The Bay State Stonewall Democrats are hosting a fundraiser in Boston, on June 11th. In the midst of Pride Week, here's a good chance to meet many of the state's GLBT activists, raise money for an organization that supports glbt-friendly Democrats and have a good time. Boston City Council President Maureen Feeney is one of the guests of honor.
With tickets starting at $50, I hope to see a lot of faces there. For just a little more, your name will be listed as a "Patron" sponsor of the event in the handout - and you'll also be given a free membership to the Bay State and National Stonewall Democrats. Click the link to buy some tickets.
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
The Film Tax Credit Just Gets Better
and better and better. Obviously, I'm no big fan. Now, the whole thing gets even worse. Not only can films receive the
The Globe doesn't paint a rosy picture.
In its high-profile bid to compete with Hollywood and New York as a film production hub, the state is doing more than subsidizing TV series and feature movies through tax credits and sales tax exemptions. It is also underwriting the cost of producing TV commercials in Massachusetts. The Department of Revenue said it has issued more than $2.1 million of tax credits for 37 ad-related productions - with eight more applications pending - since the state started offering incentives two years ago.Furthermore, per my second link, readers will note that for every 3 dollars this measure will cost the State of Massachusetts, the Bay State will get around 1 dollar in new economic development. That kind of net
Unfortunately, Massachusetts just isn't Hollywood. Sure, we want to encourage economic growth and diversity, but that growth has to make sense: we can't be spending more money than we're earning. Massachusetts will no more become the next Hollywood as it will become the next center for corn growth. If we're going to give incentives for filming in Massachusetts, then those incentives should be realistic, revenue neutral and play to our strengths: certainly, there's a media niche Massachusetts can fill. Our history, economy and transportation systems make us an ideal site for many films; we should try to maximize our potential in that arena.
We obviously haven't done that yet, instead resorting to the worst kind of Corporate Welfare. Massachusetts needs to go back to the drawing board, figuring out ways to bring new growth to Massachusetts, without being seduced by the glitzy lights of Tinsel Town. We're not Hollywood or New York - we have the Hancock, not the Rockefeller. Playing to our strengths is key. At least, if law makers can't resist the Hollywood limelight, they need to create bills that make fiscal sense - something no worse than revenue neutral for the citizens of Massachusetts.
Sunday, May 25, 2008
Get Rid of Police Details
Sadly, one of the truths to life is that it's always easier to protect something than get rid of it. Massachusetts was never going to legalize marriage equality through the legislative process, because it's so tough to get people to change their positions on it and make them do the right thing, all the while it's so easy for politicians to do nothing. However, when the court legalized marriage for us, suddenly the whole marriage equality fight became a lot easier. Why? Massachusetts was suddenly in the position of protecting marriage equality and, as already said, it's always easier to protect something than change it. Maybe that's why we're still stuck in a situation where Massachusetts is wasting a $100 million more per year paying police officers to monitor construction sites than we could paying flag details livable wages with benefits.
No one would question that police officers deserve to earn top-notch salaries. They work long hours and there's certainly a risk factor to their jobs. However, that doesn't mean they should get every perk in the book. What Massachusetts should ask itself is "are police details fair or unfair?" What's beyond infuriating, though, is that just answering that question isn't enough, because the lobbying effort on their part is truly expansive, complete withpolice officers and their spouses people making illogical and angry comments on the internet.
My state rep made it a point to tell me how many phone calls she was getting on that issue, because it certainly makes a big dent in the wallets of police officers (it also helps to have a union). Detail work is something any officer or patrolman could pick up, get time and a half for it, then move on. What people may not realize in this debate, though, is that, in order to pay police officers well, it isn't a choice between having details or not. Doing construction details makes up around half of an officer's overtime opportunities, so they still would be able to earn salaries and benefits that are the envy of almost any other municipal employee and those in the private sector - so instead of earning $90k a year, some of these officers may be earning $70-80. Someone call the poor house!
These perks are so lucrative, in fact, that they don't exist anywhere else across this country, or even the world: no other state uses police details, and I know of no other western democracy that does either. The rest of the world gets it: why pay police officers, who are obscenely overqualified for detail work, when we can train and hire any number of willing people who need the jobs, proving hundreds across this state with a livable wage, complete with benefits, while saving this state hundreds of millions. This shouldn't even be a debate.
What's even more important to realize, however, is that someone is paying for this absurd, ancient, never-ending cold Massachusetts has been trying to get rid of: you! Some estimate that switching to flag details instead of police details would save this state $100 million a year. Whether that's really the case, or if it would be closer to tens of millions a year, I don't know, but the potential savings for Massachusetts are staggering. Those countless millions have to come from somewhere, so where is it coming from? It's the school that just shut down in your town. It's the state program for homeless shelters that just got slashed. It's the 20 municipal employees who were just laid off in your community. Not satisfied enough? It's the hundreds of extra dollars you will have to pay when you want to do basic construction on your home or business.
Certainly, we need trained professionals monitoring construction sites across this state. Do we need those trained professionals to also be trained on how to safely handcuff a violent criminal? On how to do a drug bust? Or successfully investigate a crime, collecting clues and eyewitness reports? These are just some things that police officers know how to do that aren't required of someone monitoring a construction site and making sure it's safe. Why do we need police officers there?
