Friday, May 23, 2008

What is this guy doing?

Deval Patrick’s 80% office budget hike blasted

The Boston Herald, 5/23/08
By Casey Ross
Despite a slumping economy and looming budget crunch, Gov. Deval Patrick has hiked his office budget by an astonishing 80 percent, adding questionable new staff positions like “director of grassroots governance” and pumping millions into an extravagant “civic engagement” program.
“We know the governor had a goal of creating 100,000 new jobs in his first term, we just didn’t know he was going to create them all in the Corner Office,” said Sen. Michael Knapik (R-Westfield).
Added State Sen. Scott Brown (R-Wrentham): “People in my district are asking, ‘What is this guy doing?’ They get 1 to 2 percent increases for their schools, and he gets almost 80 percent? How do you explain that?”
Patrick’s office budget has skyrocketed to $9 million this fiscal year, a boost of nearly $4 million from fiscal 2007, Republican lawmakers said. Much of the increase is due to a $3 million appropriation for Patrick’s new Commonwealth Corps, a volunteerism program aimed at promoting “civic engagement” across the state.
Patrick has also increased spending by hundreds of thousands of dollars on internal staff.
Among the new positions and their salaries:
Director of grassroots governance: $50,000
Grassroots goverance liaison: $39,000
Director of new media and online strategy: $68,000.
What’s more, Patrick is spending more than $450,000 on an office in Washington, D.C., to help lure federal dollars to fund Medicaid, transportation, housing and other priorities.
During the Senate budget debate, Minority Leader Richard Tisei raised questions about the additional spending and suggested Patrick’s Washington office is unnecessary.
“We have Democratic delegation who’s in the majority in Congress, we have Democratic state Legislature and we have a Democratic governor, so why is all this money necessary for the Washington, D.C., office?” asked Tisei(R-Wakefield). “It seems extravagant to me.”
Aides to the governor defended the additional spending, saying it is meant to improve operations in the governor’s office after Romney cut the number of employees into the 60s. Patrick has increased the staff to 76 full-time positions.
“Unlike some previous administrations, this administration is serious about moving the commonwealth forward,” Patrick spokeswoman Cyndi Roy said.
She also sought to portray money to increase staffing in the Washington office as an important investment. “The office is critical to maintaining a strong partnership with our legislative delegation, especially when billons of dollars in federal funds for Massachsuetts are at stake,” she said.
Roy defended the internal office hires for new media and grassroots coordination, saying, “The people of Massachusetts deserve to have their voices heard.”
Still, Republicans succeeded in winning approval of a measure in the overwhelmingly Democratic Senate that would force Patrick to post online the job titles and duties of all employees in his office.
Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/politics/view.bg?articleid=1095850

Monday, May 12, 2008

Ethics Committee hasn't found anything wrong since 1991:

Eagle Tribune - Sun, May 11 2008

Ethics Committee hasn't found anything wrong since 1991:

Female lawmaker's complaint could be test case for secretive panel

By Edward Mason
Staff writer

BOSTON — A female lawmaker's allegation that a male House colleague told her, "I could really hurt you if I wanted to," is providing a rare public glimpse into one of the most secretive panels on Beacon Hill.

The House Ethics Committee is investigating the complaint by Rep. Jennifer Callahan, D-Sutton, but members of the committee are prohibited not only from discussing the case publicly but also from disclosing any information about any matters before them.

Nor can they reveal even the most basic details of the committee's operations — such as how many complaints they deal with in any given year.

One thing is known about the Ethics Committee's work, however: It rarely finds anything unethical about the behavior of any member of the House, even when those members admit to, or are convicted of, wrongdoing.

If the committee does recommend disciplinary action against Jennifer Callahan's colleague, it will be the first time in nearly two decades it has held a state lawmaker accountable for violating House ethics rules.

Unable to comment

Ethics Committee Chairman Rep. James Fagan, D-Taunton, politely referred to House rules when he declined to answer questions about the Callahan case, the way the committee hears complaints, the number of cases referred to the committee during this legislative session, the number that resulted in punishment, and whether the committee ever meets in public.

