Today's LeftAhead Podcast: Senator Sonia Chang-Diaz

Mike has the full write-up at LeftAhead, but here's the general gist of today's jam-packed show.

The ever-intense MA Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz joined us today, centering on redistricting, transgender rights, and education. Not only is she a progressive leader in LGBT issues, she chairs the Joint Committee on education and is vice-chair of the Special Joint Committee on Redistricting.

I was impressed with the Senator's ability to squeeze in a lot of details in such a short amount of time, never mind switching between three unrelated topics at the drop of a hat. Her intellect and energy is why she's quickly become one of the most effective senators out there, never mind one of the leaders in the Commonwealth's small-d movement of progressive politics.

Today's show ended up being more timely than I would have suspected, with Congressman Frank's retirement, but we managed to talk about redistricting at both the local and congressional levels, as well as talk about some of the meta that goes behind it -- such as the goals of the committee and the process behind it. We also have some frank discussion on the Transgender Rights bill, both the importance of getting this done and the fact that there's still a little unfinished business surrounding it, since public accommodation was left outside of the bill. On education, mainly focused on her bill tackling the state's drop out problem, in which 8,000 kids in Massachusetts are dropping out every year.

For people who want to skip to the parts of the show they're most interested in, redistricting was the first topic and then we got to the transgender rights bill at about 14:20. At 24:50, we finally got to education. We didn't have as much time as I would have liked to take on this issue, but even just the five minutes we had was enough to tackle some key aspects of her bill on how she thinks we could be better at getting kids to stay in school.

What $13,500 Can Buy You

Short answer? A lot of influence.

Long answer? Click that link, but here's a snippet.

The affidavit claims that for her cash payments, Wilkerson worked it: She sent letters to all city councilors demanding a hearing on liquor licenses. She convinced Walker to write a column pushing the joint's application - by painting the holdup as proof the city licensing board had it out for non-insiders.

And, allegedly, she then threatened the city council: Get Deja Vu its full license or she'd hold up the election bill. City Council President Maureen Feeney got mad, the complaint alleges, but agreed to meet with Wilkerson.

I'm not going to be writing a lot about Senator Wilkerson's latest - and probably last - major fuck up, but I must say that I'm proud that I stood up for what was right - at great personal cost, I may add (seriously) - because our public officials must promote the public trust, not destroy it. Sadly, my suspicions were confirmed - in ways that even I couldn't imagine - but thankfully it happened now and not November 5th.

People like Wilkerson are the reason why so many people don't trust government, which makes it all too easy to block important reforms that would improve the lives of Americans, thus giving them real reason to not trust government. Cynicism is a festering disease that feeds on itself, far easier to catch than to heal. Politicians are not special - they're people, like you or I. They work for us, not the other way around; we actually pay their salaries. A disregard for the law or an unwillingness to work on behalf of constituents is unacceptable coming from a public servant. Most politicians get it, only some don't. Thankfully, what we get out of this whole election and Wilkerson experience is Sonia Chang Diaz. As bad as Wilkerson was, Chang Diaz will be good. So a bad story - tragic, even - ends well. The system, though damaged, still works.

Party Politics at its Best

Here's the latest press release from Sonia Chang-Diaz's campaign, photo included.

DEMOCRATIC PARTY LEADERSHIP ENDORSE CHANG-DÍAZ FOR STATE SENATE

Governor Patrick: Chang-Díaz a "Great Choice for the Democratic Party"

BOSTON -- Before a standing room only crowd of supporters and community activists at the Harriet Tubman House (United South End Settlements), Governor Deval Patrick, Speaker Sal DiMasi, Majority Leader Byron Rushing and Democratic Party Chairman John Walsh unequivocally endorsed Sonia Chang-Díaz as the Democratic Nominee for State Senate in the Second Suffolk. Chang-Díaz won the Democratic Primary on September 16th.

"To be absolutely clear and unambiguous: As your governor and as a Democrat, I endorse Sonia Chang-Díaz ," said Governor Patrick. "Sonia comes to this role and to this challenge as a teacher at a time when the schools need us…and as an experienced politician, frankly – at a time when we need all the wisdom we can get up on Beacon Hill. Ladies and gentlemen, this a great choice for the Democratic Party and a great choice for the 2nd Suffolk."

