Political News from the People’s
Democratic Republik of Taxachusetts

Massachusetts Democrats Fall in Line to Support Party's U.S. Senatorial Candidate

     Here in the (un)democratic “People’s Democratic Republik of Taxachusetts – otherwise known as the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the fix may be in concerning the Democratic candidate for one of the state’s U.S. Senate seats. The front runner for the Democratic nomination and apparent shoo-in until questions were raised about her unsupported claim to be a Native American and her purported plagiarizing of Native American food recipes. The sudden surgence of a potential rival for the nomination has apparently panicked the state’s Democratic leadership and forced Democratic Governor Duval Patrick, the titular head of the state’s Democratic Party, to issue an endorsement of Elizabeth Warren for the nomination. This, in spite of his earlier pledge to refrain from endorsing any candidate until after the state’s Democratic convention when the delegates, and supposed representatives of the Democratic electorate, would have a chance to indicate their preference for the Democratic nominee. The endorsement was an apparent effort to prevent Warren’s Democratic opponent, Marisa DeFranco, from garnering the 15% of convention votes needed to ensure her place on the state’s preliminary ballot (where the voters of Massachusetts, rather than the Democratic politicians and back-room brokers, would have the opportunity to select their nominee) and force Warren to defend her candidacy against Ms DeFranco.

     “Governor Deval Patrick, who had said he would not endorse in the Democratic Senate primary, threw his support behind Elizabeth Warren . . . seeking to boost her campaign as she face{d} continued questioning over her assertions of Native American heritage.
     “Patrick’s endorsement {came} just three days before the Democratic convention in Springfield, where some Democrats {were} hoping to elbow aside Marisa DeFranco, a potential challenger to Warren, by ensuring she {did} not receive the 15 percent of delegates needed to earn a spot on the September primary ballot.
     “Massachusetts Republicans pointed out Patrick’s history of insisting he would not endorse in the midst of a contested primary and called his decision to do so . . . ‘a sign of deep panic and desperation in the Warren campaign.’” (Ref. 1)

     DeFranco said she was disappointed that Governor Patrick chose to endorse Warren “before the primary and three days before the convention.” (Ref. 2)

     Governor “Patrick’s pre-primary endorsement of {Elizabeth} Warren breaks his prior commitment to avoid any involvement that might affect the primary’s outcome. It also discards the political advice he often brags that he received from Kennedy himself: stay out of contested primaries.
     “And it gives the impression that the Democratic party apparatus - which is controlled by Patrick’s former campaign manager, John Walsh - is not neutral in either this weekend’s convention or September’s primary election.” (Ref. 3)

     “Republicans cast the 11th-hour endorsement as a desperation move by Democrats to shore up support for Ms. Warren, a Harvard Law School professor, who has been under intense scrutiny over whether she unfairly claimed she was a minority to advance her academic career. She has said she is part American Indian, though she has provided no evidence to support that assertion.
     “Must be panic time at Warren headquarters wrote a top strategist for Mr. Brown’s Senate campaign.” (Ref. 4)

     Well, the Democratic Party leadership succeeded in avoiding a primary fight. The Massachusetts Democratic Convention refused to give candidate DeFranco the 15% of its votes needed for her name to be listed in the Democratic fall primary, leaving Warren as the only Democratic candidate for the state’s Senate seat. Leftist and Liberal supporters were jubilant and rushed to sweep under the rug the furor about Warren’s unsubstantiated claim of American Indian minority status and her apparently plagiarized submission of so-called authentic Cherokee family food recipes. “To these people, the question of whether Liz Warren is actually Native American is irrelevant.” (Ref. 5) What is important to them is that she is a liberal idealist like themselves. Never mind the question of integrity and the question of “whether she embellished her identity for social or political expediency.
     “That Warren apparently submitted copied recipes to a Native American cookbook provides some evidence that she did.” (Ref. 5) This leaves the question facing Massachusetts voters this fall of whether integrity in their U.S. Senator is important or not.