Police officers earn a lot of money per hour for a reason - they're highly trained to do a wide assortment of important work. However, sometimes that scope can become too big. Why pay police officers to do something that they're so overly qualified for when we could pay and train others to do the detail work for far less? This is macroeconomics 101. We could create hundreds of new jobs, save this state hundreds of millions and still afford to pay our police officers the great premium they deserve. Politicians are always talking about finding creative solutions to save money. While I can't exactly say this is a creative solution - 49 other states have beat us to the punch - it's certainly a solution, and that's the message politicians need to get as they build up the courage to do the right thing. Every year they wait, the people of this state lose out.
Update: Bill Menzi has much more. Also, as the Mayor of Methuen, he clearly the political courage on this issue that we need on Beacon Hill. One key bit: switching from police officers to flag details would save the state 36.5-66.5 million a year, according to the Beacon Hill Institute. I've heard other sources suggest $100 million, but I'd bet the Beacon Hill Institute is closer to the truth. When there's a billion dollar deficit, saving 66.5 million is 6.65% closer to the promised land - basically, it should be the easiest, most productive decision out there in getting us out of the red.
No one would question that police officers deserve to earn top-notch salaries. They work long hours and there's certainly a risk factor to their jobs. However, that doesn't mean they should get every perk in the book. What Massachusetts should ask itself is "are police details fair or unfair?" What's beyond infuriating, though, is that just answering that question isn't enough, because the lobbying effort on their part is truly expansive, complete with
My state rep made it a point to tell me how many phone calls she was getting on that issue, because it certainly makes a big dent in the wallets of police officers (it also helps to have a union). Detail work is something any officer or patrolman could pick up, get time and a half for it, then move on. What people may not realize in this debate, though, is that, in order to pay police officers well, it isn't a choice between having details or not. Doing construction details makes up around half of an officer's overtime opportunities, so they still would be able to earn salaries and benefits that are the envy of almost any other municipal employee and those in the private sector - so instead of earning $90k a year, some of these officers may be earning $70-80. Someone call the poor house!
These perks are so lucrative, in fact, that they don't exist anywhere else across this country, or even the world: no other state uses police details, and I know of no other western democracy that does either. The rest of the world gets it: why pay police officers, who are obscenely overqualified for detail work, when we can train and hire any number of willing people who need the jobs, proving hundreds across this state with a livable wage, complete with benefits, while saving this state hundreds of millions. This shouldn't even be a debate.
What's even more important to realize, however, is that someone is paying for this absurd, ancient, never-ending cold Massachusetts has been trying to get rid of: you! Some estimate that switching to flag details instead of police details would save this state $100 million a year. Whether that's really the case, or if it would be closer to tens of millions a year, I don't know, but the potential savings for Massachusetts are staggering. Those countless millions have to come from somewhere, so where is it coming from? It's the school that just shut down in your town. It's the state program for homeless shelters that just got slashed. It's the 20 municipal employees who were just laid off in your community. Not satisfied enough? It's the hundreds of extra dollars you will have to pay when you want to do basic construction on your home or business.
Certainly, we need trained professionals monitoring construction sites across this state. Do we need those trained professionals to also be trained on how to safely handcuff a violent criminal? On how to do a drug bust? Or successfully investigate a crime, collecting clues and eyewitness reports? These are just some things that police officers know how to do that aren't required of someone monitoring a construction site and making sure it's safe. Why do we need police officers there?
Police officers earn a lot of money per hour for a reason - they're highly trained to do a wide assortment of important work. However, sometimes that scope can become too big. Why pay police officers to do something that they're so overly qualified for when we could pay and train others to do the detail work for far less? This is macroeconomics 101. We could create hundreds of new jobs, save this state hundreds of millions and still afford to pay our police officers the great premium they deserve. Politicians are always talking about finding creative solutions to save money. While I can't exactly say this is a creative solution - 49 other states have beat us to the punch - it's certainly a solution, and that's the message politicians need to get as they build up the courage to do the right thing. Every year they wait, the people of this state lose out.
Update: Bill Menzi has much more. Also, as the Mayor of Methuen, he clearly the political courage on this issue that we need on Beacon Hill. One key bit: switching from police officers to flag details would save the state 36.5-66.5 million a year, according to the Beacon Hill Institute. I've heard other sources suggest $100 million, but I'd bet the Beacon Hill Institute is closer to the truth. When there's a billion dollar deficit, saving 66.5 million is 6.65% closer to the promised land - basically, it should be the easiest, most productive decision out there in getting us out of the red.
Saturday, May 24, 2008
Teaching Blogging to Democrats!
Hey everyone, I'm just following up on a diary I wrote last week. As a direct result of BlogLeft Mass's meeting in Lowell, our group is now co-hosting a Democratic State Convention workshop on the Netroots and Blogging. The point of the workshop will be to teach people how to blog, or how to become more effective bloggers and online activists. I know there's a lot of interest in this, because we had more than 20 people show up all the way in Lowell, squeezing in a small sun room with not an inch to spare. So here's the direct ways people could get involved, in bold:
1. Help us set it up. There are power point slides to create and ideas to foster. It's a lot of work, but someone's gotta do it. What exactly can you do?