Patrick also gave a nod to the hard work of the Chang-Díaz campaign. "I saw a sign just outside that said 'This District is Not for Sale,'" he said. "And by the way, that sign is right. This district is for not for sale…this nomination was earned."
Speaker DiMasi also threw his strong support behind Chang-Díaz : "I am here to wholeheartedly and completely endorse the campaign of Sonia Chang-Díaz …She is a hard worker….She has a great ability to lead in this district. She is absolutely right on every single one of the issues that this district faces…[and] I will do everything I can to help her get her elected in November."

Majority Leader Byron Rushing, who emceed the event and offered his own strong endorsement of Chang-Díaz, read out the names of the elected officials and State Party Committee members who had endorsed. The list included State Senate President Therese Murray (who was traveling outside the country), Representatives Jeff Sanchez, Marie St. Fleur, and Marty Walz, City Councilors Bill Linehan and John Tobin, as well as Sheriff Andrea Cabral.

Chang-Díaz spoke at the end to rousing applause. "Over the next four weeks," she said, "with the help of the Mass Democratic Party and those here today, we will again reach out to the voters of the Second Suffolk District. We will again go door to door and talk to people about their real problems and their real concerns and about what we can do together through State Government to build real solutions. And we will again ask them to join us in this campaign for new leadership."

When a candidate wins a primary, it's of paramount importance that the party unite behind that person. Sonia Chang-Diaz won a hard fought, hotly contested battle - which has left some bitter and angry and acting like a bunch of toddlers throwing a tantrum. Thankfully, this party's leaders have a firm grasp of the situation. This is how people who consider themselves a part of a political party should act. I'll always encourage primary battles, but if you want to be a member of a party, you shouldn't work against the person who wins that primary. Enough said.

For Wilkerson, the Truth Hurts

One of the more perplexing arguments coming from Dianne Wilkerson after she went down in defeat on the night of the primary was that Sonia Chang Diaz spent her way to victory - that supporters like Barbara Lee, the philanthropist, 'bought' the district. Given the previously released campaign finance reports, that seemed absurd: while Sonia certainly raised a great deal of money this election, especially for a challenger of an incumbent, she was still outspent by tens of thousands.

Well, sometimes the things that hurt the most is truth. There's no need for added commentary to the latest Chang-Diaz Press Release - tackling Wilkerson's claims that the Democratic Nominee bought the district.

FACT CHECK

Dianne Wilkerson has repeatedly claimed (on Election night and again at her sticker campaign announcement event last night) that this election was "bought," calling out progressive philanthropist and Chang-Diaz donor Barbara Lee in particular:

Boston Herald (9/16/08): "My fear is that people will think this district is for sale," she said, claiming she was outspent. "There has been so much money spent in this process. It has been unprecedented for us."

Boston Phoenix (9/16/08): She called out Barbara Lee, the progressive philanthropist who helped back Chang-Diaz, as having bought the district, in so many words.

PolitickerMA (9/17/08): At her Election Night party Tuesday night, Wilkerson said that Lee spent an "inordinate amount of money" on the race, creating the perception "that this district is for sale."

Boston Herald (9/24/08): At a rally in Dorchester last night, Wilkerson said she would run as a Democrat in a sticker campaign "to make clear to all that are paying attention that this district is not for sale."

THE FACTS:

- Barbara Lee, known for her support of female candidates, including many of Boston's female candidates of color (St. Fleur, Dorcena Forry, Cabral, Allen, Mota and Sen. Wilkerson herself in prior years), donated $500 to the Chang-Diaz campaign this year, the legal campaign finance limit.

- Per the most recent campaign finance reports, Dianne Wilkerson raised and spent more money than Chang-Diaz this year -- $131,775 compared to $102,888. That figure is in addition to tens of thousands of dollars' worth of independent expenditures on Wilkerson's behalf, including mail pieces from labor organizations and political advocacy groups.

- Dianne Wilkerson received nearly $100,000, 76% of her contributions, from donors outside the district, including $14,000 dollars from lobbyists and PACs.
- In comparison, 49% of Chang-Diaz's donations were from donors inside the district, and 69% of her donations were from donors giving $100 or less. She received no money from PACs and only $100 from a lobbyist.

