Massachusetts House Passes Supplemental Budget

Posted on February 8, 2013 by billmanzi

The Massachusetts House of Representatives passed a supplemental budget this week which added some spending, and dealt with the Patrick Administration’s request to deal with a $550 million dollar shortfall in this budget cycle. The House declined to accept the Governor’s recommendation for a 1% cut to local aid, but ratified the further utilization of the rainy day fund advocated by Governor Patrick. Notable action from the House included: (State House News Service)

The House voted 141-13 for a bill delivering $44 million for the emergency shelter system, $25 million for public counsel services to eligible defendants, and $30 million to cover costs associated with an evidence tampering scandal at a state drug testing lab. Lawmakers said costs to taxpayers from the drug lab scandal, which House budget chief Rep. Brian Dempsey called a “disgrace,” could rise even higher. …The supplemental budget submitted by Patrick draws another $200 million out of the state’s rainy day fund and makes about $25 million in cuts to non-executive branch agencies on top of the $225 million Patrick slashed within the executive branch to help bridge a projected $540 million mid-year budget gap brought about by lower-than-expected tax revenues. The House jettisoned Patrick’s request to further cut local aid by $9 million and did not include another $10 million in cuts that required legislative approval.

Even though the House spared localities from the 1% cut ($9 million statewide) the Governor, using his 9C Budgetary authority, had reduced other local aid accounts by $28.5 million in December. From the Massachusetts Municipal Association letter to the House of Representatives:

In December, Governor Patrick used his “9C” emergency budget powers to cut $28.75 million from important municipal and education aid accounts that fund local budgets, including the elimination of $11.5 million from the Special Education Circuit Breaker program, $5.25 million from the McKinney-Vento account to reimburse cities and towns for the transportation of homeless students, $1 million from regional school transportation reimbursements, $6 million from municipal incentive grants, and $5 million from six other reimbursement programs. Cities and towns absorbed this $28.75 million reduction, even though it came five months into the fiscal year, sharing in the efforts to close the state’s estimated $540 million budget gap.

Some other action taken by the House included a freezing of the unemployment rates for business, avoiding a $500 million dollar hike. The January revenue figures came in above the budgetary benchmark by $173 million, an important number after the prior months numbers lagged badly, creating the shortfall that the Governor has sought to close. But that number may have been positively impacted by the fiscal cliff issue in Washington, with some economic activity moved up to avoid change in federal law, creating a blip in state revenues.

According to the Department of Revenue, tax collections in January totaled $2.28 billion, a 12.2 percent or $249 million increase over January 2012. The tax haul eclipsed the monthly benchmark by $173 million, with “weak” withholding and corporate and business tax collections offset by stronger estimated income tax payments, according to DOR. Tax collections over the first seven months of fiscal 2013 are up $455 million or 3.8 percent compared to the same period in fiscal 2012 and are running $307 million above a benchmark that was revised downward midyear by the Patrick administration as the governor made $225 million in unilateral budget cuts in December.

There were a number of Republican amendments beaten back, and some Democratic ones as well. On that score nobody should be overly concerned, as a supplemental of this importance essentially needs to be a “clean” bill. It will move over to the Senate for Tuesday action. The remarks of House Ways and Means Chair Brian Dempsey are below.

http://www.statehousenews.com/video/13-02-06dempsey/player-viral.swf

Posted in Municipal Finance, State News | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Job Poaching Between States.Tax Incentives Gone Wild!

Posted on February 6, 2013 by billmanzi

There has been much talk on Beacon Hill about the existence of tax expenditures in the state budget, and the desire to get rid of some of the less productive ones. I have done one earlier post on tax expenditures, and they are considered to be so important that they now produce a “tax expenditure” budget at the State Level, which details these items in excruciating detail. One of the areas we are all familiar with is the utilization of tax incentives to attract business to a locality or a state, with that being one of the items that I consider to be a true “tax expenditure.” During my Administration as Mayor of Methuen we used tax incentives on a couple of occasions, after public vetting and discussion. There is a new report out, from the Washington based “Good Jobs First” organization that is highly critical of tax incentives given to lure existing business and jobs from state to state. I believe they make some pretty powerful arguments, and they provide detailed examples of what they consider to be wasteful expenditures by some states that use incentives to relocate business and jobs without creating any additional economic activity.

The report,titled “The Job Creation Shell Game“, attached below in pdf format, was covered in a story at Governing magazine. The Executive Director of Good Jobs First commented for the Governing story.