A. Create slides for how to use Digg, Technorati, stat counter, social networking sites, rss feeds, blogging platforms, etc. Basically, anything I listed here. If you're willing, pick something in the comments and email me your slides.
B. Edit what we have. We're certainly going to want to have a few people take a look at what we're going to present ahead of time, so if anyone's willing to be a guinea pig, let me know.
2. Come to the convention! We're trying to incorporate as many bloggers, commenters and netroot activists as possible. As such, the first section of the presentation will be various presentations on what is the netroots, blogging, the different kinds, etc.
Then, there will be three break-out sessions:
A. Netroots 101: teaching people the basics (ex. how to create a username and post at Bluemassgroup or Blogger.com). If this sounds like something that interests you, please make a note of it in the comments - or email me.
B. Netroots 201: technical tools to help your blogging and online activism - such as video blogging, podcasting, blog tools such as Digg, etc. If this sounds like something that interests you, please make a note of it in the comments - or email me.
C. Netroots Roundtable. We're going to need a number of bloggers and netroots activists on a panel for discussion, but it's also just as important to have veterans in the audience to make sure it's a real give and take. Consider this less a panel where people talk down to others, and more a round table like that of the Arthurian Legends (which, I guess, makes the Internet our Excalibur). If this sounds like something that interests you, please make a note of it in the comments - or email me.
3. Other ways to help.
A. Start blogging about this! We should try to build excitement because an event like this could lead to dozens of new political bloggers and diarists in this state.
B. Come and critique the panel. We need to learn what we did good and what we could improve on. Did we miss anything? Could anything be skipped? The presentation at the DSC Convention is the beginning, not the end, so it's important to that BlogLeft take something away from it beyond recruiting new talent.
C. Take the presentation on tour. Ultimately, a personal goal for this entire project is to create a major blogger workshop pilot so we can form the basis of something that bloggers can take on the road. There are Town Committees, League of Women Voters and Progressive Democrat chapters that need to see this presentation, because they need to be blogging about the things they're already doing everyday in their community anyway, in order to maximize their effectiveness and increase the information available to the community beyond the shoddy reporting at local weeklies. This is the best, grassroots shot at growing the netroots movement in Massachusetts - and this is the best way anyone here can do their part to expand it. I hope we'll eventually have dozens of people involved in this aspect.
FYI: the Convention will be at the Tsongas arena in Lowell on June 7th. However, our workshop will actually be at Lowell High School. It's cosponsored by both BlogLeft Mass and the DSC Subcommittee on Communications. The workshop will begin at approx. 3pm.
1. Help us set it up. There are power point slides to create and ideas to foster. It's a lot of work, but someone's gotta do it. What exactly can you do?
A. Create slides for how to use Digg, Technorati, stat counter, social networking sites, rss feeds, blogging platforms, etc. Basically, anything I listed here. If you're willing, pick something in the comments and email me your slides.
B. Edit what we have. We're certainly going to want to have a few people take a look at what we're going to present ahead of time, so if anyone's willing to be a guinea pig, let me know.
2. Come to the convention! We're trying to incorporate as many bloggers, commenters and netroot activists as possible. As such, the first section of the presentation will be various presentations on what is the netroots, blogging, the different kinds, etc.
Then, there will be three break-out sessions:
A. Netroots 101: teaching people the basics (ex. how to create a username and post at Bluemassgroup or Blogger.com). If this sounds like something that interests you, please make a note of it in the comments - or email me.
B. Netroots 201: technical tools to help your blogging and online activism - such as video blogging, podcasting, blog tools such as Digg, etc. If this sounds like something that interests you, please make a note of it in the comments - or email me.
C. Netroots Roundtable. We're going to need a number of bloggers and netroots activists on a panel for discussion, but it's also just as important to have veterans in the audience to make sure it's a real give and take. Consider this less a panel where people talk down to others, and more a round table like that of the Arthurian Legends (which, I guess, makes the Internet our Excalibur). If this sounds like something that interests you, please make a note of it in the comments - or email me.
3. Other ways to help.
A. Start blogging about this! We should try to build excitement because an event like this could lead to dozens of new political bloggers and diarists in this state.
B. Come and critique the panel. We need to learn what we did good and what we could improve on. Did we miss anything? Could anything be skipped? The presentation at the DSC Convention is the beginning, not the end, so it's important to that BlogLeft take something away from it beyond recruiting new talent.
C. Take the presentation on tour. Ultimately, a personal goal for this entire project is to create a major blogger workshop pilot so we can form the basis of something that bloggers can take on the road. There are Town Committees, League of Women Voters and Progressive Democrat chapters that need to see this presentation, because they need to be blogging about the things they're already doing everyday in their community anyway, in order to maximize their effectiveness and increase the information available to the community beyond the shoddy reporting at local weeklies. This is the best, grassroots shot at growing the netroots movement in Massachusetts - and this is the best way anyone here can do their part to expand it. I hope we'll eventually have dozens of people involved in this aspect.