For Senator Wilkerson to make claims that the election was "bought" by one outside donor is not just false -- it's ludicrous when you put it up against the facts of who has actually funded her primary campaign and Chang-Diaz's primary campaign.

Wilkerson's Gone Too Far

Dianne Wilkerson wants a second write-in campaign, this time against the Democratic Nominee of the Democratic Party, Sonia Chang-Diaz. As an unapologetic party loyalist, I find Dianne's latest actions outrageous as a sitting State Senator and someone who attended the Democratic National Convention, presumably as a delegate.

Note to readers: publicly opposing the Democratic Nominee (through contributions or otherwise) is expressly against Democratic State Committee regulations and would make any such members subject to removal (per Section 3c of the State Party's bylaws). The same goes for most of the local town, city and ward committees - as most share the same or similar provision. Dianne Wilkerson herself is likely in violation of this policy if she is a member of her city or ward committee (she is not a member of the Democratic State Committee).

The larger question: Why did it have to come to this? Wilkerson's completely lost touch with reality. She is not the first person to have been challenged by constituents and found wanting; she won a primary challenge against an incumbent to gain her seat in the first place. Anyone who purports to be a true party loyalist - which should include every elected state official in the Democratic Party - ought to be well aware of the old adage that we come together after the primary. This is party politics 101. What is it to say that she now thinks she is more than the will of her party - the thousands of people who voted in the primary?

I'm a party loyalist because I recognize that we can't accomplish practically anything in government without a wide coalition. The party system is still the best vehicle that exists to create those coalitions. I happen to believe in progressive, populist causes, empowering everyday citizens and keeping the country out of unnecessary wars - hence my registration to the Democratic Party. That a supposed party loyalist and elected representative of my party would want to buck that system and screw the team is a notion both repugnant and revealing.

Dianne Wilkerson needs to get over it. Of course, she's entitled to a recount; that's fine. But a sticker campaign is just whining. It's an attempt to subvert the will of the voters and abandoning the core principals of our electoral system. A true leader would own the loss, clean up their act, continue to engage in the community and run again in two years. Dianne Wilkerson chose to mimic the politics of Joe Lieberman when she could have pulled a Michael Dukakis, who lost an election for governor as an incumbent and won again four years later. We need more dignity in politics, not more arrogance.

Her attempts will likely fail - but let the record be clear: not only will her campaign waste precious resources that could be going to important causes, but anyone that continues to support Dianne Wilkerson is going against the will of the Democratic Party. We have rules in place to participate within the frameworks of the party; Dianne Wilkerson has chosen to abandon them. That's her right, though she'll have to live with the consequences.

Governor Patrick, Mayor Menino and likely MassEquality won't be on her corner this time - expect them to all endorse Sonia, or at least stay out. Without all that help - and the army of volunteers that come with them - I don't know why or how Wilkerson thinks she has a chance at a sticker campaign in which her opponent, the Democratic nominee, will be on the ballot. This is vastly different than her last sticker campaign - much more like this one.

In the meantime, let the record be clear: anyone in the party apparatus who now continues to support Dianne Wilkerson's campaign is in clear violation of party rules and subject to removal from State, City, Town and Ward committees. Furthermore, any organization that continues to support Dianne's candidacy will have to answer to their membership - the financial contributions and volunteer hours that fuel these organizations. There's an easy decision to make here on solid moral grounds, but I'm always a man of the carrot and the stick. In declaring her decision to run a sticker campaign, Wilkerson's gone too far. How many people will jump off the cliff with her?

Post-Primary Wrap Up

Mike and I chatted up Tuesday's election on yesterday's episode of LeftAhead. The show ran around 40 minutes or so - Lynne had technical difficulties - and I used it to make the point that, thankfully, we're making progress in changing the tenor of Beacon Hill.

But enough self-plugging. It's time to plug this article by Chris Faraone in the Boston Phoenix. It's the best descriptive piece on Sonia's victory party yet, though I don't really know what b-boy demographic is (LOL). Gotta love those rascals at the Phoenix.