Greg LeRoy, the group’s executive director, said many incentive-laden deals aimed at out-of-state employers lead to little, if any, net job growth. “It’s not a winner for the state, it’s economically irresponsible and it shortchanges the companies that really matter,” he said.

The report itself indicts the process that has allowed corporations to shift locales to garner huge tax breaks without providing true economic benefit. From the report:

What states euphemistically call “business recruitment” is often nothing more than the pirating of jobs by one state from another. This piracy is bankrolled by property, sales and income tax breaks, land and infrastructure subsidies, low interest loans, “deal-closing” grants, and other subsidies to footloose companies.
For trophies such as corporate headquarters, some states even offer per-job cash grants to finance executive relocations.The dark flip side of subsidized job piracy is “job blackmail,” politely called “retention incentives.” With subsidies readily available to any company that creates the appearance of moving, states are more eager to pay companies to stay.

I believe the the study hits some important points, and makes several recommendations that are both pragmatic and achievable.

To cool these job wars, the report recommends that states demonetize interstate job fraud. That is, the states should stop subsidizing companies for existing jobs that are treated as “new” simply because their location has changed. The study reveals that the vast majority of states already know how to do this: four-fifths of the states already refuse to pay for intrastate job relocations. For at least one and sometimes most of their major incentive programs, 40 states disallow subsidies for existing jobs that are merely being moved within their own borders.The report also recommends that states end their business recruitment activities that are explicitly designed to pirate existing jobs from other states. It also suggests a modest role for the federal government: reserving a small portion of its economic development aid for those states that amend their incentive codes to make existing jobs ineligible for subsidies and certify that they no longer engage in raiding.

In terms of local and state incentives Massachusetts requires “new job growth” (for the state portion) in order to give a subsidy, and in my experience that definition is tight, and strictly adhered to. The locals have an ability to do some Tax Increment Financing, which would give some property tax relief on the “incremental” (increased) value of property owned by a “new” business entity after a development. Massachusetts policy on “job retention financing” for in state companies, or “job incentive financing” that may be offered to out of state companies, appears to be on sturdy ground as evidenced by the Curt Schilling case, which was cited in the study. But we have had our share of controversy in this area as well, including criticism of deals for Raytheon and Fidelity where job losses occurred in spite of lucrative tax deals bestowed. Senator Mark Montigny has been a strong advocate for evaluating these tax deals on a continuing basis, and revoking them where they are no longer effective, or the company is failing to fulfill their obligations.

Job poaching by giving away scarce tax dollars may make a politician look good in the short term, but the specific examples cited in the study absolutely warrant scrutiny. Corporations are indeed gaming inter (and intra) state relocations to extract tax dollars from states and localities, with negative impacts being felt nationwide.

The net effect of these piracy lures and blackmail payoffs is to divert economic development resources away from helping companies expand or start up, where virtually all the job-growth action is. And when many states are still making painful budget cuts, putting lots of eggs in a few corporate baskets reduces funding available for the low-risk, high-payoff investments in education and infrastructure that benefit all employers.

It is a great report, and while I realize that business incentives can be a powerful tool, I believe that the cross-border raids are not serving the needs of taxpayers or other businesses. The Good Jobs First folks have produced a report that should have both federal and state legislators asking some hard questions about the true value of many of these “business tax incentives”.

State Tax Incentives

Posted in Municipal Finance, National News, State News | Tagged | Leave a comment

NRA Delusions on Background Checks

Posted on February 5, 2013 by billmanzi

NRA V.P. Wayne LaPierre appeared on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace, and despite his personal endorsement of background checks many years earlier LaPierre and the NRA have dug in hard against those background checks today.Chris Wallace grilled LaPierre on his many inconsistencies, and was simply incredulous at some of LaPierre’s answers. As the political battle begins in earnest over common sense regulations of firearms it appears that most everyone, including NRA members, are in favor of universal background checks. Most everyone except the NRA. I have a very difficult time understanding the opposition to background checks, as did Chris Wallace. LaPierre tries to sell some delusional “slippery slope” nonsense about a federal database on law abiding gun owners. Wallace cut through that like a knife through soft butter.

