[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXdKtvXwYeg&fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0]
After a week of politicians behaving badly, leave it Boston Mayor Tom Menino to remind us of the good side of politics. (Via Universal Hub.)
Category: Politics
Candidate pays for radio interview
Too much politics this morning. One final item before I turn to the day job. Yesterday afternoon I received a call from Watertown Tab & Press reporter Jeremy Fox. He asked: What did I think of a candidate for Governor’s Council paying in order to appear on a radio talk show?
What Fox described was so odd that we had to spend some time talking it through. Here is Fox’s story. It seems that an independent candidate named Nick Iannuzzi is paying $490 to be interviewed this Saturday from 8 to 8:25 a.m. on WCAP Radio (AM 980) in Lowell.
The arrangement will be fully disclosed while Iannuzzi is on the air, so I can’t say that anyone’s doing anything unethical. But what I find bizarre about this is that, except for the disclosure, Iannuzzi will appear to be just another guest on Warren Shaw’s talk show.
Station owner Clark Smidt (remember him?) says it’s no big deal. But Shaw admits that in his 15 years of hosting the show, this is the first time the station has asked him to interview a paid guest. Shaw adds: “If someone schedules an interview for me on Saturday morning, I do it.”
You might say that such an arrangement would preclude tough questions, but Shaw makes it clear to Fox that he tosses nothing but softballs anyway. Weird.
More from Richard Howe.
Tierney versus Hudak on Fox 25
U.S. Rep. John Tierney, D-Salem, faced off against his Republican challenger, William Hudak of Boxford, in a nine-minute debate last night on WFXT-TV (Channel 25).
As you will see, Tierney was sharp and focused, but so rude that he may have done himself more harm than good. I know he’s had a bad week, but I’ve seen Tierney behave this way in the past.
If Tierney had kept quiet for a minute or two, viewers might have noticed that Hudak was shooting blanks.
Tim Cahill’s wacky yet serious lawsuit
Tim Cahill’s lawsuit against his former political consultants is the craziest Massachusetts political story since — oh, since U.S. Rep. John Tierney’s wife pled guilty to federal tax-fraud charges involving her rambling, gambling brother who’s holed up in Antigua. Since Suzanne Bump thought she had two principal residences. Since —
Well, you get the idea. It’s been a nutty week. And the temptation is to make fun of Cahill, the state treasurer who’s mounting a hopeless independent campaign for governor. It’s as though he’s trying to outlaw politics as usual.
But let’s let this play out a bit, shall we? There are two competing explanations for what’s behind the suit, and I’m not sure we can say which is more credible at this point. Cahill is claiming dirty tricks on Republican candidate Charlie Baker’s behalf by people who were on his payroll. Cahill wants to stop the turncoats from giving confidential campaign documents to Baker, which is reasonable, even if it adds to his reputation as a figure of fun.
The Republicans, meanwhile, argue that Cahill is trying to stop the disclosure of possible wrongdoing such as the use of state employees on his campaign.
Well, now. Couldn’t both be true? If the ex-Cahill folks have proprietary knowledge of such wrongdoing, they have no business bringing it to Baker. If they think it was actually illegal, then they should take their information to prosecutors. Otherwise, they cashed their checks and they should shut up.
At times like these, I turn to one of my favorite political pundits, the Outraged Liberal, who observes: “The only winner in this bizarre but entertaining tale of political intrigue is Deval Patrick, which is obvious in the silence out of his campaign.”
Indeed, Patrick has proved to be incredibly resilient during this campaign. An unpopular incumbent in a bad year for Democrats, Patrick has run slightly ahead of Baker, long seen as the Republicans’ best hope, all year.
I still think it’s going to be difficult for Patrick actually to win re-election. But he has been surprisingly lucky in his opposition.
For Democrats, a couple of taxing situations
When the word came down Tuesday night that Patrice Tierney, wife of U.S. Rep. John Tierney, would plead guilty to federal tax-fraud charges, many of us political junkies were dumbstruck. With exotic elements like $7 million in illicit foreign gambling profits and a ne’er-do-well brother holed up in Antigua, it was not your typical political scandal.
