person of your choice with you to help with voting when there are barriers due to language or disability.  If you will be out of town on Election Day, you can vote absentee on Monday at your city or town hall.  

Many happy returns,

Margot and David

Next Steps in the 2014 Elections

A little over a week after the primary, we are catching our breath!  September 9^th gave us the nominees in both parties who will face off in the general election on November 4^th.  In our previous post we endorsed seven candidates, some statewide, some local.  Primary night brought us mixed results, but we batted better than .500:  four of our endorsed candidates were victorious.  Our GOTV (get out the vote) efforts the weekend prior to the primary and primary day itself were devoted to Mary Keefe’s campaign, and we were delighted with her decisive win.  She does not have an opponent in the general election, so her re-election is now assured.  Dan Donahue also won his primary, and has no general election opponent.  Harriette Chandler won her primary handily, but faces a formidable Republican opponent in the general election.  We urge all of you who live in the 1^st Worcester State Senate district to vote for her on November 4^th and to work to support her if you can.  

Except for Attorney General candidate Maura Healey’s resounding win, our statewide endorsed candidates were less successful.  Nevertheless, we urge all of our friends and fellow travelers to support the Democratic candidates for Governor and Lieutenant Governor as well as the rest of the Democratic ticket.  While Martha Coakley and Steve Kerrigan were not our first choices, we feel that they offer a vision that we can enthusiastically support. 

Here is some of what Martha Coakley said in her speech on Primary Night:

“I’m in this fight for people who don’t have money or power…

Now it’s time to get to work. This election is going to be won on successful ideas and organizing – on our vision for a stronger Massachusetts, and with your voice.

We will provide earned sick time for all our working families.

We will deliver universal pre-K for all our children.

We will invest in regional economies and create jobs across all of Massachusetts.

We will increase clean energy sources and will continue to address climate change.

We will continue to ensure Massachusetts is a leader on LGBTQ rights.

And we will reduce the stigma around mental and behavioral health.”

She also pledged to fight for the rights of all workers, including the right to organize and closing the gender pay gap. 

At a unity event in Worcester the evening after the primary, we heard Steve Kerrigan give an inspiring speech embracing this same vision and outlining the differences between it and what we could expect from Charlie Baker and Karyn Polito, the Republican nominees.  Steve Kerrigan, who we really hadn’t gotten to know before, is a native and resident of Central Massachusetts and showed himself to be a person with a big heart and a sharp mind and an ability to speak to what is important to people.  

When Steve Grossman spoke to his supporters last Tuesday night he said, “I told Martha Coakley that I will do everything I can, and I hope everyone of you will do everything you can to make sure that Martha Coakley becomes the next governor of Massachusetts…I want to be sure that a Democrat is in the 3^rd floor corner office and I will do everything I can to make that happen.” 

We admire Steve Grossman tremendously and we worked for him in the primary.  He is a visionary as well as a mensch and a problem solver.  We join with him, and urge you to join with us, in making sure that we elect Martha Coakley as Governor.  After that we will work together to move forward his long range vision:  “I have a commitment to lifting every person up and giving them the tools to be everything they want to be…There is a breach in our society,” Steve said; and told us it is our job to work to heal it:  to work for social and economic justice, for opportunity for all, and for everyone being able to live with dignity. 

Some of our friends, we realize, voted for Don Berwick for Governor.  This is what Don wrote to his supporters yesterday: “To all of you, I have one request now:  join me in full support of Martha Coakley and the Democratic ticket on November 4^th.  Although we do not agree on all of the issues, I have no doubt at all that the Commonwealth’s future will be in excellent hands in a Coakley Administration.  I cannot say the same about the prospect of four years under Charlie Baker and the Republican Party.”

You can watch and listen to both Steve Grossman's speech and Don Berwick's speech on primary night, reflecting their progressive values and urging unity.  Take a listen! 

We hear a lot of people say, “I vote for the person, not the party,” and say Charlie Baker is a nice guy.  It really doesn’t work that way.  If you elect Baker, you get a Republican administration and a government driven by conservative and reactionary policy objectives.  You get Republican operatives, often losers in local elections, appointed to key positions running agencies whose mission they don’t believe in.  Nowhere will you find a commitment to the social, economic, and environmental justice agenda cited above.  We have work that isn’t finished.  It is no time to roll back the progress we have made. 

We have also come to admire Deb Goldberg, Democratic nominee for Treasurer.  She comes with extensive experience in business and a commitment to continuing Steve Grossman’s legacy of using the Treasurer’s office to increase economic opportunity for those who need it.  And we reiterate our support for Maura Healey for Attorney General, committed to becoming the people’s lawyer and knowing how to use the office to fight for justice. 

We remember well what it was like to lose a primary after Margot's campaign for State Representative in 2010. It was clear at that time, and still is, that we could make an important contribution by uniting behind the primary winner and using our influence to fight for the values that impelled us in our campaign.  

So join us; let’s elect a Democratic ticket in November and hold onto our progressive visions for the long haul.  And stay tuned; in future posts we will address several of the initiative questions which will be on our November ballots. 

Again, Many Happy Returns!

Margot and David