17% of country's private sector jobs created in Mass

Lynne picked up that statistic.

The new jobs report (national and state) are out for May, and Massachusetts once again is looking great in recovery compared to the rest of the union.

The Massachusetts unemployment rate held steady at 9.2 percent in May as the state’s economy added 15,800 jobs, the Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development said today.

According to a recent Twitter update by David Bernstein, 7,000 of the jobs were private sector, compared to 41,000 private sector jobs nationwide. That means that 17% of the new private sector jobs were in Massachusetts, which is pretty astounding.

Pretty astounding, indeed.

Baker's Hypocrisy Continues

Lynne beat me to it, but I've been meaning to blog today about Charlie Baker's most brazen form of hypocrisy yet. From a MassEquality email:

At the Massachusetts Republican Convention on Saturday, April 17, gubernatorial candidate Charles D. Baker came out in opposition to H. 1728/S. 1687 “An Act Relative to Gender Identity and Expression,” (also known as the Transgender Civil Rights Bill), which would outlaw employment discrimination against transgender people. As CEO of Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, however, Baker presided over a company that has for many years had a non-discrimination policy that protects applicants and employees on the basis of their gender identity.

In addition to stating his opposition to the Transgender Civil Rights Bill to reporters at the convention, his campaign circulated a flyer to convention delegates stating that Baker opposed “the Bathroom Bill,” -- the misleading name opponents of the bill use -- and would veto it if elected.

The irony is rich, given that Harvard Pilgrim -- to its credit -- has one of the state's strongest anti-discrimination policies, including for transgender people.

“Furthermore, Baker’s use of the term ‘Bathroom Bill’ in the flyer he distributed to convention delegates was a shameful attempt to use this badly-needed legislation to pander for delegate votes,” said Edmondson. “As the head of a company that gave workers a level playing field, Charlie Baker knows full well that protecting transgender people from discrimination has nothing to do with bathrooms and everything to do with attracting a skilled and diverse workforce.”

“This is so disappointing. So many in our community had such high hopes for this candidate,” said Executive Director Scott Gortikov. “I fear this is the Romney-fication of Charlie Baker. It’s stunning to me that he would borrow from the playbook of the radical social conservatives and condone this language of marginalization.”

My questions for Charlie Baker:

1) Who do you think you're kidding? You can try to rabidly flip-flop, appeasing the wingnut base, but you're just not going to be taken seriously by anyone with at least half a brain.

2) More importantly, why did you see fit to institute a policy of protections for transgender people in your workforce, as CEO of Harvard Pilgrim, but you wouldn't be willing to sign those very same protections for the transgender community across the state? Are they somehow less worthy than the transgender people who work at Harvard-Pilgrim?

Economic Prosperity for All?

Today, Lynne and I had Ben Forman on our LeftAhead podcast. It was a great show. I think one of the things that becomes clear is that while Greater Boston, especially the 128 bubble, has seen a large amount of economic growth over the past few decades -- it hasn't been shared by all. That's lead to a large disparity. One of the key things that made Massachusetts great in the past was the fact that we had large parts of the state where there was economic opportunity to find a good job and join the middle class. Most of those jobs are gone. In some parts of the state, new sectors emerged and continued to offer people in some communities the same opportunity. In the 11 cities MassINC identifies as Gateways, they haven't recovered with new, emerging fields like we've seen inside 128.

That can, of course, be changed -- maybe not with the same kinds of jobs, led by giant factories, employing thousands, but by hundreds of small businesses, employing dozens -- the bulk of which, according to Ben, would be in the business and service sector. We need to start better servicing those living in these communities, as well as work on the PR side to help lure more people to these communities -- and retain them. Speaking from experience, New Bedford was a cool place to live. Lynne loves living in Lowell. These are awesome communities that people should think about when they're considering where to open their small business or buy/rent their home/condo. With so many affordable units in great locations, these are the perfect places to locate -- inexpensive, plenty of talented people eager for jobs, decent public transportation, affordable housing and often very artsy, diverse cultural cuisines and scenes. With more small businesses moving in these communities, they can and will drive our state to a level of success for the Commonwealth I haven't seen in my lifetime -- because we won't be leaving certain parts of the state behind.