FYI: the Convention will be at the Tsongas arena in Lowell on June 7th. However, our workshop will actually be at Lowell High School. It's cosponsored by both BlogLeft Mass and the DSC Subcommittee on Communications. The workshop will begin at approx. 3pm.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Making the Ballot?
From an email I was given by someone very concerned about the efforts to repeal the income tax on November's ballot:
We're surging forward. Running as fast as we can to finish the final phase to getting the END the Income Tax Initiative on this November 4th ballot.Clearly, the group is having some trouble getting enough signatures to make the ballot. Let's all hope they can't and do what we can to stop it - educating our friends, family and coworkers on the issue.
20,000 raw petition signatures is all that stands in our way.
We need to collect these final 20,000 raw petition signatures by June 9th. We have to submit these signatures to 351 different towns and cities, get them certified, pick up the petitions - and, finally, turn them in to the Secretary of State's Office.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
What is DiMasi Thinking?!
This is a recipe for disaster!
I call on the Speaker to regain his grip on reality and run, run, run from this position.
House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi, in a startling departure from previous stances against resort gambling, today decided for the first time to back a November ballot question asking voters whether they support casinos in Massachusetts.So, in November, we're going to see two questions on the ballot - one to ask voters if they'd like to legalize casinos and the second to eliminate the state income tax. Is anyone else seeing the problem here? We're giving people an option to get rid of the income tax and to justify that by legalizing casinos - which won't come anywhere near providing the revenue that the state income tax does. This, in effect, would gut the entire state's budget: no more help for schools, no more health bill and no more roads and bridges fixed. This would be absolutely, positively disastrous.
I call on the Speaker to regain his grip on reality and run, run, run from this position.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
BlogLeft's First Blogger Workshop
Back in mid April, BlogLeft Massachusetts held its first event in quite a while. It was, as much as anything, a completely open forum filled with live, in-person meta. Names and pseudonyms were matched with faces. Over all, the event felt like a big success - it was messy, exciting and an all around good time, but, most of all, it was important. At the very least, now we all knew a little bit more about who we are, as a progressive, netroots movement, and what we'd like to accomplish.
About the only immediate action the group of people firmly agreed on as a short term goal was that we wanted to host more events - specifically events geared towards increasing the numbers of bloggers and activists across the state. Well, I just wanted to let everyone know, what went on in Lowell mattered - because that's exactly what's going to happen. It's now about as official as it'll ever get - at the Democratic State Convention, BlogLeft will co-sponsor a 'how to blog' forum for party activists with the DSC Subcommittee on Communications, something that will hopefully be so successful that we'll be able to take the forum on the road to a town near you.
Action Items
Not all the details are planned, but we know there's going to be two parts to the presentation: what is blogging and how do people do it? It'll cover both general knowledge and the technical 'how-to' that can leave so many people stumped. Consider this presentation a Netroots 101 event that teaches people all they need to know to start their own blog, join or create a Yahoo email group or write a comment on BMG. We're going to show people that it's not a big and scary thing and that a blog's results are well worth the effort.
-How to create a blog on typepad, step by step
-Ditto blogger.com
-The steps of creating your own website from scratch
-Wordpress and all its tools
-Other platforms like soapblox
-Facebook, it's uses, it's pros and cons.
-What the hell is Digg and how do you use it?
-Yahoo and Google groups from scratch
-Other email tools
-RSS feeds: how to use them, how to create them.
-Video podcasting and video editing, freeware
-Podcasting and audio editing, freeware
-Photo editing, freeware
-Technorati
-Other online tools, etc.
If there's anything I've left off, and you know about it, please contact me. Ideally, each of those tools could be kept to just a few slides, but be powerful enough to teach people how to use them. Unfortunately, there's a high probability that we won't have internet access, so these guides will have to be very, very good (don't worry, though, I'll take rough drafts and make them prettier if all you can do is help make them). All in all, this is a very exciting event and we're going to need a lot of volunteers to pull off the ambitious agenda, which for now includes not only presentation on things like "what is a blog" but will feature interactive stations, where we can have individual time with those who are attending our workshop. So, as anyone can see, we're going to need all hands on deck - it can't just be Lynne, Kate Donoghue, Susan from Below Boston and I. Keep the Grassroots growing and join in on the fun, because this presentation - which I consider to be the big, pilot test run - may become the single most effective means of increasing the size of our progressive, netroots Bay State movement.
Crossposted at BlueMassGroup.
Monday, May 19, 2008
Racinos Just Around the Corner
Hopefully people haven't been lax on casinos, because the fight is not over. According to my sources, Speaker DiMasi promised House members that he'll allow a vote on Racinos this session. Knowing that, it means there will be some kind of vote - and probably hearing - on a Racino bill by the end of July, at the latest. As one of my anti-casino colleagues eloquently says, "We have to beat casinos every time. They only need to win once." Expect the next battle to happen soon - and plan accordingly. If you haven't talked to your state reps in the past month, please do so.
We Get it Already
The Big Dig wasn't planned well - that's not news (certainly not of the front-page, above-the-fold variety). Let's have a story or two about how I can drive through Boston in 5 minutes, or drive through looking at pretty parks instead of unsightly, suffocating bridges...