"I don't want to appear to be a rude dope," Fagan said. "It's something I'm unable to comment on."

The public knows of the Callahan probe only because House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi's spokeswoman notified reporters by e-mail that the speaker ordered an investigation. That followed media accounts of Callahan's allegations made on the House floor.

Ethics investigations are private for a reason, Fagan said.

"The rule exists," Fagan said, "to protect the integrity of the committee's actions." He also said members won't "fear (complaints) will become public like other things in the Statehouse immediately are."

Rep. Michael Costello, D-Newburyport, is the only local lawmaker on the 11-member panel.

He said secrecy protects lawmakers who file complaints and lawmakers who might be the target of politically motivated charges.

"There is real value in having a confidential process until and unless there's an action to substantiate," Costello said.

Government watchdogs, like Common Cause's Pam Wilmot, said the committee's secrecy is unwarranted.

While siding with lawmakers' concerns about privacy, Wilmot called Fagan's unwillingness to discuss how the committee works — even though the committee's procedures for handling allegations are posted on the Legislature's Web site — as "a little extreme."

She also said the committee should publicly document its work.

"I think there is a line where some transparency would be helpful," Wilmot said, "particularly around procedures, general statistics, cases disposed of and if there is a specific action."

Rep. Linda Dean Campbell, a Methuen Democrat, went even further. She said the House should open up the process entirely, telling the public when a charge has been leveled against a lawmaker.

"We're elected officials," Campbell said. "Given we file our statements of (financial) interest, what funding we receive and from whom, that's all public. So if there's some evidence of wrongdoing in the conduct of public business, that should all be public knowledge."

Nothing since 1991

Because of the House policy, little beyond what happened in public view and was reported in newspapers is known about the confrontation that sparked the investigation.

Callahan, a three-term Democrat, alleged she was threatened late on Friday, May 2, as the House was debating health-care spending in next year's budget.

Speaking to the full House, Callahan said she wanted to talk "about something I'm not proud of."

She said she was confronted by a male colleague who was upset over comments Callahan made earlier in the week about an inability to get funding for a hospice care program for severely ill children. She said the male lawmaker told her, "I could make things real difficult for you. I mean, Jen, I could really hurt you if I wanted to."

DiMasi then banged his gavel and cut off Callahan before she could go into any more detail. She has refused to identify the male colleague.

The committee does disclose when it has verified a complaint or decided to punish a lawmaker, by filing a report with the House clerk.

But the last time that happened was in 1991, when William Weld was governor.

One reason could be that the House rules list just 15 ethical restrictions. Those include using campaign funds for personal use, using a legislative position for financial gain, serving on a committee that handles legislation where a conflict of interest would occur, accepting gifts greater than $100, casting a vote for an absent member, discussing an ethics committee case or verbally abusing a colleague.

While the committee has not disciplined a single lawmaker since 1991, a number of prominent legislators have committed what could be considered ethical breaches and have been punished for them outside the Legislature.

Two House speakers have stepped down: Charles Flaherty after pleading guilty to federal tax evasion and Thomas Finneran prior to pleading guilty to obstruction of justice, a felony, in a federal voting rights case.

In 1994, a judge ruled that then Rep. Kevin Fitzgerald, a Boston Democrat who acted as an attorney to a mentally ill "bag lady," manipulated the woman into leaving him and an aide a $400,000 inheritance.

If the Ethics Committee considered those cases, it took no action.

Nor did the Ethics Committee take any action after Rep. Marie St. Fleur, the vice chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, admitted to owing thousands in federal taxes. The revelation did force the Boston Democrat out of the 2006 race for lieutenant governor.

The ethics of some committee members also have been questioned.

Rep. Eugene O'Flaherty, D-Chelsea and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, is also a defense attorney who is among lawmakers blamed for watering down a 2005 law cracking down on drunken drivers.