Mission Accomplished

Today's primary turned out as good as any progressive could have possibly hoped for. According to Bay Windows, Carl Sciortino defeated his challenger. Sonia Chang Diaz pulled out the nail biter and managed to overcome the tremendous institutional support Wilkerson pulled together in a 51-49% vote. Jon Hecht, of Watertown, claimed victory in his tough sticker campaign. These are all strong, progressive voices who will make a difference in Beacon Hill. They won tough and heavily contested primaries and will now be able to work, or continue to work in Carl's case, for the progressive causes that will make a difference in the lives of those who need it most, most especially the average voter.

The only failure of the night was the seriously uphill battle in unseating Paul Donato, one of the state's most entrenched and powerful incumbents - he's a DINO that's lived to see another day, but he certainly was sent a message loud and clear. Even when we fail, we win - just consider the fact that Donato voted for ending the 1913 discriminatory bill that prevented out of staters from marrying here, when in years past he was unforgiving in his anti-equality stances.

The work is not over, though. Among the five state candidates I've endorsed, progressives facing tough challenges who could make a tremendous difference in this state, one has yet to actually face her big election day. Sara Orozco didn't have a primary challenge, but she's facing a tough anti-equality, fringe-right incumbent as an out, proud latino woman. She still has some time before the election, but this is now the race in which progressives must rally around because winning this seat is big. We have a chance to truly change the dynamic in the senate - sending in Jamie Eldridge, Sonia and Ken Donnelly will all make a difference in the tenor and ability for progressives to build coalitions from within that body. The importance of adding another bonafide, energetic and hardworking progressive to the mix - and subtracting one of the state's worst politicians - can not be overstated. We've been changing Beacon Hill one politician at a time - and the results are starting to bear fruit. Soon, we'll have the numbers and coalitions to bring the kind of change that will truly impact the lives of the people of this state.

Sonia's Endorsements Grow

You can add BlueMassGroup to the list.

PolitickerMa has a neat story comparing Wilkerson's robocalls (and endorsements) from the Governor, Mayor and Congressman Capuano to Sonia's long list newspaper endorsements - and comes up with this:

Putting any political risk aside, Stephen Ansolabehere, a Harvard political scientist, said it is unlikely the auto-calls will persuade voters. Ansolabehere has studied how effective different modes of voter contact are and recalled that "robo-calls are pretty ineffective, especially compared with in-person canvassing."

Ansolabehere noted, however, that newspaper endorsements can play an important role, especially in statewide races where they've been shown to bring in one percentage point in vote share. In this race, which is not statewide, Chang-Diaz has notably received the endorsements of the Boston Globe, the Boston Herald, Bay Windows, El Mundo and the South End News.

Now that's not a huge swing, but it's something tangible - it's also something tangible to add to the momentum Sonia clearly has going into tomorrow. If she just gets her people to the polls, she could win this race by a wide margin. That's a difficult feat to make happen, though, so I fully expect this race to be extremely close - which is why I plan on showing up to her office early tomorrow morning and helping her anyway I can. For the sake of having leadership we can be proud of, I can't sit still and just watch this election happen.

Yes!!!

The best news I've heard all week:

THE BOSTON GLOBE makes the following endorsements in three competitive Democratic primary races Tuesday:

The Globe endorses challenger Sonia Chang-Diaz.

Allow me to quickly address those who have tried to quell my speech over my support for Sonia: change is inevitable. It's happening this Tuesday in the Second Suffolk, because Chang-Diaz is by far the better pick. Mark my words: most of those who have been fighting against Chang-Diaz will be happy to have her by this time next year.

BTW: The Herald also endorsed Sonia.

Update: The Second Suffolk Trifecta - Sonia Chang-Diaz wins the Bay Windows endorsement, in was the strongest plea of them all. They also borrowed from the title of my guest column in there a month or so ago: Enough is enough. Hat Tip on this update, as well as even more endorsements, to diarist Shirley Kressel over at BlueMassGroup.

Candidates I Wish I Could Vote For on Tuesday:

I've never been a huge fan of endorsements; I don't think they sway very many voters. That said, if I believe strongly enough to support a candidate and become interested in their race, I may as well say it out loud for everyone to hear. So, for the pleasure of my readers, the following people make me passionate enough that I only wish I got the opportunity to vote for them in these supremely competitive elections. If any of you feel as passionately as I do, please click on the link to their website and find ways you can help in this last week of the primary season.

For State Senate: Sara Orozco & Sonia Chang-Diaz.