Today’s news that Suzanne Bump, the Democratic candidate for state auditor, has tax problems of her own may prove to be more important come Election Day. More about that in a moment. First, back to the Tierneys.
Republicans and the media are both calling on Tierney, a Salem Democrat, to reveal what he knew and when he knew it with regard to his wife’s tax woes. They’re absolutely right. As soon as possible, Tierney should sit down for a wide-ranging news conference and answer any and all questions. And woe be to him if any of those answers turn out to fall short of full disclosure.
But the media have an independent role here, too, and I hope they are working on it even as I write this. For me, the big question is whether the Tierney scandal resulted in any taxes being unpaid. It would appear that it did not.
Based on the stories I’ve seen, it seems that Patrice Tierney’s crime consisted of accurately reporting her brother’s income, but labeling it as legal commissions rather than as ill-gotten gains. Congressman Tierney said in a statement that “there are not any allegations of any income-tax loss to the government.” Nor are federal prosecutors seeking any sort of restitution. Along with the question of the congressman’s involvement, that is the big issue the media should be investigating.
Will this endanger Tierney’s re-election prospects? Put it this way: North Shore Republicans are eating their collective heart out that their candidate isn’t Essex County Sheriff Frank Cousins or former congressman Peter Torkildsen, whom Tierney defeated in 1996.
Instead, Tierney is facing William Hudak, an extremist who has compared President Obama to Osama bin Laden and who has flirted with the birther movement, which believes Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States and is thus ineligible to serve as president. For good measure, Hudak’s campaign wrongly claimed last winter that U.S. Sen. Scott Brown had endorsed him.
Unless there are more Tierney-related bombshells, it is still difficult to imagine a Hudak victory.
The Bump matter, though it does not involve anything as spectacular as federal charges and foreign intrigue, is likely to have a more deleterious effect on her campaign for state auditor. A veteran political figure who most recently served in Gov. Deval Patrick’s cabinet, she was caught claiming both Great Barrington and Boston as her principal residence, saving more than $6,000 in Boston property taxes.
The story, which appears on the front page of today’s Globe, was reported by my Northeastern colleague Walter Robinson’s students. Bump insists she did nothing wrong, but the state Department of Revenue says otherwise.
The difference between Bump and Tierney is that Bump’s actions, whether legal or not, definitely cost taxpayers. They raise serious questions about her ability to act as a watchdog over how state agencies spend our money.
What’s more, the Republican candidate, Mary Z. Connaughton, is credible and visible. As a former member of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, she was an outspoken advocate for cracking down on runaway spending at the Big Dig. Moreover, if it looks like Democrats are going to do well on Nov. 2 (no sure thing), a lot of voters — even Democrats — may want to elect a Republican to keep an eye on the books.
The paradox of the Tierney and Bump stories is that the more serious matter is less likely to have an effect on the election. More broadly, though, both stories put Democrats on the defensive at a time when they can least afford it.
Tierney troubles may give jolt to Hudak
Incredible political news from the North Shore tonight. Patrice Tierney, the wife of U.S. Rep. John Tierney, D-Salem, will plead guilty to federal tax charges in U.S. District Court tomorrow. According to the Boston Globe, the charges involve her management of $7 million in illicit gambling profits earned by her brother, Robert Eremian.
Could this give a life to the longshot campaign of extremist Republican candidate William Hudak, a Boxford lawyer who has flirted with the birther movement?
Even Republicans are offended by Loscocco
Given the low standards that pass for acceptable political behavior, I’m not entirely sure why I was so offended by Paul Loscocco’s decision to bow out as independent gubernatorial candidate Tim Cahill’s running mate.
But according today’s Boston Herald, I’m not alone. “What a snake! What a betrayal!” said erstwhile gubernatorial candidate Christy Mihos. Added WRKO talk-show host Charley Manning: “In all the years I’ve followed politics, I’ve never seen someone leave a ticket like Paul Loscocco did.”
Jon Keller calls it the “final blow” to Cahill’s gubernatorial campaign. But Cahill never had a shot, and unless Loscocco is delusional, he knew that the day he joined the ticket. This race was always going to come down to Democratic Gov. Deval Patrick and Republican challenger Charlie Baker. That’s what makes Loscocco’s act of betrayal so loathsome.