Over budget and years of construction - oh well. Put this blogger in the camp that says the Big Dig was, by far, one of the best construction projects the Commonwealth has ever seen. There's access to Logan Airport from anywhere in the city in minutes - and the Globe's complaining about unused ducts because of unforeseen problems? What a joke! Earth to the Globe: practically no one had cordless phones, never mind cellular, when Big Dig construction began.
Over budget and years of construction - oh well. Put this blogger in the camp that says the Big Dig was, by far, one of the best construction projects the Commonwealth has ever seen. There's access to Logan Airport from anywhere in the city in minutes - and the Globe's complaining about unused ducts because of unforeseen problems? What a joke! Earth to the Globe: practically no one had cordless phones, never mind cellular, when Big Dig construction began.
Friday, May 16, 2008
Marriage Equality: No Big Deal
Watching Keith Olbermann last night, I was excited to hear what he had to say about the move toward equality in California. It's the nation's largest state, with a full 10% of the entire US population. Surely, it's a harbinger of what's to come, right? Countdown's story ticker kept counting down and down, without a single mention of California's big story. Finally, halfway through the show, I got bored and moved on. It's clear that California's decision to become the second state across the country to welcome marriage equality isn't huge news.
The news wasn't much different across the networks. CNN's Anderson Cooper led off with the story, but it was a quick 10 minutes. PBS's Judy Woodruff tackled the subject as the second lead on the NewsHour, smooched in between China's 20,000 and Myanmar's 100,000-300,000 toll disasters. Perhaps in this day and age marriage equality's story was too prominent, even if it wasn't the lead - clearly, the media gets it: this is no big deal.
The Governor of California, Mr. Terminator, gets it too. He quickly issued a statement saying he'll oppose any attempt to write marriage equality off the books in California - which means suddenly the legislature and the Republican Governor is opposed to marriage bigotry, while the state's Supreme Court just ruled in favor of ending it. It would have been nice to have a Governor there who wasn't afraid to make the decision himself, by signing the marriage equality bill he was sent twice during his tenure - but that's all sour grapes now.
What's more important, and quite clear, is that same-sex marriage is just as insignificant to the majority of citizens in California as it was the citizens of Massachusetts, after all was said and done. The only before and after difference is the photos of happy couples, now legally wed, sharing in the same benefits and responsibilities that everyone else has access to across America. For the vast majority of the citizens across the both states, nothing has changed or will change - including for Team Homophobia. Those who are opposed to same-sex marriage will have the same right as ever, not to enter in one. Those who want to enter into one, glbt couples, will finally be given the equal right to do so, making the world a better place. It's a win/win, even if it's not a particularly loud one.
Of course, California's bigots are attempting to repeal the freedom to marry by creating a constitutional amendment question, which will almost certainly appear on November's ballot. It's not going to pass, just like it didn't pass in Massachusetts. The move from fear of the unknown to No Big Deal is rapid. Many states will follow California's lead, but as each state begins to welcome real equality, it won't even make Anderson Cooper's lead.
The news wasn't much different across the networks. CNN's Anderson Cooper led off with the story, but it was a quick 10 minutes. PBS's Judy Woodruff tackled the subject as the second lead on the NewsHour, smooched in between China's 20,000 and Myanmar's 100,000-300,000 toll disasters. Perhaps in this day and age marriage equality's story was too prominent, even if it wasn't the lead - clearly, the media gets it: this is no big deal.
The Governor of California, Mr. Terminator, gets it too. He quickly issued a statement saying he'll oppose any attempt to write marriage equality off the books in California - which means suddenly the legislature and the Republican Governor is opposed to marriage bigotry, while the state's Supreme Court just ruled in favor of ending it. It would have been nice to have a Governor there who wasn't afraid to make the decision himself, by signing the marriage equality bill he was sent twice during his tenure - but that's all sour grapes now.
What's more important, and quite clear, is that same-sex marriage is just as insignificant to the majority of citizens in California as it was the citizens of Massachusetts, after all was said and done. The only before and after difference is the photos of happy couples, now legally wed, sharing in the same benefits and responsibilities that everyone else has access to across America. For the vast majority of the citizens across the both states, nothing has changed or will change - including for Team Homophobia. Those who are opposed to same-sex marriage will have the same right as ever, not to enter in one. Those who want to enter into one, glbt couples, will finally be given the equal right to do so, making the world a better place. It's a win/win, even if it's not a particularly loud one.
Of course, California's bigots are attempting to repeal the freedom to marry by creating a constitutional amendment question, which will almost certainly appear on November's ballot. It's not going to pass, just like it didn't pass in Massachusetts. The move from fear of the unknown to No Big Deal is rapid. Many states will follow California's lead, but as each state begins to welcome real equality, it won't even make Anderson Cooper's lead.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Casinos, Speaker DiMasi and the Future
It's clear that the casino bill, while initially defeated, is not going away. This story is far from over - and, quite sadly, will only be getting more interesting as time moves on. Of course, there's the more noticeable ways in which this story refuses to die. Republicans in the Senate want to add casinos to the budget, as a budget amendment, even if all such a measure would do is waste time, since it would be defeated in conference committee.