For State Representative: Pat McCabe in Medford, Jon Hecht in Watertown & Carl Sciortino in Somerville.

I believe these are five candidates who, if elected (or reelected, in Carl's case), would do a lot to bolster the progressive movement in Massachusetts. They're candidates who have an extensive grasp of policy, as well as the energy and drive to bring about the kind of change the people of this state want. Make no mistake about it; these are people who will make a difference.

There's been a lot of progress since Deval's been in office - and a lot of that has to do with the progressive change in the Beacon Hill legislature. These five people will ensure that not only will things keep moving in the right direction, but that they do so even faster, with leadership that will make us proud. I wish I could be at all five places on election day, but since I can't, I hope readers will find a way to get involved in their most important hours of need.

Finally, most of these candidates have done interviews on LeftAhead, the Massachusetts Political Podcast. If you need to find reasons to be enthused, go take a listen. These are people who know their stuff and will do a lot of good, if elected.

Sonia/Wilkerson Debate in Video - Sonia Rocks

Lest anyone think this is just an accountability debate, the real reason to vote for Sonia Chang Diaz is because she gets it. Here she is on Cori reform, an issue that I'm sure is very important to 2nd Suffolk District voters.

But I also can't forget why I first got interested in this race: I can't fathom a time to vote for someone who breaks the law, numerous times, and thinks he or she can get away with it.

An audience member asked what both Wilkerson and Chang-Diaz would do to uphold campaign finance laws.

Wilkerson will "try her best." That's all she could say. Literally - and amazingly pathetic. She's just not listening.

The difference between the two of them here is, well, enlightening.


There is a clear choice for State Senator in this race. There's a candidate who takes the job seriously - and not just for granted. That clear choice, that person who takes this job seriously, is not Senator Wilkerson.

For all the dirty details, go visit Mike's site.

The Problem With Wilkerson

Despite what some would suggest, the problem with Senator Wilkerson isn't that voters just don't know her record; it's that Second Suffolk District voters have had decades to become intimately aware of what the Senator's all about. The problem with Dianne Wilkerson isn't that people aren't reading past the headlines; it's that district voters know all the sordid details that Wilkerson creates for herself campaign finance report after campaign finance report. The problem with Senator Wilkerson isn't the headlines; it's that the headlines write themselves.

The problem with Senator Wilkerson is that, at some point, almost anyone will realize bad behavior can't be rewarded. The problem is that at some point voters will say "enough is enough" and vote for the better alternative. The problem for Wilkerson, it seems, is the time is at hand.
______________________________
Help Keep Ryan's Take Going

More on Sonia's Poll

Mike put on his citizen journalist's hat and did the research on the poll showing that Sonia Chang-Diaz has a 17% lead on incumbent Sen. Dianne Wilkerson. Everyone who has any doubts about the poll's veracity ought to go read it.

The Chang-Díaz folk claim a combined lead on voters who lean/are probable/definitely voters for the candidates. Those are Chang-Diaz 47.2%, Wilkerson 29.7% and undecided 23%.That combines the undecided with a margin of error of 4.8%. Cohen is quick to say he wants Chang-Diaz to win but knows that four weeks before a party primary is a long time in politics. Many things could happen. "I can't say Sonia's definitely going to win, but I like the results," he adds.

So, as always, a poll is a snapshot in time, but this particular picture is not only very positive, but four weeks from when the people will mark down their choices at the booth. This is like taking a picture of a bride and groom before they say I do. They're going to say I do, it's only a formality.

Other things we learn from Mike's post:

• Even in traditional Wilkerson strongholds, Sonia's holding her own. Barring anything unforeseen happening, she won't lose big anywhere.
• The incumbent protection racket - I mean party organizations willing to ignore their constituency - don't represent the will of the people. In fact, they ignore the will of the people and their constituent base at their own peril, as well as at the cost of their integrity.
• This poll builds off previous polls. Last election, when Sonia came in a surprisingly close second, results only showed she could make it a race - never that she'd actually win. She ended up running out of time last election, but she's used the last two years well. It stands to reason that this newest poll is an extension of the last. Now that Sonia's built up her name and credibility within the district, the edge and biggest advantage that Wilkerson once had is gone.