Massachusetts Democrats Simply Change the Laws to Suit Their Needs

     “Massachusetts Democrats have offered a lot of platitudes but succumbed to raw political calculation in recent years as they’ve maneuvered to maintain or regain control over the state’s US Senate seats.
     “In 2004, when it looked like John Kerry might be elected president and then-Governor Mitt Romney would get to appoint a fellow Republican to replace him in the Senate, Democrats in the Legislature changed the state’s succession law. Overriding Romney’s veto, they required a special election - rather than a direct gubernatorial appointment - to fill a vacancy.
     “Democrats said the people should speak.” (Ref. 3)

     What they meant was: The people should be allowed to speak until what they have to say would go against the wishes of the Democratic Party bosses, or if these bosses felt that they might lose an election, as happened in 2009.

     “In 2009, after Senator Edward M. Kennedy died, legislative Democrats changed the law again. They allowed the governor to immediately fill any vacancy with an interim senator while the special election campaign was held.
     “And they did so despite arguing against just such an interim appointment when Republicans proposed it during the 2004 debate.
     “Democrats said the state should have continuous representation in Washington - especially as President Obama’s health care law was being debated.”
                                                     . . .
     “That means Democrats succeeding him can tilt special election campaigns in their party’s favor if they want.
     “Scott Brown exacted a measure of revenge for his fellow Republicans in 2010 by winning the special election for Kennedy’s seat. That never would have happened if Democrats didn’t start fiddling with the Senate succession law in 2004.” (Ref. 3)


Democratic Procedures of No Importance in the People’s Republik of Taxachusetts

     Here in Massachusetts, The Democratic Party has near totalitarian control of the political establishment. Consequently, they need pay little attention to the niceties of democratic government. Consider the following report of the state legislature’s actions during the week of 21-25 May 2012 on the proposed $32.3 billion state budget for the 2013 fiscal year. All emphasis was added by me.

     “Most of the 694 amendments filed {on the proposed} budget} never came to a roll call vote and were simply approved or rejected on voice votes without debate and roll call.
     “The Senate also rejected 188 amendments on a single voice vote without a roll call. Those amendments were ‘bundled’ together and rejected all at once. Senate President Therese Murray led the rejection of the 188 amendments with a simple: ‘All those in favor say ‘aye,’ (those) opposed (say) ‘no.’ The no’s have it and the amendment is not adopted.’ Senators don’t actually vote yes or no and in fact don’t say a word. The outcome was determined earlier behind closed doors.” (Ref. 6) So much for a free and open debate on the massive state spending budget!

     How about trying to reduce the state’s spending and cut taxes? Not likely here in Taxachusetts! The State Senate by a 33-4 vote, “upheld Senate President Therese Murray’s ruling that 13 proposed amendments that reduce taxes are beyond the scope of the $32.3 billion state budget being considered and should not be allowed on the floor for debate and a vote.” (Ref. 6)

     Opponents to the tax cut amendments successfully argued that the “budget is an ‘appropriations’ bill but not a ‘money’ bill. They argued that the proposed tax reductions would make the bill a money bill and violate the state constitution which requires all money bills to originate in the House.
     “Opponents of the ruling said it is ridiculous that a $32.3 billion budget is not considered a money bill. They also noted the budget already includes a provision that delays implementation of a tax deduction and results in a $46 million windfall for the state.” (Ref. 6)

     Here in Taxachusetts, there is always a way to avoid reducing taxes and decreasing government spending. After all, with the large number of liberal colleges and universities in our state, there is no absence of brain power to figure out how to keep the state’s coffers filled.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References:

1. Governor Patrick endorses Elizabeth Warren, Michael Levenson, Boston Globe, 31 May 2012.
2. Gov. Patrick endorses Warren — ‘I love this candidate’, Hillary Chabot, Boston Herald, 30 May 2012.
3. Platitudes succumb to politics as Mass. Democrats maneuver for Senate seat, Glen Johnson, Boston.com, 31 May 2012.
4. Governor Throws Weight Behind Senate Candidate, Abby Goodnough and Katharine Q. Seeyle, The New York Times, 30 May 2012.
5. Liz’s character flaws apparent, Jennifer C. Braceras, Boston Herald, Page 19, 4 June 2012.
6. BEACON HILL Roll Call, Forum and Editorial Page, The Winthrop Sun Transcript, Page 6, 31 May 2012.