Another member is Rep. Thomas Petrolati, D-Ludlow, who has accepted campaign contributions from known felons, according to published reports. Petrolati, speaker pro-tempore, ranks second only to the House speaker.

And perhaps ironically, DiMasi, who ordered the probe into Callahan's allegations, is the subject of four complaints Republicans have filed over whether his business and personal connections have affected major legislation.

Those complaints were filed with the state Ethics Commission — not to be confused with the Ethics Committee.

The Ethics Commission is an independent office that probes complaints against Massachusetts officials and government employees.

Wilmot said it could serve as a model for the Ethics Committee.

Like the committee, the Ethics Commission won't discuss specific cases under investigation. But it publishes an annual report that gives details on the number of complaints received and how they were resolved. And it notifies the media when public officials are punished.

While the Ethics Committee's actions remain shielded from the public, Wilmot said the public will ultimately decide if the committee is doing its job in the Callahan case.

"The proof is in the action," Wilmot said. "And they haven't done much of anything. That's what the public will be concerned about, and do they think the result is appropriate."

Inside the Ethics Committee

r The Ethics Committee investigates complaints from House members and employees. It can also initiate an investigation by a majority vote of the committee. Committee members named in a complaint cannot participate in the committee's deliberations.

r All proceedings before the committee and complaints are confidential.

r The committee notifies any person named in a complaint and the complainant of the final result.

r Any member or House employee named in a complaint can appear before the committee with a lawyer.

r If a majority of the 11-member committee (7 Democrats, 4 Republicans) votes that a complaint has merit, a report is filed with the House clerk. All other complaints remain confidential.

r A House member can be expelled, reprimanded, censured or removed from a chairmanship or other position of authority.

r A House employee can be reprimanded, suspended or fired.

Source: Rules of the House of Representatives

Tuesday, April 22, 2008

“Wake up and smell the economy!"

Tuesday, April 22, 2008 Pet projects aplenty

Earmark rush is upon House

By Steve LeBlanc THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

BOSTON— Lawmakers are scrambling to add hundreds of pet projects to the House version of the state budget, despite dire warnings of a $1.3 billion spending gap and a looming recession.

The amendments range from:
- $50,000 to clean algae on Nahant Beach
- $140,000 for a salt storage depot in Randolph
- $150,000 to battle the Winter Moth worm
- $750,000 to eliminate mold at the Stoughton Fire Station.
- $90,000 for a shellfish propagation program on Cape Cod
- $100,000 for a wind turbine at the McGlynn Elementary and Middle Schools in Medford
- $50,000 for film festivals on the Cape and Islands.
- $50,000 for teen pregnancy prevention programs in Southbridge,
- $260,000 for violence prevention programs for high-risk youth in Boston, and
- $250,000 for a colorectal cancer awareness education program.
- $250,000 for the Free Shakespeare Company in Boston
- $75,000 for collaborations between the Boston Ballet and Opera Boston
- $100,000 for the Waltham Tourism Council.
- $180,000 for a biofilter system in West Boylston
- $25,000 for improvements to the Holland Pool in Malden.

... The House budget relies on a mix of new taxes, cuts and funds from the state’s “rainy day” savings account to balance spending.

Lawmakers shouldn’t be looking to protect special projects when the state is facing a budget shortfall, according to Barbara Anderson of the anti-tax group Citizens for Limited Taxation.

“Wake up and smell the economy,” Anderson said. “Even with the tax increases we don’t have the money for the budget we have, never mind adding anything. Where are they getting the money for earmarks?”
see the full article here

McCain vs Obama Poll

A recent poll conducted by Survey USA shows some exciting news.
The poll questioned registered voters in Massachusetts. Find it here: http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollPrint.aspx?g=d328d259-7c45-49ff-a14e-c14c182cb9c7&d=0

First of all, with Barack Obama being the likely Democrat nominee, John McCain trails Obama 46% to 48%; with a +/- 4.3% margin of error. This is devastating that a Republican nominee could be in a dead heat in the bluest state.