Update: MaPoliticker has much more, including this:

In an interview with PolitickerMA.com Tuesday, Chang-Diaz's pollster, Dan Cohen at Connection Strategies, said that not only was the firm careful about who it interviewed for the survey, but it used a turnout model that would, in theory, favor Wilkerson (D-Boston).

"We used a turnout model where we expect the largest percentage of turnout coming from those neighborhoods were Wilkerson did best," Cohen said.

And more:

David Paleologos, a pollster at Suffolk University, didn't question the poll's results. Paleologos said the most important factor in these polls is determining the likelihood that the respondents are going to vote.

"You need to establish voter intensity," he said. "And you can define likely voters in two ways."

First, Paleologos said, the pollster can look at the voter history and determine if the voter cast a ballot in recent similar elections. And second, the pollster can ask the respondent the likelihood that he or she will vote.

Cohen said he used both standards. His company called voters that had voted in the last recent low turnout Democratic primaries. Then the questioner asked the respondent at the beginning of the interview how likely they were to vote in September.

Sonia's Beating Sen. Wilkerson in the Polls!

AKA Wilkerson's Going Down

The boys at BMG beat me to it, but Sonia Chang-Diaz has opened up a whopping double-digit lead over incumbent Sen Dianne Wilkerson. Of course, no one should be surprised. Here's part of the campaign press release:

JAMAICA PLAIN – Sonia Chang-Díaz's Campaign for State Senate released the results of an internal tracking poll today showing her ahead of Senator Dianne Wilkerson by a wide margin --17.5% -- among likely Democratic Primary voters.

Despite the fact that Wilkerson has received numerous endorsements from legislative leaders and political organizations, the poll shows that the voters of the Second Suffolk District are overwhelmingly looking for a change. Wilkerson, who recently admitted to once again breaking numerous campaign finance laws, had only 25.1% of likely primary voters say she deserves to be reelected, with 46.9% saying it is time to elect someone new.

Those results are translating into what will hopefully be a head-to-head victory lap for Team Chang-Diaz. The campaign still has to do the running and finish the race, but with any luck Wilkerson won't even be in sight at the finishing line. Here's the head-to-head numbers:

In a head-to-head contest, Chang-Díaz led 47.2% to 29.7% with 23.0% undecided.

There's a lot of undecideds, but even if just 3% of them swing Chang-Diaz's way, that means a victory for Team Sonia. In other words, something drastic is going to have to change for Wilkerson to put up what will now have to be deemed a major upset. Given her track record, I have my doubts.

The longtime incumbent is now known primarily for her lapses of judgment, including long-term abuse of the public trust (and law). While she has done a lot for the district and particularly the GLBT community, she is no longer fit for office. Let’s recap why:

Just this August, she reached a settlement with the Attorney General’s office over her latest violations of campaign finance law. She paid over $10,000 in fines and had to forgo over $30,000 in reimbursement for improper uses of campaign funds.

Two years ago, she didn’t bother to collect the trivial 300 nomination signatures, had to run a sticker campaign and was almost defeated by then newbie Sonia Chang-Diaz. We should expect more from such a long-term incumbent.

Also two years ago, she stopped paying her condo fees for many months, eventually owing over $13,000. Her unit faced foreclosure.

In 1997, she pleaded guilty to not filing or paying taxes for three years, from 1991 through 1994. Besides paying up, she was placed under house arrest for 30 days per a federal judge. Furthermore, she admitted not reporting $27,000 in political donations and could not account for $18,000 in reimbursements directly to her. For twice breaking curfew while under house arrest, she ended up at a halfway house for 30 days.

People are obviously starting to listen (even the media's catching on). Of course, the South End News clearly gets the support Sonia has in the district. They went out canvassing with her!

On the rainy Friday South End News spent canvassing the neighborhood with Chang-Díaz, nearly every person who came to the door not only knew the candidate but also said they’d likely be voting for her. Only one man was unwilling to pledge his support, saying that he needed more information before making his decision.

Mostly, though, the candidate heard encouraging words. One man, leaving his apartment to venture out into the rain, spotted Chang-Díaz on the sidewalk, smiled and offered, "You have our votes, don’t worry."

"I think this time around you’ll get my vote because we’re sick of Dianne Wilkerson," said a woman who came to the door of a garden level Concord Square apartment.