The Always Impressive Eileen Donoghue

Thanks to the always-impressive blogging of the great Lynne Lupien, I've been introduced and reintroduced (at least electronically) to the wonderful Eileen Donoghue. Today, Eileen took a courageous and politically risky choice to wade into the murky waters of one the ugliest of Lowell political battles yet, which is saying a lot. For those of you not familiar with Lowell, 6 members of the Lowell city council appear to have violated state law by axing a city manager employee's position (for political reasons). Here's what Eileen had to say from the link above,

The troubling fact is that the six councilors’ recent action would appear to violate the spirit and intent of the Plan E form of government — and sets some dangerous precedents going forward. Simply restoring funding for the position, then, while a necessary step, would not seem to be a fully adequate remedy.
…
In this regard, Massachusetts General Law chapter 43, section 107 provides that neither the City Council nor any of its members “shall direct or request … or in any way take part in” the removal of any person in that portion of the city government for whose administration the city manager is responsible. The framers of this law thought this check and balance was so important that there are serious penalties for a violation of the statute, including fines, prison time, removal from office, and even making the elected official permanently ineligible for “any office or position, elective or otherwise, in the service of the city.”
...
To condone the action of the six councilors here is to set a dangerous precedent. If they can “de-fund” the manager’s assistant this year, maybe next year they will de-fund the city’s CFO or the DPD director or whoever else is not to their liking. In addition, if they can appropriate the manager’s authority with respect to personnel, what will stop them from unduly interfering with his duties and responsibilities in other respects?

One of my least favorite things about politics is the fact that it makes a lot of very good people risk-averse. Not many people choose to wade in hot waters, because what's in it for them? That's how the thinking goes, even when the issues are front and center, imperative to government and society. Being risk-averse may help someone get elected, but it doesn't always help government run effectively. It doesn't help make what's right become what happens. It's often how good policy dies.

Eileen Donoghue should be credited for standing up for what's right, for acting like the grown-up in a room full of kids -- and for having political fortitude aplenty. We need more Eileen Donoghues.

She's also a very talented politician, smart and competent. For those who don't remember, she was about a week or two away from winning Nicki Tsongas's seat, a seat Tsongas almost embarrassingly lost to an inept Republican, a narrowly-missed national embarrassment. I didn't know much about Donoghue back then; I'm glad I know more now.

In fact, I wish I had the chance to vote for Donoghue for something... like, say, State Treasurer. Hmm? After years of Cahill's gross incompetence, maybe we could use someone like a Donoghue -- someone who's not a Beacon Hill insider, someone with talent, intelligence, drive... and ethics. Oodles and oodles of ethics. Eileen?

Lynne Owns Cahill

She eats him for breakfast. Mmm.. Tastes like chicken.

Protect the Dogs

Lynne and I agree as usual.

We should judge our own race by the way we treat those whose lives we control....

I will vote for the ban in November, and encourage you to do the same. Unless you aren’t human, you can’t help but be moved by pictures like these. This is what a happy greyhound looks like. Let’s ensure that all greyhounds are bred for loving homes, not gambling profit.

As does Granby's Mark Bail.

Update: I put a poll on BlogLeftMass asking if we, as a group, should support the measure to ban greyhound racing. Please vote.

A Deval Patrick Must Read

Lynne from LeftinLowell got a half hour with the Gov this morning. Do read about it!

Some highlights: Governor Patrick hopes to sign the Life Sciences Initiative and renewable energy bill within three weeks time (awesome!!). There's lots of planned investment in the state's roads, bridges and public universities (mostly bond bills, but good ones in such a tough economic time). The Governor's found some pretty nifty and creative ways to save money - and immediately translate the savings into projects desperately needed.

But, all in all, the best part about it is this: it represents another sign that Governor Patrick intends to get back to his roots - the grassroots. If he truly gets back on track, his forgettable winter and fall will be forgotten. We'll also make even more progress as a state. April is shaping up to be a wonderful month.

More discussion at BMG.

Major Casino Conflict of Interest

It seems like every time there's someone who really sticks their neck out to support casinos in Massachusetts, that someone has a serious and major conflict of interest. In that vein, Left in Lowell found a biggie.

The Sun Editor, Jim Campanini, has once again failed to disclose a conflict of interest with regards to his role as editor of the Lowell Sun. Par for the course, I suppose, but this one’s a doozy.... A week ago, an editorial appeared in the Sun (we wrote a rebuttal) telling the legislature to consider Gov. Patrick’s plan for casinos in Massachusetts (saying, “Frankly, we see no way out of the state’s fiscal dilemma without engaging in a serious debate on legalized gambling.”).

Why does the public not know that Mr. Campanini appears to have a major stake in a stable of racers that frequent Suffolk Downs? (We found out thanks to a tip from an alert reader.)

Does that sound like the actions of a disinterested and objective journalist? No. It is, however, just one more example of how this editor is ruining his paper with conflicts of interest, whether it’s in politics and protecting his buddies, or in protecting his stake in horse racing.

Par for the course, indeed.