Second, it becomes important to look at the party affiliation. Massachusetts is about 50% unenrolled voters. The poll concluded that 54% of unenrolled voters would vote for John McCain over Obama.

When it comes to the major issues, by wide margins the economy is the most important issue to voters. However, John McCain is leading when it comes to this issue. In fact, except for the environment, health, and Iraq John McCain leads every issue by wide margins.

One more issue that I noticed in this poll: SurveyUSA separated the issues of Iraq and Terrorism. Now I am one that believes they are one in the same, but it is important to notice that voters who thought Iraq was a more important voted for Obama and likewise those who thought Terrorism was more important voted for McCain.

On a completely irrelevant (but humorous) note, compare how the votes change based race when comparing McCain versus Obama and McCain versus Clinton. Barack Obama loses 10% of the black vote that Clinton carried and 53% of the Hispanic vote.

So what does all this mean for us? Maybe nothing. The election is still 6 and half months away which might as well be next year in election terms. So much can, and will, happen between now and the general election. However, with a Zogby poll showing that Candidate Jeff Beatty in a dead heat with John Kerry (http://www.telegram.com/article/20070809/NEWS/708090792/1008), and John McCain tied with Barack Obama, it does give one hope for our commonwealth.

Thursday, April 17, 2008

Budget banks on tax increases

From the Telegram and Gazette:

BOSTON— House Democratic leaders yesterday proposed a budget for fiscal 2009 that would increase state spending $1.1 billion over the current year and relies on projected increases in income and sales tax revenues, as well as $392 million from proposed corporate tax increases and another dollar-per-pack tax on cigarettes.

see the full article here

Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Will Kerry Still Support Obama At Democrat Convention?

MassGOP Calls on Senator Kerry to Denounce Obama's Elitist Rhetoric

Boston, MA - The Massachusetts Republican Party issued the following statement calling on Senator John Kerry to denounce Barack Obama's elitist rtheroic.


Massachusetts Republican Party Executive Director Rob Willington said, "Senator Kerry's silence on Obama's comments is astounding. People don't "cling" to their religion because of economic stress, they believe in their religion because it brings them comfort and strength. Those who believe in the 2nd Amendment and border security are not "bitter." Apparently Senator Obama believes that because they are angry, they believe in the 2nd Amendment and secure borders. It is the other way around - because the government can't secure our borders and it continues to encroach on our right to bear arms, they are rightfully upset. Given Senator Kerry's support for Senator Obama, will he continue to support him despite these insulting comments?"

View a new video from the NRSC on this subject by clicking here.


At a fundraiser in San Francisco on April 6th, Senator Obama Said: "You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. … And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

Thursday, April 10, 2008

Ogonowski Visit

Jim Ogonowski, candidate for US Senate, visited Winchendon during a joint meeting of the regional committees. Present were members of the Winchendon, Hubbardston, Ashburnham, and Templeton town committees. For more information on Jim, visit www.JimOgonowski.com

Jim is facing off with Republican opponent Jeff Beatty for the chance to take on John Kerry.






Friday, April 4, 2008

Our glorious State Senate Democrats defending bad teachers:

From the Telegram and Gazette: http://telegram.com/article/20080404/APN/804040685
Senate provides certification waiver for failing teacher hopefuls

The Associated Press


BOSTON—
The state Senate has approved a bill that would allow aspiring teachers who flunk the certification test three times to possibly teach anyway.

The law would provide a waiver that could lead to certification,

The teaching candidates who failed three times would have to have come close to passing at least once.

Senate Republicans ridiculed the legislation, which still needs approval from the House and Governor Patrick.

Senator Bruce Tarr asked how the state can expect students to have a minimum level of knowledge when they don't expect the same from teachers.

But Senate Democrats said it would just allow teachers to be assessed on a broader basis so talented instructors aren't denied jobs.

Monday, March 31, 2008

Comtois Meet and Greet


Great Job Templeton on putting together this event.

Photo: Templeton Organizer Isaac Matson and Stephen Comtois.