Michael Bono, a South End resident and a recently retired City Hall employee, said that Chang-Díaz would definitely have his vote and offered her an umbrella. "I think it’s time for a change, you always need a change," he said, adding that people he met through his work spoke well of Chang-Díaz. "I love Dianne [Wilkerson] and I know her, I’ve worked with Dianne. But I still think it’s time for change."

Sonia's had years to campaign in her district and clearly made the best of it. She's no longer saddled down by the fact that it's a sticker campaign - and in a sticker campaign, there's nothing better than to have institutional support. That support won't be as much help now. For starters, how many of them knew about Wilkerson's latest foray into crimes and misdemeanors before it happened? That's got to be a serious breach of trust for those organizations.

Secondly, I'd question if, with these kind of poll results, much of Wilkerson's institutional support would even want to dig their feet in on this race. Why should they? There's, of course, a lot of other competitive races for them to work on: the big Watertown race and Carl Sciortino being the big primaries that will make a difference in the progressive community. These are smart organizations filled with smart people: they're going to spend their resources wisely. Right now, that's just not in Wilkerson's campaign. There are other progressives to protect and advocate for who have never needed to plead guilty to serious crimes, never mind twice and once recently.

Lastly, here's a fun poll that sums up how the district actually feels about this race.

My Bay Windows Column: Wilkerson Must Go

Mike and I penned a Bay Windows column appearing in today's paper, following Tuesday's podcast, asking that Senator Wilkerson do the right thing and step down.

We were told, over and over again, that she could clean up her ways. Even just before this latest deal with the Attorney General, most of us believed it. We gave her second and third chances, only to have our trust betrayed each time, most recently by this latest scandal, one that went on for a stunning five years. Enough is enough. If the senator would like to restore our trust, she should do the right thing and step down. She’ll still have our thanks for her courageous votes, but it’s time for new leadership.

Furthermore,

Of course, the odds that Senator Wilkerson will willingly step down are slim. Obviously, our community can’t depend on her to make the right call. If she can’t manage step down on her own accord, leaders in our community and others whom we work with must stop covering for the senator’s bad behavior: it’s a detriment to the entire GLBT and progressive movements, making it appear as though we could care less about the law, so long as we get our votes.

The progressive community must stand for high ethics in this case, lest we be labelled hypocrites. We demand honest and fair government fueled by people-power. It's hard to see where repeated law-breaking public servants fits into the progressive landscape of candidate biography. Certainly, Wilkerson isn't the reformed type - her latest plea deal, for crimes that took place over five years, was only her latest in a long litany of epic misjudgments, crimes and misdemeanors. We must demand more - and, luckily, there's an alternative progressive candidate who offers that in Sonia Change-Diaz.

Wilkerson: It's Time to Go

Mike is right, it's well past time for Senator Dianne Wilkerson to either retire or be unseated. Her latest ethical lapse of judgement is perhaps her worst, and she's paying a mighty fine because of it: $10k.

State Senator Dianne Wilkerson has agreed to pay a $10,000 fine as part of a settlement with the attorney general's office in which the Boston lawmaker admitted violating campaign finance laws for five years....

The agreement stems from a Suffolk Superior Court civil lawsuit filed in 2005 alleging scores of campaign law violations, which included failure to report $26,935 in political donations and failure to explain $18,277 paid to her by her political committee. The lawsuit accused Wilkerson of using campaign funds for "personal benefits," accepting prohibited contributions, making improper reimbursements to herself and others, and failing to disclose certain contributions and expenditures in campaign filings.

As much as I love the fact that she's been a leader on glbt rights, I'm tired of the GLBT community continuing to prop her up against a very solid, glbt-friendly challenger in Sonia Chang-Diaz. Her leadership does not excuse her very obvious and self-admitted wrong doing. Enough is enough. We can do better than Senator Wilkerson. It's time for Senator Wilkerson to go.

Sen Wilkerson's "3,000" Signatures & More

On the surface of this article, it looks like there's some good news for Senator Wilkerson: she's "not taking any chances," and has 10x the necessary signatures, over 3,000 that she turned in (more on that next paragraph). While that certainly sounds good, doesn't the Globe emphasizing it just remind voters she was so incompetent as to forget to get her signatures last time? It's not as if she turned in her signatures last cycle, thinking she had enough, only to fall just behind - like this candidate did. Note to the Wilkerson Campaign: Get better messaging people.