Despite the overwhelming support for background checks it is an open question as to whether a stand alone background check bill could get through the Republican House. In light of rank and file NRA support of such legislation you might be tempted to ask why that is the case? My answer is simple: follow the money. The NRA represents the gun industry, and background checks might just be bad for business. And the gun industry and the NRA are generous supporters of Republican House members. It is a shame that a single item, with huge popular support, cannot be enacted quickly. and it is truly indicative of the political problems facing the national Republican Party. It is not only the Republican “base” that is at issue, but more importantly it is the Republican donor class that is destroying the national Republican Party. Having Wayne LaPierre as the face of the national Republican brand certainly will not be helpful to that brand. This interview should tell you all you need to know about the NRA working constructively to help address obvious issues where consensus exists.

Posted in National News, State News | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

What If They Had an Election and No (Republicans) Came

Posted on February 5, 2013 by billmanzi

The list of Massachusetts GOP luminaries heading for the exits as potential candidates for U.S. Senate seems to grow by the hour. We had Scott Brown, batting lead-off, shocking the Party (but not me) by announcing he would not run. He was followed, in no particular order, by former Lt. Governor Kerry Healey, former Governor Bill Weld, former State Senator Richard Tisei, Tagg Romney, and Charlie Baker.

The Republicans taking a pass must be thinking of the risk vs reward equation, with the lack of a full six year term, and the prospect of victory, followed by defeat in a year, all factored into that consideration. I happen to agree with their political calculation. This is a race best suited for a Republican who sees the reward of victory as a huge upside to his or her career. The two names that seem to correspond to that are State Rep. Dan Winslow, and Gabriel Gomez. Winslow will announce this morning, with a run looking very likely.

The Democratic side, for a day or so, entertained the possibility of a three way race, with Middlesex District Attorney Gerald Leone briefly contemplating a run. But at this point it is still a two man race between Ed Markey and Steve Lynch. The handicap on this race still favors Markey, who starts with a financial advantage, and an institutional advantage over Lynch. I make Markey a 3 to 1 favorite for those going to Las Vegas. Let us see how Lynch does from an operational point of view, including the collection of 10,000 signatures state wide. I have not seen evidence of much organization by Lynch in the Merrimack Valley, a potentially fertile ground for him. But there is time, just not much time.

My final observation is that the Democrat would be a heavy favorite in the final, but a Lynch-Winslow final would likely feature Winslow trying to get to the left rail against Lynch on social issues, and making his best efforts to flank Lynch with some key Democratic constituencies. But that race is a long way off, with no guarantee that Lynch or Winslow will be in the final.

Posted in State News | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Increased Massachusetts Revenue: Where Is It Coming From?

Posted on February 2, 2013 by billmanzi

Governor Deval Patrick has unveiled a budget and tax plan that delivers just under $2 billion in new revenue to state coffers to fund transportation and educational initiatives. The Governor’s proposal does not simply rely on a straight increase in one category of tax, but has mixed in income tax rate increases, decreases in the sales tax, tax code changes, corporate tax changes, and increasing the sales tax base in order to achieve the $1.9 billion in new revenues. Michael Widmer of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation said that the proposal had more moving parts than any similar proposal he had ever seen, and I believe he is right.

Widmer and the Foundation have come out with an analysis of the revenue proposal, showing exactly how each component of the proposal impacts state revenues. The numbers are a bit surprising. Let us take a look.

When you net out the income tax increase with the sales tax decrease you raise $110 million, which is only 6% of the overall total. ($1.48 billion increase in income tax, $1.37 billion decrease in sales tax). The real money comes from changes in personal income tax deductions that would be allowed under the Governor’s proposal. The 44 deductions and exemptions that would no longer be allowed bring just under $1.1 billion in new revenue. Expanding the sales tax to include candy and soda would bring in $53 million, and increasing tobacco and cigarette taxes would bring in $166 million. That is where the real money is, and will bring scrutiny to the tax code changes, and how they impact taxpayers. Those three items make up 68% of the new revenue, which is possibly the biggest surprise.

On the corporate side the Governor proposes to extend the sales tax to sales of specialized software and data services ($265 million), proposes three different technical changes to the corporate tax code ($194 million)and would limit the film tax credit to $40 million (increase of $40 million in revenue).Those changes are worth $499 million, or 26% of the increased revenue.

What are some of the deductions and exemptions that are impacted? The deduction for employee Social Security and Public Pension plans is one that will certainly draw some scrutiny. That change will impact 3.5 million filers in Massachusetts, and is worth $357 million at the 6.25% rate. Next up would be the capital gain for the sale of a home. Current Massachusetts law allows for exempting the first $500,000 of gain from the sale of a primary residence, a benefit that has been extended to all taxpayers. The Governor’s proposal would eliminate the benefit for all, and would impact 55,000 filers. A third prominent change would be the elimination of the deduction for child dependents. The Governor proposes to eliminate the deduction for dependents under the age of 12. 510,000 filers would be impacted by this change, worth $162 million at 6.25%. That change is going to draw heavy scrutiny.