Nor can you compare this to high-profile consultant John Weaver’s recent resignation from the Cahill campaign, followed by his endorsement of Baker. Consultants come and go. Loscocco is a candidate for a statewide constitutional office, joined at the hip to Cahill. The only honorable path before him was to stick it out until the end.
Perhaps the most laughable aspect is that Loscocco hasn’t ruled out accepting a job in a Baker administration, the Boston Globe reports. Well, maybe Baker will throw some sort of bone to Loscocco if he’s elected governor. But I think Baker would want to be very careful about letting a backstabbing weasel like Loscocco get too far inside the tent.
An anti-Nixon mole in the control booth?
Just because Richard Nixon was paranoid doesn’t mean they weren’t out to get him.
There is a surprising (to say the least) passage near the top of the New York Times’ obit of movie director Arthur Penn this morning:
Mr. Penn’s direction may have also changed American history. He advised Senator John F. Kennedy during his watershed television debates with Richard M. Nixon in 1960 (and directed the broadcast of the third debate). Mr. Penn’s instructions to Kennedy — to look directly into the camera and keep his responses brief and pithy — helped give Kennedy an aura of confidence and calm that created a vivid contrast to Nixon, his more experienced but less telegenic Republican rival.
George Will, eat your heart out.
I couldn’t find anything amplifying on the Times’ parenthetical aside. But it stands as yet another battle in the decades-long war between Nixon and the media.
Update: Steve Stein solves the mystery.
Dear media: Please educate us on Chapter 40B
Today’s Boston Globe editorializes against a ballot measure that would repeal Chapter 40B, the state’s so-called anti-snob-zoning law. The law allows developers to circumvent local zoning ordinances in order to build affordable housing.
Frankly, I’m inclined to vote in favor of repeal. My impression — and here’s where I hope the media, especially the Globe, will do their job — is that the law simply hasn’t worked. In return for setting aside a fairly small percentage of units for affordable housing, developers are able to ram through ugly condo developments that enhance no one’s quality of life.
I’m all for greater density, smaller lot sizes and smaller houses in the suburbs. But with 40B, it seems that what you end up with are a few monstrous developments on the periphery of town, with no real change to overall zoning patterns.
The Globe observes that 40B developments could be built along commuter-rail lines. True, and pigs could fly if they had wings. What I’ve seen is that 40B developments are built along highways, dumping more cars and SUVs onto already-congested roadways.
Finally, 40B encourages overdevelopment in communities that just can’t handle it. Here in Danvers, we are under a perpetual drought watch. This summer was very hot and dry, so the current drought is real. But year after year, the water warnings here never let up, no matter how wet the weather is. That leads to a common-sense observation: we don’t have a water shortage; we have too much development. And 40B means that town officials are limited in their ability to stop things from getting worse.
Over the next few weeks, as we move closer to Election Day, I hope news organizations will take a good, hard look at Chapter 40B and whether it really deserves to be retained. What are the success stories? What are the failures? How could it be improved?
I would just as soon not vote against affordable housing, but right now I don’t see any reason to keep this law on the books.
Where was Jill Stein?
I don’t understand why WTKK hosts Jim Braude and Margery Eagan would moderate a gubernatorial debate that featured only three of the four candidates. If it was their call, they were wrong. If it was management’s call, they should have refused to have anything to do with it.
If ‘TKK’s aim was to have a debate between the two major-party candidates, Democratic Gov. Deval Patrick and Republican challenger Charlie Baker, I would have fewer objections — though still some. September is too soon to start excluding anyone.
But there was no logical reason to include independent candidate Tim Cahill, who has no chance of winning, and exclude Green-Rainbow candidate Jill Stein, who also has no chance.
Not only was it unfair to Stein, it was unfair to Baker. Every time Cahill is given oxygen, he hurts Baker with the conservative base Baker needs to secure if he is to defeat Patrick this November. At the same time, nearly all of Stein’s support comes from people who might otherwise be persuaded to vote for Patrick.
She also happens to be as thoughtful and substantive as any of them, but I suppose that’s beside the point.