Sadly, it actually gets worse. Today's Globe article certainly played up the 3,000 number, making it seem like Wilkerson has incredible momentum. Yet, as David's reporting on BlueMassGroup, Wilkerson has her own new embarrassment this year. Boy, did she need those 3,000 signatures! (Emphasis mine.)

And yet, the South End News now says that of those 3,000, only 428 were certified by the Secretary of State's office -- more than the required 300, but only a 14% success rate.

How is that even possible? I've been involved in a lot of campaigns; I've never seen that many signatures rejected, never mind the proportion (!!). Did someone just take a bunch of papers and write up 2,500 fake names on them, or something? What the heck happened?

And why was the Globe so lazy as to print their Wilkerson Roxers article the very same day that the South End News unearthed the horrendous 14% success rate? What say ye, the Paper of Record?

Also, a bit off topic, but there's a weird casino quote from Wilkerson in the Globe, from one or her debates with Chang-Diaz.

Wilkerson, however, said: "I don't consider it courage at all. . . . It doesn't matter how many jobs [are created], if you do not have a car you will not be working at a casino."

I'll assume the Globe left something out, because it certainly sounds a bit strange, but I applaud the Senator nonetheless for being so vehemently against casinos (as I do Chang-Diaz, who's also against them).

Kudos for both candidates engaging in this many debates. Both women are incredibly great on the issues, so this election really comes down to what people value more: Wilkerson's time accrued in office (and all the perks that come with it) versus Chang-Diaz's clean-government message.

Full disclosure: I'm not involved in this race and haven't endorsed any candidates. That said, Chang-Diaz has been a guest on LeftAhead, which I co host weekly. Senator Wilkerson is more than welcome to come on anytime.

Update: Apparently, cities and towns only need to certify up to 140% of the signatures necessary to get on a ballot. So it's very likely that Wilkerson really did have something close to 3,000 signatures, we'll just never know quite how many for sure. If anyone has any more information, please contact me.

Sonia on LeftAhead!

Note: Sonia is the first in a series of candidates we're welcoming onto LeftAhead as the local election season heats up. If you're a candidate running for something and want to discuss the issues and the race with people who actually care, send me an email and we'll book you for one of our upcoming shows. We're looking forward to hearing (from) you.

Today, we had a very special guest, Sonia Chang-Diaz, on at LeftAhead. Lynne, Mike and I took up all kinds of issues during the podcast and asked Sonia for as many details as possible. Lots of tough questions and issue specifics were asked, and we got some pretty good answers.

Sonia is particularly thoughtful on the core issues facing urban areas such as education and housing; I also found what she had to say about taxes toward the end very refreshing. Lynne was at least slightly concerned about the new debt this state is taking on through the recently-passed (and soon to be signed) transportation bond bills. While Sonia hasn't made a cost-benefit analysis on the transportation bond bill yet, she also shares some of Lynne's worries. Here's a window to Sonia's soul re: tax philosophy.

I always look with a weary eye on taking on debt. How does our tax policy work? One thing we [at the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center] always try to get out there and give people a good grounding on is the theories of fairness that are generally recognized when talking about tax policy... one of the theories is the 'use principal' - the idea that the people who use the goods should pay for them. Generally speaking... the use principal is not the fairest... I think it would strike people silly to structure a system that only the people who use a police system should pay for it... if you get mugged, you're charged a fee. That's not how the public system should work.

That's why generally the use principal is not one that should be our guiding principal when talking about taxes. But, the big exception to that ... is longterm infrastructural costs - for things like roads, bridges... that are going to be used over multiple generations in a state, where in no cases does it make sense to share costs across time and not just across the population that currently exists as a state.

Pretty nice drapes on that window, huh? If only the Republicans in D.C. got that principal on things like a certain war in a certain part of the country which is being bought and paid for by people my age (23) and younger, maybe the world would be a better place. Sometimes a bond bill makes sense - and I've actually come out in favor of Governor Patrick's bond bill, because in the long run doing these projects now will save money (and lives) over inflation in the long run. But we need more thinking on Sonia's line, as a whole, across the state and country. With that, she made for a very nice guest and I'm hoping people will listen.

Also: Included in the tags are all the issues we hit on the show.