Slightly more interesting - and disturbing - is the fight sure to come this summer on a Racino bill, which would allow the state's race tracks to have slot machines. Racinos present all of the same problems as casinos, without any of the "benefits," as casino lobbyists would call them. While such a measure has never passed in the House, it's been a very close vote. This year, it'll probably be closer. Furthermore, there's been some speculation that the administration will try to tie casinos to the Racino bill - a bill Governor Patrick once promised to veto.
All of this back room maneuvering is petty tame compared to the story between the lines - DiMasi's death threats and journalistic hit pieces. The death threats were so real that police were stationed at DiMasi's home - conversations were overheard about the Speaker's dog-walking schedule. All of this is pretty scary stuff - and could very well be tied to the Speaker's position on casinos, as Frank Phillips suggested in the Boston Globe. Even if that's not the case, it's likely most of the Globe's hit pieces on DiMasi are motivated by people wanting revenge on DiMasi for his efforts in blocking casinos. At least that's what DiMasi thinks. According to one of my sources, who had a chance to personally thank the Speaker for his leadership on casinos, he was quoted as saying "now I am paying for it." And he is.
So, if people are baffled by my support for the current Speaker, hopefully this blog will answer those questions. If they wonder why I'm not a bit more worried about his apparent transgressions, there's your answer. He's been about as good as we could expect any person in his position to be on the issues - far more progressive than Speakers in the past. He's also just as clean as any of the people next in line for his job, maybe cleaner - I'm just not buying these bogus stories coming out about him. I'm certainly not going to convict him in the court of public opinion, I'll let the AG's office handle it, if they think there's anything amiss. Meanwhile, we've seen advances in health care, equality, transportation and renewable energy. He's shown a new-found willingness to compromise with the administration. If a few anonymous sources in the Globe are trying to convict the Speaker before a case can even be made, I'm quite content to let other people pile on. It won't happen on this blog; Massachusetts has far larger problems - like blocking casinos again.
Slightly more interesting - and disturbing - is the fight sure to come this summer on a Racino bill, which would allow the state's race tracks to have slot machines. Racinos present all of the same problems as casinos, without any of the "benefits," as casino lobbyists would call them. While such a measure has never passed in the House, it's been a very close vote. This year, it'll probably be closer. Furthermore, there's been some speculation that the administration will try to tie casinos to the Racino bill - a bill Governor Patrick once promised to veto.
All of this back room maneuvering is petty tame compared to the story between the lines - DiMasi's death threats and journalistic hit pieces. The death threats were so real that police were stationed at DiMasi's home - conversations were overheard about the Speaker's dog-walking schedule. All of this is pretty scary stuff - and could very well be tied to the Speaker's position on casinos, as Frank Phillips suggested in the Boston Globe. Even if that's not the case, it's likely most of the Globe's hit pieces on DiMasi are motivated by people wanting revenge on DiMasi for his efforts in blocking casinos. At least that's what DiMasi thinks. According to one of my sources, who had a chance to personally thank the Speaker for his leadership on casinos, he was quoted as saying "now I am paying for it." And he is.
So, if people are baffled by my support for the current Speaker, hopefully this blog will answer those questions. If they wonder why I'm not a bit more worried about his apparent transgressions, there's your answer. He's been about as good as we could expect any person in his position to be on the issues - far more progressive than Speakers in the past. He's also just as clean as any of the people next in line for his job, maybe cleaner - I'm just not buying these bogus stories coming out about him. I'm certainly not going to convict him in the court of public opinion, I'll let the AG's office handle it, if they think there's anything amiss. Meanwhile, we've seen advances in health care, equality, transportation and renewable energy. He's shown a new-found willingness to compromise with the administration. If a few anonymous sources in the Globe are trying to convict the Speaker before a case can even be made, I'm quite content to let other people pile on. It won't happen on this blog; Massachusetts has far larger problems - like blocking casinos again.
What Would We Do Without Republicans?
They really know how to work on the important issues. That Arlen Specter - making America better every day by wasting his time and your's.
Monday, May 12, 2008
Reading that Hurts the Eyes
Seriously, no. No!
A group of antitax activists launched a campaign over the weekend to abolish the state income tax, setting the stage for a contentious public battle if the measure is added to the ballot this fall.The ugliest part?
Of course, if the income tax were complete gutted, all it would mean is not only massive cuts to everything, but also a much-increased sales tax, among others. Such taxes are far less progressive and far more painful to working and middle class citizens. Yet, as patently idiotic as the measure is, that doesn't mean it can be taken lightly; a lot of people will vote for it. Hopefully, the progressive community and those who care about the services they receive from the state every day will take this cause up. It's literally the most important cause we'll see in a long, long time.How would the state cut $12 billion?
That's three times the sum the state sends cities and towns for public schools. Laying off every state employee would only save about $5 billion, said Cam Huff, a private policy consultant who studies the state budget.
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
Town Meeting, Part Two
Here's to those gluttons for punishment who like to call themselves political junkies.
Swampscott's Town Meeting is worth reading about because it illustrates that good government, transparency and efficiency is on the rise. Last night's session saw Town Meeting approve, for the first time ever, a tax "Debt Exclusion," which is putting a question on the ballot to pay for certain projects on a one-year basis. It's not an override, because the town isn't paying debt - it's deciding to fix that roof, or build that new park in one year's time. It's a decision to avoid making our children pay for today's expenses. Best yet, it avoids paying for certain projects by creating capital expenditures - which is taking on a 10 year bonded loan that increases expenses, because of interest, and decreases transparency, because voters don't get to approve the debt.