The Governor and others point to these changes and others as part of an effort to restrain “tax expenditures”, which are tax code items that provide a benefit to a certain category of taxpayers that is not available to other taxpayers.From the State House News Service:

Patrick’s multi-faceted approach to overhauling the tax code generally meshes with calls for broad tax law reforms called for in recent years by Rep. Jay Kaufman (D-Lexington), who chaired the Committee on Revenue last session. House Speaker Robert DeLeo has yet to announce this session’s Revenue chair.

The state’s tax expenditure budget identifies hundreds of specific tax breaks, which the Tax Expenditure Commission, chaired by former Administration and Finance Secretary Jay Gonzalez, recommended reducing in a report issued last April 30.

“A reduction in size of the Tax Expenditure Budget provides the opportunity to reduce tax rates paid by everyone, or to generate more revenue to support government programs and services,” the commission wrote.

I did a post on “tax expenditures” last year, and would have to say that my understanding of the term would not include the changes to the tax code mentioned above that impact individual filers. In looking at the proposals I believe that the best example of the elimination of “tax expenditures” would be the limiting of the film tax credit, and the other corporate tax changes. I realize the broader definition includes all tax deductions and exemptions, including personal ones, but the political discussions on it have frankly been centered on the corporate side.

The Governor, through these proposals, also seeks to use the tax changes to make the code more progressive.

Glen Shor, the governor’s secretary of administration and finance, did not take issue with Widmer’s math, but said he looks at the proposal through a different prism. “The governor’s revenue proposals should be taken as a whole. It raises $1.9 billion by creating a fairer and simpler tax system. Half of Massachusetts households will pay the same or less than what they do today.”

New Secretary of A&F Glen Shor points out that business will save about $470 million from the sales tax reduction, which was not included in the Widmer analysis. But as usual Widmer’s numbers are a good tool for taxpayers and legislators alike as they look at the scope of the Governor’s proposals, and what the specific impacts are. The Governor has not just produced a cookie cutter approach to revenues, but instead has laid out a proposal with many “moving parts.” The Legislature has some heavy lifting ahead.

Posted in State News | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Steve Lynch Kicks Off

Posted on January 31, 2013 by billmanzi

Rep. Steve Lynch will kick off his campaign today, traveling to Springfield, Worcester, and ending in South Boston at Iron Workers Hall. He has a Facebook Page, and a new video highlighting his working class roots. I have attached that video below. As I mentioned yesterday Lynch will not be sitting down and waiting for votes to come to him. He will be street side early in the morning, and late at night. Here we go.

Posted in State News, U.S. Senate Race | Tagged | Leave a comment

A Health Care Break for Massachusetts Hospitals Draws Scrutiny

Posted on January 30, 2013 by billmanzi

Governor Deval Patrick today named William “Mo” Cowan as the interim U.S. Senator from Massachusetts, and he will be immediately faced with an issue of great import to Massachusetts hospitals. Senator Tom Coburn and Senator Claire McCaskill have offered legislation in the U.S. Senate that may prove very costly to our hospitals. Coburn estimates that Massachusetts hospitals receive a benefit of $367 million annually from a special provision in the Affordable Care Act that only benefits Massachusetts Massachusetts hospitals. He and Senator McCaskill would like to do away with that provision. From the press release by Senator Coburn:

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) – Today, U.S. Sens. Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK) and Claire McCaskill (D-MO) introduced a bill, S.183, that would sunset Section 3141 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). The provision adjusted the calculation of a hospital wage index used to make payments under the Medicare program. Unfortunately, the provision has the net effect of reducing Medicare reimbursements for hospitals in every state except for Massachusetts. Sens. Coburn and McCaskill’s bill would eliminate this gimmick by sunsetting the provision, ending the favoring of hospitals in one state at the expense of all the other states’ hospitals.

“It is unfair to manipulate the Medicare payment system to benefit one state’s hospitals at the expense of all other states’ hospitals,” said Dr. Coburn. “This policy is effectively a payment earmark inserted in a law without the American people’s knowledge or consent. No state should have a special exemption while others bear the costs for a provision designed to advance a special interest. This legislation would sunset this unjust provision and allow all hospitals in all states to be treated equally under the law.”