So, here's to the voters of Swampscott - who will this year be given the chance to vote for a new fire truck, to replace the 1988 gem, by increasing taxes for one year only to pay for it, instead of paying for it with interest over the next ten. After the truck is paid for, taxes go back to normal and things move on. People like to know where their money is going and, thankfully, at the local level there's the ultimate potential for this kind of transparency and small d democracy. Let's hope more and more towns start to do this, because it's exactly the kind of creative thinking that could avoid some overrides to begin with.
Swampscott's Town Meeting is worth reading about because it illustrates that good government, transparency and efficiency is on the rise. Last night's session saw Town Meeting approve, for the first time ever, a tax "Debt Exclusion," which is putting a question on the ballot to pay for certain projects on a one-year basis. It's not an override, because the town isn't paying debt - it's deciding to fix that roof, or build that new park in one year's time. It's a decision to avoid making our children pay for today's expenses. Best yet, it avoids paying for certain projects by creating capital expenditures - which is taking on a 10 year bonded loan that increases expenses, because of interest, and decreases transparency, because voters don't get to approve the debt.
So, here's to the voters of Swampscott - who will this year be given the chance to vote for a new fire truck, to replace the 1988 gem, by increasing taxes for one year only to pay for it, instead of paying for it with interest over the next ten. After the truck is paid for, taxes go back to normal and things move on. People like to know where their money is going and, thankfully, at the local level there's the ultimate potential for this kind of transparency and small d democracy. Let's hope more and more towns start to do this, because it's exactly the kind of creative thinking that could avoid some overrides to begin with.
Tuesday, May 06, 2008
I'm a Citizen Journalist? And Other Peculiar New England Conventions
Whoa, Town Meeting does the weirdest things, like inspiring me to write a journalistic blog (of course, readers must click the link to read more on that).
Seriously, though, they're a good time - especially for people who have a sophomoric, political sense of humor (although, avoiding fits of laughter when speakers make silly straw-man points is a must - like when one speaker compared Jamaica Plain to Swampscott last night, as if they were the same). Also, it helps to try to be interested and to think of it like a giant game of clue - figuring out what frack is actually going on behind the scenes and what all those amendments are really about (it helps to have a partner togossip with bounce ideas off of).
In the meantime, Town Meeting members can actually do some good - like being part of the budget process, creating important bylaws, or voting to move forward an override to build a new school. Town Meeting is a peculiar New England trait, so hopefully readers are taking part in their community as I am in mine. It makes a difference.
Seriously, though, they're a good time - especially for people who have a sophomoric, political sense of humor (although, avoiding fits of laughter when speakers make silly straw-man points is a must - like when one speaker compared Jamaica Plain to Swampscott last night, as if they were the same). Also, it helps to try to be interested and to think of it like a giant game of clue - figuring out what frack is actually going on behind the scenes and what all those amendments are really about (it helps to have a partner to
In the meantime, Town Meeting members can actually do some good - like being part of the budget process, creating important bylaws, or voting to move forward an override to build a new school. Town Meeting is a peculiar New England trait, so hopefully readers are taking part in their community as I am in mine. It makes a difference.
Monday, May 05, 2008
Orozco Flying High?
One of Sara Orozco's first campaign newsletters came out today and clearly the campaign has momentum.
A major campaign milestone was reached after months of hard work and so many questions leading up to April 29 such as:Good news - and keep it up!! People should pay attention to this race, because Sara is courageously running against Senator Brown, a Republican in the true Bushiest sense. He takes a liking to swearing off at children and doing all in his power to keep equality from being a reality in Massachusetts. If people are interested in Sara's campaign, please go to www.SaraOrozco.com and volunteer. This is going to be a tough campaign and she'll need all the help she can get.
1. Would Sara and her volunteers collect the required 300 certified signatures from voters in the district to put her name on the ballot?
2. Would Sara be the only Democrat in the district to submit nomination papers?
3. Would 5:00 PM on April 29, 2008 ever arrive?
Perhaps you heard Team Orozco members exhale in unison when all three questions were answered with a resounding: Yes! Yes! Yes!
Saturday, May 03, 2008
You Don't Want a New Speaker
I'm with Charley. Speaker DiMasi has proven crucial in marriage equality, health care and in defeating casinos. In recent months, he's shown a great willingness to work with the administration - closing loopholes, securing money for roads and bridges and passing a fantastic renewable energy bill. Is he perfect? No. But he's proven to be the most progressive Speaker of the House in my memory - by a wide margin.
As Charley says, the three guys trying to line up to get next in line aren't going to be as good on the issues. Most of them are pro-casino and none of them have done as much on the critical issues Massachusetts is advancing. More worrisome is the lengths to which they're going to secure next-in-line status: the favors they're doling out doesn't exactly inspire confidence in these tough economic times.