“This provision unfairly benefits some states to the disadvantage of others, like Missouri—it’s inefficient, and I’m happy to work in a bipartisan way to improve the health care reform law by repealing the provision,” McCaskill said. “I’ve consistently said that, whether you supported or opposed the Affordable Care Act, we can work together to keep improving and strengthening it as it’s implemented.”

Recently, the National Rural Health Association and 20 state hospital associations wrote the President about the “adverse impact” Section 3141 of PPACA is having. They noted this provision of law “permitted the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to manipulate the federal Medicare program, reaping an estimated $367 million annually from the other 49 states – and unfairly favoring one state’s hospitals and Medicare beneficiaries to the detriment of others.” The association warned that “if left uncorrected, hospitals in 49 states will experience reduced funding of more than $3.5 billion over the next ten years as a direct result of this manipulation.”

Senator-Designate Cowan will not be coasting on the job, as he has been “greeted” warmly by Senator Coburn. Right to work. Congratulations to Mo Cowan on his appointment. Massachusetts is pulling for you.

Posted in National News, State News | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Lynch an Underdog but….

Posted on January 30, 2013 by billmanzi

The race to succeed John Kerry in the U.S. Senate is about to move into high gear, with Democrats Steve Lynch and Ed Markey prepared to kick off their campaigns this week, with Lynch kicking off at the Iron Workers Hall tomorrow (Thursday) and Markey kicking off Saturday at the Malden Y. Lynch is flying into the teeth of the Democratic establishment, with most of the party bigwigs, including John Kerry, supporting Ed Markey. Markey has a pretty big financial advantage as the race opens, with over $3 million on hand, compared to less than $1 million for Lynch. Lynch is perceived as more “conservative”, which is also a Markey advantage in a Democratic primary. So Markey should roll to victory based on some of the obvious political advantages? I would not be so sure.

Steve Lynch has been an underdog before, and is a disciplined and hard working candidate. Although we have all known Markey will be a candidate for weeks his campaign, as of yet, is nothing that is instilling fear into the hearts of potential opponents. In fact had more upfront work been done Lynch might have been forced into taking a pass. But Lynch has to like what he sees so far. Let us see who the harder working candidate will be on the Democratic side. I have a feeling it won’t be Ed Markey. Lynch, if history is a guide, will make this race very competitive through his strong work ethic alone. Mayor Tom Menino’s support would be a boon to either candidate, and in a low turnout primary could really make the difference between victory and defeat. The Mayor’s actions will be closely scrutinized, but I happen to believe he is more likely to give some help to Rep. Lynch. A pretty big variable for sure.

Scott Brown, on the Republican side, appears to be contemplating another run. Brown looked to be seriously considering taking a pass on this race. But he also does not seem to be smitten with fear of a potential Ed Markey candidacy, and the wooden campaign put on so far by Markey likely encouraged Brown as well. For those that say that the lack of early activity is not important I say nonsense. It is important.

I am less concerned with early polling in the general election matchup, but would love to see some Democratic primary numbers. Scott Brown leads both potential Democratic nominees in a general election matchup, but that lead will shrink as the Democrats begin to work the state. For now all the attention will be focused on Lynch/Markey.

Steve Lynch has a much stronger chance to win this primary than the conventional wisdom would have you believe.Is Lynch the underdog? Yes he is. But he has been an underdog for most of his political career.

I have not endorsed in this race.

Posted in U.S. Senate Race | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

A Balanced Budget Amendment With No Balanced Budget

Posted on January 29, 2013 by billmanzi

The Republican House caucus recently conducted a members “retreat” to discuss many things, among which was their own dysfunction, what to do about the “debt ceiling”, how to deal with a President who keeps rolling them, and what to do about a leadership team that seems more concerned with short term political survival than with long term progress for the country. Coming out of the retreat the caucus came to the realization that the debt ceiling fight was a dead loser for them politically. So instead of forcing a default the House punted the debt ceiling forward by a few months, and scored some political points by demanding that the Senate pass a budget. Republicans have been moaning about the lack of a Senate budget for some time, and as a political matter they have a point. So how did Speaker Boehner and Budget Committee Chair Paul Ryan convince the caucus to punt the debt ceiling? They promised them that the House would produce, in the next budget cycle, a budget that balances in ten years.

Lots of folks who follow this budget talk in a less than comprehensive fashion might be shocked by that. Many people I talk to would take an oath that the “Ryan Plan” produced a balanced budget! After all isn’t that what all the fighting has been about? The Republicans calling for fiscal discipline, and railing against the debt???? Surely Paul Ryan’s budget showed balance, because that is what he keeps saying we need. In fact Republicans have demanded that Congress pass a “balanced budget amendment” to the Constitution, which would make such balance a constitutional requirement. So what is the truth?

Paul Ryan’s budget did not show balance for over thirty years, and that imbalance makes his, and the Republican’s calls for a “balanced budget amendment”, fundamentally dishonest. So now they have taken the pledge to balance the budget in only ten years, and to do so with the existing revenue stream. In an interesting sidebar Paul Ryan now indicates that when he produces that budget he will include the $600 billion plus in new revenues that the Republicans strenuously fought against. Would be an interesting exercise to see what that budget would look like without those revenues.

Ryan, in his Sunday Meet the Press interview, made the claim that Republican budgetary philosophy was not to impose “austerity”, but rather to promote growth. He took pains to distance Republicans from the failures that are visible to all but the willfully blind in Great Britain, where the Cameron government has imposed austerity in a time of recession and created a downward economic spiral that comes from such wrong headed thinking. The best line I have read on the British experiment with austerity came from Matthew O’Brien in the Atlantic.

Unless austerity is offset by monetary easing, contractionary fiscal policy is indeed contractionary.

Pretty simple to understand, but something that Republicans just have trouble figuring out. If you undertake policies that are designed to contract the economy, the economy will indeed contract. Job losses, loss of economic output, and then more cuts because the economy is contracting and the deficit is rising as a percentage of the smaller pie lead to a death spiral. While you might think that nobody in their right mind would want such an outcome many Republicans seem eager to emulate the British failure. Ryan, well aware of the Cameron failure, will now be charged with the development of a budget that, by definition, MUST emulate the British model in order to achieve that balance in ten years. He is taking pains to separate rhetorically from this concept, but the numbers will be difficult to parse.

As a final thought I realize that Republicans have had a great talking point in whipping the Senate for their failure to produce budgets for many years. But Democrats have failed to ask how Republicans can advocate for a balanced budget amendment while at the same time refusing to actually produce a balanced budget. “Where is the balance” might be a question for Republican budget writers? Paul Ryan is about to try to answer that question, and the consequences for Republicans will be dramatic. His interview with Meet the Press is below.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Posted in National News | Tagged , | Leave a comment

The Massachusetts Governor's Race

Posted on January 28, 2013 by billmanzi

The Massachusetts Governor’s race will shortly come into focus, with the Senate special election diverting some attention in the short term, but the main event is not that far away. The withdrawal of Lt. Governor Tim Murray has opened the door for other potential candidates, and although it is early there are some major players looking at this race on the Democratic side. Two of the more interesting ones are Attorney General Martha Coakley, and Salem Mayor Kim Driscoll.

Attorney General Coakley has said that she is running for re-election, but with Murray out there is a clear path to victory for her. Since her loss to Scott Brown in the Senate race Martha Coakley has worked as hard as possible at her job as Attorney General. She has done some truly terrific work in that office, and in my opinion now stands as one of the most popular Democrats in the state. She would bring an awful lot to the table in that race, and it is my thought that she has certainly earned the huge respect that she commands today with Massachusetts voters, and with Democratic primary voters in particular. If she runs for Governor I make Coakley the betting favorite in that field, regardless of who else may or may not be in.

Another person that needs to be looked at for state wide office is Mayor Kim Driscoll of Salem. Mayor Driscoll is a terrific municipal manager who has done some great things for her City. She has been active state wide on so many issues vital to localities, and that leadership has resulted in her selection to head the Massachusetts Mayors Association. Mayor Driscoll has expressed reluctance to consider a run for Governor with Tim Murray a potential candidate, but that is no longer an issue. She may choose a run for Lt Governor, but I believe that she will be a strong candidate for state wide office regardless of which office she runs for.

Of course there will be other potential candidates for Governor. Mayor Joseph Curatone of Somerville would also be a candidate with a strong resume, and room to grow. Doctor Donald Berwick, relatively unknown but with a strong resume, may also run. The Democrats will have a strong field from which to choose, and you know there will be more coming. The next post on the Republicans….

Martha Coakley

Martha Coakley

Mayor Kim Driscoll

Posted in State News | Tagged , , , , | 3 Comments