The Good News? The Globe loves pushing the angle that DiMasi will be gone. It sells newspapers. However, like many media-driven stories, often times if the media says it enough, it can become true. There's blood in the water and none of it helps Speaker DiMasi get passed the sharks. If DiMasi does get ousted, expect Massachusetts to take one step back before we can go three steps forward.
As Charley says, the three guys trying to line up to get next in line aren't going to be as good on the issues. Most of them are pro-casino and none of them have done as much on the critical issues Massachusetts is advancing. More worrisome is the lengths to which they're going to secure next-in-line status: the favors they're doling out doesn't exactly inspire confidence in these tough economic times.
The Good News? The Globe loves pushing the angle that DiMasi will be gone. It sells newspapers. However, like many media-driven stories, often times if the media says it enough, it can become true. There's blood in the water and none of it helps Speaker DiMasi get passed the sharks. If DiMasi does get ousted, expect Massachusetts to take one step back before we can go three steps forward.
Friday, May 02, 2008
Thursday, May 01, 2008
Why We Need MassEquality
In case anyone was in doubt over how effective a strong lobbying organization like MassEquality is in this day and age, here's a portion of an email I got from them tonight.
Some people thought the battle was over after marriage equality was protected. Most, of course, realize that there are other, tougher legislative battles ahead - many of those battles represent the kind of causes that will again bring forth headlines in the papers. There are members of the GLBT community who are legally being discriminated at work or in finding housing, simply because they're transgender. There's an awful set of laws from 1913 which prevents out of state couples from enjoying equal rights here.
There are things that need to be fixed desperately - and, because of the dedication of all kinds of groups, including MassEquality, they can't be tucked away, at least for long. The big picture items are screaming for change and no force on Beacon Hill can stop that kind of momentum, they can only be slowed down. MassEquality is also working on this issue, and will certainly help advance it, but eventually these items will get passed. Even when we win those battles, we'll still need a MassEquality, even if only to make sure Beacon Hill never screws around with funding incredibly important programs, nor stops investing in preventing bullying, AIDS and other core GLBT causes.
Thankfully, we have a strong GLBT lobby on Beacon Hill making sure regular budget items, the kinds of things that impact lives everyday but often go unnoticed, won't ever be swept under the rug unnoticed by those who would otherwise lack the political courage to do the right thing, as happens in so many other states. We may not win every fight, but we'll certainly make sure the state is giving GLBT people - for the first time ever - it's fair share of political capital. So thanks to MassEquality for a job well done this year, and thanks to all the thousands of people in this state who have used it in order to take part in our ever-important movement. It's truly MassEquality members that make it strong.
For anyone who was wondering, "Gee, what's MassEquality going to do now?" I hope this answers the question. The nuts and bolts of why a MassEquality is necessary, going from here on out, will be budget battles. Like anything in life, advancing GLBT equality and causes takes money - money that's in the public's best interest to spend. However, even when times are good, it can be challenging to convince legislators that we need to do a better job protecting GLBT kids from being bullied at school. It can take a little political courage to get them to invest the money in HIV/AIDS prevention to help stem off that virus from making an even bigger comeback. These common-sense proposals aren't always easy to pass, or fund, and that's why there will always be a need for a MassEquality-type organization.Great news from the State House! Just a little while ago, the Massachusetts House approved several amendments to increase funding for programs supporting LGBT youth, seniors, victims of domestic violence and those living with HIV/AIDS:
And an additional $500,000 was included to help reduce disparities in HIV/AIDS funding.
- Funding for the LGBT Aging Project, which provides services and support for our seniors, increased by $20,000 to $80,000, a 33% increase over last year's funding.
- Department of Public health funding for school safety for LGBT youth was increased by $100,000 to $450,000, a 28.5% increase over last year's funding.
- Funding to support LGBT victims of domestic violence was increased by $100,000 to $350,000, a 40% increase over last year's funding.
Some people thought the battle was over after marriage equality was protected. Most, of course, realize that there are other, tougher legislative battles ahead - many of those battles represent the kind of causes that will again bring forth headlines in the papers. There are members of the GLBT community who are legally being discriminated at work or in finding housing, simply because they're transgender. There's an awful set of laws from 1913 which prevents out of state couples from enjoying equal rights here.
There are things that need to be fixed desperately - and, because of the dedication of all kinds of groups, including MassEquality, they can't be tucked away, at least for long. The big picture items are screaming for change and no force on Beacon Hill can stop that kind of momentum, they can only be slowed down. MassEquality is also working on this issue, and will certainly help advance it, but eventually these items will get passed. Even when we win those battles, we'll still need a MassEquality, even if only to make sure Beacon Hill never screws around with funding incredibly important programs, nor stops investing in preventing bullying, AIDS and other core GLBT causes.
Thankfully, we have a strong GLBT lobby on Beacon Hill making sure regular budget items, the kinds of things that impact lives everyday but often go unnoticed, won't ever be swept under the rug unnoticed by those who would otherwise lack the political courage to do the right thing, as happens in so many other states. We may not win every fight, but we'll certainly make sure the state is giving GLBT people - for the first time ever - it's fair share of political capital. So thanks to MassEquality for a job well done this year, and thanks to all the thousands of people in this state who have used it in order to take part in our ever-important movement. It's truly MassEquality members that make it strong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments